Canon Rebel vs Canon Mark III

[JerryPH]

I will say this... the photographer that KNOWS what they are doing will get superior results with the rebel vs the "better"camera and a newb. However, equal level of experitise applied to both cameras, and the more expensive camera will give yo better results.

I also find the question and situation just... wierd.

"Out of the box" settings for one camera are not the same as the other. Meaning, The out of the settings for a rebel are made to cater to someone that knows nothing about photography, where as the out of the box settings for another demand that you DON'T use the out of box settings, because you can improve on them and get the superior results.

Either way, I would not give a rebel to a pro as a photography tool... a pro works best with their own equipment and its likely a camera a lot better than a rebel on top of that. Finally... a bird sitting on a park bench in the daylight is not near as challenging as a couple just married running out of a dark church or dancing in a poorly lit reception hall.

Birds perch often... a couple gets married once, so that photogapher had better not screw up... lol.

 

[asfixiate]

Jerry
I agree totally and thanks.

What I should have asked is at what point should someone switch to the Mark III from Rebel.

 

[Groupcaptainbonzo]

When you can't do exactly what you want to with a Rebel because IT doesn't have the facilities to achieve what you want and the only thing that does have them is the EOS 1 Ds Mk III. And you have the £3000 to buy one. and you can afford and use the £6000 of glass that you will need to get the very best out of it.

 

[keith204]

What I should have asked is at what point should someone switch to the Mark III from Rebel.

What an inquisitive mind you have!

Usually, one steps through several cameras before going to the 1ds MKIII. I started with an XT, and am now on a 40D. I can see the 5D (newer generation) being useful in the future because of ISO improvements, and can see investing in one, in the next year or so. However, before I get there, you can bet I'll have a few more $,000's spent in glass.

Why are you so curious?

 

[ghpham]

A bit of advice about your wedding. Shooting it yourself is not a good ideas. There are plenty of things that are going on during the wedding that would keep you busy already, so when are you going to find time to shoot? Is your fiancee ok with the fact that you are going to leave him/her alone while you are off taking pictures at your own wedding? I don't know your friend capability, but travel pictures are not the same as a wedding pictures. If they turned out bad, you will have hell to pay for with your mate.

As to the difference between the MKIII and the Rebel, if you don't know the difference, you obviously don't need the MKIII.

 

[usayit]

Also don't forget that there are two 1 series DSLRs in Canon's lineup.

One geared towards fine art, fashion and studio work... 1ds MarkIII. Another geared towards the journalist and sports photographer... 1d markIII.

 

[Mystwalker]

You are nuts if you are going to trust a non-pro to do your wedding pictures.

I'm a beginner, but I'm smart enough to know that if wedding pictures get screwed up in any way and "my friend" was responsible ... dog will have company in his house.

Look at it this way ... you have to loan your Rebel (is that an XTi?) for friend to use. She may be the best photographer in the world, but what is she shooting with that she has to use your XTi?

If you do not listen to reason, look at logics ... what lens are you going to use? What about an understanding of lighting? There is a lot a pro offer besides pointing an expensive set-up and clicking.

And back to wife equation - if it is not up to her standards, do you really want to be "responsible"? I would go as far as to say, you pay, but have her choose photographer

 

[Heck]

A wedding pro will also use programs like Photo shop to make the photos out the camera look pro. it's not just shooting photos I don't think.

 

[ghpham]

A wedding pro will also use programs like Photo shop to make the photos out the camera look pro. it's not just shooting photos I don't think.

Wrong. That's just a technical aspect of how to get great photographs, look much better. A professional will know how to capture that perfect moment, conveying mood, romance, excitement that is a wedding day. Pointing and shooting without having an "eye" for the moment will make the photos look boring, no matter how technically perfect the picture may be. A good pro should spend most of the time shooting, not processing.

 

[JerryPH]

Look, I think that every individual is going to invest into their wedding pictures exactly the amount that they feel their wedding is worth.

When I had a pro do my wedding, I thought $800 was a rip-off. Little did I know that I was getting what I payed for. They were technically good, but weak, unimaginative, BORING.

If someone who doesn't understand the challenges of what a REAL wedding photographer does, it will be difficult to explain to them that even if you take $20,000 worth of equipment, and train someone for a month with it... they are still going to give you poor results. Why? Simple, its a case of the blind leading the blind.

I can see a professional taking a budding amateur with a couple of years of experience already behind them, and walking them through the process over a 6-12 month period and shadowing a few weddings, but I cannot see much chance of success in someone that doesn't even yet have the equipment and knowledge themselves, try to teach somone else on the BASICS of photography... much less the intricacies of how to do a wedding properly.

The very fact that they are asking about "out of the box settings" between a consumer and pro level camera is a huge warning flag. Why would someone buy a prosumer level camera to leave it on AUTO? The answer is... they would not. But someone that doesn't know better, assumes its the camera that takes the shots. I am sorry, but a camera takes no better shots than the person behind the lens is capable of, no matter what camera they are holding. Anyone with a little experience and passion knows this.

Can we change the mind of the OP? Nope, and it really is no use to try. They will see what they want to. Will they get pictures of their wedding? Yes, they sure will, but the fact is, they will be NOTHING like they could be if they had someone that KNEW what they were doing.

They will try to fool themselves into thinking that they did well and print out what they took... but a few years down the road, they may finally get more experience with a camera, learn what it REALLY is all about, look back and say... man, we really made some bad choices concerning our wedding pictures, they could have been so much better.

Yes, they COULD have been. It's too bad that you did not take the time to make the right choice and hire someone that KNEW what to do during this once in a lifetime experience that you will NEVER have a chance to repeat again.

I wish you luck and congratulations on your upcoming wedding.

 

[asfixiate]

I'm sorry that this forum turned into wedding advice 101. Like I said my original post should have been at what point should someone switch to the Mark III from Rebel.
Basically what I was getting at is if someone takes 1,000 pictures a day, very into photography, etc when should they make the switch. I've not noticed the camera really getting overheated from extensive shot taking but if this is a problem is it eliminated, etc. How long should I use the Rebel before i make the switch. I was only asking because I was looking for information on exactly what limitations the Rebel had.
I can research differences in MP, shutter speed, app, and all that jazz but since I obviously am not going to go buy a Mark III today to compare myself that's why I asked. Everyone in this forum seems very informative and experienced and a lot of the users have this caliber camera so again, this is why I asked.
The majority of everyone who responded to my thread were extremely helpful but I feel we got a little off topic. I know my photos will be what I expect as well as what my fiance expects. I know as a member of this forum I should care more about the photos but as long as their crisp and clear and the memory is there we're both fine. A good amount of photography is imagination and creativity and the individual that is taking the photos has this. She's someone who will take it seriously and be creative that's why I'm going with her.
I respect what everyone is saying about what I should and should not do or have done and I'm in agreement for the most part. If I wasn't aware of what this individual was capable I'd sure as hell be checking out 1-800-Hire a PHotographer(not a real number).

Some of my favorite photos of my fiance and I were taken with a Kodak easyshare and they have decent quality. My entire budget for the wedding is around 10-15k and this only left room for up to 1,000 bucks for the photographer. I got a camera out of the deal so I capitalized on the situation.
Please do not take this post in disrespect because I DO respect everyone's response. All in all everything is good advice but I'm a adult and I do not have any regrets for the decision I'm making. We do have a professional taking a video of the wedding in addition to our friend taking the photos as well as both of our families are picture nuts so I'm not really worried about the photos.

 

[Dao]

I think we need to give the OP a break

I agree 100% that some jobs need to hire a professional to do. Me and my wife even went to a studio to have some the pictures taken before the wedding [with the wedding outfit of course ]. The pictures were printed on canvas and couple of them are larger than a regular poster size. I know only professional can do that type of job. And that was what I choose. Good or bad, no regrets!!

I feel sorry for the OP need to explains to everybody on his wedding photos. The bottom line is, he understand the whole situation already and I respect his decision.

By the way, congrats on your weddings.

 

[Heck]

Wrong. That's just a technical aspect of how to get great photographs, look much better. A professional will know how to capture that perfect moment, conveying mood, romance, excitement that is a wedding day. Pointing and shooting without having an "eye" for the moment will make the photos look boring, no matter how technically perfect the picture may be. A good pro should spend most of the time shooting, not processing.

Well If im paying a pro to shoot my wedding and he only gives me the raw files from the camera with out any processing I would feel like I paid for half a job.

 

[Alex_B]

Please do not take this post in disrespect because I DO respect everyone's response. All in all everything is good advice but I'm a adult and I do not have any regrets for the decision I'm making. We do have a professional taking a video of the wedding in addition to our friend taking the photos as well as both of our families are picture nuts so I'm not really worried about the photos.

Well, of course you are on a photo forum, where everyone wants maximum quality when it comes to pictures, also at a wedding. So reactions on here are normal. But you are right that it is totally your decision and maybe it all works out the way you want it to be. And that is something you can judge best since it is your wedding and your photographer and all Just take the advice given here as a warning, which people want to give so later no one could say you have not been warned

I think this thread stayed wonderfully friendly, given the different opinions

 

[asfixiate]

I'm just new to this forum and want to make sure I don't get on anyone's Sh*T lists. I like this forum a lot.

By the way what does OP stand for? Original post?

Thank you everyone for the congratulations. We're both finally settled into our careers and decided this year was the best choice. Being together for 5 years I also had to stop dragging my feet.