[doc_taz_nj]

I'd go with the K1 or K1-II first. That said, I do have several lenses with a Sony a6300 MILC, and a fotodiox Pentax K adapter with the aperture ring. Honestly I like both types of cameras; it just depends on what I want to shoot. I like street shooting with the Sony best, and more controlled shoots with my Pentax bodies.

I'm finding MILCs to be great for low light shooting, especially if I don't have a tripod with me. (Silent shooting is definitely better with a good MILC body.) If there's plenty of light involved, a DSLR or MILC gives me equally great results... it then depends on what I do via post process with the RAW shots. I can probably use my Sony APS-C E Mount 35mm and 50mm lenses (both 1.8 OSS) with the A7's/A9, without using crop mode (just a guess, haven't tried it yet). At least I can do that with the Pentax DA equivalents, going into a K1/II or 35mm film body like the *ist or MZ-S.

[biz-engineer]

Thanks Winder, I try too look at the Fujifilm too. Used market offers good pricing.

As far as I know, Fuji isn't FF, Olympus isn't FF, and $1000 for FF is in your dreams. Whether you get a foot into Pentax FF or Sony FF, if you don't have the lenses, it'll cost you a lot more than $1000, count at least $5000.

The only way to get cheap FF systems is to get a DSLR because DSLR are cheap compared to mirrorless models of the same quality, and there is plenty of good lens choices of affordable lenses for FF DSLRs.
If you get a FFmirrorless, Sony may hook you with the discounted camera model, but the lenses are going to cost you 2 x what you would pay for a DSLR system that would give you the same images. Do you realize the current Sony model cost $3500, in September?

Here is a comparison between the 55mm F/1.8 (in crop) and the Olympus 45mm F/1.2 Pro

Man, the goal is not to influence this gentleman into going away from Pentax, even if this is your personal goal. This gentleman desire full frame, so why propose to go apsc, or micro 43, he already have an apsc system with good lenses.

[stevebrot]

$1000 for FF is in your dreams

Given that B&H currently has the A7II in kit with 28-70 for $988, the dreams is not too far out of reality. Most of my current lenses are FF and adaptable to Sony. I might be seriously interested if I had mad money.




Steve

[Rondec]

Given that B&H currently has the A7II in kit with 28-70 for $988, the dreams is not too far out of reality. Most of my current lenses are FF and adaptable to Sony. I might be seriously interested if I had mad money.

Attachment 462116


Steve

Well, plus 100 to 150 for an adapter and all that that entails.

[wed7]

Given that B&H currently has the A7II in kit with 28-70 for $988, the dreams is not too far out of reality. Most of my current lenses are FF and adaptable to Sony. I might be seriously interested if I had mad money.

Attachment 462116


Steve

Not to mention if these items can be had in the used market. Someone with mad money can start his FF foray. But the A7ii is inferior with the K-1 in so many ways.

[Winder]

As far as I know, Fuji isn't FF, Olympus isn't FF, and $1000 for FF is in your dreams. Whether you get a foot into Pentax FF or Sony FF, if you don't have the lenses, it'll cost you a lot more than $1000, count at least $5000.

The only way to get cheap FF systems is to get a DSLR because DSLR are cheap compared to mirrorless models of the same quality, and there is plenty of good lens choices of affordable lenses for FF DSLRs.
If you get a FFmirrorless, Sony may hook you with the discounted camera model, but the lenses are going to cost you 2 x what you would pay for a DSLR system that would give you the same images. Do you realize the current Sony model cost $3500, in September?


Man, the goal is not to influence this gentleman into going away from Pentax, even if this is your personal goal. This gentleman desire full frame, so why propose to go apsc, or micro 43, he already have an apsc system with good lenses.

I don't have a goal one way or the other. I'm just suggesting you look at other options and that unless he is making a lot of A3+ prints he doesn't need to spend the money on either as he won't notice much of a difference. I have no idea what he has and he didn't ask for a critique of his current system. An iPhone will make fine 8x10 prints, so we are to the point where sensor size isn't that critical.

[automorphism]

Between those two you presented I would choose the K1 probably. If I could choose something very similar though, it'd be the the a7iii, which is not that much more expensive.

[neokind]

Man, the goal is not to influence this gentleman into going away from Pentax, even if this is your personal goal. This gentleman desire full frame, so why propose to go apsc, or micro 43, he already have an apsc system with good lenses.

‘Personal goal?’ Yikes. That’s quite an inference. As I read it, the OP wanted FF, but for his stated use, multiple respondents suggested crop sensor cameras. I’d recommend the same. If he wants FF, The K1 and K1ii are excellent, but there are limited modern lenses that can take full advantage of its AF capabilities. Tons of vintage glass, for sure, but they have their limitations compared to the new ones.

[clackers]

The K1 and K1ii are excellent, but there are limited modern lenses that can take full advantage of its AF capabilities.

?

Focal lengths with high quality modern AF lenses alone from 15mm to 560mm.

Can't think of the OP needing either wider or longer.

[neokind]

?

Focal lengths with high quality modern AF lenses alone from 15mm to 560mm.

Can't think of the OP needing either wider or longer.

I’m not talking about crop sensor or screw drive lenses.

[clackers]

I’m not talking about crop sensor or screw drive lenses.

Neither am I, Neokind.

A pro could do any job with the DFA15-30, DFA 24-70, DFA 70-200, DFA 150-450 and DA560 (which is a FF lens, BTW, ignore the DA designation, and that's true of many others).

[neokind]

Neither am I, Neokind.

A pro could do any job with the DFA15-30, DFA 24-70, DFA 70-200, DFA 150-450 and DA560 (which is a FF lens, BTW, ignore the DA designation, and that's true of many others).

Thanks for pointing out that the 560 is FF capable. I didn’t know that. There’s no doubt that they have the range covered by those zooms, and that they could certainly make up the main kit of a pro. But I said that they had limited modern lenses, and that’s true when compared to their competitors. Granted, they are new to the digital FF game, but the fact remains. They’ve got 6, counting the dfa50/1.4, right? That being said, for his stated purpose, buying the K1 with the 24-70 or 28-105 would be be great. But if he’s looking to build a kit with more modern primes he may want to look elsewhere.

[Rondec]

Thanks for pointing out that the 560 is FF capable. I didn’t know that. There’s no doubt that they have the range covered by those zooms, and that they could certainly make up the main kit of a pro. But I said that they had limited modern lenses, and that’s true when compared to their competitors. Granted, they are new to the digital FF game, but the fact remains. They’ve got 6, counting the dfa50/1.4, right? That being said, for his stated purpose, buying the K1 with the 24-70 or 28-105 would be be great. But if he’s looking to build a kit with more modern primes he may want to look elsewhere.

There is the DFA 28-105 too. The 55, 200, and 300 are full frame lenses that have SDM and of course there are the screw driven lenses like the FA limiteds which are very nice if you can tolerate a little noise.

Currently the official full frame lens list looks like this:

15-30mm f/2.8 WR
24-70mm f/2.8
28-105mm f/3.5-5.6
31mm f/1.8 Limited
35mm f/2
43mm f/1.9 Limited
50mm f/1.4
50mm f/2.8 Macro
77mm f/1.8 Limited
70-200mm f/2.8
100mm f/2.8 Macro
150-450mm f/4.5-5.6
200mm f/2.8 (DA lens but covers FF)
300mm f/4 (DA lens but covers FF)
560mm f/5.6 (DA lens but covers FF)

[neokind]

There is the DFA 28-105 too. The 55, 200, and 300 are full frame lenses that have SDM and of course there are the screw driven lenses like the FA limiteds which are very nice if you can tolerate a little noise.

Currently the official full frame lens list looks like this:

15-30mm f/2.8 WR
24-70mm f/2.8
28-105mm f/3.5-5.6
31mm f/1.8 Limited
35mm f/2
43mm f/1.9 Limited
50mm f/1.4
50mm f/2.8 Macro
77mm f/1.8 Limited
70-200mm f/2.8
100mm f/2.8 Macro
150-450mm f/4.5-5.6
200mm f/2.8 (DA lens but covers FF)
300mm f/4 (DA lens but covers FF)
560mm f/5.6 (DA lens but covers FF)

No doubt that those all work, and work well on the K1. For my FF $$ I’d want more modern lenses than the 6 I mentioned. The FA lenses are very nice, especially the 31 & 77, however I wish there were updated versions optimized for modern cameras. By that I mean that they have updated coatings, optimization for digital sensors, and modern AF motors (not screw driven).

[Fenwoodian]

Sorry to add to the pile, but I would probably choose a fixed Nikon 600 or 610. I greatly prefer the K-1 since I have lenses for it.. but I also prefer spending less, and elder Nikon glass with vr would be fine by me. No plans to abandon ship though.

.

I own a K-1 and have no plans of abandoning ship either, just love the K-1.

However, I decided that I needed a back up full frame body and wanted something other than another K-1. So I purchased a mint Nikon D600 with 20,000 clicks on Ebay for $400. It has "only" a 24MP sensor, but I can't tell any difference between the D600 images I've been taking lately and my K-1 photos.

I didn't have to buy any new lenses as I simply "de-Leitaxed" some Nikkor and Zeiss lenses I already had. They were all originally F mount lenses that I had previously Leitax adapted to K mount - so reversing the process was quick and easy.

Here's a link to a photo I took yesterday with my new-to-me Nikon D600 camera - Sunset Sunflower at the Hallows

While I do miss the K-1's tilty LCD screen, it's nice to no longer need to worry about my camera being stolen (or damaged) while on a photo safari because the D600 is so darned inexpensive.
.