Woman sued, shot wedding on Rebel XTi

Christie Photo · Mar 17, 2010

OK... here are a couple of shots from a wedding I did in 2004 with a Canon 10D and a kit lens.

I feel these are up to pro standards... or have I outlived my usefulness?

-Pete

BTW... this was in my early digital days and I was shooting JPG.

PhotoXopher · Mar 17, 2010

Christie Photo said:
BTW... this was in my early digital days and I was shooting JPG.

Ken Rockwell would be proud :lol:

NateWagner · Mar 17, 2010

benni: the thing I was hitting on was when you said "the files don't look right" why? because that is such a subjective statement. Personally, I agree with you that full frame camera's do typically provide nicer files than a crop camera. However I don't think that means the only camera that should be used for any wedding is a full frame.

Do I agree with the investing in quality glass? yes. is there a difference between crop and full frame pics? yes. but does that mean that it's the only "Right" choice? I don't think so.

If we are going for high enough quality bodies I personally think a 7D is high enough, it handles some noise as well or better than a 5D. Nikon's D300s is also an excellent camera perfectly capable for weddings that is crop.

Beyond that, what about the 1DIV? wouldn't use that cause it's not good enough (as it's obviously crop)? Well, personally, I would have no problem having a person photograph my wedding using a couple of 1DIV's.

All I am saying is that although there are advantages to full frame, I don't think that means a crop cannot be used well for a wedding.

You mentioned show me all the great weddings with an XT, and yet you were bashing all crops. I could show plenty of well shot weddings that were done with 30d 40d 50d and the 1D series.

Now the question is, do you want to see poorly shot weddings done with a 5D? cause I could definitely provide those as well.

ghpham · Mar 17, 2010

*sigh* we are such camera geeks. A B&G couldn't give a flip if it was a crop sensor camera or not. The result, ie, the hard copy of a pic is all they will be seeing and as long as they are happy with it, who cares.

Btw, lovely pic Pete!

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

Hey Pete! Those look great. Like I said, I started with a 20D, and moved up. 20Ds are great in the right hands. But that is a pro camera or at least a pro-sumer camera. The xti is still not to that level.

If it was, don't you think all the pros would be shooting with them? It's definately cheaper, right? So why would I spend a few grand more for a better body?

Because, simply....the files look better. Less noise, bigger crop ability, and you can blow the photos up to your heart's content.

Don't get me wrong Pete. I could put a cell phone in your hand, and you would pull off great shots. But is still wouldn't be the same quality files you would get with a 5d2 or a Mark D. It just wouldn't.

Nate, again, we are talking about pro or pro-sumer cameras. There is a HUGE difference. I'm not talking about the crop vs. full frame. I'm talking about the ability to crop into the photo. When you are shooting in a huge church from a football field away with no flash, sometimes you need a close up. You can't pull that off with an XTI with a kit lens. You just CAN'T. Well, I guess you could, but it would look like $hit. A 10D? Better. A 20D? Better. And on and on and on.

If we expect people to invest in us, we need to invest in them.

Can it be pulled off in the right hands? Absolutely. Could it be better with a better camera in the right hands? Absolutely.

And yes, I agree Nate. The camera does not make the photographer. A wedding I shot back in February was for a wedding photographer, and it was chocked full of wedding photographer friends taking photos. Some with better gear than I had. I saw a bunch of the results on Facebook, and quite frankly, the results were not as good as mine. (if I do say so myself

But much of that had to do with final processing.

The bottom line is that "would you shoot a wedding with a Rebel XTI?" I can't think of any pro who would ever do it.

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

ghpham said:
*sigh* we are such camera geeks. A B&G couldn't give a flip if it was a crop sensor camera or not. The result, ie, the hard copy of a pic is all they will be seeing and as long as they are happy with it, who cares.

Btw, lovely pic Pete!

Yes, some bride's couldn't give a flip. Some brides however, can tell the difference. And those brides simply pay more. Those kinds of brides are choosy.

And if I remember correctly, part of the sales pitch of the photog was that she used Mark Ds. When she showed up at the wedding with a Rebel and a pop up flash, the bride inquired. The bride was told that the camera was in the shop.

Whaaaat?????????? That is complete crap! You can rent a camera from any camera shop from around the county. If you are a member of Canon Pro services, you can rent them for free as long as they are working on your camera at the time.

It's just unprofessional, IMHO.

NateWagner · Mar 18, 2010

Bennie: I agree with you that equipment is important. My only contention was that you said a sensor that small (in this case aps-c) could not handle it.

My contention was merely that although the crop size does make a difference, a 50D/7D etc. will be able to shoot the wedding well enough for most circumstances.

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

I agree with that, Nate. But those cameras are a LOT different than an XTI sold at Walmarts all over the universe.

The XTI is simply not a camera a working pro would ever use. Not for portraits, and definately not for a wedding.

Do some people shoot with them? Yep. In this day and age, everyone with a few bucks is a pro photographer who took pictures of their sister's new baby with a rebel.

But that goes back to the question about cameras. It does definately make a difference. Much of this argument has involved MUCH superior cameras. With better sensors.

Those arguments don't hold because we are talking about a whole different breed of camera. The pro or pro-sumer, vs a consumer camera.

The kit lens opens up a whole other can of worms. A pop up flash? Are they insane?

You see what I'm saying?

Bride's aren't that stupid. In fact, they are pretty bright. And there is a $hitload of competition out there. Sometimes a $200 photog with a Rebel will get the backyard wedding. Sometimes a bride spends more on flowers than her wedding photographer.

But if you want to stay in business....YOU DO NOT SHOOT A WEDDING WITH A REBEL, A KIT LENS, AND A POP UP FLASH.

It's really that simple.

rufus5150 · Mar 18, 2010

So let's level the playing field -- assume adequate lighting (proper bounce flash, remote lighting setup, etc) and equal, high-end glass and the same hands using it...

What are the differences between an XTi and a 20D? (The latter which you've already stated is 'great in the right hands').

The XTi has the 30D's AF system which was superior to the 20D's AF system.

They have the same DIGIC II processor, which, let's face it, determines the camera's ability to process an image. Glass is the other factor.

The XTi will outperform the 20D in ISO performance up to 1600. the 20D has a high mode which allows 3200ISO. I'm assuming the 20D has the ability to adjust ISO in 1/2 or 1/3rd stops whereas the XTi does not.

The 20D has a better build quality, longer shutter life, and 1.3 more frames per second due to its larger frame buffer. None of these affect the quality of the image, only the reliability of the device and the ability to burn frames.

So yes, if you set up a straw man with a pop up flash and crap glass, you can conclude only that you cannot shoot a wedding with an XTi. You cannot, however, make a sweeping claim that the XTi isn't a camera capable when you level the playing field in all other elements while simultaneously saying that 'the 20D is great in the right hands'. Those same hands would do just as well or better with an XTi.

You said the crop sensor was the problem yet you say the 20D, 30D, 7D are fine -- obviously it's not endemic to the crop sensor. The XTi has better resolution with the same DIGIC processor as the 20D so obviously it's not the electronics. Build quality affects durability, not image quality. The latter is the only place your argument even barely holds up -- the XTi is probably not the choice if you're chewing through 50,000 frames a year during weddings.

YOU DO NOT SHOOT A WEDDING WITH A REBEL, A KIT LENS, AND A POP UP FLASH

I don't think anyone is arguing with you on this with your two specific caveats, but as far as being able to deliver image quality, all things being the same, the XTi is a completely capable camera in terms of delivering image quality. It may not live up to the rigors of intense professional work, it may not look as 'pro', but it's a capable machine, adequately suitable to taking advantage of the best glass Canon has to offer and producing stellar prints.

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

Oh Lordy. Is it capable of taking photos of the kids playing soccer? Absolutely.
Is it as capable of taking the same wedding photos as a 7d or a 5d or a Mark? No. Just NO.

But we aren't TALKING about pro-sumer, pro cameras, are we? We are talking about a woman who went to a wedding with an XTI. Get this....I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT ANY D SERIES. I AM TALKING ABOUT A REBEL. And THAT is what the Caveat as you say, was all about.

You don't show up at a wedding with a freaking Rebel. It's a no no.

This argument is nonsense.

Is it capable of pulling off a crap shoot at a wedding. Absolutely. And NO it does not stand the rigors of intense professional work, and NO it doens't look pro. And NO, we are not talking about fast lenses. We are talking about a kit lens and a freaking pop up flash for God's sake.

Hey, if you want to walk into a wedding with a consumer camera, and a pop up flash, and a kit lens, God help you. And God help the poor bride and groom.

You can NEVER convince me that an XTI (remember folks, that is what we are referring to...with a kit lens, and a pop up flash) is as good as a pro-sumer, or pro camera.

It isn't. It just is not.

Christie Photo · Mar 18, 2010

When it comes right down to it, I have to stand over here with bennielou. (Yes, Cindy... I'm with you on this one.)

When I think about the quasi trial, the so-called judge showed how totally inept he is when he zeroed in on equipment as a factor in the dispute.

But, really... anyone who intends to regularly offer wedding photography ought to go out and buy a real camera with a real lens.

The first advice I ever received from a working professional just before I shot my first wedding (circa 1970) was, "Get a bigger a camera." It was the first words out of his mouth. He was right. I feel honor bound to pass along the advice now. If you intend to hire yourself out for weddings, get a "bigger" (proper) camera.

-Pete

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

Pete, I hope you know I am your biggest fan. You taught me so much and I will never, ever, forget all your great tips.

Yeah, the judge was a wanna be photographer. Maybe not, but IMO, he is a hobbiest. He knew just enough to mess it up.

The photos I saw where fine. But the lawsuit was about the ceremony shots which we never saw. The other contention was about equipment. I can understand someone being upset about a Rebel vs. a Mark D.

Had the wedding photographers contracted correctly, she would have not been sued for more than her photography cost was. That is another issue. I tell all of my clients, if it is worth a Million bucks to you, you need to pay me a Million bucks. I also have a contract that I can't be sued for more than I charged. Thankfully I've never had to use that clause. But you never know.

But this is more about newbie photographers, IMO. Hey, I started out somewhere too. And I'm all game for the newbie. I will help in any way I can.

But the bottom line is, if you want to be a pro, you need to invest. In bodies, in lenses, in lighting.

You owe it to the people who hire you. And you want to stay in business, right?

NateWagner · Mar 18, 2010

bennielou said:
I agree with that, Nate. But those cameras are a LOT different than an XTI sold at Walmarts all over the universe.

The XTI is simply not a camera a working pro would ever use. Not for portraits, and definately not for a wedding.

Do some people shoot with them? Yep. In this day and age, everyone with a few bucks is a pro photographer who took pictures of their sister's new baby with a rebel.

But that goes back to the question about cameras. It does definately make a difference. Much of this argument has involved MUCH superior cameras. With better sensors.

Those arguments don't hold because we are talking about a whole different breed of camera. The pro or pro-sumer, vs a consumer camera.

The kit lens opens up a whole other can of worms. A pop up flash? Are they insane?

You see what I'm saying?

Bride's aren't that stupid. In fact, they are pretty bright. And there is a $hitload of competition out there. Sometimes a $200 photog with a Rebel will get the backyard wedding. Sometimes a bride spends more on flowers than her wedding photographer.

But if you want to stay in business....YOU DO NOT SHOOT A WEDDING WITH A REBEL, A KIT LENS, AND A POP UP FLASH.

It's really that simple.

I completely agree.

bennielou · Mar 18, 2010

You are a sweetheart Nate. You do good work and I'm glad we can agree.

rufus5150 · Mar 18, 2010

bennielou said:
And THAT is what the Caveat as you say, was all about.

No, I said the caveats were the pop up flash and kit lens. Not the Non-D series.

Because you missed this part of my argument:

So let's level the playing field -- assume adequate lighting (proper bounce flash, remote lighting setup, etc) and equal, high-end glass and the same hands using it...

Because discussions evolve. I really wanted clarification on why you thought it was an inferior body because, obviously, you do have that believe even when you don't consider the glass and flash as factors.

You don't show up at a wedding with a freaking Rebel. It's a no no.

By and large you'll really get no argument from me on this when you take into consideration reliability. But that's not what I'm arguing. (FWIW I show up at shoots -- Full disclosure, I don't do weddings, won't ever do weddings and have the utmost respect for people willing to torture themselves in that particular manner -- with an XTi as a 2nd backup camera (3rd camera) for those 'holy ship!' situations. I trust it implicitly because I know its limitations, but I've yet to need it.)

Is it capable of pulling off a crap shoot at a wedding.

How is its image quality different than a 20D, which you have already conceded is an adequate camera for a wedding?

We are talking about a kit lens and a freaking pop up flash for God's sake.

I like repeating myself, so I will. Here was my first statement, for sake of setting the argument up for an image quality vs. everything else. I'll even bold stuff, because it makes it easier to read:

So let's level the playing field -- assume adequate lighting (proper bounce flash, remote lighting setup, etc) and equal, high-end glass and the same hands using it...

You can NEVER convince me that an XTI (remember folks, that is what we are referring to...with a kit lens, and a pop up flash) is as good as a pro-sumer, or pro camera.

It isn't. It just is not.

It's not. Again, not arguing that. Read again my assumptions. My fingers are getting tired so I won't re-quote.

Is it as capable of taking the same wedding photos as a 7d or a 5d or a Mark? No. Just NO.

Indeed, I agree. No argument. But if you read *really* carefully, I mean really, like you look at the words and stuff, I said this:

What are the differences between an XTi and a 20D? (The latter which you've already stated is 'great in the right hands').

I mean boil it down, let's really be honest about why the 20D or 7D or 5D or 1D is a better camera for weddings than an XTi.

Is it because of inferior image quality? No. Not unless you throw out the 20D,30D,40D. Or if you insist that the XTi be limited to kit lenses and pop-up flash (which I specifically did not).

Put an 18-55 kit on the 20D or the 7D and use an 220EX flash or the 7D's popup how much better would the images be? Not a terrible lot, I'm afraid.

What your argument boils down to is THIS: "an XTi with a popup flash and a kit lens inferior to a high-end camera with adequate lighting and top-end glass" to which I have nothing to say but, "uh, duh?"

Those other cameras are good for weddings or any rigorous shoot because of the build quality, the reliability, the comfort, the extra nice-ity features which make obtaining some shots more difficult with a lesser-equipped camera, and it's 'professional look'.

The people reading the development of this thread, not merely the reactions to the idiots in the video, at least deserve not to be lied to about the capabilities of the consumer line of cameras. Because if someone took one of your earlier posts at face value, you state that a crop sensor camera cannot shoot a wedding. And as we've seen, per you: