Recently, a relative got married, and invited me. She asked me to take pictures, too, even though she'd hired a wedding photographer. I went with a handheld off-camera flash setup (T2i, Sigma 17-70mm, f/2.8-4, and 580EX II modified).
The WP had the same camera but with the kit lens and a lesser dedicated flash mounted on the camera without any light modifier.
The WP and I briefly talked. She did have some training and had begun doing weddings about a year or so ago. I will say she did know how to arrange and set up shots for documenting a wedding.
I saw a similar WP setup and activity in Texas a few years ago.
Both weddings had a 100 or more attendees, with an ample budget for the occasion.
I'd assumed a WP would bring top-end photo gear including modified lighting equipment, if not owned then surely rented, to match the importance of the occasion.
My question: How common is it for a hired WP to use non-pro gear and unmodified flash lighting?
I'd guess its probably very common... there are always noobs buying a dslr with the hopes of making millions in this industry.
is it common among the people that post here... no, but that's not what you asked. My guess is that the couples in both of your scenarios didn't do their homework and hired someone sub-par.
Can't always blame it on the photographer unless the photographer lie about their experience and display someone else's work. Most of the time there are a lot of couple who really don't care much about their wedding photo and don't want to pay a whole lot.
RichardLavigne wrote:
is it common among the people that post here... no, but that's not what you asked. My guess is that the couples in both of your scenarios didn't do their homework and hired someone sub-par.
...wtihout seeing any result you can predict the photographer was sub-par?
anotherview wrote:
My question: How common is it for a hired WP to use non-pro gear and unmodified flash lighting?
I shoot weddings with a Nikon D7000 now (used to be 3 d700's) and use a Tokina 11-16 f2.8, Nikon 35 1.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 180 2.8 and sigma 50 2.8 macro. Most of those lenses are not the top of the line pro lens, the camera is not a pro body either.
I also have 8 years shooting weddings and provide a nice product to my clients as well as they provide me with a nice check.
So is top pro gear needed? NOPE!
Would I like to use top pro gear? Nope! Dont need it so why waste the money. Plus I am the type that needs to have the newest stuff all the time. SO if a newer camera comes out later this year, I am sure I will sell my d7000's and get it. If a newer lens comes out that I think I would need in my work, then I will sell something and get it or just get it... It isnt always the best tools, it is how you se those tools.
Like many have said here before. They know people who shot with a Canon 1dsmkIII and they had crappy pictures. Someone else shot with a 20d and had far better pictures. It is all how you use your tools.
morganb4 wrote:
Talk to Melanie (unblinkable). She does not own any L glass but routinely outclasses many shooters on this forum.
to suggest this, implies that Melanie is the norm... and she is certainly not. Melanie can do many things that most of us cannot... let alone the average shooter with a T2i and kit lens.
I used to help a professional wedding photographer in the Miami area. It was film then and he only used the finest Hasselblad cameras and lenses. He also used several flashes to illuminate the event all of them triggered by radio. His work was impeccable and his prices high. He was booked most weekends during the year.
I learned that it pays off to have professional gear for these events. I am not saying professional gear is indispensable for great shots but it certainly helps to convey the image of the photographer.
With digital, cameras similar in appearance to regular 35mm cameras is what most professionals are using. It could be kind of embarrassing, in my opinion, having someone else in the wedding using the same amateur gear the professional photographer is using.
Such a simple set up, like a camera with a flash and entry level optics could be an invitation to disaster, especially if something fails. Backups are very important under those conditions and highly recommended.
A good wedding photographer can shoot a wedding with a point and shoot using his or her expertise but when a professional camera is in use it commands attention and believe me, people notice.
People use what they have, what they like and what they can afford. No offense to Mr. Rodriquez, but not everyone goes to the wedding with the latest and the greatest gear. When showing samples, getting the bride to book, do they look at your work or do you have your tools on the table talking about cameras and lenses?
I worked with and for those that had the very best, Hassleblad included. If they can make the gear do what they want it to do that was just fine with me. It also had nothing to do with me.
It's interesting to see the dramatic, emotional responses to the "I saw a photographer shoot a wedding without pro grade gear" reports.
Personally, I don't really understand what the problem is. Is it because we can physically see what equipment someone is working with and we rush to judge their worth based on that? Is it a deep seeded hidden jealousy issue? Someone who you deem to be unworthy to shoot a wedding got the job instead of someone you would deem to be worthy of being hired? Is it a disrespect for the client who didn't hire a person based on their equipment, but you are scared to mock them so instead you take it out on the photographer?
Really what is it?
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a business that is judged more by the tools used to create the final product, than the actual quality of the final product.
I have three 20+ year old manual focus lenses that I use on a regular basis for weddings. Would my work, unseen, be deemed shitty because I don't have auto-focus, nano coated glass, and I have to calculate metering and shutter speed without the help of the camera? Or am I considered "pro" enough because I can operate manual everything settings on a digital camera/manual lens combo?
monoatomic72 wrote:
It's interesting to see the dramatic, emotional responses to the "I saw a photographer shoot a wedding without pro grade gear" reports.
Personally, I don't really understand what the problem is. Is it because we can physically see what equipment someone is working with and we rush to judge their worth based on that? Is it a deep seeded hidden jealousy issue? Someone who you deem to be unworthy to shoot a wedding got the job instead of someone you would deem to be worthy of being hired? Is it a disrespect for the client who didn't hire a person based on their equipment, but you are scared to mock them so instead you take it out on the photographer?
Really what is it?
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a business that is judged more by the tools used to create the final product, than the actual quality of the final product.
I have three 20+ year old manual focus lenses that I use on a regular basis for weddings. Would my work, unseen, be deemed shitty because I don't have auto-focus, nano coated glass, and I have to calculate metering and shutter speed without the help of the camera? Or am I considered "pro" enough because I can operate manual everything settings on a digital camera/manual lens combo?...Show more →
This is bunk... every single one of us judges the companies we deal with based on their level of technology and gear they use and provide us with the product we want. When you take your car to get worked on, do you bring it to the shop down the street that can do laser alignment or do you bring it to uncle bobby because he can do a string alignment? Are you still using dial up to access Fred Miranda or have you upgraded to the new fangled high speed internet?
If you've chosen to use 20 year old manual focus lenses.... you've chosen to do so because in your professional opinion they offer you a look and style that isn't compatibly with the latest technology. It's still a decision that's based on experience and knowledge. a Rebel T2i and kit lens represents none of those things and using one in a professional setting is silly.
Back in 2007 I was forced to shoot an entire wedding with a Rebel, kit lens, and an 85 1.8 (don't ask why but it has something to do with a river) .. using a film body as backup.
