[DeadJohn]

DPRThe world is top heavy with armchair experts and people with more opinions than photographs to back them up...who really cares what they think of pentax?

I agree with what you originally wrote but it's not only DPR.

[EssJayEff]

I understand some people love the idea of mating modern technology with old reliable lenses in some sort of strange nostalgic symmetry . . .

The curiosity of exploring old lenses paired with digital images is one of the two main reasons I switched from Canon 20D to the K-5, the other being that the K-5 had the highest rated APSC sensor at the time. I was extremely interested in exploring the visual feeling I could produce using old lenses paired with modern technology. What emerged from my explorations (which continue!) is the beauty of imperfections, and I often carried that aesthetic over to the 645D for the year that I owned one, intentionally moving and panning the camera hand-held. That said, some of those old lenses are plenty sharp, and I also have a DA* 16-50mm when needed.

My main interests in the K-1 are larger image files for making larger prints, better auto-focus and the articulated rear display (as a wearer of trifocals), and built-in GPS. I suspect I'll need a good sharp lens for those instances that call for it (like photographing my wife's paintings for reproduction prints, but I'm guessing pixel-shift will go a long way toward that need) if my Super-Macro Takumar 50mm f/4 isn't up to par with the K-1 sensor.

So yes, different features for different folks.

[Mattox]

Guys i think the real issue here is that is a big percentage of who willing to go for the k1 wants pro quality and modern day pro quality means high end and sharp lenses, the old k lenses just simply don't match the new glass coming out

[TheOneAndOnlyJH]

I don't find this troubling, I think it's actually encouraging. K-mount is Pentax's current mount, so if the most exciting 'feature' of the K-1 was ability to use K- mount lenses then it would be a pretty disappointing camera. I doubt Canon users would say that the 'most exciting feature' of the 5D mkIII is that they can use 'old' FD EF mount lenses they already own. (My bad... I see too many FD mount lenses while looking for K-mount!)

Besides, Current Pentax users already have the K-3 (II) so the exciting NEW aspects of the K-1 are improved pixel shift, new 36MP sensor performance, and full frame format among other things. This is what will make people buy the K-1. Most new users or those currently using another system probably don't care about old K-mount glass and would choose the K-1 for all the amazing tech features, including IBIS, GPS / Astrotracer, etc.

Compatibility with legacy glass (ie: M42, pre K-mount) using an adapter is a great feature but you can use an adapter on other formats as well. Pentax ease of use of legacy glass is the huge advantage here but that's not the most exciting thing about the K-1 since it's been around for ages (at least in the digital sense).

*EDIT
I'd like to add that although I very much appreciate Pentax sticking with the K-mount for all these years, it's the new tech and modern lenses that will pull in new users or convert Canikon-ers and increase Pentax market-share, allowing Pentax to make even more new goodies for us to play with.

---

Last edited by TheOneAndOnlyJH; 02-24-2016 at 02:45 PM.

[boriscleto]

Are FA lenses really "old"?

The first FA lenses came out 25 years ago...the FA 43 is 19, the FA 31 is only 15.

But it seems like the Canikon lenses get a new version every few years.

[npc]

I don't find this troubling, I think it's actually encouraging. K-mount is Pentax's current mount, so if the most exciting 'feature' of the K-1 was ability to use K- mount lenses then it would be a pretty disappointing camera. I doubt Canon users would say that the 'most exciting feature' of the 5D mkIII is that they can use 'old' FD mount lenses they already own.
.

Because they can't I'll be actually pretty surprised if most of the current Canon users know anything about FD lenses, especially the ones with a rebel and a kit zoom.

[Jonathan Mac]

They should have un-crippled the mount. On FF that omission is even more glaring than it is on the APS-C models. That would have made using old lenses much easier.

[Sandy Hancock]

I think it's great that such a poll is even happening on "other websites".
The result is irrelevant - Pentax is BACK, baby!

Personally, I have one A series lens, one F and five FA's; the rest are digital era products. I have had a few M42, K and M series lenses but found them tedious to use, and although they had qualities, they did not differ sufficiently from others in my bag. As such, I would have voted the same way, and I consider myself a pretty staunch Pentaxian.

[TheOneAndOnlyJH]

Because they can't I'll be actually pretty surprised if most of the current Canon users know anything about FD lenses, especially the ones with a rebel and a kit zoom.

Oops! I meant EF mount, but I see too many FD mount lenses while browsing eBay and I misspoke (mistyped?). My point was to say that using the company's current standard lens mount isn't really an exciting favorite feature, it's what you would expect.

I would consider a new lens mount as an exciting new 'feature' if it gave added benefits over what is currently out there. A great example would be if Pentax designed a new mount for a mirror less system allowing a shorter register distance to the sensor for a more compact system, but also offered a compatible adapter or extension that would allow full use of K-mount lenses, including auto focus and aperture contacts. THAT would be an exciting favorite feature.

Edit: Yes I know about the Pentax Q, but I don't know of any adapter that allows auto focus and data compatibility. I'm imagining a K-01 descendant the size of a Sony mirrorless with an APS-C or FF sensor and a few compact lenses, but is also fully compatible with K-lenses using an official Pentax adapter. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

[noelpolar]

Everybody has their own priorities .

I like doing a bit of everything.....buggar.....expensive that!

[pacerr]

I suspect that improvements in lens design have finally caught up with the ability of bodies/sensors to display those improvements over legacy lenses -- as it should be.

That's not say there's not good reason to value the aesthetics of legacy lenses; simply that there's advantages to modern lens designs. No one's doing 'shoot-out' tests of modern lenses on film -- and for good reason.

E.g., my ST 105 doesn't excel over a number of DA's at 135 today -- but I still like it anyway.

[Digitalis]

it seems like the Canikon lenses get a new version every few years.

That is because a lot of them are over 30 years old.

[VoiceOfReason]

My oldest lenses are my Takumar F 70-210, Pentax F 28-80, and Pentax F 50 f/1.7 along with my 1.7 AFA. While I will likely use the latter two on it I probably wont be using the former two with the K1. I plan on selling them with the SF1 as a kit for someone who wants to mess with film. I tried manual focus using M, K, A, and m42, but it really didn't do it for me. I just want my AF stuff to work fine on the camera, and I really don't see the point in getting excited over functionality that has been there with every Pentax camera I've had. If I need to manual focus I can either by quickshift or simply flicking the lever to MF on the camera, and since most of my lenses are fairly modern (see my sig) I simply wouldn't count using old stuff as a feature that attracted me to the K1.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

We really won't know until the shots are taken. Anyone who says only new tech will make the most of the FF digital, or conversely that the Tak MF lenses hold the most promise - are just kidding themselves. Some of the older lenses are going to look pretty good, and many of the newer ones will shine. What I do know, though, from shooting a Canon FF dSLR, is that some of the older lenses just don't hold edge sharpness and contrast nearly as well you would hope. You can pretty well bank that most of the DA lenses are going to have some problems in the corners, as well (yes, they work, but the contrast, CA and sharpness are compromised significantly).

That said, VoiceofReason, I have a sneaking suspicion that the Tak F70-210 shot in the middle of its range and middle apertures will rock in good light. Here's a recent example (not full frame of course):
Outlaw Country Cruise - James Robins - Powered by Phanfare

[barondla]

Wow! Lots of differing opinions here. Figured we would get a truer snapshot on a Pentax website vs a generic.

The ability to use old K mount lenses, covers more than just being able to use old lenses. It says that a company tries to keep things compatible as long as possible. People who say they don't care about old lenses - only performance, could one day find their expensive lenses "obsolete". That may be OK if there is nothing else a company can do. Often it is due to expense or pure laziness. We don't want Ricoh thinking that compatibility is expendable and something we could care less about. In the scheme of the total system - pixel shift and Astrotracer are blips on the radar. 5 years from now a new body will out resolve our current K1 with pixel shift. The SR and K mount will stay relavent. Buy for the glass not the body. Bodies become obsolete much faster than lenses.

Many say the new high tech lenses will out perform the old lenses. They probably are correct. If there is a new Lens in the same range. Where is the new Pentax lens that beats the 85 1.4, 135 1.8, 200 macro, and 1200 f8? Hmmm. Nada. Pentax doesn't have the budget to bring out all these expensive lenses. It is smart to make the old ones compatible when possible.

K mount has to survive until the Q can take over.
thanks
barondla