[Not a Number]

I count ten K-3 listed as sold/expired on the MarketPlace between 12/2013 and 12/2014 and five K-1 listed sold/expired and one K-1 currently for sale. The earliest sold listing is in Dec. 2013. K-3 was released Nov 2013.

[stevebrot]

I went through the entire Market Place Pages 1-6 and did not see any K1's listed ?

Not sure what you are on about. I went back to the middle of May (2 and 1/2 months) and found a total of FOUR K-1 cameras listed for sale on this forum. Three that sold quickly and one listed only 6 hours ago. So FOUR listed for sale in 2.5 months?

Is it just me, or does there seem to be a surpising number of folks selling off K1 DSLR's in the PF Market place.

I think it is just you. I have seen a few listings in the last several months, but noted at the time that there was not a lot of interest.


Steve

[D1N0]

Is it just me

it is

[Derek Zeanah]

It's sort of amusing to watch the K-1 being transformed into nothing more than a service appendage of cameras like my S1a, but there you go. I bought it to do the things it could do better than anything I already had, and this just happens to be one of them.

I don't want to derail this conversation much, but I'd love to know more. I've got negatives going back to '91 that I need to scan, and if a K1 + 100mm Macro can outperform something like an Epson flatbed scanner (and it probably can,) then I really need to know more.

[jpzk]

Boy ! What a thread !!!

Is paranoia setting in or what?

[jatrax]

Boy ! What a thread !!! Is paranoia setting in or what?

I don't think that was the real intent of the OP. The post might have been phrased a bit strongly but I think he was really just trying to start some conversation on the K-1. In other threads he has stated he is intending to buy a K-1. Anyway, after doing a little research I am amazed at how few used K-1s have been listed either here or on Ebay. Very, very few. People are keeping them, not trading them.

[biz-engineer]

1. Is it the kind sparse new FF lens line-up? 2. Folks hoped video was better than it was? 3. Folks hoped focus system was drastically improved and were disappointed? (In my mind it's been proven to be a highly capable system, although not outstanding) 4. Found that their photography did not improve with newer system and went back to APS-C? 5. Some other reason?

There isn't a large number of K1 being for sale second hand (not a big trend) and yes I was intrigued because new models seldom sell second hand within the first year of release. Mostly the reasons for selling aren't because of the K1 camera itself, but most likely because of some other general attributes of the Pentax brand. I was hopping for panic sales of K1 at very cheap prices. If they were selling for $1000 or less, I'd buy one or two as backup bodies, unfortunately, they aren't selling especially cheap.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 07-30-2017 at 09:17 PM.

[pinholecam]

Because make believe cameras are cheaper and has all the spec one ever needs.

[stevebrot]

I don't want to derail this conversation much, but I'd love to know more. I've got negatives going back to '91 that I need to scan, and if a K1 + 100mm Macro can outperform something like an Epson flatbed scanner (and it probably can,) then I really need to know more.

It is possible to use a K-1 for digitizing slides and negatives using a macro lens or bellows. There are several threads on the film processing/scanning forum where options are discussed...

Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom - PentaxForums.com

Whether one gets better results than with a flatbed scanner depends on the user skill with either device. Film flatness, proper alignment, lighting, and optical path are important for success. In theory, the K-1 should be head and shoulders above a high-end Epson and even a Nikon Coolscan.


Steve

[ripper2860]

OK. It appears it is just me. Research indicates that my thoughts regarding folks selling their K1 was merely an aberration and not really a trend. That's good, as it had me a bit perplexed. I think the K1 is a great camera and I'm glad to know that there seems to be no one real compelling reason why a few folks at PF have sold theirs -- at least none that can be attributed specifically to Pentax.

Thanks everyone for indulging my query!!

[Rondec]

I think it really comes down to money. People sell when they need the money for something else -- a medical expense, a home expense -- whatever. Sometimes it is that they are switching systems, but not always. The same is true for why people don't upgrade their K30s and K3 IIs -- they don't have the money for the upgrade. Particularly if you own mostly APS-C lenses, an upgrade to a K-1 could be pretty expensive.

I do think most folks with K-1s have kept shooting with them and seem pretty happy, sometimes with a few quibbles.

[MarkJerling]

Why hasn't everyone with a K3 moved to the K1 by now?

Because my K5 still works fine and I can't afford a K-1 yet!

[pepperberry farm]

In retrospect -- maybe the real question should be ...

Why hasn't everyone with a K3 moved to the K1 by now? ...

why would I?

aside from the additional expense of purchasing a K-1, the increased workload on my Mac (larger storage demands, larger initial/final file size to work with in applications), larger/heavier camera in my hands.... I'm not sure why I would move to a K-1...

somedays, the work I produce on my K-50 satisfies me, let alone what the step up to the K-3 (and it's eventual successor after the II) does for me...




nothing wrong with the APS-C format other than it does not have the cachet of being full-frame....

(just my opinion - I have seen some incredible, amazing images from the K-1 community... it's just not for me)

[pathdoc]

I really need to know more

The 100 is a problem - the field of view is far too narrow and the minimum focal distance not short enough.

I have the 35/2.8 Limited Macro (whose minimum focal distance is next to nothing) and an old Asahi Pentax slide copier (which also handles 35mm negatives), and with a filter or empty 49mm ring on the front of the lens, the copier slides neatly on and screw-clamps down. Thank God for the ubiquity of the 49mm filter thread among Pentax lenses through the years! Camera on tripod, filter (as spacer) on lens, because the hood does not retract back far enough, lamp of some sort in front of the whole setup for even illumination. Settings: monochrome filter ON, colour-inverting filter (via "info" menu) ON, JPEG to the appropriate quality you want (though I believe it also does it in Raw). Live view ON, ISO 100, f/8 or thereabouts, Av mode, then set the menu dial to +/-, turn on the light and start pulling the frames through. The Third Knob then adjusts your exposure value to give you an appropriate level of illumination/contrast and live view shows you what you are about to get. I use a plug-in cable release. With the whole assemblage on a firm base like this, shutter speeds are irrelevant. Remember to turn SR off.

You may shoot in full frame and then crop away the extra later (the 35/2.8 vignettes rather badly on full frame setting, but fortunately all the damage is outside the area of interest), or you may shoot in crop. The difficulty is getting enough blank spacers or filters to fill the FOV as much as possible and ensure the minimum of wasted space. Pull the first frame through, dial in your EV adjustment to give a pleasing result, and shoot. Then pull through the next, and the next...

I shoot my negatives while they are still in one continuous roll of 24 or 36, and it makes rendering a whole film into digital very quick and easy. If I downsample or shoot in APS-C mode and choose a smaller JPEG MP setting, I have smaller files that are still good for Flickr or Facebook, and I can look at those and decide which ones are worth doing a full treatment in RAW and cleaning up/inverting in post, and even plan what I might have to do with them. Whether Pixel Shift is even worth it for monochrome, I have no idea.

I haven't gone down the bellows route yet, because my bellows and slide holder do not clamp to each other and I don't have a stable base. You need two tripods for that, and I prefer to leave one at work for various reasons.

---------- Post added 31-07-17 at 08:41 ----------

In theory, the K-1 should be head and shoulders above a high-end Epson and even a Nikon Coolscan.

In pure resolution terms, yes. In practice, the integrated software packages for the film-capable scanners appear to simplify the workload enormously, to the point where I am still sorely tempted to buy one. Some of them will even detect and crop the individual frames of a multi-shot strip for you and present them as separate images, ready to deal with and save as such. And as they will also often handle 120-size negatives, the upgrade path to the small end of medium format is there if you want it. They will also convert colour negatives with ease, which is something I haven't worked out a post-processing workflow for yet.

[c.a.m]

Why hasn't everyone with a K3(II) moved to the K1 by now?

I don't think this question is sufficient.

It should be considered along with another one:

Why hasn't everyone with a K-1 moved to the 645Z by now?

In other words, why 'stop' at the K-1?