wedding photographer uses mirrorless camera?

[ManWearPants]

With DSLR, personally, I have a lot less keeper then if I shoot with slower camera system, the reason is simple, I spend more time getting the shots... In portrait environment, my typical shoot will yield about 50+ shots that I show my clients. I will shoot anything between 180-220 shots on DSLR to get that amount. I would should about 80-90 shots on my Leica M or H4D to yield the same number of shots. Shooting with DSLR do make like a lot easier as compare with slower system, so I tend to shoot more. If you think of it, it really makes no different if I shoot with NEX 7 with Leica lens on it.

Hart

I would think the stats above can be viewed as glass half empty or half full. It can be the slower system being more productive or the DSLR allowing more choices for your client. Isn't having a bigger pool to narrow down better? This means you have the buffer to discard 3-4 pictures for every one chosen.

Without being gear specific, shoot an entire wedding from pre-wedding to actual day event using mirrorless with manual focus lenses or mirrorless with fixed focal length lens will be hard for me to accept. Some part of a wedding with some mirrorless system with known qualities can be accepted.

My remaining 2 questions would be the photographer offering to use mirrorless.
1) Is he trying to enter the profession with a mirrorless or is already a mirrorless convert from DSLR professional?
2) For the latter in Q1. Is he trying to trim his cost or feel that his deliverables with mirrorless is on par or better than with DSLR?

I am sure there are other clients/potential clients who think and feel like me. So I am really being the advocate's devil here to the wedding photographer's community who want to go lighter and probably cheaper on gears. Please excuse me if I have stepped on anyone's toe.

 

[daredevil123]

Two observations...

1. Although mirrorless has really progressed these few years, have it really come up to par to the top full frame DSLRs? I have used a wide range of mirrorless cameras as well as DSLRs. Mirrorless certainly is getting very close to the mid level DSLRs but still quite some way off from top FF DSLRs. We are not just talking about ISO performance here, but also other important things like AF speed and accuracy, metering as well as handling. Seriously speaking, if I am to shoot a 10 hour wedding, I rather have a DSLR where I can hold and operate much more comfortably, than a mirrorless camera with a flash attached. The smaller flashes that comes with the mirrorless cameras are not powerful enough for most situations and to mount those big flashes on top is just crazy. So in the end, a DSLR will handle better, especially with the beefier hand grip.

2. Most customers, unfortunately will tend to judge you on frist impression. big cameras instill more confidence. Not saying that it has anything to do with output... but in the end, will you be willing to take the risk that your smaller system will somehow unsettle your customer? And please do not bring Leica into the picture. Simply because Leica is a luxury brand, and some customers actually like having Leicas in the mix. Makes them look cool.

 

[nitewalk]

Two observations...

1. Although mirrorless has really progressed these few years, have it really come up to par to the top full frame DSLRs? I have used a wide range of mirrorless cameras as well as DSLRs. Mirrorless certainly is getting very close to the mid level DSLRs but still quite some way off from top FF DSLRs. We are not just talking about ISO performance here, but also other important things like AF speed and accuracy, metering as well as handling. Seriously speaking, if I am to shoot a 10 hour wedding, I rather have a DSLR where I can hold and operate much more comfortably, than a mirrorless camera with a flash attached. The smaller flashes that comes with the mirrorless cameras are not powerful enough for most situations and to mount those big flashes on top is just crazy. So in the end, a DSLR will handle better, especially with the beefier hand grip.

2. Most customers, unfortunately will tend to judge you on frist impression. big cameras instill more confidence. Not saying that it has anything to do with output... but in the end, will you be willing to take the risk that your smaller system will somehow unsettle your customer? And please do not bring Leica into the picture. Simply because Leica is a luxury brand, and some customers actually like having Leicas in the mix. Makes them look cool.

Well, i made point 2 as u did earlier as well, but doesn't seem to be well-received.

 

[kandinsky]

I think it's a problem only if there was any misrepresentation involved. Generally as long as you're upfront with your process, shouldn't be a problem. There'll be less 'risk' that a client will be unsettled/surprised if they hired you after they knew exactly what they're going to get. Nobody's getting forced to do anything, so, I don't see anyone getting hurt unless there was misrepresentation involved.

E.g., Client views a portfolio of weddings shot with CILC – clearly indicated and stated by photographer. Photographer then informs client that their wedding will also be shot with CILC if they hire him/her. If client likes what they see in the portfolio, agreeable with the rates, perhaps they won't care whether CILC or DSLR. All they know is that this photographer produced these pictures we like with CILC. We like the photos, he'll use the same tool, we'll hire him. If client likes everything but for various reasons (outlined by previous posters) CILC usage is a deal breaker, then they'll just look for someone else that fits their requirements. Everyone moves on.

 

[silvermoon1407]

Its just a matter of time before smaller cameras become mainstream. Could be a year or two. Could b a decade. But the time will come.

 

[OoStarDustoO]

Its just a matter of time before smaller cameras become mainstream. Could be a year or two. Could b a decade. But the time will come.

Agree. We have to embrace new technology as time past. There is always tonnes of reasons why existing test and proven equipment are best but then there are also new reasons why new technology can be better.

If the person operating it knows the exact advantage of one equipment over another, i believe the move should be welcome.

If then operator simple induce mirrorless camera as his equipment purely because "it is smaller and light", then something is wrong.

BTW, my friend just had his wedding video shot using a mirrorless camera and at the point of time when i saw it, i was thinking "Wah, paid so much for the service but this person use a mirrorless camera to shoot video? Can or not?" and i was skeptical and even to a point of pity my friend.

But the guess what? The end product is superb and i am speechless.

Therefore, do not judge a person's end product by his equipment. Judge when only the end product comes out.

Even if the end product is not as ideal, it may be the operator, not the equipment.

If anyone don't like someone to cover your wedding using mirrorless cam, then don't engage them, but can you say the end product will be bad? I don't think so.

I read about how top range DSLR equipment can "own" the mirrorless system, but not everyone who shoots with DSLR use top range equipment.

Some of us had read how some photographer (DSLR user) shoot using kit lens.

 

[windwaver]

Two observations...

1. Although mirrorless has really progressed these few years, have it really come up to par to the top full frame DSLRs? I have used a wide range of mirrorless cameras as well as DSLRs. Mirrorless certainly is getting very close to the mid level DSLRs but still quite some way off from top FF DSLRs. We are not just talking about ISO performance here, but also other important things like AF speed and accuracy, metering as well as handling. Seriously speaking, if I am to shoot a 10 hour wedding, I rather have a DSLR where I can hold and operate much more comfortably, than a mirrorless camera with a flash attached. The smaller flashes that comes with the mirrorless cameras are not powerful enough for most situations and to mount those big flashes on top is just crazy. So in the end, a DSLR will handle better, especially with the beefier hand grip.

I have to agree with this point. Mirrorless at its current best is pretty much at most mid range DSLR but then the mass market constitute the larger business pie and being able to tap into this market is tremendous. DSLRs still have their market segment but that is thinning as we speak. A good brand should have a range where it covers all segments to be successful. Probably that's why we're seeing some major camera makers playing catch up now which is in my opinion a little too late.

 

[XavierShoot]

Something to share

Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.
Even Ansel said "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it."
Your equipment DOES NOT affect the quality of your image.
The less time and effort you spend worrying about your equipment the more time and effort you can spend creating great images.
The right equipment just makes it easier, faster or more convenient for you to get the results you need.

From kenrockwell

 

[daredevil123]

Something to share

Maybe because it's entirely an artist's eye, patience and skill that makes an image and not his tools.
Even Ansel said "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it."
Your equipment DOES NOT affect the quality of your image.
The less time and effort you spend worrying about your equipment the more time and effort you can spend creating great images.
The right equipment just makes it easier, faster or more convenient for you to get the results you need.

From kenrockwell

The key words being the Right equipment.

I agree with your point that the photographer makes the difference. But having the right tool for the right job is also important. We are not talking about whether the pictures will be bad or not. I am sure in the right hands, the pictures will still be great. But what some of us are talking about is Consumer confidence.

Coming back from a consumer's viewpoint, will the bride & groom be comfortable that the photographer is not using the best tools out there to shoot your big day? especially if they are paying for a high end package? We are not talking about quality of pictures here. But it is a fact that some customers will walk away if they know that the photographer is using mirrorless. And if the photographer do not communicate the equipment used beforehand, he/she is not managing his customer's expectations properly and not doing enough disclosure. This will give room for potential unhappiness, complaints and even confrontations.

An Analogy: You can operate a limousine business using top of the line big luxury cars. You can also do the same with Toyota Camry. Both methods will bring the customer from point A to B in comfort. But it is imperative to disclose the cars bring used when the customer signs up for the service.. if not you will get an earful.

In the end, it is how you position yourself as a business. If you are comfortable and confident that you are able to still do well even when disclosing what camera systems you will be using. Then it is great. But if you do not disclose... and suddenly show up on the big day with mirrorless... there is a lot of leeway for a lot of trouble.

Personally, I prefer DSLRs to mirrorless. Why? because they are more comfortable to hold for longer periods. And the AF, shutter lag performance is superior. Does it make my pictures any better? probably not directly, but it helps me to work better and feel better and I will get better pictures. But that is me.