Today, I received this question from a reader in Australia: (his name is Paul, also)
"Hi Paul
"In 1977 I visited Papua New Guinea while i was there i bought a camera a Soligor 35mm SLR with 50mm lense. I was 21years old. That was the start of my photography. Many years ago around twenty I think while i was riding my motor bike at 100 klm the camera fell off the back of my motor bike . To my horror the camera flew in the air a number of times hitting the ground, i pulled over my bike, thinking that my camera would be in bits and pieces, to my surprise the camera was intact and still working. I still have that camera today and works. I have used a number of film based cameras, the last few years i have been using pentax Z1 and a Pentax Z1P which i use for weddings with Fuji Film pro 160 colour and the black and white using ilford. I have been thinking going over to Digital but so many cameras, Since 2003 I went blind in my right eye and told that I would not get back my eye sight, since 1977 using my right eye to take photos , its been hard to use my left eye, the good news is that i have got back my eye sight to about 90% , I love my pentax cameras they are heavy and good to use. I like the Pentax K20 but with 14m.p. would this be good enough to do weddings or do you have any suggestions, Many thanks, Paul"
----
Hey Paul,
Thanks for writing. My first SLR was a Pentax Spotmatic, in 1970. I shot hundreds of weddings and other events with it, until I gave it to my son, about 2000. In 2001, I switched to digital (Nikon D100).
While I doubt many of the pro-sumer level digital cameras would survive jumping off a moving vehicle, there are many excellent choices. Certainly, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Pentax -- they can all do a great job. The decision is so personal -- I tell everyone, unless they have some specific technical requirements that only a few models offer, the best way to decide is to go to a good camera shop and hold them in your hands. It's that simple -- what feels good to you - that is as good a way to choose as any. The simple reason is that, as much as reviewers like to point out minor differences, or hype what they perceive as major flaws, one camera is pretty much as good as another, within specific price ranges....and, nearly any camera in the $1,000US price range, or above, can deliver creditable results in the hands of are competent photographer.
Are there major reasons to choose one camera over another? Even for most pros, the answer is 'no'. In most cases, it comes down to what you like. It's more personal preference than any technical issue.
Would a K20 be suitable for weddings? Certainly - with the right lens selection, even the K200 will do the job. More than brand, or model, the following is the sequence that I RECOMMEND FOR ALL PHOTOGRAPHERS, if they are going to photograph people, and want to be able to control the light. Follow this sequence, as budget allows:
Get a camera -- get a flash -- get a diffuser -- get the flash off the camera -- get multiple flashes, with diffusers.
Beyond this, get good lenses. Get fast lenses. I love 2.8 or faster, yet the main lens that I use for weddings is still a 24mm-120mm, 3.5-5.6.
These are all general statements, and opinions. Are there specific cameras that are better suited for certain situations? Certainly. Are there advantages and features in the $3,000 or $5,000 cameras that are not available in the $1,000 models? Yes, without a doubt.
But --- If the question is, can I do a good job shooting weddings with a K20, the answer is YES.
By the way, if you want to hook up with an online community of wedding photographers, check out the [b] school: thebschool.com
They are doing some maintenance, so you can't get in, right now, but if you go to: thebschoolblog.com/support you can get added to the waiting list. It will be well worth it, in my opinion.
Well, Paul, I think I may just use your question on my blog -- thanks, again for writing.
Regards,
Paul
