[photoptimist]

As others have noted, proper straps and bags help mitigate weight. A big related issue is how one holds the camera.

Holding the camera by the grip with the right hand puts a lot of strain on all the tendons that flex the fingers. During shooting, gripping by the grip is even worse because only the top two fingers have the carry the full weight and torque of the camera + lens. Held by the grip, the camera wants to twist and drop out of the right hand. Trying to operate any of the dials and buttons with the right hand while the right hand is carrying all the weight and torque of the camera can be really tiring.

In contrast, holding the camera in the palm of the left hand lets the fingers relax while the muscles of the forearm carry all the weight. During shooting, cradling almost all of the weight in the palm of left hand provides a stable base of support while the right hand and fingers only needed to manage dexterous control of shooting.

[Lowell Goudge]

The issue of weight and volume is most of all one of comfort for the user.

I have been accused of being Neanderthal at worst or having the arms of a gorilla at best, and for me, even the old Pentax M series cameras, although small and light were so compact that I found them difficult to use and feeling heavy with my big fingers.

I have today, 40 years later no issue with a K1 and DA 560 walking about and hand holding it on hikes covering 5-10 km and 1-3 hours. But that is me.

My wife does not have the same upper body strength and hand holding that pairing is just not practical.

There are other forum members that have had injuries, or shoulder operations that limit their mobility and or strength. So although I get it, it is not for me.

Am I typical, who the hell knows.

[biz-engineer]

A big related issue is how one holds the camera.

How to recognize a DSLR photographer? One of the arm is muscular and the other is skinny. To avoid this I usually old the camera in one hand and a dumbbell of equivalent weight on the other hand. This way, both arms are equally strong, and this avoids camera shake and no one knows I'm a DSLR shooter

[Serkevan]

As others have noted, proper straps and bags help mitigate weight. A big related issue is how one holds the camera.

Holding the camera by the grip with the right hand puts a lot of strain on all the tendons that flex the fingers. During shooting, gripping by the grip is even worse because only the top two fingers have the carry the full weight and torque of the camera + lens. Held by the grip, the camera wants to twist and drop out of the right hand. Trying to operate any of the dials and buttons with the right hand while the right hand is carrying all the weight and torque of the camera can be really tiring.

In contrast, holding the camera in the palm of the left hand lets the fingers relax while the muscles of the forearm carry all the weight. During shooting, cradling almost all of the weight in the palm of left hand provides a stable base of support while the right hand and fingers only needed to manage dexterous control of shooting.

I want to add on this to say that this is, for me, the best way to hold... if the lenses are small (hello there, Limiteds!). Heavy body and tiny lens means the camera's center of gravity is flat on your palm, so there's no tilting, which is comfortable.

The moment you have a front-heavy lens, like my previous tank of a Tokina 70-210/3.5 (1.2 kg, that one), things get messy. Option A is to continue supporting the camera on your palm, but that brings forward torque and strains your left wrist (the tendons that go to your thumb and index, namely). Option B, which is generally much better, is to move the left hand forward to also support the lens barrel, but then the arm is more extended so it tires faster, particularly if the total weight is high - although this is compensated by the right hand picking up part of the slack.


Bottom line, don't keep your K-1 in hand with a Metz 48 flash and a 700g 70-210 tele for two hours while going up and down a forest path taking portraits of friends. Trust me on that one .

[biz-engineer]

If you find your camera too heavy, you probably aren't eating your spinach.

You Tube

You Tube

[stevebrot]

Horses for courses...

There is no shame in being able to field compact/light kit when such is expedient to the task. (Why the conclusion that lack of physical strength is the deciding factor?)


Steve

[Paul the Sunman]

It's not so much the weight of the K1 compared to a more compact APS-C camera that matters; it's the weight and size of all the lenses that go with it.

[Wheatfield]

I keep my Fuji Xt kit for the times I feel small and relatively light is more important than the image quality I get from the K1 and * lenses.
There are times such as when the images will be downsized for the internet, but I will be carrying for a couple of hours, where the K1 and *50/1.4 is overkill for needed IQ, and there is no reason to not be more comfortable by having a lighter weight camera kit to lug around.

[wadge22]

I'm one of those K1 users who doesn't mind the size or weight at all during use.

Where I do understand the difference is when I'm packing my bag for travel. A K3 kit with DA lenses would clearly be much nicer for travel, and I would be able to 'just bring 'em all,' rather than make tough calls about which lenses I will bring on a trip.
Another issue where size makes a difference is DA560, which with it's >20" length becomes hard to carry on an airplane (something I don't foresee myself doing much if ever, but I still would have a very hard time buying that lens knowing it can't do). So that's a specific case where a specific dimension matters a whole lot.
To some extent there is a similar issue with tripods, where I might be able to find a carry-on-baggable tripod/head sturdy enough for APSC kit at standing height, but pretty much gave up on one that can satisfactorily support K1 with big glass.

[ProfessorBuzz]

I grew up with a Super Program and relatively lightweight lenses. My Nikon-toting buddies were always amazed. Today, I think nothing of hauling the 645Z around with a tripod. But after a few hikes into the hills, the switch to a lightweight but sturdy carbon fibre tripod was worth the expense. The K1 with the 4 Limited lenses is pretty nice too. Overall I don't mind the weight - the trick is getting rid of the stuff you don't actually need, and ditching anything unreliable!

[sarge]

My wife does not like heavy equipment. If it is to heavy she simply won’t use it.
I got her a K-70 with an 18-55 and 50-200 lens kit. We also got her a compact Godox TT350 speed light. It all fits in a tiny bag that she does not mind taking along. I do plan on getting her a 50mm 1.8 lens for low light use when she cannot use the flash. They weigh nearly nothing.

[mikesbike]

I too agree with photoptimist. This method of carrying when shooting can make a big difference, and makes the reliance on having the desirable for some big handle design less of an issue. But for carrying in hand at the ready, like for certain events, the larger handle is helpful when not shooting. The KP's design is great for changing these parameters as needed. For me with some moderate sized lenses, there's no problem with the largest supplied grip, and even the smallest grip will do fine with a compact lens. For larger lenses, the optional battery grip is the way to go, especially when hand-carrying at the side in the portrait position, which provides a whole lot of gripping area. Easy to change to the normal position if desired as the camera is swung up to the eye for shooting.

---------- Post added 11-27-21 at 07:52 PM ----------

Bottom line, don't keep your K-1 in hand with a Metz 48 flash and a 700g 70-210 tele for two hours while going up and down a forest path taking portraits of friends. Trust me on that one .

Different use conditions is the reason I've long had more than one camera size and design. For this situation and others, My K-S2 is very lightweight, and has small dimensions for a DSLR. Yet it offers 2-wheel operation, WR construction, a top-quality VF, the flippy screen with even a built-in selfie setup, and with the amazingly compact DA-L 18-50mm WR kit lens it can fit into a large jacket pocket! It is also capable of convenient high-quality imaging, while size and weight with this setup thus carried is negligible.

If not wearing a jacket, then it's back to the KP. With that same lens or say the DA 21mm Ltd, (but then no WR) it can even fit into a belt case, due to NOT having the often-desired larger built-in right-hand grip, in this instance using the smallest changeable grip for a much more slim form to fit into such a case. Again, with this arrangement size and carrying weight are also negligible, and with quality imaging. Of course, it's very possible to also slip the DA 40mm and/or DA 70mm Ltd's into one's pockets!

[niels hansen]

First. The buttons I have troubles with in cold weather on KP are not named K 1- 2..... but F 1- 2 ..I forgot to mention that the small sizes of dslr cameras.. is one of the reasons why manual focusing with dslrs are much inferieur to the good slrs , and precise ewf focusing is my biggest technical issue
Of course every photographer has his own priorities and even for me is a small camera in the hand better than a big one on the shelf.
my comment was not addressed specifically to Pentax

[mikesbike]

Well, cold weather has always presented various challenges for cameras and photographers. The old all-mechanical SLR cameras probably had the least problems. Batteries were a non-issue, and there were few features, therefore few controls.

The K-1 and the K-S2 in the above posts are referring to camera models, not buttons. Those two camera models are opposites in many ways, including size and weight, which is the topic of this thread. On my KP as well, are buttons designated Fx1, Fx2, and Fx3. These are programmable for different functions other than their normal functions. They seem well isolated for easier access, with the exception of the top one next to the shutter release and 3rd wheel. When designing for less size and weight, there has to be some compromise of some factors, in this case single buttons with optional uses instead of having more buttons each dedicated to one use, which would require more size and weight for the camera. It would be nice if the user modes could be set up to switch between the different functions for each of these buttons. I have not tried to see if this can be done.

These facts are reasons why when I need both functions that are served by one button on my smaller camera bodies, and I need quicker access to certain functions, I again turn to my larger and still very fine K-5 IIs. It has the extra buttons, each dedicated to one specific function, and the space to accommodate them. But the even much larger design of the K10D and K20D, with a bit more width than even the FF K-1 design, can accommodate yet one more control the K-7 and K-5 series lack- a bracketing button. (on-body bracketing control re-appeared with the new top controls of the K-1 and KP) With these larger K10D and K20D cameras, controls and buttons are spaced out more, and according to many people, they have superior holding comfort and handling. I still have and sometimes use my K20D for its especially rich colors for certain scenes, and I enjoy its good, comfortable feel. Wider but not as heavy as the FF K-1 or K-1 II, it is, however, certainly not a lightweight, compact camera to carry!

As to manual focusing, modern AF lenses in many cases have a shorter focusing rotation in order to achieve faster AF, but then this makes fine tuning MF for more exacting focus, more difficult to achieve. Old manual-focus only lenses are designed for MF and are totally different in this regard. They are still enjoyed by many who often use manual focus. Some AF lenses are designed with more thought of better usage for MF. They are half way between the larger focus rotation and damped feeling of MF lenses and the shorter rotation low-damped design of many AF lenses. So with them you might not get the fastest AF, but fast enough, while the MF feel is pretty good. We will see, but the new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 WR PLM might turn out to be best for both MF and AF.

[niels hansen]

Well, cold weather has always presented various challenges for cameras and photographers. The old all-mechanical SLR cameras probably had the least problems. Batteries were a non-issue, and there were few features, therefore few controls.

The K-1 and the K-S2 in the above posts are referring to camera models, not buttons. Those two camera models are opposites in many ways, including size and weight, which is the topic of this thread. On my KP as well, are buttons designated Fx1, Fx2, and Fx3. These are programmable for different functions other than their normal functions. They seem well isolated for easier access, with the exception of the top one next to the shutter release and 3rd wheel. When designing for less size and weight, there has to be some compromise of some factors, in this case single buttons with optional uses instead of having more buttons each dedicated to one use, which would require more size and weight for the camera. It would be nice if the user modes could be set up to switch between the different functions for each of these buttons. I have not tried to see if this can be done.

These facts are reasons why when I need both functions that are served by one button on my smaller camera bodies, and I need quicker access to certain functions, I again turn to my larger and still very fine K-5 IIs. It has the extra buttons, each dedicated to one specific function, and the space to accommodate them. But the even much larger design of the K10D and K20D, with a bit more width than even the FF K-1 design, can accommodate yet one more control the K-7 and K-5 series lack- a bracketing button. (on-body bracketing control re-appeared with the new top controls of the K-1 and KP) With these larger K10D and K20D cameras, controls and buttons are spaced out more, and according to many people, they have superior holding comfort and handling. I still have and sometimes use my K20D for its especially rich colors for certain scenes, and I enjoy its good, comfortable feel. Wider but not as heavy as the FF K-1 or K-1 II, it is, however, certainly not a lightweight, compact camera to carry!

As to manual focusing, modern AF lenses in many cases have a shorter focusing rotation in order to achieve faster AF, but then this makes fine tuning MF for more exacting focus, more difficult to achieve. Old manual-focus only lenses are designed for MF and are totally different in this regard. They are still enjoyed by many who often use manual focus. Some AF lenses are designed with more thought of better usage for MF. They are half way between the larger focus rotation and damped feeling of MF lenses and the shorter rotation low-damped design of many AF lenses. So with them you might not get the fastest AF, but fast enough, while the MF feel is pretty good. We will see, but the new DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 WR PLM might turn out to be best for both MF and AF.

My mainpoint is that too small a body makes it impossible to make a viewfinder on par with the best slr bodies, and that is bad, the short focus rotation makes it worse