[wed7]

What camera brand model would you advice to be used for wedding? I want to do part time wedding photography as a 2nd or 3rd shooter but mostly they hire those who have FF.

I cannot afford Pentax FF hence I am looking for your recommendations.

Thank you and Happy New Year.

[UncleVanya]

I have seen a lot of second shooters using apsc. I'm afraid that it may vary by photographer and region more than by simply format. I would solicit requirements locally and come back here for more advice after you have that feedback.

Recently I met a second shooter using a k5iis at a wedding. His main pro work is done on 6x7. Tools are a means to an end - the skill and the eye are the most important. However the first shooter may want a specific brand to have familiar results in post processing.

[photoptimist]

Have you talked to those who might hire you? They might have recommendations or requirements of specific brands and models.

It would be unfortunate if you bought a low-end FF and could not get hired.

Good luck!

[wed7]

I am from a third world country, as long as it's FF I can get many bookings.

I have a little experience in weddings and some events using apsc without problems as a second shooter. But later FF is part of their requirement. I am also aware that sometimes the you have to consider a specific brand in order to achieve a specific image output and ease in post.

Canon
5DMk2
6D

Nikon
D700

I only intend to buy a 35 and 85 not necessarily L category but something about DoF play.

I am still keeping my day job.

[UncleVanya]

I am from a third world country, as long as it's FF I can get many bookings.

I have a little experience in weddings and some events using apsc without problems as a second shooter. But later FF is part of their requirement. I am also aware that sometimes the you have to consider a specific brand in order to achieve a specific image output and ease in post.

Canon
5DMk2
6D

Nikon
D700

I only intend to buy a 35 and 85 not necessarily L category but something about DoF play.

I am still keeping my day job.

I am afraid we don't know your market. I would have said the Nikon D600 or so would be the best compromise. I am shocked that a 12mp FF is adequate for weddings given the large size prints favored by brides. But in thinking about it I guess it makes reasonable sense as long as you don't have to crop much.

[BigMackCam]

I only intend to buy a 35 and 85 not necessarily L category but something about DoF play.

A question... given that your potential clients expect you to have a full-frame camera rather than APS-C, isn't there a risk that they'll also expect you to have the standard two zoom lens kit of a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8? I wonder what they'd make of you turning up with a couple of relatively small-to-mid-sized primes. You may want to check if there are any expectations on lenses before you make a decision...

EDIT: That leads me to another question... If you're planning to take paid wedding assignments where clients expect full-frame, won't you need a backup body too? What happens if your only full-frame camera dies or develops a fault? You need to be able to keep shooting otherwise you'll have very unhappy clients. You could, of course, take your K-30 and a couple of K-mount lenses with you, but that's APS-C format. Again, worth thinking about...

[jatrax]

What camera brand model would you advice to be used for wedding? I want to do part time wedding photography as a 2nd or 3rd shooter but mostly they hire those who have FF.

If you are stuck on FF then I would suggest you talk to those studios that might hire you. If they are limiting second shooters to FF cameras then I suspect they also want you to use the same brand so the RAW format is the same and you can use their lenses if needed.

Obviously I do not know your market but perhaps you should do more research there before asking general questions on a forum. I am skeptical about the "only FF" thing. At the last 6 or 7 weddings I have attended I saw no FF cameras at all. All paid photographers were using APS-C bodies. Perhaps there was a time when a FF body was clearly better but that is no longer the case. Particularly when comparing an older FF to a modern APS-C.

I am also surprised at your lens choices. Most pros I have seen working are using a combination of zooms not primes. But again I do not know anything about your market. Perhaps you could stop in and talk to 3 or 4 photographers that might hire you. Find out if they are interested, what they would need to see from you to hire you, what gear they require and so on. You need to make those contacts anyway so it seems to be a good place to start rather than buying gear that might be wrong.

[wed7]

I am afraid we don't know your market. I would have said the Nikon D600 or so would be the best compromise. I am shocked that a 12mp FF is adequate for weddings given the large size prints favored by brides. But in thinking about it I guess it makes reasonable sense as long as you don't have to crop much.

Yep 12MP is fine with minimal cropping that is. And we do not do large prints here. Mostly stills are incorporated into photobooks with print sizes not bigher than 16R. What really shines here are the actual presentations of the event highlights via SDE on both stills and videos

---------- Post added 01-04-2017 at 04:58 AM ----------

A question... given that your potential clients expect you to have a full-frame camera rather than APS-C, isn't there a risk that they'll also expect you to have the standard two zoom lens kit of a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8? I wonder what they'd make of you turning up with a couple of relatively small-to-mid-sized primes. You may want to check if there are any expectations on lenses before you make a decision...

EDIT: That leads me to another question... If you're planning to take paid wedding assignments where clients expect full-frame, won't you need a backup body too? What happens if your only full-frame camera dies or develops a fault? You need to be able to keep shooting otherwise you'll have very unhappy clients. You could, of course, take your K-30 and a couple of K-mount lenses with you, but that's APS-C format. Again, worth thinking about...

Unfortunately the photographers were the ones "requiring" to bring FF. It's like, we won't let you into this we'll rather choose those with FF.

As for lenses, of course those fast zooms are mandatory. I have those lens equivalent in apsc and will be paired with my Pentax as back up. But I need to start somewhere in FF. And in most cases (IMHO, 35 and 85) can be sufficient specially if that suits one's shooting style and would prefer to go minimalist. I can also benefit from others as they can lend some of theirs during gigs and eventually I can save some to own those.

I would really want to use Pentax FF. But I cannot afford it now, either I save up some more and lost possible gigs along the way or make a detour by taking another format in another system.

Thank you guys for all your input

---------- Post added 01-04-2017 at 05:23 AM ----------

If you are stuck on FF then I would suggest you talk to those studios that might hire you. If they are limiting second shooters to FF cameras then I suspect they also want you to use the same brand so the RAW format is the same and you can use their lenses if needed.

Obviously I do not know your market but perhaps you should do more research there before asking general questions on a forum. I am skeptical about the "only FF" thing. At the last 6 or 7 weddings I have attended I saw no FF cameras at all. All paid photographers were using APS-C bodies. Perhaps there was a time when a FF body was clearly better but that is no longer the case. Particularly when comparing an older FF to a modern APS-C.

I am also surprised at your lens choices. Most pros I have seen working are using a combination of zooms not primes. But again I do not know anything about your market. Perhaps you could stop in and talk to 3 or 4 photographers that might hire you. Find out if they are interested, what they would need to see from you to hire you, what gear they require and so on. You need to make those contacts anyway so it seems to be a good place to start rather than buying gear that might be wrong.

Thank you for the time and iput. Everyone knows, specially with the advancement of technology, apsc CAN deliver good images with proper technique and skills of the photographers. It is just that there is a thinking here that shooting with FF is better than APSC specially in handling DoF and noise

[jatrax]

It is just that there is a thinking here that shooting with FF is better than APSC specially in handling DoF and noise

I understand what you are saying. My point is only that you speak to the photographers you are interested in working for. Maybe you already have, I do not know. But basing an important buying decision on hearsay seems dangerous to me. Of course maybe you have already spoken to them, in which case then they should be able to tell you exactly what body to buy.

Another thought about "requiring" FF, is that it is simply an excuse to not hire someone. One of the agencies I use has had a long standing policy of only accepting images from certain cameras. They maintained a list and if you used a camera not on the list your were rejected. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence that newer, smaller and less expensive cameras produced better images than many of the ones on their list. They used it mostly as a simple rejection method to exclude anyone not willing to buy an expensive big camera. That policy has now gone away and they accept based on quality of image, but it stood for many years.

[UncleVanya]

If I were shooting a wedding and a guy with a K-5iis or K-3 and a 16-50 and 50-135 came to me and another guy with a K-1 and a 35 and 85 fixed prime I would be more inclined towards the guy with the zooms assuming their portfolios were similar in quality. The zooms are almost a requirement in the fast pace of wedding/event photos - staged shots are different but on the fly - you need the zoom. This is particularly true if you are shooting with only 12MP.

Honestly I'm afraid I can't help in this thread so I wish you well and hope you get the advice you need.

[surfar]

What you may want to weigh up is the cost of the gigs you miss out on versus the interest cost of borrowing the $$$ to get the K1(and lenses to do weddings)


Some film era lenses(used obviously) at least gets you the gig having a FF camera.The DFA lenses can come later.

[wed7]

If I were shooting a wedding and a guy with a K-5iis or K-3 and a 16-50 and 50-135 came to me and another guy with a K-1 and a 35 and 85 fixed prime I would be more inclined towards the guy with the zooms assuming their portfolios were similar in quality. The zooms are almost a requirement in the fast pace of wedding/event photos - staged shots are different but on the fly - you need the zoom. This is particularly true if you are shooting with only 12MP.

Honestly I'm afraid I can't help in this thread so I wish you well and hope you get the advice you need.

@Uncle Vanya
I know using primes in an event is a compromise compare to zooms, and that is why zooms are made of to provide convenience like in those applications, it is just that shooters are requiring an FF camera in order for you to be included in the bookings.

@
Surfar
Yep. I am also considering that way. They will never know that I am using crop only lenses as Pentax is almost non-existent :P

---------- Post added 01-04-2017 at 08:43 AM ----------

I understand what you are saying. My point is only that you speak to the photographers you are interested in working for. Maybe you already have, I do not know. But basing an important buying decision on hearsay seems dangerous to me. Of course maybe you have already spoken to them, in which case then they should be able to tell you exactly what body to buy.

Another thought about "requiring" FF, is that it is simply an excuse to not hire someone. One of the agencies I use has had a long standing policy of only accepting images from certain cameras. They maintained a list and if you used a camera not on the list your were rejected. Even in the face of overwhelming evidence that newer, smaller and less expensive cameras produced better images than many of the ones on their list. They used it mostly as a simple rejection method to exclude anyone not willing to buy an expensive big camera. That policy has now gone away and they accept based on quality of image, but it stood for many years.

Though not written in print, it is just sad that here excluding non-FF users are still somehow being practice. Oh well.

[pinholecam]

I get the impression that Canon is the 'standard' brand in the Philippines?


I'd say, look at what potential employers are using and buy that brand. (best you talk to them beforehand and know that they would even consider you and the pay is worth the investment)
Reasons why I say this :
1. Brand bias
2. Similar workflow and processing
3. Similar flash, lenses, CF cards, etc - in case these need to be shared


I don't see a problem with the 2nd, 3rd shooter using APSC though as their scope is usually to cover the 'other stuff' that one main photographer can't possibly cover. (other guests; other things happening at the same time; backstage; in-laws house; etc)


If you are sure of your work, I don't see a problem showing them to employers evenif you "only" have a Pentax or APSC.
On the lower scale of the market, the shots don't get processed much anyway (esp for 2nd, 3rd photographers) , and pay is low/exploitative.

[surfar]

I am using crop only lenses

The 35 and 70mm are pretty good on FF(from all reports)....the F and FA/faj are good too, these are FF(designed for film.) and work well.I own a K1 but use DA and film era lenses on it.

[wed7]

I get the impression that Canon is the 'standard' brand in the Philippines?


I'd say, look at what potential employers are using and buy that brand. (best you talk to them beforehand and know that they would even consider you and the pay is worth the investment)
Reasons why I say this :
1. Brand bias
2. Similar workflow and processing
3. Similar flash, lenses, CF cards, etc - in case these need to be shared


I don't see a problem with the 2nd, 3rd shooter using APSC though as their scope is usually to cover the 'other stuff' that one main photographer can't possibly cover. (other guests; other things happening at the same time; backstage; in-laws house; etc)


If you are sure of your work, I don't see a problem showing them to employers evenif you "only" have a Pentax or APSC.
On the lower scale of the market, the shots don't get processed much anyway (esp for 2nd, 3rd photographers) , and pay is low/exploitative.

Thank you.

---------- Post added 01-05-2017 at 11:40 AM ----------

The 35 and 70mm are pretty good on FF(from all reports)....the F and FA/faj are good too, these are FF(designed for film.) and work well.I own a K1 but use DA and film era lenses on it.

HD 35 and DA 70