Accepted to shoot first wedding, nervous as all hell!

[guyzer09]

Hello everyone! I have already learned and have so much more to learn from reading all the posts on the wedding forum. My first wedding shoot is going to be in June and it's one of my wife's good friends from high school's wedding. Although after seeing my work her friend offered me a little of money to do it cause she is on a tight budget, I opt NOT to be paid for it because it will be my first wedding. I just asked her if it was ok I use it for a portfolio of my own. She then hooks me up with her wedding planner and I showed her my work as well. The wedding planner was fairly new and had only done a few weddings before this one. She liked my work and offered me to build a portfolio, prices, and packages so that she can use me as her main source of wedding photography. WOW are you serious? I dont even know if this will be something I willl be interested in for the future! So I told her let me experience this first wedding and I will determine if its something I want to team up with her on. So pretty much she books the weddings and advertises me and I either get the job or they opt out and go with someone else. As good as this sounds I have read about how much work and how much of a headach shooting weddings are. Man I am super nervous about the wedding now with the pressure of teaming up with the wedding planner makes me even more nervous. If I like shooting this wedding and my pictures turn out bad I will have lost a good oppertunity. BUT, as nerve racking as this all is I did get one benifit from agreeing to shoot the wedding, My wife is allowing me to buy a 24-70L f/2.8 and 70-200L f/4 to add to my line-up of glass!!! I think just thinking about the L glass kinda balances everything out for me.

[form]

Why do people always think the 70-200 is a great choice for weddings? A fast prime is infinitely better than an f/4 lens for the purpose.

I would sell the 28-135 and sigma 24 and buy a Canon 17-55 IS and 85 f/1.8 or 135L for the longer shots. The 135L will be much more usable than the 70-200 for just about everything (especially since you're not even looking into an 70-200 IS version), and to compensate for the $200 price difference between them you can get the 17-55 for about $150-$200 less than a 24-70L, plus have a wider lens AND have IS. Also, a little note about the 70-200 f/4L: Many of them have the "feature" of softness at subject distances close to the minimum range, which is not fun at all and is not considered a defect.

Alternately, you can keep your 28-135 for whatever you want, like casual shooting...but the sigma 24 is going to be obsolete with your next purchase.

[guyzer09]

Oh wow, I am not a wedding photographer and have never experienced it before so when it comes to picking specific glass to do the job I have no idea. I chose those two piece of glass not specifically for the wedding cause who knows if i will like it or not. I chose them cause my wife is allowing me to buy them for doing her friend a big favor and the 24-70/70-200L pair have been a choice of mine for some time.

[form]

Okay, as long as low light is not an issue the 70-200 will serve the purpose fine. I am so used to shooting in extremely dim situations that I can't imagine not using f/1.4 primes for 95% of the job anymore. The 24-70 is fine for weddings but a 17-55 will give IS and greater width, which comes in handy for weddings.

[zagiace]

prior to worrying about what lenses and equipment you may need, you absolutely should get some experience. Knowing how to properly expose, compose and light a shot is a portion of the knowledge you should have before shooting an event like a wedding. Check with some of the pros in your area and try to assist them to gain some experience. If you are able ot get a few assisting jobs leave your camera at home. You are not there to learn how to shoot, you should know that already.
Its a lot of work, and you only get one shot at it. Whether you are paid for it or not you will be expected to perform.
As far as equipment, you should have
2 camera bodies (at a min.)
A standard (the 24 - 70 will work fine.)
A telephoto (the 70-200 is a great choice IMO)
A wide, (the 24- 70 will be "ok")
2 flashes (too many to choose from)
Your standard 50 1.8 will work great and I have no experience with the 24 2.8,
I have used the 28-135 and some copies are very sharp for a zoom. If you have a good copy.
But, can't stress enough on getting some experience at a wedding before you are a lead photographer. If you happen to run into a problem, it can follow you for a long time.

[guyzer09]

Okay, as long as low light is not an issue the 70-200 will serve the purpose fine. I am so used to shooting in extremely dim situations that I can't imagine not using f/1.4 primes for 95% of the job anymore. The 24-70 is fine for weddings but a 17-55 will give IS and greater width, which comes in handy for weddings.

Thank you for the heads up on glass choice, it will be outdoors in june so the weather should be very nice! That is one of the reasons why the f/4 would not hurt me. As far as 24-70 or 17-55 I have debated it for as long as I got my 50d. I chose 24-70 due to the fact that it will work with my 50d and d30.


ZAGIACE- Thank you for the helpful tips! I do plan on calling studios or trying to get someone to let me shodow them and experience weddings from the shooters point of view. Reading books, forums, and online tips will be done throughout as well. I have 2 bodies and plan to use the 24-70 on one and 70-200 on another. I also think about contacting one of my fellow photographer buddies to assist me on this project. I want these pictures to come out the best to my skills cause you are right that it will reflect on my work for a long time for the better or worse.

[RT McAllister]

I chose them cause my wife is allowing me to buy them for doing her friend a big favorThat's it! Brilliant! Now I just need to find my wife a friend who is getting married. :)

I agree with Form on getting that 17-55 instead of the 24-70 for your 50D. I've used one on mine and I just never know what the hell to do with it because it's never really wide enough. It's kind of an oddball lens on a cropped camera IMO. The 17-55 will give you roughly the same FL equivalent.

And if you do chose to go into this full steam, you'll be dropping that D30. If you ever plan to go Full Frame though and using the 50D as your 2nd body, the 24-70 is fine.

[guyzer09]

Full frame in the future yes of corse! I really don't want the hassle of having to sell the 17-55 in the future. As for now the 50d will be my first serve. Maybe if need be borrow my brothers xti and slap a kit 18-55 on it for wide shots just in case.

[form]

Most people really have no idea what's best for weddings until they actually do them. Learning can be painful sometimes if one doesn't get their knowledge from others' mistakes instead of their own.

[sando]

The wedding planner was fairly new and had only done a few weddings before this one. She liked my work and offered me to build a portfolio, prices, and packages so that she can use me as her main source of wedding photography. WOW are you serious?

I'd be more worried about this. You've never shot a wedding before and you're already in a partnership? Good luck with that. :lol:

Anyway, ditch the 70-200. You'll not use it and f/4 isn't fast enough anyway.

[Peacefield]

Although many here disagree with my approach to equipment, I'm begining to discontinue the practice of taking my 70-200 2.8 IS to weddings. I'm opting for Canon's new 100mm L 2.8 macro with IS instead. On a crop body, it gets you 160mm which is about as long as I shoot at a wedding, IS lets me handhold as slow as 1/40 which is achievable at ISO3200, you get macro which is nice for the detail/ring shots, it focuses fast, is very sharp, and "only" ~$1000. You should also pick up something to get a little wider, though. I'd recommend Sigma's 10-20 which is very capable and fairly inexpensive.

These strings always default to become about equipment. They should be about creative eye and technical skills instead. Learn to control your flash: bounce it, modify it, balance it with ambient, fill flash, etc. Flash is a big deal because you're going to need it and it's something that many amateurs struggle to do well at all let alone use it creatively.

And you also want to be able to put a complete plan together for the day. Visit the sites ahead of time, know what the conditions will be, where you can stand, what's going to happen when, and then run through the day in your head repeatedly asking yourself, what equipment, what settings, to capture what shots?

It's technical skill and eye first, planning second, equipment third. I'm nearly embarassed to talk about the grade of equipment I started with in this business (think Pentak k-1000), but I was successful because I was long on the other two elements. That's where the real action is.

[guyzer09]

Although many here disagree with my approach to equipment, I'm begining to discontinue the practice of taking my 70-200 2.8 IS to weddings. I'm opting for Canon's new 100mm L 2.8 macro with IS instead. On a crop body, it gets you 160mm which is about as long as I shoot at a wedding, IS lets me handhold as slow as 1/40 which is achievable at ISO3200, you get macro which is nice for the detail/ring shots, it focuses fast, is very sharp, and "only" ~$1000. You should also pick up something to get a little wider, though. I'd recommend Sigma's 10-20 which is very capable and fairly inexpensive.

These strings always default to become about equipment. They should be about creative eye and technical skills instead. Learn to control your flash: bounce it, modify it, balance it with ambient, fill flash, etc. Flash is a big deal because you're going to need it and it's something that many amateurs struggle to do well at all let alone use it creatively.

And you also want to be able to put a complete plan together for the day. Visit the sites ahead of time, know what the conditions will be, where you can stand, what's going to happen when, and then run through the day in your head repeatedly asking yourself, what equipment, what settings, to capture what shots?

It's techni
cal skill and eye first, planning second, equipment third. I'm nearly embarassed to talk about the grade of equipment I started with in this business (think Pentak k-1000), but I was successful because I was long on the other two elements. That's where the real action is.

Wow Thank you! That's why I decided to post here in the wedding section to kind of steer away from equipment talk. I know I don't have much and I know what my limits are. I really just gotta use what I got for I am not able to got out and spend tons of money specifically for wedding shooting cause I am not sure about it. I have and will be in close contact with the wedding planner so I can get the whole run down of the entire event. Once it gets closer to June I will indeed scout the place although it is outdoors just to get my creative juices going. Oh ya not to mention its at the top of a waterfall trail so already I am streaming shots I can use the beautiful nature involved.

[tim]

The 17-55 F2.8 IS (http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&keywords=canon%2017-55%20f2.8%20is&tag=headphonerevi-20&index=electronics&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325) is definitely the best standard zoom for your 50D, better than the 24-70 imho.

The 70-200 F2.8 IS (http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&keywords=70-200%20f2.8%20is&tag=frm00-20&index=electronics&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325) is much more useful than the F4 non-IS lens, with F4 non-IS you'd need a tripod for church weddings.

Looks like Form's grumpy again. Also for a beginner a zoom will be easier than primes.

[tsw910]

Also for a beginner a zoom will be easier than primes.

and especially if you are only carrying one body around .. with primes, you will definitely miss some important stuff if you dont know how the day flows and where to stand .. so zooms are you best choices right now and you can't beat the 17-55 IS for price and value

[AlexMoPhotography]

What do you know about post-processing? That's the other half the battle.

[tim]

I don't know about PP being half the battle. It takes ages but it's not really that hard... but then again i've been doing it for years so it seems easy.

[guyzer09]

Well I use CS3 for all my pp. I like to get my exposure and what not correct in camera so pp is kept to a minimal. I shoot raw and use bridge for all my white balance issues and color corrections. I do use unshap mask on almost all my photos.

[amonline]

The 17-55 F2.8 IS (http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&keywords=canon%2017-55%20f2.8%20is&tag=headphonerevi-20&index=electronics&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325) is definitely the best standard zoom for your 50D, better than the 24-70 imho.

The 70-200 F2.8 IS (http://www.amazon.com/gp/search?ie=UTF8&keywords=70-200%20f2.8%20is&tag=frm00-20&index=electronics&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=9325) is much more useful than the F4 non-IS lens, with F4 non-IS you'd need a tripod for church weddings.

Looks like Form's grumpy again. Also for a beginner a zoom will be easier than primes.
+1,000

17-55 & 70-200L are THE lenses to have if you're on crop. 135 is far to limiting on crop when you DON'T have the 70-200L. If you're hell bent on a prime, then look at 85's instead, but the 70-200 is a must if you plan on doing more than one paid wedding in your career.

[Peacefield]

Keep it simple. I'm going to finally drop the money on Lightroom when v3 comes out in the spring. But for now, basic color/brightness/contrast/saturation adjustments in Canon's DPP, I use PSE 4 (an old version that came free with my scanner some years ago) just to straighten or clone the ocassional image, Noisware to clean up the high ISO images, and I like to use Tiffen's DFX software for my effects (B&W conversions, soft focus, etc.)

This approach is much cheaper than PS, etc., but it's obnoxious to go through multiple applications. That said, I'm a former film shooter and used to getting things right in camera so it goes quickly. And some of this work is even done in batch. If I shoot 1,000 images, it might take me one full 8 hour day to PP them all including effects.

[zshaft]

Hello everyone! I have already learned and have so much more to learn from reading all the posts on the wedding forum. My first wedding shoot is going to be in June and it's one of my wife's good friends from high school's wedding. Although after seeing my work her friend offered me a little of money to do it cause she is on a tight budget, I opt NOT to be paid for it because it will be my first wedding. I just asked her if it was ok I use it for a portfolio of my own. She then hooks me up with her wedding planner and I showed her my work as well. The wedding planner was fairly new and had only done a few weddings before this one. She liked my work and offered me to build a portfolio, prices, and packages so that she can use me as her main source of wedding photography. WOW are you serious? I dont even know if this will be something I willl be interested in for the future! So I told her let me experience this first wedding and I will determine if its something I want to team up with her on. So pretty much she books the weddings and advertises me and I either get the job or they opt out and go with someone else. As good as this sounds I have read about how much work and how much of a headach shooting weddings are. Man I am super nervous about the wedding now with the pressure of teaming up with the wedding planner makes me even more nervous. If I like shooting this wedding and my pictures turn out bad I will have lost a good oppertunity. BUT, as nerve racking as this all is I did get one benifit from agreeing to shoot the wedding, My wife is allowing me to buy a 24-70L f/2.8 and 70-200L f/4 to add to my line-up of glass!!! I think just thinking about the L glass kinda balances everything out for me.

1. about your gear: if your wife is allowed u to buy new lenses, then it's a good way to choose 2470 + 70200 (i better take 2.8 non-IS, not f4).
if it takes extra cost, u could sell your current lenses.
with 2470 + 70200 (or any primes like 85 1.8 / 135L), it's very very enough for you shooting wedding venue.

2. about your anxiety: it's normal & happens on most of people.
be confident of yourself, learn from the experts / someone who has more experience.

3. a lil tips during the venue: check your WB first (be careful not to produce too yellow pics); choose the correct lens for some chapters of the venue --> think of the space/area u have to take the pics;
for photo groups, remember to set up the f/stop around f/4-f/8. some little accident may happen, when u forget to change to f/stop from f/wide open for group/family photos..
and last one.., keep smiling while taking pics !
:D

[form]

Better shoot RAW if you want more keepers.

[Yeoer]

tim's spot on with the lens choice. A 24-70mm F2.8 on a crop... for weddings... not wide and not long and no IS its the worst of all worlds, the 17-55 is far far better and one of the main reasons quite a few wedding photographers use crops and teamed with a 70-200 f2.8 IS they are superb together.

I recommend you hire some kit to try it and use it in anger at a wedding, i'd be more than surprised if you still bought the 24-70. Don't be fooled into red ring 'L' mist.

[guyzer09]

Thank you all for your advice and encouraging words! I am still trying to get together with a professional photographer to get the feel for the whole thing. I have contacted a few and they either have no weddings till later next year or they already have shooters and do not need an extra even just for the ride. But that's not bringing me down I am going to keep trying untill someone says yes. As far as gear goes its still a toss up for me to either go 17-55 or 24-70. The efs would be limiting me only to be able to use it on my 50d and not with my d30. Its not a huge deal but it would be nicer to have both interchangeable. Also with the budget my wife is giving me for glass the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is not. Within that budget if I am getting a 17-55 or 24-70. Too many decisions and not enough money is always a drag. If this is something I will like and progress on then already I see how costly my gear is going to be but for now I don't want to arrange my glass list according specifically for weddings. I hope that made sense.

[RT McAllister]

Also with the budget my wife is giving me for glass the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is not.What's up with wive's and their aversion to the 70-200? Let's both stand up to our women and show them that it is "we" who know best in these matters.

You go first. :mrgreen:

Within that budget if I am getting a 17-55 or 24-70.You've got the cameras for either but you certainly wouldn't have problems dumping that 17-55 down the road.

[guyzer09]

What's up with wive's and their aversion to the 70-200? Let's both stand up to our women and show them that it is "we" who know best in these matters.

You go first. :mrgreen:

You've got the cameras for either but you certainly wouldn't have problems dumping that 17-55 down the road.

Lol ya for real! I have pushed my limit pretty far and am still pushing for more! Still trying to get as much out of her as I can keeping in mind that don't over do it. Actually my d30 does not take efs lens only ef. I guess I really gotta try both of them out and just judge by how much one will out weigh the other.