New FF body or new lens - which will make more of a difference in image quality?

jchrysostom · 07-31-2019, 01:51 PM

I currently shoot with a much-loved K5ii-S, with the current version of the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8, and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Most of my work is family / portrait photo sessions with a handful of weddings each year. I had a good summer and am looking to reinvest some $ into new equipment.

The budget allows for either a new K1 Mark II body, or a new FA* 70-200 f/2.8. If I go with the K1 I would continue to use my current glass for at least another year. If I go with the new lens, I will probably sell the Tamron 70-200 and pick up a used K3ii for the dual card slots and "better" AF.

Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal.

MarkJerling · 07-31-2019, 02:50 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by jchrysostom

I currently shoot with a much-loved K5ii-S, with the current version of the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8, and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Most of my work is family / portrait photo sessions with a handful of weddings each year. I had a good summer and am looking to reinvest some $ into new equipment.

The budget allows for either a new K1 Mark II body, or a new FA* 70-200 f/2.8. If I go with the K1 I would continue to use my current glass for at least another year. If I go with the new lens, I will probably sell the Tamron 70-200 and pick up a used K3ii for the dual card slots and "better" AF.

Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal.

There's no wrong or right answers. Better glass will make a difference. But, as someone who's gone from a K-5 to a K-1II, I can tell you that there's a huge and noticeable step up in image quality, even when shooting with old glass, like I do.

**ffking** · 07-31-2019, 03:19 PM - **1 Like**

On the principle that a good lens can outresolve your current sensor, I'd say that a K-1 (ii?) would make more sense. If you can pick up a K-1, you'd have more money left for your glass collection, and the resolution is the same as the mkii.

tokyoscape · 07-31-2019, 03:33 PM - **1 Like**

i would go with the K1. Save up a bit more then sale the Tamron, K5IIs and get FA* 70-200

**jatrax** · 07-31-2019, 04:15 PM - **1 Like**

The 'standard' answer to this question is something like "glass is forever, bodies come and go" and the recommendation would be to buy a new lens. But in this case I think you would get the most improvement for your investment with a K-1. There is a marked difference in performance and image quality. Your glass is already FF capable so you can certainly continue to use it.

The big adjustment will be moving to the FF angle of view and despite all the "old guys" screaming about finally being able to use their glass as designed with a K-1, those of us used to shooting with APS-C do have an adjustment when we move to FF. But once past that I think you will be impressed with the K-1 (or K-1II).

Wheatfield · 07-31-2019, 04:16 PM

Go for the K1. More real estate = better pictures.
Having said that, so does a better lens, but you need to be going from a pretty bad lens to a really good one to get a huge improvement. I suspect your Tamrons are pretty decent glass.

btnapa · 07-31-2019, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by jchrysostom

Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality?

I have the K1 and the K5IIs. Back in my wedding shooting days (Canon cameras), I always bought two of the same bodies. Reason was that I wanted the controls and the image quality to be identical. When you are shooting weddings, you do not have time to figure things out on the fly and you do not want a difference in image quality either. If I shot weddings again and Pentax was my camera of choice (which is not), I would get two K1 bodies or if budget is tight, I would get two KP bodies. I shot a friends wedding with my K1 and I suffered. In my opinion Pentax is not for weddings. I am sure a lot of people would disagree but I go by my own experiences. I have the K1 but having tried the KP, I think it is better at high ISO, it is lighter and 24PM is plenty for wedding work. Bulk of my wedding work was done with 8 and 12MP cameras. So even the K5IIs has plenty of resolution for wedding work. If there is money left, I would put it towards some fast primes for those low-light and shallow DOF situations. Just my two cents.

Paul the Sunman · 07-31-2019, 06:01 PM

Your Tamron 70-200 is a good lens. I have the DFA* 70-200, which is amazing, but I think the best bang for your buck would be to get the K1 and stick with the Tamron.

Sandy Hancock · 07-31-2019, 06:14 PM

I would definitely go for the K-1.

Your current lenses are very good, and they will really shine on a full frame body. You'll certainly appreciate the wide end of the 28-75.

**Alex645** · 07-31-2019, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by jchrysostom

Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal.

95% of the time, I'd recommend spending money on better optics rather than the camera/sensor.....but in your case I'd recommend moving up to the K-1's FF sensor. The bokeh on portraits and improved dynamic range will be tangible in a way that a different lens for your APS-C just won't match.

Nunavut · 07-31-2019, 09:44 PM

k1, no question. The low light and high iso capability, plus abilty to use 1:1 crop lens beats any aps-c pentax except if you need a light portable camera to hike with

**shardulm** · 07-31-2019, 09:53 PM

The star optics is a step up for sure and add to that the Pentaxs rendering... Makes it superb.

Tabling the FF wider FOV advantage, a K-5iis with D-FA* 70-200 will give you a cleaner image than a K-1 with Tamron would pixel for pixel.
If you don't need 36mpix and all the bells and whistles that k-1 brings with it then you may be better of getting into the star optics game at this time.

Unregistered User · 08-01-2019, 03:22 AM

I'm in agreement with @Btnapa; the KP has much higher resolution (pixels per square unit) than the K-1*, and way more than the K5s. I'm thinking, if I were in your position, the decision would depend on the present investment in lenses. If your lenses are all APS-C, then go for the KP; if you've already got FF lenses (or you're rich enough to go out and buy those in addition), then go with the K-1 (I also prefer that to the "Mark II").

I taught my kids a method of making such decisions: take a quarter, and decide which option is "heads" and which is "tails". Then flip the quarter and slap in on your forearm. Then observe yourself in the process and take note of which side you WANT to win and take that option. Never even look at the quarter.

* The KP's pixels are a lot smaller than those of the K-1, but there are more of them per square unit of surface area - being arithmetically challenged, myself, I relied upon @Clackers (who seems to know what he's talking about) for the conclusion. But see this comparison: https://www.digicamdb.com/compare/pentax_kp-vs-pentax_k-1/. I really like the increase in image detail with the KP.

**clickclick** · 08-01-2019, 04:36 AM

As pointed out, your FOV is going to change, so try to process your shooting style and how that may be impacted. You're going to need to be closer to your subject at a given focal length to fill the frame the same. Thinking if you're doing a lot of portrait work and are used to certain positions and framing and resulting depth of field etc., it's going to be different. Even anticipating this, I was surprised how my lens choice changed in certain scenarios when gong between my K3 II and K-1. This makes a KP an interesting prospect to throw into the mix as an option. All that said, the K-1 is a fantastic camera, and certainly is going to be an improvement over what you have. I just found it wasn't as cut and dry as I anticipated, and I use my K3 II more than I thought I would after buying my K-1.

jchrysostom · 08-01-2019, 05:33 AM - **1 Like**

Thanks for the input, everyone. I hadn't really thought about how the FOV change would impact the framing of certain shots; I do probably 75% of my work in 2 or 3 locations, and I definitely have a habit of setting up the same shots session after session based on what people like, so there might be a (re)learning curve.

I'll start shopping for a K1.

07-31-2019, 01:51 PM	#1
jchrysostom New Member Join Date: Aug 2018 Posts: 16	New FF body or new lens - which will make more of a difference in image quality? I currently shoot with a much-loved K5ii-S, with the current version of the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8, and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Most of my work is family / portrait photo sessions with a handful of weddings each year. I had a good summer and am looking to reinvest some $ into new equipment. The budget allows for either a new K1 Mark II body, or a new FA* 70-200 f/2.8. If I go with the K1 I would continue to use my current glass for at least another year. If I go with the new lens, I will probably sell the Tamron 70-200 and pick up a used K3ii for the dual card slots and "better" AF. Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal.

08-01-2019, 03:22 AM	#13
Unregistered User Guest	I'm in agreement with @Btnapa; the KP has much higher resolution (pixels per square unit) than the K-1, and way more than the K5s. I'm thinking, if I were in your position, the decision would depend on the present investment in lenses. If your lenses are all APS-C, then go for the KP; if you've already got FF lenses (or you're rich enough to go out and buy those in addition), then go with the K-1 (I also prefer that to the "Mark II"). I taught my kids a method of making such decisions: take a quarter, and decide which option is "heads" and which is "tails". Then flip the quarter and slap in on your forearm. Then observe yourself in the process and take note of which side you WANT to win and take that option. Never even look at the quarter. The KP's pixels are a lot smaller than those of the K-1, but there are more of them per square unit of surface area - being arithmetically challenged, myself, I relied upon @Clackers (who seems to know what he's talking about) for the conclusion. But see this comparison: https://www.digicamdb.com/compare/pentax_kp-vs-pentax_k-1/. I really like the increase in image detail with the KP. Last edited by Unregistered User; 08-01-2019 at 03:35 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FA vs. D FA for K-1 - a real difference in image quality?	Socrateeze	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	02-01-2018 04:05 AM
Difference in image quality : Pentax 18-5mm kit, Pentax 35mm f2.4 prime	richardstringer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	08-27-2013 12:27 AM
SMC 55/1.8 and 28/3.5 image quality -- big difference?	noctilux	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	12-04-2011 02:28 PM
Comparing FF to APS-C: What difference does the bigger sensor make?	dosdan	Photography Articles	26	07-29-2011 02:53 PM
What difference does JPEG star quality make?	Marcus	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	08-07-2010 06:56 AM

07-31-2019, 02:50 PM - 2 Likes	#2
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,406	Originally posted by jchrysostom I currently shoot with a much-loved K5ii-S, with the current version of the Tamron SP 70-200 f/2.8, and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Most of my work is family / portrait photo sessions with a handful of weddings each year. I had a good summer and am looking to reinvest some $ into new equipment. The budget allows for either a new K1 Mark II body, or a new FA* 70-200 f/2.8. If I go with the K1 I would continue to use my current glass for at least another year. If I go with the new lens, I will probably sell the Tamron 70-200 and pick up a used K3ii for the dual card slots and "better" AF. Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal. There's no wrong or right answers. Better glass will make a difference. But, as someone who's gone from a K-5 to a K-1II, I can tell you that there's a huge and noticeable step up in image quality, even when shooting with old glass, like I do.

07-31-2019, 03:19 PM - 1 Like	#3
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	On the principle that a good lens can outresolve your current sensor, I'd say that a K-1 (ii?) would make more sense. If you can pick up a K-1, you'd have more money left for your glass collection, and the resolution is the same as the mkii.

07-31-2019, 03:33 PM - 1 Like	#4
tokyoscape Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,256	i would go with the K1. Save up a bit more then sale the Tamron, K5IIs and get FA* 70-200

07-31-2019, 04:15 PM - 1 Like	#5
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	The 'standard' answer to this question is something like "glass is forever, bodies come and go" and the recommendation would be to buy a new lens. But in this case I think you would get the most improvement for your investment with a K-1. There is a marked difference in performance and image quality. Your glass is already FF capable so you can certainly continue to use it. The big adjustment will be moving to the FF angle of view and despite all the "old guys" screaming about finally being able to use their glass as designed with a K-1, those of us used to shooting with APS-C do have an adjustment when we move to FF. But once past that I think you will be impressed with the K-1 (or K-1II).

07-31-2019, 04:16 PM	#6
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Go for the K1. More real estate = better pictures. Having said that, so does a better lens, but you need to be going from a pretty bad lens to a really good one to get a huge improvement. I suspect your Tamrons are pretty decent glass.

07-31-2019, 04:45 PM	#7
btnapa Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,616	Originally posted by jchrysostom Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I have the K1 and the K5IIs. Back in my wedding shooting days (Canon cameras), I always bought two of the same bodies. Reason was that I wanted the controls and the image quality to be identical. When you are shooting weddings, you do not have time to figure things out on the fly and you do not want a difference in image quality either. If I shot weddings again and Pentax was my camera of choice (which is not), I would get two K1 bodies or if budget is tight, I would get two KP bodies. I shot a friends wedding with my K1 and I suffered. In my opinion Pentax is not for weddings. I am sure a lot of people would disagree but I go by my own experiences. I have the K1 but having tried the KP, I think it is better at high ISO, it is lighter and 24PM is plenty for wedding work. Bulk of my wedding work was done with 8 and 12MP cameras. So even the K5IIs has plenty of resolution for wedding work. If there is money left, I would put it towards some fast primes for those low-light and shallow DOF situations. Just my two cents.

07-31-2019, 06:01 PM	#8
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,843	Your Tamron 70-200 is a good lens. I have the DFA* 70-200, which is amazing, but I think the best bang for your buck would be to get the K1 and stick with the Tamron.

07-31-2019, 06:14 PM	#9
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	I would definitely go for the K-1. Your current lenses are very good, and they will really shine on a full frame body. You'll certainly appreciate the wide end of the 28-75.

07-31-2019, 07:39 PM	#10
Alex645 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2015 Location: Kaneohe, HI Photos: Albums Posts: 3,526	Originally posted by jchrysostom Which path will yield more improvement in terms of image quality? I'm fine with the handling and performance of my K5ii-S, just looking for the next step in portfolio appeal. 95% of the time, I'd recommend spending money on better optics rather than the camera/sensor.....but in your case I'd recommend moving up to the K-1's FF sensor. The bokeh on portraits and improved dynamic range will be tangible in a way that a different lens for your APS-C just won't match.

07-31-2019, 09:44 PM	#11
Nunavut Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2018 Location: Vancouver Canada Posts: 37	k1, no question. The low light and high iso capability, plus abilty to use 1:1 crop lens beats any aps-c pentax except if you need a light portable camera to hike with

07-31-2019, 09:53 PM	#12
shardulm Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Cumming, GA Posts: 793	The star optics is a step up for sure and add to that the Pentaxs rendering... Makes it superb. Tabling the FF wider FOV advantage, a K-5iis with D-FA* 70-200 will give you a cleaner image than a K-1 with Tamron would pixel for pixel. If you don't need 36mpix and all the bells and whistles that k-1 brings with it then you may be better of getting into the star optics game at this time.

08-01-2019, 04:36 AM	#14
clickclick Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2016 Location: East Coast Posts: 2,903	As pointed out, your FOV is going to change, so try to process your shooting style and how that may be impacted. You're going to need to be closer to your subject at a given focal length to fill the frame the same. Thinking if you're doing a lot of portrait work and are used to certain positions and framing and resulting depth of field etc., it's going to be different. Even anticipating this, I was surprised how my lens choice changed in certain scenarios when gong between my K3 II and K-1. This makes a KP an interesting prospect to throw into the mix as an option. All that said, the K-1 is a fantastic camera, and certainly is going to be an improvement over what you have. I just found it wasn't as cut and dry as I anticipated, and I use my K3 II more than I thought I would after buying my K-1.

08-01-2019, 05:33 AM - 1 Like	#15
jchrysostom New Member Join Date: Aug 2018 Posts: 16 Original Poster	Thanks for the input, everyone. I hadn't really thought about how the FOV change would impact the framing of certain shots; I do probably 75% of my work in 2 or 3 locations, and I definitely have a habit of setting up the same shots session after session based on what people like, so there might be a (re)learning curve. I'll start shopping for a K1.