[Billk]

The K1 feels perfect in my hands.

It has enough bulk to say: I'm a serious camera.

It is light enough so I will nearly always take it instead of just my point and shoot (or my K3 while i still had it).

[Lord Lucan]

I like a large and hefty camera, and the Pentax K-1 is not the only such one out there in any case. I do landscape and some technical photography and I don't care about conspicuousness as there is rarely anyone else around. I would not use a K-1 for street photography anyway - I'd use an old P&S that I would not care if I got mugged for.

Size and conspicuousness are an advantage in many professional situations - I'm an amateur, but my father did weddings, portraits, theatre stuff etc part time. At a wedding, "crowd control" was part of the job (the pictures were very formal in those days) and a large camera on a heavy tripod (he used a MF) helped him stand out as the Authority, especially when half the guests were toting 35mm SLRs. Similarly, portrait customers could feel assured they had hired a professional when he arrived with a camera that was obvioulsy bigger and more expensive than their own.

Maybe I'm odd in that I don't give a hoot about comfort in the hand etc. Perhaps because I carry in a shoulder bag and only take the camera out for a shot. Or because I'm used to using a Pentax 6x7. I'm reminded of an famous essay (sorry can't find the link right now) in which a guy compared amateur tools with professional ones. He compared an amateur drill gun - in tasteful colours and sculpted plastic handle - with a professional thing called a Hole Hog - which he described as a brutal cast metal cube with handles like short lengths of gas pipe with rubber hose on them. But the amateur drill would burn out if it jammed while the Hole Hog would start spinning its operator!

[ffking]

I would not use a K-1 for street photography anyway

I do!

[normhead]

Maybe I'm odd in that I don't give a hoot about comfort in the hand etc.

If you like what a camera does you use it.... at least that's my take. Ergonomic form is nice but not essential.

[OldChE]

Here are the two articles:

$2000+
2017 Roundup: Semi-Pro Interchangeable Lens Cameras $2000+: Digital Photography Review


$1200-$2000

2017 Roundup: $1200-2000 interchangeable lens cameras: full-frame: Digital Photography Review

Guess the Pentax was afforable enough during that time that it made it on to the <$2000USD list.

As the article (pg. 8) says,

Thanks very much for the links, I read the reviews (and some of the outraged comments from Pentaxians) and see what you mean!

[btnapa]

Maybe I'm odd in that I don't give a hoot about comfort in the hand etc. Perhaps because I carry in a shoulder bag and only take the camera out for a shot. Or because I'm used to using a Pentax 6x7. I'm reminded of an famous essay (sorry can't find the link right now) in which a guy compared amateur tools with professional ones. He compared an amateur drill gun - in tasteful colours and sculpted plastic handle - with a professional thing called a Hole Hog - which he described as a brutal cast metal cube with handles like short lengths of gas pipe with rubber hose on them. But the amateur drill would burn out if it jammed while the Hole Hog would start spinning its operator!

I agree. I think of my K1 as the "hole Hog." I do have a few Fuji cameras too but the feel is not the same.

[OldChE]

Update: I got my K-1M2 on March 4, and now that I've been using it for a while here are some observations.
- It handles very well, ergonomics are great. It fits my hand well, even without the battery grip.
- You can notice the increase in weight vs. the K-70, and it is a bit larger in size as well. Not a huge difference, incremental, but certainly noticeable.
- I suspect one factor behind people perceiving the K-1 as "heavy" is the density (weight/volume) of the camera. It is rather compact for its weight. I suspect that if a person handles two cameras of identical weight, but one is significantly smaller in size, they would think that the smaller one is "heavier" or more "massive" than the larger camera.

It is actually this last factor that I perceived as a positive for Pentax DSLRs. When I compared the "feel" of several entry level to mid range DSLRs in a local camera store, I didn't like at all the feel of the Canon and Nikon models. Their light weight and the way the controls and lenses moved gave me a feeling of low-grade construction. This may have been a misperception on my part, but that is how I felt. In contrast, the "solid" feel and smooth operation of the Pentax models always signaled to me a feeling of quality and precision manufacturing. Again, perhaps not always the most reliable impression, knowing now that sometimes some of those Pentax components would later prove to be unreliable (e.g., the aperture solenoid in my K-50 and K-70). However, I think the perception was mostly accurate, as besides the aperture solenoids my K-50 was a wonderful and robust camera, and my K-70 continues to be so.

Oh, and I noticed that a significant part of the weight is that HD 28-105 lens. It weighs about 30% more than my comparable SMC Pentax-FA 24-90mm F3.5-4.5 AL [IF] (2001). However, I think the 28-105 will prove to be a favorite lens on the K-1, just as the 18-135 WR is for my K-70.

Thanks for all of your comments! - Richard.

---

Last edited by OldChE; 03-19-2021 at 10:50 AM. Reason: Wanted to add comment on the 28-105 lens.

[texandrews]

March 4th/forth, OldChE, and conquer! Enjoy that K1M2. I totally agree with your perceptive comments about density and size, and the comparison with Canon and Nikon models---I use 5DmkIV's at work for video and they feel cheesy to me.

[OldChE]

March 4th/forth, OldChE, and conquer! Enjoy that K1M2. I totally agree with your perceptive comments about density and size, and the comparison with Canon and Nikon models---I use 5DmkIV's at work for video and they feel cheesy to me.

Thanks. Being a chemical engineer, ideas like "density" come naturally to mind.

[OldChE]

Took this soon after getting my K-1 Mark II, with the 28-105 WR lens.

[MJKoski]

K-1 has perfect ergonomics - one can shoot one-handed with heavy lens. My GFX50R is a bigger than K-1 and I had to purchase a separate grip to get some kind of grip at all. Only few modern MILCs show some promise and those are the Canon R3 and Nikon Z9.

[texandrews]

K-1 has perfect ergonomics - one can shoot one-handed with heavy lens. My GFX50R is a bigger than K-1 and I had to purchase a separate grip to get some kind of grip at all. Only few modern MILCs show some promise and those are the Canon R3 and Nikon Z9.

Agreed. Pentax does very well on some things, needs improvement on others. But thankfully one thing it does very well on is the thing you need every time you use it: ergonomics. And I'm an ergonomics skeptic, as I think in the end it's very personal. But Pentax gets it so right generally. My 645Z is bulky and heavy---it would never be confused for a lightweight(in any way), yet the ergonomics are wonderful, such that I have used it one handed while holding a flash off axis. Not something I'd want to do all day, mind you, unless I hit those kettle bells like I've been meaning to....

I had a great(for its time) MILC, the original Sony A7R, which I purchased right before I got my Z. Saw it at the big Photo Expo show in NYC when it was first released and fell in love with its solidity and looks there. But in the end its size felt cramped in use, and once I put the lenses I had on it, which needed adapters, there was no "size advantage" worth mentioning. The opposite in fact. Now, that situation has improved a great deal with Sony's work on the lens side of things, plus many others clustering around. But they are still cameras for those who like smaller bodies, and I am one of those who don't. The K1/K1mkII cameras are about as small as I want for a work camera. I'm curious if the new K3III is going to be too small for me.

The only smaller camera I would desire is something truly pocketable (coat pocket), but in FF---even better medium format, like the old Fuji 645 series. The Sony RX1R series is just a bit too small, imo. And I do want a viewfinder.

[MJKoski]

Pocket and FF is a hard puzzle to crack. RX1(R) series is one and Sigma FP another option and that is for the FP body alone. Add a lens and the pocket is no more.

[Serkevan]

Pocket and FF is a hard puzzle to crack. RX1(R) series is one and Sigma FP another option and that is for the FP body alone. Add a lens and the pocket is no more.

Yeah, the moment you add anything other that a pancake "pocketable" goes out the window...
I'd be happy to settle for a GRiii or so, though... for its use case it sounds fantastic.

[Ash]

As bulkier and heavier the K-1 is compared to all the APS-C cameras I’ve had, I’ve never appreciably felt weighed down or restricted by the K-1. What I couple it to is another question …