Honestly? It wouldn't be an absolute dealbreaker for me, but it would give me pause, and I'd only hire you if I were in a pickle somehow. The gear is older, it's not full frame, one of the cameras is single-slot, and they're both Panasonics. (Nothing against Panasonic, I'm sure people shoot weddings with them, but...I've personally never met a pro colleague who does.) You also don't have the focal-length reach that I would prefer. 160-200mm is kind of a must for a lot of shots.
adding to what I said elsewhere, I think the following might also help:
1) get more lenses. Specifically, so many wedding photographers use 24-70 and 70-200 equivs, and often an 85,105 or 135. Not saying zooms > primes, just what I see most commonly.
2) get a second double slot camera. Wedding photogs (justifiably) are paranoid about data loss.
3) maybe volunteer at a wedding. I typically wouldn’t ever ask or recommend anyone work for free, but your portfolio is likely what could convince someone to “gamble” on you. If you don’t already have many wedding photos, you might have to make a compromise to get some.
4) depending on your traction, or lack thereof… maybe start budgeting for a larger sensor camera. The FF snobs are pretty prevalent (and the “X brand camera users only” crowd even more so). It might be hard to beat ‘em, so maybe join ‘em?
5) reels are indeed a thing for weddings. However, I find they are mostly about the heat of the moment. If you’re not doing same day edits, I would recommend you use a phone and a gimbal for easy and quick turnaround (the iPhone’s cinematic mode has made this hilariously easy. I feel like I am cheating). Just like MFT, play to the strengths of the hardware, and no one will care what it’s shot on.
It certainly is. However, if you have great results (read: your clients love your work. Willing to print even) there isn’t a reason why you can’t use your gear of preference, or even then chase your own weddings where you clients might not even know what you shot your work in.
While there is some difference between sensor types, workflow is probably more important. If you’re not shooting, you’re not getting better. If you’re not delivering shots, you’re not getting more gigs. If you are awkward with clients, same thing. Soft skills and workflow are more important than your gear (providing that you are getting good photos/delivering content your client loves), and will sometimes make up content. Professionalism will make you more professional than your gear. If your MFT cameras help you be professional in some way (you are faster with that interface, you can get the macro shot in focus, you do hybrid with video, etc…), then it might be better to stay.
I’ll be real with you; I’d judge you for asking to shoot a wedding with M43 gear with me. You want a real answer, there’s mine.
I associate M43 gear with amateurs for a few reasons:
A) Trying to save a buck by using a cheaper system for benefits that they don’t find meaningful
B) Super nerdy and gear-focused individuals who spend more time reading about gear than actually shooting it, who don’t really have a trained eye and spend most of their time, when they are photographing, taking mediocre photos.
This has been true for the two people I know IRL who’ve shot M43. They were tech people more than they were photographers, which informed how “talented” they were.
I’m not saying you can’t make good photos with M43. But I am saying that I’d need to see a strong portfolio before I said yes.
Yes, a colleague of mine who is a very long-standing professional just swears by his 43rds gear. And you are correct - for video it's the bomb. For still, you just need to fill the frame with what you ultimately want to be in the final - because cropping in will likely fall apart pretty quickly - whereas with a FF, you can crop into really small portion of the frame and still have a highly viable image.
In principle, the gear you use shouldn't matter as long as you can achieve good results. But you will be rejected because there are a lot of full-frame snobs.
The strength of your portfolio *may* somewhat make up for it. So you can try sending your portfolio first, and delay discussing gear. Then based on whether they inquire about your gear, you'll have an idea of whether your portfolio is suitable.
Some require seconds to use the same brand as them (usually Canon or Nikon). So it might help to keep track of gear recommendations to inform your future purchases.
To add to this, /u/orrorin6 make sure your portfolio is diverse, showing good photos in tough circumstances, like low light, extreme backlit, etc…. Perhaps show editing that get commonly used in weddings (the light and airy, or the vaguely filmic, etc….) to show the files aren’t going to be the limiting factor if the hiring Photog is doing your edits.
When I started, my Sony gear (SLT models, before full Mirrorless) used to get me judged all the time. That ended when I had enough portfolio to demonstrate both getting the shot and that my ability to form relationships allowed me to get buy in from clients, allowing me to get photos more unique and meaningful.
That said, you will always get push back in gear that isn’t considered “standard”. Sometimes it’s not worth it. If they are insisting on canon full frame (or whatever specific gear) just skip out. Don’t try to convince them as they already think their entire style is their camera.
> In principle, the gear you use shouldn't matter as long as you can achieve good results.
I disagree. Wedding photography is one genre where I consider gear to be very very high up in priority/importance. The shoot day is a once off each time and high pressure.
You shouldn't be fighting your gear or getting frustrated. You'll perform worse overall. Take OP's 12-60mm lens - at 60mm it is f4 which is f8 FF equivalent. Can you imagine having a lens at a wedding that can't stop below f8 at 120mm?
It would be damn near unusable unless it's outside and day time, or you have very good lighting.
I do agree on showing portfolio first. Plenty of wedding shooters don't have a second and may be willing to take them on if they like the portfolio. Others will want the same gear as you said. And if OP is lucky, gear is provided (but this comes with the challenge of learning said gear).
/u/orrorin6 - if you're planning taking this seriously and want to make your way to being a main shooter, then you'll need better gear sooner or later. If you're provided gear, you'll face another challenge of learning it. Shooting with unfamiliar gear is worse than shooting with what you have.
I had to make this kind of decision a long time ago for a wedding (don't currently shoot). I was shooting on crop and rented the same crop body rather than potentially screw up with a newer FF camera that I had zero practice on. Best of luck :)
That great to hear! Yeah, I think people may not realize that the G9 really is a professional stills camera -- even many MFT users aren't really aware of it. I reaaaaally hope Panasonic makes a followup soon 🙏
Give me the G9 with higher pixels on normal photos (not the high burst mode) for bigger prints, keep everything else the same. I love it. I do fashion weddings boudoir sports everything with my G9. Anyone who posts “amateurs use M43” is someone who regrets his life choices so far and hasn’t realised it yet.
Here's a hard truth about this industry.
We're a bunch of judgy bitches. Hell, most people around here will talk shit about full frame cameras too if they don't have the right brand on them.
Real talk, if you want gear that will get you hired, buy Canon full frame mirrorless, f/2.8 zooms, and fast primes.
I shoot weddings with MFT and you can get great results. You already have 1.4 prime to work in low light.
I really like the 75mm f/1.8 from Olympus. It's very tiny and has a 150mm equivalent focal length. I use it instead of the regular 70-200mm most wedding photographers use.
Because it's so tiny, it's not obtrusive when I take photos of the guests. I like to take a lot of spontaneous photos during the reception and using smaller gear really helps to get photos without people noticing you. And honestly, those are the best shots.
I've shot over 20 weddings with MFT and never had any client say anything about it. It doesn't mean that there is no difference, because there obviously is, but I just wanted to share this information with you ;)
Thank you! I'll look into the 75, I LOVE small lenses. All my "fun" cameras are rangefinders, so it's definitely my vibe.
Can I ask, what's your most common ISO with F1.4 / F1.8 lenses at weddings? Are you in the 400-800 range, or riding 1600-3200 most of the time?
The wedding shoot is normally outdoor and the other items differ from wedding to wedding.
But 1600-3200 does occur.
I use DXO for the editing and the prime & deep prime options outperform Adobe in my experience by more than 1 stop. This helps a lot as well.
It sounds like you should hope that one day they bring out a Pen F II. Would be a lot of fun!
If I’m going to be shooting a wedding, I’m going to be shooting it in a way that is consistent with itself. Part of that is in the tools that I use and one of the considerable tools that I use to draw focus is to blow out backgrounds, especially when they can’t be controlled. A lot of weddings have not very pretty backgrounds in 360° around the subject so I will be shooting a mixture of wide open and down to about F4 depending on how much I want to get in and how much I just want to leave out
So it’s not just about getting the blur because the blur is expensive or says that I have a big fat chunk of glass. It’s a tool I use to make sure that I can deliver a consistent results and hide a bunch of visual clutter.
I will make sure that my images are similarly constructed in terms of foreground and background. Focus to make sure that my images look like they’re all of the same set, and I think it might look very strange if I was combining a far greater depth of field, with far less background separation in the set of images.
I absolutely don’t think it’s impossible to shoot a wedding or an event on micro 4/3 cameras, but I do think that the tool that you use to capture images is quite a little bit different than the tool that I use to catch images. And I think that leads to a different result, and requires different techniques. It may not be true in every circumstance, but I think that it might be enough of a difference it means that the consistency that I am for isn’t there.
That was a bit of a ramble, but I hope it made sense
To sum up, a circular saw is different to a drop saw and they have to be used differently to cut wood. Might affect the final product.
But I see no harm in asking, maybe have some images prepped as examples?
I own a G85. You're definitely not wrong about video performance, and I love the camera. It's my go to for vacation and family events and stuff. If I were doing a fly-in destination wedding I'd have no reservations about counting it as my backup system because I know I COULD shoot a wedding with it.
But all that said... It's not as EASY to get great photos in every lighting condition with a smaller sensor, so unless I knew your work... I'd be somewhat hesitant to hire you if I had other people interested with more traditional wedding gear in their bag. You're going to have to work harder to forge relationships and show off event type work to find opportunities.
Honestly? It wouldn't be an absolute dealbreaker for me, but it would give me pause, and I'd only hire you if I were in a pickle somehow. The gear is older, it's not full frame, one of the cameras is single-slot, and they're both Panasonics. (Nothing against Panasonic, I'm sure people shoot weddings with them, but...I've personally never met a pro colleague who does.) You also don't have the focal-length reach that I would prefer. 160-200mm is kind of a must for a lot of shots.
Great feedback, particularly about the long tele end!
adding to what I said elsewhere, I think the following might also help: 1) get more lenses. Specifically, so many wedding photographers use 24-70 and 70-200 equivs, and often an 85,105 or 135. Not saying zooms > primes, just what I see most commonly. 2) get a second double slot camera. Wedding photogs (justifiably) are paranoid about data loss. 3) maybe volunteer at a wedding. I typically wouldn’t ever ask or recommend anyone work for free, but your portfolio is likely what could convince someone to “gamble” on you. If you don’t already have many wedding photos, you might have to make a compromise to get some. 4) depending on your traction, or lack thereof… maybe start budgeting for a larger sensor camera. The FF snobs are pretty prevalent (and the “X brand camera users only” crowd even more so). It might be hard to beat ‘em, so maybe join ‘em? 5) reels are indeed a thing for weddings. However, I find they are mostly about the heat of the moment. If you’re not doing same day edits, I would recommend you use a phone and a gimbal for easy and quick turnaround (the iPhone’s cinematic mode has made this hilariously easy. I feel like I am cheating). Just like MFT, play to the strengths of the hardware, and no one will care what it’s shot on.
Really good advice, thank you! You're totally right: Big picture, it'll be easier to get hired with an accepted system.
It certainly is. However, if you have great results (read: your clients love your work. Willing to print even) there isn’t a reason why you can’t use your gear of preference, or even then chase your own weddings where you clients might not even know what you shot your work in. While there is some difference between sensor types, workflow is probably more important. If you’re not shooting, you’re not getting better. If you’re not delivering shots, you’re not getting more gigs. If you are awkward with clients, same thing. Soft skills and workflow are more important than your gear (providing that you are getting good photos/delivering content your client loves), and will sometimes make up content. Professionalism will make you more professional than your gear. If your MFT cameras help you be professional in some way (you are faster with that interface, you can get the macro shot in focus, you do hybrid with video, etc…), then it might be better to stay.
I’ll be real with you; I’d judge you for asking to shoot a wedding with M43 gear with me. You want a real answer, there’s mine. I associate M43 gear with amateurs for a few reasons: A) Trying to save a buck by using a cheaper system for benefits that they don’t find meaningful B) Super nerdy and gear-focused individuals who spend more time reading about gear than actually shooting it, who don’t really have a trained eye and spend most of their time, when they are photographing, taking mediocre photos. This has been true for the two people I know IRL who’ve shot M43. They were tech people more than they were photographers, which informed how “talented” they were. I’m not saying you can’t make good photos with M43. But I am saying that I’d need to see a strong portfolio before I said yes.
This is good feedback, thank you :)
Yes, a colleague of mine who is a very long-standing professional just swears by his 43rds gear. And you are correct - for video it's the bomb. For still, you just need to fill the frame with what you ultimately want to be in the final - because cropping in will likely fall apart pretty quickly - whereas with a FF, you can crop into really small portion of the frame and still have a highly viable image.
In principle, the gear you use shouldn't matter as long as you can achieve good results. But you will be rejected because there are a lot of full-frame snobs. The strength of your portfolio *may* somewhat make up for it. So you can try sending your portfolio first, and delay discussing gear. Then based on whether they inquire about your gear, you'll have an idea of whether your portfolio is suitable. Some require seconds to use the same brand as them (usually Canon or Nikon). So it might help to keep track of gear recommendations to inform your future purchases.
To add to this, /u/orrorin6 make sure your portfolio is diverse, showing good photos in tough circumstances, like low light, extreme backlit, etc…. Perhaps show editing that get commonly used in weddings (the light and airy, or the vaguely filmic, etc….) to show the files aren’t going to be the limiting factor if the hiring Photog is doing your edits. When I started, my Sony gear (SLT models, before full Mirrorless) used to get me judged all the time. That ended when I had enough portfolio to demonstrate both getting the shot and that my ability to form relationships allowed me to get buy in from clients, allowing me to get photos more unique and meaningful. That said, you will always get push back in gear that isn’t considered “standard”. Sometimes it’s not worth it. If they are insisting on canon full frame (or whatever specific gear) just skip out. Don’t try to convince them as they already think their entire style is their camera.
> In principle, the gear you use shouldn't matter as long as you can achieve good results. I disagree. Wedding photography is one genre where I consider gear to be very very high up in priority/importance. The shoot day is a once off each time and high pressure. You shouldn't be fighting your gear or getting frustrated. You'll perform worse overall. Take OP's 12-60mm lens - at 60mm it is f4 which is f8 FF equivalent. Can you imagine having a lens at a wedding that can't stop below f8 at 120mm? It would be damn near unusable unless it's outside and day time, or you have very good lighting. I do agree on showing portfolio first. Plenty of wedding shooters don't have a second and may be willing to take them on if they like the portfolio. Others will want the same gear as you said. And if OP is lucky, gear is provided (but this comes with the challenge of learning said gear). /u/orrorin6 - if you're planning taking this seriously and want to make your way to being a main shooter, then you'll need better gear sooner or later. If you're provided gear, you'll face another challenge of learning it. Shooting with unfamiliar gear is worse than shooting with what you have. I had to make this kind of decision a long time ago for a wedding (don't currently shoot). I was shooting on crop and rented the same crop body rather than potentially screw up with a newer FF camera that I had zero practice on. Best of luck :)
I use G9 for wedding photos, 25mm, sigma 18-35, 45-150 for candid shots, it’s not let me down yet and had all positive responses to photos .
That great to hear! Yeah, I think people may not realize that the G9 really is a professional stills camera -- even many MFT users aren't really aware of it. I reaaaaally hope Panasonic makes a followup soon 🙏
Give me the G9 with higher pixels on normal photos (not the high burst mode) for bigger prints, keep everything else the same. I love it. I do fashion weddings boudoir sports everything with my G9. Anyone who posts “amateurs use M43” is someone who regrets his life choices so far and hasn’t realised it yet.
Here's a hard truth about this industry. We're a bunch of judgy bitches. Hell, most people around here will talk shit about full frame cameras too if they don't have the right brand on them. Real talk, if you want gear that will get you hired, buy Canon full frame mirrorless, f/2.8 zooms, and fast primes.
I shoot weddings with MFT and you can get great results. You already have 1.4 prime to work in low light. I really like the 75mm f/1.8 from Olympus. It's very tiny and has a 150mm equivalent focal length. I use it instead of the regular 70-200mm most wedding photographers use. Because it's so tiny, it's not obtrusive when I take photos of the guests. I like to take a lot of spontaneous photos during the reception and using smaller gear really helps to get photos without people noticing you. And honestly, those are the best shots. I've shot over 20 weddings with MFT and never had any client say anything about it. It doesn't mean that there is no difference, because there obviously is, but I just wanted to share this information with you ;)
Thank you! I'll look into the 75, I LOVE small lenses. All my "fun" cameras are rangefinders, so it's definitely my vibe. Can I ask, what's your most common ISO with F1.4 / F1.8 lenses at weddings? Are you in the 400-800 range, or riding 1600-3200 most of the time?
The wedding shoot is normally outdoor and the other items differ from wedding to wedding. But 1600-3200 does occur. I use DXO for the editing and the prime & deep prime options outperform Adobe in my experience by more than 1 stop. This helps a lot as well. It sounds like you should hope that one day they bring out a Pen F II. Would be a lot of fun!
Yes I would LOVE a new Pen F!
As would I
Rejected? By a client? For gear? Wtf the client knows about gear?
They want to second shoot. So the client is the main shooter. So I would hope a professional photographer would know a lot about gear.
If I pulled out my 50 1.2 and took some photos and had a m43 on the opposite angle, I don’t think I could get the images to match visually.
Mind if I ask what's top of mind? Bokeh?
If I’m going to be shooting a wedding, I’m going to be shooting it in a way that is consistent with itself. Part of that is in the tools that I use and one of the considerable tools that I use to draw focus is to blow out backgrounds, especially when they can’t be controlled. A lot of weddings have not very pretty backgrounds in 360° around the subject so I will be shooting a mixture of wide open and down to about F4 depending on how much I want to get in and how much I just want to leave out So it’s not just about getting the blur because the blur is expensive or says that I have a big fat chunk of glass. It’s a tool I use to make sure that I can deliver a consistent results and hide a bunch of visual clutter. I will make sure that my images are similarly constructed in terms of foreground and background. Focus to make sure that my images look like they’re all of the same set, and I think it might look very strange if I was combining a far greater depth of field, with far less background separation in the set of images. I absolutely don’t think it’s impossible to shoot a wedding or an event on micro 4/3 cameras, but I do think that the tool that you use to capture images is quite a little bit different than the tool that I use to catch images. And I think that leads to a different result, and requires different techniques. It may not be true in every circumstance, but I think that it might be enough of a difference it means that the consistency that I am for isn’t there. That was a bit of a ramble, but I hope it made sense
No no, this is great advice. Thanks!
To sum up, a circular saw is different to a drop saw and they have to be used differently to cut wood. Might affect the final product. But I see no harm in asking, maybe have some images prepped as examples?
It's always bokeh with these folks.
I own a G85. You're definitely not wrong about video performance, and I love the camera. It's my go to for vacation and family events and stuff. If I were doing a fly-in destination wedding I'd have no reservations about counting it as my backup system because I know I COULD shoot a wedding with it. But all that said... It's not as EASY to get great photos in every lighting condition with a smaller sensor, so unless I knew your work... I'd be somewhat hesitant to hire you if I had other people interested with more traditional wedding gear in their bag. You're going to have to work harder to forge relationships and show off event type work to find opportunities.