Is this camera pictured here good enough for taking wedding pictures ?
- Free AdviceLv 61 month ago
I have one and it's not good enough.
- don_sv_azLv 72 months ago
Hey!. That is the camera I keep in my car. I bought it so my expensive camera wouldn't be in a hot or cold car for hours and I could take pictures anytime I'm out and about.
As much as I like it, I wouldn't use it for someplace where I was planning in advance to take pictures. For that I would use my expensive camera. If someone asked me to be the "official photographer" for their wedding I would decline as I have seen professional photos and I do not have that touch.
- spacemissingLv 72 months ago
For casual, non-official (candid) pictures, it would be pretty good.
It would NOT be good enough for the important photos,
which in any case should be taken by a professional.
Yes, professionals cost more, but (we hope!) they also deliver images
that no amateur photographer is likely to be able to produce,
which is what makes a professional worth paying.
Many couples have regretted not hiring a qualified pro.
- 2 months ago
I own a similar camera with a higher megapixel count, and no, the lighting is below sub-par and the stabilization is as well. It gets crazy out-of-focus is bright environments. 3/10 would not buy again.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- keerokLv 72 months ago
You can use it to take wedding pictures. Why not? Casual, non-critical, no problem. Album quality? The type that you'll show off to your great grandchildren in the future? Nah!
- FrankLv 72 months ago
Short answer: Generally no, but it depends upon who's using it, their capabilities and what they're going to do with the images.
If the photographer using it was capable of producing great work while overcoming the huge shortcomings of the camera, then yes.
You don't mention who's using the camera and what will be done with the image files. If the camera is going to be used by a guest for their own record, and they don't mind that it's not capable of shooting inside without a flash unless on a tripod, then it could be good enough. The camera is very limited in a variety of ways. If the user is a capable and willing to put the work into overcoming these limitations, then it could be used successfully, but lets not kid ourselves.
The photo below was taken with a $89 Panasonic point-and-shoot pocket camera.
- AndrewLv 72 months ago
If you're the main photographer, no.
A wedding is a once-in-a-lifetime event, with no chance to repeat, and everything has to be perfect - that's why pro wedding photographers charge so much.
As an experienced amateur with good and reliable kit, I did ONE wedding as a favour to friends,and it aged me ten years - I know one photographer who fouled up, and had to spend £4,000 of his own money, to hire venue, outfits and cars all over again to re-shoot.
If, "Friends," ask you to photograph their wedding to save money, run away - very far and very fast.
- qrkLv 72 months ago
What is your goal and what is the lighting like?
How will the images be presented?
If you want to take snapshots and there is plenty light (outdoors during the day), it will work. Indoors, this camera will struggle due to poor light sensitivity. If the shots are only going to be viewed on a cell phone, then this might work for indoor shots because the image is viewed on a small area. This should not be used as the primary camera for the event. This is suitable for attendees who want to take casual shots.
If this is for making largish prints (8x10", or larger) of the event this camera will fall short. Indoor shots will be too noisy due to the small sensor size and high pixel count. It will be OK for outdoor shots during the day. Distortion will be moderate, but most people won't notice since they are used to cell phone selfies.
If you want good quality images, then you go to a larger and more expensive kit. At a minimum, a 1" sensor camera like the original Sony RX100 (about $400, better prices when it goes on special). Better to go with a mirrorless or DSLR with an APS-C or full-frame sensor with a fast lens (f/1.8 or f/2.8). Using a mirrorless or DSLR takes training to use properly. There are a few basic rules that will give a better chance of having decent images like:
watch out for strong back lighting, don't use on-camera flash unless it's bounced or used as fill, basic lighting using existing lighting, composition (rule of thirds, don't crop awkwardly, no poles sticking out of someone's head, ...), setting up people, how to include children (leave them out at first, include them at the very end of a shoot), ... The simple basics can be learned in a week. To go beyond the basics is a lifetime endeavor.
If you are the primary shooter, think again. Wedding photography should be handled by someone who is competent - which means dishing out dinero.
- Pearl LLv 72 months ago
i dont see why not
- Rick BLv 72 months ago
Absolutely not. Not even close.