[normhead]

Fair enough. From this last sentence, I'm unsubscribing this thread and go enjoy taking photos with my K1 :-), instead of sterile argumentation.

You always want it to be sooooooo complicated.

[redrockcoulee]

@reh321 - yes, I believe you understand, where @Nicholas 06 and @biz-engineer don't (or they're off in some load loop arguing about something objective, which misses the point).

I bought a KI-1. I bought it retail, over the counter with local sales tax. I'm extremely happy I did because I've now had it more than a month. I bought it even though I already have a K-3, which I will never fully utilize, because I like using old full frame lenses. I like using them better on my K-1 than I like using them on my K-3 or on one of my several dozen film cameras. It brings my joy to use these things, and more joy to use them in the manner they were designed to be used.

That's the only necessary justification. It brings me joy. Rational argument is pointless and meaningless because joy isn't rational. Joy is evocative.

RICOH, I believe, knows this.

But using joy as a reason is a rationale. It is one of the reasons I love shooting the 500 CM it brings me joy and pleasure. I understand it but I also do not think it would do the same for me or at perhaps I should say the cost and extra weight etc would not bring about as much joy as other things in life. I think it is great that the FF brings you joy and I hope it continues to do so for a long time.

[monochrome]

But using joy as a reason is a rationale. It is one of the reasons I love shooting the 500 CM it brings me joy and pleasure. I understand it but I also do not think it would do the same for me or at perhaps I should say the cost and extra weight etc would not bring about as much joy as other things in life. I think it is great that the FF brings you joy and I hope it continues to do so for a long time.

I am merely mildly irritated that certain commenters continue to suggest 95% of K-1 purchasers don't need it, will never use it's capabilities and (it seems to be inferred) don't really deserve to have it based on their skill level and intended use for it.

My rebuttal suggests there are more justifications than perhaps these posters have taken into consideration.

[redrockcoulee]

I am merely mildly irritated that certain commenters continue to suggest 95% of K-1 purchasers don't need it, will never use it's capabilities and (it seems to be inferred) don't really deserve to have it based on their skill level and intended use for it.

My rebuttal suggests there are more justifications than perhaps these posters have taken into consideration.

Yes there are no wrong choices other than deciding because someone else thinks you should. Those telling we should or that we will are as bad as those saying that you do not need it. Mico 4/3 to medium format or even sticking with film are all justifiable choices and none of them are incorrect. I do not think I will go to FF but currently I have no interest in upgrading my cropped sensor camera either. What others decide to do will be right for them same as your decision to get the K1 was right for you.

[normhead]

I am merely mildly irritated that certain commenters continue to suggest 95% of K-1 purchasers don't need it, will never use it's capabilities and (it seems to be inferred) don't really deserve to have it based on their skill level and intended use for it.

My rebuttal suggests there are more justifications than perhaps these posters have taken into consideration.

My rebutal, would be 95% of K-3 users don't need it. At least 90% of K-5 users never take an image that makes use of it's ability. I bet more than 50% of K-5 users could do everything they do with a K-x, and 25% could get along fine with a K100D. When you start down that road, it never ends.

[redrockcoulee]

My rebutal, would be 95% of K-3 users don't need it. At least 90% of K-5 users never take an image that makes use of it's ability. I bet more than 50% of K-5 users could do everything they do with a K-x, and 25% could get along fine with a K100D. When you start down that road, it never ends.

I don't even use 95% of the features on our Holgas😀

[Nicolas06]

I am merely mildly irritated that certain commenters continue to suggest 95% of K-1 purchasers don't need it, will never use it's capabilities and (it seems to be inferred) don't really deserve to have it based on their skill level and intended use for it.

My rebuttal suggests there are more justifications than perhaps these posters have taken into consideration.

That's a mirror. The one who brought their K1 are almost all happy about it and enjoy it. And I would say the one didn't are exactly the same.

Each other look arround and don't like when the others remind them of all the good reason for taking the opposite decision. Basically saying that there nothing universall, utterly smart of grand in their decision. That just their own decision.

And biz-engineer is right, half of the people that brought an FF recently not long ago explained how unecessary it was, until Pentax introduced one... Like half the one that continue on the APSC bandwagon might finally change their mind and switch too... All at the same time some old FF owner will switch to m4/3 and explain how he doesn't see the difference.

All that matter to Ricoh in the end to stay alive is we spend as money as possible in the meantime... And one care surely as well do it with an APSC body than an FF body !

If we where just seeing the cameras as tools and cared only of photos, we would not spend ou time here.

[clackers]

, half of the people that brought an FF recently not long ago explained how unecessary it was, until Pentax introduced one... .

It still is unnecessary, Nicholas.

But people buy unnecessary things all the time. Watches, cars, electronic gadgets. Why are cameras any different? ☺

[Nicolas06]

It still is unnecessary, Nicholas.

But people buy unnecessary things all the time. Watches, cars, electronic gadgets. Why are cameras any different? ☺

There are no different Lenses neither None of them are important. What is important is that you can extract from your life. Be it work, love, sports, gear. I would feel more sory for the last objective, but that just me.

Back to useless gear, I love my FA77 on that petty crop camera of mine . I am sure I could have done with DA70 or FA50 f/1.8... (Beside my friend here is taking picture with his smartphone). Many would complain the picture isn't even sharp.

FA77, f/1.8, K3

[starbase218]

I know that the Pentax K1 is going to be a monster camera and looking at the specs a huge success. There are a lot of Pentaxians who have a large collection of legacy full frame glass who are going to jump all over this extremely competitive offering. However for some of us who have a complete set up of APSC lenses and not many full frame lenses this is going to be much tougher. I have a K-3 2 and a K-3 with - Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, DA*55 mm f/1.4, DA*50-135mm f/2.8,DA limited 15mm f/4, DA*60-250 f/4 and the DFA 100mm f/2.8 macro. I know that there are a couple of full frame compatible lenses there and the K-1 will support a crop mode but thats a lot of quality glass and range that I'm not sure I want to give up to migrate to the full frame platform. Of course there is always gear envy but I think I'm going to enjoy the wonderful APSC Pentax platform for a while longer

I have all APS-C glass too. But other than that, I can't really explain to myself spending 2000 euros on a new camera (and that's just the start). And it's bigger and heavier, while I already find my K-3 quite heavy (though not that big).

Also, I wonder how many Pentax shooters aren't members of this or any other Pentax forum. I think the number could be quite high. So even when you get all the members here to tell if they will upgrade or not, you still don't know if that's representative of all Pentax users. But then that's something I've been wondering about for a long time. Are there any Pentax users who are not members of forums like this one, and just shoot with their equipment and maybe run a site?

[Nicolas06]

I have all APS-C glass too. But other than that, I can't really explain to myself spending 2000 euros on a new camera (and that's just the start). And it's bigger and heavier, while I already find my K-3 quite heavy (though not that big).

Also, I wonder how many Pentax shooters aren't members of this or any other Pentax forum. I think the number could be quite high. So even when you get all the members here to tell if they will upgrade or not, you still don't know if that's representative of all Pentax users. But then that's something I've been wondering about for a long time. Are there any Pentax users who are not members of forums like this one, and just shoot with their equipment and maybe run a site?

Most people don't ever subscribe to forum. They are not interrested or have no time. A few will read when looking for information. And even fewers will subscribe.

As for price I am with you. The sales decrease for everybody. Look at K3 and K3-II prices. That K1 will drop to 1K€ soon enough. Maybe 2 years?

[pts1958]

I've a K3 II and APSC is very interestinf for my pictures (Planes and birds)... but a K1 with 150-450 could be super... Waiting for a gift !

[biz-engineer]

DSLR as a product is mature. FF DSLR too. People that wanted one now have it. SLR technology is not new or shiny or innovative. The new products have almost nothing more against the previous version. Pentax still make noticable improvement, but only because they are 10 years late to the FF game, to the modern lenses game etc. If you brought the K1 now, you are more on the laggards part of the FF DSLR graph adoption curve anyway than an early adopter.

Careful not to mix up technology, format and product. There is something called technology adoption. There is also something called product life cycle (PLC). Format (24x36) and technology (DSLR) aren't new, but the product (Pentax K1 is new). As per Philip Kotler & co (Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2014). New-Product Development and Product Life-Cycle Strategies. In Principles of Marketing (15th ed., pp. 273-282). Upper Saddle, N.J: Pearson.), the concept of early adopter, and laggards.

For example, you could consider cars. Cars have been around well before you were born, that does not prevent that, if you buy a new model of car (with 4 wheels, a gearbox, engine and 5 doors), I can't say you are a laggard, you are an early adopter of this new model when you buy one the first produced prototypes of it.

The Pentax K1 is a new product. As we can see, the early adoption rate of the K1 indicates that Pentax FF to set to become a successful and viable product line. Of course there will always be the guys who are happy with a cameraphone, but they don't interfere with photography hobbyists, uploading real time pictures of anything passing by from an smartphone to facebook doesn't appear to replace the taste for nice glass and artful photographic creations. Or, it would mean that photography is in danger of disappearing, and if so, it's going to take more than a decade, so we're still safe.

---------- Post added 12-06-16 at 18:22 ----------

My rebutal, would be 95% of K-3 users don't need it. At least 90% of K-5 users never take an image that makes use of it's ability. I bet more than 50% of K-5 users could do everything they do with a K-x, and 25% could get along fine with a K100D. When you start down that road, it never ends.

That's what APSC owners believe. The K1 gives you a significant step of additional capability, the step consists of higher ISO and more resolution combined. Which means that if I take a photo at a jazz concert in dim light, the K3 photo is blotchy, and the K1 photo is an order of magnitude better, because the noise is lower and since it packs 36Mpixel, the overall image resolution is also better (the image look better, significantly). The problem with the K1 is the total cost of the full frame system including new lenses is way beyond the budget for non-pro usage. For a complete K1 system including three DFA zoom lenses, is about $5K or $6K, costs as much as a small car, hard to justify to take pictures for a hobby, if you don't have spare money. There is sort of an acceptable threshold around $1K for spending money on camera gear, that's what apsc dsrl prices are at, but when you see that K1 and most new DFA lenses are priced $2K (more or less), that's a show stopper for a number to K5/K3 users, because even if the larger sensor has more room for image quality, the system itself is beyond budget. Prices may adjust in the future though.

[redrockcoulee]

Cars might not be your best example. Here they range from Smart Cars to one ton pick ups and from brand new off the lot to from the sixties. When SUV became popular, no one thought your choice was to get a large SUV or ride the bus. Even Suvs come in a variety of sizes. Your needs and your wants decide what type of vehicle you buy. Many people choose not to drive.

Enjoy your choice. The purchasers of the K 70 will enjoy theirs as will all those buying m 4/3 mirror less or 4X5 LF ones.

A new K1 costs $350 more than I paid for my SUV. I have no interest in driving a larger vehicle nor in driving one with an automatic trasmission. It is all about choices which is why there are the K 70 and 645Z and the Q series in addition to the FF model.

There are many formats between smartphones and FF cameras. There are many types of photographers. Many will make choices that are not the same as your choice. Some will make the same choice as you did. In the long run they are all right choices.

[reh321]

The problem with the K1 is the total cost of the full frame system including new lenses is way beyond the budget for non-pro usage. For a complete K1 system including three DFA zoom lenses, is about $5K or $6K, costs as much as a small car, hard to justify to take pictures for a hobby, if you don't have spare money. There is sort of an acceptable threshold around $1K for spending money on camera gear, that's what apsc dsrl prices are at, but when you see that K1 and most new DFA lenses are priced $2K (more or less), that's a show stopper for a number to K5/K3 users, because even if the larger sensor has more room for image quality, the system itself is beyond budget. Prices may adjust in the future though.

Cost is one problem with a K-1 system. Mass is a different problem. The camera bag holding my K-30, at roughly 12" x 8" x 12", is the largest camera bag I've ever used. I wouldn't want anything larger, because I wouldn't want to haul that much mass around with me. That is also why I tend to talk about smaller bodies; if Pentax would create a K-70 derivative MILC, I might have more room, and ability to haul more mass, without losing any capability. That is a personal choice based on personal standards. My wife and I make an annual trip to Pt. Pelee NP, on the north shore of Lake Erie. We have seen guys haul a large bag and wooden tripod down to the tip, and take what are probably perfect pictures before hauling all that gear back home. I take a smallish bag with my Q-7 based birding kit and walking-stick / monopod as we spend the day hiking the various trails there and occasionally take a few less-perfect pictures. The selection is a personal matter based on personal desires {aka "needs"}, but so often here we have someone say "this is how I do it, and you should do it that way also".