Crop camera wedding shots

Very predictable outcome for this topic. Sad.

jack880 wrote in post #14910856
Here are mine - I wasn't the official photographer, I was just a guest with a camera...

All with the 7D - very low light so had to use ISO3200 for some of the indoor shots...


WED_0401 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0580 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0732 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0650 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0820 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0407 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0646 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr


WED_0758 as Smart Object-1 by J_Q_H, on Flickr

Nice job, Jack! Beautiful shots!

Yogi Bear wrote in post #14912331
Nice job, Jack! Beautiful shots!

Thanks a lot mate! Some are pretty noisy, but hey, what else can you do in near darkness with a 7D? I don't think the noise really matters though, gives it a sort of low-light atmosphere maybe....?

I disagree that weddings are not a demanding environment - the light is often poor, and it's a one-off opportunity - you can't ask them to do the ceremony again because you didn't have the right shutter speed selected.

But, I agree that there is no reason not to use a crop sensor. I think the FF vs crop is irrelevant. A 1Ds is FF, but would have more noise than a crop sensor 7D. I think for the most part it's FF snobbery, but that's a separate conversation...

Just a small sample from my Flickr. I'm not really seeing how FF, in and of itself, is necessarily "better" for weddings. Sure, less noise for any given ISO, nothing a little bounce flash and/or noise reduction can't fix.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

Hey Mark.. that DJ Shot is very interesting, well done !

CyberManiaK wrote in post #14915055
Hey Mark.. that DJ Shot is very interesting, well done !

Thanks, for some reason I'm fond of that pic as well. Taken at f/1.8 with the 28mm, ISO 1600, and I believe something like 1/60 shutter

mannetti21 wrote in post #14915102
Thanks, for some reason I'm fond of that pic as well. Taken at f/1.8 with the 28mm, ISO 1600, and I believe something like 1/60 shutter

I think the reason why is so interesting, is because all the little buttons and the rivets looks like little sparkles and are well harmonized.. Repeat well done on that one ! I really like it.

I posted these in another thread, we had a 350D, 40d, and a 7d.

Since you wanted some photos, i thought id share - nothing spectacular, but it was my first 'wedding shoot' - was a fun and rewardin experience!

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61387457​36/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61388367​68/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61383023​19/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61388662​54/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61388760​98/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61388821​76/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61388836​84/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/mrkgoo/61383401​75/

Eagle wrote in post #14907973
It's amazing how the OP asked about camera bodys:

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

I'll chime in with this:

Bigger pixels = lower noise & greater dynamic range.

I was just a guest, but this picture was taken on Saturday with my T2i and 18-55mm kit lens.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image%2fjpeg'

mclaren777 wrote in post #14916200
I was just a guest, but this picture was taken on Saturday with my T2i and 18-55mm kit lens.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image%2fjpeg'

Could use a little cropping.. Love the expressions though.

nice jack880

jaomul wrote in post #14918114
nice jack880

Thanks a lot mate