Crop camera wedding shots

crop body + high quality lenses is and will be always better than ff + mediocre/crappy lenses
but it does seem that some of those so called pro photographers are so damn cheap that they use Rebels with kit lenses. I hope they will get sued like this one

http://www.youtube.com …z-07D5KoE&feature=relate​d

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14906676
crop body + high quality lenses is and will be always better than ff + mediocre/crappy lenses
but it does seem that some of those so called pro photographers are so damn cheap that they use Rebels with kit lenses. I hope they will get sued like this one

http://www.youtube.com …z-07D5KoE&feature=relate​d

Even a rebel with a kit lens is not bad in and of itself...

cdifoto wrote in post #14906688
Even a rebel with a kit lens is not bad in and of itself...

I do agree that it is very adequate for everyday snap shots but when you are getting paid 1000 bucks + for shooting a wedding you should at least get some decent lenses especially considering the very narrow maximum aperture of those kit lenses and relatively poor performance like sharpness and AF speed and accuracy of those lenses.

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14906705
I do agree that it is very adequate for everyday snap shots but when you are getting paid 1000 bucks + for shooting a wedding you should at least get some decent lenses especially considering the very narrow maximum aperture of those kit lenses and relatively poor performance like sharpness and AF speed and accuracy of those lenses.

I'm just finding it awesome that the judge knows quite a bit about photography - I bet the photographers didn't expect that. I agree that the camera itself is fine, but they should have a fast prime or something better suited to the obvious low-light that comes with every indoor wedding. In this case its not so much the camera, as it is the lenses they are putting on it. **currently watching the video**

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14906705
I do agree that it is very adequate for everyday snap shots but when you are getting paid 1000 bucks + for shooting a wedding you should at least get some decent lenses especially considering the very narrow maximum aperture of those kit lenses and relatively poor performance like sharpness and AF speed and accuracy of those lenses.

Meh. It's all about the lighting and emotion. Every wedding photographer worth a damn knows that.

Christina.DazzleByDesi​gn wrote in post #14906734
I'm just finding it awesome that the judge knows quite a bit about photography - I bet the photographers didn't expect that. I agree that the camera itself is fine, but they should have a fast prime or something better suited to the obvious low-light that comes with every indoor wedding. In this case its not so much the camera, as it is the lenses they are putting on it. **currently watching the video**

Correct me if I am wrong but the difference in IQ is not that hugely different between modern DSLRs sure the much much more expensive 5DIII and 1D X may produce less noise compared to the current Rebels but the main advantages offered by them are really not that important for shooting static and slow moving subjects so in the end what really can improve the quality of the images are the lenses you put in front of the sensor. It's the same doesn't matter if you shoot weddings or landscape or wildlife.

cdifoto wrote in post #14906763
Meh. It's all about the lighting and emotion. Every wedding photographer worth a damn knows that.

yes knowledge is very important but having good equipment is very important as well. Sure you can achieve good results with a kit lens but it does impose a lot of limitations and using cheap low quality equipment is just wrong when charging that much money. It's funny we are talking about this because I was watching this video earlier

http://youtu.be/zh6zr3​wKRV0

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14906824
Correct me if I am wrong but the difference in IQ is not that hugely different between modern DSLRs sure the much much more expensive 5DIII and 1D X may produce less noise compared to the current Rebels but the main advantages offered by them are really not that important for shooting static and slow moving subjects so in the end what really can improve the quality of the images are the lenses you put in front of the sensor. It's the same doesn't matter if you shoot weddings or landscape or wildlife.

yes knowledge is very important but having good equipment is very important as well. Sure you can achieve good results with a kit lens but it does impose a lot of limitations and using cheap low quality equipment is just wrong when charging that much money. It's funny we are talking about this because I was watching this video earlier

http://youtu.be/zh6zr3​wKRV0

That video would not exist and those photographers would never have gone to court if they understood lighting and produced good results. The equipment is not the reason they were sued. As far as being "wrong" - it's not "wrong" if the results are good. Charging a good amount of money ($1000 isn't a lot of money) doesn't automatically mean the gear has to be expensive.

People who think they can just buy a fast lens and crank up the ISO to get amazing images are in for a surprise.

EDIT: Sorry I thought it was the Judge Joe Brown lawsuit video.

As you can see and hear in that video the cheap and crappy equipment can put serious limits to creativity and require a lot of skills and thinking out of the box to somewhat compensate for those. then of course I am sure not many people in this forum are not even close to as good as the pro photographer in that video. So if 1000 bucks is not a lot of money then paying 1000 USD for a high quality L lens is really not much at all considering how many years you will be able to use it to create superior images as oppose to keep shooting with kit lenses.

IMO: Knowledge is more important than equipment. Probably doing a wedding with a slow lens is not the best equipment to use, but if you know how to use lighting, dragging the shutter, post process,etc then you can achieve great results.. And if you don't know anything, but have great lenses the results would be mediocre. And I think that is why they are a lot of people claiming they are "Pros" because are doing weddings with expensive lenses, just because they read this is the best for weddings, and they say oh yeah my pics are great, but they are trash cuz they don't have a clue how to use it..

Real photographers will not cry because they don't have the ultimate lens/bodys, they are photographers because they know how to use any equipment they hold, and produce great results.

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #14907189
As you can see and hear in that video the cheap and crappy equipment can put serious limits to creativity and require a lot of skills and thinking out of the box to somewhat compensate for those. then of course I am sure not many people in this forum are not even close to as good as the pro photographer in that video. So if 1000 bucks is not a lot of money then paying 1000 USD for a high quality L lens is really not much at all considering how many years you will be able to use it to create superior images as oppose to keep shooting with kit lenses.

You're nuts if you expect a $1000 wedding professional to have the latest and greatest top end equipment.

A skilled professional could blow your mind with the kit lens and a rebel. Of course a skilled professional isn't going to be a mere $1000 though either, and probably wouldn't use the kit lens and rebel simply because it's not a very durable combination.

i dont have weddings photos
but
You can make miracles with cheaper lenses
like the 50mm 1.8

It's amazing how the OP asked about camera bodys:

jaomul wrote in post #14904500
While ff cameras are no doubt better for weddings I hoped some of the people who use their cheaper smaller cropped cousins could post to show how good they can be. We are always told its not the camera. Please post!

And a couple posts later this thread turned into a lens argument.

Eagle wrote in post #14907973
And a couple posts later this thread turned into a lens argument.

And a "GOOD" lens IS probably more important than the selection of a body, FF or Crop, when shooting something as important as a wedding for hire.

Perfect exmaple ... was asked to be a 2nd shooter for a wedding, the photographer's 1st wedding. Minister tells use minutes before the wedding is to begin, "NO flash in the church during the ceremony!" Panic hits the photog! Think he was glad he asked me! I DID have the ability to capture the shots in the church, with my 10D body because I do have better lenses.

Granted, the OP only asked about bodies but the body is only one part of the photography and the selection of a lens or lenses is as important! Should help the OP just as much as suggesting this body over that body!

body is more important than lens when discussing two different form factors (crop vs FF).

the camera does make quite the difference when comparing between two different form factors, but not so much within the same form factor (low level crop vs high level crop)