Reply To: Save Big Money by Not Hiring a Professional Wedding Photographer

[cameraclicker]

I liked the article.  I think the point made in comments is valid that if you recruit some enthusiasts, they may well do a professional looking job, and they will bring their own equipment, so you could get all the value with none of the rental expense or learning curve.

Yesterday I put one of my cards into a Canon G16 and took some test photos in the store.  I just looked at the photos and I am completely impressed!  It is a little rangefinder/P&S but it has a 5X zoom lens that is f/2.8 at the wide end, and it takes useable photos (not grain free but not bad) at ISO 12,800!  Pro quality it is not, but it has a full set of controls and takes excellent photos.  It fits in a pocket.  Output from some mirrorless cameras is also very impressive.  You could shoot a wedding with anything in that general range and get better results than what we see in the thread Fauxtogs who should end up on the main page…

On the other hand, we went to dinner Monday night and two different people tried to take our group using my 5D Mk III.  Even with the camera preset for them the photos are not very good.  In the past, random people have demonstrated my 1Ds Mk III will happily take a bad photo, too.

Wedding photos have immediate value to pass around so family and friends can re-live the wedding a week, or a month, later.  Then they gain value again when shown to adult children or grandchildren twenty or forty years later.