Can't wait much longer for the FF

Sliver-Surfer · 03-18-2015, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by rawr

No doubt! Although I have seen people shoot 'themed' weddings before, few wedding ceremonies will ever match the dark, loud and grungy atmosphere of a death metal gig.

So for your work you can probably produce a style of image that is different from what people would like to see from a regular wedding. Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800.

Where do you get this info? How do you shoot with a 70-200mm when the church does not allow flash photography. Noise is always better than lens shake. 1600 iso rarely makes a negative impression on a print smaller than 8x12

noser · 03-18-2015, 04:23 PM

Originally posted by rawr

Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800.

I think that was more true a few years ago, ie the original 5D - I had friends that wouldn't shoot higher than ISO400, and wouldn't accept second shooter files shot higher than that either (!). Keep in mind that some wedding photographers are not gear hounds, pixel peepers, or overly artistic - but focus instead on business. This means less frequent hardware upgrades, and a general aversion to applying either NR or sharpening to their images. I don't want to say 'technophobe', but a good whack still think they have to edit every image in PS to call it 'done' when really they should be shooting more consistent M settings and just batch processing in LR... but they don't own LR.

Personally I do shoot the Sigma 70-200 on a K-5 in the aforementioned 'churches almost as dark as death metal shows' and it's often 800-3200 ISO as a normal thing. Even if I can get good SR, there will be subject motion, so higher shutter speeds are also called for, I guess I settle around 1/250th but may go up or down a notch. Depending on the distances and angles I do (rarely) have to go to 6400 if I'm at 200mm and need more DoF than f/2.8 gives.

It's also a game... we might call them a 'semi usable shot', but the couples are always amazed that any shot exists at all, especially if they've seen the Uncle Bob shots that suck.

rawr · 03-18-2015, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by Sliver-Surfer

Where do you get this info?

Just from various anecdotes I've heard. Generally noise in wedding photos seems less acceptable than noise in other shooting genres.

Of course the technology has moved on. Even the K-x does great at ISO 1600, so any wedding shooter using a K-5 or modern FF would have little practical problem with anything in that range, or even a stop or two above, providing everything else worked in the image.

**iCrop** · 03-18-2015, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by ClinchShots

someone convince me to stay because this $4,000 is burning a hole in my soul

I need a full frame for my wedding / portrait bookings as the little improvement over the K3 does make a difference to me

I have 2 weddings this month and two next month and I might leave this system

wtf do I do?

If you must, rent something now and wait for the Pentax FF. Or, you can do what I did, buy a D800 and sell it for 50% less when you need to move on... Good luck.

kenspo · 03-19-2015, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by rawr

No doubt! Although I have seen people shoot 'themed' weddings before, few wedding ceremonies will ever match the dark, loud and grungy atmosphere of a death metal gig.

So for your work you can probably produce a style of image that is different from what people would like to see from a regular wedding. Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800.

I am already taking some weddings. Not my favourite to do, but sometimes money speak..haha! When people ask me about weddings, it is just because my style and they want a rock'n roll touch on the pictures.

I have printed pictures from the K-3 in A3 size with 3200ISO. Most times that is perfectly fine. I love the Pentax, but i have to admit, that on ISO handling and AF, my old D700 is still way better then the K-3. K-3 is the best aps-c camera by far, and i got the feeling the FF was coming sooner then it is. That was one of the reasons i agreed on a contract with Ricoh. But hey, i like the whole package i get so much, that i wouldn't dream of switching back to Nikon at the moment. The FF is coming now, so the future is bright.

But i dont see any problems with doing weddings with the K-3. Know your camera, and you can deliver most things

shaolen · 03-19-2015, 08:28 AM

Buy a Nikon FX camera and sell once Pentax FF comes. It's not too hard really and lens prices seem to stay pretty much the same on used market

Rico · 03-23-2015, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by ClinchShots

someone convince me to stay because this $4,000 is burning a hole in my soul

I need a full frame for my wedding / portrait bookings as the little improvement over the K3 does make a difference to me

I have 2 weddings this month and two next month and I might leave this system

wtf do I do?

Did you think of getting the Pentax 645D or 645Z?

This is a professional option.

ClinchShots · 03-26-2015, 03:19 PM

a little update..... I'm selling my K5IIS keeping my K3 and already purchased a Sony A7R at a bargain for $1000 from the photographer who was lending it to me

So once the Pentax FF comes out I'll sell the A7r at little to no loss and be a happy camper

Pentax Hero to stay

---------- Post added 03-26-15 at 05:21 PM ----------

also the grittyness of ISO3200 may be acceptable to the rock crowd but it's not acceptable in my wedding images

It may be to my brides but it isn't to me.

Sliver-Surfer · 03-26-2015, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by ClinchShots

a little update..... I'm selling my K5IIS keeping my K3 and already purchased a Sony A7R at a bargain for $1000 from the photographer who was lending it to me

So once the Pentax FF comes out I'll sell the A7r at little to no loss and be a happy camper

Pentax Hero to stay

---------- Post added 03-26-15 at 05:21 PM ----------

also the grittyness of ISO3200 may be acceptable to the rock crowd but it's not acceptable in my wedding images

It may be to my brides but it isn't to me.

Smart choice..1grand wow what a steal you will get that back no problem if you can part with it. Get familiar with the WiFi remote on a tablet it's a useful tool when you want to compose an aerial pole shot of large wedding group

retroflex · 03-27-2015, 05:05 AM

Originally posted by JimmyDranox

If you want to see the bottleneck check this out. Sony A7 at left and Pentax K-3 at right, both at ISO 6400. From Imaging Resources.

Is it only me that cannot see the bottleneck here? The image has been cropped too much at the top...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How much would you pay for the FF body only?	VoiceOfReason	Pentax Full Frame	109	08-16-2015 11:59 PM
Would you buy the first FF if it is a K-01 or wait for the FF DSLR?	slackercruster	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	07-18-2012 10:09 PM
Can't Wait For Summer	Venturi	Post Your Photos!	7	04-26-2009 02:38 PM
Can't wait till Canon Announces New FF Cam	Okami	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	09-15-2008 05:45 AM
Can't wait for Spring!	kpfeifle	Post Your Photos!	4	03-01-2008 10:01 AM

03-18-2015, 03:12 PM	#76
Sliver-Surfer Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,558	Originally posted by rawr No doubt! Although I have seen people shoot 'themed' weddings before, few wedding ceremonies will ever match the dark, loud and grungy atmosphere of a death metal gig. So for your work you can probably produce a style of image that is different from what people would like to see from a regular wedding. Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800. Where do you get this info? How do you shoot with a 70-200mm when the church does not allow flash photography. Noise is always better than lens shake. 1600 iso rarely makes a negative impression on a print smaller than 8x12

03-18-2015, 04:23 PM	#77
noser Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Calgary, AB CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 292	Originally posted by rawr Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800. I think that was more true a few years ago, ie the original 5D - I had friends that wouldn't shoot higher than ISO400, and wouldn't accept second shooter files shot higher than that either (!). Keep in mind that some wedding photographers are not gear hounds, pixel peepers, or overly artistic - but focus instead on business. This means less frequent hardware upgrades, and a general aversion to applying either NR or sharpening to their images. I don't want to say 'technophobe', but a good whack still think they have to edit every image in PS to call it 'done' when really they should be shooting more consistent M settings and just batch processing in LR... but they don't own LR. Personally I do shoot the Sigma 70-200 on a K-5 in the aforementioned 'churches almost as dark as death metal shows' and it's often 800-3200 ISO as a normal thing. Even if I can get good SR, there will be subject motion, so higher shutter speeds are also called for, I guess I settle around 1/250th but may go up or down a notch. Depending on the distances and angles I do (rarely) have to go to 6400 if I'm at 200mm and need more DoF than f/2.8 gives. It's also a game... we might call them a 'semi usable shot', but the couples are always amazed that any shot exists at all, especially if they've seen the Uncle Bob shots that suck.

03-18-2015, 05:55 PM	#78
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Sliver-Surfer Where do you get this info? Just from various anecdotes I've heard. Generally noise in wedding photos seems less acceptable than noise in other shooting genres. Of course the technology has moved on. Even the K-x does great at ISO 1600, so any wedding shooter using a K-5 or modern FF would have little practical problem with anything in that range, or even a stop or two above, providing everything else worked in the image.

03-18-2015, 09:05 PM	#79
iCrop Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tucson Photos: Gallery Posts: 292	Originally posted by ClinchShots someone convince me to stay because this $4,000 is burning a hole in my soul I need a full frame for my wedding / portrait bookings as the little improvement over the K3 does make a difference to me I have 2 weddings this month and two next month and I might leave this system wtf do I do? If you must, rent something now and wait for the Pentax FF. Or, you can do what I did, buy a D800 and sell it for 50% less when you need to move on... Good luck.

03-19-2015, 12:34 AM	#80
kenspo Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Oslo Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by rawr No doubt! Although I have seen people shoot 'themed' weddings before, few wedding ceremonies will ever match the dark, loud and grungy atmosphere of a death metal gig. So for your work you can probably produce a style of image that is different from what people would like to see from a regular wedding. Many wedding photographers would rather kill themselves than shoot any higher than even ISO 800. I am already taking some weddings. Not my favourite to do, but sometimes money speak..haha! When people ask me about weddings, it is just because my style and they want a rock'n roll touch on the pictures. I have printed pictures from the K-3 in A3 size with 3200ISO. Most times that is perfectly fine. I love the Pentax, but i have to admit, that on ISO handling and AF, my old D700 is still way better then the K-3. K-3 is the best aps-c camera by far, and i got the feeling the FF was coming sooner then it is. That was one of the reasons i agreed on a contract with Ricoh. But hey, i like the whole package i get so much, that i wouldn't dream of switching back to Nikon at the moment. The FF is coming now, so the future is bright. But i dont see any problems with doing weddings with the K-3. Know your camera, and you can deliver most things

03-19-2015, 08:28 AM	#81
shaolen Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Phoenix AZ Posts: 1,047	Buy a Nikon FX camera and sell once Pentax FF comes. It's not too hard really and lens prices seem to stay pretty much the same on used market

03-23-2015, 09:30 PM	#82
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,204	Originally posted by ClinchShots someone convince me to stay because this $4,000 is burning a hole in my soul I need a full frame for my wedding / portrait bookings as the little improvement over the K3 does make a difference to me I have 2 weddings this month and two next month and I might leave this system wtf do I do? Did you think of getting the Pentax 645D or 645Z? This is a professional option.

03-26-2015, 03:19 PM	#83
ClinchShots Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 437 Original Poster	a little update..... I'm selling my K5IIS keeping my K3 and already purchased a Sony A7R at a bargain for $1000 from the photographer who was lending it to me So once the Pentax FF comes out I'll sell the A7r at little to no loss and be a happy camper Pentax Hero to stay ---------- Post added 03-26-15 at 05:21 PM ---------- also the grittyness of ISO3200 may be acceptable to the rock crowd but it's not acceptable in my wedding images It may be to my brides but it isn't to me.

03-26-2015, 05:27 PM	#84
Sliver-Surfer Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 1,558	Originally posted by ClinchShots a little update..... I'm selling my K5IIS keeping my K3 and already purchased a Sony A7R at a bargain for $1000 from the photographer who was lending it to me So once the Pentax FF comes out I'll sell the A7r at little to no loss and be a happy camper Pentax Hero to stay ---------- Post added 03-26-15 at 05:21 PM ---------- also the grittyness of ISO3200 may be acceptable to the rock crowd but it's not acceptable in my wedding images It may be to my brides but it isn't to me. Smart choice..1grand wow what a steal you will get that back no problem if you can part with it. Get familiar with the WiFi remote on a tablet it's a useful tool when you want to compose an aerial pole shot of large wedding group

03-27-2015, 05:05 AM	#85
retroflex Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Mölnlycke Photos: Albums Posts: 98	Originally posted by JimmyDranox If you want to see the bottleneck check this out. Sony A7 at left and Pentax K-3 at right, both at ISO 6400. From Imaging Resources. Is it only me that cannot see the bottleneck here? The image has been cropped too much at the top...