[junlin79]

Hi, just wonder if any one have experience on K1 system compared to Canon or Nikon. I have crop system K5 and DA*16-50 and 50-135/2.8 and quite happy with them. If upgrade to K1, it seems need to have new lenses as well, although K1 can function at crop. K1 costs about $1700, at par with Canon 5D Mark 2 or D6, Nikon D750. Any one has looked into them? What is the advantage of K1 system? Thanks!

[Wild Mark]

I will give a partial answer to your question for consideration.

The K-1 in crop mode gives you what the K-5 currently gives you in terms of pixel density (i.e. K-1 in crop mode is 16MP = K-5).

The K-1 will give you heaps of benefit in other ways over the K-5 when used in crop mode, but, the MP equivalence means no difference there.

In considering a transition to a K-1 I ask you the simplest of questions - what are you looking for out of the camera?

If you are a landscape shooter then I would suggest the FF option (e.g. K-1 is an excellent upgrade choice). Yes you will need new lenses but there is a plethora of legacy FF lenses to choose from in addition to some excellent new FF lenses. FF in landscape and even short tele (portrait) gives so much more than APS-C.

If you a wildlife shooter then I would think twice. The crop sensor in the K3ii and KP coupled with a long lens is probably arguably better. Macro shooting might also be better aligned to the crop sensor.

So, what kind of shooter are you and is the FF upgrade what you are after. I would not consider the system until after you have classified yourself in terms of what you shoot.

I hope this helps.

[automorphism]

As a small remark, I definitely don't think you should compare the K1 to the 5D2. The latter has way worse image quality compared to the newer K1's sensor. Not just in terms of resolution, but also dynamic range. I think the K1's advantage is really the high image quality for the price. The comparison you should consider is between the D750 that you mentioned. Do some research on what features you want more.

Definitely you'll have to get new lenses. There's not much point in going FF if you just want crop mode. So in my mind it seems to come down to the great K1 sensor vs. the autofocus speed of the D750. I'd say consider the latter if you're really into wildlife but consider the former otherwise.

[Adam]

What is the advantage of K1 system?

Simply put, you get D810 image quality at the price of the D750.

But a proper answer to your question really requires a long answer, because all these cameras are really really good to begin with.

If those are your only lenses currently, then when you upgrade you would be more or less free to go with any system you want. If you're a fan of the Pentax user interface, shoot mainly stills, or use a lot of manual lenses, then the K-1 would make a lot of sense.

Other advantages of the K-1 include the built-in stabilization, astro features, and pixel shift.

If you shoot a lot of action, Canon would probably be a better route. Same goes for video.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[disconnekt]

The one big benefit going the K-1 route (to me at least) is the In-body Image Stabalization, which means any lens you put on it (especially manual lenses) are stabelized which saves you money in the long run compared to Canon/Nikon lenses that have VR (in most cases you pay more to have the VR included in the lenses)

[teiki arii]

Hi, just wonder if any one have experience on K1 system compared to Canon or Nikon. I have crop system K5 and DA*16-50 and 50-135/2.8 and quite happy with them. If upgrade to K1, it seems need to have new lenses as well, although K1 can function at crop. K1 costs about $1700, at par with Canon 5D Mark 2 or D6, Nikon D750. Any one has looked into them? What is the advantage of K1 system? Thanks!

Hello junlin79,
I had Canon EOS 5DMKI, 5DMKII and 6DMKI. I tried 5DMKIII and 5D MKIV but not enthusiast about them. I liked all my Canon gear although I actually prefer Tri-X with my Leica-R gear. But Pentax K-1 is far far better DSLR camera: IBIS (SR), Dynamic Range, Pixel Shift mode, excellent noise reduction, 36Mp Sony Sensor & excellent performance price ratio. I must say I only use MF Leica-R lenses on it.
If you want a very good OVF FF camera with excellent AF lenses, go for Nikon D850 (and Sigma Art lenses). Otherwise, with EVF FF camera, you have Sony A7RIII/A9.
Best regards.

[alamo5000]

Hi, just wonder if any one have experience on K1 system compared to Canon or Nikon. I have crop system K5 and DA*16-50 and 50-135/2.8 and quite happy with them. If upgrade to K1, it seems need to have new lenses as well, although K1 can function at crop. K1 costs about $1700, at par with Canon 5D Mark 2 or D6, Nikon D750. Any one has looked into them? What is the advantage of K1 system? Thanks!

First let me tell you why I moved up from a crop sensor to a full frame sensor. Regardless of brand you need to think about stuff like this.

I shot with crop sensor before and yes for 95% or more it is fine. In regular daylight there is little to complain about. The lenses for Pentax (at least on balance) and the ones I used were generally slower lenses.

When I found myself in dark or dimly lit situations...late late shooting... even into the night sometimes...I felt like I was bumping into the ISO limits of my camera and lens combo. Keep in mind I like to do a lot of travel and that low light walking around is a real thing and that bigger sensor helps a whole lot.

With the K-1 though I am MORE than happy. I could only imagine using the 645Z. The ISO sensitivity for very low light situations is substantially better in bigger formats. For that, and that reason alone I moved to a Full Frame sensor. Given it is also nice to have extra detail and ability to crop down if needed.

If you think you will benefit from the extra low light/extra ISO capabilities of a bigger sensor then you can start shopping for systems in whatever brand. Compare apples to apples. But do realize you will have to pay extra money to be able to shoot in low light situations while keeping shutter speeds up and still being able to use higher ISO and have the photos still be usable.

I would say having never used a Nikon or Canon that you will have a wider variety of modern lenses to choose from but those lenses will be extremely expensive in most cases. Again it all depends on what you're trying to do. Pentax is all I use and all I have ever used. There are downsides to the system. One is they are still filling out their full frame lens line up.

That said for overall apples to apples comparisons you will spend almost double getting a Canon set up that is even remotely equivalent in capability. That said Canon supposedly has better auto focusing if that's a thing for you, depending of course on subject matter.

Nikon at least on paper has a wide variety of good lenses and a couple of bodies that are on par with the K-1, but you will pay a heck of a lot more for the total system in either Canon or Nikon either one.

If ultra low light walk around shooting isn't worth a few thousand bucks to you, then stick with what you got.

[biz-engineer]

What is the advantage of K1 system?

K1 is comparable to a D810. Other Canon 5DII, Nikon D750 aren't quite in the same class.
You can get K1 + DFA24-70 + DFA70-200 for about the same cost as a D810 + Tamron 24-70 G2 + Tamron 70-200 G2 (eventually cheaper).
The advantage of getting the Pentax combo is that you'll have in body lens corrections, pixel shift (if that's useful for you) and in body stabilization interesting for using legacy k mount glass, but no so much for long lenses.
The advantage of getting the Nikon+Tamron combo is that you'll have stabilized image in viewfinder (more confortable, especially with the 70-200 lens), better autofocus, and you go mainstream (easy to find system parts like remote, third party lenses, flashes for Nikon).

If the intention is to strictly use only a 24-70 and 70-200 combo, for the equipment itself, there is not significant advantage of going Pentax or Nikon.
However, when considering other aspects, I'd chose Nikon, we have to be honest here.

[Dericali]

Here are my pros and cons for the K1 full frame system:

Pros:

Body price is very good, compared with comparable FF offerings from other brands
Image quality is amazing, excellent - great colours, detail, dynamic range, ISO performance
Body is well-made, weather resistant, durable, handles well
Intuitive menu
Lots of legacy lenses, such as the limited range
Good macro lenses, and there is pixel shift if macro is your thing.

Negatives:

Video function is basically pointless (quite bad). You could use it, but if you want to make a video in any kind of professional capacity you would just use something else, even a 4k smartphone.
Some/many lenses currently missing from the line-up. For example if you specifically want to do a lot of portraiture work, there's no modern 85mm f1.4 released yet.
Body and many of the new lenses are quite/very heavy. If you're comfortable with buying e.g. Sony mirrorless, the weight difference is a big advantage.
Auto-focus - Pentax does not seem to be very intuitive. I struggled with the AF system initially, but I now nail all my shots, so the inherent sluggishness can be overcome with technique.
Less 3rd party support - though there are some notable exceptions, for example Cactus offer a great flash system that is compatible with Pentax.


However, every camera has its own advantages and disadvantages. If you just want a FF camera, but don't have a specific shooting style in mind, I'd recommend the K1 + the 28-105 lens, which is great quality, and then you could pick up some older primes for not very much money and you'll have a great camera system.

[Darkover]

What is the advantage of K1 system?

I am the owner of a K1 now for two years. Before the K1 I used a K5IIs and was very disapointed of Pentax because I missed a FF-body.
At this time a friend sold a 5DII and he lend it to me for two weeks in the hope to sold it to me. :-)

I found the 5Dmark2 is not as good as the K5IIs and the main reason is the usability. The Pentax had two weels and the Canon not. If you like to compare with canon you have to choose something MORE expensive.
Now at the K1 I have three wheels. One for every possible aspect of a picture. (aperture, speed, ISO)

Of course the picture quality of the K1 is much better, but the usability is a joy for every second you are using the camera. With only one exception. The dioptric adjustment on the K1 disguse often if you walking with the K1 on your wrist. I had to glue it.

Olaf

[Dan Rentea]

Hi, just wonder if any one have experience on K1 system compared to Canon or Nikon. I have crop system K5 and DA*16-50 and 50-135/2.8 and quite happy with them. If upgrade to K1, it seems need to have new lenses as well, although K1 can function at crop. K1 costs about $1700, at par with Canon 5D Mark 2 or D6, Nikon D750. Any one has looked into them? What is the advantage of K1 system? Thanks!

With Canon and Nikon you will have the advantages that comes with a big system (third party support, big second hand market, renting options, advanced flash system, etc.).

For the low price of a 6D these days you'll get a very good all around camera, even if there are people who will argue that. 98% of the images from my website ( www.danr.ro ) were taken with 6D. I don't think you will recognise the other 2% images that were taken with 5D Mark IV.

With K1 you will get a better camera than the other ones you mentioned in terms of image quality, features and build quality. K1 is a very good camera for it's price and if you like legacy glass, manual focus and if you don't have the budget to buy the new full frame lenses, you will probably find a lot of cheap old lenses to play with and benefit of the features of K1.

Wait a month and see what Pentax will present at CP+. Maybe they will anounce/release a K3 Mark III with better af than K1 and with the high ISO capabilities of KP. This way you will not have to change your current lenses and you will also benefit from the increased resolution.

[Darkover]

> Video function is basically pointless (quite bad).

No! The video funcionality is good, because Pentax hide it so good you will not know it exist and it did not disturb a photographer.

> For example if you specifically want to do a lot of portraiture work, there's no modern 85mm f1.4 released yet.

It's bader! As the owner of an old 85 f1.8 I did not know why I should by a new 85 f1.4.

> Body and many of the new lenses are quite/very heavy.

From my point of view I like heavy gear. Perhaps I like it less when I have to carry it, but I like it in the moment I take the picture and this moment is counting. Of course, for walking in town I would not carry more than a K1 and perhaps three lens, but a little bit austerity improve the picture quality, too.

BTW: When I moved from the K5IIs to the K1 I thought: Uh..its a little big heavier..
But after 2-3weeks this feeling is gone because the muscle in my arm grow.

> Less 3rd party support - though there are some notable exceptions, for example Cactus offer a great flash system that is compatible with Pentax.

Yes the Pentax flash are not so good. I am using now a wireless Meike transmitter for my FGZ360, because the K1 can not control the flash wireless.

Olaf

[Rondec]

A lot of good advice here. If you like the ergonomics of the K5 then you probably will like shooting with a K-1. It feels a lot like a larger version of the APS-C cameras. There are some changes with the addition of a third control wheel on top, but otherwise it is similar. I think for portraiture and landscape work, the K-1 really shines. For any type of action type photography, its frame rate is slow enough that it becomes more difficult. The DFA zooms are excellent and there are a few third party lenses that will work (older Sigma 70-200/Tamron 70-200/Tamron 28-75).

Good luck with your decision.

[KiloHotelphoto]

I had a K1 then got a Canon 5dsr. I switched to Canon for the lenses and autofocus, I mainly do wildlife. I would say find the lenses you would use for your type of shooting then buy a body to go with them, don't buy a body and then find lenses.

On image quality between the K1 and the 5dsr, the K1 is just as good at low ISO but at higher ISO the K1 is much better I thought. The auto focus isn't close the Canon is far better, but if you don't do a lot of fast moving wildlife or sports the K1 will do fine. The K1 was the best Pentax I used in terms of auto focus, I had a K50 and K3 before and I didn't think it was that bad until I used the Canon.

Canon and Nikon do have a much larger used lens selection also compared to Pentax, especially for newer designed lenses. You can find tons of older Pentax designs but you don't see as many of the DFA lenses compared to the others. It is a way to save some money and if you buy them from the big camera retailers, B&H,KEH or Adorama they offer great return polices.

[teiki arii]

If you want excellent FF lenses but the autofocus is not a real matter for you, you should go for Pentax K-1 and Sigma Art lenses. Because you can profit of IBIS, shake reduction is included in the camera! If you want a very performant auto focus, go for Nikon D850 and Nikon lenses including Shake reduction in lenses. If you prefer FF EVF cameras, go for Sony A7RIII/A9.