Low-Light wedding tips?? Please advise/help?!

[Rebekah5280]

#2, yes, the shadow bugs me to no end!

 

[DiskoJoe]

I use a Nikon D3100, 24-70 F2.8. I understand getting fast glass, my problem is shooting wide open, I tend to miss focus (like my focu will be on the hair instead of the eyes, ect.. Or if I'm trying to get two people in the shot together, I only get one in focus.
I've been practicing with my camera since the wedding at ISO 1600, and I'm actually getting decent pictures as long as my exposure is right on and I'm not trying to fix it PP.
I love the edit or the bride, my concern is when printing the pictures that they will be really dark. :\ I guess I need to try to work a little more in Post on these pictures and do a LOT of trial and error practice and NOT practice at an actual event. lol

A better motor is really needed to shoot inside a church. Stepping up to the d7000 as suggested would be a good move. You could then easily shoot at 1600-3200 with almost no noise and get better shots with no flash. Basically it just time to upgrade. Your doing more professional shoots now you need more professional gear. Get the upgrade. It will pay for itself.

 

[PapaMatt]

 

[IgsEMT]

Your lighting is a bit harsh and WB seems a bit too cold for my flavor.
Practice Practice Practice

Joe

 

[o hey tyler]

Was this a commissioned event?

o lord

Worth asking...

 

[DiskoJoe]

Was this a commissioned event?

o lord

Worth asking...

I dont think that is a bad question. If payment was arranged up front then this would effect what quality of product the customer would expect.

 

[Rebekah5280]

Yes, I think its time for me to upgrade my equipment. I just don't know where to go from here!

The suggestion of the D7000 would be a good upgrade for me? Would there be something else that I should get instead? Thank you all for your advice. I really appreciate you taking the time to help me out.

 

[12sndsgood]

I traded up to the D7000 and low light ability is greatly enhanced. but if you want to get into this profesionally and your going to drop money on a new camera you may just want to look into a full frame option. I wonder if I should have just done that myself.

 

[Rebekah5280]

Yeah, I was thinking full-frame. I wasn't sure if the D7000 was full frame, but I just looked and it is not.

What are some of the Full-Frame Nikons that are great in low light? I'm trying to find a few good leads on cameras that may be good for this typen of photography. I'd like to stick with Nikon, just because I have my lenses that are compatible with Nikon already.

 

[Rebekah5280]

OK, so I've been looking through Nikon's cameras...
Do I need a full-frame? Or would a 7000 work fine?
What are the benefits of a full frame vs not?

 

[manaheim]

D7000 is a VERY good camera and handles low-light even better than my D300, and my D300 handles low light admirably. A full-frame camera will generally handle low light even better, but it's really all about budget.

If you have $20K, you go all out and get a D3S/D4 a 12-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and an SB910. (That's probably a little less than $20k, but you get the point.) If you have less, you make compromises wherever you think you are able to. For me, I would probably start by dropping the 12-24 2.8 and next I would probably drop the D3S/D4 and maybe go D700 or D7000.

If you have to go REALLY economical, at least get a flash that you can bounce off the ceiling and do not EVER pop a flash in someone's face. Learn as much as you can about the flash and flash/high-ISO combinations (when apppropriate- ISO 800 and a flash bounced off a fairly high ceiling works surprisingly well), and you can handle a bit more than you're dealing with currently.

Unfortunately, beyond that... low light is almost all about gear. There are some minor tricks to improve whatever you have, but if you don't have the gear to handle it, there are certain barriers that you just won't ever be able to cross.

Good luck with it.

 

[Rebekah5280]

I currently work with a bounce flash, 28-70 2.8, D3100. My lens was not good for the wedding ceremony. I don't know if I'm going to offer to do another one, but I will not be doing another one for sure without a longer lens! I'm thinking a 70-200 or 300.. not sure.


So my thoughts are to get the D7000 and inverst in the 70-200.

 

[Mach0]

The 28-70 2.8 didn't work out? Feel like selling it ? Lol

 

[Rebekah5280]

The 28-70 2.8 didn't work out? Feel like selling it ? Lol

No!! Its my go-to portrait lens! Love it so much I actually have two of them... lol

I just wanted/needed more reach. There was a balcony that I would have loved to take pictures from, but 70 couldn't get me close enough. :\

 

[Rebekah5280]

The other problem was that there was a giant white projector screen right above their heads. It was installed so it could not roll up. This problem was exaggerated by the fact that they decided to get married up on a stage so when I shot from the ground level, their heads were intersected with the bottom of the white screen (hard to explain..) I could stand on my tip-toes (thank goodness I'm just about 6ft tall) and I was able to get the bottom of the screen to lay just above their heads, but I could have done more with composition had that not been an obstacle for me to work around.
In hindsight.. actually.. I Should have used that gigantic white projector screen as a bounce for my speedlite! Why can't I think of these things on the fly?! uggh..
The formal pictures are all fine. I brought my umbrella lights and set up those pictures nicely (I'm a portrait photographer). It was just the ceremony pictures I struggled with working with the low light.. Enough so that i will be investing innew gear. Friends have seen the pictures from this wedding and some are asking me to do other weddings for them... Im saying no until I get my camera upgrade.