Anyone shoot weddings with a Pentax?

[paulsoucy]

I shot for fun my friends wedding a two weeks ago, having finally sat down and looked at the pictures something became very apparent to me:

I should never shoot weddings because shot after shot was out of focus, and either I suck at photography or my camera ( the k10d ) sucks. I was using the FA 50 wide open at ISO 400 and I can't really say that even without the pressure of being the paid photographer I have but 10 good shots out of 600 or so...

So does anyone know anyone who actually braves weddings with their Pentax equipment? Is it even possible given the really rapid nature of a wedding shoot and the camera's poor af ability.

This is when I look over at my Canon & Nikon friends and envy what their camera's can do in low light...

Now, I am not at all knocking the K10d, I absolutely love iit, but if you are getting paid to shoot a wedding ( something I open to down the road perhaps pursuing ) you need to really have equipment that works, and either my approach was way off or the k10d just absolutely sucks in a low light enviroment regardless of how fast the lens is..

Anyone have any thoughts?

[Zewrak]

Focus manually? It's not like you are shooting gazelles trying to outrun a lion?

[Ash]

Hold on - you're shooting with the FA 50 wide open? And at ISO 400? Just how fast do you want the shutter speed to be?

Shooting indoors? If you're running out of light and thinking shooting wide open will help, then probably you're way past the point where you should be using an external light source...

It's really nothing to do with whether using Canon or Nikon cams. It's more understanding the exposure triad and interplay between aperture and focusing distance in getting the depth of field you need.

There would be lots of Pentaxians doing weddings, with all of the dSLR bodies Pentax has made. Keep trying to get good results by learning what settings work where.

[ftpaddict]

I've never once gotten focus wrong with my K100D. Not once. And my fastest lens is an f/1.7. Maybe something's wrong with your technique?

[ll_coffee_lP]

I've shot several weddings with my K10D's and haven't had a problem at all. Weddings are not easy to shoot (I get plenty of non-keeper shots too), but that's the nature of the beast...and why wedding shoots cost so much from professionals.

I don't think its your camera system that's the problem. Shoot another 30 of your friend's weddings then come back and tell us how you are making out...

c[_]

[Mike Cash]

Originally Posted by paulsoucy

I should never shoot weddings because shot after shot was out of focus, and either I suck at photography or my camera ( the k10d ) sucks. I was using the FA 50 wide open at ISO 400 and I can't really say that even without the pressure of being the paid photographer I have but 10 good shots out of 600 or so...

You do understand that at f1.4 your DOF is exceedingly thin, don't you? If not, there's the bulk of your problem right there.

So does anyone know anyone who actually braves weddings with their Pentax equipment? Is it even possible given the really rapid nature of a wedding shoot and the camera's poor af ability.

We have a nice long thread on this very question which appears just a very short space down the page from your question.

[rparmar]

Originally Posted by paulsoucy

I should never shoot weddings because shot after shot was out of focus, and either I suck at photography or my camera ( the k10d ) sucks. I was using the FA 50 wide open at ISO 400

I would have to say you suck at photography!

But, hey we all did once, then we learned and got better. The good news is that with constant practice and reading here you too can improve. There are also some great dedicated wedding site / articles out there.

The first thing to know is that the FA 50 wide open has a depth of field of about zero. Getting focus takes practice and even then only a sliver of the image will be in focus. If this is not what you want, you'll need to stop down. Go to f/4 for starters. Or even f/11. Depends on how much you want to be in focus. Practice.

Second, if you don't want to focus directly in the center of the image, set your camera so you can use the cursors to change your AF point. Take the time before pressing the shutter to set it to the best spot.

Third, you will need more than natural light for the bulk of your interior shots. Invest in a good P-TTL flash. Add a diffuser, point at a bouncing surface (wall, ceiling). Or get a flash bracket to put it off-axis.

You will be able to do a lot with your FA50, but will likely want a fast zoom or two eventually. The DA* pair work fantastically, from results I've seen.

Originally Posted by Zewrak

It's not like you are shooting gazelles trying to outrun a lion?

In fact that would well describe some weddings.

[rparmar]

My page was stale so I see some of my response was redundant.

Oh, and I wasn't trying to be harsh. I am sure I would suck at wedding photography too.

[jake14mw]

paulsoucy,

The main problem here was undoubtedly trying to shoot at 1.4. The DOF at that aperature is so thin, you are going to get many out of focus shots.

[Mike Cash]

SMC Takumar 50/1.4 (reportedly optically identical)

at f1.4:



at f4



I did the f1.4 shot on purpose just to play with the narrow DOF. Notice that on the f4 shot the bulk of the image is somewhat out of focus, but the key portion (face) is sufficiently contained within the DOF area that your mind really doesn't register it, plus the fact that the degree/severity of out-of-focus is much less, even when stopped down just a few stops.

[Wheatfield]

Originally Posted by paulsoucy

I shot for fun my friends wedding a two weeks ago, having finally sat down and looked at the pictures something became very apparent to me:

I should never shoot weddings because shot after shot was out of focus, and either I suck at photography or my camera ( the k10d ) sucks. I was using the FA 50 wide open at ISO 400 and I can't really say that even without the pressure of being the paid photographer I have but 10 good shots out of 600 or so...

So does anyone know anyone who actually braves weddings with their Pentax equipment? Is it even possible given the really rapid nature of a wedding shoot and the camera's poor af ability.

This is when I look over at my Canon & Nikon friends and envy what their camera's can do in low light...

Now, I am not at all knocking the K10d, I absolutely love iit, but if you are getting paid to shoot a wedding ( something I open to down the road perhaps pursuing ) you need to really have equipment that works, and either my approach was way off or the k10d just absolutely sucks in a low light enviroment regardless of how fast the lens is..

Anyone have any thoughts?

I've shot weddings for some 25 years with Pentax equipment. I didn't have an AF camera until my first DSLR (istD) and then I didn't have any AF lenses for it. The only problems I ever had shooting weddings with Pentax was with the LX and it's weird flash control habits, and with the istD's small buffer and slow write speeds.
The LX cure was to just use K1000s, the istD cure was to not use it for weddings.
This was shot recently with the K20 and Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4, handheld and available light. It made a very nice print.
I wasn't the official photographer on this one, there was a person running a recent Nikon who was being paid. Apparently the bride was a little disappointed with her results

[skid2964]

I'm relatively new to the photography scene, the first thing I learned was DOF.

I got a neat little 50mm 1.4 lens, "oh cool, I can open this sucker wide open and shoot in any light!" .... nope, there is always a comprimise that must be made.

I purposely started with film cameras to make each shot counted and forced myself to learn. I wanted to learn as much as I could before using more expensive film or buying a digital (or shooting a wedding! )

Hope the bride doesn't see the pics during her next cycle, she will hunt you down and kill you.

[innershell]

You sound like me on my first day with a 50mm f1.4. I cranked her wide open too just because I could and my poor understanding of photography told me I needed 1.4 in low light conditions.

This weekend, I used the same lens (and camera) as yours on a wedding outing where there was low light at the reception. I did not use AF because it is too slow and hunts a bit. MF was perfectly fine with the right DOF.

My settings were as follows for most of the night:
F2.8 or greater
ISO100-800 (auto)
EV +1

At one point, I even squeezed in a F1.4 shot of a group standing over 30 feet away and every single person was razor sharp.

Practice with this lens some more and don't take it off your camera until you understand every setting that controls image quality (or leave it at Auto). :P

[dylansalt]

You can shoot anything you want in most lighting conditions with the K10D.

And to be actually jealous of the N & C users??????????

I recently covered an indoor bouldering contest - very grunge, low light (phosphour, incadacent mix) only using on board flash 1600 iso, F3.5, 40/50 sec, kit lens (absolutely impossible without OIS) and captured 200 images- the pace is extremely fast and I was covering all age categories who were climbing simultaniously - I was running, lying on ground (getting the weird angles) and had to get the shot in less than 2 secs- result - 180 keepers

The fact is there was two guys there with a Nikon D80 and Canon 40D and a myriad of lenses who just didn't shoot - they were petrified of buggering up there camaras as the conditions was filled with Magnesium chalk dust and super hyped up teenagers

A wedding is not some super hypo event where things move at break neck speed - that type of photography was my semi-profession and all we had was manual lenses and I never struggled to get an in focus pic.

Never ever blame the equipment
D

[innershell]

Originally Posted by dylansalt

Never ever blame the equipment
D

At least not right away...