Comments on: Wedding photography and the Canon EOS 40D

By: ringoisthebestbeatle

ringoisthebestbeatle — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:25:31 +0000

I can’t understand the reason why he was dubbed with this strong italian accent…it isn’t his voice!!Subtitles would have been better.. not all the italians speak english like that!

By: kileycaitlyn

kileycaitlyn — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:42:19 +0000

wow thats amazing !! i love that camera

By: logaranjan

logaranjan — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 22:44:39 +0000

Great Video

By: ywh555

ywh555 — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:21:06 +0000

I love ur video, it’s really great

By: srotex

srotex — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 07:57:41 +0000

he is absolutelly amateur… boring photographer… and he use amateur camera on wedding!

By: ish718

ish718 — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:50:42 +0000

Its not so much the camera, more about the photographer, you don’t need a >$5000 to get nice pictures.

By: srotex

srotex — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:20:12 +0000

on wedding you need good camera: full frame, good lenses, coz in church very often is dark, and simple lenses loose focus.
So if some1 wants to be wedding photographer needs min. 5d + 16-35/2.8, 430ex

sorry, but video like this makes me laugh

By: scaredweepel

scaredweepel — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 08:00:25 +0000

very easy to say i guess…I’ve been impressed by a lot of photographers who use what you call amateur equipment. Anyone can name equipment and say what your using is rubbish! Maybe give advice instead of criticism…show why a 5D + 16-35mm f2.8 would be better and maybe show your examples?!

By: widdlwichard

widdlwichard — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:22:17 +0000

Yes, your videos are much better!! perfect style, beautiful pictures. BRAVO! stop throwing tomatoes from the sidewalk until you can back up your critical words.

By: monstertruckess

monstertruckess — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 08:20:36 +0000

Great videos and great photos! And its the man (or woman) behind the camera that makes the pictures not the camera. Maybe more grain or less depth of field, but what is shown here is beautiful.Belissima! (i owe a 40D too and will be shooting my first wedding this week *yikes*)

By: hutdockz

hutdockz — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:02:33 +0000

Do I need 40D for photography?

By: mrmindstorms

mrmindstorms — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:41:09 +0000

at 2,15 u can really see how small he is.
great film

By: magix93

magix93 — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 13:26:53 +0000

no, i would start with an amateur Dslr. For example a Canon 450d.

By: antoniboy

antoniboy — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 02:19:07 +0000

does anyone know what lens he uses besides the EF-S 10-22?

By: ilovesteve7

ilovesteve7 — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:37:31 +0000

is this a advertisement

By: d49u

d49u — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 13:06:16 +0000

10-22mm, i like this lens…
this lens can make the dramatic picture

By: timbaktol

timbaktol — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 07:01:46 +0000

I enjoyed watching the movie. Its spiced up with his accent! Its like watching Van Helsing!

By: ryanracca

ryanracca — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:10:34 +0000

oh, how much is the lens that you have? (10-22mm)
I kinda like it:))

but I like the fisheye lens better XD!!!

By: ryanracca

ryanracca — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 20:11:40 +0000

And I thought professionals use Mark-III’s for their job :-j:))

By: hayataultraman

hayataultraman — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 21:37:40 +0000

Well, the Canon EF-S 10-22mm have a high price, and you will need buy the lens hood. If you want a fisheye lens too, maybe the Tokina AT-X 10-17mm f3.5-4.5 DX is a better election for you.