Illogical lusting for Pentax K1

[Bryan]

Yesterday I browsed through David Kilpatrick's review of the new Pentax (Ricoh) full frame camera in, I think, the BJP (on a supermarket shelf). He clearly liked the camera a great deal. From memory, he rates the sensor as the best around.

 

Why would I want one? Well it takes vintage Pentax K fit lenses, of which I have a boxful, has in body image stabilisation with adjustment for focal length, and offers focus confirmation for manual focus.

 

In practical terms I would probably have to buy a wide angle zoom 15-30, in addition to the camera body, in order to allow me full scope for stock shooting. I would sell all of my ageing Canon FF kit to part sponsor the deal.

 

It would give a somewhere near state of the art camera, which would weigh a ton and occupy more space than I would care to admit, while the return on investment would surely be negative. In short it's not viable, heart ruling head....

 

I fear that the heart might win, could do with sensible persuasion to think again!

[CM photo]

Go with the heart Bryan; you only live once.

 

As Malcolm Forbes wrote, "He who dies with the most toys wins."

 

[MDM]

I agree with Chris.

 

It's only 925g so not likely to damage or kill. It sounds like an amazing camera for the price - up with the Nikon D810 it seems. Be aware that 36MP cameras require excellent lenses and special treatment so your old lenses may disappoint if not perfect and new zooms had better be very good ones. That said, I've never regretted taking the 36MP step with Nikon and my old Nikkor lenses have been mostly well up to the job.

 

Don't procrastinate too long though. Have you seen what is happening to the £.

[ReeRay]

No pockets in a shroud. Get it bought!

 

My old boss used to say "if you can afford it, it ain't worth having". He went bust but seemed quite happy.

[Colin Woods]

 I too am lusting after this camera. I was a Pentax user for ages, their LX was superb and gave me the best exposed slides I ever had. I am too invested in Nikon (bought the D750 and three new lenses a couple of years back) so it will remain an irrational lust (the D750 is the best camera I have ever owned by a mile). But I would like to have a Pentax again. As for your justifications Bryan - I think you are over-thinking it. Is Alamy your main business? If not, forget return on interest, wisdom of investment, etc and go for the camera you are craving. As Oscar said, the only way to get rid of temptation is to give in to it. For the 15-30mm I can confirm that Tamron's 15-30mm f2.8 is astounding. My astro pics http://colin-woods.pixels.com/featured/walkway-to-the-stars-colin-woods.html are all taken on it.

Colin

[John Mitchell]

Sounds intriguing (said the Devil). I guess my concerns would be the weight (I've developed a fondness for lightweight gear) and how good those vintage lenses might be with a 36MP sensor. You would of course have lots of leeway for downsizing and cropping. Does the Pentax have anything similar to Sony's "focus peaking" for manual focusing?

 

P.S. DK also really likes the Sony a6000 if I remember correctly.

[Bryan]

Goodness, I had hoped for discouragement, but get the opposite!

 

That 15-30 sounds all the more interesting!

 

You have identified the key issues John, weight, and the quality of my old glass with that full frame 36MP sensor. The K1 has a manual focus confirm feature, based upon centre spot focusing I believe. I don't know if it has focus peaking, not that I trust focus peaking.

 

Regarding the Sony, I would have considered an a6300 or a6500, but the  APS - C a6500 is almost as costly as the FF Pentax. The Sony does score for video, but that's of secondary interest to me. The a6000 can now be had for a bargain price, another contender.

 

Still pondering.....

[alphaomega]

The "ups and downs" of lust for new cameras and lenses. I stuck with my X700 Minolta camera for a long time until Sony came out with their R1 with the fixed Zeiss 16-80 zoom. Great camera at the time with a lousy viewfinder and crap high ISO, but no dust on sensor. Held back until the A700 was launched and bought it with the now interchangeable Sony/Zeiss 16-80mm zoom and then piled on lenses as well as A350/550/580/A58/NEX-3/5N/6 and then RX100/RX100M3 and A6000 for good measure as well as E zoom lenses.

Now I look at every new release A77II, RX100M5 now (I think) and A6300/6500 and wonder what next month will bring. I look at my main cameras RX100M3 for carry about and A6000 for dedicated photography for Alamy and wonder what is wrong with these. Nothing I conclude and will continue with these until they give out. For my type of Alamy work I have reached a plateau and any improvements are so marginal for me that it is not worth spending the money. 

[MDM]

 I too am lusting after this camera. I was a Pentax user for ages, their LX was superb and gave me the best exposed slides I ever had. I am too invested in Nikon (bought the D750 and three new lenses a couple of years back) so it will remain an irrational lust (the D750 is the best camera I have ever owned by a mile). But I would like to have a Pentax again. A

 

The D750 is a wonderful camera but the D810 (800E, 800) are even better in terms of image quality - not a lot better for sure but the bigger images give more options. The D810 is missing a few things that the new Pentax has but it is a real beauty and is probably a more financially practical and rational form of lusting for a Nikon owner who has never had one.

[Allan Bell]

 The a6000 can now be had for a bargain price, another contender.

 

Still pondering.....

 

 

If you are still in the market for a new camera because the old one is on the way out then why not go with what you know and are comfortable with considering the bargain price?

 

Allan

 

OR is it that you just fancy a change in that case I can recommend the Nikon D750 but then you need a whole load of new glass to make use of the sensor qualities.

[Robert M Estall]

I'm a Pentax user and am considering the K-1. As ever, there aren't many lenses with the first wave. The 15-30 sounds useful, but IT IS HUGE! (and it's not really a Pentax design) Sigma has an alternative which is about a stop slower but who needs really fast lenses these days? It doesn't rattle through the frames so pure press togs won't be impressed, but I don't care about that.

[Bryan]

 

 

 

If you are still in the market for a new camera because the old one is on the way out then why not go with what you know and are comfortable with considering the bargain price?

 

Allan

 

OR is it that you just fancy a change in that case I can recommend the Nikon D750 but then you need a whole load of new glass to make use of the sensor qualities.

 

 

The old NEX 6 is still soldiering on - I don't essentially have to change.

 

I have a soft spot for Pentax, as I recorded the family growing up with a Pentax camera - which I still have, and a collection of glass. When digital started to be available at a reasonable price/quality Pentax had no competitive offerings so I opted for Canon. The Canons (I've had 4 DSLRs) have served me well enough, but I feel that their sensor technology is now behind the pack.

 

Nothing against Nikon - my brother in law has one and he gets some superb results, but I don't want to start a completely new system.

 

If I buy it will probably be either another Sony or the aforementioned Pentax, both of which will take Pentax glass.

[Bryan]

I'm a Pentax user and am considering the K-1. As ever, there aren't many lenses with the first wave. The 15-30 sounds useful, but IT IS HUGE! (and it's not really a Pentax design) Sigma has an alternative which is about a stop slower but who needs really fast lenses these days? It doesn't rattle through the frames so pure press togs won't be impressed, but I don't care about that.

 

Thanks for the tip about the weighty glass, not over keen on that!

 

The downsides of the Pentax appear to be below par auto focus (particularly for tracking moving objects), relatively slow frame rate, limited availability of new lenses, and not quite state of the art video.

 

I should add it's heavy compared to a Sony mirrorless, and that is a snag.

 

Positives, great value for money, excellent (class leading according to DK)  IQ and 36 MP for stills, built in image stabilisation, weather sealed construction, ability to use heritage glass.

 

For my purposes, and we all have different requirements, none of the cited disadvantages, other than weight, are potential deal breakers and the pros are all very attractive!

[John Mitchell]

 

I'm a Pentax user and am considering the K-1. As ever, there aren't many lenses with the first wave. The 15-30 sounds useful, but IT IS HUGE! (and it's not really a Pentax design) Sigma has an alternative which is about a stop slower but who needs really fast lenses these days? It doesn't rattle through the frames so pure press togs won't be impressed, but I don't care about that.

 

Thanks for the tip about the weighty glass, not over keen on that!

 

The downsides of the Pentax appear to be below par auto focus (particularly for tracking moving objects), relatively slow frame rate, limited availability of new lenses, and not quite state of the art video.

 

I should add it's heavy compared to a Sony mirrorless, and that is a snag.

 

Positives, great value for money, excellent (class leading according to DK)  IQ and 36 MP for stills, built in image stabilisation, weather sealed construction, ability to use heritage glass.

 

For my purposes, and we all have different requirements, none of the cited disadvantages, other than weight, are potential deal breakers and the pros are all very attractive!

 

 

 I need a new left hip, and the lineup of limping baby boomers is so long, that I won't be getting one for well over a year. So it's definitely light and mirrorless for me. As you say, everyone has his or her own needs. Better sign up for weight-training if you go for the Pentax.

[Colin Woods]

Yes, the 15-30mm f2.8 is heavy, 1100g. I curse it, until I am hand holding and getting Alamy sharp images at 1/4 second. Then I love it.

Colin

[Robert M Estall]

if you occasionally feel the need for some extra weight, a length of duct tape and a brick under the body would do the trick just as well as a heavy piece of expensive glass on the front.

 

But seriously, what's that lens like for CA, my particular bete noire?

 

and I have yet to see comments on the more modest lens , the 28-105mm which is a couple of stops slower than the two top-of-the-range 2.8 lenses. In the days of film we had good reason to spend as much as we could lay our hands on for a few extra stops. I had a 24mm f1.4 virtually fixed to one of my Canon F-1s but that was shooting Velvia which had a realistic ASA of 40  The much loved Kodachrome II was only 25 ASA. Before my days I think it was 8 ASA. In these digital days, I don't hesitate to use 400 or 800 without thinking I'm "pushing" it

[Colin Woods]

"But seriously, what's that lens like for CA, my particular bete noire?"

 

Robert

If you are having trouble with CA, have a look at DxO Optics Pro for RAW conversion. I have used it for 6-7 years now and its excellent. Superb RAW conversion and with their lens corrections built in things like CA are entirely eliminated. They offer a 30 day trial. Have a look, its really worth it. Its not that fast and file handling is a browser rather than a database like lightroom, but its speed is forgiven for the magic it works on conversion.

 

Colin 

[Robert M Estall]

Thanks for the DxO suggestion. They are on my radar and they send me offers from time to time. I have Photoshop CS5 which is fine for many things but the lens profile list is getting out of date. DxO seem to promise continuing updates which is where Adobe lets us down.

 

I am hesitant about Lightroom precisely because it wants to organize my archive. I'll do that thank you! My wife lets her iPhoto organize and hide her shots & drives her nuts

 

If it were up to scratch, the K-1 with 28-105 would make a pretty handy walkabout outfit even if I had wider & longer options for more serious photo outings. Mounting most of my K-5 lenses and letting the K-1 auto-crop seems a no-brainer although it seems there are a couple which should fill the full frame sensor.

[spacecadet]

 

 

I am hesitant about Lightroom precisely because it wants to organize my archive. I'll do that thank you! My wife lets her iPhoto organize and hide her shots & drives her nuts

 

 

As far as I can see you just import and LR adopts what you already have. My folder structure looks exactly as it does before I got it. It doesn't "organise and hide" anything. It's indispensable to me now.

[CM photo]

 

I am hesitant about Lightroom precisely because it wants to organize my archive. I'll do that thank you! My wife lets her iPhoto organize and hide her shots & drives her nuts

 

 

Robert, I suggest you give Lightroom a chance.  It's very easy to set it up so that it simply organises your images into folders by date (year > month > day).  If you prefer to organise by subject or location, you can do this, too, although you can also use "collections" for this.  For some people (including me) there was a steep learning curve at first but once the penny drops it becomes very intuitive.  The books by Scott Kelby will see you through from initial set-up to more advanced aspects.

[spacecadet]

 

 

 

Robert, I suggest you give Lightroom a chance.  It's very easy to set it up so that it simply organises your images into folders by date (year > month > day).

Ah, I see, I didn't notice the difference because there wasn't one- that's how I organise anyway. I change the folder name to the subject after copying the images over. You can put as much index detail as you like in LR but I don't as I usually search in Picasa (yes, really).

[Robert M Estall]

I spent 40+ years building a physical archive of carefully captioned transparencies. It fills 8 big filing cabinets. The captions were all logged into a searchable database using Helix Express running on a Mac starting with a IICi. When I had to join the digital world, the new system had to resemble the physical system as closely as possible. If I were starting to-day, I might well let something like Lightroom do some sorting, but that's not where I am. Photoshop makes no attempt to file my finished images and DxO wouldn't try to meddle either.

 

Microsoft Word tries to help if it thinks I am making a list for example. I hate software which tries to interfere with my work methods so I'm hesitant to lock horns with Lightroom's preferences if there is a simpler option.

 

But we're getting away from the idea of upgrading to a K-1 Pentax. The body is a bargain, the first lenses look big and fast and expensive, but I see nothing much about the 28-105 zoom is only 3.5 at its fastest setting.

[Ed Rooney]

To drift even further from Pentaxland, may I pet your big dog, Robert? She looks friendly and well behaved, and a doggie kiss helps get me through the day. 

[Robert M Estall]

but of course Edo! She's not huge, weighs in about 24kg. A labradoodle as you have probably spotted. Smart dogs and highly trainable though we're not much into teaching tricks. She came from a rescue center and was already ball obsessed. And she does molt a bit, contrary to design.!

[MDM]

I spent 40+ years building a physical archive of carefully captioned transparencies. It fills 8 big filing cabinets. The captions were all logged into a searchable database using Helix Express running on a Mac starting with a IICi. When I had to join the digital world, the new system had to resemble the physical system as closely as possible. If I were starting to-day, I might well let something like Lightroom do some sorting, but that's not where I am. Photoshop makes no attempt to file my finished images and DxO wouldn't try to meddle either.

 

Microsoft Word tries to help if it thinks I am making a list for example. I hate software which tries to interfere with my work methods so I'm hesitant to lock horns with Lightroom's preferences if there is a simpler option.

 

But we're getting away from the idea of upgrading to a K-1 Pentax. The body is a bargain, the first lenses look big and fast and expensive, but I see nothing much about the 28-105 zoom is only 3.5 at its fastest setting.

 

You don't seem to understand how Lightroom works - not sure what experience you had to give you such a negative impression of a really excellent program. There are two main parts to Lightroom - the catalog and the raw converter. The catalog is a very good flat file database with superb search facilities, just like a stack of cards you might have for locating your files in your filing cabinet or a simple database program to keep track of them as you mention. It doesn't move anything (unless you specifically request it to do so) and is very non-intrusive. The catalog doesn't contain the files - it just tells you where they are and keeps track of the metadata through the xmp files if you are processing raw. It is easy to learn, extremely intuitive to use, provides a very efficient workflow with Photoshop and the latest version is a major improvement over previous versions in terms of speed - not to be written off easily I suggest.