[pres589]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

With a FF lens it’s beyond my budget.

…. what? You're going to change systems entirely but can't stay with a K-1 because you can't afford any lenses? I'm not trying to stop you from leaving k-mount land but this seems very curious.

I've no experience with any of the cameras that have been mentioned although I will admit to looking at D750's and all of the nice first & third-party AF glass available for them. The Sony also seems worth a look, especially if you have interest in manual-focus glass, as previously mentioned.

[timb64]

…. what? You're going to change systems entirely but can't stay with a K-1 because you can't afford any lenses? I'm not trying to stop you from leaving k-mount land but this seems very curious.

I've no experience with any of the cameras that have been mentioned although I will admit to looking at D750's and all of the nice first & third-party AF glass available for them. The Sony also seems worth a look, especially if you have interest in manual-focus glass, as previously mentioned.

If you can find me a used K1 together with a 24-70/105.?? within my budget (total spend under £1000)I’ll happily look at it.

As previously stated I’m not a lens collector and don’t really have an interest in manual focusing non-native lenses.

[ddharriman]

“what adapter winder? Thanks”

Not Winder here, but it’s one adaptor for each type of camera.
Normally they are just a tube with the lens slot on one side and the Sony FE slot (in this case) on the other.
If the lens has a manual aperture ring, one of these is enough, the unique thing is one looses auto focus and has to focus manually.

Per example, for Pentax cameras my advice is to go with this (or similar) adapter: amazon.com : Fotodiox Lens Mount Adapter - Pentax K AF Mount (PKAF) DSLR Lens to Sony Alpha E-Mount Mirrorless Camera Body with Built-in Aperture Control Dial : Camera & Photo?tag=pentaxforums-20& so one can use manual aperture lenses and lenses without aperture ring (as the Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 XS).

Best regards,

[devouges]

If you can find me a used K1 together with a 24-70/105.?? within my budget (total spend under £1000)I’ll happily look at it.



As previously stated I’m not a lens collector and don’t really have an interest in manual focusing non-native lenses.

In the used forum

Pentax K-1 - PentaxForums.com

Maybe you can convince him to ship to the UK

[ddharriman]

timb64

Here you have a Sony A7II with the kit lens for £894,44: Amazon.co.uk: Buying Choices: Sony ILCE7M2KB Full Frame Compact System Camera with SEL2870 Lens Kit (5-Axis Image Stabilisation, 24.3 MP, Fast Hybrid AutoFocus) - Black

Best regards,

[normhead]

If I can just chirp in, (cause I always do) in my 3 years with a K-1 I've made not one large print that would justify the purchase. I'm in a different position in that I already have an FF, but if anything I've been less than impressed with the K-1 experience. My next camera will a be K-P or the K-new, no more FF for me. It's just not relevant to my photography. I may never buy another FF. It's nice, but the cost if you look at lenses is excessive. Mind you if you were happy before with the 16-85, a DFA 28-105 would be all you'd need.

I've compared my APS-c images with 20-24 MP FF images, and they hold up very well , as would your K-5. The biggest advantage to the K-1 in my mind is how much you can crop and still have a functional 4k ( 8 MP) image, or even 12 or 16. A 20-24 MP FF makes no sense for my shooting. All you get is shallower Depth of Field at the same f-stop, and for most of my images, that's not a good thing.

Personally if all my stuff went today, I would be very unlikely to replace the K-1. But since I have it I'll use it.
Tess shoots side by side with her K-5, there is rarely a detectable difference if ever, on any method if display we have.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/389019-full-fra...you-judge.html

Many who think they would prefer FF images, actually preferred APS-c images, when they didn't know which image was taken with which camera. The FF is definitely harder to manage with twice the weight in glass to do the same thing. So, more money for less capability. Now that I own one, trying to sell me another would be tough.

[timb64]

If I can just chirp in, (cause I always do) in my 3 years with a K-1 I've made not one large print that would justify the purchase. I'm in a different position in that I already have an FF, but if anything I've been less than impressed with the K-1 experience. My next camera will a be K-P or the K-new, no more FF for me. It's just not relevant to my photography. I may never buy another FF. It's nice, but the cost if you look at lenses is excessive. Mind you if you were happy before with the 16-85, a DFA 28-105 would be all you'd need.

I've compared my APS-c images with 20-24 MP FF images, and they hold up very well , as would your K-5. The biggest advantage to the K-1 in my mind is how much you can crop and still have a functional 4k ( 8 MP) image, or even 12 or 16. A 20-24 MP FF makes no sense for my shooting. All you get is shallower Depth of Field at the same f-stop, and for most of my images, that's not a good thing.

Personally if all my stuff went today, I would be very unlikely to replace the K-1. But since I have it I'll use it.
Tess shoots side by side with her K-5, there is rarely a detectable difference if ever, on any method if display we have.

Thanks for the input Norm. I suppose we all aspire to the best we can afford, otherwise why did you even bother buying the K1?

On the question of 28-105 on FF isn't 24mm equivalent to my starting point of 16mm on crop frame?I would hate to start with the equivalent of only 18mm at the wide end

[aslyfox]

If I can just chirp in, (cause I always do) in my 3 years with a K-1 I've made not one large print that would justify the purchase. I'm in a different position in that I already have an FF, but if anything I've been less than impressed with the K-1 experience. My next camera will a be K-P or the K-new, no more FF for me. It's just not relevant to my photography. I may never buy another FF. It's nice, but the cost if you look at lenses is excessive. Mind you if you were happy before with the 16-85, a DFA 28-105 would be all you'd need.

I've compared my APS-c images with 20-24 MP FF images, and they hold up very well , as would your K-5. The biggest advantage to the K-1 in my mind is how much you can crop and still have a functional 4k ( 8 MP) image, or even 12 or 16. A 20-24 MP FF makes no sense for my shooting. All you get is shallower Depth of Field at the same f-stop, and for most of my images, that's not a good thing.

. . .

Many who think they would prefer FF images, actually preferred APS-c images, when they didn't know which image was taken with which camera. The FF is definitely harder to manage with twice the weight in glass to do the same thing. So, more money for less capability. Now that I own one, trying to sell me another would be tough.

I appreciate you " chirping " in

very informative and interesting points

[normhead]

Thanks for the input Norm. I suppose we all aspire to the best we can afford, otherwise why did you even bother buying the K1?

On the question of 28-105 on FF isn't 24mm equivalent to my starting point of 16mm on crop frame?I would hate to start with the equivalent of only 18mm at the wide end

I got an inheritance. My dad bought me the K-1.

Ya, thats the best reason for ditching Pentax, others have 24-105. As a person who appreciates the extra width of the 16-85, you'd definitely miss it. I have an older FA-J 18-35 but it's not the sharpest. Just adequate to use until something better comes along, and there's no guarantee that will ever happen. I waited for 6 months because I wanted 24-105, before it sunk in it wasn't going to happen. In fact if anything the release of the 28-105 would suggest it's never going to happen. Pentax just doesn't make what you want in that regard.

After 3 years I still don't have an acceptable solution.

What makes me happier with the 28-105 over time is it appears to me to be a better lens than what others sell at 24-105. It's a spectacular lens.

My final take, again after 3 years, would be I doubt Pentax could meet the IQ standard they desired in a 105 lens if they extended to 24mm from 28. Tess who is far pickier about IQ than I am, uses the 28-105 as her preferred walk around on her K-5. It's that good.

But final word on the K-1, I paid close to $3,000 CAD for the camera, the final total for lenses before i was happy with it was an additional $5000. In your position I might even be looking at 4/3 or a K-P.

[ChristianRock]

There's just no way that in the used market, the D750+24-120 or the A7II+24-105 is going to cost less than a K-1+28-105. And an A7ii+28-70 is not going to cut it because that lens isn't very good, a co-worker had that combo and was very quick to acquire a Zeis 24-70 f4.
If we throw in an FA*24 2.8 along with the DFA 28-105 to make up for the lost range, then we might be a bit over the D750 budget (but probably not the A7II - those 24-105G lenses are expensive, like every Sony lens is).

I understand retiring and wanting to treat yourself to a full frame (I'd love to even though as Norm said, I'm sure I don't need it), and I understand wanting to go to a new system. You only live once So go where your heart leads you I guess... if you ever wanted a Nikon or Sony system, now might be your time.

[C_Jones]

I have the Pentax K-5IIs and the 16-85 lens. I used to use the 16-85 on my Pentax K-5IIs and it did really well. I also have a Pentax K-1 II that I use with a Pentax 70-200 lens. With the K-5 and 16-85 you definitely have the capability of handling/doing for example landscape, and some other shooting where you do not require mid or super telephoto. If you get a full frame camera such as the K-1, the distance you cover is less oriented for ultimate distance that otherwise another aps-c camera or just and/or adding another lens dedicated to mid or super telephoto would do. For example, if you purchased a Pentax KP or K-70, you will have more megapixels covering an aps-c frame. On the other hand, if you are looking for more megapixels accompanied with less distance covered, a full frame camera with more megapixels than the the KP or K-70 may be something useful for you. I would definitely not recommend buying something where the only mode you can facilitate is the manual focus mode with your lens, unless you are a completely dedicated manual focus shooter. So, approaching something where your equipment will still facilitate the AF is something you may want to consider. As I said, I have my Pentax K-1 II on my Pentax 70-200, where it serves a specific range and supplies an excellent amount of megapixels. That is why I decided to purchase and use it for that specific purpose. If you know what specific ranges and amounts of megapixels you will need, that may help you decide. The newer Pentax aps-c type camera bodies offer more megapixels than the K-5, which may be useful for you, along with a number of Pentax lenses that would cover the different focal ranges.

Of course it is your decision, but those are just come suggestions on equipment types/use.

[timb64]

Hmm lots to think about here!
Maybe I should completely rethink.I’ve always discounted the KP, I like a top plate lcd and am pretty sure I won’t benefit from pixel shift as I’m averse to lugging around a tripod and SWMBO,despite her patience ,may baulk at even more time setting up shots!

But,...but....the temptation of staying with Pentax, a better sensor,upgrading my 55-300 to the PLM version is worth considering.What I really want to avoid is an incremental increase in quality which leaves me wondering if the cost of changing was worthwhile.Hence the jump to FF and possible change of system.

[normhead]

Hmm lots to think about here!
Maybe I should completely rethink.I’ve always discounted the KP, I like a top plate lcd and am pretty sure I won’t benefit from pixel shift as I’m averse to lugging around a tripod and SWMBO,despite her patience ,may baulk at even more time setting up shots!

But,...but....the temptation of staying with Pentax, a better sensor,upgrading my 55-300 to the PLM version is worth considering.What I really want to avoid is an incremental increase in quality which leaves me wondering if the cost of changing was worthwhile.Hence the jump to FF and possible change of system.

The problem for me was, there was always that one more thing needed to make the K-1 as versatile as the K-3. And when I finally got all those things, they made my camera bag too heavy to carry.

You can't win sometimes.

[C_Jones]

Hmm lots to think about here!
Maybe I should completely rethink.I’ve always discounted the KP, I like a top plate lcd and am pretty sure I won’t benefit from pixel shift as I’m averse to lugging around a tripod and SWMBO,despite her patience ,may baulk at even more time setting up shots!

But,...but....the temptation of staying with Pentax, a better sensor,upgrading my 55-300 to the PLM version is worth considering.What I really want to avoid is an incremental increase in quality which leaves me wondering if the cost of changing was worthwhile.Hence the jump to FF and possible change of system.

I also like the top lcd, and have only bought Pentax cameras that have it. If you did want a switch to a full frame system as an upgrade, you may want to sell your K-5II and lens you have, and use the funds from that to help in a purchase of the K-1 and a Pentax 24-70. That would give you more megapixels, the more advanced functions of the K-1, plus the ability to continue your wide angle zoom objectives. I realize it would weigh more than your present system, but the advancement and advantages are there. Like I mentioned in my earlier post, I have the K-1 II, which I use with a Pentax 70-200. and for me the quality of the images I get is well worth the carrying/handling involved. Considering the 24-70 is smaller than the 70-200, it would be lighter to carry/use.

Otherwise, if you would like to stay with the aps-c type camera body, you could sell your K-5 II to help fund the new Pentax aps-c body that is supposedly coming out early next year, and also get the newest model of the 55-300 (PLM) you mentioned. You could either keep or sell your 16-85, depending on your focal range needs/wants.

[normhead]

I also like the top lcd, and have only bought Pentax cameras that have it. If you did want a switch to a full frame system as an upgrade, you may want to sell your K-5II and lens you have, and use the funds from that to help in a purchase of the K-1 and a Pentax 24-70. That would give you more megapixels, the more advanced functions of the K-1, plus the ability to continue your wide angle zoom objectives. I realize it would weigh more than your present system, but the advancement and advantages are there. Like I mentioned in my earlier post, I have the K-1 II, which I use with a Pentax 70-200. and for me the quality of the images I get is well worth the carrying/handling involved. Considering the 24-70 is smaller than the 70-200, it would be lighter to carry/use.

Otherwise, if you would like to stay with the aps-c type camera body, you could sell your K-5 II to help fund the new Pentax aps-c body that is supposedly coming out early next year, and also get the newest model of the 55-300 (PLM) you mentioned. You could either keep or sell your 16-85, depending on your focal range needs/wants.

The weight of that (k-1 and 24-70) compared to a K-5 and 16-85 would be a big negative in that scenario.