[Rondec]

They do make a difference, instead of choosing between 25 points (or 36), i can now simply click the back button focus and the camera focus right on the face or with the touch screen one simple touch and the focus is lock (not sure if the current touch screen is capable to do so but if not yet it will be soon enough), it will make the life of portrait/wedding photogs a lot easier

Are you shooting weddings? My wife does and she is very pleased with the K-1's capabilities. If she had a touch screen she would never use it as she prefers to frame through the viewfinder. It isn't as though wedding photography is photographing an athletic match. The more important thing is having good high iso capability and I think most of these camera are capable in that department.

Each person is different in their skills and how they use their camera. There really are still folks who prefer SLRs, even with all the options that mirrorless offer.

[UncleVanya]

Are you shooting weddings? My wife does and she is very pleased with the K-1's capabilities. If she had a touch screen she would never use it as she prefers to frame through the viewfinder. It isn't as though wedding photography is photographing an athletic match. The more important thing is having good high iso capability and I think most of these camera are capable in that department.

Each person is different in their skills and how they use their camera. There really are still folks who prefer SLRs, even with all the options that mirrorless offer.

On some mirrorless cameras you can use the evf simultaneous with the touch af on the back. However it is not super intuitive and easy to cheek it...

[Rondec]

On some mirrorless cameras you can use the evf simultaneous with the touch af on the back. However it is not super intuitive and easy to cheek it...

Photography is best done where the camera is an unconscious instrument used to attain an end (an image). The best situation is where you know your camera well enough that you can adjust aperture/exposure comp/iso without thinking about it. All of these things where you are using a touch screen and holding a camera away from you to compose feel best for folks who are used to smart phones and that style of photography. It can be done and I'm glad that allowances are made for them, but I can't see many pros in portrait or wedding situations using touch screen auto focus.

[Mikesul]

I do not use the touch function on my Sony cameras but, just to clarify, they now have a setting which allows you to view through the view finder and use your thumb to move the focus point. It works reasonably well. Some people love it. I do not find it an improvement.

[reh321]

dont chase them... be near them, sit on the floor, or small chair.... Predict where they're movin, caption when they're still, or most still, choose aperture f 8 if they're fast, to avoid blur from small depth of field...
..
Also speed - push your iso to 3200 even 4500 and 9000 would work if you have enough light to slightly overexpose with that highest values... Don't be afraid of using it. ( I have custom NR - and my settings are minimal processing of NR in 4500 and 9000 )

In daylight you can get everything tack sharp - with 1/200 aperture f 8, and let's say around iso 800-1600...

If you have lens with slow AF ( like zoom or something ) - you can get best results by manual focusing, with red indicator lightning when you're in focus... With f8 you will probably be in sharp focus every time. ( AC Focus confirmation red dot is available from menu - and it lights in OVF )

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".

[twilhelm]

I say, buy what makes you happy.

I was a late adopter to auto focus and digital, so I've shot many events with an old Canon AE-1. I wasn't very impressed with the early Nikon auto focus, but it had some convenience. Personally, I have many action shots of my kids growing up, using my Canon, the auto focus of the Nikon 8008, and the K10 D. I did a lot of weddings with the K10 D, the K20 D, the K5, and recently the K3 and K-1. If I were going to specialize in weddings today, I'd probably buy into Nikon. Why? Because in my experience, the build quality of Sony is junk. And I hate using a menu when I'm trying to focus on what people are doing and what shot I'm getting ready for.

But in this day and age, we have cars that will drive you down the freeway and parallel park for you...

[UncleVanya]

Photography is best done where the camera is an unconscious instrument used to attain an end (an image). The best situation is where you know your camera well enough that you can adjust aperture/exposure comp/iso without thinking about it. All of these things where you are using a touch screen and holding a camera away from you to compose feel best for folks who are used to smart phones and that style of photography. It can be done and I'm glad that allowances are made for them, but I can't see many pros in portrait or wedding situations using touch screen auto focus.

The example I was talking about doesn't work that way. The camera in this case IS at your eye and you are not taking it away to hold at arms length. I am talking about being able to use the touchscreen WHILE using the viewfinder. It is an acquired skill that I am not good at but I have tried it a few times. I am more of a single point AF and recompose person even when using mirrorless - so this is less relevant to me most of the time.

[Rondec]

The example I was talking about doesn't work that way. The camera in this case IS at your eye and you are not taking it away to hold at arms length. I am talking about being able to use the touchscreen WHILE using the viewfinder. It is an acquired skill that I am not good at but I have tried it a few times. I am more of a single point AF and recompose person even when using mirrorless - so this is less relevant to me most of the time.

I understand. I just think it sounds clumsy.

[Culture]

I have to say that I am surprised how pentaxians fanboyism can be so strong. And we think Canikon fanboys are so strange.
I saw a video of a guy shooting a wedding with an A9 I think, with Eye AF.
He didnt want to stand in the aisle so he sat done on one of the benches, pointed the camera at the couple without looking at the screen and just started shooting.
All shots were in focus.

I cant get all shots in focus even looking through the view finder.
If you have not done your research dont talk about what you dont know. Geez.

[normhead]

I have to say that I am surprised how pentaxians fanboyism can be so strong. And we think Canikon fanboys are so strange.
I saw a video of a guy shooting a wedding with an A9 I think, with Eye AF.
He didnt want to stand in the aisle so he sat done on one of the benches, pointed the camera at the couple without looking at the screen and just started shooting.
All shots were in focus.

I cant get all shots in focus even looking through the view finder.
If you have not done your research dont talk about what you dont know. Geez.

You need to get your Sony fanboyism in check. No one is saying eye focus isn't a wonderful thing for weddings. All anyone is saying is, you can get it done with a pentax. I shot a wedding recently with my K-1. It could have been easier, but long story short, where we are a month or two later, I barely remember the work, everyone loves those 36 MP files, and I got every shot i wanted. Maybe not 15 duplicate images but all the ones I wanted. 800 images 300 good enough to print. maybe I would have 600 good images with a Sony eye AF set up, but I needed 90 files to give them everything they wanted. I had 300 files I could use so I had selection for many shots. Everyone is happy.

I don't need a Sony fanboy telling me I should have had a Sony. A good Sony system would have cost me about $10,000 CAD more than I made, and I shoot a wedding every 25 years these days. The K-1 was the right tool for the job, and it got the job done.

I told them, I won't buy any equipment, I'm not set up for weddings, I'll just make do with what I own. The two page thank you letter after I sent them the files almost made me cry.

Don't talk about what you don't know.

Not everyone wants to pay extra for their wedding photos so the photographer can buy fancy toys.

The fact that something else (that costs a lot more) is better for a task, doesn't mean what you've got isn't good enough.

Funny thing is, being a pentax "fanboy", I know exactly what level of commerce I'd be involved in before I went for an A9. It's not a fanboy issue for me. it's a what do i have to earn to be able to invest. I'd be turning over at least $90,000 a year in weddings before i'd invest in an A9 system with the famous eye AF. We get the Sony fanboys on here talking like everyone should buy one.

My Pentax fanboyness is based on value, not on bogus technical stats read from biased websites or youtube videos. 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.

Experience has taught me, Nikon Canon and Sony users pay for a lot more tech, to often get inferior or the same pictures. They may get the odd shot, maybe .01% of their files, that I don't have the technical ability to get, but, they pay through the nose for those capabilities. Show me your business model and I'll help me evaluate if it's worth it for you.

I might end up recommending the A9, I might end up recommending the K-1, if that makes me a fanboy, so be it.

Your blanket endorsement of Eye AF for weddings certainly would suggest you are a fanboy. Wedding photographers worked for 100 years without it. It's nice to have, not have to have.

[GeneV]

I understand. I just think it sounds clumsy.

The A7III also has a joystick above the usual selector buttons, which is far more useful than the touchscreen. The only banding issues I have had were using the silent (electronic) shutter in certain LED lighting at higher shutter speeds. With the mechanical shutter, there has been no banding at all.

[Culture]

You need to get your Sony fanboyism in check.

I am not a Sony fanboy. Yes I have bought an A7III but I dont even have it in my hand yet.

Yes You got your wedding done.
I applaud you. Others might not have the skills that you have. Recognize that.

Why are you so bent out shape about people doing what they want to do with their own money.

Not everyone wants to pay extra for their wedding photos so the photographer can buy fancy toys.

I agree with you. But that is not your decision. You cannot control what people decide.

This whole post of yours is base on what you will do and what you can do. But we are not all you.

So please stop jumping on every thread that mentions something different than Pentax “whatever”.

Well its a free forum so I guess you can do whatever you want with your own time.

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.

This coming from an experienced guy like you completely changes my opinion of you.

I have read enough of your posts to admire your knowledge.
But I can also read between the lines. You, Sir can be a bully. Sorry but that is how I feel.

So stop trying to push people opinions down with long, smart, winded sentences and just let people be.

Nobody is spending your money.

Culture

[GeneV]

if you have preordered a A7III then a A6500 will be redundant, unless you need a backup body

YMMV, but I see them as serving two different purposes. The A6500 is smaller and great for travel, and getting 24mp on APS-C is a better option for wildlife. (The same reason my K1 has not supplanted my K3) The A7III is terrific in low light and has the other FF advantages, but with 24mp on a FF sensor, it is not ideal for reach.

[normhead]

What I do recognize ifs that folks who don't have the skills I have, shouidn't be passing themselves off as wedding photographers. The skill set needed is hardly confined to AF. Care to have the best possible back grounds, control of DoF , there are quite few things that have to be done that can't be done sitting down in a chair beside the isle. They are all necessary for a good wedding photographer.

his coming from an experienced guy like you completely changes my opinion of you.

I'm sorry, when a person hires a wedding photographer they pay the photographer to use their photographic eye. To frame the pictures, control the backgrounds and catch the expressions. Some guy holding a camera without looking at the screen or viewfinder snapping off images is a fraud. Sorry that upsets you.

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 it does. There's no reason to start calling people fanboys just because they see thing differently and have different priorities than you do.

I gotta admit, Eye Focus is a long way down my list of priorities, And that doesn't make me a fanboy. Deal with it.

Buying a Sony (or a Pentax) doesn't make you a competent wedding photographer. End of discussion (at least in my part,)

[GeneV]

How are the external controls on new Sony bodies? The last one I looked at, roughly three years ago, seems to require that I spend way too much time in their menu system.

The A7III has more external controls, but really all of them work very well if you just get used to it, and take the time to program the buttons. I am so used to the Pentax system, that the Nikon controls seem to go too far the other way at first.

---------- Post added 06-07-18 at 02:14 PM ----------

Not so much. Pretty much all of their current zooms except for the 18-55 have in lens motors now. More of the primes have screw drive, but even there, new lenses are going to have in lens motors. At the same time the FA limiteds are nice enough that I wouldn't upgrade mine simply to get silent auto focus.

As far as auto focus goes, a lot depends on what you are shooting. For portraiture and wedding photography you just don't need 500 auto focus points and so having the extra ones doesn't necessarily make a difference. At the same time, if you have seen the banding the A7 III shows, for instance, it isn't fixable and even if the photo is sharp otherwise, it is completely unusable.

Just curious, but have you actually used the A7III? I'll have to go out and try to create the banding (outside of the LED issue with all electronic shutters), because I haven't seen it in the three months I have had mine.