[mattb123]

One thing I'd like that we don't get is a faster sync speed on flashes for sports.

In bright daylight with fast moving action it's challenging (for me anyway) to use the flash system either at 1/180 (too slow for fast motion) or in HSS mode (better, but often not powerful enough, doesn't work off-camera).

In most cases I can find a workaround, but it would be nice to not have to.

[ElJamoquio]

In bright daylight... are you shooting into the sun and just want fill light?

[mattb123]

In bright daylight... are you shooting into the sun and just want fill light?

Yes, races in mid day sun and helmets with visors shade the riders faces so they end up pretty dark compared to the rest of the shot. Fill helps a lot but ideally I need some power and a fast shutter speed which can be a hard combo to come by!
If I need the fill I'll try to catch them at a slower part of the course but that can be out of my control.

[philbaum]

1- From the standpoint of weddings and portraiture, our go-to lenses are the 50-135, 16-50, and 15 Limited. So three lenses, two bodies. The 50-135 in particular is well worth the price of admission, and when evaluating the price of Pentax zooms I think it's important to compare against the stabilized versions of the competition's offerings.


2- Autofocus can be a challenge with the K-5 in certain situations, namely tracking and low-light, but I've never really used anyone else's stuff or had a chance to test-drive the K-3. So far it hasn't been a deal-breaker. It can be overcome with proper technique and a knowledge of your gear's strengths and limitations.


3- I'm a fan of manual flash and use it almost exclusively. In that situation the playing field is pretty level.


4- If a full-frame offering were to materialize I would definitely give it some serious consideration. But for me the increase in image quality would have to justify the weight and price penalties of FF. I would much rather have two high-end APS-C bodies vs. one FF body with no backup. Most importantly, the income of the business would need to be sufficient to justify an upgrade to a different brand or system.

Great comments. The 50-135 in FF terms is the roughly 70-200 lens that many makes sell. But the 50-135 makes a lot of sense for events and carrying around. I use it a lot for dress rehearsal shooting and promo shots for a local playhouse company. Like a series of limited, Precise focusing but focusing speed is slowish but adequate for most things. Has edge to edge sharpness.

The K3 can autofocus down to -3EV which is unusual for most dlsrs. Beats out the Nikon 7100 in that regard. In lowlight situations it can easily find a static focus where other dslrs can't. The new Sony FF A7S is the only one i know of that will beat it -it goes to -4EV.

I'm a fan of manual flash strobist type work and have used it for promo shots outsdoors in poor light and in group shots, portraits, etc. When i tried P-ttl with a Pentax DSLR - had problems with the preliminary flash causing subjects to blink - i think many TTL systems have that same problem but am not sure. Manual flash doesn't cause that blinking reflex, except after the shot. Manual flash is also easier to tune-in, especially in low light conditions. Cost of YongNuo 560 II flash - about $60 when i bought it. Cost of Nikon top of the line flash - i think its over $450. They both break quite as easily when dropped - i know from experience and from a friend who stopped at a light with the Nikon flash on the seat next to her - dead in a second when it tumbled to the floor.

Pentax has allowed me to do a lot of experiementing with primes and zooms at relatively low cost. Now i'm selling successfully out of a gallery, so yes - i would buy Pentax again. I like what Ricoh is doing with the brand.

[clackers]

One thing I'd like that we don't get is a faster sync speed on flashes for sports.

In bright daylight with fast moving action it's challenging (for me anyway) to use the flash system either at 1/180 (too slow for fast motion) or in HSS mode (better, but often not powerful enough, doesn't work off-camera).

In most cases I can find a workaround, but it would be nice to not have to.

Matt, swapping brands won't help.

If you want to freeze action at 1/1000s, the others also top out at 1/200, 1/250, whatever, so everyone has to use HSS or ND filters.

[clackers]

When i tried P-ttl with a Pentax DSLR - had problems with the preliminary flash causing subjects to blink - i think many TTL systems have that same problem but am not sure.

They all do, and that's an excellent point, Phil.

My wife completely shuts her eyes at a pre-flash.

Manual fixes all that.

Btw, the Yongnuo 560s are so cheap I've ordered two and a separate transmitter that will remotely change their outputs

Say what you like about Chinese factories, they've turned the speedlight field into a buyer's market.

[_quicksilver_]

I would like to make a different opinion:

I have been doing some semipro shooting myself, both with Pentax and Canon FF. I have K-5 and the FA limiteds, which are of course great, but, if I were you, and not so heavily invested in the brand yet, I would check out the Canikon FF options. If you can borrow or rent the equipment and try it real-life it will give you more information than any writing in the forums.

For me it was a revelation to find out that the ancient Canon 5D had much better AF than K-5. I also tried Nikon D3, Canon 5D mk III and Canon 6D which eventually became my choice. Depending of course what type of shooting you are going to do, but I feel that for events, weddings etc, FF camera is hard to beat. Yes, you can almost get similar kind of pictures with fast lenses in crop camera, but to get the job done, it´s easier to just go with the FF flow.

Also, check out the flash and the service options for your gear. Canikon offers extensive programs for pro shooters.

There is no reason to get too emotionally attached to the camera gear, or any brand, you would need to find the thing that works for you best. For me, it´s a combination of Pentax and Canon, but I´m soon going to go full-time canon, just for the convenience.

that´s my 0.002 €

[Kerrowdown]

Going (semi)pro with Pentax - Is it a good call?

If you plan on going Pro eventually, I'm afraid Canon is the route you need to go with in terms of Pro support and perceived client/customer acceptance. I'm not getting into debate here about the rights and wrongs and the what ifs, it's just the way thing things are.

Me I have the best of both worlds, I use other brands for work, but I shoot Pentax for pleasure, which kinda says it all really.

[wed7]

There is no pro level gear, only pro level work

[Aksel]

...
So now I'm considering either staying with the Pentax and getting the K-3, or switching brands and going for the Nikon D7100 (or Canon 70D). I would love to stay with Pentax, but only if it really is a viable option for the long run...

I don't see any reason for D7100 or 70D. The only reason for Canon/Nikon would be FF system (because we don't know nothing about Pentax FF). In APS-C i think that Pentax is one of the best options. If you get some decent lenses, then their price will not decrease significantly over time. You do not lose much of anything going with Pentax, even if you decide at some point to sell all of your K-mount lenses. Except for the cameras, but the same fate hit with both Pentax and Canon/Nikon cameras.

... in your (non)professional opinion, can a Pentax K-3 be used effectively for proffesional work?...

Here, it all depends on what you mean by "proffesional work". Effectively? It depends on you.

[bdery]

1. Lenses - After looking for the lenses I would need right now, and those I might need in the future, I was surprised to find just how few modern AF lenses there are for the k-mount. It's not that there are no quality f2.8 silent zoom lenses for Pentax, but the choices are so few and most are very expensive. It appears Canikon has a lot more choice with a much wider price range, especially used. Am I wrong?

Pentax has the most APS-C lenses available. Nikon and Canon have more lenses, counting FF lenses. Honestly, I believe all brands have their bases covered. Pentax has more unique focal lengths, and I believe that's a perk. There is no picture that cannot be taken with a particular system.

2. Auto-Focus - Although I understand the K-3 has a much improved AF compared to other Pentax cameras, from what I've read online, most still agree the D7100 AF is better. Is there a significant difference and does the K-3's AF work for time-critical work such as weddings?

The Nikon AF is faster, especially for tracking. Faster, not "better". For weddings, where subjects stay still for long moments, you won't see the difference. The K-3's AF is better in low light, and that's part of the equation too.

3. Flash - So far I've been using mostly on-camera flash (Metz 48 AF-1) and I've been very pleased with the results. However, when doing studio/portrait/group shots, the Pentax Flash system is widely considered limited. What exactly are the limitations of the system compared to Nikon?

The Nikon system has zones, manual control via wireless TTL, and a few other perks. but you can get a full complement of manual flashes for the price of one TTL flash from Nikon OR Pentax. for studio work, you'd be much better off using a system such as the Godox, Cactus or Yongnuo.

4. Full Frame - I know Pentax is developing a FF camera. But IMO, it would not be wise to rely on it until it's out. Also, I have no plans to go FF. However, I've heard a lot of photographers eventually take the plunge, and most of them never go back. In your experience, is FF still necessary for pro photography?

If you're happy with APS-c, the gain of full frame would be, in my opinion and experience, marginal. You'd "gain" a more expensive system, with larger bodies, lenses, and no easily measurable IQ advantage. You might get more resolution, true, but the K-3 has 24 MP! You'd use FA lenses at their "intended" focal lengths, true, but you'd begin seeing their flaws in the corners. Honestly, I don't see the advantage.

[ElJamoquio]

Pentax has the most APS-C lenses available.

Is that true, taking out the lenses that would be labeled 'FF' in other systems (35mm F/2.4, 40mm F/2.8, 50mm F/1.8, 70mm, 200, 300, all the FA's and DFA's)...

My gut guess is that Canon has more APS-C only lenses. But I dunno.

[Miguel]

Is that true, taking out the lenses that would be labeled 'FF' in other systems (35mm F/2.4, 40mm F/2.8, 50mm F/1.8, 70mm, 200, 300, all the FA's and DFA's)...

My gut guess is that Canon has more APS-C only lenses. But I dunno.

If you count third-party offerings such as offered by Tokina and Sigma then you are probably correct. Seems like Canon is introducing more EF-S lenses lately, so maybe in another couple of years Canon-branded lenses will be of the same number.

I'm sure someone will perform a count for the record.

M

[Homo_erectus]

I do a lot of macro. I have a little station set up on a table next to my desk where my computer sits. I was watching a youtube video about focus stacking the other day and the guy was using a canon dslr and a canon application that let him control the camera from his computer. This application let him change exposure, select focus points and focus from his computer. If I could afford to, I would buy into a system that has that feature right this moment but when I decided on Pentax I had no idea I would even want to do that.

My point being that cameras and lenses are more or less equally good enough from all the manufacturers these days but the peripheral elements, the things that make up a *system*, can vary quite a bit and should really be the focus of your attention when trying to decide which brand to go with.

[emalvick]

Is that true, taking out the lenses that would be labeled 'FF' in other systems (35mm F/2.4, 40mm F/2.8, 50mm F/1.8, 70mm, 200, 300, all the FA's and DFA's)...

My gut guess is that Canon has more APS-C only lenses. But I dunno.

Why would it even matter if a company has more APS-C lenses? I guess size perhaps, but one of the beauties with APS-C is you can use the APS-C only lenses AND the FF lenses. Heck, I find that FF lenses on my Pentax cameras are pretty good and sharp across the frames pecisely because the softer corners are taken out of the picture by the cropped sensor. APS-C lenses don't necessarily have that benefit. The only big benefit I've seen is that with Pentax most FF lenses were developed prior to the dSLR boom, and so purple fringing and CA are real issues with those lenses. I'm guessing that a lot of these issues would exist in other systems except I suspect that Canon and Nikon develop more FF lenses now than Pentax does, and those newer FF lenses probably handle certain digital issues better than Pentax lenses.