The OP's use cases are similar to mine, although I don't do astro. I'd call myself an enthusiastic hobbyist, and my subjects are typically landscapes, nature, cityscapes, family, classic autos, static aircraft. I have been shooting with a K-5 II, and have been happy with my images. I print only occasionally (e.g., 16x20-inch). When I travel, I take several lenses.
I have been following the K-1 and D-FA lens developments with interest. At one point, I thought that the K-1 might be my next camera after my current K-5 II -- the preliminary performance indications have been very good, and the new lenses appear to be exceptional. However, there are two negative aspects for me - the
cost and the
weight/mass of a K-1/lens kit. My other consideration is whether the K-1 would introduce a dramatic enhancement to my photography and my enjoyment of the hobby, or only an incremental improvement.
I have a decent stable of lenses covering 15mm to 300mm, including contemporary lenses (two Limiteds, 18-135, 50-135,
Sigma HSM II 70-200, and DA* 300) and older ones (e.g., K 30/2.8, K 50/1.2, quality Takumars, F 50/1.7). To get the maximum benefit from a K-1 with similar 'reach,' I'd need to use the 70-200 in place of the 50-135, acquire the D-FA 28-105, and probably get something in the 400-500mm range. The current Canadian price for the K-1 is CAD $2,500. With a minimal lens purchase (say, the 28-105 to start), the cost would approach $3,800-4,000 including sales tax.
I'm also hesitant to replace the relatively compact and lightweight APS-C format with a '
full-frame' format. The K-1 is only ~250 g heavier than my
K-5 II, but with the necessary longer lenses, the K-1/lens combination weight drives up considerably. Some might think, "if you want the increased performance, then suck up the weight..." That's a valid point, perhaps, but I think the IQ vs weight/cost trade-off of APS-C vs K-1 is also a valid consideration.
So, being not totally convinced the advanced features and enhanced IQ are worth the cost for me, I acquired a
K-3 II recently from a local dealer who had one in stock. The price was softer on our family budget, which keeps the window open for a possible new lens. So far - I'm happy with the K-3 II. Amongst other improvements, I find that I can push the ISO a bit higher - my RAW developer (Photo Ninja) does a decent job with noise reduction of images up to ISO 3200+.
All that said, I'm still following the K-1 revelations, and hope to see users posting images soon. The K-1 has the potential to be a milestone camera.
- Craig
Last edited by c.a.m; 03-31-2016 at 01:06 PM.
Reason: Correct ISO.