[mikesbike]

One advantage of the K-1 is that for shorter focal length lenses, there is a limit unless you go into the fisheye realm. My widest, for example, is 14mm and it's just a full-frame, ultra-wide lens. With the KP, you would only be able to use the APS-C area of that lens and the image would effectively be a cropped image. The K-1 will allow full use of the image area.

This is correct. I have had Pentax APS-C bodies for years, with the K-5 IIs, K-S2, and KP being my most current, and before I got into digital, Pentax 35mm bodies for years. Just over 2 years ago, I took the deal for a new K-1 II packaged with the fine DFA 28-105mm lens at a great savings. This is a very fine-perforning lens and its WR feature gives me a FF WR ensemble. One main reason for this move was my having some great FF (AF) lenses from my film shooting years left sitting now for years due to the shortcomings they present with APS-C (as posted above). This move gave my photography a new range of options. Just one example is the compact, reasonably-priced excellent HD FA 35mm f/2 which used in its original intended format provides moderate wide angle, but with APS-C presents a "normal" field of view- no WA at all. A very useful and easy-carrying lens on my K-1 II. To get the same FOV with APS-C, you'd need a 24mm lens. But, there are none available that can perform with the edge-to-edge quality of the HD FA 35mm f/2. And IF there were, you'd have a fine 24mm shot from your very good K-70, but then with the FA 35mm on the K-1 II you'd get the same shot but it would be a 36mp shot. Same with another favorite, the FA 28mm f/2.8 lens- useful on APS-C as a wide/normal but not WA. Same with zoom lenses having WA being not so wide.

The low-light/higher ISO performance of the K-1 II is well beyond that of even your K-70 or the KP. Image quality is even better yet as well. I would say, to add a whole new meaningful aspect to your photographic arsenal and experience, a combo of the K-70 and the K-1 II would be a great idea. But don't miss out on the deal with the DFA 28-105mm WR lens. It is exceptional.

When I will be doing lengthy walking, or when riding, it is my compact APS-C gear for sure. I love it. And I value it for longer telephoto use. But I did not realize how much I would use and appreciate having both my K-1 II and my fine-quality APS-C equipment until I made this move.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 11-14-2022 at 03:59 PM.

[rr1736]

I have both the KP and the K1 they are great cameras but if I want to limit the weight the KP goes out with me. Can you even find a new KP as they are out of production?

[Papa_Joe]

I own a K-70 and a K-1, which I bought for astophotography and portrait. A KP was also on the list, when I decided to buy the K-70. Main reason for the K-70 was the price difference (substantial) in comparison to image quality (not so much). The K-1 came later for a very good price, but I also owned three very good full frame lenses (35mm, 70mm and 70-200 mm), so it was a no brainer.

First of all, as other members of the forum have suggested. Try the K-1 in comparison to the K-70. If you like it better, do you have very good full frame lenses abvailable? The K-1 as well as the K-70 and the KP shine with better lenses. So if you do not have very good ones allready, go for a used K-70 and buy some of these first.

My personal opinion of K-1 versus K-70 is, I like the K-1 more. Handling is more fun, the jpges are much better and the depth of field is breathtaking. Image quality overall is comparable and not a reason to decide for FF or APS-C. On the other side it is much heavyer and if you have to take your full frame lenses from the current Pentax setup, you will substanially ad up weight, not to talk about spending money. The the K-70 ist still my main camera though, as I have all the lenses I need and it fits easier into its bag with two lenses and a flash.

Concerning astrophotography, the K-70 and the K-1 in my opinion are the most suitable in the Pentax line-up. I would count the KP into the same league, but its screen is not as suitable for upright orientation. The K-1 has built in GPS as well, so if you want to use two cameras with the astrotracer side by side, you save the expenditure for a second O-GPS.

The K-1 is better suited for normal to wide angel lenses, as it will catch about 2 times more photons, with a lens of the same viewing angle and f-stop. The K-70 is better suited for deep sky photography where its resolution and crop factor count more then the additional dynamic range of about 1-2 stops of the K-1.