weddings....

[jstuedle]

I must concur with the purchase of the 50 1.8. Cheap, fast, and very sharp. A "normal lens for your digital is a little more toward 35mm. I use a 35 f/2.0, very close in speed to the 50 1.8 as my go-to lens on my digital when shooting low light. Indoors, the 50 might be slightly too long to get a few people in. By too long I mean the focal length is longer than the 35, this causes you to have to back up further in order to frame your shot. A wall might interfere with the backing up process. The disadvantage to the 35 is it's cost. About $300 as compared to $120.

 

[ksmattfish]

While I agree with most of the advice posted above in general, I would suggest that you stick with what you know for this wedding. If you are shooting jpegs, and that's what you know, stick with jpegs! At least until you have time to practice with raw, and the raw workflow. Use the techniques and gear that you've been using to get the results that the bride-to-be has seen in your recent photos. I'm all for experimenting, practicing, and learning new ways of doing things, as well as trying out new gear, but I do it on my time, and not at weddings unless I'm sure I've already gotten the shots the B & G want. I know you aren't getting paid, but you still want to do a good job. Maybe you have plenty of time to learn and practice with the info, techniques, and gear mentioned in all the previous posts. If so, great, get to learning! If not, do and use what has been successful for you for this wedding.

 

[EOS_JD]

While I agree with most of the advice posted above in general, I would suggest that you stick with what you know for this wedding. If you are shooting jpegs, and that's what you know, stick with jpegs! At least until you have time to practice with raw, and the raw workflow. Use the techniques and gear that you've been using to get the results that the bride-to-be has seen in your recent photos. I'm all for experimenting, practicing, and learning new ways of doing things, as well as trying out new gear, but I do it on my time, and not at weddings unless I'm sure I've already gotten the shots the B & G want. I know you aren't getting paid, but you still want to do a good job. Maybe you have plenty of time to learn and practice with the info, techniques, and gear mentioned in all the previous posts. If so, great, get to learning! If not, do and use what has been successful for you for this wedding.

I can see where you are coming from with this train of thought but indoors with an f3.5-5.6 lens and no flash will likely result in no sharp images.......

RAW v JPG.... I'd shoot both RAW+JPG if you can. If you shoot JPG and get the exposure wrong it's more of a struggle to correct an under/over exposed JPG than an under/over exposed RAW.

To shoot a wedding fairly well, you need decent fast glass. If all you want are snapshots of the day your current gear with the on-board flash will work.... but not well.

 

[hawee99]

so would you recommend using the high aperature lens with no flash at all. I've never really liked flashes, but then again, i've never used anything but the on camera flash. So who recommends the high aperature and who recommends the flash. I'm sure it's also circumstancial on the building

 

[EOS_JD]

so would you recommend using the high aperature lens with no flash at all. I've never really liked flashes, but then again, i've never used anything but the on camera flash. So who recommends the high aperature and who recommends the flash. I'm sure it's also circumstancial on the building

Sometimes both are required!

Bigger aperture lets in more light which allows you to take images in low light without flash however if the place is still very dark you probably need a high ISO (or you may still not get fast enough shutter speeds even at high ISO)! The use of flash will allow you to keep the ISO lower and will allow you to supplement the light available to get shutter speeds you need. Your images are likely to be sharper too.

Flash is almost a MUST HAVE item especially when outdoors in very bright light. The mid-day sun casts very harsh shadows especially under the chin/shoulders and in the eye sockets. Use of a flash (fill flash) is sometimes a necessity in situations like this (reflectors also help).

I'd say no matter what you are doing, havving a decent flash a lens for low light photography should be in everyone's bag. The 50mm f1.8 is a great lens for the money. Cheap but sharp and fast. The 50/1.4 is even better. Better built, faster and more consistent.

 

[ksmattfish]

I can see where you are coming from with this train of thought but indoors with an f3.5-5.6 lens and no flash will likely result in no sharp images.......

RAW v JPG.... I'd shoot both RAW+JPG if you can. If you shoot JPG and get the exposure wrong it's more of a struggle to correct an under/over exposed JPG than an under/over exposed RAW.

In another post I already suggested a f/2.8 zoom, and I got the impression that it was too expensive for an immediate purchase. It doesn't take too much practice to learn a new lens, but if someone is used to something like an 18-50mm zoom, and then switches to a 50mm prime I think it would be a good idea to get used to a fixed focal length and switching lenses quickly before the action starts.

Raw + jpeg would be a good way to do it if she has enough memory. I agree that raw is the way to go; I shoot raw 99.9% of the time. But if someone is used to a workflow for jpeg, they will have to learn about raw conversion software, and how that workflow goes. It's generally my opinion that if someone doesn't know whether they should shoot raw or jpeg, then they'll probably be better off shooting jpeg.

My point is that whenever someone posts a "I'm shooting my first wedding for a friend" here or elsewhere it seems like many folks advise them to get new equipment and use new techniques. Most of the time I agree with the advice as long as the person has time to learn about the new stuff, but I don't think that they should try to learn it on the job (even if they are doing it for free). There are going to be a whole lot of other things that they will be learning about photographing weddings as they do it, it's a super busy day for everyone involved, and I really think that the photographer better be familiar enough with their photo skills, techniques, and gear that all of that operates on an instinctive level. If it's anything like the weddings I shoot there won't be time to be fiddling with anything unfamiliar.

Make sure you have back-up gear in case something fails: camera bodies, lenses, and flashes.

 

[Southerngal]

So, I am officially VERY NERVOUS!!!!!

Thanks so much for all the replys!

 

[EOS_JD]

In another post I already suggested a f/2.8 zoom, and I got the impression that it was too expensive for an immediate purchase. It doesn't take too much practice to learn a new lens, but if someone is used to something like an 18-50mm zoom, and then switches to a 50mm prime I think it would be a good idea to get used to a fixed focal length and switching lenses quickly before the action starts.

I agree that getting used to a prime lens is not as easy but using this, there would be no point in switching lenses indoors..... the other lens is too slow to use. Switch when heading outside if you must have a zoom.

By the way the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 are both excellent lenses and not too expensive.....

Raw + jpeg would be a good way to do it if she has enough memory. I agree that raw is the way to go; I shoot raw 99.9% of the time. But if someone is used to a workflow for jpeg, they will have to learn about raw conversion software, and how that workflow goes. It's generally my opinion that if someone doesn't know whether they should shoot raw or jpeg, then they'll probably be better off shooting jpeg.

My only point here would be that by shooting RAW at least you have the digital negatives. Shooting a wedding needs lots of memory - ~9Gb for me shooting RAW only!

My point is that whenever someone posts a "I'm shooting my first wedding for a friend" here or elsewhere it seems like many folks advise them to get new equipment and use new techniques. Most of the time I agree with the advice as long as the person has time to learn about the new stuff, but I don't think that they should try to learn it on the job (even if they are doing it for free). There are going to be a whole lot of other things that they will be learning about photographing weddings as they do it, it's a super busy day for everyone involved, and I really think that the photographer better be familiar enough with their photo skills, techniques, and gear that all of that operates on an instinctive level. If it's anything like the weddings I shoot there won't be time to be fiddling with anything unfamiliar.

Again my point is that the gear posted is likely NOT good enough to do the job. Shooting in low light the smaller aperture lenses (even at high ISO) will be unlikely to provide enough light to get a high enough shutter speeds. It's not a case of this being better, it's almost a case of a must have. I think a faster lens and a flash is a must have to be honest!

Make sure you have back-up gear in case something fails: camera bodies, lenses, and flashes.

VERY important but I didn't mention this because it's unlikely that the OP will be able to purchase another body, lens, flash etc..... Taking the chance with one is risky business.

If you can, think about renting a lens.