The Bare-Bones Minimum Gear Needed to Photograph a Wedding

The Bare-Bones Minimum Gear Needed to Photograph a Wedding

Having the right gear for the job is essential in being able to handle the barrage of lighting scenarios that a wedding photographer will encounter on each outing. I, like many others, am constantly thinking about the next piece of gear. What lens, what camera, or what lighting system will allow me to take higher quality images and provide a better experience to my client? This led me to think, what do I really need to shoot a wedding? I mean in reality, to walk out my door and provide my bride with the images she expects, what are the bare essentials I really need?

Whether you are a seasoned professional who is always spending that next bit of extra money on a new lens or whether you are new photographer thinking about jumping into wedding photography, it's important to nail down your essentials-only gear list.

It might sound nice to some to have two Nikon D4Ss or D810s, every lens under the sky, and a full Profoto lighting system to take with you on every wedding, but is it really what you need? And even more importantly, is it even ideal?

The Minimum Gear

Camera Body

Let's start with camera bodies. First, do you need two camera bodies or one? I personally shoot with two bodies, but I love the idea of shooting with one. I do, however, think it's important to have two cameras on you just in case something happens to the first. Part of the job of wedding photography is being foolproof, meaning nothing can go wrong that would stop us from recording that day. Now, that doesn't mean there aren't photographers who don't carry only one body. There are in fact some very good ones that do that, but it's a risk. The chances of a body failing during a wedding (especially a new body) are very slim. So you decide if you want to take that risk, but I personally wouldn't recommend it at all.

My current camera body of choice on wedding days is the Nikon D750, which is currently selling for about $1,900 new on B&H. I've often said that Nikon has made this camera too good, because wedding photographers don't need to spend $6,000 to get the low-light capabilities of a model like the D4S that was previously the standard.

If you are looking for a less expensive option, I think you can still photograph in most lighting conditions with very professional results with the Nikon D610, which retails for about $1,500.

The Nikon D7000 series is also a good value, and I would have no qualms with a D7200 or D7100 being a backup camera body. They perform decently in low light and also do a fair job of focusing quickly. One should keep in mind though that these are crop sensors. That means they are not full frame, and you need to be mindful of that, especially when making lens selections.

Final Verdict: If you are looking for your main camera body and the cheapest option to start shooting weddings, I would recommend either the Nikon D610 or the Canon 6D, with the 6D coming in at about $100 less expensive.

And if not? If you are to attempt shooting a wedding with a lower model like the Nikon D7200, I would suggest — in order to protect yourself and in the bride's best interest — that you be up front. There are certainly countless examples of beginner, entry-level camera owners being asked to shoot a wedding. In fact, that is how many get started in wedding photography. But you should be clear to your couple that, while you are confident that you can take photos for them throughout the day, you are not a professional and your gear is not professional gear. Your cost should therefore be in-line with your skill set and gear capabilities. If you can't ensure you will get all the shots with professional quality you shouldn't be accepting professional rates.

Camera Lenses

You need to be able to basically do two different things: shoot wide and shoot far. The usual choice photographers have to make is whether to go with zoom lenses or prime lenses (fixed focal-length lenses). My personal lens list looks something like this:

Full disclosure, here: I barely use my 70-200mm and only pack it just in case I need the longer focal length. Ninety percent of my wedding images are shot with either the 50mm or 85mm prime while a few images on each wedding are taken with the 24-70mm zoomed wide and the 105mm Macro. So, even on my own list, I could eliminate a couple of lenses if I needed to. What I need though is the ability to shoot wide at either 24mm or 35mm and the ability to zoom in with something like an 85mm. You also don't need the f/1.4 lenses if you are on a budget. Moving down in price range to the f/1.8 can work when dealing with primes. Note, however, that the difference in these lenses is not the two-thirds of a stop, it's the overall quality of the lens build and lens elements. If you would like to see my gear in action, check out some of my blog posts. All of my recent posts are using the D750 and D810 and this lens list.

You could probably make do with a Nikon 35mm f/1.8 (which retails for about $530) for your wider shots and a Nikon 85mm f/1.8 (which retails for about $500) when you need to punch in a bit. I would also recommend picking up a 50mm, mainly because the price point is so low for what you get. The Nikon 50mm f/1.8 retails for about $200, and the Nikon 50mm f/1.4G retails for about $450.

Also, let's look at the comparable Canon lenses and their approximate cost.

Lighting

First, do you need a flash in order to shoot a wedding? My answer is yes. You are going to have to shoot in situations that are not ideal. Not every wedding is going to have the perfect outdoor ceremony followed by the perfectly lit reception. Most first dances happen on a dance floor that requires you to light the subject. The bottom line is, if you are walking out the door without any lighting, then you cannot shoot in any situation. 

Second, do you have to be able to get the flash off-camera? And, my very hesitant response: No. You can light a group with your on camera flash -- not well, but you can do it. You can also light dark reception venues without having a light off-camera. It's not the look I like at all, but you can do it.

Also, keep in mind that if you only have one flash and no flash triggers, then you may be able to fire that flash with your on-camera pop-up flash. And while the pop-up flash isn't by any means the best, I have seen some pretty good first dance and exit photos using pop-up flash along with an off-camera flash as a backlight (this is a scenario where you only have one external flash).

Ideally, you should have two or three flashes and be able to shoot off-camera using a light stand, umbrella, and flash triggers. My wedding kit includes five flashes and an Einstein strobe with a couple of different modifiers.

For flashes, your two main options are brand or off-brand. The Nikon SB-910 runs about $550, and the lower end SB-700 runs about $325. In the Canon realm you can choose from the 600EX for about $470 or the 430EX for about $300. My other recommendation would be looking at a brand like Yongnuo. The newer model with iTTL for Nikon is around $100 and the Canon model is about $20 more. Yongnuo also sells a great set of triggers that allow you to change the flash power remotely. One transceiver and one controller combined go for around $85. Fellow writer Jason Vison recently put together a great article on them.

Also, I want to note that if you are shooting the wedding with only one on-camera flash, you need to know how to use it. Just pointing the flash straight at your subject is not going to cut it. Being able to bounce in multiple directions (left, right, up, back) and use the flash as a subtle fill in certain situations is essential to lighting and shooting in the constantly changing landscape of the wedding day.

The Bare-Bones Kit

Nikon Kit

Nikon D610 - $1,500

Nikon D7100 - $800

Nikon 35mm f/1.8 - $530

Nikon 85mm f/1.8 - $500

Yongnuo 568 EX - $100

Total: $3,430

Canon Kit

Canon 6D - $1,400

Canon 70D - $1,000

Canon 35mm f/2 - $550

Canon 85mm f/1.8 - $370

Yongnuo 560EX - $120

Total: $3,440

I mentioned earlier that you could very well decide to not pick up the second camera body, but that is at your own risk, and I do not recommend it. Also, if you were looking to expand this kit just a bit, I would recommend picking up the 50mm f/1.8 or f/1.4, a second flash, a light stand, an umbrella, a set of triggers, and a 5-in-1 reflector. These additional items would probably run you about $500 and are well worth the money, given that they provide you with much more flexibility. You also need to keep in mind you will need memory cards for your camera, and I highly recommend extra batteries for your camera body. Heading out with one battery to shoot a wedding is asking for trouble. Lastly, you will also want something to carry your gear in as well. If I were going to build a starter kit that was a little bit more ideal, I would recommend setting aside about $10,000. But if you are looking to start off in wedding photography, you can set out with around $4,000.

Summary and Disclaimer

Finally, I want to again state that in my opinion if you are setting out with lesser camera bodies, without a flash (and the knowledge of how to light with only one flash), and without a wide and tight lens, you should be very upfront with your bride or groom. If for nothing else than to protect yourself. You don't want the expectations to be unsaid and then deliver images that are not what the client expected. (this statement is more for the beginners, I don't want anyone new misleading themselves and then getting themselves sued). As a wedding photographer the job is unique in that you need to be ready for any and all situations.

That being said, having all the best gear in the world does not replace knowledge and experience, nor predetermine success or "professionalism". Conversely, not having a D610 or D6 doesn't mean you can't shoot epic weddings, certainly skill and knowledge can over ride your gear budget (within reason), but having lower end gear, even with great skill, does mean you will be some what limited in particular situations. This article is simply a gear list intended for those looking to build their first kit, to have a starting point, or for those looking to stream line their wedding kit.

Log in or register to post comments

126 Comments

Previous comments
Eddy Van den Broeck's picture

I might be missing some parts of the discussion, but all can read is how important 'expensive' prof gear is... true, to some extend... there are technical differences. But, what about the photographer??? Give a 'gifted and talented' photographer (everyone can be a professional) a basic camera, and he will produce better images than any other less gifted professional with latest most expensive equipement! Too many photographers start to rely mainly on their gear.... and forget all about the skills! What is more important, a technically perfect photo, or a photo that shows the atmosphere and really captured 'a moment'??? I hate to see the ART of photography get lost with the megapixel hunt..... Has everyone forgoten about the era where we had no digital cameras? Are all the 'noisy' and 'grainy' wedding pics shot on ISO1600 by moder standards awefull and bad?....

Kyle Medina's picture

It's a tool. Gear doesn't make you a "professional." Yet the word professional is a muddy term nonetheless.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Kyle you might be correct, tried using "professional quality" as well but I would agree its subjective. I also would consider saying "acceptable" but that's even more subjective. At the end of the day the market will decide what is professional or what is 3k work, 5k work, etc.

its a bit like the "elite" QB conversation, there isn't I would agree a line in the sand for professional vs non-pro, but I need to make sure I don't send a beginner out there to shoot a wedding with sub-par gear and not suggest they don't accept thousands of bucks and don't set expectations with the client, to some degree that would be a dis-service and misleading to them, no what I mean?

michael andrew's picture

Just got back from shooting 2 weddings out of town and one of my camera bodies was limping on the second wedding day near the most important moments. It was pretty lame, but I am glad I had 3 bodies (one was film).

I cannot imagine the shear horror of having a single camera (or lens) fail and not have a backup during an event like a wedding.

Lance Nicoll's picture

agreed. I'm super paranoid. I have back ups for back ups, I'm always trying to figure out if these batteries fail and the ones I just bought are bad (don't know if that even happens) then what is my next option etc etc - I actually bring my Film camera with me on a lot of my shoots as well.

Sean Slavin's picture

If you're willing, you can trim this even further. Most people think I'm out in left field but for the majority of my weddings I go very minimal.

2 bodies (1Ds MkIII), a 50/1.2, a 35/1.4, small shoulder bag. In the bag is a speedlite, cards and batteries. Maybe a 24-70/2.8 but it's a rarity.

First time I tried this setup was a little daunting. To make it work, I present myself to the venue, planner, officiant, etc and educate on what I do. I've only been told no a handful of times because of access issues. I never force the issue and remain respectful.

It's very freeing to not have to carry a giant bag. There's no worry about leaving it someplace. Everything I need is on me.

Ben Sandness's picture

I feel that this article is misleading. There are 2 factors that the gear should be selected based upon: 1) Redundancy across the board (wide-ish and long-ish fast-ish glass x2, two bodies, light light light light, etc), and 2) knowing how to use your gear intuitively and without hesitation.

I think that the budget could be allocated in a more flexible way.

D7000 - Used mint for $400. Get 2 of these for consistency or pair it with a used D600 (these are a steal right now) or maybe a D7100 (Used/refurb for $500-650). Of course only use bodies with 2 card slots and shoot RAW to both.

Sigma/Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 OS/VS lenses. New $500, used for half that.
35mm f/1.8g DX - $200 new
85mm f/1.8g - $400 used
Something long. 180mm f/2.8D, 80-200mm f/2.8D, 50-150mm f/2.8 OS Sigma, 50-135mm f/2.8 Tokina, etc. Whatever you get will be $400-700 or so used and good quality.

At this point, you're looking at between $2300 and $3300. Now spend $1000 to $2000 on an off camera light system. There are oodles of options, more than I could list for sure.

Ultimately, it comes down to how you work, your budget, and priorities. Glass and lighting are more long term pieces of equipment. New bodies are constantly being updated and depreciating. From a business standpoint, it makes most sense (for my math) to buy year old bodies used or refurbished and use quality glass and lighting.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Ben, I'm not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing. Your budget comes out to be about the same. I don't have an issue with other lens brand like tamron, I actually love the Sigma glass, and think Tamron puts out some decent glass as well. But I've had 2nds show up and shoot with mid-range DSLR's and I can see a clear difference in image quality. I do agree that, the budget can be flexible. This isn' t meant as a bible but a guide, you can definitely spend more or less on each category.

Ben Sandness's picture

Lance,
By and large I am agreeing, but I was hoping to shed some different perspective on the negative slant put on APSC sensor cameras. My examples focus on things that I feel are really good value items and more than capable.

I don't disagree that the gear that you listed would be more than fine for wedding use, but I do wonder about if this article really lives up to the title. Perhaps the whole thing could be simplified into bullet points that might be more useful:

-Two or more camera bodies, preferably of the same lens mount, both with dual card slots, preferably weather sealed, reliable autofocus, and capable of usable image quality at ISO3200-ish

-Batteries, lots of them. 3x more than you need.

-Memory, good quality cards, formatted before hand and extra cards. A card wallet is a good idea to keep cards safe if changing between cards.

-Lenses. Fast glass of some sort. If you like zooms, then f/2.8 zooms (VC/OS/etc if possible). Primes of f/2 or better. Like bodies, you need duplicates. This doesn't mean buying multiples of the same lens, but have enough that you can keep shooting if anything fails.

-Lighting. No right answer for this category, other than knowing how to use what you have. There are some that get amazing images with on camera light, but everyone is a little different. I bring strobes, off camera speedlights, and a few on camera lights as well (and gels!)

-Good shoes. Seriously, get some good shoes.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Thanks Ben!

Chris Demadura's picture

What would be an ideal non-bare bones canon kit?

Also, what bags are people using for their kits?

Ben Sandness's picture

For the Canon end of things, the 5D3 is a staple of almost all of the Canon shooters I know.

For bag, I carry a LowePro Urban Reporter 250, plus I keep a hard case in the car with other stuff.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Chris, I shoot Nikon I would say 2 D750's - and then prob a 35 1.4, 50 1.5, 85 1.5, and a macro lens - then your lighting - if you have specific questions, email me, its cool - me@lancenicoll.com

Chris Demadura's picture

I seem to have everything but a 35mm prime. Would my 24-105 replace it?

Jacques Cornell's picture

Ugh. The whole "smaller sensors are not professional" trope is retrograde. Today's D7200 produces IQ equal to or better than yesterday's 1Ds3, and Micro Four Thirds rivals a 1Ds2. If you cut your teeth on film, you should know how to get good results from APS or MFT. Keep ISO at 3200 or less, use flash when needed, apply noise reduction and sharpening appropriately, and don't print poster-size. It's not rocket science.

Adam Ottke's picture

You're right, partially. But I think you're hung up on the same part everyone else seems to be hung up on.

The issue isn't in terms of what you can do today that you couldn't do yesterday with a crop sensor and how those have become as good as yesterday's FF sensors... The point is that, along with those advancements, people's expectations have changed as well.

It's the same way that (there was a post on Fstoppers a while ago on this) a Super Bowl was photographed years ago, and no one questioned the images. But when brought back and compared to images of a Super Bowl 4 years later, the difference was crazy...a newsroom editor at any respectable organization wouldn't stand for the quality of the "old" image in today's world. And they're printing or reproducing in spots that are a few inches tall in a paper or online!

And whether or not our clients can put their finger on the fact that there's more grain, or noise, or less dynamic range, or whatever -- they'll likely be able to tell or at least they'll feel like the images look better or worse depending on which system you use...

Two to three generations old...I wouldn't do it...definitely not that old on an APS-C body... But then it all depends on what you're okay with your clients seeing/thinking... I think it's easy to see a difference...but of course, only you and/or your client can know if that difference matters... It certainly matters to me...

Jacques Cornell's picture

You're right that one has to use the gear that will meet clients' expectations. But, among wedding and event clients, expectations haven't changed much. They still expect clean reproduction at album size or an occasional 12"x18" enlargement, easily met with MFT. In fact, tech requirements for my event work have actually declined over the past decade, as photos that previously would have been published in an in-house magazine now go online.

I think it's mostly relatively new photographers, not clients, who are chasing the latest shiny object with regard to IQ. And, a lot of veteran pros I know in NYC still produce truly remarkable stock, lifestyle, fitness and wedding work with cameras from 2-3 generations back. Their clients aren't complaining.

Wow. I don't know what concerns me more. The idea that you can't shoot a wedding with a crop sensor or the thought that ANY professional photographer would show up without redundancies in their kit. I've had two cameras and a lens go bust on me in 8 years of shooting, all on location. Customer had no idea because it didn't slow me down - I carry two of everything.

The notion that "I'm cheaper because my gear sucks" sounds like advice you'd give to a competitor you are trying to run out of business. I don't like competition, but I'd never advise anyone to consult with a client advertising a shortcoming that frankly isn't a shortcoming at all.

In the end this feels like an article written to discourage would be wedding photographers from giving the work a shot. "If you can't spend $4000, don't bother". Truth is that there are tons of fantastic shooters that can and do shoot circles around "the seasoned pros" with far less investment.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Ty, I think you're missing the point. At no point do I say, "don't bother" I say be upfront with your client and don't charge "professional rates" - 2nd shoot, shoot lower budget weddings, etc and then when you are ready, invest the 3 to 4 grand in yourself and your business.

Lance Nicoll's picture

Also, Ty, there are zero comments that say "redundancies" are bad. I state that my kits has 2 bodies ( I actually bring a film camera too, so 3) and I that I have 24-70 and 70-200 as well as my primes. The list is called "bare bones" cause its the minimal I would be confident sending someone out to shoot a wedding (purely from a gear standpoint not skill set thats a separate topic)

thats why the "bare bones"list doesn't have multiples.

help me out though, where does it say that you should show up without redundancies ?

I think we are actually saying the same thing and agreeing here. Now if you are saying you show up with 2-35 1.4's , 2-50's, 2-85s, 2-24-70's, etc then I applaud you but would think that slightly overkill. If my prime does get dropped or fails, then I fall back to the zoom and vice versa.

Eric Duminil's picture

Exactly.

Ugh. "professional" vs. "non professional" gear. This needs to stop! A lot of people who know nothing about photography sometimes hear, make sure your photographer has a full frame camera. This is BS. It's photographers shooting other photographers in the foot. If Photographers did it with ISO 100-800 film only a few decades ago, you can do it with any current digital camera on the market today. Improve your technique, style, and educate yourself! GAS is a real thing and it doesn't make you any better than the next person. Please stop the full frame lie!

Lance Nicoll's picture

Far less about Full Frame and Crop and more about low light shooting/ISO and focusing - Nikon Crop sensors can't handle low light anything like the D750, imo

professional gear is a real thing. If you are heading out to shoot weddings with an entry-level DSLR you are not, guaranteed, going to be able to deliver high-quality, professional-quality, images in ANY lighting condition.

Conversely, I would agree that having top gear does NOT ensure you can do the job either. This is purely a gear list, not a skill set list.

Sander van der Veen's picture

I think gear is overrated these days, sure you can deliver professional quality with entry level dslr's. It sounds cliche, but it's still the man/woman behind it that does the job. And if you shoot with a entry level all your life, and you're getting booked for a wedding because of your work.. you sure can do it.

"If you are heading out to shoot weddings with an entry-level DSLR you are not, guaranteed, going to be able to deliver high-quality, professional-quality, images in ANY lighting condition."

What? I'm sure W. Eugene Smith heard similar words when he went from medium format to 35mm. This simply is 100% incorrect. Don't get me wrong. a "pro" full frame camera will be easier to get the shot with (in some conditions), but that is not to say it can't be done with aps-c or even m43.

Lance Nicoll's picture

So Kevin would you say you could take a Nikon D3000 out on a wedding day and be able to shoot and focus on fast moving subjects and then shoot an outdoor night time first dance and any other condition, and deliver high-quality images your client will be happy with and want to print?

I get you point, and the point is correct, but also the statement I made about not being able to guarantee you can get any shot in any lighting condition with an entry-level camera is correct. Wouldn't you agree that a Nikon D3000 at ISO 6400 wouldn't hold up as professional quality to a bride paying 3K or more ?

Jacques Cornell's picture

..."would you say you could take a Nikon D3000 out on a wedding day and be able to shoot and focus on fast moving subjects and then shoot an outdoor night time first dance and any other condition"...

You've heard of flash and zone focus?

People used to shoot weddings with Speed Graphics and TLRs, fer crying out loud. All this angst about fast AF and stratospheric ISO settings sounds like the insecurity of a new generation who either 1) simply can't imagine a different style, approach or way of working, or 2) are in the habit of buying technology rather than developing technique. Jeez, guys, I'm only 51, but you're making me feel like an 80-year-old geezer chastizing the whipper-snappers.

Jozef Povazan's picture

Well, this article can be a bit misleading. Bare-bones minimum to photograph a wedding? Hm. there is more to this then just some list of cameras and lenses. I know photographers who will shoot with 2 full frames bodies and 2 primes and set of OCF and pretty much create unbelievable creative imagery in such a compelling way one can only dream about. Then I know masters who bring only an extreme wide angle zoom lens, no flash and rule the day with it like no one else does. And then another great crazy photographer I respect brings his 70-200 and for the 90% of the day he will literally knocks down everybody to tears with his amazing portraits he is able to cover in that range through the day and his one camera on him is enough for that. It is all about who you are, how you feel and know to express your vision and how capable you are to do it the way your clients will beg you to photograph their wedding day. Knowledge and capability to consistently deliver what you are the best at is the key here IMO! Is gear important? Yes! But do not ask me to shoot your wedding day with just a 24-70 for example, because yes I can do it, but my client will not like it since my portfolio shows variety of lenses and creative techniques mixing ambient light and OCF through the day as it was needed. That is my shooting habit, and I know about it and that is why I can deliver it to my clients. Everyone has its own shooting habit. And you need time to realize what it is :) or what it will be! So the gear in general means nothing here. It is about who you are, what you know to do with particular gear set up and how you deliver every single time to your clients. A camera with a lens is the extension of my mind, eyes and hands in order to create... I could have the golden Hasselblad from saudi arabia and it would not help me to get better because I do not see things in square format :) Do you see my point? Knowledge comes before gear! So if you have one camera and one lens and nothing else, shoot, observe, be critique to yourself, shoot more, get better and then if you feel you need more and know exactly what that one camera one lens combo did not let you do, buy what was missing :) but get some gear based on advice of others seems to me as coming to a Best Buy and ask what is the most bought gear by wedding photographers here... and you end up short of couple hundreds or thousands $$$ with the same exact result like after reading this article :) Just my 50 cents thanks :) Enjoy your day and tomorrow grab a camera and shoot and learn so you know more about who you are when you work with your camera :)

Lance Nicoll's picture

Jozef, not sure my article and your views are mutually exclusive, because I actually agree with what you've said and stand by the article. The nature of this is if you are going to walk at the door and shoot weddings (which require you can handle to constantly changing conditions) AND you want to spend the minimum $$$ then here is a minimalist list you can start from. for instance you can shoot 90% percent of your day with you 70-200 but you still need to be prepared if you need to shoot wide. So you could go 70-200 and a 24 or something like that, but the cost would prob be higher. So I'm balancing cost with being able to handle different situations.

but yes, an individuals tendencies, shooting habits, skill set, etc are essential. But again, take the best wedding photog and give them a D5000 and they won't be able to shoot really well in low-light, the gear becomes limiting. ya?

Jozef Povazan's picture

Hi Lance, Are you a wedding photographer? If yes then you know your fellow photographers from the same region, shooting at the same venues like you can have completely different styles. That style often depends on their personality and gear they use. If a person has a shy personality he will probably opt for a longer lenses through the day since 35mm would require from him to stay close by most of the time and he would not be able to stand the pressure being around couple and the guests in such an intimate distance for example. So the idea of minimalist gear in general does not help here IMO. I have also said YES THE GEAR MATTER :) so pulling out example of the basic Nikon D5000 model which is archaic these days is an under par statement do not you think :)?. And yet I am glad you mentioned that camera because it is a tool and if used by a skilled photographer at a wedding I am 1000% sure he could be able to pul amazing stuff out of it despite its lack of low light focusing and possible bad quality noise in colour images :). In fact if you have ever seen Jerry Ghionis weddings images, I have to strongly disagree with yours : "But again, take the best wedding photog and give them a D5000 and they won't be able to shoot really well in low-light, the gear becomes limiting. ya?" He entered couple years back into Album of the year competition book with images shot only on iPhone, which had a joke camera specs compared to your mentioned D5000 one! No one knew the album comes from a phone camera images!!! Now he finished 4th !!! in the world toughest wedding printed contest ever, and he was able to keep up with the others in top ranking..? Btw, he also took 1st place with another couples album in the same contest !!! So to me, the camera gear is a tool like for a carpenter is a hammer. Give a lousy carpenter the best hammer you can buy and watch what he will create, give a skilled carpenter a regular Home Depot hammer and he will build you a house !!! Again, this is just how I see it and I believe a skilled carpenter will buy himself a decent hammer to make sure his work is as efficient as he needs it to be :) Enjoy your day guys :) I am back to my work, designing two more wedding albums :) today.

More comments