Should I go for K1ii or K3iii I really need some help

noelpolar · 01-29-2021, 06:03 PM - **1 Like**

Def a K1... or K1ii... wouldn't matter much either way.... I can't believe you have hung out so long. If one isn't happy with your 85, 43, 300 and 400 on a K1.... well....

mactrash · 01-29-2021, 10:45 PM

Originally posted by mikesbike

Back in October, I came to the point of making the same decision, and like yourself have a fairly good supply of very high quality FF lenses, especially in the shorter-to-medium FL range, many of which have been seeing little use with my fine APS-C bodies. I have really missed their use in their full FOV as I enjoyed on my 35mm film bodies. So I went for a K-1 II and I am glad for it. Unless you need the improved action shooting capabilities of the K-3 III, which apparently is a major design goal, or likewise its improved video, like my reasoning for my FF lenses, the K-1 II should prove to be a fine advancement for you. As to the forthcoming K-3 III's superior new VF being "almost" as good as a good FF VF, well my new K-1 II's VF is not "almost". it is great. Then you still have your fine K-3 for its APS-C advantage for longer FL work with lenses of lower weight/size/cost as well as the other fine APS-C lenses you have, or you can switch the K-1 II to crop mode to use them as an alternative. There are still some advantages to doing that- such as lower noise at higher ISO, better DR, and taking advantage of special features offered by the K-1 II, like its pull-out tilting screen for shooting from low or high positions, etc. which the K-3 III does not offer. The price of the new model will probably approach that of the K-1 II rather closely, making adding FF with the K-1 II even more attractive. All of the above reflects the reasoning I employed in my decision. I am very happy with my new K-1 II, for sure.

My FA lens is stock for long time not use much after I got APSC, as you can see my list they are very close in range and not same impact in FF film age i.e. FA20 2.8

Now I use most is
DA10-17 for creative environmental portrait (not use much maybe 3-4 photo per year)
DA14 for interior / some creative portrait
DA 35 2.4 for ultra light kit for casual portrait ... although it's a bit distort the face (not so flattering) for classic portrait but people who like selfie with iphone may like that
DA40 for interior / environmental portrait
DA70 for corporate headshot is very good
FA100 3.5 although not sure optical quality but good for food / table top etc.

The PF (maybe I am wrong to use PF to discribe that) what I mean is when using FA lens in a digital body it look like there is a fog or maybe like I have using a difusser filter over the lens. Most of the time I have to use the Dehaze filter in lightroom / acr for better result and this still don't bring me the same image details / edge with a digital lens... sigh.

I understand there are D FA line of lens but they are quite expensive if I go to buy them all

with that money I may rebuild another system for more MP and more modern workflow i.e. Wifi / Cable tethering / Click then Zoom to focus point for review etc.

Sorry if my words affect your feeling...

In my last corporate assignment, the client from German require minimal 24mp for the job and although he just need to print a 1/4 page in a news letter... Maybe I should go for the K1ii but 36MP maybe not modern enough for the next job

**UncleVanya** · 01-30-2021, 12:00 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mactrash

The PF (maybe I am wrong to use PF to discribe that) what I mean is when using FA lens in a digital body it look like there is a fog or maybe like I have using a difusser filter over the lens. Most of the time I have to use the Dehaze filter in lightroom / acr for better result and this still don't bring me the same image details / edge with a digital lens... sigh.

I understand there are D FA line of lens but they are quite expensive if I go to buy them all

with that money I may rebuild another system for more MP and more modern workflow i.e. Wifi / Cable tethering / Click then Zoom to focus point for review etc.

Sorry if my words affect your feeling...

In my last corporate assignment, the client from German require minimal 24mp for the job and although he just need to print a 1/4 page in a news letter... Maybe I should go for the K1ii but 36MP maybe not modern enough for the next job

First if you see a fog/diffuser effect - check the lenses - maybe there's fungus in those FA's? Good FA lenses should not look like that. My FA's are clear and bright and clean imaging. My older lenses are also. Where the PF term usually comes in is purple fringing and it refers to the tendency for extreme contrast to manifest purple color shifts around the boundry in the high contrast areas. It is localized and correctable but not without slight losses.

I think today specific MP requirements tend to be about 24 since that's the typical resolution of the common FF cameras like D750's and Sony A7, A7ii, etc. I don't think you'll get pushback on 36mp files.

**mikesbike** · 01-30-2021, 01:02 PM - **1 Like**

My FA lenses, as well as my 3rd party FF lanes are also clear, and are so with film or with digital, and in either format. I have not seen a haze or fog-like problem with any of them. I value my APS-C camera bodies and lenses for the advantages they offer. Smaller, lighter carrying being most obvious. Especially in longer focal length use. For example, I would much rather take out my KP with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 and not have need to purchase the much larger, heavier DFA 70-200mm f/2.8 to use on my K-1 II, being a far bulkier and heavier ensemble.

At the same time, with APS-C it is a difficult matter to satisfy a fast wide angle need. The FA 35mm f/2 does not provide any wide angle. But using that lens on a K-1 II does provide wide angle, and the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd is yet wider. So there is capability here that is not available with APS-C. I enjoy a number of FF lenses once again with my K-1 II, such as my FA 43mm f/1.9 Ltd which in its original FOV design, is a wide/normal, not as a short tele as it functions with APS-C. The very compact FA 28mm f/2.8 is also a very nice lens on a K-1 II, but again does not provide wide angle on APS-C where it becomes as a wide/normal, but not a fast one. Hopefully, your copies of these lenses are not compromised in any way.

Last edited by mikesbike; 01-30-2021 at 01:25 PM.

gatorguy · 01-30-2021, 01:20 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mikesbike

My FA lenses, as well as my 3rd party FF lanes are also clear, and are so with film or with digital, and in either format. I have not seen a haze or fog-like problem with any of them. I value my APS-C camera bodies and lenses for the advantages they offer. Smaller, lighter carrying being most obvious. Especially in longer focal length use. For example, I would much rather take out my KP with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 and not have need to purchase the much larger, heavier DFA 70-200mm f/2.8 to use on my K-1 II, being a far bulkier and heavier ensemble.

At the same time, with APS-C it is a difficult matter to satisfy a fast wide angle need. The FA 35mm f/2 does not provide any wide angle. But using that lens on a K-1 II does provide wide angle, and the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd is yet wider. So there is capability here that is not available with APS-C.

My FA85 agrees with you.

**mikesbike** · 01-30-2021, 01:31 PM - **2 Likes**

It is worth noting that the FA 35mm f/2 for example, has been lab-tested on APS-C digital bodies as having exceptional edge-to-edge clarity, very good even at wide open aperture.

mactrash · 01-30-2021, 03:33 PM

Thanks for all reply ... really thanks.

Let say now I nailed to go for the K1ii

My next question is

Tethering to OSX (I don't really need control the camera I just want to transfer the file quickly and preview in lightroom automatically ), I am now using old eyefi solution to transfer small jpeg for this purpose.

I know there are

1. IT2, Does it can select just transfer JPG only, and how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW?

2. Lightroom plugin is that it can select just JPG only? If not how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW?

3. FluCardPro-AutoImport-master is that work with K1ii wifi? and how long does it take to transfer a smaller JPG, and what size of the JPG should be set if I just want to preview or check focus in Lightroom? Will the program remember the last file and transfer the next file after restart or crash?

4. Or there are more solution you do feel good and using them in daily base?

Sorry if those information is already answered in other threads, I am now digging them and read slowly.

Last edited by mactrash; 01-30-2021 at 03:41 PM.

texandrews · 01-31-2021, 09:30 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mactrash

Thanks for all reply ... really thanks.

Let say now I nailed to go for the K1ii

My next question is

Tethering to OSX (I don't really need control the camera I just want to transfer the file quickly and preview in lightroom automatically ), I am now using old eyefi solution to transfer small jpeg for this purpose.

I know there are

1. IT2, Does it can select just transfer JPG only, and how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW?

2. Lightroom plugin is that it can select just JPG only? If not how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW?

3. FluCardPro-AutoImport-master is that work with K1ii wifi? and how long does it take to transfer a smaller JPG, and what size of the JPG should be set if I just want to preview or check focus in Lightroom? Will the program remember the last file and transfer the next file after restart or crash?

4. Or there are more solution you do feel good and using them in daily base?

Sorry if those information is already answered in other threads, I am now digging them and read slowly.

I have shot tethered only with my Z and only WinOS into LR with a cord, not wifi. Worked better than I was led to believe, and although I didn't think it was zippy speed wise, for my studio shooting it was not problem at all. The bigger problem was that I didn't have as much control of the camera as I would have liked. But it was fine overall. I expect the K1mkII would do better being newer, but maybe it would be the same. I was shooting DNG.

The whole speed thing is a user issue AFAIC, and has more to do with 1. what is being shot and how, and 2. the user's temperament and patience.

mactrash · 02-02-2021, 12:28 AM

Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow

texandrews · 02-02-2021, 08:12 AM

Originally posted by mactrash

Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow

Uh-oh! You're in trouble now....

tibbitts · 02-02-2021, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

I'm a little late to the thread, so my recommendation adds little to what's already been said. For the use cases you mention, the lenses you own and the choices you've given us, the K-1II makes better sense. Effectively, you get a 36MP full frame camera and 16MP crop camera in one body, so you can use all of your lenses as originally intended by switching between those formats. Or, you could sell off your DA Limiteds and raise enough to buy, say, the D FA*50/1.4...

I don't have personal experience with a K-1, but... I'm not convinced I'd be happy with the viewfinder situation in crop mode. I might be happier with a FF mirrorless in crop mode, since I'd still have the full-sized viewfinder image, I'm not sure. Maybe those with experience can comment. I'm just saying I'm not sure a FF with a mirror would be just a really big crop camera.

normhead · 02-02-2021, 01:42 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by mactrash

Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow

Get ready for some adventures.

**UncleVanya** · 02-05-2021, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by tibbitts

I don't have personal experience with a K-1, but... I'm not convinced I'd be happy with the viewfinder situation in crop mode. I might be happier with a FF mirrorless in crop mode, since I'd still have the full-sized viewfinder image, I'm not sure. Maybe those with experience can comment. I'm just saying I'm not sure a FF with a mirror would be just a really big crop camera.

My impression when I had the K-1 was that the optical image size of the crop area was similar to what I got on my crop k-3. I have a Sony A7rII and I have yet to shoot in crop mode. I may eventually but I can’t compare results for that reason. Even when I did have the K-1 I was mostly using ff or near ff glass and cropping only in post.

normhead · 02-05-2021, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

My impression when I had the K-1 was that the optical image size of the crop area was similar to what I got on my crop k-3. I have a Sony A7rII and I have yet to shoot in crop mode. I may eventually but I can’t compare results for that reason. Even when I did have the K-1 I was mostly using ff or near ff glass and cropping only in post.

Since we shoot both a K-5 and a K-1 I'd say for close to 100% our images the images are indistinguishable. From our perspective, the need for more resolution is completely undefined for 16 MP or later.

**UncleVanya** · 02-05-2021, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Since we shoot both a K-5 and a K-1 I'd say for close to 100% our images the images are indistinguishable. From our perspective, the need for more resolution is completely undefined for 16 MP or later.

The thing they asked that I (badly) responded to was about how it looked in the viewfinder masked in the k-1 vs a mirrorless that presumably would just zoom in. I recall the k-1 experience not being uncomfortable and I’ve never tried with the Sony. It seemed a non-issue on the k-1 for sure.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lenses for K3iii	zapp	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-29-2021 07:54 AM
For Sale - Sold: Zacuto "Pro" Viewfinder Kit - For Pentax K3iii, K3ii, K3, K-1, or K-1ii cameras	Fenwoodian	Sold Items	2	01-21-2021 12:32 PM
What do I gain, going from KP/K3iii+DA 16-50 to K1ii+DFA 24-70?	Bui	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	36	11-05-2020 10:06 AM
K3iii vs K1ii	troika	Pentax DSLR Discussion	36	09-10-2018 12:24 PM
Should they stay or should they go? Some of my lenses that is.	jboyde	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	07-30-2009 01:21 PM

01-29-2021, 06:03 PM - 1 Like	#16
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Def a K1... or K1ii... wouldn't matter much either way.... I can't believe you have hung out so long. If one isn't happy with your 85, 43, 300 and 400 on a K1.... well....

01-29-2021, 10:45 PM	#17
mactrash Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: China Posts: 117 Original Poster	Originally posted by mikesbike Back in October, I came to the point of making the same decision, and like yourself have a fairly good supply of very high quality FF lenses, especially in the shorter-to-medium FL range, many of which have been seeing little use with my fine APS-C bodies. I have really missed their use in their full FOV as I enjoyed on my 35mm film bodies. So I went for a K-1 II and I am glad for it. Unless you need the improved action shooting capabilities of the K-3 III, which apparently is a major design goal, or likewise its improved video, like my reasoning for my FF lenses, the K-1 II should prove to be a fine advancement for you. As to the forthcoming K-3 III's superior new VF being "almost" as good as a good FF VF, well my new K-1 II's VF is not "almost". it is great. Then you still have your fine K-3 for its APS-C advantage for longer FL work with lenses of lower weight/size/cost as well as the other fine APS-C lenses you have, or you can switch the K-1 II to crop mode to use them as an alternative. There are still some advantages to doing that- such as lower noise at higher ISO, better DR, and taking advantage of special features offered by the K-1 II, like its pull-out tilting screen for shooting from low or high positions, etc. which the K-3 III does not offer. The price of the new model will probably approach that of the K-1 II rather closely, making adding FF with the K-1 II even more attractive. All of the above reflects the reasoning I employed in my decision. I am very happy with my new K-1 II, for sure. My FA lens is stock for long time not use much after I got APSC, as you can see my list they are very close in range and not same impact in FF film age i.e. FA20 2.8 Now I use most is DA10-17 for creative environmental portrait (not use much maybe 3-4 photo per year) DA14 for interior / some creative portrait DA 35 2.4 for ultra light kit for casual portrait ... although it's a bit distort the face (not so flattering) for classic portrait but people who like selfie with iphone may like that DA40 for interior / environmental portrait DA70 for corporate headshot is very good FA100 3.5 although not sure optical quality but good for food / table top etc. The PF (maybe I am wrong to use PF to discribe that) what I mean is when using FA lens in a digital body it look like there is a fog or maybe like I have using a difusser filter over the lens. Most of the time I have to use the Dehaze filter in lightroom / acr for better result and this still don't bring me the same image details / edge with a digital lens... sigh. I understand there are D FA line of lens but they are quite expensive if I go to buy them all with that money I may rebuild another system for more MP and more modern workflow i.e. Wifi / Cable tethering / Click then Zoom to focus point for review etc. Sorry if my words affect your feeling... In my last corporate assignment, the client from German require minimal 24mp for the job and although he just need to print a 1/4 page in a news letter... Maybe I should go for the K1ii but 36MP maybe not modern enough for the next job

01-30-2021, 12:00 AM - 1 Like	#18
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by mactrash The PF (maybe I am wrong to use PF to discribe that) what I mean is when using FA lens in a digital body it look like there is a fog or maybe like I have using a difusser filter over the lens. Most of the time I have to use the Dehaze filter in lightroom / acr for better result and this still don't bring me the same image details / edge with a digital lens... sigh. I understand there are D FA line of lens but they are quite expensive if I go to buy them all with that money I may rebuild another system for more MP and more modern workflow i.e. Wifi / Cable tethering / Click then Zoom to focus point for review etc. Sorry if my words affect your feeling... In my last corporate assignment, the client from German require minimal 24mp for the job and although he just need to print a 1/4 page in a news letter... Maybe I should go for the K1ii but 36MP maybe not modern enough for the next job First if you see a fog/diffuser effect - check the lenses - maybe there's fungus in those FA's? Good FA lenses should not look like that. My FA's are clear and bright and clean imaging. My older lenses are also. Where the PF term usually comes in is purple fringing and it refers to the tendency for extreme contrast to manifest purple color shifts around the boundry in the high contrast areas. It is localized and correctable but not without slight losses. I think today specific MP requirements tend to be about 24 since that's the typical resolution of the common FF cameras like D750's and Sony A7, A7ii, etc. I don't think you'll get pushback on 36mp files.

01-30-2021, 01:02 PM - 1 Like	#19
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	My FA lenses, as well as my 3rd party FF lanes are also clear, and are so with film or with digital, and in either format. I have not seen a haze or fog-like problem with any of them. I value my APS-C camera bodies and lenses for the advantages they offer. Smaller, lighter carrying being most obvious. Especially in longer focal length use. For example, I would much rather take out my KP with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 and not have need to purchase the much larger, heavier DFA 70-200mm f/2.8 to use on my K-1 II, being a far bulkier and heavier ensemble. At the same time, with APS-C it is a difficult matter to satisfy a fast wide angle need. The FA 35mm f/2 does not provide any wide angle. But using that lens on a K-1 II does provide wide angle, and the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd is yet wider. So there is capability here that is not available with APS-C. I enjoy a number of FF lenses once again with my K-1 II, such as my FA 43mm f/1.9 Ltd which in its original FOV design, is a wide/normal, not as a short tele as it functions with APS-C. The very compact FA 28mm f/2.8 is also a very nice lens on a K-1 II, but again does not provide wide angle on APS-C where it becomes as a wide/normal, but not a fast one. Hopefully, your copies of these lenses are not compromised in any way. Last edited by mikesbike; 01-30-2021 at 01:25 PM.

01-30-2021, 01:20 PM - 1 Like	#20
gatorguy Moderator Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Central Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,092	Originally posted by mikesbike My FA lenses, as well as my 3rd party FF lanes are also clear, and are so with film or with digital, and in either format. I have not seen a haze or fog-like problem with any of them. I value my APS-C camera bodies and lenses for the advantages they offer. Smaller, lighter carrying being most obvious. Especially in longer focal length use. For example, I would much rather take out my KP with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 and not have need to purchase the much larger, heavier DFA 70-200mm f/2.8 to use on my K-1 II, being a far bulkier and heavier ensemble. At the same time, with APS-C it is a difficult matter to satisfy a fast wide angle need. The FA 35mm f/2 does not provide any wide angle. But using that lens on a K-1 II does provide wide angle, and the FA 31mm f/1.8 Ltd is yet wider. So there is capability here that is not available with APS-C. My FA85 agrees with you.

01-30-2021, 01:31 PM - 2 Likes	#21
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	It is worth noting that the FA 35mm f/2 for example, has been lab-tested on APS-C digital bodies as having exceptional edge-to-edge clarity, very good even at wide open aperture.

01-30-2021, 03:33 PM	#22
mactrash Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: China Posts: 117 Original Poster	Thanks for all reply ... really thanks. Let say now I nailed to go for the K1ii My next question is Tethering to OSX (I don't really need control the camera I just want to transfer the file quickly and preview in lightroom automatically ), I am now using old eyefi solution to transfer small jpeg for this purpose. I know there are 1. IT2, Does it can select just transfer JPG only, and how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW? 2. Lightroom plugin is that it can select just JPG only? If not how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW? 3. FluCardPro-AutoImport-master is that work with K1ii wifi? and how long does it take to transfer a smaller JPG, and what size of the JPG should be set if I just want to preview or check focus in Lightroom? Will the program remember the last file and transfer the next file after restart or crash? 4. Or there are more solution you do feel good and using them in daily base? Sorry if those information is already answered in other threads, I am now digging them and read slowly. Last edited by mactrash; 01-30-2021 at 03:41 PM.

01-31-2021, 09:30 AM - 1 Like	#23
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,390	Originally posted by mactrash Thanks for all reply ... really thanks. Let say now I nailed to go for the K1ii My next question is Tethering to OSX (I don't really need control the camera I just want to transfer the file quickly and preview in lightroom automatically ), I am now using old eyefi solution to transfer small jpeg for this purpose. I know there are 1. IT2, Does it can select just transfer JPG only, and how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW? 2. Lightroom plugin is that it can select just JPG only? If not how long does it take to transfer a K1ii RAW? 3. FluCardPro-AutoImport-master is that work with K1ii wifi? and how long does it take to transfer a smaller JPG, and what size of the JPG should be set if I just want to preview or check focus in Lightroom? Will the program remember the last file and transfer the next file after restart or crash? 4. Or there are more solution you do feel good and using them in daily base? Sorry if those information is already answered in other threads, I am now digging them and read slowly. I have shot tethered only with my Z and only WinOS into LR with a cord, not wifi. Worked better than I was led to believe, and although I didn't think it was zippy speed wise, for my studio shooting it was not problem at all. The bigger problem was that I didn't have as much control of the camera as I would have liked. But it was fine overall. I expect the K1mkII would do better being newer, but maybe it would be the same. I was shooting DNG. The whole speed thing is a user issue AFAIC, and has more to do with 1. what is being shot and how, and 2. the user's temperament and patience.

02-02-2021, 12:28 AM	#24
mactrash Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: China Posts: 117 Original Poster	Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow

02-02-2021, 08:12 AM	#25
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,390	Originally posted by mactrash Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow Uh-oh! You're in trouble now....

02-02-2021, 01:33 PM	#26
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,193	Originally posted by BigMackCam I'm a little late to the thread, so my recommendation adds little to what's already been said. For the use cases you mention, the lenses you own and the choices you've given us, the K-1II makes better sense. Effectively, you get a 36MP full frame camera and 16MP crop camera in one body, so you can use all of your lenses as originally intended by switching between those formats. Or, you could sell off your DA Limiteds and raise enough to buy, say, the D FA*50/1.4... I don't have personal experience with a K-1, but... I'm not convinced I'd be happy with the viewfinder situation in crop mode. I might be happier with a FF mirrorless in crop mode, since I'd still have the full-sized viewfinder image, I'm not sure. Maybe those with experience can comment. I'm just saying I'm not sure a FF with a mirror would be just a really big crop camera.

02-02-2021, 01:42 PM - 1 Like	#27
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by mactrash Thanks for all the reply... K1ii will be arrive my home tomorrow Get ready for some adventures.

02-05-2021, 01:38 PM	#28
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by tibbitts I don't have personal experience with a K-1, but... I'm not convinced I'd be happy with the viewfinder situation in crop mode. I might be happier with a FF mirrorless in crop mode, since I'd still have the full-sized viewfinder image, I'm not sure. Maybe those with experience can comment. I'm just saying I'm not sure a FF with a mirror would be just a really big crop camera. My impression when I had the K-1 was that the optical image size of the crop area was similar to what I got on my crop k-3. I have a Sony A7rII and I have yet to shoot in crop mode. I may eventually but I can’t compare results for that reason. Even when I did have the K-1 I was mostly using ff or near ff glass and cropping only in post.

02-05-2021, 02:28 PM	#29
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by UncleVanya My impression when I had the K-1 was that the optical image size of the crop area was similar to what I got on my crop k-3. I have a Sony A7rII and I have yet to shoot in crop mode. I may eventually but I can’t compare results for that reason. Even when I did have the K-1 I was mostly using ff or near ff glass and cropping only in post. Since we shoot both a K-5 and a K-1 I'd say for close to 100% our images the images are indistinguishable. From our perspective, the need for more resolution is completely undefined for 16 MP or later.

02-05-2021, 04:37 PM	#30
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,401	Originally posted by normhead Since we shoot both a K-5 and a K-1 I'd say for close to 100% our images the images are indistinguishable. From our perspective, the need for more resolution is completely undefined for 16 MP or later. The thing they asked that I (badly) responded to was about how it looked in the viewfinder masked in the k-1 vs a mirrorless that presumably would just zoom in. I recall the k-1 experience not being uncomfortable and I’ve never tried with the Sony. It seemed a non-issue on the k-1 for sure.