Mirrorless camera for Weddings ?

The other day I finally got my hands on a Sony A7 III, a Nikon Z7, a Fuji XT3, and a Canon EOS R mirrorless cameras. No I didn't win the Lotto, but a representative from the local camera store gave a presentation on these cameras at my local Photo Club. He then handed each camera to us so we could get a feel of the camera and play around with all the buttons. I'm not trying to start any wars, but the Nikon Z7 with a 24-70mm f4 lens felt the best in my hands. The Canon with the rather large 24-105mm felt a little awkward. The Fuji was way to small and felt more like a point-and-shoot in my hands. The Sony had sharp corners that I figure after a whole day of shooting might start to wear on your hands, plus it didn't have the top LCD like the Canon and Nikon cameras.

This is not really a review, since I only held each camera for about 3 minutes or less, then I handed it to the person sitting next to me. What I noticed was that the viewfinder was very bright on all 3 cameras, but NOT, I repeat not exactly true to life. If you panned the camera a little bit too fast, then there was slight ghosting ? The camera would quickly reset itself however, then you were back in business.

Another thing I noticed was that what you saw in the viewfinder and what appeared on the back LCD did not match exactly. Let's say I purposely under exposed the subject by 2 stops. The viewfinder would not change, it would stay bright as ever, but the picture on the back LCD after I took the shot would look 2 stops under exposed. That's not a biggie since DSLRs react the same way, but it was a bit confusing. The viewfinder was still a thing of beauty though on all 4 cameras. You could easily see all the functions you chose displayed brightly on the screen. No squinting, or eye gymnastics like on a DSLR. To tell you the truth, the viewfinder looked more like the Monitor on a computer than anything else, not like the back LCD which is more life like.

Another thing to appreciate about these cameras is the silky smooth shutter. I had problems trying to push the shutter half-way down to focus or recompose because it would go off. It reminded me of the super-sensitive shutter on my EOS-3 film camera. Not sure if you can adjust this, but its certainly something you have to get used to.

With that said, I'm pretty sure these cameras could probably handle a wedding easily if you know what you are doing. With the Canon and Nikon you would probably need to bring some extra batteries and maybe a charger. The Sony would not have any problem at all, not sure about the Fuji ?

The question is would you rather use the tried and true DSLR, or use one of these mirrorless cameras ? The thing these cameras have that is superior to the DSLR is the Auto Focusing(AF) . I was checking out the Canon EOS R and when I looked through the viewfinder I saw the local camera store representative way to the top left of the viewfinder and almost out of the frame, but I was able to quickly move the AF focusing point there and the camera focused on that point only. It was Amazing ! The focusing points on the mirrorless cameras are not in the center of the viewfinder like a DSLR, they are on a tic-tac-toe looking grid that covers the entire viewfinder with the focusing point in the center of each box in the grid.

Another good thing is the quiet shutter. Canon is notorious for loud noisy shutters, but this time they did a great job damping all the noise. The shutter on the canon is still the noisiest out of all 4 cameras. With a quiet shutter you can take pictures during the ceremony without raising eye-brows. That's something to think about.

Despite all of this technology, I'm still not convinced that these cameras are ready for prime-time. The viewfinder being so bright might confuse you into over exposing your shots and when you are in the middle of fast moving wedding, there is really no time to chimp. The Canon has a flip LCD great for Video, but all the other cameras have the useless tilting LCD unless you want to take shots from different angles.

I can't think of nothing else that might prevent one from using these cameras to shoot a wedding. Some might point to the single flash-card slot, but what is the probability that a flash card might go bad on you ? Probably less than 2%. Back in film days there was always the possibility that you did not load the camera with film ! There was no such thing as back-up film. Can somebody think of something else ?

You have a camera store in your town?

Believe it or not YES, but they are way more expensive than buying online.

Some might point to the single flash-card slot, but what is the probability that a flash card might go bad on you ? Probably less than 2%.

So, after shooting 100 weddings, you will remember those 2, where you got faulty memory cards, for the rest of your life.

There is a setting in the Sony which enables the viewfinder to mirror exposure and effects settings. The default is to ignore them and simply present the clearest view. I presume there are similar settings in the Nikon Z7 and Canon R.

The A7iii shutter can be electronic only, and completely silent.

The A7iii uses Sony's new battery, twice the capacity of their first version. I can shoot 5 hours and 600 shots on one charge, or 2.5 hours of video, continuously. One extra battery would probably cover you, but I'd have another one just in case (like you forgot to charge one). A charger is of no use at a wedding or event. It will be over before the light stops blinking (2+ hours). Do get a dual charger for home use. I recommend one by Watson. Don't plan to backup card either. Memory is cheap, and lost time is priceless.

These mirrorless cameras have AF sensors covering 90% of the field, compared to about 25% for a DSLR. Furthermore they are embedded in the sensor, not in the prism housing, so calibration is unnecessarily, even with long or fast lenses. If you are seeing a "checkerboard" effect, it is because AF is set in the snapshot mode, where the closest object governs the focal point. There are many options, and some work better for weddings and events, some for action sports.

What I derive from the OP's comments is a nearly complete lack of familiarity with the cameras, a condition shared by many early reviewers of these cameras. My son is a Nikon (D3) shooter, but asked to borrow my Sony A9 to shoot a wedding. I let him use it for two weeks before the event, and it went well with only minor hiccups. Most of the settings were appropriate, so I just coached him on the exceptions. Personally, I would not shoot a wedding on two weeks experience without someone to hold my hand. Even then...

There are three cameras that a wedding photographer can choose from:

1. Rangefinder (only one real choice for digital, three for film)

2. Mirrorless (lots to choose from)

3. Film (lots to choose from)

DSLRs have no place in a wedding shooter's kit anymore, if you were to ask me. The first mirrorless camera that truly killed off the DSLR in the wedding space was the A7s, which was released in 2014. I will concede that many might prefer dual slots, so perhaps some will disagree. But you do have two or three bodies with you, right? Right?

Mirrorless has also killed of the DSLR in sport - and pretty much everything else, frankly. The DSLR was always a temporary replacement for film. But if you had bought a DSLR kit recently, don't just turn around and sell it. Just use it and forget about upgrading for as long as you can.

P.S. I have shot a few weddings, two on DSLRs.

I've never shot a wedding (nor would I!) so I can't really answer the question. I suspect that pro photographers use the technologies (Film, DSLR, Mirrorless, FF, MF) that gets them the results they want, when they want them and that they feel comfortable using.

Just one point: the failure rate of cards seems to be about 1 in 100.00 - 1M 'writes'. Much, much lower than 2%! But however negligible the risk is, I don't think I'd want to just rely on a single card for weddings. Worst case scenario is that the whole card gets 'frazzled' and all stored images are lost. The Z7 (and maybe other cameras) does have a feature for automatically sending shots (buffered) via Wifi to a laptop or internet server. It's pretty slow (up to 1 min per RAW file) but it could perhaps work as a 'workaround' backup solution.

I don't expect pro photographers to rely soley on single-card mirrorless cameras just yet. But I expect that the range of mirrorless cameras will gradually creep into the higher-end systems.

The other day I finally got my hands on a Sony A7 III, a Nikon Z7, a Fuji XT3, and a Canon EOS R mirrorless cameras. No I didn't win the Lotto, but a representative from the local camera store gave a presentation on these cameras at my local Photo Club. He then handed each camera to us so we could get a feel of the camera and play around with all the buttons. I'm not trying to start any wars, but the Nikon Z7 with a 24-70mm f4 lens felt the best in my hands. The Canon with the rather large 24-105mm felt a little awkward. The Fuji was way to small and felt more like a point-and-shoot in my hands. The Sony had sharp corners that I figure after a whole day of shooting might start to wear on your hands, plus it didn't have the top LCD like the Canon and Nikon cameras.

 

This is not really a review, since I only held each camera for about 3 minutes or less, then I handed it to the person sitting next to me. What I noticed was that the viewfinder was very bright on all 3 cameras, but NOT, I repeat not exactly true to life. If you panned the camera a little bit too fast, then there was slight ghosting ? The camera would quickly reset itself however, then you were back in business.

 

Another thing I noticed was that what you saw in the viewfinder and what appeared on the back LCD did not match exactly. Let's say I purposely under exposed the subject by 2 stops. The viewfinder would not change, it would stay bright as ever, but the picture on the back LCD after I took the shot would look 2 stops under exposed. That's not a biggie since DSLRs react the same way, but it was a bit confusing. The viewfinder was still a thing of beauty though on all 4 cameras. You could easily see all the functions you chose displayed brightly on the screen. No squinting, or eye gymnastics like on a DSLR. To tell you the truth, the viewfinder looked more like the Monitor on a computer than anything else, not like the back LCD which is more life like.

 

Another thing to appreciate about these cameras is the silky smooth shutter. I had problems trying to push the shutter half-way down to focus or recompose because it would go off. It reminded me of the super-sensitive shutter on my EOS-3 film camera. Not sure if you can adjust this, but its certainly something you have to get used to.

 

With that said, I'm pretty sure these cameras could probably handle a wedding easily if you know what you are doing. With the Canon and Nikon you would probably need to bring some extra batteries and maybe a charger. The Sony would not have any problem at all, not sure about the Fuji ?

 

The question is would you rather use the tried and true DSLR, or use one of these mirrorless cameras ? The thing these cameras have that is superior to the DSLR is the Auto Focusing(AF) . I was checking out the Canon EOS R and when I looked through the viewfinder I saw the local camera store representative way to the top left of the viewfinder and almost out of the frame, but I was able to quickly move the AF focusing point there and the camera focused on that point only. It was Amazing ! The focusing points on the mirrorless cameras are not in the center of the viewfinder like a DSLR, they are on a tic-tac-toe looking grid that covers the entire viewfinder with the focusing point in the center of each box in the grid.

 

Another good thing is the quiet shutter. Canon is notorious for loud noisy shutters, but this time they did a great job damping all the noise. The shutter on the canon is still the noisiest out of all 4 cameras. With a quiet shutter you can take pictures during the ceremony without raising eye-brows. That's something to think about.

 

Despite all of this technology, I'm still not convinced that these cameras are ready for prime-time. The viewfinder being so bright might confuse you into over exposing your shots and when you are in the middle of fast moving wedding, there is really no time to chimp. The Canon has a flip LCD great for Video, but all the other cameras have the useless tilting LCD unless you want to take shots from different angles.

 

I can't think of nothing else that might prevent one from using these cameras to shoot a wedding. Some might point to the single flash-card slot, but what is the probability that a flash card might go bad on you ? Probably less than 2%. Back in film days there was always the possibility that you did not load the camera with film ! There was no such thing as back-up film. Can somebody think of something else ?

But you do have two or three bodies with you, right?

What you gonna do, tape them together? LOL

What you gonna do, tape them together? LOL

Either DSLR or Mirrorless, or film for that matter, will do a fine job on a wedding. You use multiple cameras for the same reason you have spare flash equipment. You are shooting a one off event - no redo possible, you must deliver results, and occasionally an essential tool will fail. There are a variety of pro level camera harnesses that facilitate easy transition from one camera to another. Odds are one will work if the other fails and you will capture the occasion with at least one camera. Add to that, never shoot a wedding with a camera you are not totally familiar with, I bought my DF (rationalized purchase of my DF) based on my son's wedding, which I wanted to photograph despite there being a firm hired to do the job. Practiced with the camera for nearly two months before the event. I stayed out of the professionals way, used available light, and got some good images they didn't. I would get considerably better shots today after several years experience with the camera.

Mirrorless cameras wonderful product of technology, just like cellphones, but serious photography equipment is usually used as system. What is a point to buy best and newest camera if no lenses or flashes available?

Rumors of DSLRs death greatly exaggerated. When I want sure shot, I am reaching for my D810, not for my A7-2.

Either DSLR or Mirrorless, or film for that matter, will do a fine job on a wedding. You use multiple cameras for the same reason you have spare flash equipment. You are shooting a one off event - no redo possible, you must deliver results, and occasionally an essential tool will fail. There are a variety of pro level camera harnesses that facilitate easy transition from one camera to another. Odds are one will work if the other fails and you will capture the occasion with at least one camera. Add to that, never shoot a wedding with a camera you are not totally familiar with, I bought my DF (rationalized purchase of my DF) based on my son's wedding, which I wanted to photograph despite there being a firm hired to do the job. Practiced with the camera for nearly two months before the event. I stayed out of the professionals way, used available light, and got some good images they didn't. I would get considerably better shots today after several years experience with the camera.

He mentioned multiply bodies as dual memory card slot replacement:)

Its not card failure you should worry, its camera failure. That's why the pros I've observed usually carry one or two backup cameras.

As I said tape 2 of them together and don't worry:)

Sorry guys, why it is so complicated to understand difference between backing up every shot and general camera failure. Two or three spare cameras or memory cards sitting in your bag, wouldn't save you, if only card you using at the moment is gone bad, when bride walking the aisle.

I wonder what wedding photographers did before the advent of two slot digital cameras?

We took 2 or 3 shots of everything, in case some dufus put a thumbprint on one. If the entire roll was ruined, the exposure was off, or the film not advancing, you probably didn't know until the film came back from the lab.

Things ain't as good as they used to be (and they never were) - attributed to Will Rogers.

Yes the EVF is usually adjustable.

I have my EVF set so that it reflects the exposure. That way I can see what changing the exposure will do to the image.

Yes the EVF is usually adjustable.

I have my EVF set so that it reflects the exposure. That way I can see what changing the exposure will do to the image.

That's good to know. What type camera are you talking about ?

That's good to know. What type camera are you talking about ?

Olympus EM1-mk1

I would guess that most of the other mirrorless have a similar function. You just have to find it in the menu. And finding things in the menu is not always easy to do.

He mentioned multiply bodies as dual memory card slot replacement:)

I mashed two points together, so I'm not surprised you misunderstood me. I will say that I prefer two single-slot bodies to one dual-slot body, but that is an academic question. I would also use smaller capacity cards, and I would have a lot of them.

Add to that, never shoot a wedding with a camera you are not totally familiar with,

Guilty! I don't regret it, though. You can't learn from success.

There are three cameras that a wedding photographer can choose from:

 

1. Rangefinder (only one real choice for digital, three for film)

2. Mirrorless (lots to choose from)

3. Film (lots to choose from)

#2 and DSLR. Mirrrorless is to kill DSLR on sports and wedding markets but obviously it has not yet. Have a look what was used by sports photographers at the football championship last summer. Nikon D5 and EOS 1Dx.

DSLR cameras are very good to use now.

Rumors of DSLRs death greatly exaggerated.

True. I would give them 8 - 16 years. Those used must age, some have to be discontinued, companies have to push more efforts to boost their MILC systems and so on.... It is like cars: front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive. The latter must be dead in early 1980s, but it is really not (almost dead).

Most wedding photographers use DSLR nowadays - period.

But my next choice will be Sony. Progress cannot be stopped.