david_noceti

<p>Good news is, once you send it in to Canon you won't have the fried flash problem anymore. Similar thing happened to me, sent it in under warranty and haven't had the problem since. My guess is that Canon knows something isn't right in their setup and isn't fessing up.</p>

<p>And don't try those NiZn batteries in anything other than a canon flash, they popped my brand new LP-160 as well. After reading in the candle power forums about the number of problems that NiZn's have and how easy it is to fry the actual battery itself, and after finding that five sets of four no longer hold a charge, I've decided to ditch them and move over to Powerex and Eneloop. Until Powergenix comes up with a way for the consumer to test and recondition batteries, I'll be with sanyo and maha.</p>

<p>Are you a left eye shooter? I find that I bend my left wrist more when I'm viewing the scene with my left eye as opposed to the right. And as others have said, pay attention to other things that you do throughout the day. While shooting my be the point at which you feel the pain, it's likely something else that you do on a day to day basis that is actually causing the problem, shooting just brings it to the surface. For instance, I found that when I was doing a lot of commuting and getting stuck in rush hour traffic every day, I would prop my elbow on the armrest a lot. That eventually led to pain in my left wrist. These days the problem is with my right. Years of using an impact gun, coupled with years of graphic design have lead to a very overworked wrist. I find that stretching and a $5 hand strength builder from a sports store helps the best.</p>

<p>And while seeking advice from a doctor is a good idea, it doesn't hurt to first ask others working in the same profession if they've had similar issues. It arms you with information that can be shared with the doctor who likely does not have an intimate working knowledge with what could be causing the problem. I for one say that this is the perfect place to start.</p>

<p>We carry 50Ds as backups. The benefits of the 7D over the 50D don't justify the price in my mind, especially as a backup and with how much the 50D has dropped in price. With the extra cash pick up a Sigma 30 1.4 which is as close to a 50mm as you can get on a crop after the conversion. I keep the 50D as my walk around camera and it nearly always has the 30mm on it. I've also read mixed reviews on whether or not the ISO handling on the 7D is really all that better than the 50D although the focusing is supposed to be superior to even the 5D. But really, unless you're planning on using it a lot, the 50D would be a wiser use of money IMO unless of course you have a need for covering sports as well.</p>

<p>I'd definitely advise against any Rebel. The layouts are so different from a the prosumer and up that it's hard to make changes on the fly if you're trying to shoot two cameras at once. I've tried using a rebel as a backup and found that I had to relearn how to get to different functions each time I went back to it.</p>

<p>Coming from the 50D and moving to the 5Dii, I'd opt for a 5D over the 7D, especially with weddings. The higher usable ISO with the 5D makes it almost essential for wedding photography where you can get yourself into all manner of low light shooting situations. I have heard that the 5Dii low light focusing is abysmal, especially when compared to Nikon, but I make due.</p>

<p>In your position I would look for a used 5D classic. After all, Nikon shooters are still making due with 12 megapixels, so I'm not sure the 21 offered by the mark ii is really necessary. Build your business with the 5Di and upgrade when the 5Diii comes out as it is rumored to have all the focusing upgrades that the 7D got.</p>

<p>And while I don't know the actual physics behind this bokeh issue, I will say that to my eye the bokeh produced on a ff verses a crop is better. That was the first thing I noticed back when we got our mk ii. I put the Sigma 50 1.4 on it and was blown away by the bokeh. Same lens, two different cameras, big difference.</p>

<p>So yeah, in your situation, I'd get the mk i, wait for the mk iii, and if you can justify it, purchase the mk iii at that time. Use the extra money (as if there is such a thing) on a lens or two if you find that your other lenses are crop lenses. Don't worry about the L series glass, start with the middle grade equivalent (except for the 24-70, that's a great lens and someday I won't have to rent it anymore). We've got a Tamron lens, two Sigmas, and the rest are Canon. When folks are talking about IQ and focusing issues, the glass you put in front of your camera is going to really affect what you get out of it or if you are even able to take the shot. We have one tamron lens that stays in the bag. The two sigmas are used often (primes). Maybe consider moving away from the tamron glass. The mid-range Canon lenses are a better choice although, after using both, I'd opt for the Sigma 50 1.4 over the Canon 50 1.4.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I for one can definitely see how this could happen. It's not so much a matter of not knowing that it was there but, like Nadine said, a matter of getting caught up in what you're doing. Apertures, shutter speeds, ISO, expressions, the flash, do I have time to pop off a shot with the other camera, with all that information flying through his head I can definitely see him thinking that he had a few more feet behind him before he got to the fountain. And it did seem as though there were an awful lot of guest snappers, so walking in front of the B&G might have been a part of his strategy to keep them at bay.</p>

<p>Even if you think this was too intrusive (I myself wouldn't have shot this way) other members' examples have already shown that any situation could turn into this whether you're being intrusive or not. But it does go to a rule that I keep trying to hammer into my own head SLOW DOWN. I find that my best pictures don't come when my head is so muddled with information and thoughts that I can't keep track of where I'm standing.</p>

Haven't really liked any of the PS tweaks offered up as they feel to me to be a bit heavy handed for a shot filled with simplicity. The lighting is beautiful, the angle of the head is just right, and her face and hair frame that far eye perfectly. The changes I would suggest have to do with the original composition of the shot. I would first avoid placing her dead center as it does not provide for movement of the eye throughout the frame. I would have also brought her into that dark area to the left, having her as a shining beacon amongst the dark and therefore the most powerful element in the frame and bringing in an element of chiaroscuro. Finally, the lead hand should be turned in so that it is more than just a thumb and forefinger which would also help with the locked elbow. The opposite hand should be in the frame somewhere so that she does not appear amputated. Possibly have the trailing hand holding the flowers across her lap?

 

All in all, a very good shot that the untrained eye is not going to question. Very well done.

<p>Hi Matt, glad to see you're trying to get added experience before these B&Gs big days. That is to be commended. The trouble with your post is that to the pro it comes off as, "I'd like to use you to get experience before I go into competition with you in our market." Working with another photographer at a wedding is not as easy as it sounds. There's logistics of where each shooter is going to be, understanding when you might be in their shot and getting the heck out of it, anticipating where they'll go next. I shoot as a part of a husband and wife team and we still get our signals crossed, so taking on someone for a couple of weddings is really more hassle than it's worth.</p>

<p>I'd say that your best bet is to second shoot for the UNprofesionals and offer to simply assist for a pro. A pro might be willing to open up to someone who's willing to work up to the second shooter status, but they're not going to do it as a hand out. That means carrying gear, fetching lenses, holding lights, all of the really glamorous stuff associated with photography. After maybe four or five weddings of that, THEN they might be willing to let you do SOME second shooting while still performing your role as assistant and then build up to a designated second shooter if your styles and personalities click.</p>

<p>Basically, the first shooter/second shooter relationship is exactly that, a relationship. You have to first be friends, then date, and then commit. The red flag here is the perception by new photographers that they are working for someone for free. Most pros use few to none of the second shooter's shots, as it detracts from their brand and style, and simply because the new photographer is just not up to par. Realistically it is the pro who is working for free as they are taking on the added task of training someone else to work with them.</p>

<p>If you are serious about second shooting for a pro you're going to have to change the way you approach this. Join photography groups, meet people, attend a paid seminar put on by a local pro, build relationships. Once you exhibit to the pro that you truly value what they are doing for you, you then get the opportunity to enter into a relationship with them.</p>

<p>Excellent points all around. I was leaning towards hanging back with the bride, but wanted to see if I could get a nudge to push me over. :O)</p>

<p>@David: I plan on being behind the wall the entire time and completely out of the eyes of those inside the church. Once the bride exits I'll sneak out, duck behind a pew until they're in the right spot then I'll slide out, catch the low, down the aisle shot, then dart up to the balcony to catch the W/A of the church before heading back down to continue my circuit. This church provides a wonderful opportunity in that they allow us access to the back chambers to go back and forth on both sides without being seen.</p>

<p>To contribute, "Yes, you MUST backup in the field." :O)</p>

<p>If you're shooting solo, then yeah, you probably don't have the time, but if you have an assistant or a second, then there is definitely time. After all, who wants pictures taken of them while they are eating? We (husband wife team) pack enough cards to get through the entire day. I backup our shots to a hyperdrive throughout the day, leaving images on cards. That gives us two copies of the images. Once home we load up to the computer which then has two separate backup drives. I leave the images on the cards until they are needed for the next job, and the hyperdrive holds its backup until it is full enough to warrant a reformat. That effectively gives us five copies of the files during the first week, four copies for a week or two after that, and then three indefinite copies. Oh, and our online hosting keeps a downsized jpeg copy on file.</p>

<p>One of the biggest complaints that pros make about newbs is that they don't have backups of their gear. The other complaint is that a wedding is a once in a lifetime moment (hopefully). There are no do-overs. It always surprises me when these same pros turn around and don't bother to back up the most important part of the no do-over day, the actual images. I mean, how many photogs would rather lose a piece of equipment over someone's wedding day?</p>

<p>So if you can afford it, get a dedicated backup drive like the epson, wolverine, or hyperdrive. And definitely don't "dump" to something else, have enough cards to get you through the day. While the chance of something going wrong is minute, if it does go wrong it can be crippling to your business. The last thing you want is an angry bride out there talking about how key moments, or worse yet, all of her wedding was lost because her photographer didn't spring a couple hundred bucks for a backup drive and/or didn't take the 10 minutes needed to backup cards.</p>

<p>And those were my lengthy two cents.</p>

<p>~David</p>

<p>My wife and I shoot as a team. This weekend's wedding will be in a Cathedral. As I was mapping out my shooting route, I found myself torn about the beginning. My wife will be posted about halfway down the aisle taking pictures of the procession. My plan is to be with the wedding party in the entryway capturing expressions before they head out. The part I'm a bit iffy on is the bride with her father. Before she heads down, the coordinator will pull the doors closed, then set the bride and father up and open them again so that she can make a grand entrance. The question is, should I exit with the last couple and lie in wait just outside the door in order to capture the moment when the bride fist sees her groom, or should I wait with bride and father and catch their last moment of quiet?</p>

<p>I'll of course ask the bride what she'd like, but she's been so easy going I'm almost certain she's going to tell me to do whatever I think is best. So now I pose it to you. I'd like to get feedback on what others in a team shooting situation would do.</p>

<p>Many thanks. David</p>

<p>John, I think I owe you a bit of an apology, William was right when he pointed out how you were originally right. :o) My logic didn't quite match up. Like I said, this discussion has brought me around to seeing things a bit differently.</p>

<p>I guess I noted that I'd extend the professional courtesy for pro gear and bad practice because that's what I did at the last wedding. But given the quality of what was produced, especially for the amount of money paid. And to further hold with the notion that the gear does not make the photographer, I'll leave the 5Dii at home and bring a rebel with a couple sigma lenses. Actually, I hate the rebel, I'll bring the 50D instead. Although the rebel would make for a good challenge. Hmmm.</p>

<p>Anyway, I think what I was trying to get at was the idea of minimum requirements. To me, a P&S does not meet minimum requirements and it's insulting to anyone that works hard at this.</p>

<p>Well then, John, I'm curious what you would have done in a similar situation to Scott's. It's your son's wedding, the guy that someone else hired to shoot the wedding is using a point and shoot, you can tell that simply by how he's setting up shots, or not setting them up, that he really doesn't know what he's doing. You know that his five mega-pixel camera is not going to produce a very good quality large print, nor perform well in low light. Do you sit back and watch the train wreck, or do you try to save as many lives as possible?</p>

<p>And I will partially agree with you, gear does weigh into my equation heavily, but it is not the sole deciding factor. Matter of fact, you may have just convinced me to bring my camera to a wedding this weekend for a friend who hired a terrible photographer. This same photographer covered another friend's wedding a couple of months ago. She charges mid-range prices for entry-level work and carries decent gear (better than mine at the time of the first wedding). I gave her the benefit of the doubt the first time because you can't really know how someone's shots will turn out until afterwards, and maybe she just had a very different shooting style than mine. Well, I saw the proofs from that wedding, and you're right, gear doesn't get you off of the hook, but until I saw the end product I couldn't be certain.</p>

<p>I just think that showing up with proper equipment shows that you are at least taking it seriously even though you might not be very good at it. Again, without the correct tools it's very hard to do any job satisfactorily. I'm not saying it's impossible, but you sure are stacking the odds against yourself. That's just a fact of life. Let's call it a baseline. If you're trying to drive nails with a rock, at least step aside and let the guy with the hammer give it a go. No guarantee that he'll do a better job than you, but it's safe to say that he'll have a better chance at getting it right.</p>

<p>And to Matt: If you're as new to photography as it sounds, then just talk with the pro. Tell him you're just starting out, you don't really even want to shoot weddings but thought it would be a good way to get some practice in, and see if he'd mind you shooting as well. Don't shoot over his shoulder, don't try to reproduce his shots. To extend an even further courtesy you could ask him how long he'd like for you to hang on to your images before you give them to the bride and groom because although you don't think your shots will compete with his, you really don't want to cause any problems. More than likely, he'll be impressed with how respectful you were and might even give you some pointers. It's really more about mutual respect than anything else. </p>

<p>Actually, John, had you paid closer attention to my post you'd have noticed that I said the P&S photographer would have been one of two things, a charlatan, or a master of the art. So, my definition included a lot more than you suggest.</p>

<p>Professional quality is most definitely NOT dependent upon gear alone, but anyone worth a lick will know that you have to have the right tools for the job. If you were a plumber and were over to visit a friend who happened to have me over fixing his sink, a job for which I was charging him good money for, and you saw that I came in with only a hammer and duct tape, you'd likely be more than a little upset. You'd be upset not only because I was taking advantage of your friend and providing them with terrible service but also because I'd be making a mockery of your profession.</p>

<p>Like I said, respect goes both ways. Guests need to have respect for what the pro does, but when it's obvious that the pro doesn't know what they're doing and really isn't a pro, then I see no problem with stepping up and making sure that your friends or family (as was the case in Scott's example) get quality photographs of a moment that can't be redone.</p>

<p>I see advertisements in my area all the time for photography services by people using top quality gear who still get point and shoot results out of that gear. That's what they have advertised and that's what the B&G bought. But when I'm at a wedding and I see that they at least have the proper tools for the job I give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that the B&G vetted them properly. Even still, it is possible for a good salesman to portray themselves as something they are not (see the Sean Peele thread). But for those of us who know what we're doing, it is rather easy to sniff out an impostor, especially when they're working. Respect is something that needs to be earned, not given. And from the description of the shooter at Scott's son's wedding, that person was an impostor and deserved little to no respect for what he was doing.</p>

<p>Scott: Wait a minute. The "pro" showed up with a point and shoot? I extend professional courtesy a long way, even for photographers who I can tell are producing terrible images, but a point and shoot is all bets off. If I'm a guest at a wedding and I see something like that then either that person is A) a master at the craft whose shots I'll never be able to rival no matter what I shoot with, or B) a charlatan. More than likely it's going to be B, in which case I go out to my car, stick my point and shoot in the trunk and pull out my gear.</p>

<p>In the same way I try to pay respect to other pros by not bringing my gear into their gig, I expect anyone accepting money to do the same job I do, to pay the profession its due respect by not ripping people off and pretending they are something they're not.</p>

<p>I say you did the right thing by shooting.</p>

<p>I've read this kind of thread several times over the course of getting into photography and the one argument that I see missing is the potential impact "supplemental" pictures might have on the pro's earnings. If the pro's price structure is such that they ask for little up front because they plan on making more with prints then if the OP's shots are any good and she's giving them for free, it actually harms this photog's bottom line. Frankly, that's not cool.<br>

However, the pro could be priced completely differently so that they make their money with what they've already sold to the B&G. In that case I can't see them having a problem with another shooter wandering around and sniping with the super zoom. (By the way, is that 100-400 mounted to a crop sensor because that really will be sniping?)<br>

The only other concern that I would raise would be the portfolio concern. You likely don't have the intent of doing this now but it might arise in the future, don't publish these photos as work you've done in order to win clients down the road. I don't think there is much that can be done about it legally but it would be in bad form and I have read other threads where semi's got into hot water with the pro for basically making it look like they were the pro for the wedding. Actually, the one I'm thinking about had the bride and groom in all sorts of headaches because the pro was threatening legal action against them because of the amateur's actions.<br>

In the end, the classy and respectful thing to do is to get permission first.</p>

Forgot to add that I added some volume to her hair as well. I'll try uploading it as an animation.

<p>I sort of like your photo the way that it is. I'd definitely clone out the creepy hand thing and maybe clone out that strange spider web sort of highlight behind the veil, including the lower bright patch midway down on the veil (in the background), but otherwise I rather like it the way that it is.</p>

<p>I wouldn't crop in because that would get rid of the path that she's on. That path helps to clue the viewer in on the surroundings and goes well with the flair in the top right. It's a documentation of the day. Many of the corrections posted turn the shot into a portrait and have a very over-processed feel to them. And honestly, in my interactions with clients who like the style of the original photograph, they say that they like it because it doesn't feel processed. They tend to be clients who like the outdoors and nature, the kind of client that would get married in this location with a simple yet elegant dress.</p>

<p>That said, to my eye you're pretty close to nailing it for this client. I might crop down to an 8x10 so that the bottom patch of her dress gets cut out (being careful not to crop her at her elbow), and I might also liquify her shoulder so that it doesn't push out in the manner that it does. I'd also fix her bra if I were going all out.</p>

<p>This is my first one of these so hopefully I get all this right and don't offend anyone by doing edits. Also, I'm not sure if the crop on the shot I'm uploading is actually 8x10, but it looks close.</p><div></div>

<p> Wow. Someone's feathers are ruffled.</p>

<p> Do I dare ask if that 1000w/500w lighting backup was a set of shop lights?</p>

<p> Also, isn't the 18-135 f 3.5-5.6 (not 4.5 as stated above) the kit lens for a D80?</p>

<p> I'm just starting out but I'd say that the criticisms provided here may sting, but it's the backlash from a community of professionals who find themselves having to explain to people more often why what they do has worth. More and more people pick up a fancy DSLR and think that they can shoot weddings. The amount of study, preparation, and practice that goes into being able to handle a situation like the one you encountered is mind numbing.</p>

<p> Our first wedding, (shot pro bono for someone who would have had a friend do it with a point and shoot) was a similar experience. We didn't leave it thinking that the only thing we had to do was salvage some images, we left it with the very firm realization that we had a lot to learn. Between that wedding and the next there has been about a year of weekly practice, gear acquisition, practice, study, practice, and then some more practice. We've shot quinceaneras and baptisms and parties and everything that could be similar to a wedding, often for next to nothing, just so that when we get to the paying gigs we'll be prepared to handle it. And frankly, I'll still be worried.</p>

<p> But I can now walk outside and look at the light around me and say, "If I'm shooting wide open it looks like it'll be 1/1200 at ISO 100." 7 out of 10 times I'm right or within a third of a stop from being right. If I'm wrong I'm able to look at the lcd and say, "That's about one and a third stops underexposed, need to dial the shutter speed down four clicks." If you're relying on the camera to figure that out for you (and in most cases it can) then you shouldn't be shooting weddings because in that clutch moment when the camera can't figure it out for you, you are the one left on the hook.</p>

<p> My suggestion, as someone who went through what you did, stop shooting weddings until you're ready. I'm not trying to be mean or insulting, like I said, we did the same thing. But if you continue down this path you are going to run the risk of having more brides out there that tell their friends that their photographer ruined their pictures. In a word of mouth industry, that is a very bad thing.</p>

<p>@Ron: Just bear in mind that 12,800 ISO is worthless if it doesn't create a usable picture. And the 7D does not create a usable picture at 12,800. Heck, for my needs it doesn't really produce a usable picture at 1,600. But from your lens choices I'd say you probably shoot sports or wildlife, in which case you're absolutely right, the 7D is better. I also agree that the 7D has a better AF system which would also help in those applications. Sounds like you definitely made the right choice, Ron. Happy shooting.</p>

<p>Avoid the AA's in the grip. If you check the user manual you'll find that you won't get many shots out of a set of AA's, probably a lot fewer with older rechargeables. As has been noted, it depends on what you're shooting with. If you shoot a lot with image stabilized lenses, they'll drain power faster than primes. I carry two sets of batteries, as in two in the grip and two for replacement. Better safe than sorry.<br>

I too stick with smaller cards rather than running the risk of card failure and losing an entire segment of the wedding. We started with lots of 4Gb cards but that was because we were shooting on 50D's, now that we have a 5D Mk ii, I'll likely move to 8Gb cards.<br>

I've also heard of photographers who change the file size they shoot at depending upon what part of the wedding it is. If it's something you likely won't sell a large print for, getting ready, reception, they shoot at a smaller raw size then bump it up for the ceremony and portraits.</p>

<p>The 7D winning out clearly over the 5D Mk ii? That's opening a Pandora's Box for sure.<br>

I for one started with a Rebel and quickly dumped that for a 50D. A week after I got the 50D they released the 7D. At first I was kicking myself but I soon got over it. The savings allowed for more gear and a sooner jump the the 5D Mkii. The 5D and 7D are two different cameras with different end uses. The 7D moves you closer to sports photography and the 5D is the go to portrait/wedding/landscape body. Until you're sure about what you want to do, go with the 50D as it places you solidly between the 7D and 5D (although, honestly, it sounds like the 5D will be your destination).<br>

I'll also echo the earlier comment that the prosumer body will help you to learn the ins and outs of the camera system you'll end up using in the future. When I first started using the 50D and still had the Rebel around I found myself making all kinds of mistakes when I went back to the Rebel. The layout just doesn't make any sense after you use a prosumer body.<br>

Also, avoid the kit lens that comes with the 50D. It's really a sad piece of glass. It looks impressive, with the shear size of it, but once you get another lens you'll never put it back on your camera. Get the body only which I think can be had for about 900 new, and invest the rest of your money in good lenses. If you get the kit lens you'll just end up selling it anyway.</p>

<p>I just went through this same dilemma. In the end I got the 2.8 IS Mk1 used. It's a great lens, as has been noted over and over. But really, what you're looking for is peace of mind in your decision, so why not rent them? Don't bother with the f4, but rent the non IS one week and then the IS the next and see how you feel about it. Personally, when I've got it zoomed all the way in and I half press the shutter I'm amazed at how much steadier I suddenly hold the camera. :o)</p>

<p>I agree with a lot of what's already up. At first I was going to add more pointers but then I realized that this isn't a job. You're not getting paid and it's not like they ever intended on paying anyone. As you said, they don't place a value on pictures like you do. So don't sweat it. If you want to do a little better, get a 430 ex ii. It's something that you can use in the future and it's not a huge investment. Practically, get a couple extra batteries for your camera and have plenty of memory cards or a place where you can have a laptop setup so that you can dump pictures.<br>

As far as backups go, you can rent the same camera that you have, that way there's no learning curve. Alternatively, I'd find one or two other family members with decent cameras and ask them to help out. There is safety in numbers, both in the number of pictures that you take and the number of people covering the event. Keep it low key, and don't stress. It sounds like this is stressing you out a little and trying to figure out how to become a pro in a few months is only going to stress you out more. Show up, snap shots, have fun.</p>

<p>+1 for the lowepro SlingShot 100 AW. I don't have mine set up the way they suggest. I run my adjustable compartments so that I can get to everything from the side flap and never unzip it all the way. This gives me room for two flashes, a 50.4 on top of a 30.4, an 85.8 with a 50.8 underneath, and a 70-200 IS, with a little slot open to stack two hard shell CF card cases. You've still got the top compartment to carry all your spare batteries and a front pouch for odds and ends. I've got a little box in that top compartment that has 4 50D batteries, 8 rechargeable AA's, 4 2CR5's, and some AAA rechargeables. It's got the rain cover, and you can pick it up on e-bay for a third of what a shootsac runs. I use it primarily as a lens bag during location shoots and stick the two camera bodies in a regular old tamrac shoulder bag for transportation purposes. Once on site the tamrac remains in the car because the cameras are with me.</p>

<p>And really, what's the deal with this shootsac craze? It's a bit of neoprene with vertical pouches sown in it, that's it. I'd sooner make one myself than spend the kind of cash that they're asking for it. And that's without the "customization."</p>

<p>

<p>Interesting thread. As someone starting out in wedding photography I'd note that while the camera doesn't make the photographer, no good photographer would be without the proper tools. The bride's insistence that they have the proper tools for the job is just another way to weed out bad photographers. I wouldn't try to dissuade her from her criteria but add to it. Truth is, anyone can hop on the forums and find out from the pros have in their kits. What they can't get is the ability to make amazing photographs.</p>

<p>While the portfolio helps, I've seen a number of portfolios that look amazing only to find that those happened to be the lucky shots from their shoots. Every photographer gets lucky, and if they compile a portfolio around those lucky shots they can appear to be top notch but that's not what you want for your wedding day. The bride needs to see a series of shots from a single wedding before she can make her decision. Those shots need to show that the photographer can produce quality photos all day long in all the lighting situations they might run into.</p>

<p>It sounds to me as though this bride is trying to find a photog on a budget, hence three shooters with sub par cameras. In that instance I would tend to agree with you about not going with the 5D MII shooter as I would not trust anyone shooting with that quality gear at bargain prices. Still, I can't see anyone who wants to be taken seriously shooting with anything less than a xxD series camera. The rebels are for hobbyists and that's where they should stay especially on a wedding day.</p>

<p>In the end it's coming off as the bride trying to get top quality for next to nothing. Hope she gets what she deserves, which is not necessarily the same as what she wants. :O)</p>

</p>