HELP, first time Wedding Photo Shoots

[quixoticsage]

Yeah don't get me wrong - everyone has to start somewhere. But the equipment you list is still going to make it that much more difficult on you.

I would track down local wedding photogs and see if you can get a gig as an assistant... before I got the more permanent assistant I use now I always used to use local photog students.

You really just have no idea what to expect until you participate in one and the first should be your friends.

Thanks man! I will update my equipment with some research and look into assisting local photogs - accent that with study, reading and lots of forum posting, web surfing and constant thinking of how and what to do (I drive myself nuts and cant sleep sometimes due to OCD... even dream it). I have more than a year to start but glad I posted tonight for sure! Good stuff.

[Ads]

[Leo]

Im thinking this lens as a purchase:Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO

that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.

[quixoticsage]

that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.

You are satisfied with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8? Not too soft? I just worry about consistancy with Tamron lenses (same model, different build quality between purchases)... however would consider this a big option since I have a 100mm canon lens to cover the longer end. Hows the background blur on that lens? Hmm hmm hmmmm... Another option!

[dewey]

I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.

[quixoticsage]

I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.

Well, I think you disagree with the tamron lens being overkill? Well, if I can get the money for the big guns, then why not get the Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO I suppose. If I already have a 20-35mm than 70-200 just makes sense... the only thing I am missing is a fast 50 mm.... not sure if I can come up with that cash, but who knows in a years time.

[Garbz]

I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.

It depends entirely on how you will work. As the photographer you have freedom to move around during the wedding. Although do it VERY discretely. My 18-70mm would have been great for the last wedding I was at. Unfortunatley the only thing I had on hand was an old manual 50mm f/1.8 which caused big problems for the group photos but worked fantastically for pictures of the couple.

[dewey]

That's very true - I just think the 70-200 range is perfect for a wedding no matter what your style.

I carry a 17-55 on one body and a 70-200 on the other body, so I can grab those candid moments without running across the room.

[Mike_E]

Take what you have and find a wedding pro that will let you tag along. After you have seen what you need to be doing, find some one who will let you be a second shooter. In the mean time go here and get started on classic posing.

http://jzportraits.home.att.net/

Every thing starts from there (if you can't tell what you're doing wrong, you'll never know what exactly you are doing right)

[Moxi]

Ive been in the same position and if they are asking you to do such an important thing for them, relax and do it. Get on the web and familiarize yourself with at least 10 of the standard wedding poses. You know, Bride/Groom alone, B/G with B's family, then with G's family. Then Best Men alone, Bridesmaids alone, then all together. Then one of the whole wedding party.
Go early and take pictures of everything set up but before people arrive. Take lots of pictures of the wedding elements such as flowers, rings, veil, tux and tie, shoes, cake, presents, church altar, etc.
Some of the things I found that helped alot was to make sure you understand about preventing redeye. Even if you can eliminate it in post-developing its still a horror to see. Then make sure the rest of the shots are candid. For the most part just wander around and take pictures of guests, of couple holding hands, or holding babies.
During the ceremony make sure you get the exchange of rings and dont you dare miss the kiss!
Youre going to do fine!

[EOS_JD]

that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.

Leo..... You do realise the 17-55 is a zoom lens too

I say get both. A telephoto zoom is a fantastic lens to use at a weddding. Great for candids and portraits. A long lens used close up to the subject and away from a background is the perfect way for those shots with smooth bokeh (background blur).

You need 2 fast zooms. A 17-50 and a 70-200 are perfect and used on 2 cameras you can switch quickly. I'll add more comments as I read more but listen to Dewey as he makes a lot of sense.

[EOS_JD]

OK here's my 2 cents.

Why buy a digital camera at all??

You have been shooting film for years and have some great images in your gallery all shot with film! Use your film cameras. Learning digital takes time and it's easy to forget things that you would not normally need to think about on a shot by shot basis (ISO springs to mind).

Regards equipment my basic setup is as follows..... Work out the cost yourself. I've also added some tips on what you should think about.

20D
XT (2nd body and backup)

Zooms - You need 17-200 coverage over 2 or 3 lenses. If I was to choose again I'd have the 17-55 f2.8 IS and would still use the 70-200 f2.8L IS

I use the following
Canon 10-22 f3.5-4.5 - (Used for creative wide angle shots)
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 - Fast zoom for use in church and as a backup for the 24-105
Canon 24-105f4L IS - My preferred formals lens for groups
Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS - Fantastic all-rounder and always on one of my cameras. Church, formals (particularly single portraits), reception - amazing!!!

Primes - You need at least 2 fast zooms for dark churches, receptions and low evening light use without flash. As your weddings are outside this may not be so much a priority but will help later in the evening when light is low.

I use the following

50mm f1.4 - You can also look at the 50mm f1.8 - canon's cheapest lens (and a great one)
85mm f1.8 - Another great portrait lens.
100 f2.8 Macro - Use this for detail shots of the cake, rings, flowers etc. Also a great portrait lens in good light.

Use of flash I try no minimise however in bright light outside you may find dark shadows very difficult to live with. Use of a flash that has high speed mode will really help and you can add just a pop of flash to lighten these shadows.

The canon 580EX flash is probably a must have item - preferably 2
I also use a Sigma 500DG super as a backup flash but it's not as well built or easy to use as the canon.

Diffusers - Sto-Fen or a fong will help soften the light from your flash. Everyone has different ideas on the best. A cut off milk carton taped to the head works amazingly well!!! Buit perhaps you don't want to look that daft

I now have 8Gb of CF memory (very easy to shoot this amount) and I have an Epson P-2000 for backup. Laptops are too slow and while you try to use these for backup you are missing shots. Think about hiring an assistant for the days (a wife/friend etc) who can backup for you and carry your gear. I also have other lenses like the Tamron 17-35mm f2.8-4 and the amazing Canon 300f4L IS - I don't use this at weddings though and use a 1.4 converter if I need to be close and have enough light.

Depending on the situation, you may also need a decent tripod as well.

[EOS_JD]

You are satisfied with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8? Not too soft? I just worry about consistancy with Tamron lenses (same model, different build quality between purchases)... however would consider this a big option since I have a 100mm canon lens to cover the longer end. Hows the background blur on that lens? Hmm hmm hmmmm... Another option!

To further add the 17-50 is not soft by most of the accounts I've heard although I can't testify as I've not used it but it's a pretty decent lens.

The 100mm Macro is not that long a lens! The 70-200 will be much more use.

You ask about background blur on a lens?? The Bokeh is a factor of 4 things. Focal Length, aperture selected, distance to subject and subject's distance to background. Most (if not all) f2.8 and faster lenses will be able to blur a background better than smaller aperture lenses but it's how you use the camera and position your subject to get great bokeh this that makes the difference.

[EOS_JD]

Well, I think you disagree with the tamron lens being overkill? Well, if I can get the money for the big guns, then why not get the Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO I suppose. If I already have a 20-35mm than 70-200 just makes sense... the only thing I am missing is a fast 50 mm.... not sure if I can come up with that cash, but who knows in a years time.

The 20-35 3.5-4.5 lens is slow for a wedding lens but as you are using outside it may be ok. How's the sharpness?

The 50mm f1.8 is the cheapest lens Canon make. Not a fab wedding lens but sharp and very fast - great for low light use. Any Canon user should have the nifty fifty in his bag - unless he has the 50f1.4 or the 50f1.2L

[EOS_JD]

The Rebel XT is the bottom, XTi is quite a step up with 10+ megapixels (yeah, I know megapixels doesnt make the camera - but its canon optics...). I would like the 30D, but I think... why? If it was full frame, heck yeah... but the only advantage I can see is that it is a light bit faster... im probably missing something though. Its only 8+ megpxls. SO i dunno. More research to do here! EXIF data noted. Thanks!

8-10Mp is nothing really. The 30D is an easier camera to use than the XTi. THe XTi has functions located in menus and the 30D can change things by pressing one button and rotating a dial. the 30D is built better and feels more robust in use. It's a close choice between the two and I suspect by the time the weddings come around there will be a new kid on the block..... 40D or something similar.....

[dewey]

That's a great point. Having commands at easy reach is much easier to work with than digging through menus.