Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-02-2018, 04:26 AM - 1 Like   #16
Veteran Member
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
After shooting my niece's wedding with my K-1, I'd probably say it's not the best for weddings. Two things, the images I got were top notch. Second thing, it was way too much work getting those images and the keeper rate was not what I hoped for, even knowing it was sold as a field camera. Personally Winders switch from the K-1 to an A9 for weddings is completely understandable to me now. Face recognition frame rate and quick accurate AF would be what I'd want. And on his recommendation I would consider renting one instead of using my K-1, if I were being paid. Essentially , I wasn't paid for this work, and I refuse to buy new gear for work I'm doing for free, so I'm happy to have had a K-1 for the job. It made the best of some serious lighting and framing issues and being able to heavily crop was a god send.

But I did way more work to get those images than I suspect would be the case with a camera more suited to the task. Another thing Winder said was there was way less post production with his A9. I worked three days on those images and got burned out. My wife took over and worked two more days.

As for portraits, I would imagine the K-1 would work just fine, and I got some great candids with it. But my overall impression was it was more work than it should have been.
You are very close to my findings regarding K1. I managed to make it work (the af) when I used K1, but it takes a little extra second to lock focus and at events if you miss a moment...it's gone. The other inconvenice is that in TTL the flash mounted on camera is not very reliable (it's not much an improvement over K-3 II in terms of flash system).

For still portraiture I really have a hard time thinking that is going to be a problem shooting with K1, K-3 II. There are lots of techniques that can compensate for the lack ok the eye af option that Sony has (yes, I do like the eye af on the new Sony models).

To the OP: K1 is an oustanding camera, but to me Pentax is concentrating it's attention to landscape photographers more than it does for events photographers. If you're planning to do weddings for a living, try and rent a K1 with a 24-70mm before investing in the system.

I have a Canon 5D Mark IV and despite the fact that the body with a Canon 24-70mm f2.8 costs around 1800$ more than a K1 with Pentax 24-70mm f2.8, it's an investment for at least 3 years and for events this camera worth every penny. I'm not saying this to start a debate. I say this because it's the honest truth.


Last edited by Dan Rentea; 05-02-2018 at 01:49 PM.
05-02-2018, 04:54 AM - 2 Likes   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
macman24054's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 461
I have been shooting weddings and events the last four years with two K-3's and could not be happier with the results and the growth of my business due to referrals and client reviews. I shoot 1600 to 3200 ISO on a regular basis. The fact that all my packages are print packages does help. My clients don't pixel peep. And prints are much more forgiving at noise than digital only.
Now i grew up on a Spotomatic and K1000 shooting sports during high school. So any modern DSLR with auto focus is great to me. The mixed AWB I have found to be very accurate in some really nasty lighting conditions. The auto focus is more than sufficient. I do use 2.8 zooms witch does help. With ROE being a major concern, my plan is to shoot the K-3's until they die or the next flagship APSC comes out.
I have shoot 58 weddings with my kit and have 22 scheduled already for this year. IMHO Pentax is a viable wedding and event system.
05-02-2018, 05:48 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Si Chiang Mai. Nong Khai Province
Photos: Albums
Posts: 358
QuoteOriginally posted by rollsman4 Quote
I appreciate your honesty. That makes it easier for me to decide which way to go. Thank you
Hi, I used to do weddings etc in the 80s with my 6x7 then 6x7ii, looking at the scanned slides on hard drives not all that brilliant but the K1 out does all of them, technology wins, just a bit limited on lenses now, which will eventually arrive, no point the best camera on the market, cheapish as well, with manual focus or legacy lenses, but there is and or enough lenses to use for weddings and portraits, just, got not to upset everyone soon a full range will arrive, regards Ian

---------- Post added 05-02-18 at 05:56 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by rollsman4 Quote
I have a lot of experience with Pentax 645D and Sony and Nikon and Canon. I have Never tried Pentax DSLR cameras or their lenses. I need; Excellent Skin tones out of the camera using AWB, ISO Max 1600 with No noise, Reliable AF and Easy to use Menu system. Zoom lens in the are of 24-105, 24-120 . Any suggestions and Images that you can share. Thank you
I used to use my 645 with a host of lenses to shoot CORRIDA a touchy subject brilliant but slow, in ARLES some of my pics are on flickr ian stevenson1, regards Ian
05-02-2018, 10:43 AM   #19
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I've used several Pentax cameras for both portraits and weddings. I used the K10D and K-1 most for these subjects though. There are advantages of each camera brand and a lot of great opinions in this thread. A camera is only half the solution though. The lens is just as important as the camera. For me, I use the Nikon D4 with the 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 for indoor events with low light. The focus on those two lenses, especially the 70-200 is extremely fast and accurate. Over 90% of my shots are keepers. With the K-1, about 75% are keepers in similar lighting, due to the slow, but accurate AF. This is why I don't use the K-1 in low light. It excels elsewhere, and the image quality is way sharper, cleaner, and overall better when I use it with my FA* 80-200 compared to the D4 and 70-200.

I use a Canon 80D, 5d mk iii and occasionally a mk iv for video. The noise and grain is horrendous on the mk iv, so I never use it for stills. The AF is fast, but sloppy. I get about a 50% keeper rate with a 5D mk iii and the 70-200/2.8L. Their dual-pixel AF is getting better and improving accuracy so it's not so sloppy.

K10D and FA* 24


K10D and FA* 80-200


K-1 and FA* 80-200


QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Essentially , I wasn't paid for this work, and I refuse to buy new gear for work I'm doing for free, so I'm happy to have had a K-1 for the job. It made the best of some serious lighting and framing issues and being able to heavily crop was a god send.

But I did way more work to get those images than I suspect would be the case with a camera more suited to the task. Another thing Winder said was there was way less post production with his A9. I worked three days on those images and got burned out. My wife took over and worked two more days.
Even though this thread was created some time ago, I wanted to address you comment, as you never mention the lens used. I've seen some great photos from you here too and you provide a wealth of knowledge with your experience. But I respectfully disagree with your points above. You provide a lot of great input to discussions here, but it always surprises me when you comment about issues with equipment when you're using variable-aperture super zooms to take wedding photos. Above you said you wouldn't buy new gear (inferring lenses too, not just cameras) when you're doing work for free. So three things here: One, I'm guessing the photos would have turned out better if you weren't doing it for free. Money is a motivator to many. Two, taking a bunch of photos and heavily cropping them is not how a typical wedding photographer works. Heavily cropping can make a photographer lazy. You know this with all your photography experience. And three, the K-1 can certainly take great wedding photographs with great lenses. I don't care how nice the camera is, if you use mediocre lenses your photos will be mediocre.

05-03-2018, 08:22 AM   #20
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Because of the terrible lighting conditions in the venue I was pretty much reduced to using the FA 50 ©1.7 and Sigma 70 2.8 macro.

As for the photos, they would have turned out better if I'd had the DFA 24-70, and a decent set of flashes. And honestly, the family loved the photos, but as i said when I agreed to do the work, "I expect you'll be happy, but I'm not equipped to shoot weddings, and I won't be." and that has proved to be the case.

If I was to make one change with the gear I have it would have been using the FA 50 macro instead of the 1.7. On some of the group shots the borders were weak and I totally filled the frame, using the macro would have corrected that. But, at the end of the day, the "clients" are happy so I am too. They got a lot more than they paid for.

The weaknesses I suffered with were slow to lock AF and inaccurate AF. Winder who has shot with the K-1 and A9 says focus is snappier and more keepers with the A9. He also said he needed less PP on his A9 images. But that camera is way out of my league.

I don't know how many paid weddings you have to do to pay for a piece of equipment like that, but this was my last one. At almost 70 years old, I'm simply too old for this $&@%. I burned out before the PP was finished. My wife Tess did the last couple days and got them mailed out.

My favourites, this one posted on everyone's facebook page, a candid that was supposed to be setting up a more formal image.


Trying to make a kid friendly place with all this fuss.

Last edited by normhead; 05-03-2018 at 08:38 AM.
05-03-2018, 09:44 AM   #21
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Weddings are a lot of work, no doubt. I agree the 50 macro would produce sharper edges, but it would pose a bigger problem. Lock-to-lock focus rings on macro lenses would have been even slower to focus on your subject than the 50/1.7. The 70 macro has the same issue. Due to the longer focus throw, it takes a lot longer to lock focus.
05-06-2018, 01:30 PM   #22
2B1
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 72
Intresting , the number of posts comparing the K1 to more expensive cameras Nikon D850, Canon 5D4 and Sony A9 and A7Rii
Hardly a fair comparison , but shows how highly rated it is.

Regards

05-06-2018, 01:50 PM   #23
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by 2B1 Quote
Intresting , the number of posts comparing the K1 to more expensive cameras Nikon D850, Canon 5D4 and Sony A9 and A7Rii
Hardly a fair comparison , but shows how highly rated it is.

Regards
I'm not sure why the comparison is unfair. The K-1 wins some of the battles against all of those cameras. They probably win more battles overall, but the K-1 is still the best field camera of the lot, especially with Pixel Shift turned on.

Last edited by normhead; 05-06-2018 at 01:57 PM.
05-06-2018, 02:39 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,129
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
the K-1 is still the best field camera of the lot, especially with Pixel Shift turned on.
Yes.
QuoteOriginally posted by 2B1 Quote
Nikon D850, Canon 5D4 and Sony A9 and A7Rii
All very capable but the A7iii as well as a K-1 provides a better set of devices that will do lots of genres of still and moving pictures.
05-06-2018, 02:41 PM   #25
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I think K-1 holds its own very well against the D850 (as I was much more impressed with Nikon's D800 and D810 than the D850) and 5D mk iv (I also prefer the mk iii to the mk iv). The mk iv has horrible noise compared to the K-1's clean images, obvious even from ISO 400. Those models compare fairly well though, and that's why you usually won't find K-1 comparisons with the D5 and 1D.

Here's a studio comparison screenshot from DPReview. I love showing this to others when they're not familiar with the quality Pentax produces. The first one has Pixel Shift on, the second doesn't. It's also important to note the other three brands were used with modern lenses, while the Pentax sample was produced with a 20-year-old FA 77 Limited (although no one is disputing the magic from FA Limited lenses).


05-06-2018, 03:57 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Lord Lucan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: South Wales
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,898
QuoteOriginally posted by 2B1 Quote
.. comparing the K1 to more expensive cameras Nikon D850, Canon 5D4 and Sony A9 and A7Rii. Hardly a fair comparison
Not sure what you mean by unfair. They are the top of the range full frame cameras of those brands, so it is quite right and very interesting to compare them; they each have strong points and less strong points, but they are all in the same very high league. The only thing that might be unfair in the comparison is the price, where Pentax beats the others into a pulp - that seems to be because Pentax skimp on expensive advertising.
05-07-2018, 03:36 PM - 1 Like   #27
Veteran Member
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
The mk iv has horrible noise compared to the K-1's clean images, obvious even from ISO 400.
First time you said that 5D Mark IV has horrible noise and sloppy af, I thought that you are joking. But you are not. Can you please post some of your Canon images so that we can see for ourself how horrible is that noise?

I'm on my phone right now, but I can show you if you want some indoor portraits taken with 5D Mark IV at ISO 3200 or ISO4000, without flash. Regarding the sloppy af, if I start posting BIF images (in challenging conditions) of small birds who have chaotic flight you will probably need at least a week to view them all. With people at events you have lots of tricks and options availabe if the situation requires to, but when comes to catch in flight a bird who has a chaotic flight and the size of a pencil... And if you are tracking that bird with a 500mm or 600mm lens from short distance, you will see very soon how "sloppy" is the Canon's af.

QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Here's a studio comparison screenshot from DPReview. I love showing this to others when they're not familiar with the quality Pentax produces.
This is quite a nice comparation. The only problem is that I shoot anywhere except in the lab, like DPreview or DXO. If you want to prove something to the ones that are not familiar with the quality of Pentax cameras, the best and correct way is to post your images, as Normhead and others do. Then we have something to talk about. You posted 3 portraits a few comments back, one of them taken with K1 and a zoom lens. I don't know that lens and you forgot to mention if that lens is a mediocre one or not, but regarding the afirmation of yours that a mediocre lens will produce mediocre results, let me ask you something: who is responsable for mediocre results, the gear or the photographer? Allow me to give you my opinion. As long as you know the limitations of your gear and as soon as you stop blaming the gear you have, the mediocre images will disappear like magic. With a mediocre lens sometimes you have to work a little harder to get the images you want, that's all.

If you consider that Canon 85mm f1.8 (it costs 250$) or Sigma/Tamron 150-600mm (second hand can be bought under 800$) are mediocre lenses, let me know. I have some mediocre images to show you.

And a final conclusion regarding mediocre images: the photographers and the clients are the ones who decide which image is mediocre and which is not. The photographer is responsible for:
- removing/deleting the images from the event that he photographed, images which he thinks that are mediocre
- editing the selected images

After that the clients will judge the images and they will recommend your services to other people if they like what they see. I don't think that the clients are interested in the lenses used to take their images or how hard you tried to take those images. So, as you see, we have different opinions regarding mediocre images taken with mediocre lenses. I can shoot an entire event with the kit lenses as long as I'm allowed to use flash and at the end of the day no one will care as long as I manage to capture beautiful moments. Because weddings are about moments, not about how sharp or how correct the white balance is. As a professional photographer, you are also responsible for having the tools that allows you to concentrate at capturing those moments and not getting worry that the gear you have will make you work harder.

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 05-08-2018 at 02:15 AM.
05-08-2018, 03:43 PM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
macman24054's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 461
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
I can shoot an entire event with the kit lenses
The first wedding I shoot was with a K2000 and kit lens and a K100 with a 50-200. That is one advantage to growing up on film in the 80's with a manual focus SLR and range finder. You had to adapt and improvise. Yes i shoot plenty of sports with those film kits. Shooting with two K-3's now is like i have turbo charged cameras. My eyes don't work well enough to manually focus anymore, so I am lucky to have auto focus. I don't get caught up on the gear. I just know how to use what I have, know what it can and can't do and go out and get the photos.
05-08-2018, 04:01 PM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian
Lord Lucan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: South Wales
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,898
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Here's a studio comparison screenshot from DPReview. I love showing this to others when they're not familiar with the quality Pentax produces.
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
.... This is quite a nice comparation. The only problem is that I shoot anywhere except in the lab, like DPreview or DXO. If you want to prove something to the ones that are not familiar with the quality of Pentax cameras, the best and correct way is to post your images .... Then we have something to talk about.
The criticism or ignorance of "others" is almost invariably made in a technical context ("Canon lenses are sharper than Pentax lenses blah blah blah" etc), so these DPReview comparisons are entirely relevant as ammunition against that criticism. Posting images taken in the field brings in the artistic component of picture quality which we all know (even those "others", unless they are really ignorant) is nothing to do with the camera used and is a distraction if we are comparing the technical quality.

Technical quality and artistic quality are independent of each other.
05-09-2018, 01:46 AM   #30
Veteran Member
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by Lord Lucan Quote
The criticism or ignorance of "others" is almost invariably made in a technical context ("Canon lenses are sharper than Pentax lenses blah blah blah" etc), so these DPReview comparisons are entirely relevant as ammunition against that criticism. Posting images taken in the field brings in the artistic component of picture quality which we all know (even those "others", unless they are really ignorant) is nothing to do with the camera used and is a distraction if we are comparing the technical quality.

Technical quality and artistic quality are independent of each other.
Who is talking about artistic quality here? Our colleague said that he has K1, D4, 5D Mark III and 5D Mark IV, but he tries to have a point here by posting DPreview studio shots that are impossible to replicate at weddings? I'm talking about real life shooting conditions where you may find a lot of surprises if you shoot the same thing, from the same distance, with 2 different cameras and similar lenses. Those technical quality files that you see on DXO and DPreview are irrelevant for an event (wedding) photographer and you or him should now that by now. Why? Because DXO and DPreview doesn't tell you with those files the following:

1. how fast and accurate the camera will focus in challenging situations
2. how the camera will handle high ISO in challenging situations
3. how the skin tones are rendered in challenging situations
4. how accurate and consistent is the white balance of your camera (manual white balance is a luxury at events due to mix of lights)
5. how consistent is the flash system
6. etc.

Except point nr. 1 where there are just a few options/tricks to help you out, the others can be fixed up to a point in Photoshop, Lightroom, Capture One, etc. But if you have to tweak each image due to the inconsistency of your white balance or due to how the camera handles high ISO in difficult scenarious, then for me it's a big problem. I don't want to spend 5 days or more as Normhead did to edit the images he took. He had to spend more time due to the fact that he went to photograph that wedding being aware that he is not equipped to shoot weddings. He has experience with Pentax gear and yet, he realised 2 things:
1. despite the fact that he had a full frame camera (a field camera) the results where not the ones he expected to be; and I'm sure that if he had used K3 instead of K1 he would have had even more problems due to the fact that K3 is a noisy camera when you shoot indoor and just with available lights from the restaurant
2. fast and good opticaly lenses would have made his life a little easier (it's the same with cameras; having a better camera for a specific job will make your life easier)

Their clients were happy at the end of the day as far as I understood, but he had to work hard editing the images he took.

For the above points (2 to 5) our colleague can post images that can convince all of us that he has a point. I haven't found a single solid argument in favor of K1 for weddings (other than image quality which is very good on K1) against 5D Mark IV, D850. Sure, there are a lot of photographers who shoot weddings with APS-C cameras. The sky is the limit. I guess it depends on:

- the type of clients that you're after
- the fee you charge for a wedding
- your willingness to spend lots of hours editing files instead of buying the right tools for the job
- the number of weddings you have in one year
- the part of the world you are living (in Romania the only good light you have available is when you shoot the trash the dress after the wedding). If you find a priest that doesn't allow you to shoot with flash, then good luck shooting with K3 at ISO 4000 or 5000 in an orthodox church

Someone above said something about being cought up on the gear. On the contrary, I don't like being cought up on the gear and I realised long time ago that being cought up on the gear is one of the shortest way to be unsuccessful. Sure, knowledge and experience will help you to go through, but on the long term, using the right tool for the job will help you grow and improve your business. I'm the kind of guy that will not go and shoot for a client with gear that I know is not ideal for that job. Helping a friend or a member of my family by shooting their events is one thing, but shooting for clients is another thing. I guess it depends on what you want: either you invest more money and make your life easier on the long term, either you save some money and work a little harder at every wedding to get the job done.

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 05-09-2018 at 01:52 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
advantage, af, aps-c, camera, cameras, dslr, dslr for portraits, europe, f2.8, ff, gear, ian, images, k1, lenses, pentax, pentax dslr, photographer, photography, photos, release, selection, wedding, weddings
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone Shoot weddings with K3 rollsman4 Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 17 05-05-2015 02:49 PM
Which limited series lens for weddings and portraits? phuey Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 07-16-2010 10:05 AM
Anyone shoot weddings with a Pentax? paulsoucy Photographic Technique 58 08-01-2008 03:18 PM
Anyone using their Pentax to shoot weddings/professionally? Takman Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 10-31-2007 05:24 PM
Anyone use JUST primes for Weddings and Portraits pentaxshooter Photographic Technique 15 09-06-2007 01:19 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:33 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top