Originally posted by ChristianRock I'm saying because the main reason people go to Sony for weddings is because they feel Pentax AF isn't good enough.
Nikon's AF-C might be the best out there.
Sure, understood. If they were photographing fast-moving subjects, I can absolutely see the attraction. But wedding photography - at least most of the time - is going to rely on AF.S rather than AF.C, and Pentax AF.S is very accurate if lenses are set up correctly.
Originally posted by Culture AF is a sore topic for us Pentaxians. We are always on the deference about it.
We praise our ergonomics, we praise our weather sealing. Since pentax is not perfect I am sure some companies might have some things better than us. Say AF?
Pentax is definitely trailing in AF.C performance - no question. It's never been a sore topic for me, and I don't feel the need to defend it... it is what it is (though, of course, I'd like it to be improved). As mentioned above, though, Pentax AF.S is
very accurate if AF fine adjustment has been carried out properly, and the photographer has good understanding of how autofocus works.
Originally posted by Culture Like UncleVanya said skill is hard, Tech is easy. True to that.
I learnt photography in the digital era. So I dont have the skill of someone who started in the film era, I understand that. I just dont have the time to master that skill
If technology can cut that down I am all for it.
Like you, I learned photography in the digital era. Over the years, I've experienced many problems that I thought were failings in my equipment, and a select few of them really were - well, perhaps not failings, but weaknesses. Most, however, were my own lack of skill or understanding, and were resolved through learning (much of which, due to the good folks of these forums). I got a lot of satisfaction from that process, and continue to do so.
I completely understand there will be folks that don't have the time or desire to learn and improve their skills, and as I already mentioned, there's nothing wrong with switching to different equipment to solve a problem. But whilst tech might be easy, it costs time and money. It could take many weeks or months to sell existing gear, establish a new kit - camera, lenses, flashes, triggers, accessories etc. - and become entirely familiar with it. On the other hand, improving skills and learning new ones is mostly free (financially, at least), and can start today. Who knows how much can be learned in the same time it takes to fully switch platforms? Again, I'm not saying one approach is better than another... only that there is a real alternative to buying new gear