[timb64]

I recently "achieved" semi retirement and have a small sum (in the region of $1000 plus trade in on my trusty K5ii and beloved 16-85.)with which to reward myself after 30 years in a fairly stressful profession.

With the extra time on my hands I'm keen to venture into the world of full frame photography and whilst a K1 is the obvious choice I'm afraid it's beyond my budget.After much research I've narrowed down the choices in my own order of preference to Nikon D750, Sony A7ii and Canon 6D with an equivalent of the 16-85 lens.I mainly shoot landscape/wildlife and have very little interest in action photography or video.Anyone been through a similar process or willing to chip in with advice?

Thanks in advance,

Tim

[Winder]

I have owned the K-5, K-1 and the A7II. The advantage of the A7II is that with an adapter you can put just about any brand of lens on the A7II. Manual focus is actually a lot of fun with the A7II. Its a fun camera for an enthusiast with a lot of options. The D750 would be my second choice. Its a great camera and more than capable of professional work. The Canon 6D series in one of my least favorite cameras, but the lens options are very good.

[tokyoscape]

I would go with A7II + adapter to K too. I am looking at that path myself.
@Winder or any Sony user, From what I know (by reading and asking Sony user), User can set the camera to magnify view in the viewfinder and manual focus third party lens. Is it correct? Auto focus is almost unnecessary if I can do something like that.

[TwoUptons]

For landscape/wildlife, I might stick with APS-C unless you have some full frame glass you really want to try.

A KP and 55-300 PLM would be close to your budget and offer 24-420 equivalent on full frame with a weight savings if you kept the 16-85.

For landscape, you probably don’t need scathingly fast lenses, and APS has a niche in wildlife on a budget. You could do a similar kit in other brands, too if you’re just in the mood for something new.

As a K1 owner, I can’t say too many bad things about full frame, but you may be in one of those places where APS is better...

Just another option...

-Eric

[Winder]

I would go with A7II + adapter to K too. I am looking at that path myself.
@Winder or any Sony user, From what I know (by reading and asking Sony user), User can set the camera to magnify view in the viewfinder and manual focus third party lens. Is it correct? Auto focus is almost unnecessary if I can do something like that.

Yes. You have a button programed to zoom in on the EVF while you focus. You can also set up colors to indicate what is in focus. Focusing manual focus lenses it pretty easy and quick with older manual focus glass.

[rawr]

I mainly shoot landscape/wildlife and have very little interest in action photography or video.

Worth noting that the KP, with it's accelerator chip, has evaporated one of the key advantage of a full-frame sensor over APS-C: clean high ISO capability. KP performs at same level as D750/6D in that department, which can open up a lot of possibilities with wildlife photography. Plus KP has pixel-shift, which many have found can make a noticeable difference to landscape.

D750 is a nice camera, even the cheaper D610 is fine, but you will need a new lens lineup if you go down the Nikon path, which will certainly push your whole package well over $1000. But at least there is a big used Nikon market out there, which means there may be many options for you to get some good deals on Nikon gear.

[microlight]

There’s also the APS-c pixel shift route to consider. PS gets you closer to 35mm film format in terms of resolution, colour accuracy and ISO cleanliness without breaking the bank or having to dispose of the 16-85. KP, K-70 or K-3II would work in this respect and give you a whole new tripod-based technique to play with.

[timb64]

Thanks for all the replies so far,they've given me a bit to consider.

I won't address each reply but my thoughts subsequently are:

With regards to the KP I would discount it because the way I travel and places I visit I am really unlikely to move away from hand-held and wouldn't therefore close the gap with FF from pixel-shift.

The idea of using the A7 is an interesting one.I've never been a lens collector so the idea of adapters and the ability to try out different lenses isn't something that really grabs me.In truth the A7 and 24-240 is appealing but I realise a 10 times zoom involves significant compromises in IQ which is probably my major consideration.

Within my budget I know I can get a relatively lightly used body and 24-105 (or similar).

[BigMackCam]

If you're set on shifting to a different brand, I'd happily recommend the A7 MkII as a capable, inexpensive full frame option. I mostly shoot mine with vintage manual glass using a variety of adapters, and it feels almost tailor-made for this application, with excellent focusing aids and helpful custom button placement . I also shoot Minolta AF / Sony A-mount auto-focus glass with it, using the Sony LA-EA4 SLT adapter, as a backup for my A-mount kit.

So long as you can get along OK with the EVF and less-than-stellar battery life, the A7II is a cracking little camera, especially at current prices. The 24MP sensor is excellent and resolution is ample for the vast majority of uses. More recent generations of the camera have improved on various aspects of the design and performance, but the MkII still holds its own where it counts.

[ismaelg]

Have you considered a used K1?

[timb64]

Have you considered a used K1?

With a FF lens it’s beyond my budget.

[arnold]

Do you think that you would notice the advantages of a K1 over your lovely K5ii? Are you going to use extreme enlargements that may show a difference? Even though I bought a K1, it wasn't because I was dissatisfied with my K5, it was only because I wanted one not because I needed it. The biggest factor is the photographer in my opinion.

[devouges]

I recently "achieved" semi retirement and have a small sum (in the region of $1000 plus trade in on my trusty K5ii and beloved 16-85.)with which to reward myself after 30 years in a fairly stressful profession.

With the extra time on my hands I'm keen to venture into the world of full frame photography and whilst a K1 is the obvious choice I'm afraid it's beyond my budget.After much research I've narrowed down the choices in my own order of preference to Nikon D750, Sony A7ii and Canon 6D with an equivalent of the 16-85 lens.I mainly shoot landscape/wildlife and have very little interest in action photography or video.Anyone been through a similar process or willing to chip in with advice?

Thanks in advance,

Tim

Timb64: I was in a similar position and I chose to wait nearly 2 years and put aside a bit of money every month and now I have my K1ii ! And for me, it was WORTH THE WAIT

[pearsaab]

I have owned the K-5, K-1 and the A7II. The advantage of the A7II is that with an adapter you can put just about any brand of lens on the A7II. Manual focus is actually a lot of fun with the A7II. Its a fun camera for an enthusiast with a lot of options. The D750 would be my second choice. Its a great camera and more than capable of professional work. The Canon 6D series in one of my least favorite cameras, but the lens options are very good.

what adapter winder? thanks

[timb64]

Timb64: I was in a similar position and I chose to wait nearly 2 years and put aside a bit of money every month and now I have my K1ii ! And for me, it was WORTH THE WAIT

But I deserve a reward,NOW