Pentax K-1 landscape photography review

Gyroscope · 10-05-2016, 09:56 PM - **8 Likes**

Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking

Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare | Photography

Qwntm · 10-05-2016, 10:56 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Gyroscope

Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking

Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare | Photography

EXCELLENT review!! You hit all the important issues and added nothing superfluous.

I would only comment that Lenrentals.com did variance testing on the Tamron 24-70 along with the Canon and Nikon and the Tamron had the biggest sample variation. It is very possible your 24-70 is a not great copy, especially when you say it required -10 AF adjustment. You may want to see if Pentax could try to make it better, but it depends on the distributor in your country.

I just got the Pentax 24-70 and it seems to be a decent copy in my initial testing. I am optimistic.

(If you ever need a contact or guide in the Pacific NW of the USA, (particularly Oregon hot spots) shoot me a message!)

Peter Nutkins · 10-05-2016, 11:08 PM

A really useful review...honest look at strengths and opportunities for K-1 to be better. I was surprised at your comments on the zoom lenses...that wide angle sounds like a great purchase!

Thank you for sharing.

Peter

rullrich · 10-05-2016, 11:28 PM

Great review, especially for people who'd like to know how a camera works and feels under "field conditions". Thanks a lot! And great pictures!

roseblood11 · 10-06-2016, 12:12 AM

Great review, thanks!

But there's one mistake: The first DSLR's with IBIS where Minolta Maxxum 5D and 7D, followed by all Sony A-mount models since they bought the Minolta camera department in 2006.

And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder. Canon and Nikon have it because of in-lens stabilization, Sony has it because of the electronic viewfinders. Big disadvantage for Pentx, esp. if you use long focal range in combination with manual focus.

And when did Canon make a new mount for their aps-c cameras? They introduced a new mount only for their mirrorless cameras, not for the DSLR's.

**NZ_Ross** · 10-06-2016, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Gyroscope

Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking

Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare | Photography

Thank you, that is a very thorough and helpful review

Gyroscope · 10-06-2016, 12:41 AM

Originally posted by roseblood11

Great review, thanks!

But there's one mistake: The first DSLR's with IBIS where Minolta Maxxum 5D and 7D, followed by all Sony A-mount models since they bought the Minolta camera department in 2006.

And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder. Canon and Nikon have it because of in-lens stabilization, Sony has it because of the electronic viewfinders. Big disadvantage for Pentx, esp. if you use long focal range in combination with manual focus.

And when did Canon make a new mount for their aps-c cameras? They introduced a new mount only for their mirrorless cameras, not for the DSLR's.

And why don't you mention, that it's a disadvantage, that many interesting lenses from thitd-party manufacturers simply aren't available for k-mount?

Thanks for the feedback. I didn't think Sony A-mount camera's had IBIS - it seemed like they introduced it for the a9911 but maybe they had it in older bodies? I'll change the wording on this. I hadn't even heard of a minolta maxxum

I did mention that you don't get the stabilization effect through the viewfinder like you do with Canon etc. There is only so much info I can get into an article you have to stop somewhere. The canon ef-s is a seperate mount because you can't fit ef-s lenses on the full frame ef mount like you can with Pentax.

I also did go over some of the third party lens stuff but again I didn't want to be spend 4 paragraphs on the topic.

---------- Post added 10-06-16 at 12:48 AM ----------

Thanks for comments. I appreciate any corrections. I've made some quick corrections thanks to comments by roseblood11.

**Rondec** · 10-06-2016, 02:34 AM - **1 Like**

It is a very nice review and great photos with it. I have been pretty satisfied with my copy of the DFA 24-70, but I agree that it isn't a stellar lens. Reminds me a little of a super-sized DA *16-50 -- a lens that is very useful because of the focal lengths it covers, but doesn't ever get into the "great" category at any focal length. However, as you say, since for landscape you are stopped down most of the time, it is pretty good there.

AdrianM · 10-06-2016, 03:35 AM - **1 Like**

Great review and excellent example shots. My only area where I question the assesment is with respect to the K-1's suitability for wildlife action. When the opportunites for action arise, I have been getting some great results from the K-1 and the DFA 150-450 or Sigma 500 f4.5 and seriously notice the difference in ability to focus for a moving target against a background and focus tracking.in comparison to the K-3.

wanderer2 · 10-06-2016, 04:23 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Gyroscope

Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking

Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare | Photography

I'm wondering if you might be a bit overly critical of the K-1 auto focusing. I can't speak to this from any experience as I use my K-1 only for landscapes, but there have been images posted on this forum of motorcycle racing and horses running, for example, that are superb, and a sharp contrast to DPR not being able to effectively capture a bicyclist. It seems to me that in skilled and experienced hands the K-1 auto focuses much better than some have given it credit for. But again, this is supposition and not based on personal experience.

I don't believe there is a better DSLR for landscape photography and your gorgeous images certainly support that. I'm an amateur in every sense of the word and when I see fabulous images such as yours I often think "why do I even try?"

Overall a great review. Thanks for doing it.

Gyroscope · 10-06-2016, 05:14 AM

I don't think I said you can't use it for wildlife I just said the AF is not industry best. The AF is better than what I had in my 5D mk2 bodies which I had great success with for wildlife on my first African trip. Like with any tech once you understand its limitations you learn how to get the best out of it.

I do actually hope to review the 150-450 for bird photography sometime if I can get a loaner which will be an interesting test and I can compare it 5d3 and 100-400 which I have.

**Miguel** · 10-06-2016, 09:27 AM

I greatly appreciate your thoughtful and comprehensive review. I was a former Pentax shooter who left for Canon about 8 years ago. I just purchased (awaiting delivery) a K-1, the 24-70mm, and the FA 77 mm and will join these with a couple of K-mount gems I hung onto. I’ll still use my 5D MKIII for shooting sports and birds, but expect to retire from the former after next year, as my 60+ year old elbows and knees will have had enough.

All camera systems are highly imperfect and I see this in both Canon and Pentax. The inherent conservative design and feature set on the 5DMKIV gave me enough second thoughts to try the K-1. The Pentax FF platform is a work in progress which I find a bit frustrating coming from the well-envisioned Canon camp. The weight of the Tamron/Pentax 15-30mm seems overburdened compared with my optically superb and relatively light Canon 16-35mm L f4 IS. It is also interesting how varied the owner reviews of the 15-30mm have been.

I can feel the sense of frustration with the slim modern K-mount lens offerings now available. Buying into Pentax seems in part an act of faith on a few levels. The longer-term payoff is that Ricoh will release great single focal length glass, while more immediately one hopes that the older FA primes are up to snuff enough to fill in the gaps left by the new zooms. I just purchased a FA-20mm f2.8 (which is relatively lightweight) that I hope satisfies my UWA shooting requirements for a while at least.

Finally, could you please share your website platform? Your pages look excellent. Thanks.

M

yygomez · 10-06-2016, 09:48 AM

I don't know if it is the post processing or if it is intentional but the images taken with the15-30 look soft to me

funktionsfrei · 10-06-2016, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by roseblood11

And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder.

Actually, Pentax does have a stabilized viewfinder, when you use a stabilized lens. For incomprehensible reasons, Pentax does not make such lenses, but Sigma does.
Yes: optically stabilized lenses with K bayonet exist and work pretty fine on every Pentax DSLR since the K10D.

One pretty famous example for such a lens is the "Bigma", the 50-500/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. Another rather inexpensive example is the 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS, which can still be bought as new in some markets.

Of course: Neither the lens nor the camera body is aware of the other's stabilization, you should turn one of each off to circumvent problems. But with a long telephoto lens you might prefer OS, and using these Sigma lenses you can do what no user of any other camera brand can do: You can choose. Nearly instantaneously, for each shot differently, if needed.

teiki arii · 10-06-2016, 01:48 PM

Nice and very interesting review. Thank you for sharing. To meditate...
As I feel the Pentax K-1 very versatile and innovative for the kind of photos I do, as I use only Leica-R lenses on third brand cameras, I should go for it very soon. I hope not to be disappointed versus my EOS 6D...
Should I?

10-05-2016, 09:56 PM - 8 Likes	#1
Gyroscope Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 166	Pentax K-1 landscape photography review Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare \| Photography

10-06-2016, 12:12 AM	#5
roseblood11 New Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 9	Great review, thanks! But there's one mistake: The first DSLR's with IBIS where Minolta Maxxum 5D and 7D, followed by all Sony A-mount models since they bought the Minolta camera department in 2006. And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder. Canon and Nikon have it because of in-lens stabilization, Sony has it because of the electronic viewfinders. Big disadvantage for Pentx, esp. if you use long focal range in combination with manual focus. And when did Canon make a new mount for their aps-c cameras? They introduced a new mount only for their mirrorless cameras, not for the DSLR's. Last edited by roseblood11; 10-06-2016 at 12:39 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Popular Photography K-1 review	SteveD	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	24	07-30-2016 02:40 AM
Review - The 645 System for Landscape Photography	harklee	Pentax Medium Format	33	12-28-2015 05:31 AM
Recommend a lens for landscape/urban landscape photography	a96agli	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	01-22-2015 10:26 AM
Sony RX-1 Review on Luminous Landscape	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	12-26-2012 12:00 AM
Pentax K-7 Review @ Photography Blog	markgoldstein	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	06-25-2009 07:43 AM

10-05-2016, 10:56 PM - 1 Like	#2
Qwntm Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Eastern Oregon Posts: 856	Originally posted by Gyroscope Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare \| Photography EXCELLENT review!! You hit all the important issues and added nothing superfluous. I would only comment that Lenrentals.com did variance testing on the Tamron 24-70 along with the Canon and Nikon and the Tamron had the biggest sample variation. It is very possible your 24-70 is a not great copy, especially when you say it required -10 AF adjustment. You may want to see if Pentax could try to make it better, but it depends on the distributor in your country. I just got the Pentax 24-70 and it seems to be a decent copy in my initial testing. I am optimistic. (If you ever need a contact or guide in the Pacific NW of the USA, (particularly Oregon hot spots) shoot me a message!)

10-05-2016, 11:08 PM	#3
Peter Nutkins Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Exeter Photos: Albums Posts: 442	A really useful review...honest look at strengths and opportunities for K-1 to be better. I was surprised at your comments on the zoom lenses...that wide angle sounds like a great purchase! Thank you for sharing. Peter

10-05-2016, 11:28 PM	#4
rullrich Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Berlin Posts: 122	Great review, especially for people who'd like to know how a camera works and feels under "field conditions". Thanks a lot! And great pictures!

10-06-2016, 12:31 AM	#6
NZ_Ross Kiwi Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Timaru Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,225	Originally posted by Gyroscope Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare \| Photography Thank you, that is a very thorough and helpful review

10-06-2016, 12:41 AM	#7
Gyroscope Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 166 Original Poster	Originally posted by roseblood11 Great review, thanks! But there's one mistake: The first DSLR's with IBIS where Minolta Maxxum 5D and 7D, followed by all Sony A-mount models since they bought the Minolta camera department in 2006. And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder. Canon and Nikon have it because of in-lens stabilization, Sony has it because of the electronic viewfinders. Big disadvantage for Pentx, esp. if you use long focal range in combination with manual focus. And when did Canon make a new mount for their aps-c cameras? They introduced a new mount only for their mirrorless cameras, not for the DSLR's. And why don't you mention, that it's a disadvantage, that many interesting lenses from thitd-party manufacturers simply aren't available for k-mount? Thanks for the feedback. I didn't think Sony A-mount camera's had IBIS - it seemed like they introduced it for the a9911 but maybe they had it in older bodies? I'll change the wording on this. I hadn't even heard of a minolta maxxum I did mention that you don't get the stabilization effect through the viewfinder like you do with Canon etc. There is only so much info I can get into an article you have to stop somewhere. The canon ef-s is a seperate mount because you can't fit ef-s lenses on the full frame ef mount like you can with Pentax. I also did go over some of the third party lens stuff but again I didn't want to be spend 4 paragraphs on the topic. ---------- Post added 10-06-16 at 12:48 AM ---------- Thanks for comments. I appreciate any corrections. I've made some quick corrections thanks to comments by roseblood11.

10-06-2016, 02:34 AM - 1 Like	#8
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	It is a very nice review and great photos with it. I have been pretty satisfied with my copy of the DFA 24-70, but I agree that it isn't a stellar lens. Reminds me a little of a super-sized DA *16-50 -- a lens that is very useful because of the focal lengths it covers, but doesn't ever get into the "great" category at any focal length. However, as you say, since for landscape you are stopped down most of the time, it is pretty good there.

10-06-2016, 03:35 AM - 1 Like	#9
AdrianM Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Ipswich, Queensland, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 589	Great review and excellent example shots. My only area where I question the assesment is with respect to the K-1's suitability for wildlife action. When the opportunites for action arise, I have been getting some great results from the K-1 and the DFA 150-450 or Sigma 500 f4.5 and seriously notice the difference in ability to focus for a moving target against a background and focus tracking.in comparison to the K-3.

10-06-2016, 04:23 AM - 1 Like	#10
wanderer2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Posts: 301	Originally posted by Gyroscope Hi, all. I thought there might be a few landscape photographers out there interested in a review of the Pentax K-1. I've just completed my review that includes the 24-70 and 15-30. Thanks for looking Pentax K-1 Landscape Photography Review ? Morden O'Hare \| Photography I'm wondering if you might be a bit overly critical of the K-1 auto focusing. I can't speak to this from any experience as I use my K-1 only for landscapes, but there have been images posted on this forum of motorcycle racing and horses running, for example, that are superb, and a sharp contrast to DPR not being able to effectively capture a bicyclist. It seems to me that in skilled and experienced hands the K-1 auto focuses much better than some have given it credit for. But again, this is supposition and not based on personal experience. I don't believe there is a better DSLR for landscape photography and your gorgeous images certainly support that. I'm an amateur in every sense of the word and when I see fabulous images such as yours I often think "why do I even try?" Overall a great review. Thanks for doing it.

10-06-2016, 05:14 AM	#11
Gyroscope Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 166 Original Poster	I don't think I said you can't use it for wildlife I just said the AF is not industry best. The AF is better than what I had in my 5D mk2 bodies which I had great success with for wildlife on my first African trip. Like with any tech once you understand its limitations you learn how to get the best out of it. I do actually hope to review the 150-450 for bird photography sometime if I can get a loaner which will be an interesting test and I can compare it 5d3 and 100-400 which I have.

10-06-2016, 09:27 AM	#12
Miguel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Near Seattle Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,743	I greatly appreciate your thoughtful and comprehensive review. I was a former Pentax shooter who left for Canon about 8 years ago. I just purchased (awaiting delivery) a K-1, the 24-70mm, and the FA 77 mm and will join these with a couple of K-mount gems I hung onto. I’ll still use my 5D MKIII for shooting sports and birds, but expect to retire from the former after next year, as my 60+ year old elbows and knees will have had enough. All camera systems are highly imperfect and I see this in both Canon and Pentax. The inherent conservative design and feature set on the 5DMKIV gave me enough second thoughts to try the K-1. The Pentax FF platform is a work in progress which I find a bit frustrating coming from the well-envisioned Canon camp. The weight of the Tamron/Pentax 15-30mm seems overburdened compared with my optically superb and relatively light Canon 16-35mm L f4 IS. It is also interesting how varied the owner reviews of the 15-30mm have been. I can feel the sense of frustration with the slim modern K-mount lens offerings now available. Buying into Pentax seems in part an act of faith on a few levels. The longer-term payoff is that Ricoh will release great single focal length glass, while more immediately one hopes that the older FA primes are up to snuff enough to fill in the gaps left by the new zooms. I just purchased a FA-20mm f2.8 (which is relatively lightweight) that I hope satisfies my UWA shooting requirements for a while at least. Finally, could you please share your website platform? Your pages look excellent. Thanks. M

10-06-2016, 09:48 AM	#13
yygomez Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Surfside,FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 155	I don't know if it is the post processing or if it is intentional but the images taken with the15-30 look soft to me

10-06-2016, 11:14 AM	#14
funktionsfrei Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 183	Originally posted by roseblood11 And you should mention that Pentax cameras are the only ones that don't have a stabilized viewfinder. Actually, Pentax does have a stabilized viewfinder, when you use a stabilized lens. For incomprehensible reasons, Pentax does not make such lenses, but Sigma does. Yes: optically stabilized lenses with K bayonet exist and work pretty fine on every Pentax DSLR since the K10D. One pretty famous example for such a lens is the "Bigma", the 50-500/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS HSM. Another rather inexpensive example is the 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS, which can still be bought as new in some markets. Of course: Neither the lens nor the camera body is aware of the other's stabilization, you should turn one of each off to circumvent problems. But with a long telephoto lens you might prefer OS, and using these Sigma lenses you can do what no user of any other camera brand can do: You can choose. Nearly instantaneously, for each shot differently, if needed.

10-06-2016, 01:48 PM	#15
teiki arii Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Posts: 689	Nice and very interesting review. Thank you for sharing. To meditate... As I feel the Pentax K-1 very versatile and innovative for the kind of photos I do, as I use only Leica-R lenses on third brand cameras, I should go for it very soon. I hope not to be disappointed versus my EOS 6D... Should I?