mirrorless cameras for weddings

Peter69

Peter69

Messages
1,013
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
This is a general question to professional wedding.

have any of yoi used or considered using a mirrorless camera?

I ask as, after attending a wedding at the weekend, the shutter noise from the pros camera was very noticeable (especially in my videos).
A friend of mine has been given a Olympus mirrorless to try out. It produces amazing images (not sure on its crop) & is near silent.
 
I've been using Fuji's for weddings for a couple of years now, sometimes just a question of adjusting your shooting style and expectations of what the cameras can do. As long as you don't expect it to act like a Nikon D4 then all is good. There are a few using the OM's for weddings with superb results.
 
Of course it's not the only solution to the OP's issue.
The quiet shutter mode on the 6d is really effective.
 
I've used Fuji's X range at a few now. I'm still waivering about making the jump completely. There have been a couple of times I've come against the cameras limits. Mainly with lighting. Something which hasn't happened with Nikon - I always run out of talent first. But certainly for 95% + of wedding work the fuji X system is perfectly capable and so very much lighter
 
Hmmm ... some interesting responses there. I honestly don't recall us ever getting the slightest hint of our shutter noise being in any way a problem, and that's with two of us using Canon IDMkIIIs which aren't exactly quiet. Surely it's only really noticeable to anybody who matters during the ceremony and then only if the snapper's overdoing it?
 
Serendipitous Sid said:
Hmmm ... some interesting responses there. I honestly don't recall us ever getting the slightest hint of our shutter noise being in any way a problem, and that's with two of us using Canon IDMkIIIs which aren't exactly quiet. Surely it's only really noticeable to anybody who matters during the ceremony and then only if the snapper's overdoing it?
Click to expand...


I have to admit shutter noise isn't even a consideration when thinking about this. And just anecdotealy I've found Nikon shutters are louder then Canon. Weight is an issue which is my big driver
 
Perhaps it was my ears or the frequency of the noise that the mics are more attuned to?
The Photographer was using 5D mkII.
 
I don't but I know a few guys who do, specifically in churches. The Fuji is popular as is the Sony A7S.

Especially as you can set the camera up at the front of the church, and control it from your phone at the back.
 
Phil V said:
Of course it's not the only solution to the OP's issue.
The quiet shutter mode on the 6d is really effective.
Click to expand...

The 5D MkIII on silent mode is so much quieter than normal mode. It's never been an issue, but out of courtesy always put in in this mode during ceremony. It's pretty quiet to be honest.

As for mirrorless camera's, I keep considering whether to get one more for my own personal use more than anything else. Looking at the fujifilm range, but I always wonder when compared to my a DSLR what kind of quality can I expect from them. From a canon perspective will it match for example the 1200D, 700D, 70D, or 5D level of quality from the sensor when it compares to pixel cramming, colour smoothness, ISO, grain that kind of thing? (nearest way I could get my message over as a question, hope that makes sense!)
 
I just purchased an Olympus E-M5MarkII, along with an Olypmus 40-150 F2.8 for shooting classical music concerts. The shutter is a lot quieter than my Canon 40D and Canon 5D and the 70D (in normal mode, I havn't tried "quiet mode") even when the Olympus is in normal mode (not in silent mode) although the focus lock "beep" needs to be turned off as I found it be intrusive.
The High ISO performance is better than the 40D and 5D but not as good as the 70D, However with some test shooting of a choir practice it will meet my needs especially when shooting with a long f2.8 lens and real good in camera image stabilisation, all in a light package.

For an upcomming concert I feel it will complement my DSLRs nicely especially when I want a bit of reach.
 
Last edited:
On my 5DIII I use silent mode unless I have reason not to.
Not just out of courtesy to the guests, but on my 5DII I noticed that certain shutter speeds and focal lengths the mirror slap produced noticeable degradation in image quality and I'm sure 5DIII silent mode fixes this.

5DIII has another trick I occasionally use.
Less so at weddings, but at concerts where shutter noise detracts from the paying punters experience and is frowned on.
Sometimes you can hear a pin drop and shutter noise travels a long way.
There is a live view mode which pressing the button takes the shot, just the tiniest snick; but the loudest part of the action (cocking the shutter) waits until the button is released.
Hence when super-stealth is needed, use live view, take the shot and keep the shutter button pressed, lower to waist and put on opposite side of body from the audience, release the shutter button.
Don't need to do this very often, but I leave my 5DIII set up ready just in case.
 
Last edited:
Silent mode - PAH! I like the noise of my camera. I just hold the shoot until the buffer is full and then shoot some more :exit:

If you ever get @Daryl to second shoot for you, the guests won't even notice your noisy camera!

OP. 5D MK2 shutter noise - "KA DUNK!"

All said tongue in cheek
 
I'm pretty sure there was a big migration towards mirrorless, but I seem to recall reading that many came back.
 
The most intrusive noises I normally heard from snappers at weddings came not from mirror slap but from those pillocks who hadn't turned off the beeps on their cameras. I often wondered if some of them were the same ones who had previously shot on 35mm and never realised that they could disable auto-rewind after last exposure. Now that was really intrusive during a church ceremony! Always seemed to go on for ages and was absolutely guaranteed to get everybody glaring at the offending snapper ...
 
I took a fair few shots at a wedding recently as a guest with the A6000 and would have no problem using a pair to do weddings. Will see if I can post up some examples.
 
The thing that puts me off (other than the fact that I prefer my Nikons) is the fact that they only have one card slot. I know I'm always banging on about it but it's a risk I prefer to avoid.
 
Marcus Geezer said:
Looking at the fujifilm range, but I always wonder when compared to my a DSLR what kind of quality can I expect from them. From a canon perspective will it match for example the 1200D, 700D, 70D, or 5D level of quality from the sensor when it compares to pixel cramming, colour smoothness, ISO, grain that kind of thing? (nearest way I could get my message over as a question, hope that makes sense!)
Click to expand...

I can't answer for canon, but my feeling is against a Nikon probably samewhere slightly better then a d700/d3. It doesn't have the iso range of a d3s but at lower ISO its up with it. I don't think the quality is as good as you can squeeze from say a d800 but for weddings its more then good enough. One thing it does struggle with and fall behind on is AWB at higher ISO.
 
Absolutely. I do 99% of my weddings with Fuji X gear now. It's already been stated why and what to look out for but, especially on a long day, these cameras really do win out. It's refreshing and full of soul. Just take spare batteries ;)

I find the little Nissin flash does what I need for the only times I ever use flash now, first dance.. and rarely.. but it just works.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00FheRhSPTI


The XT1 especially is my favourite.

The speed may scare you at first with the other bodies especially, for things like when they are walking up and down the aisle... but we coped just find with manual film cameras so why not now. Plus I haven't missed any shots. Occasionally I've had the buffer fill too fast and keep the camera busy for longer than I'd like, but then the other body comes into play or patience. Again, haven't missed a shot even when I thought I would.

The FX bodies are awesome, and technically ahead still no doubt. But I love these fuji cameras and it inspires me even more. Plus my old hands aren't suffering so much now
 
db247 said:
but we coped just find with manual film cameras so why not now.
Click to expand...

Because very few wedding snappers still shoot the same sort of pictures they did when using manual focus lenses. Customer expectation has changed.
 
Serendipitous Sid said:
Because very few wedding snappers still shoot the same sort of pictures they did when using manual focus lenses. Customer expectation has changed.
Click to expand...

I wasn't challenging or saying it's as slow as manual film cameras but rather photo journalists got the shot in all kinds of situations, somewhat comparable to modern days, people aren't running that much faster at weddings as they were in the old days. We aren't limited even with mirrorless gear, in the same way we were back then. So whatever difference there is nowadays in the changed market, is more than manageable with "even" mirrorless gear.

Probably haven't expressed it correctly :) But I know what i mean :D
 
In them days, the plop of the Hasselblad mirror never seemed to be a problem. But I'd still have to go careful during the ceremony, when I was allowed to shoot then. Mostly in Catholic churches.
 
Last edited:
Here's a few I took as a guest with the A6000 - please excuse any quality issues on my part, I'm far from a pro!

I mainly used the camera's Wide area AF system and it almost always found the right subject to focus on, I could even just point it in the general direction and it would hit its mark! lol It was very harsh sunlight outside but the RAW files allowed me to pull all the detail back in some of the shots, especially the wedding dress. On the dance floor I decided to test the camera out with the old slow shutter + flash technique and it did ok considering it's on-board flash.

It's never going to beat the likes of the D4s or even lesser pro DLSRs but for the price and weight difference it's a camera which has certainly impressed me.


Here's two to show what the camera decided what to focus on:

View attachment 35764

View attachment 35765



With this one I was able to pull back all the detail in her dress whilst also regaining detail in the darker parts in shadow:

View attachment 35766



Low light in the ceremony area, ISO-3200:

View attachment 35768



And some dance floor action using the on-board flash:

View attachment 35769
 
Marcus Geezer said:
The 5D MkIII on silent mode is so much quieter than normal mode. It's never been an issue, but out of courtesy always put in in this mode during ceremony. It's pretty quiet to be honest.

As for mirrorless camera's, I keep considering whether to get one more for my own personal use more than anything else. Looking at the fujifilm range, but I always wonder when compared to my a DSLR what kind of quality can I expect from them. From a canon perspective will it match for example the 1200D, 700D, 70D, or 5D level of quality from the sensor when it compares to pixel cramming, colour smoothness, ISO, grain that kind of thing? (nearest way I could get my message over as a question, hope that makes sense!)
Click to expand...

I suppose a lot depends upon what you think is better and how the images are going to be displayed and viewed. Certainly there are some easy to find on line pro blogs and sites covering CSC image quality.

I've been quite impressed with my MFT cameras and I think that my Panasonic GX7 stands up well to my former Canon 20D and 5D, old though they were. Even my old Panasonic G1 is IMVHO good at low to mid ISO's.
 
I have used the Fuji X-T1 with the XF 23mm, XF 35mm and Zeiss 50mm with reasonable success although I wasn't completely happy with the performance of the camera. The B&G wanted a very subtle wedding with no obvious photography so the X-T1 fitted the bill as it's small and discrete.

However, I prefer the faster AF, tracking and image quality (even at high ISO) from the Nikon D750 / D810 over Fuji -XT. In addition, I would never (again) rely on a single card slot to record images, when one goes down, consider yourself very lucky if you can recover any useable images. I had my Nikons as a back up but it was a very nervous wedding for that reason.

Fuji need to improve the noise at high ISO and also introduce a second SD card slot for me to consider it suitable. There are some very dark churches and registry offices in York and it really dosen't cut the mustard. Give it a few more years and I suspect it will.
 
ianp5a said:
In them days, the plop of the Hasselblad mirror never seemed to be a problem. But I'd still have to go careful during the ceremony, when I was allowed to shoot then. Mostly in Catholic churches.
Click to expand...

I just used to put the mirror lock up on then cough whilst pressing the shutter. I always got my shot.
 
Any one remember the mirror slap from the old bronica sq medium format cameras,
It would sound like a light aircraft crashing into the vestry compared to today's offerings !
And it was manual focus, manual winding, only 12 shots on a roll, manual exposure, no choice of changing film speed mid roll, no screen to check if the brides eyes were open, you'd need to lug around a tripod, spare backs, lenses (if you could afford them) have a light meter on a shoelace around your neck and pockets stuffed full of film, nd filters, and dark slides etc,
How times have changed !!!
 
paul.w said:
Any one remember the mirror slap from the old bronica sq medium format cameras,
It would sound like a light aircraft crashing into the vestry compared to today's offerings !
And it was manual focus, manual winding, only 12 shots on a roll, manual exposure, no choice of changing film speed mid roll, no screen to check if the brides eyes were open, you'd need to lug around a tripod, spare backs, lenses (if you could afford them) have a light meter on a shoelace around your neck and pockets stuffed full of film, nd filters, and dark slides etc,
How times have changed !!!
Click to expand...
I had an ETRS (never fancied square format) it was a bit of a distraction in a church (I did it once), you could change film mid roll if you had enough backs. Which was one of the advantages over 35mm.
 
Your correct on the back changing issue (now I remember) but I used to make sure I ended a roll at the church steps with the bride and her father, so I could do a quick change to ISO 800 for inside the church.
At least I never spent hours and hours in front of a computer back then.
 
paul.w said:
... so I could do a quick change to ISO 800 for inside the church.
Click to expand...

Good grief! I don't think I ever went above 400 on 120. But I know I once tried Fuji 1600 35mm for a lark at a winter wedding and the couple never seemed to notice anything untoward ... :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top