[UserAccessDenied]

I don't think anyone would want to argue that your wildlife is not 1st class!

I'll argue that.
I think we need to reserve this notion for photographers like Paul Nicklen and Tim Laman.

I think there are some great photographers on this forum, Norm included; however I think there's a huge gap between wildlife photos and feeder photos.

[Rupert]

I think there are some great photographers on this forum, Norm included; however I think there's a huge gap between wildlife photos and feeder photos.

Not nearly as much difference as between the lenses used by "feeder shooters" and those out in the wild shooting for cash and publication.

I'd be willing to bet that given the same gear, Norm and several others here could easily equal those guys. The camera and lens isn't everything...but you can't deny the importance it plays in wildlife or sports photography.

I sit at my desk...drink coffee...pick up my K1 and Bigma 50-500 and shoot through double pane glass handheld at birds on a fake Cheater Branch screwed to a tree trunk for my best advantage....Do I fell guilty? Hell no! I do feel comfortable and warn in the winter/cool in the summer...and no ticks, mosquitoes or dangerous rabid squirrels to contend with out in the wild!

1/50 handheld ISO 1600 @ 500mm ...shot from my desk in lazy Rupert-type style!


How would you know I didn't hike all day through varmint infested woods and jungles, fight off snakes, bears, tigers and angry fire breathing dragon squirrels just to get that shot?

Regards!

[biz-engineer]

That's what the skepticism

No skepticism at all. No bias. I shoot birds. I could have sold my K3 when I purchased the K1, but I kept the K3 to compare it with the K1 for the same reach. So, I did not compare one pixel, I compared the same frames , frames from the K3 and frame from the K1 crop mode, my conclusion was that the image from the K3 are slightly better than the ones from the K1 in crop mode, and since the K3 AF is faster and FPS also faster I don't see any reason to trade the K3 for K1 crop mode. Here seems that the OP doing long shot also considered the K1, so I provided honest feedback from the results I get, unbiased. I mean, if people buy a K1, it's also Ok, I never said K1 crop isn't good, I simply said that in crop mode, there's not difference between the K1 and the K3. I'm absolutely not trying to prove anything, having and keeping both cameras, I provided my observation if that could help. If people think differently, it's ok for me as it is not my money, and eventually I have no interest in seeing the value of my K1 drops because of bad saying. In short, if I go birding / BIF, I use the K3 (faster AF), if I know I can shoot K1 in FF mode I take the K1.

[UserAccessDenied]

Not nearly as much difference as between the lenses used by "feeder shooters" and those out in the wild shooting for cash and publication.

I'd be willing to bet that given the same gear, Norm and several others here could easily equal those guys. The camera and lens isn't everything...but you can't deny the importance it plays in wildlife or sports photography.

I sit at my desk...drink coffee...pick up my K1 and Bigma 50-500 and shoot through double pane glass handheld at birds on a fake Cheater Branch screwed to a tree trunk for my best advantage....Do I fell guilty? Hell no! I do feel comfortable and warn in the winter/cool in the summer...and no ticks, mosquitoes or dangerous rabid squirrels to contend with out in the wild!

1/50 handheld ISO 1600 @ 500mm ...shot from my desk in lazy Rupert-type style!


How would you know I didn't hike all day through varmint infested woods and jungles, fight off snakes, bears, tigers and angry fire breathing dragon squirrels just to get that shot?

Regards!

I also wish I had $100k in camera gear and was contracted to travel the world in search for those remarkable shots.
I am just saying there's a difference between the styles...

Hooking an yellow-fin tuna from a kayak is much different than long-line fishing 60 miles out.
Not saying one is better than the other. Each has their advantages; disadvantages.

I have friends and family that still shoot and cannot move about as much anymore. I have a huge amount of respect for them as photographers.
I am still young and able to get out in the woods and I enjoy that. That's the reason I picked up a camera in the first place, to share my experiences with nature.
When I'm older I hope to still have that drive, but ultimately we have to shoot to match our lifestyle.
And there's nothing lazy about your style of shooting!
Keeping double-paned windows clean takes some work as well!!

Is the bow-hunter jealous of the crossbow?
No, they share the same season and can easily hunt with one.
However, they prefer to master something that others cannot.

---

Last edited by UserAccessDenied; 05-26-2016 at 12:11 PM.

[Rupert]

No skepticism at all. No bias. I shoot birds. I could have sold my K3 when I purchased the K1, but I kept the K3 to compare it with the K1 for the same reach. So, I did not compare one pixel, I compared the same frames , frames from the K3 and frame from the K1 crop mode, my conclusion was that the image from the K3 are slightly better than the ones from the K1 in crop mode, and since the K3 AF is faster and FPS also faster I don't see any reason to trade the K3 for K1 crop mode. Here seems that the OP doing long shot also considered the K1, so I provided honest feedback from the results I get, unbiased. I mean, if people buy a K1, it's also Ok, I never said K1 crop isn't good, I simply said that in crop mode, there's not difference between the K1 and the K3. I'm absolutely not trying to prove anything, having and keeping both cameras, I provided my observation if that could help. If people think differently, it's ok for me as it is not my money, and eventually I have no interest in seeing the value of my K1 drops because of bad saying. In short, if I go birding / BIF, I use the K3 (faster AF), if I know I can shoot K1 in FF mode I take the K1.

Biz...That all makes good sense, and is reasonable...but if you are talking about having both cameras, not everyone can afford that. One trick the K3 cannot do...shoot 36MP FF shots.
For me it is a very handy advantage to have the Crop Mode. I am not currently shooting much FF but when I do, it is there for me. My circumstance (breaking the K5IIs) made me face a decision on what to buy....I have zero regrets with the K1!



Regards!

[Adam]

Adam, would you recommend this as a walk around lens for the K-50? Notwithstanding the different focal range I assume this is much better than the 18-55 kit lens.

I'd stick with the 18-135mm on crop, unless you don't mind not being able to go as wide.

[grispie]

Given my interest of wildlife and nature photography, should I buy a K-1 or K-3ii or perhaps invest in a good quality wide angle zoom lens for landscapes.

Since you take pictures on the go :-), my advice is to immerse yourself in the wideangle world and get a da15 or 12-24 & give that a try.
You could go with the 15-30 (future proof for FF) but requires funds and it's heavy.
Seems to me, for now, you are fine with your three nice bodies. Lenses will make more of a difference in the way to visualize the world around you..

[UncleVanya]

I'm lost. There is a lot of debate about the functional use of the cameras but I'm still unclear if wildlife and nature meant landscapes as well as moving creatures or something else. I would also follow up by asking what SIZE creatures at what distance and I would ask is this a blind setup or a stalk and shoot setup? The crop mode of the K-1 is competitive with the K-5iis but framing for crop mode seems difficult from what I am hearing from users of the K-1. I'm of the uninformed opinion that the FOV change is important to consider. The K-1 seems fantastic - and for someone like me it may be more than I can justify but I can see it fitting well with my lens collection. But I have a lot more FF lenses than most people in this position - even so I'm asking myself to justify the expense and falling short. My current K-3 outperforms my ability most of the time.

Frankly it boils down to what are you trying to improve and what do you want to spend. The simple answer might be to add a DA 15 or DA 12-24 and understand that's a toe in the waters to see if the DFA 15-30 and a K-1 are in the future. I wouldn't buy the K-3ii until you know what you want from the camera/lens. If you need to buy glass - factor that in. So if the K-1 means a DFA 150-450 or an FA* 600 is in the future - so be it. Factor in also any backup you might need. If you get the 15-30 - and the K-1 goes down - is using it on the crop body OK? If not then do you need a second K-1 or can you get by with the DA 15 or DA 12-24 as the backup? Likewise in reverse - if the DA* 300 on the K-5iis is the main bird camera - will using it on the K-1 in crop mode (or full frame for that matter) be sufficient for use as a backup or do you need a longer lens etc.

I don't know the answers - I'm curious about the details of the questions and the outcome.

[Driline]

I sit at my desk...drink coffee...pick up my K1 and Bigma 50-500 and shoot through double pane glass handheld at birds

You're not doing it right. You should really be sitting in a hot tub out on the deck with NO glass to shoot through. You're just not a real purist are you?

[UncleVanya]

You're not doing it right. You should really be sitting in a hot tub out on the deck with NO glass to shoot through. You're just not a real purist are you?

Dang - now all I can think of is Rupert doing a Hugh Heffner impression with a water resistant cell phone and the wifi control app - he's drinking champagne with some companions and occasionally lazily pressing a button on the screen of his wireless device to capture stunning shots of whatever animal has landed...

[Rupert]

You're not doing it right. You should really be sitting in a hot tub out on the deck with NO glass to shoot through. You're just not a real purist are you?

I'm more a cheater type. Nothing against hot tubs, but those mosquitoes here in Texas can be viewed on radar this time of year.

As for the camera decisions.....I will state as I have often, my K5IIs was the best Pentax I had ever owned and I could still be very happy with it. It fit my kind of shooting perfectly. Still, after a couple of weeks with the K1 I am now spoiled and it fits too.....just better.

You won't become a Pro with the K1 if you aren't already one....I tried that with the silk shirt, alligator loafers/belt and fancy pants. All it did was to make squirrels and old ladies laugh at me.
People can read, review reviews, check their cash or credit and decide which camera is right for them...it's not all that hard nowadays. Old Rupert's advice is not much better than a silk shirt and alligator shoes.

Regards!

[Ian.morgan]

I think it comes down to how much money you have to play with. I had the same internal debate 3 weeks ago when by K-30 died , and I decided i would notice enough of an improvement with the K-3ii to justify £500 but not enough of an improvement with the K-1 to justify an extra £1000. Three weeks later, and some lovely K-3ii shots later, and no amount of K-1 images I've seen online have made me question that decision yet.

In a year, I may change my mind, but I'm pretty sure I'll find one for £500 less by then.

Just my 2p worth

[Suhail]

I'm planning on a K-1 for my next purchase, but I don't plan to use it for birding. I'll keep the K-3 for that.If I'm birding... I'm not giving this up. Nothing I've seen from a K-1 to date has changed my mind.

normhead,

And I am inclining towards this. K-3ii for birding, but I also want K-1 for more landscape and macro shots. Let us see how much deep I can get into my bank account.

Regards,

Suhail

---------- Post added 05-26-16 at 08:03 PM ----------

Can you more clearly define wildlife and nature photography? ....... It has been so long since I shot full frame so I'm am not certain how the two really compare and I would advise you to try one or both before making the plunge. Maybe you can find a local pentaxian with a K-1 or rent one.

Hi UncleVanya,

I shoot moving animals, preferably in their habitats. I don't go for close ups. A bird is, therefore, an object against a landscape or a historic building. I use K-5IIs for these shots.

Other than the above, I shoot landscapes as my dog and I hike together. It is usually my dog standing or hiking against landscape. I also am taking more and more macros of wildflowers as I hike. At present, I use K-S2 with either a mediocre DA 18-135 mm wr or DFA 100mm/f2.8 macro.

I hope this explains and I have got you viewpoint :-)

Regards,

Suhail

---------- Post added 05-26-16 at 08:08 PM ----------

I have the K-5IIS and the K-3II. The K-5IIS is an excellent performer. .... I just got my K-3II last October, and it is great, so I am set up very well for now, but I look at the K-1 as an option for the 36 mp to accompany possibly a Pentax 70-200 and/or some other Pentax lens in the future if I may need it.

Hi C_Jones,

This is very nicely explained. I appreciate your advice.

Regards,

Suhail

---------- Post added 05-26-16 at 08:12 PM ----------

The K-1 makes sense for someone who is already heavily invested in a collection of (likely older) Pentax "full-frame" lenses. S....... The most dramatic different would be seen using wider angle lenses on the K-1.

JeffB,

I just got double-minded because I was thinking if I have to move up with a camera body, I might as well go for the best.

Thanks and regards,

Suhail

---------- Post added 05-26-16 at 08:21 PM ----------

@Suhail, from what I've seen on your (very interesting, bookmarked for later viewing) web site, I could make a case for both the K-1 and K-3. However, one deficiency I see in some of your photos is simply a lack of reach for shooting distant birds. ...... a new high-end APS-C camera this year, possibly one that includes a K-1 derived AF unit.

Hi luftluss,

Thank you so very much for checking out my website to first know who I am and what I am shooting. For that blog site, unfortunately, I am resorting to pixel size of only 6MP and that too on jpeg. I take bird shots while hiking with my dog and want to show the birds, who are almost always moving/flickering, in their natural habitat. I have only recently started shooting at 16MP. I am now feeling like a fool LOL.

Thanks for the suggestion. It makes sense to me now.

Regards,

Suhail

[frank]

Just get the K1, it is the end game camera for me. I've used pretty much all Pentax cameras, so far this is the ONE.

The only thing might bother some users is that you might not be able to use some of those Sigma lenses (which are fantastic btw). Luckily I don't have any.

[Suhail]

I have a lot of the same interests in wildlife and nature shooting but it will be a while before I am in the market for my next camera. But if it were right now I would have the same dilemma between the K-1 and K-3ii. If I could afford either I would take the K-1 for the increased frame size. ....Good luck in whatever choice you make.

Hi ramseybuckeye,

Thank you for the advice. It is true that if I settle for K-3ii, i can invest in at least one other quality lens for the price of K-1. Otoh, if I want to upgrade, my mind says, go for the best body lol.

Regards,

Suhail