[interested_observer]

Well either save me or push me in to the abyss. I have been very satisfied with my K5/K5IIs (and still am) for everything other than the Milky Way (just a matter of physics). I do know that the only way to improve there is to spend money for a K1 and a 15-30/f2.8, for the larger sensor, and then a wide fast lens. I really don't want the size or weight. but it is only slightly larger than the old K20D - so it should be OK.

The original plan was to wait for the K3II replacement. Based on the KP perhaps the replacement will be lower noise than the K1 (or not). I have been looking and comparing the KP against the K1 - making some extrapolations on what the replacement may bring. Then there was the brief 5 day price reduction on the K1 that I missed. I know that the only real path forward here on ambient low light is a full frame - regardless of how well I like my K5. I just came to the decision to essentially go do the K1 and go do more shooting.

I have 3 old Contax AE lenses that I can't remount to Pentax (they are not the MM version of the C/Y mount) so, I'm packing them up for sale on some other websites.

Now to the question - lenses. I'm very happy with my lenses, but if I upgrade to a full frame, it's going to be a two step process. Buy the K1, use it while selling some lenses, then picking up the 15-30. I'm primarily concerned with the wide end of things. So right now I have....

• DA 10-17 - will probably go - I do like the thought of having a fisheye, I have shot several of my most favorite images with this.

• Sigma 8-16/f4.5 - I like the field of view, but the FDA 15-30/f2.8 will cover this (larger and heavier), however it's faster and with little to no coma. So, it will go.

• DA 12-24 - I really like this lens, but again the FDA 15-30/f2.8 will cover this, so it will be going.

• Sigma 18-35/f1.8 - this has been my Milky Way lens and again the FDA 15-30/f2.8 will cover this. In theory, I'll gain a stop on the sensor size, but overall all will loose a 1/3 of a stop overall. 1/3 of a stop is not too much to get upset over.

• Zeiss ZK 25/f2.8 - will become my main Milky Way lens until I acquire the FDA 15-30/f2.8.

• Contax 28/f2.8 Distagon - Will also supplement with the Milky Way.

• K 28/f3.5 - I would really like to use this to its full capabilities shifted wide all around, but depending on how it compares to everything else, we will see. Jury is out on this. Anyone have any experience with this shift lens on the K1?

• FA 31/f1.8 Ltd - ain't going anywhere - even though folks say that it has seen its day and may not be up to the rigors of the K1's sensor. Don't know will see...

• A 50/f1.7 - Will probably keep, pending on perhaps a 50/f1.8 with auto focus or perhaps FA 43/f1.9 Ltd - probably need to look and see how this performs on the K1

• DA 60-250/f4 - Will keep, but remove the light baffle so that it will be full frame. I really do not need anything faster for distance. Has anyone found any problems with using this as essentially the only telephoto lens on the K1?

So, my plan is to buy the K1, and use the 25, 28 and 31 to shoot wide angle for a while. Sell off the 10-17, 8-16, 12-24, 18-35 to fund the 15-30/f2.8. Anything that I am missing here?

I haven't heard any more about the white dot issue since the first of the year. I've been following it, but it seems to have died out. I'm guessing that this has not been a continuing problem with new bodies? Any further insight on this?

Over the last 10 years, I have shot very little between 30 and 60mm. I have no idea if this will remain the same or if the 43 will be sufficient. I kind of hate the idea of acquiring the 28-70. I would then have 3 large and heavy zooms with me all the time.

Weight wise the K1 and 15-30 would top out at ~3.5 pounds. My nodal ninja 3 has an ideal working weight of 3 pounds with a maximum working weight of 7 pounds. Overall, I should be fine there. My heads and tripods will carry the overall weight.

Any one have any preference between the L brackets - the Kirk and the RRS. The only difference I can see is that the Kirk has the ability to handle cables from the left side of the body for potential tethering? So, anyone using tethering with the K1?

___________________

I have spent the weekend looking at some images I have shot (Landscape Milky Way), along with some daytime shots with my little Q hiking around some areas looking for better locations. I have been contemplating (perhaps over thinking) this for awhile, but the 15-30/2.8 will shoot 111 degrees wide. In portrait, that would provide me with

• The full 90 degrees from the horizon to straight up vertical.

• Plus another 21 degrees below the horizon of foreground.

• It also provides 72 degree wide verticals, and when stitched another 40 degrees wide per stitch (even with a 1/3 overlap).

That right there pretty much made up my mind when I was looking at some other location that I want to shoot from. Single row, with no need to futz around with multiple rows, unless I really want to. It eliminates the need for compositing and makes post processing much simpler.

[jatrax]

Just do it
Get the 15-30 as that fits your needs. Keep your primes as you already stated and add the DFA 28-105, not the 24-70. 28-105 is a pleasure to use, light and really nice and sharp. Just not f/2.8. I have 60-250 and that fits my needs 90% for tele. I also have the 150-450 but it only goes along if I am sure I need it.

[kiwi_jono]

If you desire it and have the budget then go for it.
The only disadvantages I can see with the K-1 (versus say a K-5 / K-3):
* Price
* Size (although its still compact for a FF DSLR and its not that much bigger than - I don't find it a problem walking around or in my existing bag)
* Weight. Yeah it is noticeably heavier but its sure nice to hold!
* The files are bigger - as long as you have a good computer should be ok.
* lenses are often be bigger / more expensive but not such a problem with those FA prices for example

Otherwise its better in every way over the K-5 series IMO.

[wtlwdwgn]

If you like a prime you might consider the Irix 15mm f/2.4 and save some money. You could get the 28-105 and the Irix for less than the price of the 15-30. I like the 28-105 and it's on my K-1 90% of the time. I'm lusting after the Irix 15.

[CarlJF]

Well either save me or push me in to the abyss. I have been very satisfied with my K5/K5IIs (and still am) for everything other than the Milky Way (just a matter of physics). I do know that the only way to improve there is to spend money for a K1 and a 15-30/f2.8, for the larger sensor, and then a wide fast lens.

I don't want to be the guy telling you not to buy a K-1 but, for Milky Way shot, why not just get the O-GPS1 and use Astrotracer with your K-5 ? Okay, it's not like working with a FF but it's also much cheaper and still works quite well... You can get a used one for about 150$ and if it's not to your liking, you can still sold it at almost no loss and then buy the K-1...

[photoptimist]

I, too, went from the K-5 to the K-1 (about a year ago) and definitely recommend it.

Yes, the K-1 is bigger and heavier than the K-5 but I found that I quickly adapted to the extra weight. The camera really handles nicely whether you tend to support it in the left palm or grip it with the right hand.

The K 28/f3.5 shift works very nicely on the K-1. It's amazing how much stronger the shift-effect feels on FF and I love that 28 is a true wide angle on FF. There's no problems with clearance of the shift mechanism with the mount or over-hanging prism. The only issue I've encountered is that a 77mm polarizing filter on the lens does vignette at the extremes of shift.

You may find that you'll want to keep the DA 10-17 if you like the fisheye effect. In crop-mode, the K-1 has about the same resolution as the K-5. Thus, there's a K-5 inside the K-1. That applies to telephoto, too. There's also square-crop mode for lenses that aren't quite good enough in the extreme edges or corners.

For wide-angle astro, and high-angle astro, the tilty-screen on the back is really nice whether you tend to stand above the camera or sit on the ground next to the camera during long-duration night shots. The built-in illumination of the lens mount, card slot, and under the tilt-screen is also useful at night.

Join me in the abyss!

[timw4mail]

Join us, for we have the true field of view.

[interested_observer]

Just do it
Get the 15-30 as that fits your needs. Keep your primes as you already stated and add the DFA 28-105, not the 24-70. 28-105 is a pleasure to use, light and really nice and sharp. Just not f/2.8. I have 60-250 and that fits my needs 90% for tele. I also have the 150-450 but it only goes along if I am sure I need it.

I had not really considered the 28-105, but that may be a real option. I don't really know or think that 2.8 would be necessary here. Thanks!!

If you desire it and have the budget then go for it.
The only disadvantages I can see with the K-1 (versus say a K-5 / K-3):
* Price
* Size (although its still compact for a FF DSLR and its not that much bigger than - I don't find it a problem walking around or in my existing bag)
* Weight. Yeah it is noticeably heavier but its sure nice to hold!
* The files are bigger - as long as you have a good computer should be ok.
* lenses are often be bigger / more expensive but not such a problem with those FA prices for example

Otherwise its better in every way over the K-5 series IMO.

I just retired late last year. I really don't want to spend the money. I do have my camera funds in my sock drawer, that I have been squirreling away for this. I really don't want to commit any more cash to this, as I have lenses that I am no longer using and probably not use with the K1 - so I might as well recycle them and use the funds for the 15-30. I'm starting to get over the size and weight aspect of this. The file size should not really be an issue - I have computing power and storage space to spare - a couple of Tbytes until I need to add to the array. I have been looking for well over a year for a small capable laptop to help. I just picked up an XPS13 for travel - that is working out well.

If you like a prime you might consider the Irix 15mm f/2.4 and save some money. You could get the 28-105 and the Irix for less than the price of the 15-30. I like the 28-105 and it's on my K-1 90% of the time. I'm lusting after the Irix 15.

I have been looking at the Irix since it was announced. The problem is, at this end, I would like a more general purpose lens and the 15-30 ticks off a number of boxes - especially Auto Focus. The Irix seems to have some coma issues where as the rebadged Tamron does not. But then on the other hand - other folks report and show - no problems.... So, the jury is still out.

• Irix 15 mm f/2.4 Blackstone review - Coma, astigmatism and bokeh - LensTip.com

• A Comprehensive Guide to Photographing the Milky Way – Irix USA

I don't want to be the guy telling you not to buy a K-1 but, for Milky Way shot, why not just get the O-GPS1 and use Astrotracer with your K-5 ? Okay, it's not like working with a FF but it's also much cheaper and still works quite well... You can get a used one for about 150$ and if it's not to your liking, you can still sold it at almost no loss and then buy the K-1...

I've had the O-GPS for several years now. It's good, I like it for what it is - but I have been pushing the K5 sensor somewhat hard. I have been trying to get more color - by using lower ISOs, and that is the main problem. I might have the same problem with the K1, using that extra stop to push down the ISO to get more color and wind up in the same spot that I am in now. That's my fear. I am trying to analyze this now with out the K1 - in terms of re-balancing my approach. I keep coming back to the images from full frame sensors vs what I can capture with my crop sensor. Based on what I am seeing - this should be the last piece in the jigsaw puzzle. I can shoot astro, but I want to shoot both landscape with astro, with a reasonably low amount of noise. That I can do - but I want to also pull the color from the sky. That is the main problem.

The GPS providing 60 to 90 seconds of tracking (without any star trailing) should in theory provide the coverage I want at the lower ISO, to be able to capture the colors I grasping to acquire. The GPS should also satisfy and stop me from going whole hog on tracking (I don't want to be come a pack mule hauling an equatorial mount around). I did a star tracker for a little telescope down in Texas.

I, too, went from the K-5 to the K-1 (about a year ago) and definitely recommend it.

Yes, the K-1 is bigger and heavier than the K-5 but I found that I quickly adapted to the extra weight. The camera really handles nicely whether you tend to support it in the left palm or grip it with the right hand.

The K 28/f3.5 shift works very nicely on the K-1. It's amazing how much stronger the shift-effect feels on FF and I love that 28 is a true wide angle on FF. There's no problems with clearance of the shift mechanism with the mount or over-hanging prism. The only issue I've encountered is that a 77mm polarizing filter on the lens does vignette at the extremes of shift.

You may find that you'll want to keep the DA 10-17 if you like the fisheye effect. In crop-mode, the K-1 has about the same resolution as the K-5. Thus, there's a K-5 inside the K-1. That applies to telephoto, too. There's also square-crop mode for lenses that aren't quite good enough in the extreme edges or corners.

For wide-angle astro, and high-angle astro, the tilty-screen on the back is really nice whether you tend to stand above the camera or sit on the ground next to the camera during long-duration night shots. The built-in illumination of the lens mount, card slot, and under the tilt-screen is also useful at night.

Join me in the abyss!

That is good news on the shift lens. I really want to try it up in the Grand Canyon and Canyon de Chelly. My wife wants to take a cruise down to Baja California. They have an excursion to the Copper Canyon (which is rumored to be larger than the Grand Canyon), but it's an 18 hour train ride round trip.

The articulating screen I can not wait to try. I am getting so tired of trying to see what is on the rear screen when I am setting up the GPS - that is the one really annoying thing on the K5, I have found.

[bertwert]

Sounds like you have pretty much made up your mind... get the K-1, life is short - enjoy it!

[shardulm]

Honestly that does not even qualify enough as a question anymore given the K-1 prices and its IQ performance. Especially combined with that D-FA*70-200 at $200 less...
A K-1 + DA35f2 and that D-FA 70-200 is what you should be good with for a year or two until you feel the need to have the 24-70.

[DeadJohn]

Snipping for brevity

...very satisfied with my K5/K5IIs (and still am) for everything other than the Milky Way ... Buy the K1, use it while selling some lenses, then picking up the 15-30 ... So, my plan is to buy the K1, and use the 25, 28 and 31 to shoot wide angle for a while. Sell off the 10-17, 8-16, 12-24, 18-35 to fund the 15-30/f2.8 ... Zeiss ZK 25/f2.8 - will become my main Milky Way lens until I acquire the FDA 15-30/f2.8.

Get the K-1 (it's easy for me to spend your money). The K-1 superiority for the Milky Way is more than just sensor size. The K-5 had a very aggressive IR block filter on the sensor that cut off too much light from hydrogen emission nebula; the K-1 seems better in that respect. The K-1 astrotracer has also been more precise than my K-5 O-GPS1.

Consider selling the 28mm prime. Your 25 and 31 nicely bracket that focal length.

The 15-30 is a very nice lens and works well for the Milky Way. It's heavy and bulky for travel. If you camp, hike, or fly by air there will be times when you want something lighter. The Samyang/Rokinon 14/2.8 works well for the night sky and costs much less. It's arguable too wide but could be a nice companion to your 25.

For general daytime usage with the K-1, the 28-105 is a must have lens for me. It's a versatile lens as long as you don't need a wide aperture. Compact, weather resistant, good image quality. Not very expensive. I generally pack a specialty lens for whatever I plan to shoot plus the 28-105 so I'm covered for unexpected things.

The DA10-17 is the only lens I have left after going FF. It works on the K-1 and stops vignetting at about 14 mm, i.e it gives you a little more FOV than on the K-3 at 10 mm.

[Gimbal]

The K-1 astrotracer has also been more precise than my K-5 O-GPS1.

I have the exact opposite experience.
The built-in O-GPS in my K-1 is not as good as the original mounted on the K-5. I figured it was due to the magnetic compass sensor being closer to the cameras own magnets in the K-1.

The flip-out LCD though, VERY nice, especially when aiming for the stars. (Beware though, its position effects the built in compass and thus also the astro-tracer.)

[pathdoc]

A little off topic, but I just stumbled across this and thought it might help or at least interest the OP:

You Tube

You Tube

[dave2k]

I can relate as my position was similar to yours about a year ago. I started with the D-FA 24-70 as I shoot in those focal lengths quite often. For ultra wide shots I kept my Sigma 8-16 for quite a while as it was fine at 16mm on the K-1 and it's a pretty good lens. I finally bought the D-FA 15-30 as it provides a very useful range in focal length and it is a good lens. However, there have been times when I've left it behind due to size and weight. And I had to replace my trusty backpack to be able to carry it securely. While the size and weight are annoying, I haven't found a better option. I recently traveled to Alaska where much of the scenery is distant and my DA 60-250 was on the K-1 almost non-stop. Having reviewed the many pictures I took with the K-1 and the 60-250, I've concluded that lens is even better than I thought. It worked flawlessly and I have no complaints with the resulting pictures. I did modify, not remove, the baffle very carefully and now there is no vignetting as far as I can tell. So my standard set is the 15-30, 24-70 and 60-250, and those are all great lenses. If I have to lighten-up the 15-30 stays home. I can then stitch photos or take my Sigma 8-16 (allowing super-wide in crop mode) or slightly inferior Pentax 20mm. Good luck with your decisions.