[sumitkar1971]

As Photographers flock to Mirrorless and New Technology, I fall further in love with my K1. It's a camera that makes sense to me and allows me photograph the way I like to - Slow, Deliberate and concentrating on the subject. I don't need the latest and greatest and the K-1 is more camera than I will ever need - My Photographic Gear is complete. I might need the occasional visit to the Chiropractor but I love my Pentax gear. I have no need to upgrade to the Mark 2 as the K-1 is all I need - Brilliant ergonomics, built like a tank, Incredible IQ, Built in Shake Reduction, A Menu system that is intuitive and a body that is a pleasure to hold in the hands. The three lenses I own are just magical - Pentaxian from the Late 70's and a Pentaxian for life

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[photoptimist]

Me too!

I honestly do not want what Sony, Fuji, Canon, Nikon, etc. are offering and would not use them even if given to me for free. Their specs hold no allure and they lack so many important features that the K-1 has that it's simply no contest.

Everyone differs in what they consider to be a superior or an inferior camera. Others may prefer other models or other brands. I judge the K-1 to be superior for me.

[Bob 256]

I waited many years for a FF replacement for my Pentax PZ-1p film camera and jumped on the K-1. So far (about a year in), I have no regrets and am still learning new and amazing features of the K-1. One of my wants was to obtain a digital camera which challenged FF film resolution, dynamic range, speed & grain structure (not good comparisons for the last one) and I think the K-1 is right there. No regrets other than some high initial investment costs which can be recouped in film & film processing/scanning costs (and turnaround time of digital is in another ballpark).

Bottom line sumitkar1971 - be happy. Live the K-1.

[CDW]

I've said it before, worth repeating: Use the right tool for the job.

For my shooting style (landscape, nature, high resolution) I use my K1.

My only fast action shooting is occasionally wildlife (mostly birds) and my recently acquired a7III fills the need.

For video and stills backup, my a7III and GH-4.

I'm pretty brand agnostic, with the exception of Canon and Nikon, neither of which produce bodies that are of interest to me. However, I do wish Pentax had a customer service department that was the equal of Canon.

[kiwi_jono]

Me three!

I'm mostly into landscape photography and the K-1 is an amazing tool for the money. The little movie and action shooting I do, has turned out alright and I certainly don't crave any other camera at this stage. The only one Canikon that looks interesting to me is the D850 but then its way more expensive anyway - and why do the Canikon cameras tend to cheat a bit on their ISO settings (see DxoMark tests)?

But that said I get that everyone has different needs. I can see that if you were shooting a lot video or action then something like a Sony a7III appeals.

Not sure if I will bother upgrading my K-1 at this point - I'm not even sure if its going to be offered in NZ anyway!
I find the K1 II improvements to high ISO are a little disappointing but after playing with some sample RAW files, I don't see the new accelerator chip as a disadvantage either (other than a little on battery life!).

[Billk]

I love my K1 but I do dream about a particular brand of MF camera that can do this with just fading light, when I would be pulling out my flash with just about any other camera. For around 10K less, though, the K1 delivers wonderful images in its own right. Plus, the MF only does slow photography, whereas the K1 has a decent burst rate for most wildlife photography.

[mcgregni]

I don't need the latest and greatest

I thought the K1 was the latest and the greatest ....

[davesofnj]

My K-1 would be complete if there were a Pentax 1.7x full-frame teleconverter. Otherwise, I agree with everything said here, although I will be upgrading to the MkII.

Dave