[reh321]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

And that's from somebody that make $10K a day... For most the K1 is a rather big step financially.

Ohhhh yeahhh . If you can't save 2K over 5 years , you should ask for social assistance. 2K over 5 years = 1.09 euros per day. When it's like this, it really turns to a kind of loss of interest for photography, sounds like the K3 is going to stay in its carton more and more, while focusing a lot more on some other interests. We have to let go people who lost passion in photography, that can happen.

I'm sorry, biz-engineer, but this is a really dumb statement. I worked as a software engineer for a number of years; my wife has been a chemistry professor. We have adequate income for our needs, but the most I have ever spent so far on a camera kit for myself is just over $700 for the Canon EOS Elan kit I bought in 1995. Why? Because we choose to make regular and consistent donations to charity, and we make other choices as well. Those things are important. Yes, I could make a small reduction of those expenditures and use the money to buy a K-1, but a hobby should never be more important than other people. This doesn't mean that I have lost interest in photography; I don't take thousands of pictures each year, but I regularly take 500 or more per year, and I enjoy it as much as I ever have {which is what is important!!}

[zestoi]

I'm thinking of taking up smoking so I can quit and justify purchasing a k-1. I'm going to ease into it though, I'm starting with nicotine gum then I'll work my way up to the patch. Eventually I hope to be a chain smoker so quitting will "save" me enough to get a 200mm macro as well...

good luck on your quest personally i absolutely love my k-1 and plan to get a 2nd one as soon as in stock here again. my main reason for wanting it was depth of field. the ergonomics are just fantastic too. i wouldn't get rid of my k3 though as a nice lightweight backup plus my 10-20, 17-50 and 50-135 are APS-C only and I'd rather use them on my k3 than the k1 in crop mode.

As a side benefit, I have been wanting to try some B&W film work and all this smoking should make it nice and atmospheric.

[Nicolas06]

I'm thinking of taking up smoking so I can quit and justify purchasing a k-1. I'm going to ease into it though, I'm starting with nicotine gum then I'll work my way up to the patch. Eventually I hope to be a chain smoker so quitting will "save" me enough to get a 200mm macro as well...

As a side benefit, I have been wanting to try some B&W film work and all this smoking should make it nice and atmospheric.

The whole argument is funny. Either you don't feel concerned because you don't do it, either you have quite some reason to do it and may not be willing at all to give it up. Who can decide for you what is more important?

This is an argument saying that you have to basically loose something to get something else, because obviously this something else quite better. But really this is only valid in the eyes on the guy that say it... But the giving-up part is always true because whatever the way you see it theses 2000€ could be used to buy a used car, to go on vacations, on smoking, on driking, on musical instruments on whatever. And this whatever, you'll loose it. Pure and simple.

Better to have a fancier camera NOW than to smoke or drink, go the pub with friends or to to the restaurant and wait a bit for the prices to drop... Better to have a fancier camera than to spend too much on hobbies like buying many musical instrument, sport equipment or photographic gear... Oups ? Nobody see an issue ?

Yeah...

[Barry Pearson]

This is an argument saying that you have to basically loose something to get something else, because obviously this something else quite better. But really this is only valid in the eyes on the guy that say it... But the giving-up part is always true because whatever the way you see it theses 2000€ could be used to buy a used car, to go on vacations, on smoking, on driking, on musical instruments on whatever. And this whatever, you'll loose it. Pure and simple.

The older you get, the more an extra possibility opens up:

Becoming incapacitated or dying before you've been able to spend your money!

I'm 69, with no dependents. (Still healthy, I hope). I think like this now.

[Nicolas06]

The older you get, the more an extra possibility opens up:

Becoming incapacitated or dying before you've been able to spend your money!

I'm 69, with no dependents. (Still healthy, I hope). I think like this now.

When you are young you have no money and lot of time. When you are old, you might have quite some money (not sure actually), but not much time remaining to benefit of it. In the middle you have neither money or time available. Too many things to do, too many things to acquire.

Not everybody yet retired and even among the retired, not all are wealthy . But yep would be stupid to keep that money forever in your case, I fully agree.

[monochrome]

The older you get, the more an extra possibility opens up:

Becoming incapacitated or dying before you've been able to spend your money!

I'm 69, with no dependents. (Still healthy, I hope). I think like this now.

I think there was once a certain modesty, an old-school sense that one should deny oneself pleasures in favor of saving as a virtue signal. Profligacy was tacky, thrift was classy, parsimony was pathology. Maintaining appearances in some circles meant NOT Gatsby.

Buying used is a variant of this, or choosing to have a couple dozen manual focus lenses or a couple great zooms, but not both.

At a point, selecting one thing to act as a spendthrift is acceptable - maybe even quietly expected - demonstrating the fruits of one's previous self-denial.

It's uncomfortable to act contrary to 50 years of habit and just go buy the damned camera at a store because I want it.

[redrockcoulee]

Ohhhh yeahhh . If you can't save 2K over 5 years , you should ask for social assistance. 2K over 5 years = 1.09 euros per day. When it's like this, it really turns to a kind of loss of interest for photography, sounds like the K3 is going to stay in its carton more and more, while focusing a lot more on some other interests. We have to let go people who lost passion in photography, that can happen.

What a patronizing statement. For some people saving 2500 for a new camera when they have kids in sports or a pet that needs medications is nit the best choice. When my last dog was alive we struggled with paying her med but I would have sold all my camera gear if it had been necessary for her health.

Maybe I should sell my Hasselblad and 4X5 and 3ven my Pentax gear as I am not committed enough to photography to buy the K1? At least according to your proclamations.

To the OP, there are K3 and K5 owners who are satisfied with the equipment they currently own and as one would expect, the K1 owners are more than pleased with their new cameras. Do you need a K1, I don't know. A better camera than both the K3II and the K1 is bound to be released, and a better one than that. Will the K1 be a silver bullet or a real game changer for you? Might depend more on your stage in your photographic endeavors, your physical abilities, your funds and your subject of interest than what anyone else's says. You can still be a photographer with a cropped sensor digital camera or a film camera or a 4/3 camera or a smartphone camera.

[biz-engineer]

What a patronizing statement. For some people saving 2500 for a new camera when they have kids in sports or a pet that needs medications is nit the best choice. When my last dog was alive we struggled with paying her med but I would have sold all my camera gear if it had been necessary for her health.

Of course!! Of course. I fully agree.

Except when you buy a FA limited for 1400 when you could have bought a DA35 2.4 for 10x cheaper, then you can place any valid argument about money saving.
And some arguing that K1 is too expensive already owns 2 apsc bodies and >10 apsc lenses at the same time. All I mean is that from my experience, not getting fooled by the feeling that buying one lens every year for 4 years costs less than buying 4 lenses the same year. In Germany or in Austria (and also in France), if you don't buy a K1 and put the money in a saving account, at the end of the year you get 5 euros interest! Buying one bit at a time just give you the illusion that you spend less, that the kind of thinking that put the same people in trouble with credit card in the USA (= being mistaken with financial calculations).

In short, for many people (except the one who are having a really tight budget), the money argument for the K1 is actually the hint of a lack of desire. So, you can say, for a number of reason, I don't desire that camera that much (relative to what I already have). Perhaps if the K1 was a retro FF mirrorless design , a complete departure from existing K3/K5 line, it would trigger desire from other persons, I don't know.

[Nicolas06]

I think there was once a certain modesty, an old-school sense that one should deny oneself pleasures in favor of saving as a virtue signal. Profligacy was tacky, thrift was classy, parsimony was pathology. Maintaining appearances in some circles meant NOT Gatsby.

Buying used is a variant of this, or choosing to have a couple dozen manual focus lenses or a couple great zooms, but not both.

At a point, selecting one thing to act as a spendthrift is acceptable - maybe even quietly expected - demonstrating the fruits of one's previous self-denial.

It's uncomfortable to act contrary to 50 years of habit and just go buy the damned camera at a store because I want it.

Most people have no clue what a luxury camera is so nobody would notice. You'd be more spotted with a APSC and a 150-600 than with a K1 and an FA31. Nothing to worry here. Maybe the white lenses of canon could mean something to other photographers, but that would be about it.

[Barry Pearson]

It's uncomfortable to act contrary to 50 years of habit and just go buy the damned camera at a store because I want it.

Many years ago I had a ladyfriend who told me what I should wear as a consultant. No "autumn colours" because I'm pale and they don't work, but navy and red and white, etc. Years after we separated, and I've retired from being a consultant, I still mentally have to ask her permission to buy browns and greens, etc!

I have to keep reminding myself that I no longer need "to save for when I'm retired and living on my pensions". I'm there - whatever I had in mind to spend that money on, now is the time! But I'm still dithering about whether to buy an extra 64 GB memory card or two because of the larger raw file sizes for the K-1!

---------- Post added 14th Aug 2016 at 10:25 AM ----------

Most people have no clue what a luxury camera is so nobody would notice.

I've known Brian Bower for years. He writes books on Leicas.

Some of us do have some 2nd-hand clues about what a luxury camera is!

[Nicolas06]

Of course!! Of course. I fully agree.

Except when you buy a FA limited for 1400 when you could have bought a DA35 2.4 for 10x cheaper, then you can place any valid argument about money saving.
And some arguing that K1 is too expensive already owns 2 apsc bodies and >10 apsc lenses at the same time. All I mean is that from my experience, not getting fooled by the feeling that buying one lens every year for 4 years costs less than buying 4 lenses the same year. In Germany or in Austria (and also in France), if you don't buy a K1 and put the money in a saving account, at the end of the year you get 5 euros interest! Buying one bit at a time just give you the illusion that you spend less, that the kind of thinking that put the same people in trouble with credit card in the USA (= being mistaken with financial calculations).

In short, for many people (except the one who are having a really tight budget), the money argument for the K1 is actually the hint of a lack of desire. So, you can say, for a number of reason, I don't desire that camera that much (relative to what I already have). Perhaps if the K1 was a retro FF mirrorless design , a complete departure from existing K3/K5 line, it would trigger desire from other persons, I don't know.

You assume virtual people that for you act stupidly as ultimate argument. But no people here find their behavior stupid or would find your proposition better than their own. Most often you got the computation wrong because you try to make your case better than it really is.

For example in my case the FA31 was 700€. Not 1400€. K1 still 3 time more expensive and it would not hold its value as much in the 5 coming years than a made in Japan FA31 paid 700€. Was I to sell the FA31 and FA77, I would no longer have FF primes to put on that K1 that would be nonsence to have a body without lenses. You preffer zooms, that you choice, but if I had just a 16-50 + a 50-135 and a K3, upgrading to K1 and DFA24-70 and DFA70-200 would still be a huge investment. By today price this would be about 3500€ final balance. (K3: 500, 16-50: 600, 50-135: 600 vs K1: 2000€, DFA70-200: 2000€, DFA24-70: 1300).

Money just doesn't grow on trees. As you explain interrest rate are really low. There still the issue that money spent somewhere can't be used elsewhere. If I spend 2000€ more on a K1, there will be other thing I'll not be able to fund. There nothing arround that. Even for Barry that retired and alone, that the money to visit a country for a few weeks, that's maybe a part of the funding of a new car, maybe AC in the flat or an OLED TV to look at theses photos in the best conditions. There always something more, this is so always a question of priorities. And everybody as different set of priorities and different amount of available money.

And it is not like the K1 would keep its price for ever, would not be replaced by a better body in 2-3 years maybe even a smaller/lighter version of it... Even if a new FA31 version come around, reselling that used FA31 for its acquisition price going to quite easier than for a new K1 paid 2000€.

[redrockcoulee]

Of course!! Of course. I fully agree.

Except when you buy a FA limited for 1400 when you could have bought a DA35 2.4 for 10x cheaper, then you can place any valid argument about money saving.
And some arguing that K1 is too expensive already owns 2 apsc bodies and >10 apsc lenses at the same time. All I mean is that from my experience, not getting fooled by the feeling that buying one lens every year for 4 years costs less than buying 4 lenses the same year. In Germany or in Austria (and also in France), if you don't buy a K1 and put the money in a saving account, at the end of the year you get 5 euros interest! Buying one bit at a time just give you the illusion that you spend less, that the kind of thinking that put the same people in trouble with credit card in the USA (= being mistaken with financial calculations).

In short, for many people (except the one who are having a really tight budget), the money argument for the K1 is actually the hint of a lack of desire. So, you can say, for a number of reason, I don't desire that camera that much (relative to what I already have). Perhaps if the K1 was a retro FF mirrorless design , a complete departure from existing K3/K5 line, it would trigger desire from other persons, I don't know.

The 35 2,4 is the only lens that I bought new. The rest of my lenses were bought used when I had the funds and when I found a good deal. For the price of a K1 I can buy 500 rolls of film for the Hasselblad. The K5iis is by far a better camera than the vast majority of cameras from say 8 years ago. Even the Kr could run circles around the earlier top of the line Nikon professional cameras that I started out with.

For me if I went FF I would only need a WR lens as already my lenses are wider for FF then for the K5iis? For what I do my current camera is more than enough and if I really needed the very best I would get a 50 MP back for the Hasselblad. Instead I went to Iceland. Instead we bought kayaks. Currently the only lens I am thinking of adding is one more for large format.

One does not need the very best piece of equipment to be really into photography or to be a good photographer. A friend of mine who uses a D4 for work bought a Fuji system for his personal use.

One does not need to be constantly upgrading to be into photography, just need to be if one is into cameras. I am glad you are pleased with your new camera but try to remember that we are all individuals with different goals, funds and needs.

[robr7]

OP here and boy do I feel like I stepped in it but my Thanks for everyone's input.

I believe I am at least obligated for a quick update...

I did end up buying the K-1 w/ the DFA 24-70 just prior to leaving, so part of the enjoyment has been learning (I am a geek) and I brought along the FA31, *55 and the DA55-300. These seemed to be some of the lenses there was some consensus to keep. For some reason the *55 is the only one I have not shot with. I do intend to sell off the rest to recoup some of the cost and / or to gift them.

I am still on vacation (we needed a quiet day) and so far have very much enjoyed the upgrade. I originally bought my K-7 for a previous trip here so I've attempted to recreate some shots but for a whole bunch of different reasons that didn't work out as intended most of the time but I can safely say to no ones surprise the night shots are significantly better. - (the K-7 generated some of my favorites shots ever here so it'll be interesting to try to compare).

What else can I safely say?

The system is built like a tank. Dropped twice from waist height for reasons I'll try not to blame on a certain contraption I bought with only small scuffs plus a broken lense hood as damage.

It is noticeably heavier at times but not overly bothersome and still quite ergonomic.

The extra dial is useful.

The adjustable LCD is very useful.

Maybe I'll follow up soon after vacation is over with some of my opinions trying not to kick some dust back up on this thread but I think it is also safe for me to say before I head back off that I haven't regretted buying it.

[normhead]

OP here and boy do I feel like I stepped in it but my Thanks for everyone's input.

I believe I am at least obligated for a quick update...

I did end up buying the K-1 w/ the DFA 24-70 just prior to leaving, so part of the enjoyment has been learning (I am a geek) and I brought along the FA31, *55 and the DA55-300. These seemed to be some of the lenses there was some consensus to keep. For some reason the *55 is the only one I have not shot with. I do intend to sell off the rest to recoup some of the cost and / or to gift them.

I am still on vacation (we needed a quiet day) and so far have very much enjoyed the upgrade. I originally bought my K-7 for a previous trip here so I've attempted to recreate some shots but for a whole bunch of different reasons that didn't work out as intended most of the time but I can safely say to no ones surprise the night shots are significantly better. - (the K-7 generated some of my favorites shots ever here so it'll be interesting to try to compare).

What else can I safely say?

The system is built like a tank. Dropped twice from waist height for reasons I'll try not to blame on a certain contraption I bought with only small scuffs plus a broken lense hood as damage.

It is noticeably heavier at times but not overly bothersome and still quite ergonomic.

The extra dial is useful.

The adjustable LCD is very useful.

Maybe I'll follow up soon after vacation is over with some of my opinions trying not to kick some dust back up on this thread but I think it is also safe for me to say before I head back off that I haven't regretted buying it.

Fantastic, enjoy your setup....
And thanks for coming back and letting us know how things are working out.

[repaap]

OP here and boy do I feel like I stepped in it but my Thanks for everyone's input.

I believe I am at least obligated for a quick update...

I did end up buying the K-1 w/ the DFA 24-70 just prior to leaving, so part of the enjoyment has been learning (I am a geek) and I brought along the FA31, *55 and the DA55-300. These seemed to be some of the lenses there was some consensus to keep. For some reason the *55 is the only one I have not shot with. I do intend to sell off the rest to recoup some of the cost and / or to gift them.

I am still on vacation (we needed a quiet day) and so far have very much enjoyed the upgrade. I originally bought my K-7 for a previous trip here so I've attempted to recreate some shots but for a whole bunch of different reasons that didn't work out as intended most of the time but I can safely say to no ones surprise the night shots are significantly better. - (the K-7 generated some of my favorites shots ever here so it'll be interesting to try to compare).

What else can I safely say?

The system is built like a tank. Dropped twice from waist height for reasons I'll try not to blame on a certain contraption I bought with only small scuffs plus a broken lense hood as damage.

It is noticeably heavier at times but not overly bothersome and still quite ergonomic.

The extra dial is useful.

The adjustable LCD is very useful.

Maybe I'll follow up soon after vacation is over with some of my opinions trying not to kick some dust back up on this thread but I think it is also safe for me to say before I head back off that I haven't regretted buying it.

Funny, I'v read through this thread and just was about to say that K-1 has changed my shooting more that I did think beforehand.

You'll be happy when you get back home and really begin to process those images you got. And yes, it is build like a tank. Have fun with it.