APSc or 35mm full frame??

The F series 17-28mm fisheye zoom might be useful as well. I use my 10-17mm quite a bit on the K-5.

I stand corrected I share your thoughs about weight, the K-1 is not heavy compared to other fullgrame cameras or indeed the mighty Pentax 67.

I had forgotten about the 17-28mm fisheye, that is also an interesting option.

There is a Norwegian Pentax ambassadeur that currently is using a pre production K-1 (maybe it is only the software that is not fully developed?). Anyway, he recently posted a comment on the American forum that the DA 12-24/4 + 1.4 converter works flawlessly through the whole zoomrange on the K-1, without significant vignetting. If this is true, this combination could be a useful 17-34mm fullframe zoom for daylight shooting Exciting times ahead.

Yes John, I need to clarify this. Sitting in a bird hide, say, or by a race track with a camera on a tripod and a long lens a DSLR would win every time. I was thinking more for general use, carrying the thing around town for street pictures, for example, where a DSLR is perhaps more intrusive, or for holiday use where a lighter-weight camera might be better. Nothing beats the pleasure of using a "proper" viewfinder but if bulk/weight/obtrusiveness put you off taking a camera with you then that's not a good thing.

Maybe we're reaching the point where cameras are so diverse that they're becoming specialist tools dependent upon the type of photography we enjoy. Each type offers advantages and compromises. Perhaps it's unrealistic to expect one size to fit all. Personal choice is the great thing although sometimes too much choice can be confusing.

A 'proper' viewfinder for manual focus is EVF with digital zone and focus peaking.

Yes, those decades old manual focus lenses were just WAY ahead of their time ...

What that 'simulation' does not show is the vignetting that you'll get with many (most) APS-C lenses. So not only will the actual 'APS-C' viewfinder image be smaller, it will also have an interesting tunnel vision effect, making the black gimmick tilt 'fuel gauges' all but invisible ...

I disagree. I never have problems focusing my MX which, obviously, has none of those features. The "proper" viewfinder is something big and clear, it can be optical, it can be electronic, but it shouldn't feel like staring down the wrong end of a telescope.

K.

I agree, still reckon the best focussing aid is the split screen prism found on ME's and MX's. It works 100% every time!

Whoops, I should have said on a digital camera.

Agree, the original 'FF' 35mm camera with optical viewfinder and those cool split focussing screens was a joy.

Not sure about others, but I can definitely say that I haven't found the same feel, enjoyment and certainty around manual focussing on a DSLR though.
In that instance the EVF is significantly better for my eyes. I can see the precise focussing points I'm after.

Similar in nature to the live view approach, with digital zoom and focus peaking on, but only via a viewfinder and the more stable grip stance that a view finder offers.

It's all about the field of view for me. I have a small home studio (12x10ft) and shooting full length on the K3 pushes me down the route of needing too wide a lens. I shot this last week but ended up with a three quarter crop while shooting.




Some of the full length ones just about worked:




But I think a K1 and 24-70mm 2.8 is going to be like adding another 6ft to my shooting distance and that is far cheaper than talking to the local builder about an extension!!

So it's a guaranteed purchase for me, even though I love my K3.

saxon