Wedding Photography / Not Using A Pro Class Camera...

I would like to ask a question that has been bugging me for a long time.

Everywhere I read, I keep seeing how the modern entry level DSLR cameras beat the top of the range cameras of 10 years ago. I know that to be true comparing entry level v entry level past and present, and with good glass on the front of entry level cameras today, give or take depending on what you are interested in, give outstanding quality.

Now, this is what I can't get my head around. Why does everyone who is a professional (full time) insist that if you shoot a wedding, you must have a top of the line or near as dam it, camera?
I don't follow the logic here.
I know that top cameras are built like a tank, weather sealed, etc etc, but is that really the only reasons?
Or is it the case that a pro does not want to turn up with a camera that maybe a guest has?

All that aside, if I was earning my living from photography, I would have the D700 or there abouts as a main, the same as I would have a quality car if I was offering myself up as an executive driver.
But to put things in reality, I can't see how you "couldn't" shoot a wedding with a lower priced camera...

It would be interesting to hear from professionals or semi professionals here because I think you are all awesome in what you do.

You are totaly correct in your thoughts. IQ wise, just about any modern DSLR is more than enough for a wedding.
I even shot a few weddings using an Olympus E1. It was a pro camera yes... but it was also only 5 million pixel and
you wouldnt wish to use it higher than 800 ISO. Its more of a question of reliability than anything if you are making a living though.
Also, its normaly the case of the high end cameras simply perform better, which makes the photographers job that much easier.
A high end camera is likely to focus better in low light, which can be important if your in a dimly lit church etc.
Reliability is the biggest thing to me. Its wise to have a back up camera too.
I also choose and prefer DX to FX but thats more a personal choice and suits my way of working.
You also hit another note... Image ! If a Client is paying for your services they expect reasonbly high quality gear etc.
Most wouldnt know the differance or care as long as they are happy with the pics though.
I would say about ten % of my clients ask what camera I use. Most just look at the pics though.
Weather proofing can be more important than many realise too. Its not so much about shooting in the rain, but,
more condensation etc. I once left my camera at my studio overnight. My friend also left his with mine. His was a cheap consumer camera.
Next day I went to pick him up and took him over to get his camera back. Mine was right next to his. His was badly condensed and he
couldnt see a thing through it. Mine on the other hand was just fine. You pay for functionality and durability with pro equipment.
This makes everything easier and better and less stressful. With thought and care though, and with the right knowledge, any photographer
worth there salt should be capable of shooting a wedding with any modern DSLR.

Thanks for the reply.

Yes I can see the logic - quality camera = quality tools for the job.
It was just a thing that was bugging me because almost to a man/woman they all say "Nikon D3200 or whatever, you wouldn't use it to shoot a wedding but for an entry level camera it is great", or always something like that.

Lately, I saw a vid on youtube and the pro actually said, "You can't shoot a wedding with a D5100"!
"Can't"???
I would think with the right glass you could do a wedding with a D3100 or an old D70..

Appearance is I think a major factor here as you said about 10% ask what camera you use.
Funny story which I have encountered a few times actually - everyone at a party I was at was using their point and shoots and I used a D50 and kit lens.
"Wow, you have a proper camera there Dave, it must take better photo's"!!
I would imagine at a wedding that those that do know a bit about camera's would say something like, "
The pro is using a D300 so will take better photo's than that bloke who has a D3100"!

Funny old logic...so it nothing to do with the photographer in their eyes, its the camera! Lol..

here is an answer simple, and short. if everybody/anyone can shoot a wedding with an entry level camera, the business itself would be dead, and everyone would be a "pro". In fact, this is EXACTLY what is happening right now, slowly. Every tom, dick and harry who goes out and buys a DSLR immediately thinks they are a pro, and can hang with the big boys. WRONG. YES, TECHNICALLY speaking, you COULD shoot a wedding with an entry level camera. But compare the quality, and versatility to the same wedding shot by a pro, with pro gear and the difference is HUGE. It also comes down to knowing how to use the camera...a d700+ shot in manual by someone who knows how to use it, will always succeed over a d3100 in auto by a schmuck.

I cant tell you how many consumer grade camera owners i have come accross that bought their entry level dslr, with false expectations and high hopes. I know a d3000 owner who had all the money in the world to spend, and opted for the 3000 because "its no different". And another who cant figure out for the life of her, why her pics dont look as sharp and colorful as mine, and they should because she has the same kind of camera. Plus, it would look lame...i mean, a professional photographer at a wedding holding the same camera as aunt Edna.

anywho....yes, technically you can shoot a wedding with a point and shoot camera if you want....should you? NO.

To put it another way...... You can shift 3 tons of sand in your car !!!!!
BUT ! Its a lot easier if you have a wagon !!!!
BUT ! neither is any good if you cant drive !!!!

Hmm ....... so the answer is buy an entry level DSLR rather than a pro level and with the money saved book on a decent photography course!

Chris Norris said:

Hmm ....... so the answer is buy an entry level DSLR rather than a pro level and with the money saved book on a decent photography course!

Click to expand...

mmmmm but then you could possably outgrow your camera quickly.
Knowledge is the thing that takes great pics, but quality gear helps make them even better or easier to obtain
Just to confuse things even more..... learning the camera is only half the battle.
You still need to be able to see a picture in your head in the first place.
Its one of those topics with so many variables you could talk forever lol.

Chris Norris said:

Hmm ....... so the answer is buy an entry level DSLR rather than a pro level and with the money saved book on a decent photography course!

Click to expand...

ummm...no, not exactly. Buy the best camera you can afford, THEN book a decent photography course. All this depends on whether you want to earn a living doing this, or you're doing it for your own personal pleasure. People's reasons for photography are endless. And there's that old saying...'buy cheap, buy twice".

You can get all the advice in the world, and it will still come down to what you want to do with your photography, what you can afford, how far you want to go with it, the time you're willing to put into learning your craft, etc etc etc.

I've done weddings with a D200 and a D40 as backup. It's the best I can afford, and I take care of my equipment. I've never had a complaint on any of my shots for clients. Do I want a D3S? Of course! lol But......I work with what I have and within it's limitations.

Good luck in choosing your camera. Let us know.

Just to put a spanner in the works, I know 2 professional photographers of long experience who in my opinion, are not as good as me who has little experience, no matter how much they have paid for their gear.
I'm not saying I'm fabulous or gifted, and I'm not bragging, just telling the truth.

One of those photographers wedding pics are 50% bad and 50% just ok..ish...
It is no different from good and bad Electricians, Decorators, even Doctors.

They are both long standing and well known Photographers who get a lot of work, but they just go through a routine which you can see they rarely enjoy and have an "That will do" attitude.

Technically, they know far more than I will ever know, but on the practical side, I know I can do better even though I don't have their higher priced equipment.

My point here is that respectfully I do not agree with you when you say a "pro with pro gear and the difference is huge". That is not always the case I'm afraid, even though I am on your side and wish it to be so.

you are right, in saying that not all pros with pro gear are good...of course their are pros who suck lol. I was referring to a good pro...though a good pro, even if handed an entry level camera should be able to get the job done...it may not be up to par as if he had his pro gear.....

it all comes down to knowledge and, well, talent. who is shooting that wedding with the d3100, or who is using the d3s etc....and do they have the eye....is it a purely creative eye, or is it a technical, i read all the books and took all the classes eye. there are just too many variables. Honestly, i think the BIGGEST one, as stupid as it sounds is the visual. a pro looks better with big fancy gear and lots of do-dads. He MUST be good or he MUST know what hes doing...he wouldnt have that setup if he didnt! Or....is this guy serious? My 15yr old nephew just got that same camera for xmas! Maybe we willo get him to shoot our wedding! lol

I personally have done quite a few weddings. do i NEED my pro gear, no...do i want it...of course. Can I work with lesser gear if need be...sure i can, but only if I HAD to.

Hi friends i just want to say you that you should use a good and heavy duty camera for any wedding photography because there you have to shoot Bridal's photos and other wedding theme vanue and reception so you should need a good qualtiy of camera

There is a lot more to "Professional" than camera equipment.

We are shooting weddings with camera bodies that are 3 generations old. We don't even have the best glass. We have good glass...but not the best.

Being professional has more to do with your interaction with your clients and the resulting artwork you can give them. Being reliable, coming through with great shots no matter what, etc. Getting the shots, making the client look amazing, creating beautiful art from their day. That is what professional wedding photography is about and that is really where the difference between $1000 wedding photographers and $5000 + wedding photographers comes in.

Having the best gear just makes it easier.

I'm always a little wary of someone who says you "can't" do something.

I'd also be wary of a wedding photographer claiming to be "professional" having only shot 2 weddings and using a consumer slr.

Well I use the D7000 (soon to be D7200 I hope) but I have a D3200 as a spare and use it with a 10=20 lens.. Now I could shoot a wedding with the D3200 but I would have to keep faffing with the controls for certain shots whilst with the D7000 I have U1 U2 A P so I can just flick in what I need and I have 2 chips in case one fails ..... But a good wedding photographer can handle the clients well and get the best out of them and the location which is nothing to do with the camera.....
If someone says get a better camera I say pay me more I am here to make money not spend money on equipment ...

I have always been a firm believer in the "operator" not the "equipment". However the consistency of a D4 is much greater than a D3100 or D7000. What I mean is that it has more low light abilities, and faster shutter burst, and better focusing system, thus providing better potential for images. Build quality and features overall can have great impact on quality of work.

Of course a D4 is going to do better probably...

Probably or probably not

Low light ability .....its always light enough to read a book in the darkest church which is more than enough.

faster shutter busrst...while I always take two shots do I want them so fast that I get two with the bride blinking ..??

Better focus system ..possibly but I always use AF-S

In the end it all comes down to profit ....more spent on equipment for a 1% gain is less money in the bank ..a bankrupt wedding photographer is not a wedding photographer anymore

pistnbroke said:

Probably or probably not

Low light ability .....its always light enough to read a book in the darkest church which is more than enough.

faster shutter busrst...while I always take two shots do I want them so fast that I get two with the bride blinking ..??

Better focus system ..possibly but I always use AF-S

In the end it all comes down to profit ....more spent on equipment for a 1% gain is less money in the bank ..a bankrupt wedding photographer is not a wedding photographer anymore

Click to expand...

While this is true to an extent, I would not show up to a wedding shooting on a D3100. I have done many weddings, and 99% of the church's lighting is still dark enough to make me raise the iso. In either way, there is no way a D3200/D5200 or a D7000 is going to achieve the same exact results as a D4 or a D800. They are not built as tough either.

If you did the photos with a D4 and a D7000 would you be able to tell the difference ? I doubt it .

Would the customer tell the difference ...No

would the bank manager know the difference Yes

That's a pretty bold statement. Totally inaccurate, but bold nonetheless.

Browncoat said:

That's a pretty bold statement. Totally inaccurate, but bold nonetheless.

Click to expand...

I agree. There is no way somebody is going to show up to a wedding with a D7000 and produce the goods that a D800 or D4 does. If there were 2 photographers very equal in skills at the same wedding, at the same time, in the same exact weather. The D4/D800 cameras will produce VERY noticeably better images. YES I could tell right off the bat!

No offense when I say this "Anyone" who can't tell the difference in a photo between a D7000/D3200/D5200 and a D800/E is just blind!