[AgentL]

Hello friends, this may just be GAS, but I can't get the K-1 mkII out of my head. It just offers such a powerful FF sensor along with all the Pentax goodies and the K-mount for such a good price. The one thing, however, is how large and heavy the camera appears to be. I had a KP for a little less than a year and I loved certain things about it, but I found it heavy - for its size - and therefore a little awkward to carry. I am used to micro four thirds, if that gives you a good idea of the system size I tend to carry. So I'm just interested in hearing whether anyone coming from much smaller and/or lighter cameras has made the adjustment to carrying a K-1, and how that went for you. I realize it will not have the same portability as the EM5 mk II that I am used to, but I don't really have any analogous experience of what it would feel like in use. Perhaps I need to rent one...

[robgski]

I recommend renting. I rented a K-1 several times before I purchased a used copy for myself.

Unless one has unlimited free time for photography, one’s gear can sit unused for days or weeks, but Renting often gave me impetus to use the camera as much as possible during the rental period, so I often used it in a broad range of circumstances.

[UncleVanya]

I used m43 for many years - only recently selling off my m43 gear due to the decision to use a Sony RX100 IV as my compact camera. I use both Pentax APSC (KP) and Sony FF (A7R IV) and both are noticeably larger than the m43 gear I once used. However the low iso performance and higher resolution allows for more cropping and slower lenses that help curb the size growth when this type of tradeoff is acceptable. As an example with the E-m1 of GX8 I would take a 12-35/2.8 or 12-32/4-5.6 and 45-175/4-5.6 as the “do anything two lens kit” but often the 20/1.7 and 60/2.8 or 42/1.7 would get a lot of use due to aperture and iso limits. On my KP I can often use the 20-40/2.8-4 and 55-300/4.5-6.3 PLM and perhaps the DA 40. With the Sony I use a 24-105/4 or a 28-70/3.5-5.6 as a do all kit plus the Tamron 70-300/4.5-6.3 as the light do all kit.

When I tried the K-1 I was also trying the 24-70/2.8 and found that combo really too big for my tastes. That said, I think if I had tried the DA 28-105, I might have selected a different path as that lens seems to be the light and capable lens needed to make the k-1 comfortable. I did enjoy the FA 31/1.8 and FA 77/1.8 as well as the D FA 100/2.8 on the K-1.

This isn’t quite what you asked, and the a7R series is lighter and smaller than the k-1 but lenses for ff are larger even in the mirrorless world so similar issues exist.

[pschlute]

I upgraded from the K10D to the K1 about six years ago. I don't find it heavy, but of course a lot depends on the optics you have attached.

I take the view these days that if you want a camera for your pocket, then your smart-phone is your friend. If you want to go and take exceptional pictures, then you have to put up with the weight.

I do most of my K1 photography these days on a tripod.

[UncleVanya]

I upgraded from the K10D to the K1 about six years ago. I don't find it heavy, but of course a lot depends on the optics you have attached.

I take the view these days that if you want a camera for your pocket, then your smart-phone is your friend. If you want to go and take exceptional pictures, then you have to put up with the weight.

I do most of my K1 photography these days on a tripod.

My iPhone 11 isn’t a top of the line iPhone but it isn’t bad. However compared to a 1” sensor Sony RX100 IV with an f1.8-2.8 zoom the iPhone suffers greatly.

[bigted]

I came from. K-3 to a K-1 and I was worried about the weight difference but so far the weight doesn’t bother me quite as much as the size. It is a little harder for me to grab a hold off. Having said all of that I am enjoying using it and I don’t doubt that it wont be long before it feels like an extension of my hand like the K-3 does.

[BigMackCam]

I don't own the K-1 or K-1II, but I do own and occasionally use a Hasselblad HV. It's based on the Sony SLT-A99 full frame camera, which is very similar in size to the K-1II - just a little wider, but very similar height, and slightly thinner. Importantly, it's about 15% lighter than the K-1II. The lenses for it - whether compact traditional primes, variable or constant-aperture wide-to-short-tele or telephoto zooms, consumer or pro level - are all similar in size and weight to their Pentax equivalents, as you'd expect.

For several years before acquiring my HV and lenses, I'd been shooting primarily with a Pentax K-5 or K-3 and mostly dedicated APS-C format lenses. Switching up to full frame with the HV, I really noticed the difference in size and weight, especially when walking around for a few hours (and with early-onset rheumatoid arthritis starting to kick in gradually). At home, or stepping out of my car for half an hour, the size and weight aren't an issue, but a full morning or afternoon's shooting whilst walking is a different matter, and an entire day lugging the full-frame camera about with a 24-70 f/2.8 fitted and 70-200 f/2.8 in the bag is a chore for me; do-able, but not a great deal of fun.

Really, I think it's the lenses that make the most difference. If I just have, say, my old Minolta 50mm f/1.7 on the HV, or even a variable aperture, light-weight consumer-level zoom lens, I could happily carry that all day... but a fast, constant-aperture 24-70 or 70-200 zoom is a pretty bulky and heavy thing (according to my own tolerances, of course), and combined with the bigger, heavier camera, I personally don't find it enjoyable to carry around for long periods - especially if photography isn't the only objective of my day.

Given the above, I decided some time ago to stick with Pentax APS-C for my day-to-day shooting, and I only bring out my full-frame kit on select occasions. I'm glad I own it, and I do use it - but far less frequently than I'd anticipated.

Since you're used to shooting micro 4/3 - mirrorless systems with thinner bodies (due to lack of mirror mechanism) and smaller lenses due to the cropped sensor size - I think you'll find the K-1II a quite bulky, heavy camera by comparison (especially if you already found the KP heavy), and more-so once you attach faster lenses to it.

There is, however, a "look" to full-frame images that sometimes - depending on the lenses and apertures used - can't be easily achieved on anything other than a full-frame system, and rarely on micro 4/3. The shallow depth-of-field available at moderately wide fields of view and anything tighter can appear remarkably three-dimensional and pretty, with a real sense of "space". This offers some nice creative possibilities, depending on the use-case. For example, shooting a 35mm f/1.4 lens wide open on full-frame creates remarkable separation for the given field of view... On APS-C, you'd need a 24mm f/0.9 lens to achieve a similar look. Such a lens doesn't even exist to my knowledge - and if it did, it would be bulky and expensive. In micro 4/3 you'd need an 18mm f/0.7 lens

As @robgski suggests, it would be advisable to rent a K-1 or K-1II and a couple of lenses at the focal lengths that would suit you - or, ask around the forums and see if you can find someone relatively local to you who would meet up so you can try their camera and lenses for a short while, just to get the feel of them.

EDIT: Whilst I found that APS-C format gear is my "sweet spot", there are days - an increasing number of them, actually - where I don't even want to carry my APS-C kit around (for a while, I considered a micro 4/3 kit for such days, but I'm already maintaining two different systems - and that's more than enough ). If photography is very much secondary to my reasons for being out and about, I'll often take my little Pentax Q7 and a couple of lenses, or even just a smaller-sensor compact. As always, it's about picking the right tool for the situation...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-02-2022 at 01:36 PM.

[c.a.m]

The one thing, however, is how large and heavy the camera appears to be.

I think that tolerance for size and weight in camera gear is a personal thing, and the performance-size trade-off depends on the weight (pun intended) that a user puts on image quality and other factors. It also depends on the type of shooting -- in-studio use would be quite different from an extended bush hike.

Personally, I've settled on an APS-C system as my 'sweet spot'. Currently, I use a K-3 Mark III. Although I've never owned a K-1, I had an opportunity at a camera trade show several years ago to spend 10-15 minutes with a K-1 and several lenses. I found that the K-1 and a D FA* 70-200 (comparable to my DA* 50-135mm) would be beyond my comfort level for extended hikes and city photo outings. However, with a small prime lens, I found the K-1 to be comfortable to carry and use.

I've also tried an Olympus M4/3 setup briefly while on a photo outing with my camera club friends. I found it to be slightly too small and cramped for my liking, compared to my K-3. So, the APS-C offers very good image quality, versatility, and a good selection of lenses -- all in a relatively compact kit.

- Craig

[pschlute]

My iPhone 11 isn’t a top of the line iPhone but it isn’t bad. However compared to a 1” sensor Sony RX100 IV with an f1.8-2.8 zoom the iPhone suffers greatly.

My iphone (7) is a lot older than yours but still produces excellent pictures of my dogs in the garden or friends in a restaurant.

[house]

Hello friends, this may just be GAS, but I can't get the K-1 mkII out of my head. It just offers such a powerful FF sensor along with all the Pentax goodies and the K-mount for such a good price. The one thing, however, is how large and heavy the camera appears to be. I had a KP for a little less than a year and I loved certain things about it, but I found it heavy - for its size - and therefore a little awkward to carry. I am used to micro four thirds, if that gives you a good idea of the system size I tend to carry. So I'm just interested in hearing whether anyone coming from much smaller and/or lighter cameras has made the adjustment to carrying a K-1, and how that went for you. I realize it will not have the same portability as the EM5 mk II that I am used to, but I don't really have any analogous experience of what it would feel like in use. Perhaps I need to rent one...

The K-1 isn't a "just in case" type camera. I only bring it when I know I'll be taking photographs and I know the situation is such that it won't get to much in the way. The K-3 despite still being a heavy camera went with me in more circumstances thanks to the DA limited prime lenses.

The K-1 is great though.

[UncleVanya]

My iphone (7) is a lot older than yours but still produces excellent pictures of my dogs in the garden or friends in a restaurant.

Lol. Yes sure. And mine does also. But I don’t limit my rx100 to those images. I can’t seem to do this with my iPhone:

Afterglow at the beach by -vanya_42nd-

Afterglow at the beach by -vanya_42nd-

Barn in Rural Western Kentucky by -vanya_42nd-

Bell Tower by -vanya_42nd-

But the ergonomics more than the sensor and the easy access to raw may be more important than anything else in the comparison.

[JohnMc]

You need to decide what you're willing to sacrifice to get what you want, and as BigMack suggested, start with the glass you need, as that will typ outlive the body it's mounted to.

[reh321]

You need to decide what you're willing to sacrifice to get what you want, and as BigMack suggested, start with the glass you need, as that will typ outlive the body it's mounted to.

It still depends on your personal situation. No matter how much I am willing to “sacrifice”, my body is capable of doing only so much - force of will can do only so much. At age 74, I have reached the point that “excellent” pictures are of no use if I cannot lug myself and the camera system to where I would take the pictures. I am mostly interested in birding these days, but I’m finding it increasingly difficult to accompanying my wife on her bird walks, especially if the area hasn’t bothered to plant occasional benches. My wife’s solution was to get a light-weight chair she could carry {she’s 6-1/2 year’s younger}. My solution is to audition possible lighter camera systems. The KP is heavy all on its own, and “longer” lenses are not light, so now I’m seeing if there are lenses which I could use with my “Q”. Manually focusing remains a problem, of course.

[pschlute]

The best camera is always the one you have with you.

[JohnMc]

It still depends on your personal situation...

Of course it does, but the OP starts off with, "...this may just be GAS, but I can't get the K-1 mkII out of my head."


We all have to make that decision/those decisions... size, weight, price, life expectancy (user and gear), IQ, clique-ability, etc. The KP is 1.5 lbs and the K1mkii is 2.25, so..