[northcoastgreg]

I don't actually find the weight of the K-1 to be that much of a problem. It's the lenses, particularly the DFA lenses (except the macros and the DFA 28-105). When I started with the K-1, my main zoom kit was the FA 20-35, the DFA 28-105, and the FA-J 75-300. Now that's a pretty light-weight kit --- lighter than you would get with a comparable FF mirrorless system. Now eventually, I replaced the FA 20-35 with the DFA 15-30 and the FA-J lens with the FA 80-320. That's added some weight, I haven't had a huge problem with that. I've also formed a prime kit for when I really want to go light: M 20/4, FA 31, FA 43 or FA 50 Macro. The main strategy to keep the lens weight down is avoid the DFA monsters as much as possible and look more to legacy options, particularly FA lenses. If you need fast glass (luckly I rarely do), use primes instead of zooms.

Of course, if you want to shoot with the very best lenses in the system (essentially the DFA* lenses along with the DFA 15-30 and DFA 150-450), you're going to be stuck with very heavy glass. But the FA limiteds are small and superb on their own terms, as are the DFA macros. And there's quite a bit of underrated FA glass out there as well, particularly among the prime lenses.

[Alex645]

...the K1 is quite big and heavy and it is the only digital choice for a pentax shooter. When is a camera to heavy ?

I love photography so much, that I do and use whatever it takes to get the image quality that inspires me.

I've spent days walking miles with a Pentax 645 medium format and at least two prime lenses, so to me a camera is too heavy when my heart and mind is not into photography.

Of course there are always lighter, smaller, and less bulky ways of shooting that are easier, but ease and convenience are not high on my priority when it comes to photography.

A large format photographer may call me a hypocrite because I have drawn the line to not shoot with view cameras, but when it comes to weight, shooting with lighter prime lenses has helped me working with heavier cameras.

[Paul the Sunman]

I have largely gone down the "heavy" route with the K1: DFA 15-30, DA* 50, DFA* 70-200, DFA 150-450. However, the DFA 28-105 is very manageable as are the FA Limiteds. If you already have the 77 and intend to get the new 21, there's a great not-too-heavy kit right there.

On the other hand, the K3iii may be so compelling that thoughts of FF evaporate.

[aslyfox]

To be fair, Allen, what the OP said was "I would like to go full frame, but ......the K1 is quite big and heavy and it is the only digital choice for a pentax shooter" - meaning clearly that the K-1 series is the only Pentax FF digital option. The OP is undoubtedly aware of the many APS-C alternatives - indeed, has a K-70.. . . .

point accepted

I modified my post to strike out that language

[UncleVanya]

I grappled with this. I even got a k-1 here for a month with a d fa 24-70. I found it too heavy and felt I wouldn’t bring it with me often enough. I sent it back. The camera was every bit a lovely well made worthy camera. But it was more than I wanted to carry - full stop. I did like seeing the FA 31 at the “correct” angle of view. I did see how it would be useful with prime lenses, but the heavy body with heavy lenses didn’t appeal.

I recently bought the Pentax KP, and I’m finding it very good. I also have a Sony A7rII (I didn’t buy it, long story) and other than the MP difference and angle of view - I’m not seeing any major difference between the two cameras. Both excel at low iso, high dynamic range etc.

The KP is a huge upgrade over the K-3. I would suggest deciding what ASPECTS of full frame are actually important to you. If you mainly want dynamic range and low iso improvements - the KP and K-3iii should have improved performance over the k-70 you have. (KP increase may be slight).

If you want that “FF look”, you may want a k-1.

My best advice. Rent the camera (and a lens?) for a week. It will clarify things quickly.

[normhead]

Have taken the K-1 on my last two big canoe trips and it has been carried with the 28-105 and DA 55-300 in a pelican case fo over 50 km.

As for what I get or my effort, I don't know, at 4k the images are identical to images taken at the same time with my wife's K-5. And since 8k is or target resolution at the moment, I'm thinking I'll take my old K-5 back from her. She just bought a lightly used K-5ii, It will fit in an even smaller case.

Using he K-5 will allow me to go from the bigger case to the smaller one.


SO it's not just the weight, it's the size. My K-3 will not fit in the smaller case either.

On recent trips to the park I've opened up camera bag, and taken my K-3 with the DA 55-300 LM on it in one half and the K-1 with the DFA 28-105 in the other, for wildlife and landscapes without lens changes. It's actually quite manageable. But, there is so little difference between the images of these camera K-3, K-5, K-1, in my use, I use the K-1 becausee of it's "Je ne sai quoi." Or as the Who would say "Can't explain."

There's just something about that camara that says "You really want me, you like to use me." Then it gestures hypnotically. I have no reason to think my enjoyment of the K-1 is little more than a feeling of luxury and not related to camera performance at all. But I can't stop myself from wanting to take it along. If there is any possibility I'll use it, I take it. But it's not rational.

[cport]

For me, K-1 II is too heavy and big. Otherwise I would have one at home instead of my KP. I tried to use it with FA 35/2 (which is the best focal lenght for FF IMO) but this approach did not help.


So, yes, I wish Ricoh to release a compact mid-range FF camera (of the KP size) ...

[clackers]

...the K1 is quite big and heavy and it is the only digital choice for a pentax shooter. When is a camera to heavy ?
What are your thougts and experiences with the K1, especially when combined with a heavy lens ?

A good advice is needed.

p.s. I currently own the 77 mm limited and I consider purchasing the upcomming 21 mm limited and the Laowa 100mm.

Serious picture quality goes with serious lenses, serious bodies and serious prices, Asko, you just have to figure out personally how serious you are, strangers can't do that for you.

I have a Sony A7 as well as a K-1, but it's a red herring, because the mirrorless has similar dimensions bar the thickness, and the lenses are just as big anyway, along with tripod or whatever. Basically, my K-1 kit ends up being little different from my Sony kit. The bag is the same bag, so no saving in size there, and the weight of a complete loadout is similar.

We have members who go on long hikes with their K-1, and one member has done cycling trips in NZ and Australia with the K-1 and lenses.

Your 77 will really come alive on full frame. The 31 would be magical, or even a secondhand FA28 f2.8 would make for something of a substitute if you couldn't afford that. The upcoming 21 might be quite sizable for all I know. It will probably be very expensive.

[tibbitts]

Question for the OP: why would you like to switch to full-frame? Not that there aren't reasons but I'm wondering what yours are. Interestingly, in terms of image quality, before the K-1, there were lots of posts here declaring how close APS was to full-frame image quality. Suddenly when the K-1 appeared, full-frame benefits became more highly valued - and I don't think that was due to the K-1 producing such superior image qualify vs. all other full-frame alternatives at the time. Similarly, before the K-1, Pentax APS bodies were often cited here for being compact vs. competitors. After the K-1 appeared, those discussions of the value of compactness seemed much less frequent.

[Lord Lucan]

My advice to the OP is to carry a shoulder bag or backpack (whichever he intends to use) with rocks in it to the same weight as the kit he is thinking of using, and carry it around for a bit to see if he can put up with it.

I believe that what you can tolerate depends on how serious you are. If taking photos is for recording holiday memories, as an add-on to the experience, a big heavy camera is a pain and a smaller and lighter camera is more appropriate - which is why most people use smartphones on their holidays. OTOH if you are taking photos for the photos' sake, art for art's sake in other words, then a greater burden is part of the bargain.

I don't find a K-1 with two lenses a significant amount to carry, even in a shoulder bag, and in a backpack their weight seems negligable. But kit in a backpack is slow to deploy. Of course, there is always an upper limit of your physical capability. I once carried a Pentax 6x7 with three lenses (including a big 300mm) for several miles in a shoulder bag, and I had shoulder ache for a few days afterwards. After that 6x7, anything seems light, and I'm not a big guy..

[c.a.m]

I don't find a K-1 with two lenses a significany amount to carry, even in a shoulder bag, and in a backpack their weight seems negligable.

Your post makes some good points, especially about the nature or intention of the photographic situation.

If I may suggest, identifying the two lenses you carry might help the OP to understand your particular experience.


- Craig

[clackers]

But kit in a backpack is slow to deploy.

My backpack carries the kit until I'm at somewhere interesting, LL, when I deploy the camera on a shoulder strap from that point on for shooting, so not a problem. It's how photojournalists and event shooters do it.

[jatrax]

When is a camera to heavy ?What are your thougts and experiences with the K1, especially when combined with a heavy lens ?

I shoot with both the K-1II and the K-3II. There is no question that the K-1II is heavier. However, I find that I have less trouble holding it for long periods of time than I do the K-3II. I think the grip fits my hand better so even though the weight is more the strain on my hand / wrist is less. YMMV but I do not find the difference in weight to be an issue for me.

[Lord Lucan]

If I may suggest, identifying the two lenses you carry might help the OP to understand your particular experience.

It varies. I always have the FA 24-70mm F2.8 (weight 790 gm), and the additional lens I had in mind is a legacy manual zoom, a Sigma 70-250mm F3.5 (weight 812gm) - similar in dimension and weight to the modern Pentax FA 70-210mm F4.

[traxino]

Here is my experience: I bought the Fuji XT2 years ago because everybody said it is so light. And then I realized I need battery grip with extra batteries for longer battery life and better ergonomics. And I put the XF 16-55 lens onto the Fuji. Turned out: K1mkII + 24-70 and the FujiXT2 + battery grip + 16-55 don't have too much difference in weight.

Ergonomics for me is more important than weight and K1 is very good in my hands, I think you will be okay with the weight.