[Kerrowdown]

with the exception of @Kerrowdown

Thank you for your "in the positive" mention.

[luftfluss]

Pentax doesn't seem to have the resources to produce the modern "FF" lenses wanted by modern, photographers, so I am unclear on where Pentax is going with their "FF" line {or even why it exists}.

Curious statements. Pentax has "modern" FF glass ranging from 15mm to 560mm. Folks know that the 85/1.4 and 70-200/4 are coming next year, and there is plenty of older-but-still-good AF lenses available like the 60-250/4 and FA Limiteds.

The "FF" line exists because Ricoh feels that such a line is profitable. They might be right.

[mikesbike]

Yes, it seems evident that both FF and APS-C have advantages to offer, which advantages are important depends on one's point of view. As to FF glass, I agree with luftfluss. From my own point of view regarding FF use, it is mainly for wide angle to moderate tele. I already have some fine vintage AF glass which beckons for a FF body, but as I see it now the missing link in the chain is a high-performing fast wide angle prime, such as a 24mm. I am well fixed for quality FF glass, but the DFA 28-105mm would be worth having with its very good IQ, useful zoom range and especially also having WR. I have the FA 43mm and FA 77mm Limiteds, the latter of which I especially love on APS-C, but would of course also be useful on FF, but the FA 43mm would definitely get more use. Also getting the FA 31mm becomes then even more intriguing.

[Wasp]

Pentax's lineup is currently about as budget friendly as it gets! The very fine, very advanced K-1 II is now offered at a "holiday" price of about $1,700 at B&H, or about the same as the 24mp Nikon D750's regular price. A remarkable price for such an advanced FF body.

However, right now Nikon has a Black Friday sale gong on so the D750 for 1-day can be had for about $1,000!

But for the best deal, be patient and wait for the K-1 II replacement so it will be even less as a left-over stock closeout, maybe very close to that $1,000 mark! I have done this a number of times in the past.

In the meantime, I suggest taking a look at the "holiday" price there for the current KP, at just $697, either black or silver/black, including a high-speed memory card, camera bag, and Paint Shop Pro editing software. An incredible value. For serious photography, it is capable of substantially improved performance over your K10D, in an advanced, well-built, but compact body.

A KP just doesn't do it for me, I'm afraid to say. Even at $700 I find it hard to justify spending that much on yet another APS-C body. Especially when I already have four of them. Another unknown is how much better it will be than the Samsung NX1 I already have. Hard to say, but I guess the law of diminishing returns applies. I would rather have a full frame, then.

A new K-1 II may be "good value" but $1700 is just way, way too much. Even a used K-1 is still $1400 and up. Nope...

The Nikon looks like good value, but is not much use with K mount glass.

For $1000, a Sony a7ii or a Canon EOS RP is very tempting. Both can take K mount glass with an adapter. Manual aperture and focus only, but:

• I only have MF primes
• My AF zooms work just fine on my K200D and Kx
• I already use my Samsung NX1 that way

But I would rather have a Pentax logo on my full frame body, and that is where the aforementioned 24MP model would fit in.

PS: the Canon EOS RP is quite keenly priced in local shops. There is very little difference in price between the one that is available right now (and backed by an active local distributor) and the one from the rain forest that will take weeks to arrive (and will have to be shipped back to forest if anything goes wrong). Local Pentax gear is way more expensive than it is in the forest. As for local support - I have no idea but the number/lack of dealers is not a good sign.

---

Last edited by Wasp; 11-29-2019 at 11:41 AM.

[reh321]

Curious statements. Pentax has "modern" FF glass ranging from 15mm to 560mm. Folks know that the 85/1.4 and 70-200/4 are coming next year, and there is plenty of older-but-still-good AF lenses available like the 60-250/4 and FA Limiteds.

The "FF" line exists because Ricoh feels that such a line is profitable. They might be right.

(1) People who do use "FF" are often complaining about the lack of 'glass'. They must be complaining about what I call "modern glass", usually DFA lenses or lenses for sale now {which is a slightly larger class}, because {as is often pointed out by Pentaxians}, that is a hard claim to make if you include every Pentax-made lens, since there are many such lenses, and every one will mechanically attach to the K-1 and K-1ii.

(2) I am fairly certain that the K-1 and K-1ii have been profitable for Ricoh. The question is whether Ricoh is committed to providing the modern lenses that "FF" users "need".

(3) I am not certain that Ricoh entered the K-1 "FF" business intending to meet every "need" today or because of the "old glass" that is more useful on a "FF" camera than on an "APS-C" camera. For example, I personally have at least four or five 50mm lenses; they are not nearly useful to me as an "APS-C" shooter {for whom they are mildly telephoto lenses} as they would be to me as a "FF" shooter {for whom they would be normal lenses}.

(4) We don't know anything about Ricoh's internal schedule for the 85mm f/1.4 and 70-200 f/4 lenses. Right now there are threads in which users basically say "We have been waiting forever for those lenses; when are they going to actually come?" Responses guess that both will be out next year .... but that is all. Pentax has shown examples, but made no kind of commitment.

[madad07]

It would seem whatever upgrade in technology Ricoh are rolling out will be tested with the new apsc camera, so I would expect great things from the upcoming K1 III.

I have to agree with this. I'm currently enjoying my KP but thinking about the K1 mk3 in the future... here's hoping!

[mikesbike]

A KP just doesn't do it for me, I'm afraid to say. Even at $700 I find it hard to justify spending that much on yet another APS-C body. Especially when I already have four of them. Another unknown is how much better it will be than the Samsung NX1 I already have. Hard to say, but I guess the law of diminishing returns applies. I would rather have a full frame, then.

A new K-1 II may be "good value" but $1700 is just way, way too much. Even a used K-1 is still $1400 and up. Nope...

The Nikon looks like good value, but is not much use with K mount glass.

For $1000, a Sony a7ii or a Canon EOS RP is very tempting. Both can take K mount glass with an adapter. Manual aperture and focus only, but:

• I only have MF primes
• My AF zooms work just fine on my K200D and Kx
• I already use my Samsung NX1 that way

But I would rather have a Pentax logo on my full frame body, and that is where the aforementioned 24MP model would fit in.

PS: the Canon EOS RP is quite keenly priced in local shops. There is very little difference in price between the one that is available right now (and backed by an active local distributor) and the one from the rain forest that will take weeks to arrive (and will have to be shipped back to forest if anything goes wrong). Local Pentax gear is way more expensive than it is in the forest. As for local support - I have no idea but the number/lack of dealers is not a good sign.

You're talking a different animal here- mirrorless. I am not an engineer, but it could be that it can cost less to produce a mirrorless design compared to a DSLR of comparable build quality. A good part of the K-1's cost is from its quality of build. The current price offering of the KP is quite remarkable for a current DSLR model of its build quality. As to mirrorless, some people love'm, some hate'm, some neutral. Some people don't want to be without an OVF. I'm one of those, and for me the models I've seen don't have other features I value in terms of controls, or lack of IBSR, or even a built-in flash. Some people have reported eye strain with extensive use of the EVF. Others highly value the EVF.

Pentax would be crazy to put R&D into producing a 24mp FF model, either DSLR or mirrorless, because others have had such already out there for some years now. Such is obviously on its way out. Pentax historically has met with success in refining the latest established technology to produce a better-built product with better features at a lower price. That was the story of the K-1 DSLR.

Your Samsung NX1 has a good reputation for performance, even over your much older Pentax DSLR models. From what I've seen, very good IQ for low light use, although having somewhat more noise in shadows at higher ISO than does the KP or K-70. But the KP is a newer design.


I have no FF DSLR, though I can afford to get any I wish. I am basically satisfied with the quality and performance my APS-C DSLR models provide for the kinds of photography I engage in, so my interest in FF is primarily for using the FF lenses I already own with the FOV they were originally designed for. Beyond that, if I take that next step, I am interested in any upgrades in IQ and lower noise that are on the way, so I am not investing in outgoing technology at this point. The only reason I previously went for deals on closeout discontinued models, is because after reviews, etc. I determined the incoming model was not enough of absolute advancement over the outgoing model in every aspect. In fact, t was shown in the new model reviewed that some aspect or other was not quite as good as the outgoing one, so I took the deal, as the outgoing model meant a real advancement over what I then had.

What advancements or capabilities for your photography do you expect from obtaining a FF DSLR that current APS-C equipment cannot provide?

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 11-29-2019 at 04:06 PM.

[madad07]

Battery life is an issue without the extra cost of a grip.

Plus 2 card slots

[photoptimist]

What advancements or capabilities for your photography do you expect from obtaining a FF DSLR that current APS-C equipment cannot provide?

Simply put, for a given generation of sensor technology, bigger sensors have: 1) better DR, 2) better high ISO performance, and 3) higher resolution.

In this regard, medium format beats FF which beats APS-C which beats M4/3 which beats smartphones. However, the bigger the sensor, the bigger (and more expensive) the body and lenses which then forces each photographer to pick the best compromise between IQ and size+cost.

And with every photographer making format trade-off decisions, some formats become more popular and thus attract more R&D in lenses and bodies. For example, there's a lot more choice in rectilinear UWAs for FF than for APS-C and medium format.

[mikesbike]

Yes, I get the theoretical advantages. Even that resolution is increased if one walks closer to a scene shooting at the same FL to fill the frame to the same size as the APS-C from farther back. I have compared images by good photographers from both with a comparable level of equipment. I have looked at test shots and test measurements. I have come to the conclusion that for my own uses, the kinds of things I do, in these parameters- high ISO, DR, resolution, etc my KP comes so close I would rarely if ever notice the difference, and certainly not worth lugging the size and weight including lenses that correspond to the reach or FOV, let alone the extra expense.

I certainly agree regarding the shortcomings regarding fast WA and UWA lenses when it comes to APS-C. But then once again, the importance of this has to do with one's photographic interests, hence my question to the OP. I am wondering what he is looking for in terms of specific improvements over what he has.

---------- Post added 11-30-19 at 11:19 PM ----------

Battery life is an issue without the extra cost of a grip.

Plus 2 card slots

Right. If 2-card slots are very important, then to get otherwise equal performance one would have pay more for the model that has this and some other features. As to the cost of a KP battery grip, it would be less than the difference of buying a KP vs. a comparable quality FF body, and would still weigh less. It would also yield even more battery life than the other models without a battery grip.