wedding photographer uses mirrorless camera?
- Thread starter Exposure
- Start date
My feedback is either
1) This guy is really that good until the couple can trust him to shoot a wedding just with a mirrorless camera
or
2) He is just plain "Gung Ho" to challenge himself at the expense of the couple's once in a lifetime happiness
1) This guy is really that good until the couple can trust him to shoot a wedding just with a mirrorless camera
or
2) He is just plain "Gung Ho" to challenge himself at the expense of the couple's once in a lifetime happiness
If the guy is good,does it matter what camera he uses?
An experienced photog should be able to capture the same shots be it using a DSLR or Mirrorless imho
An experienced photog should be able to capture the same shots be it using a DSLR or Mirrorless imho
using or not using "whatever camera" is not a selling point of photography BUSINESS. and it shouldn't be.
I'm more of a result oriented guy.
If the result is good, who cares?
Would you trust my daughter (4yrs old) with D3 to shoot wedding, or a world class pro with Oly OM-D?
If the result is good, who cares?
Would you trust my daughter (4yrs old) with D3 to shoot wedding, or a world class pro with Oly OM-D?
It really depends on what the photographer is looking for...
If Leica M is allow to be consider mirrorless, well, what do you think? Don't think anyone will make any noise? well, at least for people who know that?
If you want a small package while still getting excellent result as well as being invisible at the wedding, why not? at the current trend, even NEX-7 with a combination of Leica 35mm, 50mm and 90mm can achieve a lot in a capable hand.
I shoot with Mirroless, FF DSLR and MF Digital on my portrait work, and it doesn't really mean much as long as I could produce the result.
Please stop judging the photographer by the gear that they use... it is just a tool. Each tool has its plus and minuses.
Photographer is not equal to Camera Operator.
Regards,
Hart
If Leica M is allow to be consider mirrorless, well, what do you think? Don't think anyone will make any noise? well, at least for people who know that?
If you want a small package while still getting excellent result as well as being invisible at the wedding, why not? at the current trend, even NEX-7 with a combination of Leica 35mm, 50mm and 90mm can achieve a lot in a capable hand.
I shoot with Mirroless, FF DSLR and MF Digital on my portrait work, and it doesn't really mean much as long as I could produce the result.
Please stop judging the photographer by the gear that they use... it is just a tool. Each tool has its plus and minuses.
Photographer is not equal to Camera Operator.
Regards,
Hart
I'd be fine with it, and i'm sure if u r into photography u'll most probably understand that mirror-less cameras nowadays aren't much that diff from the high end cameras. Off-hand i can count at least 5 bros who dumped their full frames/high-end DLSRs for the OMD (pls, not wanting to make any offence here - apologies if u're offended)
I'd be more particular with the skills of the photographer and spend more time looking at his portfolio than his camera. Foxshade's example makes a lot of sense. Give an amateur a D3 and i don't think the person even can use it properly.
I'd be more particular with the skills of the photographer and spend more time looking at his portfolio than his camera. Foxshade's example makes a lot of sense. Give an amateur a D3 and i don't think the person even can use it properly.
I was pondering about this question, and the conclusion was like what most have mentioned. There is something else which pop up which may not be generally true but worth considering. I was thinking there could be clients who are more particular if you use mirror-less. They could possibly be more picky and if there is a little mistake, they will go "see? don't bring don't use pro camera lah, see what happen now!". Just saying there could be such people.
just wondering, the client/customers hiring you is because they see the photos created by you or your gear set up??
Good question.
I got one too. How many wedding photographers are confident shooting a wedding with mirrorless?
I got one too. How many wedding photographers are confident shooting a wedding with mirrorless?
When you are in business of photography, regardless what you use, there aren't much room for error.
But sure, in terms of brand image, you should use whatever that is not questionable by clients.
When in doubt, just use the best gear that is available that fit your budget.
Regards,
Hart
Agetan said:
What i mean is, there could be laymenwho doesn't understand that and judge. Then they will pounce on little errors, whereas a similar error by someone who uses FF may not receive the same flak. I understand, of course, that equipment doesnt translate to results, but what i'm thinking of are clueless clients. Possible?
Clueless people comments on anything... FF or not is not a question really.
For example, some clients generally prefer flat equally lit image, but photographer like to create profile using light and shadow... I don't think u get more or less comment on what camera you use.
Regards
Hart
I know of some good folks who use mirrorless systems for video.... But I digress...
I think the issue is multi-fold.
1. Technical Aspect
- Are the current mirrorless systems sufficiently mature?
+ Are the available systems able to effectively capture the scene? (Speed of focusing, quality image processor, quality of image sensor at various ISO etc.)
+ Is the lens selection adequate?
+ Are the accessories adequate? (Flash, secondary media slot etc.)
- Assuming that the 35mm dSLR systems are the de facto leaders in this field, do mirrorless systems offer any benefits that 35mm dSLR systems cannot?
2. Client Acceptance
- Can the client(s) accept the use of a mirrorless systems?
+ Do they trust the skill and output of both the photographer and the latter's tools?
+ If "face" in important to the client, then what are the perceptions of the guests on the use of the mirrorless systems?
3. Business Solutioning
- What advantages do a mirrorless system provide over a traditional setup? (Cost? Strategic advantage?)
I think with these pointers as starting points, you will be able to discern if there is a market sufficiently large for the use of mirrorless systems today for important personal events such as weddings.
I think the issue is multi-fold.
1. Technical Aspect
- Are the current mirrorless systems sufficiently mature?
+ Are the available systems able to effectively capture the scene? (Speed of focusing, quality image processor, quality of image sensor at various ISO etc.)
+ Is the lens selection adequate?
+ Are the accessories adequate? (Flash, secondary media slot etc.)
- Assuming that the 35mm dSLR systems are the de facto leaders in this field, do mirrorless systems offer any benefits that 35mm dSLR systems cannot?
2. Client Acceptance
- Can the client(s) accept the use of a mirrorless systems?
+ Do they trust the skill and output of both the photographer and the latter's tools?
+ If "face" in important to the client, then what are the perceptions of the guests on the use of the mirrorless systems?
3. Business Solutioning
- What advantages do a mirrorless system provide over a traditional setup? (Cost? Strategic advantage?)
I think with these pointers as starting points, you will be able to discern if there is a market sufficiently large for the use of mirrorless systems today for important personal events such as weddings.
Wedding photographer? What style of wedding photography? Actual day or pre-wedding?
I would say the some mirrorless are more than good enough for pre-wedding photography, and could be better in some aspects than some d-slrs for things that don't move too much. I've yet to see a mirrorless that meets both my demands for low-light performance AND fast shooting (refering to both shooting speed & AF). If you are doing traditional posed shots and group pictures, even the notorious EOS-M will do the job, and really well indeed.
With the mirrorless market so diverse now, there are really good and really sucky mirrorless cams. I've got a events buddy who already using OM-D for shooting events. I've heard of a videographer who is shooting hybrid video-slideshow with Nikon V1.
I would say the some mirrorless are more than good enough for pre-wedding photography, and could be better in some aspects than some d-slrs for things that don't move too much. I've yet to see a mirrorless that meets both my demands for low-light performance AND fast shooting (refering to both shooting speed & AF). If you are doing traditional posed shots and group pictures, even the notorious EOS-M will do the job, and really well indeed.
With the mirrorless market so diverse now, there are really good and really sucky mirrorless cams. I've got a events buddy who already using OM-D for shooting events. I've heard of a videographer who is shooting hybrid video-slideshow with Nikon V1.
Last edited:
it's not wrong to shoot with mirrorless....
but the issue goes beyond tat as some has pointed out.
remember that most cients would b/might be layman, and the built-in/sunk-in idea is bigger the better...
but the issue goes beyond tat as some has pointed out.
remember that most cients would b/might be layman, and the built-in/sunk-in idea is bigger the better...
Need to look at it from the branding and packaging aspect. The way you dress, the equipment you use, the way you carry yourself and the way you guide and reassure your customer.
Everything is about packaging these days. Hard to trust a doctor in shorts and singlets. Will probably ask to see his license first.
Everything is about packaging these days. Hard to trust a doctor in shorts and singlets. Will probably ask to see his license first.
Similar threads
