Why don't I have a Pentax K-1 or K-1 II? Welcome to Kobie's Korner!

Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @kobiemc the question has come up as to why I don't have a K-1 or k-1 Mark II. Well, I explain all in this video.
If you'd like to ask a question to be featured in an upcoming 'Kobie's Korner' I'd love to hear it! Send your questions to [e-mail] and I'll get through as many as I can and will strive to answer all questions!

[@photobobo]

I have a K1 and it is a fabulous camera and a real bargain. Pentax, like other manufacturers, did not hold back features when they made the K1. It has everything. I especially like the colors that I get with the K1.

[@loboptlu]

@@photobobo yes love my k1ii too , having also a sony 7r3 and a canon r7 and none of them is even remotely close in image quality. Now you will hear those not knowing what a photocamera is crying around it has bad video (main reason image quality has gone down), well if it’s video you need get a camcorder.

[@douglasstemke2444]

Love the one you're with. For me the K1 is a godsend. I shoot a lot of macro and having a moveable screen is SO much better than a right angle viewfinder for my work. Also for Astro photography, for the obvious reasons as well as landscapes. You are 100% right about wildlife, I use mostly the K3 M3 with the 150-450 or 600mm f5.6 A.

[@billkennon319]

Excellent discussion! Who knows, maybe the K1-III will win you over. I certainly look forward to Pentax continuing to update the line. The K3 III family is a home-run. I also sincerely hope and trust Pentax will give the lens lineup some love. As you mention, the telephoto lenses need serious updating - PLM function, higher aperture (300 - 400 - 600 lenses in the f2.8 class) and updated wide angle lenses in the f1.4 class also. The K3 III is a fantastic camera.

[@edduffy9366]

I definitely understand your reasons for not needing a K-1 original or K-1 Mark II. The K-3 Mark III is more than enough for all the work you stated you do (with good lighting either natural or off camera flash). I just too out my Pentax K-5 this past weekend and all the pics came out great in the bright sun light. I liked my K-1 Mark II when it came to needing extra details in my landscape photography and if I needed to crop.

[@jw48335]

My biggest issue would be one that I didn't hear you mention: the screen. I could never go back to shooting a body without a movable rear screen. Macro, astro, events with crowds, video. I end up using in just everyday shooting. I own a K70 with a macro lens. It's main job is for film digitization because Pentax has the best pixel shift, resulting in perfect film grain. I use the flip screen on that - it's excellent. The entire reason I won't buy a k33 mono it's because I want to flip screen or at least a tilt screen.

[@railspony]

I have a KS-2 with a broken screen, a K-70 with a broken screen, and a replacement K-70 with a good screen that I rarely opened. On the K3-iii doing insect macro there's only been a few times I would have used it. All but one I just got down there to get the shot, no big deal, and one time I did use the camera app as a screen. Which works great on the updated app. Lots of people think they'd miss it, but most don't. It sounds like for your use case, you use it but don't actually need it at all. When I bought the K3-iii I thought it would be the same for macro, and I'd only notice a difference when doing birds. But wow, the stabilization is so much better, my keeper rate went way way up. I guess it is different on a tripod, but I think most use cases of macro are handheld.

[@steveoc64]

@@jw48335 I guess you could run hdmi out to a monitor? Would be nice for scanning film with a huge display to dive in on the grain I’m keen to see what a mono can do with scanning bw as well as

[@jw48335]

@@steveoc64 True, you could use an external monitor for scanning, although I find it not needed. I have dedicated macro lenses and I have marked the barrel exactly where optimum focus is. It drove me batty back in the day with a copy stand trying to level the camera and such. I don't have to do any of that anymore thanks to valoi and blackscale labs.

[@jw48335]

@@steveoc64 Also worth mentioning, I am looking at doing a monochrome conversion on a dedicated scanning camera, since that would accomplish the goal of getting the bayer filter out of the mix. Pentax would not make sense for that because I would want to opt for a body that uses half pixel increments for Pixel shift, where Pentax uses full pixel. I haven't had cycles to dig into that yet. One of the Sony bodies is an obvious candidate though because you could push the dynamic range likely past 13 stops and crazy resolution.

[@steveoc64]

@@jw48335 awesome! Keep us informed on that one .. the crazy things we do in pursuit of improving the film process I had a lucky find on eBay, and picked up a cheap 100mm macro “dental lens” in k mount that has an insanely tight focussing range. Not a bad scanner lens :) My home dev process is super rough though.. lovely detailed scans with pixel shift at 36mb, complete with scratches, water drop stains and bromide drag :) Love it

[@secretsquirel5306]

I go back a long way with Pentax starting off with my ME super then decades later getting a K10, K31 and now have K70. I love the K1 but at just over 1kg didn't fancy carrying that level of build quality. So I went for the K70 because it was a lot lighter, a lot cheaper, had an articulated rear screen and a built-in flash. IMO a great all round camera and oh yes, metal body and great weather sealing.

[@vinx7272]

Thanks for answering this question so we might as well wait for a hypothetical K1 III to have all the advantages!

[@user-bg5lq3gs2d]

A refreshing exposition on matching equipment to use case. It’s nice to find some honesty and integrity on KZbin

[@bannor4-930]

Wow Kobie, you clarified the differences between a Full Frame Sensor and an APS-C Sensor perfectly. Nicely done, using real world experiences to back your explanations.

[@suhailzubaid9192]

Very informative video, Kobie! You have a very good reason to stick with Pentax APSC camera. My reasons would be that Pentax FF cameras are bigger and heavier. As a hiker, I can carry only that much load in my backpack. Other reasons for enthusiasts could be that switching from APSC to FF gear could be costly.

[@richardhale9664]

As an enthusiastic amateur and having owned or owning the K30, K5, K3 and KP I can honestly say IQ wise I have not missed out by not having a K1 or Ki ii. Then, a couple of years ago as a treat to myself I purchased a new K1 ii at a very reasonable price. It does not make me take better pictures than any other of the cameras I have owned but there are three things about it I really like. First it is beautifully engineered and designed, so if you don't mind the size and weight it's a joy to use. Second because of that size and weight I find it easier to shoot with when light weight and discretion is not important. It fits my hands better, has a larger and better viewfinder and it's easier to get stable shots at slow shutter speeds and is less fiddly when tripod mounted. Thirdly and most importantly for me is the pleasure I get from shooting old, classic K mount glass and the results cannot be replicated by the APSC cameras. I did seriously consider the K3 iii at the time I got the K1 ii, but the improvements over the original K3 were not a big enough deal to justify the extra £500 over the K1ii price and the biggest downside of the K3 iii is the lack of built in flash, a feature which proves to be very useful quite often. The K3 has the best implementation of built in flash I have ever used, but that feature rarely gets mentioned. So I kept the K3 and bought the K1 ii. Obviously if one requires superior AF, frame rates and reach (which I don't) the K 3 iii is the superior camera and as I shoot a lot in B&W, a K3 iii Monochrome is on my wish list!

[@melbournepixs]

I shoot the k5ii as much as the KF, a year ago I got the Canon 6DMKII full frame, I went the Canon as it's $1600 cheaper than the Pentax, you really don't get anything more in full frame other than the width of the sensor. Eventually I will get the k3 when my k5ii dies

[@dukenukem5768]

I went for FF because of the availability of older lenses that fit and do what they were meant to do. Nikon FF DSLRs could do the same but they have abandoned that ability with their mirrorless. Don't talk to me about adaptors. I already had some Pentax film era lenses, and I have bought more since at crazy low bargain prices. I like the feel of a big camera anyway, used to have a 6x7.

[@LeeIveson]

Stupid Train shut that horn off! 😂 It's funny all this time, I've never really sat down to way up the pros & cons of full frame vs crop. I might need to do just that. Good video 👍

[@xmeda]

Reminds me Cutting Edge Engineering videos where Kurtis is often interrupted by train while explaining something :D :D

[@jamesmlodynia8757]

I purchased my k1mk II to add a full frame option for my event photography, at the time I was using a variety of Pentax APSC camera bodies with different prime and zoom lens. I used a few different limited series primes mostly the 31mm and 77mm along with a 35 mm Sigma f1.4 art lens, having both a full frame and APSC K3 body gave me the ultimate in lens flexibility as I could set up the camera with a wide variety of combinations. This also allowed me to get the most out of the 31mm limited edition and 35mm Sigma, when I needed a 50mm I just used the 35 mm on my K3 and the same with the 77mm, I used that on my K3 when I was talking photos during the reception and I need to isolate people at different places on the floor or take headsets of guests or wedding party, it also worked great for talking photos of mothers holding their children.

[@RobHardin-eu5vl]

I use a Pentax k-70 and I have not yet found any problems with using that. Not to put down anyone that uses anyone else’s brand. Where else can I use every lens that I have that is manual. But when I don’t have the money, they spent three grand on a lens where I have one that does it in manual. I guess you spend for what you like.

[@MichaelRusso]

I have one but I own a huge array of manual lenses that desire it.

[@RoyalMobileAutoDetailing]

Awesome brother!

[@steveoc64]

I totally agree about apsc being more than good enough Having said that, I got a decent deal on a k1 with a 50 1.4 .. and that lens is so incredibly good, that I don’t mind carting the extra weight around

[@GODSPEEDseven]

Hey Kobie, Good points. I sincerely think people in general over-estimate the impact of sensor size. When I felt like upgrading from my K-70, it was based on ergonomics, controls, dials, etc... I wanted to have knobs and dedicated buttons instead of dealing with a menu. I asked myself K-3iii or K-1ii for a while. My decision for going K-1ii was mainly because I wanted: 1. A hinged screen. I can have some issues bending for some low ground shots. Painful. So I needed it. 2. I KNEW i was going to be going back to film as well. I wanted to have a consistent lens experience between digital/film. Purely interested in the Limited lineup with aperture controls, I wanted the 31mm to be 31mm regardless if I was shooting digital, or film. 3. Knobs and dedicated buttons. The ergonomic experience feels very important to me. In the end though, there is no wrong choice. I think these cameras are absolutely incredible. The K-1ii might be "old" in comparison, but it doesn't feel old to me. Just a more patient experience. Have a good one!

[@loboptlu]

shoot inside a museum or a cathedrale with no flash allowed and say that about overestimating size again;). true in full light and with a good flash every size is more or less the same but as soon as you get into real lowlight situations ,as those above for example , the difference gets very visible, shot multiple brands and models with same lenses ,for ech brand, in ff and apsc (fuji obviously not) and at best the apsc was 2 stops worse if not more in exactly the same situation.(no cannot say which brands apsc is better i always had only same brand with me every time ,so no comparison between brands sorry).

[@danigonzalez4299]

Neither do I. And yes I'd like to try FF once, but with a Way Better BUFFER (massively huge) and mooooore FPS like 20 at least.

[@theharper1]

I agree Kobie, it depends on what kind of pictures you want to take. Like you, I want that extra effective reach with APS-C when I'm photographing birds and wildlife. I haven't used FF since I stopped using film, so honestly I haven't missed it, even when taking photos of landscapes and architecture. Maybe if I used a K1ii for a while, I might find some aspect of it worthwhile. But with the DFA 150-450 on the K3iii, I've even given up using the 1.4x TC because the softness it introduces on my copy negates the magnification it achieves.

[@FreedomToRoam86]

I agree, that my K3-III gives me all the big glass-lens that I can think of needing. But my little Micro 4/3 is fun to play with for more casual shooting, and way better at real (moving) video than any Pentax I have owned. To me, for casual use, is more of an argument for most people to go that route, than the Big One. And honestly, if I was going to bump sensor sizes, I’d probably go for the medium-format camera instead, for all the reasons that you state for the K1

[@dominicwroblewski5832]

I agree with you that if you don't need a full frame for a majority of your work it is not worth it. APSC is just fine for what I shoot. I do have 3 full frame bodies that I got to use with some legacy Nikon lenses that I had. The main thing for me was that I got a great deal on the full frame bodies used. I would not have gone out of my way to get a full frame at any cost.

[@wojciechskorza3051]

I watch your videos in Poland using Google Translate and I completely agree with your statement. I also use a Pentax camera on an APSC matrix and when it comes to wide angle, the wonderful Pentax 10_17 mm fisheye lens works great in my artistic vision for architectural photography from World War I. I was just thinking about buying a Pentax K1 mark II or K3 mark III, where I have been using a K 3 mark II so far. Thanks for the tip. Greetings from Poland from the city of "Przemyśl Fortress".

[@TheSquirrelMafia]

I'm a big fan of APS-C Pentax. The latest DA* lenses are amazing. I'm hoping that the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 revamp arrives sometime next year, but who knows with Ricoh. They're slow. To me, the K-3II is usable to ISO 12800 & coupled with the latest fast focusing PLM lenses, it can AF fairly decently. A future K-3III upgrade will yield me far better AF performance & image quality usable tot ISO 25600. It's a win for me. 🙃

[@tomsun3159]

The use of a K1 or K1-II definitely depends on your usecase! Birding Nope, Wildlife Nope, Sports Nope, Portraits YES, Landscape YES, Astro YES, Architecture YES. If you are allready invested in the Pentax Eco-System you'll will have also severeal lenses which are FF-suitable or allready FF-lenses, so i would highly suggest to try the K1 (K1-II) if you find one for a good price. Rumours say its heavy and bulky compared to a APS-C, i cannot confirm that, yes if i compare it with my K-50 or K-70 yes thats a valid point but if i compare it to my K3-II i don't feel a real weight difference especially if i use comparable or same lenses. The downsides due to larger imagesizes the computing and saving of the images take longer time therefor low burstrates. The higher resoulution of course come at acost of speed, the older computing unit compared to a K3-III comes at a cost of speed, so compared to a K3-III a K1-II feels really slow. But only the engineering of the lunar landing gear on the display is worth it. I use mine for landscape, town, astro, nature, macro. For birding, sports, wildlife i would choose different for sure probably a M4/3 system.

[@jimzielinski946]

In the film era, bigger was always better. I used a Pentax 6x7 and appreciated the noticably better 8x10 prints and certainly better 16x20 prints those negatives produced. Im not so sure the same rules apply in the digital era. Im very happy with my KP. I did pick up the k3 monochrome and, so far i think its amazing. I think the only shortcoming for APSC i can think of is not getting the full effect of vintage lenses designed for full frame.

[@richardhale9664]

In my experience vintage K mount glass on the K1 is the biggest reason to have a K1 over an ASPC model. Using a K 28mm f3.5, K 50mm f1.4, K 85mm f1.8 and M 100mm f4 Macro is a joy on my K1 ii.

[@Xitrun]

I do not have k3 mark iii. But I have many other crops such as k5, k3ii, KP. I use K1 and K1-ii as well. Full frames k1 and k1ii have much much better image quality than even kp. But I love all of them of cource

[@Needacreate]

One would think these discussions along the lines "Why have you never gone full frame?" would be a thing of the past, particularly with the latest generation of APS-C cameras in people's hands for quite a while now, but I guess the yapping will never cease. The simple truth is crop cameras have become good enough for most genres of photography and have been for years now. Plus, people are rediscovering that their idea of photographic fun is not necessarily lugging around tons of gear instead of shooting. Go figure.

[@rascalhusky8129]

I have a Ko1 and a k70, the k70 is a great camera the ko1 is debatable.

[@MattTaggart]

Love the body (it's due a refresh), the Glass is killer...💪

[@scrptwic]

Kobie I have four Pentax APS-C camera bodies I have never felt I was missing something not having a full frame Pentax DSLR. And now having fixed my Spotamatic SP11 I now have a full frame Pentax Film Camera if I want full frame pictures

[@andynagy5300]

I get what you saying. But once I tried mark 2 I don’t think I would go back.

[@KobieMC]

@@andynagy5300 What subjects do you generally shoot?

[@andynagy5300]

@@KobieMC I shoot a variety, architecture when i travel to other countries, landscape when i hike in the mountains and wildlife. In a couple of weeks i will be heading to South Africa and hoping to see what i can shoot there. Of course family type shots as well. I am also a scuba diver and i do a lot of underwater photos, these are not done with pentax. I honestly believe this is not a right or wrong answer but what is best for you. I do love your channel it is very informative and i do learn stuff watching it.

[@KobieMC]

@@andynagy5300 Thank you, I was just curious as to what you normally shoot 👍🏽

[@edduffy9366]

Yeah, why didn’t you drink the full frame Pentax cool-aid?😂

[@KobieMC]

@@edduffy9366 Because I'm 🤪😜🙃

[@edduffy9366]

Oh, I also meant to tell you my friend, Ed posted all his “Photo Universe” KZbin videos back up on KZbin. Very cool to see his old Pentax camera videos again. I do believe you have the Pentax title now. Keep going my friend. I still love Pentax.

[@bittertruth6175]

Very clearly you explained the difference between FF and APSC in layperson and practical terms. I believe that 90% hobbyist would be satisfied with APSC for their need.

[@juniord3997]

Isn't Pentax more or less obsolete at this point?

[@haenzelv6287]

I've been hearing this for 12 years or so...But they're still there and will be there for years to come....

[@juniord3997]

@@haenzelv6287 "obsolete" doesn't mean it won't "be there". People still buy VHS and cassette tapes and shoot film too. As long as people buy it they will sell it. I'm referring to the technology and image quality. I mean they can't even get auto-focus right after all this time.

[@haenzelv6287]

@@juniord3997 Image quality (Pentax K1) is amongst the very best. Autofocus requires a bit more skill. Doesn't bother me having learned to shoot with film and manual focus...Autofocus.Pentax K3 III is on par with most competitors. Mirrorless will beat any DSLR when it comes to autofocus....I like the Pentax viewfinder. Won't go mirrorless....

[@juniord3997]

@@haenzelv6287 "Autofocus requires a bit more skill"?? No it's downright atrocious if you can be honest. "K1 is amongst the best" (says who? You? That's a matter of opinion) , K3III (on par? That's not saying much) , "Mirrorless will beat any DSLR" -Yes exactly. I'm not saying you're a bad person if you like it, it's nothing personal. But at this late date into the 21st Century Pentax is an inferior product. Not to say you can't have fun with it though. The K3III Monochrome seems like a nice niche gadget. And I wouldn't throw away any of the lenses. You could do better with a mirrorless + K mount adapter.

[@haenzelv6287]

@@juniord3997 More skill, yes...by using single point autofocus and anticipate on a moving subject. Everybody can point a camera and let the camera pick the eye to focus on. That's not skill. To me that doesn't give me satisfaction. You didn't produce the picture, the camera did it for you. THIS is an opinion... Image quality: Judge the sensor of the K1, combine it with the perfect glass Pentax produces.That's 'basically' all it takes to produce high quality images. Internet is full of reviews and excamples. The most convincing is my own experience though...

[@ihknilsen]

You make a couple of points that are good, however, I find the fact that you still believe the false notion that APSC gives you better “reach” to be laughable. A 500mm lens on a full frame or an APSC camera still gives you 500 mm of reach. You can’t change the physical dimensions of a lens by placing it on a different body. The only difference is in “field of view”. Stop lying to your audience about “reach”. If a smaller sensor gave you better “reach” then all the sports photography and wildlife photography pros would be using Micro 4/3 or smaller sensors. Rant over.

[@KobieMC]

@@ihknilsen It's called breaking things down to layman's terms. Instead of making the video super long by explaining the crop factor, field of view differences and effects of aperture on those differences, I'm making it digestible for those who would prefer a much easier explanation. "Reach" is often mentioned due to the magnification of the image which happens when you 'crop'. It's not a lie, it's the end result interpretation broken down so non technical people can understand the effect. For example, a 450 mm lens on a 1.5x crop APS-C sensored camera would give you a focal length field of view equivalent of 675 mm on a full frame camera. Since you're using a 450 mm lens, you can in fact look at it as more reach regarding perception of image, not the physical properties of the lens since that won't ever change. 450 mm is 450 mm. What do you think happens when you add a teleconverter? You times the focal length by whatever the teleconverter is, so, 450 mm x 1.4 = 630 mm. That becomes the new focal length. An APS-C sensor is basically doing the same thing when compared to a Full Frame sensor. It's only achieving that effect through the crop factor.

[@xmeda]

All depends on available resolution. For example 500mm lens on Fuji X-H2 has similar resolution per area like non-existing 100Mpix FF sensor. So if you are shooting birds, planes or other telephoto stuff that only uses part of image circle, you are better served with APS-C since only FF with high resolution is Sony A7R4/R5 which has 60Mpix and when you cut APS-C crop out of it, it is +/- equal to 24Mpix APS-C... So at the moment 40Mpix APS-C Fuji and 25Mpix M4/3 Panasonic are kings of telephoto. Even Olympus with 20Mpix M4/3 has resolution per area that will only be reached by 80Mpix FF sensor which.. does not exist (yet). Another issue is with lenses alone. FF lens capable of high resolution in whole image circle does not exist. While APS-C can use the best central part of FF lens for such hi-res crop. In general FF has some advantage with wide angle fast lenses, but that does not apply for Pentax, because K mount FF lens portfolio is tragedy. But if you switch to Sony or Nikon, options are better. Although at particular cost + weight.

[@suhailzubaid9192]

@@KobieMC Very well explained.