[Fcsnt54]

Depends on priority and what you will shoot, so maybe?

[pathdoc]

I was going to tell you not to even think about it until you had handled one in-store, because the KS-1 is a tiny, compact, svelte little thing which looking at made me want for its compactness and the K-1 was such a brute that handling it the first time was almost a deal-breaker, and you might have wanted to handle it first and know that the weight and ergonomics weren't going to be offputting (especially at the price)...

But it looks like you've gone ahead and done it now. Remember, inside every big camera is a little camera screaming to get out, and in your case the little camera (in crop mode) is basically a K-5 IIs. Enjoy. I generally use mine in about the same way as most people who own medium format bodies use those - sparingly and with careful deliberation - but on the other hand I suspect there will be an odd satisfaction which awaits the first photographer who literally wears out a K-1 in day to day field use.

[timw4mail]

I was going to tell you not to even think about it until you had handled one in-store, because the KS-1 is a tiny, compact, svelte little thing which looking at made me want for its compactness and the K-1 was such a brute that handling it the first time was almost a deal-breaker, and you might have wanted to handle it first and know that the weight and ergonomics weren't going to be offputting (especially at the price)...

But it looks like you've gone ahead and done it now. Remember, inside every big camera is a little camera screaming to get out, and in your case the little camera (in crop mode) is basically a K-5 IIs. Enjoy. I generally use mine in about the same way as most people who own medium format bodies use those - sparingly and with careful deliberation - but on the other hand I suspect there will be an odd satisfaction which awaits the first photographer who literally wears out a K-1 in day to day field use.

Funny you should comment on the size. I got the bundle from B&H which includes the battery grip, a bag, and a 64gb SD card.

I'm sure I'm going to be shocked at the size of it..

[surfar]

Well, I just spent a lot of money...

A wise investment!

[clickclick]

Funny you should comment on the size. I got the bundle from B&H which includes the battery grip, a bag, and a 64gb SD card.

I'm sure I'm going to be shocked at the size of it..

Congrats! That's a nice bundle they have with the grip.

Don't think about the size, just grab your favorite lens, go for a walk, and start using it. I was concerned on the size thing. 3 blown out discs in my neck make weight a real issue for lugging heavy gear around. I quickly forgot about the size as I used it. Worst case is you trade it back to B&H for a KP....

[clackers]

You wouldn't play golf with just one club in your bag, Tim, so I'm sure you'll work out that your K-S1 will still be the go-to for street, macro, hiking and wildlife, just as the K-S2 is for me.

The K-1 can be your big boy camera with big boy lenses, if you wish, for everything else.

Not all of us need these expensive things, but I have friends who now have a boat, a custom car or shares in a racehorse, and the money I've put into photography versus what they spend for their fun is pretty good in comparison, actually!

[timw4mail]

You wouldn't play golf with just one club in your bag, Tim, so I'm sure you'll work out that your K-S1 will still be the go-to for street, macro, hiking and wildlife, just as the K-S2 is for me.

The K-1 can be your big boy camera with big boy lenses, if you wish, for everything else.

Not all of us need these expensive things, but I have friends who now have a boat, a custom car or shares in a racehorse, and the money I've put into photography versus what they spend for their fun is pretty good in comparison, actually!

Between my phone (Google Nexus 6P), Micro 4/3s (Olympus E-PM1), APS-C (K-S1), and now the full-frame (K-1), I should have most photography covered

[Canada_Rockies]

Norm, I've been exclusively APS-C since 2007 when I bought my K10D. My "normal" lens was 55mm for probably 40 years. I have adapted by looking through the lenses, but I did rebuild my lens collection to take into account the framing difference. On 35mm I would never have thought that 18-36 mm would be a lens I would be happy with (despite Nikon's first loved zoom), but I am using the equivalent now, the DA 12-24, and I have found that I can go a whole day with it, happily.

I just rediscovered a favourite focal length, my second, the 135. I used the FA 100/2.8 macro in the back yard for the first day of spring, and it felt natural: I saw the fov I expected when I put it to my eye.

I guess I could adapt to a K-1 easily enough, after all.

[normhead]

Norm, I've been exclusively APS-C since 2007 when I bought my K10D. My "normal" lens was 55mm for probably 40 years. I have adapted by looking through the lenses, but I did rebuild my lens collection to take into account the framing difference. On 35mm I would never have thought that 18-36 mm would be a lens I would be happy with (despite Nikon's first loved zoom), but I am using the equivalent now, the DA 12-24, and I have found that I can go a whole day with it, happily.

I just rediscovered a favourite focal length, my second, the 135. I used the FA 100/2.8 macro in the back yard for the first day of spring, and it felt natural: I saw the fov I expected when I put it to my eye.

I guess I could adapt to a K-1 easily enough, after all.

What I found out was, even though I had APS-c gear I was still acting like I was shooting a 50 on a Full Frame. The spot I walk to for my first look through the viewfinder is 50mm. MY first digital was a *ist in like 2004 or something. It took a few years before discovered it was APS-c. I'm not sure I ever adjusted. The first lens I bought apart from the kit for the *ist was my Sigma 70-300 and then my FA 50 1.7. It took 13 years but I finally have what I thought I was buying.

[pathdoc]

It took 13 years but I finally have what I thought I was buying.

I got my first DSLR in 2005 and even though I also had a P50T with a 50mm/1.7 A on it, I never realised there was a difference until much, much later - possibly because I was always in situations where I could "zoom with my feet" and I always just looked through the viewfinder and zoomed/moved till I got the shot I wanted. Which leads me now to think that a lot of people are overthinking the difference, but man, what a strange thing it is when you put a 17/3.5 on the K-1 and it drinks in more scenery than a DA15 on the K-5...

[gaweidert]

Since 2012 I have purchased a K5, K5-IIs, K3 and a K1. The two K5's sit mostly unused. The K1 is my go to camera and the K3 complements it. I got my first SLR, a Mamiya/Sekor 500 DTL in 1970 or so. Benn sporting Pentax mount lenses ever since.

The K1 is the first DSLR that I have owned that IMHO is a good as film. It has replaced my Spotmatic II as my favorite SLR type camera. All the number crunching about pixel density etc aside, I just like the image quality that I get from it. The images just have that unmeasurable "something" about them. From what I have seen on this board the KS1 and KS2 have "it" too. The K5's and K3 not so much. This is just my opinion. Others may differ.

[pathdoc]

The K1 is the first DSLR that I have owned that IMHO is a good as film.

I guess it depends on the standards you hold your shots to. Some of us just want "good screen/6x4 glossy" standard - others (for very good reasons) demand only the best at 8x10 or bigger. I made the switch to digital when 8MP became affordable for me, which was where I had been told digital overtook 6x4 glossy. For various reasons I went first with a Nikon bridge camera (Coolpix 8700) before replacing that (when stolen) with an *istDL (which I found just as good optically, though I missed the Nikon's video capability at first).

Certainly the first few shots I took with the K-1 convinced me it was something really, really special. The K-5 is more than adequate, IMO, but the K-1 is at least two generations newer to start with and the K-5 simply can't compete with that. You would need to make a 16MP DSLR with all of today's enhancements for a fair comparison, and that just isn't going to happen.

[gaweidert]

I guess it depends on the standards you hold your shots to..

I am not talking about technical standards but just the overall impression that the images make on me. I can't really explain it, but I just like the K1 images a little better than those taken with my Pentax APS-c cameras.

I have mentioned before that in the past (1970's) I have worked with films that had a digital equivalent of 1 terabyte of information per square inch. Each image was 81 square inches too. The roll of film could be up to 10,000 feet (3000 meters) long!. The specialty camera and lenses were wonders too. In Pentax K1 terms, each image would need to contain about 1.2 terabytes of data to match it. No need for pixel shift.

[monochrome]

I already have a problem with buying lenses... I actually shipped off some lenses for the first time today.

If buying lenses is a problem, K-1 is like a gateway drug.

Here -- borrow my K-1 for an hour. First one's on me.

[pathdoc]

If buying lenses is a problem, K-1 is like a gateway drug.

I bought my K-1 to keep company with a large number of film-era lenses I already had.