[Alice]

There's a lot to consider, we can agree on that! It may be that the OP has already made the aps-c vs FF choice, and is committed to it. However, the price, both financially, and in lens size/weight needs careful consideration, and I thought might be worth re-visiting. In most output situations it is unlikely that anyone would notice any differences.

First of all, I appreciate all the replies so far. You're really helping me make the decision on the lenses. I'd love the 24-70 but I think it's too expensive for me for right now - probably will stick with the 28-105.

I've considered APS-C - but I'm going to go with FF and hope to grow into it.

[Lord Lucan]

The K-1 is an excellent choice for your usage. The only advantages it's direct rivals (Nikon D850, Canon EOS 5D Mark IV, specification wise) are said to have over it are in video, auto-focus speed and lens choices, which do not sound like deal-breakers in your case as they are not in mine. Moreover, the K-1 is fantastic value for money compared with those rivals while losing nothing in quality.

I would add that a 43mm prime lens is a general purpose lens, not a portrait lens. In the film days the main brands generally offered a 85mm lens for portraits (Pentax did a SMC Pentax-M 85mm F2 Reviews - M Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database), and if you fill a full frame with a face using a 43mm lens, their nose will look too big because of perspective effects; you will also need to be close enough to maybe unsettle the sitter. AFAIK Pentax do not yet offer a 85mm prime in the D FA series (ie for the K-1) but the 100mm would do the job, or you have it covered anyway with your mid-range zoom. I'd recommend the 24-70mm F2.8 rather than the 28-105mm F3.5 if you can afford it, partly for the larger aperture (letting you throw portrait backgrounds out of focus) and because it is a better lens anyway.

[LeeRunge]

Hi,

I'm an amateur photographer, new on the forum, who's been using an entry level DSLR for the past two years (Canon Rebel t5) and is interested in making the jump to full frame. I'm interested mostly in landscapes, macro, and portraits, although as a hobbyist I'd still like to take occasional action shots and street photos. Video doesn't interest me.

After doing a lot of research, I'm definitely leaning toward getting the K-1... but still looking at the Nikon D750 and the Canon 6D Mark ii. The features that attract me to the K-1 are the weather sealing (I love taking shots in the rain), the image quality, the in-body stabilization, and the buttons on the frame which seem to make the camera easier to use rather than hunting in menus. I'd like to try some night shooting as well (events/street scenes, not stars).

I don't have any lenses yet - for any system - and can spend about $3000 - 3500. With the Pentax I'm thinking of going with the 24-120 kit lens, the 100 mm for macro and possibly the 43 mm f1.9 for portraits.

Questions:
1. Is the K-1 too much camera for me? I'm still figuring out some of the basics like managing ISO and shutter speed. I'm very willing to learn and if I'm going to learn, I'd like a decent system. The quality of my Canon has been really frustrating to me (I know, I know, blame the photographer, not the camera...).

2. For those with some experience with the Canon D6Mii or the Nikon D750, would you recommend them over the K-1?

3. Are my lens choices appropriate for someone at my level?

I keep coming back to the K-1 and really appreciate how passionate some of the reviews are. Thanks in advance.

I own the D750 after debating between it and the K-1. I picked it for AF advantage and lens options that Pentax doesn't have (long telephoto's, cheaper third party options). I love the D750 it's quick to start up, fast enough shutter wise for me and had really good AF-C compared to my Pentax K-3. Image quality is great but it's 24mp so keep that in mind if your planning very large prints or like to crop a lot as the K-1 will have an advantage. Battery's last very long on the D750 (1230 shots)

Pentax AF isn't bad at all in AF-S, My K3 is exceptionally good at low light focus in AF-S with a single point, it just requires more work or techniques for fast subjects with less keepers. If that's not a big deal and lenses exist for now and future needs the K-1 is a great camera with exceptional image quality.

You'll be looking at 2300 for a D750 and 24-120 f4. 50mm 1.8 will be @ 200, plus a 90mm 2.8 macro (tamron WR) is 649 or a Sigma 105 for 569 or Tokina 2.8 for 350. so all together 2859 to 3159. The D750 body is weather sealed. A D810 (same sensor as K-1) with the same lenses is 3859 to 4159 btw. 250 dollars more than the K-1 with the less expensive third party lenses.

Look very closely at lenses you need now and anything in the future as that's more important than the body as those will change frequently.

The K-1 is excellent and if it fits your needs you'll be very happy especially for landscapes and portraits as well as macro. End image quality will be higher resolution. A similar setup will run 3600 for a K-1, 43 1.9, 28-105 plus 100mm Macro WR. The 28-105 has better sealing then the 24-120 (rear gasket only i think). I'd pick the 24-120 f4 however as it's got a really quick AF motor in it and wider/longer range.

If Pentax meets your lens needs go with the K-1. Pentax has excellent ergonomics and button controls which I'd rate as the best in the industry and I've owned Fuji/Nikon/Olympus/Sony/Canon in the past 10 years.

If you need/want telephoto's and fast AF I'd pass on the K-1 and go D750, or if you want a "all rounder" that has lower resolution photos but a much larger choice of lenses. Thing's like the 24-70 and 70-200 plus wide zooms are covered for Pentax but there are multiple options of each in Nikon that are often much less money but still high quality. An example would be the 15-30 wide angle, which is a tamron design. It's available in Nikon as well as Nikon 12-24, 16-35 etc plus sigma/tokina etc options, in just wide angle you'll have a lot to choose from. That Tokina 17-35 f4 is 399 for a ultra wide vs 1 option for Pentax costing 1250 dollars. Keep that in mind with your choice.

[clickclick]

Lots of good advice already. I have the 24-70 and 15-30 with my K-1, and they both are great on it. Fully understand grabbing the 28-105 to start - I snagged a Tamron 28-75 to tie my over while I mulled over the 24-70.

It hasn't be stated directly, and not to overstate the obvious, but in a tad over two weeks (March 1), it is expected to get information/see the next full frame camera from Pentax. No idea on availability or cost, but I'd hang in there to see what it is before making any purchases.

[Craig66]

K1 is a great camera.

Better to get a camera you can learn, grow into and get better with your photography, than something you'll outgrow too soon. The K1 still has the basic/auto settings that will let you use it while you advance your skills to get the most out of the K1 and your photography.

I'd say go for it. Get the K1. Only thing to think over is. Do you get the mark 1, or wait a month or two to see if the mark 2 is released. A plus with the upcoming (?) release of a K1 mark 2, is a lower K1 price.

Either way. You'll end up with a great camera that will help take your photography to the next level.

[lesmore49]

First of all, I appreciate all the replies so far. You're really helping me make the decision on the lenses. I'd love the 24-70 but I think it's too expensive for me for right now - probably will stick with the 28-105.

I've considered APS-C - but I'm going to go with FF and hope to grow into it.

I like your statement..." I'm going to go with FF and hope to grow into it. "

I know exactly what you mean. I've been a photo enthusiast for 50 years, actually got my first good camera in February, 1968...so exactly 50 years.

First good camera was a 35mm SLR, a Pentax S1a. I didn't have a flash, didn't have a ln camera light meter. I bought a hand held meter and learned how to meter light, both indoors and outdoors, how to manually set shutter speed, F stop. Mostly by myself. There were times I thought why did I buy such a complicated camera, but persevered.

About 15 years later I wanted to get into Medium Format film photography. So I bought some medium format cameras and learned to work in this medium. Not too much different from 35mm...you still set ISO/ASA, meter light, set shutter speed and F stop and focus. But medium format was still a bit different in some regards. In my case more tripod work and I learned to take my time composing a photo.

When digital came out, at first I wanted no part of it. I didn't like electronics doing the work for me...and was a film guy through and through. But eventually got into it, after watching my wife use our first digital, a little Panasonic .

I got a Pentax K10D, read the manual, read Yvon Bourque's K10D manual, etc. After 11 years of digital, I am firmly in the digital camp.

So like much in this old life we grow into things. Reading your thread I think you'll grow into the Pentax K-1. Read the manual, experiment, don't be afraid of using high ISO like I was at first. I kept to a maximum of around 800 ISO for too long. I find this camera thrives on high ISO ...indoors I use 6400...quite a bit different from my K10D's max of 1600. BTW the K-1 will go much higher than 6400, but for me 6400 is where I'm happy regarding grain...or picture noise.

Good luck on your decision. BTW, I'm happy with my decision...I can tell you the K-1 is quite a camera.

Les

[mcgregni]

I can see I continue to he a lone voice here, but that's something I'm content with .....all in a good cause .....

I believe someone can "grow into" a camera in respect of it's complexities and the degree to which it offers both auto assistance and a free reign to the user. In these ways a photographer can apply their growing skills and knowledge in practice and switch around ways of working with ease on the one camera.

I don't believe that someone can "grow into" a particular sensor format. That is a decision mainly to do with output size and the intended final results in terms of their public display.

[Alex645]

I believe someone can "grow into" a camera in respect of it's complexities and the degree to which it offers both auto assistance and a free reign to the user.
I don't believe that someone can "grow into" a particular sensor format. That is a decision mainly to do with output size and the intended final results in terms of their public display.

For the most part, I agree with you that most of us do need to take incremental steps and benefit from it.

But I think that's not true for everyone. Ansel Adams (yes, I know, not your average photographer) with his large format work for years, didn't downsize to medium format until his last 20 years. And beyond output size, working with a larger FF vs. APS-C viewfinder, better low ISO performance, and the stability of a heavier camera contributes to habituation with that format.

[Sandy Hancock]

The K-1 will serve you well. Not that the D750 and 6D II are bad cameras, but if the features mentioned in your original post matter then the decision is already made

You should definitely get the DFA28-105. No question. It's affordable, compact, versatile, weather sealed and produces great images.

While the DFA15-30 is an excellent fast ultra-wide zoom, with the advantage of weather sealing, it is huge, heavy, and expensive. An older lens in the 20mm range would compliment the 28-105 nicely for landscapes - the FA20-35/4.0 is nice, and remarkably light and compact. The FA20/2.8 is superb. If manual focus is acceptable there are several other options.

For portraits at a reasonable price, I'd be looking at the FA77 or maybe the Tamron 70-200/2.8 zoom. The FA43 is a bit too wide unless you're talking about full body shots or groups.

Don't buy too much too quickly, but remember that if a lens doesn't suit your needs you can usually sell it on at minimal loss. Enjoy the ride!

[LFLee]

First of all, I appreciate all the replies so far. You're really helping me make the decision on the lenses. I'd love the 24-70 but I think it's too expensive for me for right now - probably will stick with the 28-105.

I've considered APS-C - but I'm going to go with FF and hope to grow into it.

If you have decided to go with FF, and DSLR (instead of mirrorless) the only advise I would give is look at lenses - is there a particular lens that you like to use, and are they available in k-mount?

while Pentax K1 offer a lot for the bucks, there are limitations (videos, focus point, AF) on the camera body, but as well as lenses - while there are a lot of used lenses to buy, not much new fast prime lenses offered, especially 3rd party lenses.

Pentax is typically for people who did a lot of comparison before they settle on buying, and will still complaint after buying into it.

Pentax is for people who feel comfortable even when he is the only one using the 'odd/off' brand camera in a camera club.

[PPPPPP42]

In photography a starter camera isn't easier to use, just crappier in quality and features. So money aside there is zero reason to start with anything but the best, don't use what you don't understand yet, but it will be there for when you do.
Coming from Pentax film cameras APSC isn't even on the table for my next camera body and the only reason I'm not already using a K1 is because I was deliberately waiting for its successor to either:
A. Knock the price way down on the 1st model when its released, or
B. Fix all the shortcomings of the first model.

The K1 is an excellent camera but definitely wait for either a better price or a better camera when the 2nd version comes out.

As far as lenses I bought the DFA 24-70 F2.8 and I can tell you it will rarely be off my camera. The quality and speed are really all you need unless you are making huge prints or doing something way different than the shooting I do. Its not a star lens and has its shortcomings but I picked it up for $999 on sale which I feel is the right price for it wheras a star lens would be more like $1500 at least for the same range and aperture, and under most circumstances (by far) show little to no difference outside of a technical lens review.
Just the weather sealing would be enough to make me stick with name brand Pentax lenses on my $2000, needs to stay dry inside at all costs, camera body

You keep your lenses when you replace your camera body for a newer model, and a cheap lens make the best camera in the world worth crap. You MUST buy right the first time for lenses or you are wasting your money on stuff you will absolutely replace.

So to summarize:
K-1 purchase right now - No
APSC or lesser model - Absolutely No.
Kit lens or any cheaper substitute for lenses - No

[monochrome]

Just remember, you invest in lenses. You ‘rent’ cameras.*

Good lens designs last for ten or more years before they’re replaced. Good lenses tend to hold their value better and last longer than cameras. You will use a lens for much longer than you think you will. Good (FF) camera designs last 3 or 4 years before technology advances to make them replaceable (though you can still use a well-made camera for many years after it has been superseded). Cameras depreciate fairly quickly to a low resale value. If you have to choose, spend your money on lenses and plan to upgrade your camera later.

I’d start by choosing the D FA24~70/2.8 and the FA77/1.8 Limited for portraits. That’s about $1,950. A K-1 is about $1,950; a KP is about $1,150; a K-3ll is about $950. The K-1 and my two recommended lenses are about $3,900. If you had to, the D FA28~105 is an outstanding value and saves $750 if you substitute it for the 24-70, so about $3,200. My recommendation (if $3,900 is too much money) though is buy the best lenses and a KP or K-3ll. Get the FF (K-1 Super?) in two years

* By ‘Rent’ I mean the loss of value over time is similar to renting the camera monthly (rental expense), then just renting another new one after two or three years. You ‘pay for’ the use in loss of value over time whether you use it or not, so the more you use it the more effective the expense is.

[clackers]

For many Pentaxians, the K-1 has been their first FF camera, and this guy joined Pentax recently getting rid of his Canon FF gear:

First time Pentax owner! Received my K-1 and 24-70 2.8 today. - PentaxForums.com

[Alice]

Okay, another question: what about a tripod? Is it necessary at this stage and if so, which one? Any other essential accessories?

Also about holding off buying the K-1 - I'm flying to the States for a visit in late March and want to order the camera then. If Pentax does a new release of the K-1... and if it's in early March... when can I expect a drop in prices?

Thanks again for your invaluable help. One thing that has me swaying toward the Pentax is this forum. There seems to be so much advice, even for people of my level.

[monochrome]

@Alice It isn’t clear there will be a significant drop in K-1 prices. It is a low volume product - 7,000 a month - and I don’t think there is a large inventory in the pipeline to clear. Hard to predict. I’d make your play, whatever it is, and not look back. I’m not upgrading. The K-1 Super might not ship until April or May.

AFA a tripod and head, if you plan to shoot a lot of lower light, low ISO landscapes (dawn, dusk) below 1/30, or Astrophotography you’ll need one, but that can otherwise wait. If you’ll shoot interiors or need fill light for outdoor you might need a strobe (K-1 doesn’t have an onboard flash). Pentax P-TTL flashes are pricey.