A point of interest.

[Cyrus]

Yesterday I went to a wedding where the contracted photographer was a female with another female offsider. Both togs had a Canon 350D and kit lenses with NO external flash, just using the incamera flash.

I found this to be quite odd, in fact only once did I see one of them change lenses to a sigma long lens for candid shots after the ceremony.

Just wondering about your thoughts.

[Wilt]

Wedding wannabe's starting on a very tight budget and trying to get by with what they own already. Or wedding wannabe's who do not comprehend flash well enough to try using an external unit on a bracket. Or friends/relatives of the bride who cannot afford to hire real photographers who have suitable equipment and knowledge and experience.

[MHP]

or totally pro photographer who just had ALL her Nikon gear stolen and so had to borrow this gear from a friend. they don't know much about the gear cause they're not used to it so aren't using the flash incase because it is just too much to think about. But she intends to buy new Canon equipment after using the friends gear now :-D

[cdifoto]

My thoughts:

Hope they didn't charge much, if anything. Nothing against working photogs on a budget, but there's only so much you can do with the kit lens.

[Skrim17]

the proof is in the pudding, wait and see what their photos look like.

[tim]

Betcha Toogy and a few others here could make great images with a 350D and kit lens. In general i'd be sceptical of "professionals" using such limited/limiting equipment.

[Cyrus]

that was my point Tim. I have nothing against somebody use a standard piece of equipment, I'm not loaded with ggear so I work with what I have. I thought it was extremely suprising to see so called "pros" with such limited gear.

[cdifoto]

And my point is that even a seasoned pro can only do so much with a f/5.6 lens and no external flash to bounce. Unless, of course, this was a broad daylight wedding (which I have yet to have the pleasure to shoot).

[Toogy]

Although I have taken some pretty good pictures with my old 300D and kit lens, I would shudder in fear if I ever had to use that lens to shoot a wedding!! :) Well unless it was an outdoor wedding and I could shoot at F8.
The biggest problem I see is the onboard flash, I cannot fathom how that would work well at all.
Now if I HAD to use a 350D with a kit lens, I'd try and shoot everything without flash, at ISO 1600 and convert to B&W and call it "fine" art ;)

[monter]

Yesterday I went to a wedding where the contracted photographer was a female with another female offsider.

Why is the fact that they were female important??????

[cdifoto]

Why is the fact that they were female important??????

In case you have to identify them in a lineup...so you don't accidentally pick the big guy on the end. :)

[monter]

LOL!! Well that makes sense then!

[ssim]

I attended a wedding a couple of months ago as a guest. The photographers were a husband and wife team. The husband was shooting Nikon film and no flash and the wife had a 20D using only the popup flash. I too thought that this was risky at best.

I went over to the parents of the bride the other day to see the shots. The film were all done in black and white (which the families were disappointed about). Generally they were decent but the ones in the park in the shade certainly could have used some fill. The digital images weren't bad, in fact better than I had imagined.

The point that I am trying to make is that you cannot assume that because someone doesn't have a gazillion dollars worth of equipment that they can't produce quality work. I saw a site once of a guy that did glamour work with a 350D, I was in awe. As well, as has been noted, those that are just starting out or trying their hand in wedding photography are not going to be overly equipped.

I've seen some amazing work by limited equipment lists and seen some crap work by photographers with the Hasselblads you can buy. You cannot qualify the price charged by the equipment they are using only the final results.

[liza]

Agreed. And Toogy could make great images with a pinhole camera!

[Dimitry]

Who's Toogy? Unless he posts very little I haven't seen that many posts by him.

This thread reminds me of an article on Ken Rockwell's page about the medium of photography vs the message it's trying to convey and his view is that the message is much more important than the medium and that's what most people should focus on.

[tim]

Who's Toogy? Unless he posts very little I haven't seen that many posts by him.

Look at the list of threads in the wedding forum for threads he's started.

[grego]

I'd be worried, to generalize it.

There are many inexperienced people who jump into photography, especially wedding photography. Makes me think of the real estate agent. Many people get in, and only see the glamour part. With that said, situations will help dictate what tools can be used. There are always limits. Sometimes they can be pushed, but sometimes the stuff is not enough, even if you get a highly skilled person.

[Cyrus]

Why is the fact that they were female important??????

I didn't say it was "important" however it was relevant to the facts so I wrote it.... the same as I would have done if it were two males, or one male and two females or a polar bear taking the photos ;)

Cyrus