[rparmar]

I recently tried shooting an event in a church using manual focus. I was excited about the idea and may even try it again, but the results were not encouraging. The problem is, if the light is low enough to make autofocus difficult, it's going to be low enough to make manual focus difficult. Just like the camera's autofocus sensor, your eye needs to find an area with some contrast in it. If it's dark you just can't see the contrast well.

Good post! One quick comment.

An advantage of manual focus is that one can "focus bracket" to increase the possibility of getting a sharp shot. I first get the focus as well as I can by eye and then pull back a little so (I think) I am front-focusing. Then, I quickly take a sequence of shots while slowly incrementing the focus plane backwards. With a good lens one can do this quite smoothly.

The similar technique for AF would be to let the auto-focus do its thing (if it can) and then use the quick-shift ring to vary the focal depth. In practice, however, the feel of this ring (on the lenses I have used) is too loose to allow the fine control needed.

[yeatzee]

If you can't handle 1.5kg then you must be pretty old & frail and I can understand you moving to a smaller cam based on weight alone.

But to say the K7 bests the D700 in AF performance & IQ in all areas then I must disagree.

The D700 has easily one of the best proven af/flash systems in the world & will trounce ANY aps-c in IQ from ISO 400 upwards

Regards

Your attacks at anything someone says that might mean they prefer Pentax to another brand is getting beyond old.... I'm 16 and very fit, yet I do not like to carry with me overly bearing camera equipment. It ruins the experience to me, having to carry an unnecessarily heavy object around your neck for long periods of time.

Also, it seems this guy is talking from his experience..... if that's what he found when using both camera's than thats what he found. If your experiences were different than they were different. No need to go on the attack.

[yeatzee]

Good post! One quick comment.

An advantage of manual focus is that one can "focus bracket" to increase the possibility of getting a sharp shot. I first get the focus as well as I can by eye and then pull back a little so (I think) I am front-focusing. Then, I quickly take a sequence of shots while slowly incrementing the focus plane backwards. With a good lens one can do this quite smoothly.

The similar technique for AF would be to let the auto-focus do its thing (if it can) and then use the quick-shift ring to vary the focal depth. In practice, however, the feel of this ring (on the lenses I have used) is too loose to allow the fine control needed.

Now that I have a camera with no split prism focusing screen and 5+ fps, I do this frequently in lowlight situations. Works very well

[WMBP]

An advantage of manual focus is that one can "focus bracket" to increase the possibility of getting a sharp shot. I first get the focus as well as I can by eye and then pull back a little so (I think) I am front-focusing. Then, I quickly take a sequence of shots while slowly incrementing the focus plane backwards. With a good lens one can do this quite smoothly.

An intriguing suggestion. I may try it and I think it might indeed work at a wedding.

Unfortunately in some other circumstances, I fear it would cause me to slow down my shooting even further, and I'm already pretty slow. At tonight's Confirmation, for example, I expect to have, oh, maybe 1 whole second when the bishop puts his hands on the candidate—the sacramental moment or, in photographer's lingo, The Shot. Then the next candidate steps up. I'll have sixty of these in fairly rapid succession. Can't see fussing with the focus for sixty kids in a row.

From all I can tell, the image quality of the K-7 isn't superior to that of my K20D. But one of the main reasons I was (and still am) very tempted by the K-7 is that very superior LED display screen. If I take a test shot for focus, then review on the back of my K20D, I can only kinda sorta tell how well focused it is. If I am 25 ft from the subject, by the time I "zoom" in tight enough on the display screen to examine how well focused, say, the nose and eyes are, I've blown the image up very large and it becomes unsharp for that reason. I've seen a Canon 50D, which has a display similar to the K-7's, and the display is awesome. A K-7 may yet be in my future. I expect Pentax to release a new camera this year but I also expect that, if it's above the K-7 in the product line, I won't be able to afford it.

The similar technique for AF would be to let the auto-focus do its thing (if it can) and then use the quick-shift ring to vary the focal depth. In practice, however, the feel of this ring (on the lenses I have used) is too loose to allow the fine control needed.

Yeah, quick shift is a great idea, but I can't make it work for me very well, perhaps partly because not all of my lenses support it.

I should add another small point. I will shoot tonight with the Pentax 70 f/2.4 Limited. I'm also fond of the 40 and 21 primes. There's not a lot of barrel to hold on to with the 70 and 21, and almost nothing to hold on to with the 40. It's doable—but it's much easier to manually focus my Sigma 28 and 105 which are lenses you can really get your hands on solidly.

But thanks for the focus bracketing suggestion. I really would like to focus manually and I do so when shooting portraits. When I do it right, I believe that I do indeed get better, sharper pictures. The problem is that autofocus is more reliable. In other words, with my current skill level focusing manually, if I shoot 10 pictures using manual focus and 10 pictures using autofocus, two of the best 3 pictures in terms of sharpness will probably have been manually focused; but 3 of the 5 softest or least well focused shots will have been manually focused, too. I can tolerate this hit rate shooting a portrait. It's not so good when I'm shooting an event where consistency and speed really matter.


Will

[WMBP]

By the way, the mention of focus bracketing gets me thinking. Am I imaging this, or do some point and shoot cameras have automatic focus bracketing? I have a vague recollection of such a feature on one of the Canon Powershot Sx IS-series cameras that I shot with years ago. I know the difference between focus and exposure bracketing and I'm sure I'm not thinking about the latter.

I think automatic focus bracketing would be a killer feature. Not sure what engineering challenges this would present. But it would be cool if I could hit the AF button to get the camera's best guess, then hold down the shutter and get 3 shots, with the focus just slightly different in each.

Will

[rparmar]

Automatic Focus Bracketing (AFB perhaps?) would be killer!

[nulla]

Automatic Focus Bracketing (AFB perhaps?) would be killer!

Agree

[Ratmagiclady]

I actually find myself focus-bracketing quite often. (I keep meaning to adjust focus for my new 28: I've discovered in the field that I'd really prefer this one to focus a bit shorter, which is something I keep forgetting when I get home. (*ahem.* Excuse me a sec. There. I think that's behaving better. )


What was I saying. I don't generally like the scattershot approach, ...I may need to break down and get a more precise manual focus screen, (these modern stock ones are nice and bright with slow lenses, but too vague for me and my use of faster ones.) With this, focus bracketing is pretty useful, especially when my eyes are bothering me somewhat. I do suspect it's just as easy to bracket manually with the continuous shooting on, really. I could probably do it to good effect with the FPS turned up, but I usually like a pace I can control better.

[JohnBee]

Are there any pro photographers using the K7 successfully for wedding photography? I'm considering purchacing a K7 body to force my K10D to be my backup/alternate camera.

What are your thoughts please?

I have my first(hopefully of many) weddings coming-up in a few weeks. After spending time on location with my Pentax's(K20D's and Kx), I ended-up investing in a D700. And I'll be going back to the location next week to work with that setup and see how things feel. Needless to say, based on what I've see so far, the D700 is in a class of it's own in low light shooting and focusing(even with mediocre glass).

TBH. It wasn't my idea to get into a D700, but the main shooter wanted specific gear as part of his backup, and our Pentax kits just weren't up to the task(trust me we tried...)

It's going to be interesting to compare the two under trial. But the K20D and Kx turned out to be a real challenge to work with under trial. and I was very disappointed with the outcome. So my conclusion was(simply put), that Pentax camera's are most likely not suited for all types of photography. Especially where complex or demanding lighting is in the mix.

And though I managed to pull off some nice shots with some faster primes... after seeing the images the main shooter accomplished through the versatility of his zoom, I realized just how limited Pentax was in contrast to a FF under such circumstances.

PS. my experience may be somewhat specific. The wedding planners want natural lighting and as little flash as possible during the main ceremony. And I'm sure all weddings are as demanding.

JB

[HuhPentax?]

I use k-7 for weddings. But the "look" from the camera was so much different than my other cameras that it took me a while to figure out how to process all my images so it looked like a cohesive set for an album.

Now that I am used to it this is my favorite camera. I use it primarily with DA*16-50, 43mm and DA*200mm. The increased focus accuracy is the biggest improvement for me. I now have to make a mental note and flip the camera to manual focus when I'm shooting my K20d in the dark (i.e. first dance) or I'll drive myself crazy waiting for it to lock focus.

I've used it for some video at weddings too. The still photos in this wedding came from a mix of Canon 5d, Canon 30d, Canon 1dmkIII and Pentax k-7 while the video was taken by a Canon HD video camera (I don't know what model) and the Pentax k-7 (with 16-50 mounted)
Wood's Blog Fusion Wedding Video

My only difficulty with my Pentax setup for weddings right now is getting a fast-wide lens. I really need the 31mm Ltd for church weddings but I do so few church weddings that I'm having a hard time justifying the cost. I've got a job this summer that just may push me over the edge though. I took a test shot in the church last week and the exposure was ISO 3200, F2.8, 1/20sec. So if I get the 31mm for my pentax I will probably shoot my Canon 1dmkIII with the 135mm F2 and the Pentax k-7 with 31mm F1.8. I'm not sure if the K20D will be invited to that wedding or not

Your wedding pictures are inspiring! I can't wait till I get my camera! Do you guys have any problems with your K7? Like not auto focusing?

[k54]

Considering that one of the major weaknesses of Pentax as compared to the other guys is the strength of the AF, I'm not seeing this as being off topic.
Far from it not hurting to be a manual focus expert, if one is going to use a Pentax camera as a wedding camera, becoming a manual focus expert is a necessity, not an option.
My last wedding I went back to what I learned in the early 70s for shooting processionals and focused on a point in the aisle and shot when someone got there.
It worked far better than the AF would have, given my prior experience with it.

I agree, using AF in wedding ceremony is difficult as there were so many movements and some people might pass in front of the camera and your AF will be affected then you missed the event or shot.

Users should try to not rely too much on Technology such as AF and SR but learn to improve their skills and techniques using the all manual mode.

Therefore, they will not be bothered and complain that this camera or this feature is a problem and so on.

The wedding pictures of CWOOD is inspiring. Very good indeed.....

[jboyde]

I
Let me return to flash. It's really important for weddings. I can't speak from real knowledge, as I've never actually used the Nikon or Canon systems, but from everything I've read and from talking with other more experienced wedding photographers, I have concluded that the Pentax flash system is the weakest part of their product line. By "flash system," I mean everything related to flash: the physical flash units themselves (Pentax's aren't very powerful, have a slow sync speed, and aren't very durable either) and the features they support (complicated subject). When I fantasize about switching to Nikon these days, it's not because the cameras I could afford would be any better than the K20D or K-7 (they wouldn't) but because of the Nikon Creative Lighting System (CLS).


Will

I normally leave my Pentax flashes (540 & 2 360s)home when I shoot outdoors because I worry about one knock breaking it. I also have the Sigma 530 Super and the Metz 48 and I bring the Metz out because it feels a bit more durable and I can overpower sunlight easier when barebulb.

Are all your flashes Pentax made?

[WMBP]

I normally leave my Pentax flashes (540 & 2 360s)home when I shoot outdoors because I worry about one knock breaking it. I also have the Sigma 530 Super and the Metz 48 and I bring the Metz out because it feels a bit more durable and I can overpower sunlight easier when barebulb.

Are all your flashes Pentax made?

No. Right now I have four hot-shoe flash units: two Pentax 540's, a Metz 58, and an old Nikon. The Nikon isn't powerful and hasn't many features but works fine as an additional radio-triggered flash for minor highlighting. The Metz is the most powerful and is a Pentax-compatible flash so it supports P-TTL (either when it's in the hot-shoe or when I'm using optical triggering).

I don't mean to say that it's NOT possible to do it with Pentax flashes. Not at all. I'm doing it. And most of the time, when I run into problems, I guess I'd be inclined to blame myself first rather than the equipment. I just think that, with Pentax flash, you have to work a bit harder, and perhaps do more stuff in manual mode on the flash units.

I think I'm about to buy another flash unit, possibly a Metz 48. (I've already got the more expensive 58.) However, I have to say that I hate the menu system on the Metz. Makes absolutely no sense to me at all. I've managed to learn my way around it, at least well enough to get where I need to get. But gosh it's awful.

Will

[steve500]

I very much suggest the 20mm Sigma F1.8 for DSLR pentax mount...

Super sharp, such a great build, just creates BEAUTIFUL shots and is very fast indoors.

Just traded it for a 10-17mm pentax fisheye, but i will absolutely get that 20mm sigma back as soon as money is available.

[gostwick]

Are there any pro photographers using the K7 successfully for wedding photography? I'm considering purchacing a K7 body to force my K10D to be my backup/alternate camera.

What are your thoughts please?

I got my K-7. Usedit for weddings this year, and it works well.

It is a pleasure to use in comparison to the K10D. I can really trust that the shots are going to be in focus where the K10 would not manage a focused shot.

I will endeavour to get a K-5 next summer as ISO performance and still improved auto focus will make it a near perfect wedding photography camera.