Best camera for wedding photography

Changing photographic systems is a decision full of emotions and dilemmas for a photographer. As a wedding photographer with many years of experience, I’ve gone through this journey – starting with Nikon DSLRs, to Fujifilm’s stylish mirrorless cameras, to modern Sony cameras. In this article, I’ll talk about my photographic journey: what made me switch from system to system, what are the advantages and disadvantages of specific models from the perspective of wedding reportage, and I’ll share my thoughts on what really matters in wedding photography. Perhaps you will be able to deduce from this article what, in my opinion, is the best camera for wedding photography 🙂 It will be light, personal, with a touch of humor – that is, not a dry review of equipment, but a story from the life of a photographer. I invite you to read it! 😊

Beginnings with Nikon – from D50 to Z6II

My adventure began innocently enough, with the first Nikon SLR camera I received as a gift. Nikon D50 came into my hands thanks to my sister and brother-in-law – and immediately ignited in me a photographic passion. At first I photographed literally everything with it: flowers in the garden, the streets of Cracow, family celebrations. I remember long walks with this camera hanging around my neck – exploring the surrounding meadows, learning how to frame and catch light (still very unconsciously). Although the D50 had only 6 megapixels and today is considered a relic of the past, for me it was magical. It allowed me to freeze moments, and every successful frame filled me with pride.

The first photographic successes came quickly. I began to send photos to contests and actively contribute to the photo forum forum.fotoszop.pl. It was there that I received my first constructive feedback and met people who shared my passion. One such person was Łukasz from tatrafoto.pl, with whom we still maintain a good relationship today 🙂

Over time, I naturally began to invest in better equipment. Every zloty I earned went into a piggy bank labeled “new lens” or “body upgrade.” I switched to the Nikon D90, which already offered more megapixels, better autofocus and – the hit of those years – video mode. It was the D90 that accompanied me on my first assignments as a wedding photographer. Yes, it was not ideal equipment: the APS-C sensor in low light generated noise, and the dynamic range left a bit to be desired.

Nevertheless, I have a great fondness for it. It was on the D90 that I learned the basics of working with flash and reportage – often by trial and error. The first weddings photographed with the D90 were stress and excitement at the same time. Batteries barely lasted for intensive shooting, autofocus sometimes whimpered in dark churches, but at the time I didn’t even think about it – I was just happy to be doing what I love.

As my photographic development continued, my appetite grew. I dreamed of a full frame, better photo quality and higher reliability in difficult lighting conditions. When the opportunity came, I bought a used Nikon D600 – my first full frame. Already the first wedding reports taken with the D600 showed me a leap in quality: the colors were richer, the image was “cleaner” at high ISO, and the wide angle lens was finally wide as needed (without the APS-C crop multiplier). Unfortunately, the D600 had its own pain – the famous problem with oil stains on the sensor. Every few hundred shots there were tiny dots that required cleaning in post-production. Despite this drawback, I bravely photographed weddings with it for two seasons. Each subsequent frame reaffirmed to me that the investment in full frame made sense.

Finally it was time for the Nikon D750, a camera that stole the hearts of many wedding photographers (and no wonder, because it is a really successful model). The D750 combined great image quality, reliable autofocus and relatively compact size for a full frame. It had a tilting screen, which sometimes saved shots from a low perspective when playing on the dance floor, and two memory card slots – an absolute must have in wedding photography (data security above all!). Working with the D750 was a pleasure: accurate AF even in low light, usable ISO 6400, ergonomics refined to the fingertips. Shooting with it, I felt that technically nothing limits me anymore – now it’s up to me to polish my craft.

Despite the successive equipment improvements, the sentiment of predecessors has always remained in my mind. I warmly remember my well-deserted D90, which, although it stood apart in terms of parameters, taught me the most and opened the door to the world of wedding photography. I often repeat the famous phrase to beginners: the best camera is the one you have with you and that you know how to use. In my case, that “best” at the start was a simple Nikon D50, then a better D90 – and each subsequent model was just a tool, not an end in itself. This philosophy will come in handy later, when I’m faced with the decision to change systems… but before that happened, I still had a photographic fascination with a certain retro mirrorless.

System change #1: Adventure with Fujifilm X-T – light reportage in retro style

After years spent with heavy (but reliable) SLR cameras, I longed for a change. The world of photography was getting louder and louder about mirrorless cameras. I was particularly interested in the Fujifilm X system – known for its beautiful colors straight out of the camera and stylish analog design. My choice was the Fujifilm X-T2, and then I consistently continued on this path through the X-T3 and X-T4. And I must admit: I fell in love up to my ears. At the time I thought it was the best camera in the world

The very first contact with the X-T2 made me feel like a “real reporter” from the old days. The Fuji has that unmistakable charm – the time, ISO and exposure dials on the top panel evoke the atmosphere of old analog cameras. The camera is lightweight, small, yet superbly made. Suddenly I was no longer carrying a bag full of heavy equipment. The physical relief translated into photographic freedom – I started experimenting more from non-obvious angles, moving faster and more discreetly around the ceremony and reception. I felt less like a “technical equipment attendant” and more like a participant in the events with the camera – almost invisible, which is a huge advantage in wedding reportage.

The aesthetics of Fujifilm photos immediately charmed me. The famous film simulations (Velvia, Classic Chrome, Acros, etc.) meant that straight out of the camera came out photos with beautiful colors and contrasts, often requiring little processing. As a wedding photographer, I particularly appreciated the Classic Chrome simulation for reportages – it gave the photos a slightly dimmed, nostalgic atmosphere, perfect for the emotional moments of a wedding. Clients asked me more than once what “filter” I used to achieve such an effect, and I answered with a smile that it was the magic of Fuji.

Of course, it was not without its challenges. Switching from a DSLR to a mirrorless required a change in habits. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) on the X-T2 seemed strange to me at first – I could see the effect of exposure and white balance right away, which was a novelty. However, I quickly appreciated the feature, as it saved time and made it easier to work in changing light. Fuji’s autofocus, while fast, had its vagaries – the X-T2, in particular, was sometimes unreliable in low light and a busy dance floor.

The X-T3 brought significant AF improvements and a 26 MP sensor, and the X-T4 added in-body stabilization (IBIS) and a better battery, which solved one of the biggest pain points of earlier models. Still, in really challenging conditions (e.g., a dark church on a winter evening), I felt the APS-C had its limitations compared to the full-frame Nikon I was used to. Images were a bit noisier at ISO 6400+, and the dynamic range was a tad narrower – which manifested itself sometimes in burnt-out highlights where the Nikon was still able to recover detail.

This does not change the fact that I had a lot of fun working with Fujifilm. Every wedding with a Fuji X-T in my hands was like combining my passion for photography with the fun of a new gadget. Clients often complimented the look of my camera – “Oh, what kind of retro camera is this? Are you shooting on film?” – such texts I heard more than once, because the X-T looks like an old analog can. The lightness of the kit (two X-T bodies instead of two heavy Nikons, and 23mm, 35mm, 56mm Fujinon constants instead of big zooms) made my back hurt less after a day’s work, and I was more rested. I felt I could take on the role of a quiet observer: with a small, non-intrusive camera, I was less noticeable, thus catching more natural, unfussy shots.

Unfortunately, after a while I began to notice Fujifilm’s shortcomings in the context of wedding photography at the highest level of quality. While in good light and outdoors the Fuji shone, in very dark rooms or during fast action the autofocus could miss, and the APS-C sensor generated more noise. In critical situations, where the moment is unmistakable, I began to miss the confidence and “power reserve” of my Nikons. I realized that I missed full frame – its plasticity (e.g., shallower depth of field at 85mm f/1.4) and its ability to pull detail out of shadows at high ISO. The Fuji X-T4 came close in performance to full frame, but it still wasn’t the 100% I would want as a demanding professional.

This slight frustration grew in me over the following seasons. And finally I made another difficult decision: it was time to change system number 2. It was time to return to Nikon! This time already in the mirrorless version.

System change #2 – Back to Nikon

After a few seasons with Fujifilm, I felt the need to return to full frame, but I wasn’t ready for a big step into the unknown (read: a complete switch to Sony). So I decided to return “for a while” to the Nikon ecosystem I was familiar with, this time in the Z version.

At that time I chose two bodies: the Nikon Z5 and the Nikon Z6II. The Z5 was such a budget full frame, but with quite reasonable parameters – it was completely sufficient for shoots where image quality and quiet pace mattered. The Z6II, on the other hand, had faster autofocus, continuous mode, two processors and two card slots– everything I needed for wedding reportage. Both cameras were solid, ergonomic and, importantly, familiar to me, as I was returning to a system I had worked with for years. This made it easier for me to adapt after Fuji, where, however, the operating philosophy was completely different.

This return was an interesting experience. On the one hand – I felt again the quality of full frame, better ISO, more depth, familiar Nikon color. On the other – I had the feeling that the Nikon Z at that moment was still catching up a bit to the competition (e.g. Sony or Canon already had more advanced eye-detection autofocus and a larger selection of native lenses). It worked fine for me in practice, but somewhere in the background I felt that it would not be a solution for years to come. I also lacked a bit of Nikon’s boldness in its approach to mirrorless – I had the feeling that this system was still “getting there,” and I already needed a ready-made, mature tool to work with.

That’s when I looked harder and harder at Sony – which already had everything I was looking for: modern technology, speed, great AF and a rich lens system. The Nikon Z6II and Z5 helped me cross the bridge from Fuji to Sony, giving me peace of mind and job security for two seasons. But I knew that ultimately my place was elsewhere – and so began my adventure with Sony.

System change #3: Switching to Sony – full frame, speed and reliability

After a few seasons with Fujifilm and a brief return to Nikon, I started thinking more and more seriously about a long-term system change. The Nikon Z worked well as a temporary, safe solution – it gave me what I was looking for from Fuji’s APS-C: full-frame quality, reliability and a familiar working environment. However, as time went on, the feeling grew in me that I needed a system that was not only good “for now”, but also future-proof – with full support, dynamically developed and offering maximum comfort in all conditions.

And that’s when I started seriously considering Sony – the leader in the mirrorless market, which for several years had set the standard when it came to autofocus, speed and lens selection. I knew that switching to Sony was a big step – it involved replacing the entire system, investing in new glass and learning a different workflow. But I was also sure that if I wanted to go further as a professional wedding photographer, I needed a tool that could keep up with my pace and allow me to work without compromise. Thus began my next photographic revolution – entering the world of Sony. I chose first the Sony A7R V and then the Sony A9.

The switch was like entering another world. The Sony A7R V is a camera with a resolution as high as 61 megapixels – a real beast when it comes to the detail of photos. The first time I took pictures with it at a wedding, I was stunned to see how much detail it can capture: every eyelash, the texture of the dress, the specks of confetti flying through the air during the first dance – everything as if it were in plain sight. Of course, such high resolution required more capacious cards and file drives, but I found it a price worth paying in exchange for the ability to frame and print large albums without losing quality.

The A7R V also delighted me with its new AI-based autofocus system – the bride and groom’s eyes “glued” into focus in every shot, whether I was framing horizontally or vertically, or shooting from a frog’s perspective with my arms outstretched (the tilting screen made such stunts easier).

The Sony A9, on the other hand, has become my go-to tool. This model is famous for its incredible speed – 20 frames per second without blanking the image is something that sounded like science-fiction just a few years ago. During a wedding reportage, the A9 allows me to capture the exact moment of vows, smiles or emotion, shooting a series from which no micro-expressions escape. I remember being shocked at my first wedding with the A9, when I silently (electronic shutter ❤️) photographed the ceremony – no mirror flapping, the guests didn’t even have a clue that I was taking 20 pictures in a second. This discretion and speed was exactly what I needed in a dynamic reportage.

Why Sony? After several years of use, I can say that Sony has given me, first of all, confidence in performance. The autofocus with eye detection of people (and even pets, although at weddings this comes in handy when photographing the young couple’s pet 😉) works instantly and accurately. Finally, I stopped worrying that the shot might come out out out of focus – the accuracy of the photos has increased significantly compared to my earlier system. On top of that, there is a huge selection of lenses: Sony has an open ecosystem, so in addition to lenses from Sony (G Masters beautiful, though expensive) I also use cheaper but great quality lenses from Tamron and Sigma. The Sony E-mount system offers practically everything a wedding photographer could dream of: from bright 24, 35, 50, 85 mm constants to excellent 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 zooms.

I personally am a fan of fixed focal length lenses and at weddings I mainly work with a set of 35mm (general reportage, situations), 50mm (ceremony, universal angle) and 85mm (portraits, close-up emotions, details). Such a set covers most of my needs and allows me to achieve a consistent style of work. I tried to convince myself of zooms – I had an episode with a sigma 28-45 mm f/1.8 and a 70-200 mm f/4 – but in the end I missed that magic of a bright fixed and discreet work. Zooms are great and many fellow wedding photographers can’t imagine life without them, but I like the limitation of a single focal length – it forces you to move, to think about the frame, and at the same time gives you as a reward a lighter and smaller equipment in your hand.

Speaking of weight – did I achieve my goal to stop lifting? Well, so half and half. Sony bodies, although full-frame, are quite light for their format, but high-end glass (especially bright f/1.4) weighs its own. Nevertheless, still my Sony kit is comparable in weight to the Nikon and the Sony’s ergonomics suit me very well. Importantly, the batteries in the Sony (especially the new generation NP-FZ100) are a championship – I can shoot practically a whole shooting day on a single A7RV battery, where with the Fuji I had to change batteries every few hours.

I finally felt that I have equipment that does not limit me in any aspect: full frame gives me quality and plasticity, autofocus and speed – comfort and confidence, and a variety of lenses – creative freedom. Does this mean that from now on I stopped being interested in novelties and other systems? Not at all! Geek hardware curiosity has remained in me – I follow the news, test what I can (sometimes all too much, about which in a moment), but today I know that the foundation I have is strong and proven.

Sigma 150-600 at a wedding, or (un)controlled joke

Let me interject here a funny story that happened to me back in the Nikon era. Well, as I mentioned, I like to test new equipment – sometimes all too enthusiastically. Once upon a time I was tempted to buy a Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 telephoto lens. It was a purchase with nature photography and maybe a few sports assignments in mind, but of course I had to somehow before myself (and my wife 😉) to justify spending a not inconsiderable amount of money on such a narrowly specialized glass. “Honey, with this lens I will take amazing shots at weddings, you’ll see!” – I argued and believed myself that I would try. And so I tried… The plan was ambitious: during an outdoor session in the mountains, I wanted to use it in an unusual way – to bring the mountains closer to the bride and groom, to literally “pull the Tatras” into the background of the photo. Sounded beautiful, didn’t it?

The reality turned out to be a little less romantic. To catch the bride and groom in their entirety at the 600mm focal length, I had to walk some 200 meters to the side and still uphill. I shouted something to them from afar, waved my hands, tried to signal positions – it looked like some kind of rescue operation in the mountains. 😅 The couple was obviously having a great time, but contact was nil, and framing through that focal length proved breakneck. In addition, from such a distance , each side step of the couple changed the frame by the entire composition, so they had to stand like pillars, which rather kills the atmosphere of a “natural” session.

In the end, the whole experiment was more of a logistical challenge than a photographic pleasure. The Sigma 150-600 is a great lens – but for nature photography, sports, birds… not necessarily for outdoor weddings in the Tatra Mountains. 😉 I have since said to myself (and others): “Not every new toy needs to find its way into a wedding photographer’s bag.” Although I have no regrets – at least I have a story I can now tell with a smile.

Full frame vs APS-C in wedding photography

Going through different systems, I have had the opportunity to work with both full-frame (aka full-frame) cameras and APS-C (smaller) sensors. Many people ask: full-frame vs APS-C – which is better for weddings? The answer is not clear-cut, because it depends on the photographer’s style of work and the conditions in which you shoot. From the perspective of my experience, I can outline a few key differences:

• Depth of field and “plasticity”: This is an aspect often discussed in the context of full frame vs APS-C. Full frame at the same focal length and aperture will give a shallower depth of field, which translates into a stronger background blur (bokeh). In wedding portraits, this softness of the background is sometimes desirable, as it beautifully separates the couple from the background. On APS-C, to achieve a similar effect, you need to use brighter optics or a longer focal length. Example: 50mm f/1.8 on full frame will give similar depth of field as ~35mm f/1.2 on APS-C (because we have to multiply the focal length and aperture by a factor of 1.5x). This doesn’t mean that APS-C won’t make a “plastic” photo – it will, but it requires a slightly different approach. Personally, I shot APS-C Fuji weddings for years and clients were delighted with the shots, no one asked “is it full frame?”. Plasticity is not only about equipment, it’s also about light, composition, the moment. Nonetheless, having a full frame today, I feel I have an easier time achieving a certain look to the photos I strive for (especially in low-light shots and portraits).
• AF accuracy and coverage: it used to be that APS-C vs FF DSLRs also differed in AF modules, but in the mirrorless era it is not the sensor that determines AF, but the technology on the sensor. So in practice we are comparing specific models. My experience: Fuji X-T3 vs Sony A9 – here the difference was colossal in favor of Sony, but it’s a matter of camera generation, not the sensor size itself. The newer Fuji X-T4 made up for a lot. Today, for example, the Canon R6 II (full frame) and Fujifilm X-T5 (APS-C) both have great AF based on phase detection on the sensor and subject recognition. Full frame may have more AF points covering a larger area – the Sony A7IV, for example, covers virtually the entire frame with focus points, while older APS-Cs may have had them focused centrally. But again – it’s a matter of model. What I appreciate about the Sony full frame is that even the extreme AF points are very effective, which was not always so obvious in my earlier equipment.
• Work culture and lenses: Full frame often means larger, heavier glass (especially bright tele and zooms). APS-C can be more compact – a smaller sensor means smaller lenses for the same equivalent focal length. On the Fuji, I could have a tiny 35mm f/2 that was equivalent to ~50mm f/2.8 on FF – a downright pocketable lens. On the Sony, the 55mm f/1.8 was already quite a bit larger. For a wedding photographer who carries two bodies and 3-4 lenses all day, such a difference translates into comfort. Ergonomics also plays a role: FF cameras (especially DSLRs) had large grips and solid bodies, which gives some people a better grip. There are photographers who prefer to feel the weight of the camera, because then they stabilize it better – for them, for example, the former Nikon D3 or D850 “fits” perfectly, while the small Fuji can seems like a toy. It’s a very individual thing.

In summary: full frame vs APS-C – both formats are suitable for wedding photography, but each has its own characteristics. I, personally, ultimately chose full frame for its maximum quality and performance in difficult conditions. However, in retrospect, I’m glad I also worked on APS-C – it taught me discipline and showed me that it’s the photographer who takes the picture, not the camera. In the hands of a skilled photographer, an APS-C can make a phenomenal wedding reportage. What counts is skill and a sense of the moment. Equipment is important, but not the most important – as I will write more about in the conclusion.

How does equipment affect a wedding photographer’s working style?

My journey through various systems has taught me one more thing: equipment affects how we photograph – and sometimes more than we would think. Some thoughts from my experience:

• Shooting pace: When I was working with a Nikon D750 (mirror), I had my rhythm – a 6 fps shutter, the limitations of the mirror meant that I only shot in bursts at key moments. With the Fuji X-T I slowed down a bit, enjoyed every frame, and often shot more quietly, as the camera encouraged such photographic “meditation.” The Sony A9, on the other hand, gave me the ability to shoot very fast and a lot – I even had to learn the discipline not to come back from every wedding with tens of thousands of the same shots for selection. 😂 So equipment can dictate the pace: some cameras ask for thought (such as manual focus on old lenses or the limitations of old equipment), while others allow you to “spray and pray” (that is, batch and then select). It’s important to be aware of this and not get carried away – the photographer controls the camera, not the other way around.
• Approach to the frame: When I carried heavy zooms, I often stood in one place and zoomed in/out with the ring. It’s convenient, but when working on fixed lenses, I realized that zooming in with my feet changes the perspective of the photo, gives a different background, forces me to be closer or further away from the scene. Because of this, my photos became more “immersed” in the action, less peeped at from a distance. On the other hand, a small, unobtrusive camera (like the Fuji) allowed me to get in between people and shoot up close without intimidating them – a large SLR with a big flash drew more attention. Such hardware details shape our style of reportage work.
• Limitations encourage creativity: Paradoxically, I often took the best pictures with the simplest equipment. When I only had a d750 and one old 50 f/1.8, I had to combine things to make each scene look interesting – changing positions, looking for different light. With a backpack full of gear, it’s easy to fall into the trap of technical perfection, where “everything can be done,” but sometimes spontaneity slips away. That’s why to this day, although I have a large selection of lenses, I often take a limited kit on a reportage and try to squeeze the maximum out of it. Equipment influences our awareness – if you know that your camera has certain weaknesses (e.g., noise above ISO 3200), you will look for better light, use a flash or creatively use noise as artistic grain. If you know that your autofocus doesn’t do well in the dark – you’ll set the focus zone manually and catch the frame at the crucial moment.
• Mental attitude: the psychological aspect can’t be overlooked – new equipment can give a kick of motivation. I remember how excited I was each time I switched: from D50 to D90 (“wow, new, better, I’m going to take pictures!”), then to D750, to Fuji… Each time I felt a surge of creative energy, a desire to test the camera’s capabilities. It’s a bit like a new pair of running shoes – you seemingly run the same, but you feel faster, more confident. Of course, it’s a placebo effect, but if a new body makes a photographer feel more motivated, more confident, why not? You just have to be careful that you don’t become addicted to buying novelty items. I try to cultivate motivation in other ways as well – for example, by attending workshops, browsing through albums of master photographers, doing personal projects. Equipment is a tool, but the story and emotions are created by me.

In conclusion, equipment undoubtedly influences the style of work, but a conscious photographer can maintain his individual style regardless of what he shoots with. The most important thing is to know your camera, use its strengths and work around its weaknesses – and the photographer’s heart and eye do the rest.

What is important when choosing a camera for wedding photography?

The market for photo equipment is rushing forward – new models appear every year, the marketing of “the best camera for wedding photography” is tempting. It’s easy to get lost. Looking from the perspective of a practitioner who has converted several systems, I can tell you what really counts when choosing a camera for weddings (especially today, in 2025):

• Reliability and ergonomics: a wedding is a unique event – there are no duplicates, we will not repeat the kiss or putting on the rings. The camera must work flawlessly in the decisive moments. So, two memory cards are important (in case one fails, we have a copy – I always use parallel recording mode!), solid construction (rainproof in the open air or dustproof, because weddings have been both in barns and on the beach), long battery life. Ergonomics – that is, how the camera lies in the hand, how quickly we change settings – also affects reliability in practice. The camera should be an extension of the hand. If the menus are chaotic and the buttons are awkward, precious seconds will be lost. That’s why, for example, I value the Nikon D750 for its great ergonomics, and Sony has only improved the menus and layout in newer models (older A7s of the first generations had problems with this).
• Autofocus and responsiveness: There’s a lot going on in wedding photography – we need a camera that can keep up. Today, most new mirrorless cameras (Canon R6 II, Sony A7IV, Nikon Z6 III, Fuji X-T5, etc.) already have very good AF systems, often with face/eye detection. It’s a game-changer – before, in DSLRs, we often risked sharpening by method-over-sharpening on the central point. Now AF “tracks” the bride’s eye even as she moves. When choosing a camera, I would pay attention to whether the AF is praised for accuracy in low light and with movement. The shooting speed (fps) can also be important – for example, a Sony A9 with 20 fps will give you a better chance of capturing the perfect moment than a camera with 5 fps, but beware: this generates a ton of images to select. I usually shoot in medium mode (about 5-10 fps), which is sufficient. More important for me is the lack of shutter lag and minimal blackout in the viewfinder – so that I can see the action all the time and react in real time.
• Picture quality (ISO, dynamic range, colors): All today’s cameras take nice pictures in good light. The devil is in the harsh conditions. When looking for the perfect wedding camera, look at performance at high ISO – is ISO 6400 acceptable? 12,800? Sometimes in a dark church you need to use that much. Let’s check the dynamic range – will we get detail out of the shadows if we take an underexposed shot against the light? Full frames lead the way, but APS-C and m4/3 are making headway. Colors – here it’s a matter of taste and possibly profiles/processing. Canon is famous for nice skin tones, Fuji for film colors, Sony used to be criticized for colors, but since A7III series it is really good (and we can develop RAWs anyway we want). Resolution – 20-30 Mpix is quite enough for albums and 60×40 cm prints. More megapixels (45-60) will come in handy if we make large prints or crop, but keep in mind larger files. I myself with the A7RV (61 Mpix) sometimes reduce the RAW resolution to mRAW when I know I don’t need the maximum size.
• System and glass: When choosing a camera, you de facto choose a whole system. Therefore, it is worth looking at what lenses and accessories are available for a given bayonet. Are there bright lenses for portraits? Wide angle for tight interiors? Long tele for distance shots? Are the lens prices within our budget? Sony and Canon RF currently offer the most options (although Canon blocks third-party lenses, making cheap alternatives difficult). Nikon Z already has basic glass, Fuji X has the entire APS-C ecosystem. If you’re just starting out, the Micro 4/3 system (Olympus/Panasonic) can also tempt you with its compactness – there’s clear glass there too, but the sensor is the smallest, so ISO and dynamic range are a bit weaker. Also important is how the system handles flash (lamps). Nikon/Canon/Sony have refined systems and many compatible flashes (profoto, godox, etc.), Fuji and smaller systems too, but the selection is sometimes more modest. I use radio triggers and reporter lights – I made sure the triggers worked for me on the Fuji the same way they did on the Nikon.
• Video (if that’s relevant to you): Increasingly, photographers are also filming or want this option. It’s worth checking the camera’s video capabilities – does it record in 4K, 60 fps, what is the stabilization, AF in video, image profiles. For me it’s an add-on, but the Canon R6 II or Sony A7IV, for example, offer great video, making them versatile tools (if I wanted to record a wedding video, I can do it with the camera without a problem).

In summary, the best camera for wedding reportage is one that will not let you down and allow you to focus on the moment and emotions. It does not have to be the most expensive or the latest – it is important that it meets the above criteria according to your needs. I found my set by trial and error, you can use my conclusions. 😉

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions

Is Fujifilm suitable for wedding photography?

Yes, Fujifilm X is as suitable for wedding photography as possible, although you need to know its limitations. Many photographers (including myself for several seasons) have successfully used Fuji’s X-T or X-Pro series cameras for wedding reportage. Their advantages include compact size and weight (less fatigue), beautiful colors straight out of the camera, and a unique retro design that allows you to blend in discreetly. Fuji’s APS-C matrices do well in low light up to a certain level (ISO 3200-6400 is useful, especially on the newer X-T4, X-T5 models). Autofocus, especially on models from the X-T3 upward, is fast enough for most wedding situations.

Challenges? In very dark places and with fast-moving subjects (e.g., dancing in the dark), the full frame of top competitors can be a bit more reliable. Also depth of field – Fuji has great bright lenses (f/1.2, f/1.4), but the full-frame equivalent is about f/1.8-f/2 – so ultra-romantic background blur is easier to achieve with full frame. Bottom line: the Fuji is up to the task, as long as you consciously use its strengths. I know photographers who have created stunning wedding portfolios only with Fuji – because it’s the eye, the storytelling, not the sensor size that counts.

Why did I switch to Sony?

My switch from Fujifilm to Sony was driven by professional needs: I was looking for equipment that would give me maximum speed and reliability in any situation. Sony (specifically the A7R V and A9 models) gave me full-frame image quality combined with excellent autofocus (especially eye tracking, which was only in its infancy on Fuji at the time) and a huge selection of lenses.

At some point, I felt that Fuji’s APS-C was starting to limit me – mostly in low light and dynamic moments. The Sony solved those pains: I could shoot at higher ISOs without worrying about noise, and the A9 hit focus where the X-T3 sometimes missed. Additionally, I needed more versatility in the system – for example, glass like 85mm f/1.4 for portraits or 35mm f/1.4 with a certain look – there were no such equivalents in the X-system then (now Fuji has 56mm f/1.2 II and 33mm f/1.4 – close).

Sony also gave me better cooperation with flashes and external equipment in general. Well, and I do not hide – technological curiosity also did its part, I wanted to try whether the grass was actually greener with Sony. 😉 After more than three years I can say that for my applications the choice was the right one. I still love the Fuji for its character, but at weddings I breathe easier with the Sony, because I know I have equipment that will “prove” the shot at the critical moment.

What camera to choose for wedding reportage?

The choice of camera for wedding reportage depends on your style and budget, but a few features are key: two memory card slots, effective autofocus, good high ISO performance, convenience of use and reliability. Of the specific models (as of 2025), I can recommend:

• For beginners: Sony A7III/A7IV, Canon R6 (or R6 II), Nikon Z6 II – these are full-frame mirrorless cameras with great value for money, proven by many wedding photographers. They provide very good photo quality and all the features you need. If you prefer a DSLR – Nikon D750 or Canon 5D Mark IV are still excellent cameras for reportage (although a little larger and heavier).
• For demanding professionals: the Sony A9 II / A1, Canon R3, Nikon Z8/Z9 – these are already top machines that can handle any conditions. They have the fastest AF, seals, very high usable ISO. Their downside is the price and often larger size, but if you shoot intensively and a lot, the investment can pay off with working comfort and shots that weaker equipment might not capture.
• APS-C alternatives: Fuji X-T4/X-T5, Sony A6600/A6700, Canon R7 – these APS-C cameras can be confidently used for weddings. They are smaller and cheaper, and in the right hands will provide professional results. Especially the Fuji X-T5 and Canon R7 stand out for their fast performance and solid construction. You just have to keep in mind the limitations (however, slightly worse low-light performance vs full frame).

In general, what camera to choose for weddings? – One that meets the minimum technical requirements and you are “comfortable” with. Go to the store, hold it, photograph it. One prefers a smaller body, another a larger one. One relies on the noiseless shutter of a mirrorless, another trusts a proven mirror. The most important thing is that you feel confident with your equipment. When the camera becomes an extension of your eyes and hands, you can focus on catching emotions and moments – and that’s key in wedding reportage.

Full frame or APS-C – which is better for weddings?

This is one of the most frequently asked questions by beginners. Full frame (FF) is generally technically superior: it yields less noise at high ISO, more tonal dynamic range and easier to achieve shallow depth of field (which is sometimes desirable for artistic shots). APS-C, on the other hand, offers smaller equipment (lighter lenses), often a more favorable kit price and, in today’s cameras, also great image quality – in good light the differences are sometimes small. For wedding photography, where conditions are variable, full frame gives that extra margin of safety – in a dark church, for example, a full frame photo will be cleaner at ISO 6400 than an APS-C one. On the other hand, many photographers work on APS-C (e.g. Fujifilm) and their images are excellent. More important is how you use the camera.

If you plan to shoot weddings a lot and have the budget – aim for full frame right away (Sony A7, Canon R, Nikon Z series full frame). If your budget is smaller or you want a lighter kit first – APS-C won’t limit you, as long as you understand that it won’t physically match full frame in extreme ISO or background blur. From my own experience: I’ve shot beautiful weddings with APS-C and weaker ones with full frame – because it was the moment and the light that mattered, not the sensor. Technically, however, having both, I usually reach for full frame for important assignments, because it’s simply a “safer” tool in difficult conditions.

Is it worth changing the photo system?

Changing the system is a major decision – it involves costs, learning how to use the new equipment and the risk that it will not meet 100% of expectations. Is it worth it? It depends. It’s worth it if you feel your current system is realistically limiting or frustrating you, and another will solve those problems. In my case it was like that: I switched from Nikon DSLR to Fuji because I wanted a lighter and creatively inspiring kit – it worked, gave me a new boost. Later, I switched from Fuji to Sony because I needed better performance – and I consider that a good decision professionally, too.

It is not worth changing a system just for a whim or fashion. Every system has its pros and cons, which you often realize only after time. Before you change, maybe try renting the equipment, doing one-two sessions/weddings with it. Also, recalculate the costs: a body is one thing, but there comes a set of lenses, accessories. Sometimes it’s better to invest in a better lens for your system than to throw yourself into a complete replacement. I know photographers who jumped from flower to flower (Nikon -> Canon -> Sony -> Fuji…) and were constantly dissatisfied – the problem often lay not in the equipment, but in the lack of full use of its capabilities or in the longing for a “better tomorrow” that is not coming 😉.

To sum up: it makes sense to change the system when you have specific, legitimate reasons to do so and when the new system will clearly improve your working comfort/quality of results. Otherwise, it’s better to polish your skills on what you have – customers really don’t care what brand you shoot with, what matters is the result.

Conclusion: Equipment is just a tool – it’s the emotions, people and stories that count

We have come a long way together through the meanders of hardware choices: from the first Nikon D50, through subsequent models and systems, to the current innovations. If you made it all the way here – thank you for your time, I hope you found my story interesting and helpful. Finally, I would like to share the most important reflection that comes to me after all these years of photographing weddings:

Equipment is important, but it’s just a tool. Even the best camera won’t take a great photo for us if it lacks heart, idea and a sense of the moment. Wedding photography is all about emotions, people and their stories. The smile through tears of a dad leading his daughter down the aisle, the look of love between the newlyweds during the first dance, the crazy joy at the bouquet toss – these are moments that happen regardless of whether we hold an old camera in our hands or the latest model for tens of thousands.

I’ll admit that for a while I myself fell into the technical trap – I chased after equipment upgrades, thinking that they would make me a better photographer. But the truth is that a better photographer is made by practice, empathy and observation skills, not by more megapixels. Of course, a professional should make sure he has tools he can rely on – hence my change of systems. However, at key moments at a wedding, I don’t think about what camera I have. I think about what’s happening in front of my lens: the people whose stories I’m privileged to tell with images.

Looking back, I am grateful to every camera that has accompanied me – each has taught me something and each has allowed me to freeze fleeting moments. Nikon taught me the basics and resilience to work hard, Fuji reminded me of the joy of every shutter press, Sony gave me a sense of peace that I was prepared for anything. Today I can say that hardware-wise I have found my golden mean, but I also know that this is not what will weigh on the memories of my brides and grooms. They, looking at the photos in 10 or 20 years, won’t think “ah, this was probably taken with a Sony A9 with an 85mm lens…”. 😉 They will think instead: “how many emotions of that day, how wonderfully captured our smiles, emotions…”. And this is the most beautiful thing in wedding photography.

Finally, I would like to encourage every photographer – whether an enthusiast or a professional – not to forget why they press the shutter button. Equipment makes our task easier, but it’s sensitivity and passion that make an ordinary photo a priceless keepsake. I still love what I do, and although I like gadgets, I know that the most important thing happens in front of the lens, not in the camera body.

Thank you for reading my story. If you have questions or want to share your own experiences – go ahead and write in the comments or through the contact form on my website. I will be happy to discuss equipment and photography (these are two favorite topics of all wedding photographers, right? 😁). And if you are preparing your own wedding and you are more interested in photos full of emotions than in equipment – I invite you to look at my portfolio and to contact me about my wedding photography offer. I will select the equipment – so that nothing will limit us in capturing your story.

See you on the wedding trail! 🥂

See also entry: Why don’t I direct the shoot? – natural wedding photography – behind the scenes of my work