[Culture]

But let's be clear, it was you who decided it was time to take on the Pentax "fanboys", and start the whole bully thing. I'm just defending my comrades here. If you can't handle the forum without name calling etc. go somewhere else. This isn't the forum you're looking for.

It's a Pentax discussion, it's a Pentax forum. It may be a Sony vs. Pentax discussion, but that doesn't mean Sony users have the right to tell Pentax user what they can and cannot do, or start calling them fanboys, because they have a different point of view than you do. It's not that Sony stuff isn't impressive at what it does. It's that Pentax is just as impressive at what ti does. There's no reason to start calling people fanboys just because the see thing differently.

You are here defending your comrades. OK I will not touch that.

This is pentaxforums. But this subsection was created for people who want to talk about other cameras.
I have never been here until recently. A subsection dedicated to discuss other cameras mean people will talk what you might not like. But is that so bad?

No one camera is perfect. You have attested that yourself after your wedding shoot. Why cant others say the same.

If you dont want to talk about it why are you here. And if you really want to defend your comrades then request a petition to delete this subsection.

I have to say I am really surprised by you.

[BigMackCam]

You are here defending your comrades. OK I will not touch that.

This is pentaxforums. But this subsection was created for people who want to talk about other cameras.
I have never been here until recently. A subsection dedicated to discuss other cameras mean people will talk what you might not like. But is that so bad?

No one camera is perfect. You have attested that yourself after your wedding shoot. Why cant others say the same.

If you dont want to talk about it why are you here. And if you really want to defend your comrades then request a petition to delete this subsection.

I have to say I am really surprised by you.

No-one is going to petition anyone to delete this section or thread

We are, however, in the Pentax K-3 forum, not the "Non-Pentax" one, so if members rush to the defence of Pentax cameras, I'm not going to stand in their way

I think you'll find the majority of folks here at PentaxForums are open-minded and sensible about all the brands, but given that this is Pentax enthusiast website, there's naturally going to be an overall preference for Pentax equipment - and many members are likely to have some bias towards Pentax because that's what most of them use and discuss every day on these forums

[Rondec]

You are here defending your comrades. OK I will not touch that.

This is pentaxforums. But this subsection was created for people who want to talk about other cameras.
I have never been here until recently. A subsection dedicated to discuss other cameras mean people will talk what you might not like. But is that so bad?

No one camera is perfect. You have attested that yourself after your wedding shoot. Why cant others say the same.

If you dont want to talk about it why are you here. And if you really want to defend your comrades then request a petition to delete this subsection.

I have to say I am really surprised by you.

Let me note that there are a lot of threads on Sony's amazing cameras in the non-Pentax section of the forum and I tend not to weigh in on those as it is an appropriate place to discuss cameras of all ilks. But, the initial question was K3 versus A6500, but over time this has morphed into a general "Pentax isn't as good as Sony" thread, which is problematic for the section of the Forum it is in.

Actually, in general, the goal should not be to attack gear, regardless of brand, but more to look at these as tools to achieve an end. If you can't do it with a Pentax or it is hard to do so then it is appropriate to move on as the OP did, but plenty of others are still getting half decent shots with their Pentax gear and there is no reason to run down their decision to continue with Pentax either.

[Culture]

I will apologize that I did not look at the section where this thread was created. I will also apologize about the subsection being removed.

In that same vain I apologize to Normhead for the comment.

But the sentiment still stands live and let live.

[Dan Rentea]

As for not composing your wedding photos as described above, just pointing the camera, Nonsense, I look through the viewfinder and I compose every shot. Anyone doing less is a fraud.

Normhead, it's not uncommon, at least from what I saw among some wedding photographers with strong background in street photography. They use the method described above, but just on few occasions. Shooting street photography they learned some methods to shoot people without distract them from what they are doing. You know that once you put the camera to the eye people are changing their expression. So they apply this method at weddings (but only in certain let's say unimportant moments). They hold the camera at the waist level in order to not draw attention on them, they use a wide lens and an aperture that allows them to have enough dof (I imagine that eye af would be usefull in this kind of situations if you want to use wide apertures and lenses with focal lenghts between 50mm and 200mm) and they take candid shots of people acting natural. You may end up with unique images or you may end up with nothing. But I've seen some interesting results once or twice. The dificult part is to gain enough skills in order to make the guest at the wedding think that you are busy adjusting the settings of your camera or something so that they can ignore you.

[redcat]

Yes, I agree with your words. My daughters are now assured professional women - if I photograph any more children, they will be grandchildren, so I speak from some experience. I never viewed photographs of my daughters as attempted works of art. They are not flowers; if anything, the best analogy is street photography. The masters used f/8 because it gave them a DOF which made focusing mistakes difficult, but a side benefit was to show the context clearly. I believe that "subject isolation" is a mistake also with children, because they don't live in a bubble.So, my advice to the OP is "sit on the floor with the kids and play with them. Do have a camera - any camera - close by so you can grab a shot if appropriate, but this is not 'photo-op' time .... this is time with people who will grow faster than you can imagine".

I do play with my child a lot and use my camera less and less, with the Sony it feels like i need less time to take the photos in focus and i have more time to play (i tend to stop shooting when i see somes photos i really like). And i'm not a fan of f/8, i still want to take the best photo i can with wide aperture, blurred background (less distracting, my room is a mess when the baby start playing and leaving the toys all over the place !) and i do want the result to looks artsy enough that i can print big and hang on the wall Some examples are in my signature's link, i think i'll get a Sony A7III, it fits my needs at the moment : fast moving "model", quick focus, eye AF, just compose and let the camera do the rest => less sweat from my side, i'm getting lazier and full-time tired with the new born (+ a 2yo child running around), just want the job done as quick as possible : click, click, chimp, done