Originally posted by aleonx3 OP, just to get an idea of the FF vs APS-C differences, I attached a couple of photos taken on my travel to Tokyo in 2017. First one is the cropped photo from the original image taken with k-1; the second is the original (from DNG file). Back to your original question, narrow DOF does not play any part in my style of photography, and most of my photos are in f4 - f5.6 range, and sometimes f8 (probably the sweet spot in many of the lenses I use). It is not a true comparison but close enough if you were using APS-C camera vs FF camera using the same aperture.
K1_P0386_1
K1_P0386
K1_P0299_1
K1_P0299
Hi Aleonx3, Thanks for sharing the pics, nice ones
Yes, i do crop pics a bit and yes I am not comfortable getting too close to the subject either. During travel I agree that it is better to have more depth of field and that was one of the reasons I used to convince myself to get the KP over the K1 knowing it would serve my purpose for travel. Where I feel I can justify a K1 is for indoor portraits and boudoir shots, sometimes the rooms are quite small and tight, and would be nice to be able to go wide without having to depend on wide angle lensse and the accompanying distortion
---------- Post added 07-22-19 at 01:59 AM ----------
Originally posted by johnha The FA43 was the reason I bought a K-1, it's my preferred focal length that's too long for APS-C. I can use an FA28/2.8 as an equivalent, the FA35/2 makes a good "fast fifty" equivalent and a 50/1.4 makes a good "portrait" length lens.
As a medium format film shooter, even FF feels a bit small, I don't always want thin DoF but I want the choice, many of the wider DA primes seem too slow to allow this. I haven't used any (for this reason) so this might be an assumption.
Hi Johnha, very true, its nice to have options. Although I feel i am well covered for now with my K3 and KP, someday I would like to own a K1, more for want than need actually
---------- Post added 07-22-19 at 02:07 AM ----------
Originally posted by mikesbike Definitely true. The special qualities and angle of view from the FA 43mm Limited are best served on a FF body from my experience, along with the versatility it affords together with its compactness. Getting all of these attributes for APS-C would require a 28mm f/1.9 or f/2 which would certainly not be a compact pancake lens like the FA 43mm! It is likewise more difficult to design a fast wide angle lens for APS-C in reasonably compact form. However, if you have a desire for a fast WA zoom lens, getting the KP and putting the savings over the K-1 towards a DA* 11-18mm f/2.8 would make sense.
As to the FA 77mm LTD, which I also have had for many years, I find it serves at least as well on APS-C with more reach, and being in the tele range, it is still not hard to achieve a very shallow DOF to blur background for effect. I love it on my KP.
If I did not have the FA 43mm LTD, the FA 35mm f/2, the FA 28mm f/2.8, and a fine Tokina 28-70mm f/2.8 zoom lens, getting a FF digital body would not cross my mind... and it has been just to that point- crossing my mind only! Getting one would also necessitate including the DFA 28-105mm lens in order to have a high-quality, versatile WR FF kit.
Hi Mike, yes I love the 77 on my KP and K3 too.
I do not have a 43 but have a fa 501.4 and a supertakumar 50 1.4. The focal length and optics of lenses in these ranges has a desirable quality in my opinion and sometimes for indoor portraits, it would be nice to be able to use these lenses at the focal length it was intended for like you say
Having said that, I do enjoy using these lenses on the K3 and KP as well.
The 11-18 is on my long list of stuff i want to buy some day when i can afford it, but mostly for landscape and architecture
---------- Post added 07-22-19 at 02:11 AM ----------
Originally posted by Kerrowdown I sure you will enjoy the K1, but be aware that due to the very narrow depth of field at these larger apertures your discussing, it's easier to miss the precise focus on the eyes.
My advice would be to take a few shots at slightly different focus points to ensure you have got the image you want, it takes no extra real time to do.
Below is an image with "Lady Luck”(Pentax-A* 135mm F1.8) wide open @ F1.7
Thanks Kerrodown, thats a nice pic, sharp eyes!!
looks like a wonderful lens too. I agree, getting eyes sharp is a challenge wide open, definitely need to take a few. I usually shoot portraits closer to 2.8 unless I have the model stationary and I can take my time to focus on the eye, maybe one day pentax will have eye af too