Possibillity of a wedding.

[lewvanbommel]

Hi all. There is a decent chance that I am going to be photographing a couple of weddings in the near future and I'm using it as a very good reason to update my lenses.

I was thinking the Canon 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS and possibly the 16-30 f2.8L. This is going to end up quite expensive though.

Peoples thoughts? Also what to charge for the events?

P.S I use a Canon 450D so I can use EF-S lenses but id rather not, facilitating the ability to upgrade the body without having to worry about lenses.

Thanks in advance,
Lewis

[IanB]

I does matter what you use but how you use it. Just looked at your photos and there not to many photos of people and even less where you have directed them. Doesn't matter what lenses you have; equipment is the smaller part of wedding photography. ;)

:)

[Shaddsi]

Salina, isnt the 40-150mm equiv to 80-300mm?? that would mean that the 70-200mm would be 112-320mm. This is not far from the legnth that your 4/3rd system will achieve.

Lewis - Most wedding photogs will priase the prime. The iso handing on the 450d isnt fantastic so you only have a certain amount to move without generating noise. have you gotten yourself a flash?

[lewvanbommel]

Just looked at your photos and there not to many photos of people and even less where you have directed them. Doesn't matter what lenses you have; equipment is the smaller part of wedding photography. ;)

:)

I was thinking about that myself Ian, I am taking a photojournalism course at college this year which is quite heavily based on people stuff. As for equipment, I only have the kit lenses( 17-55 and 55-250 both 4.6-5.8 ish) and a 50 1.8. If nothing more would like to use it as an excuse to upgrade ;).



Lewis - Most wedding photogs will priase the prime. The iso handing on the 450d isnt fantastic so you only have a certain amount to move without generating noise. have you gotten yourself a flash?

Affirmative. Have a 580EXII

Also thanks to you Artemis.

[Shaddsi]

Cool, I would personally look at another body and that 70-200mm. I have shot weddings with just a 28-75 tammy before without trouble but didnt have to get down an aisle (garden wedding)

[lewvanbommel]

In a perfect world I would like a 1Ds MkIII and the stated lenses. Unfortunately mr piggy bank says no :(. I would like to get the 24-70 and 70-200 anyway though.

[Smorter]

There are two types of Wedding photographers when it comes to lenses

The traditional type - these ones just use the bread and butter lenses, i.e. 16-35L II, 24-70L/17-55 IS and the 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and occasionally will use a fast prime like a 50 f/1.4

The arty type - these ones dislike the zooms and go for the stylised, fast prime look using 35L, 50L, 85L, 135L (sometimes) though they also will likely have a 16-35L and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS too for when they are needed.

[Charismatic]

I was thinking the Canon 24-70 f2.8L, 70-200 2.8L IS and possibly the 16-30 f2.8L.

All three of them lenses (And their mm's) could be solved with just a 17-55 F2.8 and the 70-200F2.8 / F4


As for equipment, I only have the kit lenses( 17-55 and

You mean the 18-55 I think?

As far as what to get ... It depends on your shooting style like Smorter pointed out.

My ideal setup at the moment, though:

Zooms:

Sigma 10-20mm (Group Shots)
Canon 17-55F2.8
Canon 70-200F2.8

Primes:

Sigma 30mm F1.4

I never find myself thinking, "Damn! I could really use a --Insert desired lens here--" now days with that setup.

I use the Sigma 30mm for all my 'details' at the wedding (All the little stuff - Ring shot, flower shot, dress shot, great for when they're getting ready and all that other stuff.. And for when your being "arty", too.)

I use the Sigma 10-20 for group stuff. Or when there is a huge amount of cool background that the couple look great up against.

And then the 17-55 / 70-200 for everything else. I usually throw my bag down, strap a lens holder to my belt or have one lens on either body, and rotate around the Aisle / Alter / Reception with just these two. Great for everything.

(PS - Prepare to be broke)

As for the second body thing.. I got away with no second body for the first few Weddings I did but I must admit, it certainly takes the weight off your shoulders now having a second body.

I'm still yet to get an error on either bodies, but still, if it did... That "What If" is scary. I find myself still using the 450D most of the time for some odd reason.. I love that camera.

580EX II will definitely do the trick. I use a 430EX II on my 450D and have the 580EX II on my 50D now. Just make sure you know how to bounce or have some PW's to do off camera stuff. 580EX II w/ direct flash is deadly.

[lewvanbommel]

All three of them lenses (And their mm's) could be solved with just a 17-55 F2.8 and the 70-200F2.8 / F4

You mean the 18-55 I think?

As far as what to get ... It depends on your shooting style like Smorter pointed out.

(PS - Prepare to be broke)


Yeah sorry I did mean the 18-55. Fat fingers :p

As for shooting style, I tend to favour zooms more for the convenience of not having to move to places where I may not be able to or get in peoples way.

I would prefer to stay away from EF-S lenses such as the 17-55 2.8. It may end up being financial suicide but its personal preference really.

Does anyone know of any wedding photographers in Tassie that would be looking for a second?

[MDSimpson]

The EF-S 17-55 f2.8 is a great lens, but if you one day want to go full frame, it will not fit....
I've just bought the 70-200 f2.8 - fantastic lens (heavy).

[lewvanbommel]

The EF-S 17-55 f2.8 is a great lens, but if you one day want to go full frame, it will not fit....
I've just bought the 70-200 f2.8 - fantastic lens (heavy).

That's the main reason I don't want EF-S lenses, as silly as it may seem. I tend to look into the future instead of the now.

I have heard that is quite heavy (over 1Kg), but I don't really mind the weight.

[Ausnapper]

People say they do not mind the weight and most do not however I encourage you to get a good idea of the weight of the kit you want and then replicate that with water and cool drink bottles 1Kg = 1Ltr etc... Then put them in a bag and carry them around for a few hours go on a walk or something. Then you get a good idea of yeah it is fine or no this is really to heavy.

Aus

[lewvanbommel]

People say they do not mind the weight and most do not however I encourage you to get a good idea of the weight of the kit you want and then replicate that with water and cool drink bottles 1Kg = 1Ltr etc... Then put them in a bag and carry them around for a few hours go on a walk or something. Then you get a good idea of yeah it is fine or no this is really to heavy.

Aus

Trust me. I'm in a couple of emergency services down here in Tas. I know what its like to be carrying heavy weights while doing strenuous duties for a while. I know it can be a different sort of weight but I'm pretty sure I have it covered.

[trigger]

I think its a bit different then carrying the weight vs shooting with it.
Tendonitis is an issue I was thinking about.

4-5kgs for about 5-6 hours pivoting / twisting motion is tough on your wrists no matter how strong you are.

I think the 40D + 24-70mm 2.8 was damn heavy and the 70-200mm 2.8 impossible.... But then again... i am a 75kg asian...lol


Trust me. I'm in a couple of emergency services down here in Tas. I know what its like to be carrying heavy weights while doing strenuous duties for a while. I know it can be a different sort of weight but I'm pretty sure I have it covered.

[Shaddsi]

I think its a bit different then carrying the weight vs shooting with it.
Tendonitis is an issue I was thinking about.

4-5kgs for about 5-6 hours pivoting / twisting motion is tough on your wrists no matter how strong you are.

I think the 40D + 24-70mm 2.8 was damn heavy and the 70-200mm 2.8 impossible.... But then again... i am a 75kg asian...lol

You get used to it. I can carry around my 40d, battery grip and 24-70mm 2.8 all day without problems.

[lewvanbommel]

Yeah I think it will be a different sort of weight but I'm sure ill adapt to it quickly.

[MDSimpson]

While I have the 400D, battery grip and the 70-200 f2.8, yes it is heavy, I also use a monopod. Not sure if this would work in a wedding environment. Has anyone else tried a monopod during a wedding shoot??????

I know it makes it MUCH easier for general shooting with this setup...

[DG77]

I think the monopod would just be too much of a hassle when you're constantly moving around e.t.c.
I went to an Industry camera show recently and some tool brought along his own gear - a 40d and 70-200 f2.8L IS with a monopod. Don't know why, the whole idea was to try out gear that you didn't own... anyway, he kept turning around with the monopod over his back and was smacking people in the face e.t.c. - By the end of the day there were plenty of people wanting to give him a smacking.

You do get used to the 70-200 2.8's weight fairly quickly.
Try using it for a few days with a speedlight also attached, then go back to just the lens and body and it will feel light.

I've just taken delivery of a 85 1.2L II and 200 f2L IS.
The 85 1.2L II feels very bloody heavy because it's such a short lens, where as the same (or more) weight in a longer lens isn't as noticable IMO.

Without it's lens hood, the 200 f2L IS is similar in length to the 70-200 f2.8L IS, only a nuggety version that weighs a fair bit more.
It is hand holdable though (just) and I managed to get some reasonable hand held shots when playing around with it on a short holiday over the weekend, but I suspect I'll probably have to drag out the monopod when I start using it in anger this week for paid work.

Despite being much heavier I actually found the 200 more comfortable to use on my 1d3 than the 70-200. I often get a blister on my middle finger when using the 70-200 for extended periods because that finger sits under the bulge below the shutter button on the 1d3, and as a result supports much of the weight of the camera and lens.
As the 200 is so much heavier and bulkier I found that I tend to support more of the lens weight with my other hand (probably for fear of the lens shearing off my mount) which means my right hand is blister free. :)

The main downside to the 200 f2L IS (and 70-200 f2.8L IS to a lesser extent) is that you can feel like a bit of a tool walking around with it at anything that is not a sporting event where you don't look out of place.
IMO the most useful wedding lens would have to be the 24-70 2.8L, with something really fast like the 85 1.2L as a backup for when you need to shoot in really low light. (Although I'd rarely use the 85 wide open)

[sams86]

re: what to charge?

This highly depends on your skill and time. Since your asking what to charge im assuming here that you havent done a wedding before. In my search to find a wedding photog myself ive come across varying prices but there is a pattern:

For pre ceremony shots, ceremony, 1-2 location shoots after ceremony, and the first hour of the reception all together it equated that its about 5-6 hours of your time. Most photogs average about 100 photos per hour with weddings. And with about 100 prints and a small album the pattern cost is about $1600-$2000 not including travel or accomodation if your coming from a distance.

That said if your new to the wedding game but are experienced and skilled in other forms of photography id advise not to charge quite that much, maybe something like $1400 - $1500 for the same package.

[MDSimpson]

DG, thanks for that visual on the monopod. I guess a mono at a wedding is not a great idea after all...

When I first took my 70-200 out, I did feel like a tool, but then when I started taking photos with it, it felt great..