Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="fotojack" data-source="post: 92335" data-attributes="member: 16">Welcome back, Wendy. Long time no see! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />I can't tell you how many weddings I've done with just an 18-55, an 18-105, and a 55-300 lens. I've never had a complaint over any of my wedding shoots. Proper lighting, good composition and good backgrounds, along with good post production make or break good photos. There's also the factor of the photographer behind the lens. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />If you're going to do this on a regular basis, sure, get the D300. Awesome camera. If this is just the odd time thing, then I would opt for the D3200, absolutely.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="fotojack, post: 92335, member: 16"] Welcome back, Wendy. Long time no see! :) I can't tell you how many weddings I've done with just an 18-55, an 18-105, and a 55-300 lens. I've never had a complaint over any of my wedding shoots. Proper lighting, good composition and good backgrounds, along with good post production make or break good photos. There's also the factor of the photographer behind the lens. :) If you're going to do this on a regular basis, sure, get the D300. Awesome camera. If this is just the odd time thing, then I would opt for the D3200, absolutely. [/QUOTE]

Verification