[ElJamoquio]

So of the current camers out right now, k30 or k-7?

K30. But there isn't any other 'current' camera. There's some plusses and some minuses vs. the K-5 but overall you're probably slightly better off with the K-30's AF. Either one is clearly a better choice than the K-7.

[noahpurdy]

I started shooting weddings commercially with the K-7 and K-5 and I found that they soon became the limiting factor in getting the shots that I wanted when I wanted them.

The best way I can put it is that Pentax cameras are photography enthusiast cameras. They're great machines that are clearly designed by people who take photos but they are not tools that you can depends on every day all day. I have since switched to Nikon for full-frame, autofocus, build quality, and general robustness.

I miss my Pentax's for the glass and for the way they handled but they are light-years away from performing on a similar level as Nikon professional bodies. This is simply irrefutable. My clients trust me to capture their important moments, and I cannot in good faith trust Pentax kit to be there for me 100%.

If wedding photography is something you plan to pursue full-time then you will inevitably switch; it's just a matter of when.

[tclausen]

I started shooting weddings commercially with the K-7 and K-5 and I found that they soon became the limiting factor in getting the shots that I wanted when I wanted them.

The best way I can put it is that Pentax cameras are photography enthusiast cameras. They're great machines that are clearly designed by people who take photos but they are not tools that you can depends on every day all day. I have since switched to Nikon for full-frame, autofocus, build quality, and general robustness.

I miss my Pentax's for the glass and for the way they handled but they are light-years away from performing on a similar level as Nikon professional bodies. This is simply irrefutable. My clients trust me to capture their important moments, and I cannot in good faith trust Pentax kit to be there for me 100%.

If wedding photography is something you plan to pursue full-time then you will inevitably switch; it's just a matter of when.

Just out of curiosity, what were the actual "limiting factors" that you encountered with Pentax gear, that you didn't with Nikon, wrt wedding photography?

My - quite limited - experience photographing weddings is that things are moving glacially......bride-dresses do not encourage greyhound-race-speeds (generally, at least), so I'd not imagine AF speed to be much of a limiting factor.

I did shoot a wedding once where water-resistance actually was a real limiting factor: it was an underwater ceremony. I think that neither Pentax nor Nikon would have been robust enough to survive that

You mention build-quality and robustness....what kind of full-contact weddings do you shoot that they knock and wear out a K5?

In serious, as someone who's perfectly convinced that given my current skills *I* am the limiting factor, not my gear, and that it will stay that way for a good long time forward, I am pretty interested in what limits those more advanced than (seeing the photos posted here, that'd be pretty much everybody on the forum ...) I actually do encounter?

Best,

[noahpurdy]

Just out of curiosity, what were the actual "limiting factors" that you encountered with Pentax gear, that you didn't with Nikon, wrt wedding photography?

My - quite limited - experience photographing weddings is that things are moving glacially......bride-dresses do not encourage greyhound-race-speeds (generally, at least), so I'd not imagine AF speed to be much of a limiting factor.

The second you're not in bright daylight with either the K-5 and K-7 they struggle to keep up with a flower-girl walking down the isle in terms of both speed but especially accuracy. Especially when there are subtle moments only a few split seconds apart; I can't in good faith provide the best service possible to my clients without the best kit in this regard.

I did shoot a wedding once where water-resistance actually was a real limiting factor: it was an underwater ceremony. I think that neither Pentax nor Nikon would have been robust enough to survive that

You mention build-quality and robustness....what kind of full-contact weddings do you shoot that they knock and wear out a K5?

You haven't shot enough weddings then. I shoot with two cameras dangling from a cross strap. I'm always moving and it's easy for things to get bumped and knocked around. Gear gets quickly set-down, picked up, shuffled from place to place; you're focused on the moment and you don't have time to worry about keeping your kit safe. I never had any issues with my Pentax doing this; but I was always worried about how it would fare. With a Nikon D3s I don't have to worry about it because the camera feels practically indestructible (and it is).

In serious, as someone who's perfectly convinced that given my current skills *I* am the limiting factor, not my gear, and that it will stay that way for a good long time forward, I am pretty interested in what limits those more advanced than (seeing the photos posted here, that'd be pretty much everybody on the forum ...) I actually do encounter?

As a photographer you're always the limiting factor. It's good to think in those terms as it causes you to continually push yourself. That said it's silly to think that your kit can never limit you. I've heard analogies that saying your camera can limit you is like saying a runner's shoes limit them; or the type of a brush a painter uses limits them.

These simply don't make sense. They're great at encouraging amateur's to focus on the important stuff (composition, exposure, etc) and in most cases for most amateurs it is a true statement but photography is more of a science and more of an instinctual leveraging of your kit than anything else. You can have a photo in your head but if you don't have the gear to make it possible you can't make that photo. A painter can imagine an image and then simply paint it.

There are other things that caused me to make the switch: full-frame (shallower depth of field, true wide-angles, better low-light performance, etc) but that sums it up. I still love my Pentax cameras; they're my choice for personal shooting but they're not up to professional chops yet.

[tclausen]

<SNIP - a lot of interesting and enlightening arguments>

You haven't shot enough weddings then.

Absolutely. I tend to run away and hide under the bed, when somebody starts talking about weddings....nothing is more frightening than the wrath of a bride, disappointed by *any* aspect of "the most wonderful day of her life" (regardless if it is her 3rd "most wonderful day of her life"..... )

Thank you for sharing your experiences, it was enlightening. I'll not comment on each of your points & arguments, that'd be futile as we've got very different "photographic paths", but I really really appreciate your sharing.

[noahpurdy]

Absolutely. I tend to run away and hide under the bed, when somebody starts talking about weddings....nothing is more frightening than the wrath of a bride, disappointed by *any* aspect of "the most wonderful day of her life" (regardless if it is her 3rd "most wonderful day of her life"..... )

Thank you for sharing your experiences, it was enlightening. I'll not comment on each of your points & arguments, that'd be futile as we've got very different "photographic paths", but I really really appreciate your sharing.

I just thought of a proper analogy for what photography is like:

If you give a professional car-driver a car with a V6 and a road-course he'll drive circles around an amateur in the same car with a V8; but give that professional car-driver the car with the V8 and he'll tear it up (but Gregory Heisler in an F1 car will still always make your driving look like crap :-P).

[tclausen]

I just thought of a proper analogy for what photography is like:

If you give a professional car-driver a car with a V6 and a road-course he'll drive circles around an amateur in the same car with a V8; but give that professional car-driver the car with the V8 and he'll tear it up (but Gregory Heisler in an F1 car will still always make your driving look like crap :-P).

And, give me an F1 car, and I'll have a load of fun - but you really wouldn't want other drivers on the track, to avoid accidents, nor spectators, so as to avoid laughter-cramps and people dying from boredom

I think that we've squeezed all we can from that analogy now, eh?

[steezylistic]

Yeah.. I don't really understand what the limiting factors are..

[tclausen]

Yeah.. I don't really understand what the limiting factors are..

In my case (both with photography and F1 cars) the limiting factor is clearly me

[zbrueningsen]

I just shot my first wedding with a K5 and a K-X (gasp, I know). On the K5 my wife used the FA 50 1.4 and the Tamron 17-50 2.8 and they did a wonderful job (superb really). On the K-X I used an M 100 2.8 and that thing is an absolute killer with portraits. My favorite pictures were certainly with the K-X and the 100 2.8 wide open. They were outdoor shots. Indoor shots the K5 is light years ahead because of Iso to noise ration compared to the K-X (and the K-X is better than the K7 and K20d in that department. It was my first shoot and I am nothing but impressed with the 3 lenses I mentioned. If we could do something differently it would be have my backfocus fixed on the K-X (good thing I shot manual most the time!) and get something in between 50-100. I have a Sigma 50-200 but that has no place in professional photography especially with low lighting. I will post some pics on here to get some ideas going for others.

[Zafar Iqbal]

I only managed to do a wedding workshop using the K-5. Shot a handful using K-x and a couple with K-30.

There are areas where I could wish for improvements (even with K-30) but in overall the cam performs well. My biggest shortcoming (besides more experience and routine) is a fast prime with AF. I only have fast primes with manual focusing.

With that said: I still come home being surprised by the number of shots I actually nailed (bot manually and auto focused). I was rather certain I did not get the putting-the-rings-on shots, but in fact got good enough pics of both persons. Hurray \o/

[skyoftexas]

I have shot many weddings using the K5 and K20D, and only Pentax prime lenses.

[dinamojuan]

I have shot many weddings using the K5 and K20D, and only Pentax prime lenses.

Loved your work... The colors and textures are very Pentax, so personal, and natural, not over produced, I´m gonna shoot my first Wedding in one month, I have a Brand new K20D with grip, The 18-55 WR lens, The heavy Rare Fa*28-70 F2,8. and im waiting to get the flash, how many camera batteries do you recommend for 6 hour of shoots.?

Im doing in this moment the opposite of a lot of people talks, after 8 years working with Canon Im changing to Pentax, I get so bored about Canon, something was missing.

[MPrince]

Yeah.. I don't really understand what the limiting factors are..

That's easy. The limiting factors are, in order, the skill of the photographer, the skill of the photographer, and the skill of the photographer. (but really)

[dinamojuan]

Hi everyone ! Im starting as a wedding photographer... and im about to by some flashes, I have a K20D griped + FA*28-70 , what do yo think about the Neewer 850 with the Lumiquest promax system, to use always reflected light.
My positive reasons about the flash are: Fast recycling time, Lithium battery, good price to buy two or three. I think manual flash allows me to get more consistent results
The negative: Im not sure if the HSS of this flash works on Pentax, I´ve seen that Cells II trigger is needed, but haven´t found if works well on Pentax, Thats my biggest doubt,
Do you think that working with 1/180 speed on camera is good enough for flash lighting on all around wedding?