Job Offer - Advice Needed

[forbiggs]

Please give me some advice here. I want to start doing more weddings so I offered my services to a local wedding photographer. Below is his response. I would like to know:

1) What equipment should I invest in first?
2) What is a reasonable fee for me to charge?

"I sometimes need a second phtographer for some of my weddings that are large. The only little issue that I might see is your equipment is not really suited well for wedding photography. The 20d will work, but a 5d or better can get Full Frame and the speed of the camera is a little slow. The flash is great, the lenses or so so. I use only "L" series lens, which will play a great factor when shooting in low light situation without a flash. I'm not sure how many weddings you done before, but weddings are very fast pace that you need a fast lens to capture that split second of a perfect picture. Just something to keep in mind. "

These are the prices he charges:

Package 1: $1800

200 (4x6) prints
2 (8x10) prints
2 (16x20) enlargements
3 Months Web Hosting

Package 2: $2800
200 (4x6) prints
2 (8x10) prints
2 (16x20) enlargements
1 (40 page Italian Style Magazine Album)
6 Months Web Hosting

Package 3: $4200
400 (4x6) prints
4 (8x10) prints
2 (16x20) enlargements
1 (40 page Italian Style Magazine Album)
2 (Parent Italian Style Magazine Albums)
9 Months Web Hosting

Package 4:
Create your own. Please contact us (http://www.filteredbypaul.com/about.html) for more details.

Also Available:
Additional Photographer
Canvas Prints

[form]

The Canon 24-70L is much quicker and better focusing than the Tamron 28-75, so for that reason it's a better wedding lens. However many people would say the 17-55 f/2.8 IS is a better wedding lens for crop sensor cameras, and the IS is a big part of that. Of your other equipment, the 55-250 would need to be a 70-200 f/2.8, and you'd need at least 1-2 fast primes somewhere between 35mm and 135mm. If money were no object I'd say buy a 35L and 85L. If you have limited money, 35L alone. If you have even more limited money, Sigma 30 perhaps?...or Canon 85 f/1.8.

Cameras, best to have a 40D or better for quicker, more reliable autofocusing. This includes the 5D classic, which IMO does just as well as the 40D. My 20D hunts in many situations where the 40D/5D do not. Also for weddings I would never do them without 2-3 cameras.

Can't say what your fees should be; I started at $30/hour as a second photographer, but I was lucky.

Incidentally, that guy does a worse job than I do but he's charging 3x as much as me and not including DVD discs of the images. I wonder how that kind of pricing would work out here where almost everyone includes a disc of the images.

[Josh G]

40D with a 17-55mm 2.8IS is a fast and relatively inexpensive combo.

[tim]

20D is actually faster than a 5D, operationally. 40D is way faster than both, and the 17-55 suggested is what I use for 30 weddings a year with great success. I have two of each actually, plus a bunch of other stuff.

Sounds like the guy you emailed is a little full of it. L series lenses with full frame is one approach, if he doesn't understand others he might not be good to work with. Experience is experience though.

[form]

The 20D is only faster with the shutter/burst; the 5D's review mode is much more responsive than the 20D and the camera itself is otherwise about the same as the 20D for overall speed, except...AF is much better on the 5D. Now, the 40D is definitely more responsive in every way than the 20D. Incidentally, the 5D mark II's review mode is actually very sluggish, though other things are not.

[tim]

I find both the 5D and the 20D a little painful to use. I shot with a 5D for a while at one wedding but didn't much like it because it was so slow, so I switched back to the 40D. I shot with my backup 20D at another wedding, also not so fun to use but I had to since I dropped a 40D (which later proved to be ok).

[form]

Personal preference. For me the 5D's AF system is comparable to the 40D and that makes all the difference; the 20D hunts much more.

[Peacefield]

Incidentally, that guy does a worse job than I do but he's charging 3x as much as me and not including DVD discs of the images. I wonder how that kind of pricing would work out here where almost everyone includes a disc of the images.

This is why I got into wedding photography in the first place. I couldn't stand to see people pay so muich to guys that were completely uninspired and just pounded the work out.

Anyway, I don't think you can tell what is reasoable based on his pacakge pricing because it doesn't include a second shooter. At the bottom, you indicate that he says second shooters are available for an additional fee (that goes unspecified). I would assume you get most of that fee.

[forbiggs]

Thank you Peacefield, Form, Tim, and Josh for your valuable feedback. I feel like I've got some clear direction. This man's fees are higher because this is the Silicon Valley and everything is higher. Perhaps this can give me some valuable wedding experience and at the same time add some inspiration to his repertoire. Atom

[LVPhotos]

Hmm... Atom (you didn't happen to live in Vegas before have you?)

Anyway, your lens setup is fine for a 2nd photog. We require ours to have f2.8 minimum and 50mm minimum. If they have something longer then great.

If I had to suggest a first lens purchase it would be the 70-200 f2.8L but that's pretty hefty price-wise.

And I agree with Joey, his work isn't that great, looking at his very first portfolio pic, he needs to decide whether he want a silhouette or a regular photo... in-between just doesn't work! :)

[tim]

Personal preference. For me the 5D's AF system is comparable to the 40D and that makes all the difference; the 20D hunts much more.

Most people evangelize their new toys.

[form]

I tell you that if the 5D hunted as much as the 20D it would be a frustrating camera to use, but it actually locks on in low light just as well as the 40D. I was prepared for any other "sluggishness" since I used two other 5Ds before I got mine, and I accepted that there were tradeoffs for an inexpensive full frame choice.

[tim]

I'm not sure inexpensive is a good term for a 5D. It's a nice camera. 5D vs 40D is just personal preference. The camera is irrelevant really, I could do what I do with a 300D, 5D, 50D, 5DII, or maybe even a G10.

[form]

Compared to other full frame options (with the possible exception of the original 1Ds), the original 5D is dirt cheap. Granted it's still a $1k camera, but so's the 50D.

I like full frame. Crop sensor still has its uses, like macro, telephoto, and greater DoF for certain shots. A 40D took one of my favorite photos from my last engagement shoot - for various reasons I wanted good DoF for the shot so I'd be sure to have the subjects completely in focus. But I really like full frame too. I think I'll always have one of each from now on.

This is why I got into wedding photography in the first place. I couldn't stand to see people pay so muich to guys that were completely uninspired and just pounded the work out.

That was also one of my reasons: The people who charge what I do were giving clients utter crap as far as I was concerned, so I almost felt like a robin hood of sorts. Even if I was no master, at least I bothered to retouch my photos; none of the other budget shooters ever seemed to have any handle on processing.

[forbiggs]

Compared to other full frame options (with the possible exception of the original 1Ds), the original 5D is dirt cheap. Granted it's still a $1k camera, but so's the 50D.

The 50d and 40d are about the same price. Any reason I shouldn't go with the 50d?

[bnlearle]

I HATED the 40D's I had - so I'm not going to defend it just because. But throw a 50L on a 5D and you have serious AF issues once the light goes down a tad. On the 40D? No problem at all.

The 5D's AF issues doesn't bother me all that much, but with a 50L paired in low light, it's definitely the worst AF combo I've ever come by...

To the OP. I couldn't imagine getting paid in the early stages. Shoot a couple freebies for the guy - or even one if you do great - but know what your capable of before you start charging, imo.

[Alextee]

I don't know about you, but by the time I'm finished drinking a glass of water, it's usually about time the 85L has achieved focus...
I don't usually shoot weddings, but I do a lot of event photography at retreats and performances and such, and in low light my 40D autofocuses fine. I just got to play with a 5dII for a little bit and discovered that it kind of has a little pause in it's autofocus and then fine tunes it. Also, if you haven't shot events that are fast paced before and are nervous, then maybe the burst shots of a xxD series camera would be better suited + the quicker autofocus due to the 9 cross type sensors?

[PhotoMatte]

I have a couple 5Ds and some 20Ds (never used a 40D); I like them both equally well. The 5D is nice in that it has the 'instant-on' feature (unlike the 20D, which takes 3 seconds to 'wake up' if it's gone to sleep). But those are minor considerations. I like the full-frame of the 5D, and have never had a problem with it focusing in low-light. I use my 20Ds with my long telephotos, so they get even longer without losing any stops. If you shoot with a high ISO, the 5D is better than the 20D. I've never used Image Stabilization lenses during a wedding (since they don't help if your subject is moving), and have never wished I had. As for the burst rate, the only time I use the multiple-frames option is during the flower toss and the garter toss, and the 5D has done just fine with those. Good luck!

[tim]

I thought the 20D was pretty much instant on, not like the 10D/300D. The 40D starts up faster, but you're best to leave it for a couple of seconds while it does its self cleaning. When waking up from sleep the 40D's instant, as is the 20D in my experience.

[PhotoMatte]

I thought the 20D was instant-on too, until I got the 5D. The 5D can be totally shut off and if you press the shutter button it instantly wakes up and takes the picture at whatever settings you had for your last shot. The 20D takes about 3 seconds to do this (not a long time, I know, but I like to be able to just pick up my camera and shoot if a 'moment' arrives).