Getting started with wedding photography

[10megapixel]

Me and my partner are getting ready to tackle a small local wedding for the first time with 2 crop bodies and two 70-200 2.8's ( one is IS ) a 17-55 2.8 IS, and two 550 EX flashes. Does this sound like an adequate setup to start with?

[SuzyView]

Welcome to the world of Wedding Photography. :)

Since you don't have an image to SHARE, I put this thread in TALK as the pros can come here to give you advice.

I think you'll be fine. Just make sure you can bounce the flash if you need to. Shadows are a PP killer. If you have never done a wedding before, talk to someone who has just for the business part. There are a lot more things to worry about than the gear. Look at the stickys here, including the information about poses and shooting in a church. That will really help you.

[Mike]

Here's some reading for you. I'd recommend getting another lens in the standard zoom range, if your 17-55 goes on the blink you'll be stuck with just the 70-200s.

Here's a whole lot of reading for you:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5999915&postcount=2

[SuzyView]

Yes, another wide zoom would be wise. I always have back ups.

[10megapixel]

Welcome to the world of Wedding Photography. :)

Since you don't have an image to SHARE, I put this thread in TALK as the pros can come here to give you advice.

I think you'll be fine. Just make sure you can bounce the flash if you need to. Shadows are a PP killer. If you have never done a wedding before, talk to someone who has just for the business part. There are a lot more things to worry about than the gear. Look at the stickys here, including the information about poses and shooting in a church. That will really help you.

Sorry about posting in the wrong thread:o

[rammy]

I did my first wedding earlier this year and I agree about getting more backup gear. I took virtually all my camera's and lenses and although I didn't have a problem, I did have the peace of mind that I had a load more gear in the car if I needed it.

[tim]

You need a standard zoom for the other camera (another 17-55 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425812-USA/Canon_1242B002_EF_S_17_55mm_f_2_8_IS.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) ideally), as well as a backup lens for when the 17-55 fails as it does sometimes. A Sigma 30 F1.4 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) works well for me, but my 17-55 backup is another 17-55, as well as the prime, a wide zoom, a macro, etc.

[10megapixel]

You need a standard zoom for the other camera (another 17-55 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/425812-USA/Canon_1242B002_EF_S_17_55mm_f_2_8_IS.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) ideally), as well as a backup lens for when the 17-55 fails as it does sometimes. A Sigma 30 F1.4 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) works well for me, but my 17-55 backup is another 17-55, as well as the prime, a wide zoom, a macro, etc.

What's this about the 17-55 "Failing"? :confused: Is there a common problem with this lens that I missed? I just dropped $1100 bucks on it...I sure hope not:rolleyes:

[tim]

The IS unit fails more often than most IS units, there's a report somewhere by lensrentals.com that reports failure rate. Canon doesn't acknowledge it. I have three of that lens, and two have failed at one time or another. They just shake like a mad thing and are useless. Sometimes turning off IS fixes it, sometimes not. They just have to go to Canon for service. My third 17-55 is totally stuffed, I dropped it 1m onto a hard surface and Canon said it was "uneconomic to report". Fortunately I have insurance.

So you can pretty much bank on the lens needing repair eventually, might be 3 months, might be 5 years. Everything fails eventually. My 70-20 F2.8 IS L has had the IS unit replaced once too.

That's why you need a backup. It's not something to panic over, but you have to keep it in mind. Like I said though, the lens is so good I have two working copies.