scyrene said:
Tiderace said:
As a Photography Camera looks promising, if these differences are VISIBLE to the consumer, which I am not as yet convinced they will be in the wedding business. Perhaps there are fashion and other high end markets it will serve.
I thought the 5D series was the wedding photographers' go-to model, with the 1Dx aimed at wildlife, sports, and messy environments (like warzones)?
Of the many wedding photographers I know,
Megapixels isn't even on their radar of importance at all. No album size they print is large enough to exceed the resolution.
The 5D3 is king because they get all the performance they need, for 1/3 - 1/2 the price of the 1DX.
Sure, the 1DX you don't need battery grip, it has the higher flash sync speed which is very nice for weddings, and the selective spot metering, which isn't that critical for weddings.
It has the downside of being large and heavy for long 8+ hour days and there are a lot of women wedding photographers who don't want to sling that beast.
The high FPS are not much use except for catching the bouquet / garter toss shots.
The low light capability is a plus, but not game changing over the 5D3. The AF is similar enough.
These are business people. Not just photographers. At least the successful ones.
A camera is a business tool. A piece of equipment. They want to keep equipment costs down as much as possible, while getting the results they need. 5D3 is very durable and lasts long. Thus it is a superior value. A business minded photographer needs to be able to prove that a 1DX's $3,000 - $4,000 higher cost will bring that money back in and then some.
The ones that I know cannot find any feature worth that, nor a feature that would make that money back.
It is very different from Nikon. A lot of Nikon wedding pros use the flagship D4S ...because in the Nikon world, they do not have an equivalent wedding workhorse camera like Canon does in the 5D series.
Most of the Canon wedding shooters I've seen are using cameras like the 7D, 5D2, 5D3, 60D, 40D or a combination of them main vs backup or secondary. Of those, the 5D3 is the rarest, even after it has been out all these years.
At the end of the day, if the camera has sufficient speed, durability, AF and image quality to deliver quality results to the customer, why upgrade? Not a single customer says "oh good thing you got that 5DS for the bridal party shot" ..."it makes a huge difference on my 12" album" ... We're talking printed photos or albums no larger than 16". For digital, no more than 4-5MB JPG's so they can easily share, print and post on the web and elsewhere. There's also DVD/Bluray slideshows.
Not a single customer says "oh wow, love the dynamic range on these pictures, I appreciate the cleanliness of the shadow areas cause that's where I look when I view my wedding photos" not that it shows up in print anyway!
The wedding pros that I know are all more interested in glass. There they will buy good glass and don't mind doing so as they hold value within reason. That and, only with certain lenses can one get a certain perspective and look. No getting around that. And even with that, several do not upgrade anytime soon. Now, on workhorse glass - the majority I know run 1st generation 24-70, along with the 70-200. No hurry to update. For what? Is it i even a possibility for a client to see the difference between the I and the II ? They're not viewing these in Lightroom at 1:1. A couple wedding pros don't even bother with the 2.8, they go with the F4 70-200, and save a lot of money and get great shots. The 85mm 1.2 and lenses like that, different story. You just can't find a cheap way to get that look.
But I digress, so back to the camera.
What business sense does a 1DX make for a wedding pro? Not much at all.
1DX will always make more sense for the serious sports, news, and some wildlife pros.
? It's ok, only joking...
