Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-26-2018, 01:44 PM - 1 Like   #31
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 13,324
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
And I can think of another thread in the past few weeks where a couple regular members had quite a go at full frame versus crop for wildlife photography. There are folks who steadfastly go one way or the other. It's like UV filters. You can ignite a passionate debate on this.
Hah, I didn't know - and I won't look! There is no reason for a heated debate in my view. I know what works for me - if others think differently that's perfectly valid. As old Perl programmers would say: There's more than one way to do it!

QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
I have to confess I bought an a6000 for that purpose....
I have a Ricoh GR as my "go everywhere" camera. Limitied in focal length, but what a brilliant little camera!

02-26-2018, 01:45 PM   #32
Veteran Member
joergens.mi's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 381
It's a real step forward, especially low light. If the AU in the K1-II will bring at least 1 EV - it believe it's the minimum, as shown by the pictures - may be up to two, it will be the low light monster on the market.

I was an early adopter, my K1 has a shutter count above 60000, I hadn't so much keepers before. I'm thinking of upgrading my K1 to K1-II. I'm waiting for some real tests and example pictures.
02-26-2018, 01:48 PM   #33
Insanely humble
Loyal Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 13,324
QuoteOriginally posted by joergens.mi Quote
If the AU in the K1-II will bring at least 1 EV - it believe it's the minimum, as shown by the pictures - may be up to two
I know. It will be very, very hard to resist if it's as good as it looks to be
02-26-2018, 03:15 PM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,762
QuoteOriginally posted by savoche Quote
Hah, I didn't know - and I won't look! There is no reason for a heated debate in my view. I know what works for me - if others think differently that's perfectly valid. As old Perl programmers would say: There's more than one way to do it!



I have a Ricoh GR as my "go everywhere" camera. Limitied in focal length, but what a brilliant little camera!
Yep, I have no interest in an opinion debate either. There are valid points in each camp. I would be lying if I said I didn't switch to my K-1 a fair amount when after the birds due to a need for higher shutter speed and faltering light. I have absolutely needed to switch to the K-1 for higher ISO to get a decent shutter speed and take any pictures. That's back to my 800 ISO and high shutter speed caveat on preferring my K3II for birding and telephoto work.

I was really on the fence on the GRII versus the a6000. I knew I would want longer focal lengths for this particular use, so I went for the a6000 over the GRII for the interchangeable lenses, but it was not an easy choice. Part of the decision is tied to hoping a GR III is around the corner, and if I bought the GR II this past fall, it would have made it harder to "justify" a replacement so soon.


Last edited by clickclick; 02-26-2018 at 03:20 PM.
02-26-2018, 03:55 PM   #35
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,036
I got a K-1 but also still use my K-3 quite a bit.

The K-1 rules for astro and landscape but the K-3 is still more responsive for action and considerably smaller and lighter.
The K-3 goes skiing and mountain biking but the K-1 generally does not. I like having both.
02-27-2018, 09:04 AM   #36
Veteran Member
joergens.mi's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 381
QuoteOriginally posted by mattb123 Quote
I got a K-1 but also still use my K-3 quite a bit.

The K-1 rules for astro and landscape but the K-3 is still more responsive for action and considerably smaller and lighter.
The K-3 goes skiing and mountain biking but the K-1 generally does not. I like having both.

+1

Both cameras are in use, each of them has it special points.
The K-3 has an 1.5 built in tele converter (crop-factor) and the higher frame rate.
The K-1 the higher resolution and lower noise
02-27-2018, 11:08 AM   #37
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Arizona
Posts: 930
I guess I upgraded in a way , but then again I didn't. I have both the K-3II and the K-1. In one respect it was worth it , and in another it wasn't.
Bigger , heavier Vs. Smaller , lighter.
The debate will go on and on forever , with no clear winner because there is none.
Remember.....the best camera is the one you have with you ! Sorry , but the K-1 gets left behind a lot.
02-27-2018, 01:00 PM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 571
Personally I wouldn't switch to only a K1. I have a k3 and bought a K1 and sold off my K5. The K1 just isn't a performance camera, it's just too slow. The buffer and frames per second of the K3 is very useful if you shoot any type of event photography. The K3 also 200 grams lighter and that is significant.

The format change can also be a hindrance as the depth of field is a lot shallower so you have to be a lot more careful shooting portraits. Again if you are into food photography the shallow depth of field often requires additional stopping down.

On the plus side the picture quality really is stellar. Put on the DA*55mm F1.4 the clarity is impressive.

I think of them more as a duo as I certainly would find the slow frames per second and slow saving to SD card a hindrance of the K1 if it was my only camera. I'm happy to keep both.

Howie Be

02-28-2018, 07:34 PM   #39
Pentaxian
Rickster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SE Idaho - Rocky Mtns
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 558
I upgraded from a K3 II to the K1. I already had 3 full frame lenses at the time. I've added 7 more FF lenses since then, I've kept the K3 II, but to be honest, I haven't shot with it since getting the K1. I sold off a couple APS-C lenses with a K30 I still had. At this point the K3 II is a back up in case something happens to the K1, or I when I send in the K1 for the II upgrade. Who knows how long that will take. ;-)
03-01-2018, 07:59 AM   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 711
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rickster Quote
I upgraded from a K3 II to the K1. I already had 3 full frame lenses at the time. I've added 7 more FF lenses since then, I've kept the K3 II, but to be honest, I haven't shot with it since getting the K1. I sold off a couple APS-C lenses with a K30 I still had. At this point the K3 II is a back up in case something happens to the K1, or I when I send in the K1 for the II upgrade. Who knows how long that will take. ;-)
If you (and others) don't mind, if you did switch from K-3ii to K-1 (or added it), what lenses did you get?

I've got a mess of lenses that are already FF, from just coincidental ones like a Pentax 100mm macro, and Tamron 70-200mm, but also a ton of old manual lenses, and even say an F 35-70. And I understand that there are some APS-C lenses that work quite well FF, if with a tad of vignette or softness at some apertures. But hey, I actually LIKE that in some of my lenses anyway.

But of the APS-C lenses, would you find any of those worth keeping if you did NOT have the K-3ii?
03-01-2018, 08:15 AM   #41
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,762
If I didn't have my K3II and was ever only to be full frame, of the DAs in hand, I'd keep the 60-250 (actually bought that for the K-1 - need to do the baffle mod), DA50 - vignettes some, but worth hanging on to for the price, or lack of what I'd get to sell if used. I've heard good things about the 40's, but I have not tried them. I do have the 40XS, but I also have the 43 Limited, so never put my 40XS on to see what it's like. In fact, after getting the 43, don't know that the 40XS has been on the K3II either. Hhhmmmm.
03-01-2018, 10:07 AM   #42
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,812
QuoteOriginally posted by Oakland Rob Quote
But of the APS-C lenses, would you find any of those worth keeping if you did NOT have the K-3ii?
I kept the DA 16-85 which lives on the K-3II. The DA*60-250 has had the baffle modified to work on FF so it can be used on both K-3II and K-1 now. I gave my DA 12-24 to my wife so we have it available yet. I sold off all other APS-C lenses including my set of DA Limiteds.

I have a full set of Pentax F lenses that I've collected so I had plenty of FF glass available.
QuoteOriginally posted by Oakland Rob Quote
If you (and others) don't mind, if you did switch from K-3ii to K-1 (or added it), what lenses did you get?
I bought the DFA 24-70 and later the DFA 28-105. I also bought an FA 20-35 f/4. So my FF kit is the 20-35, either the 24-70 or 28-105, and the DA*60-250.
03-01-2018, 10:30 AM - 3 Likes   #43
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,059
QuoteOriginally posted by Oakland Rob Quote
Given that the K-1 is now superseded (and the K-3 discontinued), I'd like to find out the impressions of it from folks who upgraded to it from the K-3, and who've used it for a considerable period of time now. Reviews all seem oriented to newer owners, and I'm especially curious if over time the added size and bulk of the K-1 and lenses has been worth it over the K-3.
I've had my K-1 for over a year now, and my K-3 for almost 4.... and I'm not reading the rest of the thread, so I may be repeating some things.

The bulk of the K-1 isn't an issue for anyone who's used to a K-3. The qualification being if you are one of those k-3 users looking to lighten your load and looking at 4/3, the K-1 is out to lunch heavy.

The K-1 is nicer to use... bigger viewfinder, better low light performance, sometimes noticeably better resolution, but not always.

When I go for a dog walk/hike, the K-3 with the 18-135 usually goes, the K-1 goes at times, but I have to be feeling muscular.
For landscape, sunset etc., always the K-1 with the DFA 28-105 it is really nice kit.

Where I live we have what we call "road warriors". People who drive up and down Highway 60 through the park, looking for wildlife and views. When I'm doing the road warrior thing I have the Tammy 300 with 1.7x beside me on the seat of the car waiting for wildlife and the K-1 in landscape mode in a case with a neck strap in case I want to get out and walk. When I go to say a beaver lodge or something, I take both cameras. I use the K-3 for most shots, but on the odd chance a subject fills the frame I' may switch to the K-1 instead of changing lenses.

So to end the descriptions, the K-1 has just become part of the kit. I used to carry an K-01 as a back up for the K-3, the K-1 has taken the K-01's place. I frequently walk with 5 lenses and two bodies.

If I had to give up one, IMHO the K-3 does better at landscape and sunset than the K-1 does at wildlife and macro. If I was to sell a camera it would be the K-1. But, I really like having the K-1 as part of the kit and I take it many places I don't use it just on the odd chance that there might be keeper I could use it for.

I am almost 70 years old and have a new hip and two torn rotator cuffs, and I'd have to be in a lot worse shape than I'm in before I'd give up the K-1 because of the weight. My solution to the weight? Buy a couple fo straps with really wide shoulder pads to carry the heavier gear (like my 6 pount 300 2.8.) Heavier gear is all about weight management. I wouldn't give up gear because of weight, but I might look at better carrying solutions. When I bought the Tamron 300 2.8 I swore it was so heavy I'd never take it anywhere. With the bag and strap solution I came up with for it, I carry it for miles. And the K-1 is both nice to use and produces great results... so what's not to like?

Last edited by normhead; 03-04-2018 at 07:49 AM.
03-18-2018, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #44
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
chickentender's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Olympia, WA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,843
QuoteOriginally posted by savoche Quote
Hah, I didn't know - and I won't look! There is no reason for a heated debate in my view. I know what works for me - if others think differently that's perfectly valid. As old Perl programmers would say: There's more than one way to do it!



I have a Ricoh GR as my "go everywhere" camera. Limitied in focal length, but what a brilliant little camera!
As usual we line up. The K-3 is a slight bit less capable in most ways, but for birding it utterly shines. "I know what works for me" ... this is key. My case is specific and extreme perhaps, but K-1 doesn't serve me personally only because I use digital SLR only for birding and the K-3 handles that better (for me), whilst digital on-the-go landscape is the domain of the GR. But most of the time for everything else (and often landscape as well) I'm shooting film. The K-1 just doesn't make sense in my photographic world, even though, again, it's the better of a K-3 in most practical ways.
03-18-2018, 11:07 PM   #45
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
david94903's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Rafael, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 595
QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote
Remember.....the best camera is the one you have with you!
Absolutely true.

QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote
Sorry, but the K-1 gets left behind a lot.
For me, I'm finding the opposite is true. I'm so addicted to the IQ and ease of use of the K-1, I'm leaving the K-3 behind.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
crop, detail, dslr, feet, frame, full frame, full-frame, k-1, k-3, k-3ii switchers, k1, light, pentax k-1, pixel, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Worth waiting for the K-3II Successor? Ducky13 Pentax DSLR Discussion 75 12-07-2017 02:58 PM
K-3ii with DA*300... Is the 1.4TC worth $450? UserAccessDenied Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 26 04-03-2016 07:09 AM
International travel, is it worth upgrading from K-30 to K-3/3ii? Newtophotos Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 12-27-2015 11:30 AM
Switchers: what brought you here! jeffryscott Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 09-09-2015 07:44 PM
Using the K-500 and looking at the K-3II - Is it worth the upgrade price? Rayn Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 05-23-2015 08:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:41 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top