The K-1 is 4.4 fps.

Brian, referring to this site now, the 1000 pixels is for images put into the forum and is typical for a message forum. It keeps loading speeds up and is enough for images to support text.

As for our own Gallery, post bigger images if you want to as a High Res version will then be available. However, make them too big and loading times will become longer and people may not wait if they are on slower connections. I would limit images to 2000 pixels for this reason, but by all means try it and see what the system will accept. Don't try it in the forum though as all that will happen is that the forum software will resize it for you and maybe not as well as we can do it upfront.

Stan, are you talking about the Pentax Photo Gallery website? If so, that has nothing to do with Pentax User.

We have our own Gallery here and people are posting as usual, some very fine shots as well.

Just needs clarification to avoid confusion and misunderstanding.

There is a precedent going back to the Spotmatic. The f/2 version of the Super Takumar 55mm lens was the same as the f/1.8 version, but with a baffle to restrict the aperture.

Weddings will not be a problem for the K-1, but neither would they be a problem with a K-5. I've shot many weddings using the K20D, K-5, K-S2....and all kept up perfectly well.

This claim of inferior AF speed is not really borne out in practice. Tracking AF seems to be what people complain about, but I never use that on any camera. I've had many cameras through my hands over the past couple of years in particular and the Pentax ones are as fast as anything else. It also depends on the lens used. I've been using a very expensive camera today that is positively lethargic using AF, and the K-1 would absolutely knock spots off it.

I shot a lot of images with the K-1 and 150-450mm at Exmoor Zoo and I was very pleased with the speed and accuracy of the focusing. Significantly better than my K-5.

There was no juddering to lock on, no hunting through the whole range as can happen with the earlier bodies and particularly the 55-300mm lens.

Incidentally, don't overlook the SMC Pentax-FA J 75-300mm lens, still available from SRS at a miniscule £119. This is full frame, dates from the release of the *ist film SLR, but is very good for the price. It's light and effective, not quite as sharp as the 55-300mm but stopped down it takes close inspection to be sure. Not the quietest lens, it wallops into sharp focus on the K-1, but it's light, so gets away with somewhat vigorous operation. I can now add it to my list of lenses I've had, sold, regretted selling and then bought again.....

Your Fowers have recovered from their cold and are now Flowers......

The f/64 group were using cameras that had very little DOF, so the smallest apertures would be needed.

Going back to 35mm-format with the K-1, I do need to stop down a bit more to get the desired DOF for flower portraits and similar subjects. For masses of DOF the MX-1 is a good choice, or the Q-S1 of course.

I'll have a look at your thread title now.

It's not so much that as them being very different propositions. For example, the K-1 is superb, but full frame lenses will cost serious money and are big and heavy. By comparison, the K-3 is smaller, lighter and we probably have the lenses to go with it. So there are all sorts of factors apart from quality that come into it.

Sue bought a K-3 because she wanted the pop up flash and it was the right weight for her. The K-1 was too heavy. I bought the K-1 because I really liked the lenses and the camera. Having reviewed the lenses for EPZ I didn't want to send them back, but back they went and I bought the camera and the 28-105mm for starters. Next up will be the 15-30mm, but it's more serious money and will have to wait for now.

Of course, if the truth be known, we both fell in love with those cameras at the NEC and simply wanted them. There's nothing wrong in wanting things.....

It's a big step in various ways, so absolutely yes.

From a K-3 to a K-1 would be a different issue.