[Eyewanders]

I'll not get terribly detailed, but just want to respond briefly. A K-1 at current used pricing is a truly ridiculous value (and I say this after *still* not ever owning one for reasons i won't go into other than despite longing for a PK fullframe for many years, I never got around to as I shifted back to film). It is quite a camera and it will allow you to realize those lenses fully AS WELL AS address your digitizing concerns. The K-1 is perhaps one of the best options going for digitizing film with DSLR scanning methods. I've made due with my K-3 for several years now (having sold off my scanners a long time back as part of the course: a Pakon F135, a PrimeFilm XA, and an Epson V750) but am finally looking to add a full-frame digital to my workflow now that pricing is reasonable.

To the digitizing end, there's a fantastically detailed thread created by Mike that you may find very useful. His method and setup is quite similar to my own. The modular aspect of approaching scanning this way is hard to understate, not to mention the speed, quality, and utility (that of using a device, a DSLR or mirrorless camera that has another use beyond just being a "scanner") that it offers.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/61-post-processing-articles/432695-creat...ising-rig.html

Cheers. That's a great little stable of Pentax you've been handed.



**I should add that I'm actually about to pull a trigger on a Nikon Z7 for my uses, but that has much to do with the fact that I shoot Konica as much (more nowadays) as Pentax and I've no other way to digitally adapt that glass (due to register distance for the Hexanon mount) with Pentax. If I primarily shot Pentax only, I'd have had a K-1 quite some ago.**

---

Last edited by Eyewanders; 04-06-2022 at 12:10 PM.

[Sakura]

I own the K1-II and some old glass from my Pentax MX time, and it works fine with the K1. I see absolutely no need to change the focus screen to be able to manual focus.
The K1 is rather expensive, but you can use all you're lenses with no problem. So that would really be something i could advice you (if you're pockets are deep enough for a K1)

[dionhouston]

Well, wow . Quite a bit of advice -- all appreciated. But complicated

I guess, what I'm thinking -- I don't currently have any full-frame cameras, but I do have lenses. So when (to be honest if) I decide to move up, Pentax makes sense. At that point, I would expect to buy some more modern glass as well.

But today is not that day.

I'm also making the assumption that Pentax will be the best overall experience for shooting Pentax lenses. It looks whether on purpose or not, the different levels are a few hundred dollars apart -- used K-5s in the $300s, used K-3s in the $600s, used K-1s in the $1000s.

For entry into the ecosystem, is a $3xx K-5 II series OK? Because I could pretty freely justify that. Convenience alone. The higher models get progressively harder - mostly because I just got done spending a couple thousand on new lenses for my Olympus

Right now, my camera is analogous to a K-1, basically now two generations old (OM-D E-M1 Mark II). There are two levels below my model, E-M5 series, which tends to mirror the previous generation E-M1, and then the E-M10 series, which are consumer models, and have fewer features, aren't weather-sealed, but MUCH cheaper. If this parallels Pentax, I'm curious what major features are missing from the K-5 series.

Thanks for your help! I'm happy to see that my Dad's faith in Pentax really is justified -- great community

[Sakura]

I don't know about the K5, but my former camera was the K7, and i couldn't manual focus correct with that camera because of the smaller viewfinder. But i think that also was because i was used to the (analog) Pentax MX what imho have the best viewfinder pentax ever produced.

[JoelA]

I'm a little late to the party, so apologies.

If you really enjoy the image rendition from the fantastic array of lenses you've been given, then I really strongly recommend looking at the K-1 or the K-1 II.

I'll be honest, I had a bunch of lenses from the film days (I'm older than most film!) and had tried them out on the crop sensors and just kept feeling like I was "boxed in" from an image and composition standpoint.

I went back and forth for a full year debating if it was really worth the money to bring the lenses back to "native".

It is.

Every penny!

Regardless of what you decide, please enjoy those lenses! They are treasures.

Joel

[wadge22]

There's been a lot covered here, and I haven't read every response. But I will point out that you can probably (with a little patience) get a used K1 for closer to 900, as opposed to the more than 1000 that's being mentioned. Don't know if that hundred or three would change your decision. It's still a lot of money, but maybe not just quite as much as you're thinking.

[vladimiroltean]

I have a K-1 mark II and I'm surprised by how little I've been using it for the past year. The volume of my pictures has been low enough that I've been able to use mostly my film cameras, mostly with Portra 400 and 800, but also with Delta 3200, and occasionally with others. I don't really enjoy using the K-1 with the FA 50/1.4 and FA 35/2, at least not nearly as much as either a K1000, an MX, Spotmatic or even a Cosina K-mount camera, with their manual focus lenses and focusing screens, and not to mention smaller and lighter bodies.
For digitizing I use the services of a good local film lab.
With a low contrast slide film like Provia 100F you can get a look that is rather similar to full-frame digital, for good or bad. Plus you can project the slides on a wall which is quite cool.

I wouldn't recommend Pentax lenses on Canon DSLRs if it involves cutting anything. I've no clue how people even get that idea.

[UncleVanya]

K-3 offers good focus peaking and magnified live view which can help with manual focus lenses. K-70 is also a reasonable choice.

[Joetitch]

Well, wow . Quite a bit of advice -- all appreciated. But complicated

Right now, my camera is analogous to a K-1, basically now two generations old (OM-D E-M1 Mark II). There are two levels below my model, E-M5 series, which tends to mirror the previous generation E-M1, and then the E-M10 series, which are consumer models, and have fewer features, aren't weather-sealed, but MUCH cheaper. If this parallels Pentax, I'm curious what major features are missing from the K-5 series.

Thanks for your help! I'm happy to see that my Dad's faith in Pentax really is justified -- great community

The K5 series were the flagship cameras of pentax. The AF improved from K5 to K5ii and some other minor improvements. In the K5iis they removed the aa filter to give sharper pictures. They all use the 16 mp sensor which has a similar pixel pitch to the K1.
They don't have pixel shift and only one sd card slot. They will take a battery grip to allow AA batteries to be used as well as the lithium.
There were many improvements in the K3 series but AFAIK some people have complained that the files are not quite as flexible as the K5IIS. No personal experience about this.

[dionhouston]

Seems like multiple right answers, and it does seem like the K3 and above is worth it.

Tell you what -- I think I'll bring it back to this (film) forum. Seems clear I need to get a better feel for these lenses. I _can_ see what they look like in full-frame. I just need to use film, which I think will be fun. I also can shoot adapted on my 70D, which at least will give me an idea of what a K3 would produce.

And while I'm doing that, I can pay off the lenses I just bought, so my budget is bigger for whatever the Pentax adventure is.

Thanks everyone -- I think I'll start shooting with these gems and see what they look like

[Papa_Joe]

I second the multiple recommendations to buy a mirrorless camera.
If I would go sriously into manual focus on full frame, I would buy a used Sony Alpha 7II or 7III. A friend of mine bought one because adapting all his manual lenses to his Canon 6D was to much of a fuss. Especially cliping of the lever from the Pentax lenses does them no good. The view times I used it with a manual lens focusing was a breeze compared with my K-1. It is nearly as fast as with a splitscreen and usually spot on, while my K-1 is more often a bit of focus, which you will notice in 100% view.

Of course I should add, that the A lenses will work with all the automatics of the K-1 or any other digital Pentax only drawback is manual focus. Working with the M lenses is a bit more complicated. On a mirrorless all of the lenses should work in M and presumable Av mode, just with the aperture closed, but who cares on a mirrorless and you will have DOF preview allways on.


That said, I might add a comment on film area lenses on digital cameras. You do own a set of really, really impressive lenses, with exception of the two 50/2.0 and the M 135/3.5 they are all in the upper league of image quality and the 135 is there stopped down to 5.6 as well. But they are film lenses and will have an individual amount of CA when used wide open.

So I recommend to use them on your 4:3 system first and get familiar with them. If you like them on your 4:3 you will like them on full frame as well. Probably they will perform better on full frame as the pixel density of a 24 MP FF ist about the same as 6 MP on your 4:3.

And of course you have areally impressive set of analog film gear, so using it with film is quite a obvious suggestion. I send my analog films to a lab where they are digitized in very high quality. The few films I shoot are not worth buying a scanner and getting into the workflow.

[mlag]

The nice set of lenses are all manual, and can be used on any digital body of pentax both full frame K1 or any other aps-c model (equivalent focal length is 1.5x). However the digital bodies have a matte focus glass without split screen or other more precise focussing aids... as designed mainly for autofocus new lenses . Focussing can be more difficult than on older film bodies, in difficult situations like low light or macro or limited dof.
As an alternative for focus in viewfinder, one can use liveview on pentax bodies, or as suggested an adapter and mirrorless cameras - using similar techniques as liveview - from various other brands (with also 1,5x or similar focal length increases).

You indicated to keep the behaviour of the lenses, which suggests to stay fullframe, unfortunately more expensive option. Pentax only has K1 series option.

If you accept the increase in equivalent focal length, pentax aps-c and convertors to aps-c or mirrorless comes into view.
Pentax bodies like any recent used aps-c about 25 Mpixel K5 K3 K70 KP are all good options. K70 is the cheapest new option... if you want a cheap try out body, a K10D is a good but 10Mpixel body , can be an cheap option to find out if want to invest in pentax ecosystem later ...

Personally I never minded the change into aps-c coming from film originally, but you might need an extra 10...20 mm lens if ultra wide is important for your photo work...
If you need more info on using digital "auto" bodies with manual lenses , start here ... How to use/meter Manual & M42 Lenses on all Pentax DSLRs (K-1, K-3, K-5, K-30, etc) - PentaxForums.com or search for green button metering on forum.

[nickthetasmaniac]

That said, I might add a comment on film area lenses on digital cameras. You do own a set of really, really impressive lenses, with exception of the two 50/2.0 and the M 135/3.5 they are all in the upper league of image quality and the 135 is there stopped down to 5.6 as well. But they are film lenses and will have an individual amount of CA when used wide open.

So I recommend to use them on your 4:3 system first and get familiar with them. If you like them on your 4:3 you will like them on full frame as well. Probably they will perform better on full frame as the pixel density of a 24 MP FF ist about the same as 6 MP on your 4:3.

I've spent a lot of time adapting old lenses to MFT (Panasonic and Olympus) and FF (Nikon) and without any qualifications I guarantee they will perform better on MFT.

Pixel density really isn't an issue, but where a lot of old lenses fall apart on digital is in the corners (particularly wides). On MFT, the corners are cropped out, on FF they're not.

[estost]

Hi all,

Only been on a forum a couple days... I am mostly an Olympus user, but I started with Pentax when I was very young, and my Dad gifted me a bunch of equipment I would really like to use:

Pentax P30t; K1000
Pentax-A: 20/f2.8; 24/f2.8; 28/f2; 50/f2; 70-210/f4; 135/f2.8
Pentax-M: 35/f2; 50/f1.4; 50/f2; 100/f2.8; 135/f3.5

So, as a 2x crop guy besides obviously being film lenses designed for "full frame" 35mm film many of these are not ideal for crop sensors (e.g. the 20/f2.8 which is quite wide, not so much so on APS-C or M43). Trying to replicate the way the lenses were designed.

Which brings the questions. What is not (immediately) possible is for me to buy a K-1 (even the Mark I is >$1000) .

So questions:

- As a film photographer, do you stay "old school" and use it just for making prints?
- If not, what digitizing process / equipment do you use? I noticed everything from very modest (presumably very modest quality) to ~$400 (which still isn't bad).

- For hybrid (digital/film) photographers - with these lenses did you go with the K1? Other full-frame?
- APS-C users (I have a Canon 70D as well)? Focal reducer?

Thanks in advance... For now, I have some film, I'm thinking of just trying out all the lenses that way, but curious what options are out there. From what I've seen so far (from adapting) the quality of these 40+ year old lenses is awesome

This is great stuff:
Pentax-A: 20/f2.8; 24/f2.8; 28/f2; 135/f2.8
Pentax-M: 35/f2; 100/f2.8

Just get a used K-1 and focus in live view. You can also switch the focusing screen to Canon EOS-1 Ec-S-type, that helps a lot. That is the cheapest DIY solution, and if your lucky you don't need any spacer at all for the thicker Canon screen. It doesn't make sense to spend money on APS-C bodies or strange adapters.


Read more at: Pentax Way-Ahead - PentaxForums.com

[Joetitch]

One option not yet brought up, (I think) is hire a K1 if possible to get a feel for the camera. I might not feel right for you. Or you might just fall in love with it and head straight for this goal rather than all the other steps between.