[nicolpa47]

I added a K-1ii to my kit last year when it was available at an exceptional price. Prior to that I had been put off a little by the constant mention of the size and weight as against the APS-C cameras I was using. I was therefore surprised to find the FF camera very little different in handling compared to the K-3ii - certainly the size and weight has not so far given this septuagenarian any problems.

I have relatively small hands and appreciate that the K1 is not as large as some other FF cameras. I have no problem with the modest sized top screen - I use it all the time - and I would certainly prefer that to a larger screen which might give rise to a larger body or a less user friendly layout of the main dials/controls. One of the great features of all Pentax cameras I've handled is that they feel "right" in the hand and the controls are logically and mostly conveniently laid out.

[Lord Lucan]

I only use the top screen to check battery status. This thread makes me think I ought to make more use of it.

[OldChE]

Canon 5D iv is 130g lighter than K1ii. The 70-200 from Canon is lighter than the Pentax. K1ii is not overly heavy, but also not lighter than its competition.

The Canon EOS 5D IV weighs 890 g with battery. The EF 24-105 F4 lens that is sold with it as a kit weighs 795 g. The total weight of the camera and kit lens, in use, is 1,685 grams.

The Pentax K-1 Mark II weighs 925 g with battery. The HD Pentax-D FA 28-105 F3.5-5.6 lens that is sold with it as a kit weighs 439 g. The total weight of the camera and kit lens, in use, is 1,449 g. The Canon kit is 16% heavier than the Pentax.

In addition, the kit price for the Canon kit is $3,599, which is 64% higher than the $2,197 kit price of the Pentax.

Richard.

---------- Post added 04-11-23 at 09:39 PM ----------

Nnno. The K-1 is the second-heaviest FF DSLR body, a touch behind the D850. It's *noticeably* heavier than the 5D and 6D for sure. It just doesn't feel as heavy as it is due to its much better grip.

With lenses, it feels lighter because the center of mass is closer to the body - though the total weight might well be higher than in most other cases.

The weight of the Pentax K-1 Mark II with battery and memory cards is 1,010 g.

The weight of the Nikon D850 with battery and memory cards is 1,005 g, only 5 grams lighter (0.5%). Many of the Nikon lenses are heavier than the Pentax lenses, however (Nikon stabilization in the lens can make them heavier).

Not sure what you meant by "5D and 6D" since both Canon and Nikon have 5D models. I addressed in another post that the Canon 5D body alone is lighter than the Pentax K-1-II, but with kit lenses the Canon is heavier. As for the Nikon models:

The weight of the Nikon 5D with battery and memory cards is 1,405 g. This is 39% higher than the K-1-II.

The weight of the Nikon D6 with battery and memory cards is 1,450 g. This is 44% higher than the K-1-II.

Richard.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

The Canon EOS 5D IV weighs 890 g with battery. The EF 24-105 F4 lens that is sold with it as a kit weighs 795 g. The total weight of the camera and kit lens, in use, is 1,685 grams.

Are surprised that a constant ƒ4 24-105 is heaver than a 28 -105 ƒ3.5-5.6 go figure, and when comparing a 24-105 3.5-5.6 it only comes in at 525 g

Not sure what you meant by "5D and 6D" since both Canon and Nikon have 5D models.

The Canon 5DS is 930g and the 6D comes in at 770g

[Serkevan]

The weight of the Nikon 5D with battery and memory cards is 1,405 g. This is 39% higher than the K-1-II.

The weight of the Nikon D6 with battery and memory cards is 1,450 g. This is 44% higher than the K-1-II.

Richard.

That's the D5 and D6, not the 5D and 6D (which are from Canon).
As Ian said, the lenses you chose are not comparable.

[SirGuinea]

I wish they could do a K1 mirrorless version, it'd sell like hot cakes

By going mirrorless, they'll have to design new lenses as well. and that would actually make them lose loyal customers to the brand. They're the only company currently supporting DSLRs with Image stabilisation.
Why compete in an already saturated mirrorless market when you have the current one(DSLR) you can dominate in that the competitors aren't offering?

I do get what you say, DSLR autofocus isn't the greatest.
The K-1 ii's autodetection could be more accurate. I'm guessing the K-3 iii's system will be implemented in the K-1 iii

[hjoseph7]

You can use this website to compare camera sizes : Compare camera dimensions side by side

[mikesbike]

I too have found the K-1 II to be "built like a tank" yet remarkably compact for all that it is. And though it is a meaty handfull, it handles beautifully. I like the top LCD, always have in other models, but especially on the K-1 because I can see at a glance basically what is going on, without having to constantly tilt this very substantial camera with lens down and up to view this info, or swing out the rear screen. I love my KP just as much when I need more compact usage, and don't miss the top LCD as much, as it will be lighter handling, and I understand the need to omit it in order to include the advanced controls while maintainng its compact advantage.

Of course one has to include the likely lenses to be used in making comparisons. I've found the DFA 28-105mm to be an impressive performer and again not matched by the competitors for that along with very good WR construction at such a modest cost, and yet still compact. With the K-1 and K-1 II there are also the remarkable Limiteds to be included, which makes for powerful, superb FF photography with reduced size and weight. In fact, at this moment I happen to have an HD FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited mounted on my K-1 II sitting in a holster type case in a nearby room. Very compact. In another drawer beneath are a number of fine lenses, including the marvelous DFA 21mm, the HD FA 31mm and the HD FA 77mm f/1.8 Ltds. After years of use, I still can't get over the small size ot the 77mm Ltd for its FL and f/1.8 aperture. Easy carrying, these lenses, and talk about wonderful and very sharp imaging!

OldChE does do a good job of bringing direct comparisons that are also in touch with reality.

[OldChE]

That's the D5 and D6, not the 5D and 6D (which are from Canon).
As Ian said, the lenses you chose are not comparable.

Yes, I understand the lenses are different. But I didn't choose them. I used the lenses that were shown paired with the cameras in sales of a camera + lens "kit" such as shown on B&H photo.

[AgentL]

The K1 is small FF, even when considering modern FF mirrorless. If you take the pentaprism out the K1 is not much bigger than Sony bodies. I wish they could do a K1 mirrorless version, it'd sell like hot cakes. (I don't have my K1 anymore but here's my K10d next to Gen 4 Sony FF)

Ugh, no, I'm not replacing the excellent optical viewfinder of the K-1 with an EVF that I can't see properly with my transitional lenses on outside. Not to mention the K-mount is wasted space without a mirror.

[Wheatfield]

Ugh, no, I'm not replacing the excellent optical viewfinder of the K-1 with an EVF that I can't see properly with my transitional lenses on outside. Not to mention the K-mount is wasted space without a mirror.

This particular subject has been discussed ad infinitum. Ricoh has commited Pentax to be the last man standing in the SLR arena. Their reasons are theirs, as is the decision to live or die on that hill.
If they go mirrorless, they will be just another also ran bit player in a market that is both saturated and shrinking, and they will fail.

[madison_wi_gal]

Late to the party but my 2 cents.

Rented a K-1 II from Lensrentals, sending it back today. Walked around mostly with the 28-105 so it was a chonker setup but not overly heavy. Once I got it packed it up I grabbed the K-3 III to do the firmware update and it seemed a bit lighter and smaller but specs show that they are very similar. Although the K-1 II is thicker than the K-3 III, the grip feels the same so it is not a huge difference (to me).

My friend has a Nikon D850 and I could never see myself lugging that around all day.

[AgentL]

Late to the party but my 2 cents.

Rented a K-1 II from Lensrentals, sending it back today. Walked around mostly with the 28-105 so it was a chonker setup but not overly heavy. Once I got it packed it up I grabbed the K-3 III to do the firmware update and it seemed a bit lighter and smaller but specs show that they are very similar. Although the K-1 II is thicker than the K-3 III, the grip feels the same so it is not a huge difference (to me).

My friend has a Nikon D850 and I could never see myself lugging that around all day.

The K-1 feels a lot different with a small prime attached. I sold the 28-105mm to help fund the camera when I bought it as a kit. It was a very substantial lens, added a lot of weight.

[madison_wi_gal]

The K-1 feels a lot different with a small prime attached. I sold the 28-105mm to help fund the camera when I bought it as a kit. It was a very substantial lens, added a lot of weight.

I also put Señor 43 on it, and that was quite pleasant to use.

I'm not in the market for a super telephoto, but if I ever get the Viridian I might want to pair it with the D FA* 85mm f/1.4 SDM AW. I'm thinking I might need to get a wheelbarrow for that combo

[Wheatfield]

I also put Señor 43 on it, and that was quite pleasant to use.

I'm not in the market for a super telephoto, but if I ever get the Viridian I might want to pair it with the D FA* 85mm f/1.4 SDM AW. I'm thinking I might need to get a wheelbarrow for that combo

The K1 with the DFA*85/1.4 mounted weighs in at 5 lbs. That's a heavy rig. The nice thing is all that weight gives the camera a lot of inertia, so it's actually quite easy to handhold, at least for short periods of time. The not so nice thing is that all that weight gives the camera a lot of weight. Carrying the combo, gravity is definitely not on the side of the photographer.

My solution was not a wheelbarrow. I have a PA to carry my stuff. She also comes with great big teeth and a protective attitude.
This is a picture of the previous PA. He wasn't someone to tangle with at all, he was more the mess around and find out type.