Originally posted by clackers Yeah, I think if people have never seen or held a K-1 before, you're getting twice as much picture, but it's only 33% more weight, not 100%.
My wife and I often have the K-5, K-3 and k-1 on the dining room table beside the door to the great outdoors. I have often picked up the wrong camera and started for the door before realizing my mistake. The weight difference just isn't great enough to make an instant impression.
The difference in weight is only meaningful to us, if we choose to stick a big ole lens on the K-1, And many of us simply choose not to do that. Older lenses like my lightweight plastic FA 35-80 produce great results on a K=1 as do the FA ltd for not much weight at a all.
You will get better results from a K-1 and a plastic FA 35-80 than you will with a K-3 and the same lens or probably any lens.
People should think less about getting the absolute best from their system, which on any system is prohibitively expensive, and coming to compromises that work for themselves. If you are a landscape shooter, the K-1 with the 28-105 and all your older landscape lenses is a wonderful thing. And with lenses like the 31, the weight really isn't going to be an issue.
Now if you stick that big huge 15-30 on it and put the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 in your bag, that's a weight issue.
A K-1 kit can get heavy, but that's a personal choice. It doesn't have to be.
With all the hype about newer glass, people seem to miss the excellent results people get with older, deigned for film glass.
Last edited by normhead; 11-09-2018 at 01:19 PM.