second camera shooter

Members how many of wedding photographers have used a second or even a third camera at weddings?

I think most photographers use 2nd. It's a trend right now that allows you to sell plus as a lot of photographers do not have a lot of experience, it helps them to hide that by having "backup" images.

I haven't used a 2nd(aside when it really requires due to scheduling conflicts) in over 6 years. Haven't had any complaints. If I need a photo from the left, I can very well step there and take that photo and not rely on some amateur(let's face it, if 2nd photographer was good, he wouldn't be 2nd...)

Your ego tells you that a second is superfluous. You can't be everywhere at once. A "step" to the side is not the same as a shot from a completely different angle. It's nice to think that a second is unnecessary, but a second can be a completely seperate view. To think that it is worthless is just foolish. MHO of course, but I think you are too hung up on your own self worth to appreciate a second viewpoint.

DMPRO78 wrote in post #16100857
Your ego tells you that a second is superfluous. You can't be everywhere at once. A "step" to the side is not the same as a shot from a completely different angle. It's nice to think that a second is unnecessary, but a second can be a completely seperate view. To think that it is worthless is just foolish. MHO of course, but I think you are too hung up on your own self worth to appreciate a second viewpoint.

What he ^^ said......

DMPRO78 wrote in post #16100857
Your ego tells you that a second is superfluous. You can't be everywhere at once. A "step" to the side is not the same as a shot from a completely different angle. It's nice to think that a second is unnecessary, but a second can be a completely seperate view. To think that it is worthless is just foolish. MHO of course, but I think you are too hung up on your own self worth to appreciate a second viewpoint.

Without providing proof, this is an useless personal attack of some kid or an old man who is afraid to show his own website. Why don't you just tell us when you would require a second,instead of a useless post you did that does not add any value?!

I suppose photographers who have 2nd and 3rd photographers with them also give 1000s of images to their clients thinking every possible angle is what they need. An angle of an amateur will be quite different than from an accomplished photographer, don't you think? I'd much rather deliver 500 really good photos that I think my clients are going to love; and pictures that show the story of the day, than a bunch of absolutely useless images from 100s of angles from 2nd photographers who barely have any experience.

That's not ego, that's common sense, based on 10 years of experience.

During getting ready you have to be a brain dead not to be able to step to the side if you really need another angle. The process is slow. If you want you can always ask your clients to repeat it again, if you don't know what you are doing, slow and don't know what happens during that part.

During the church ceremony, say 1 hour long, I am always able to go everywhere, including the balcony of a church, if there's one. I never had church ceremonies less than 45 minutes. That's enough time for everything, if you know what you are doing. But again, I don't deliver 200 images from the ceremony. My clients see the albums I provide and are aware of what will be given to them at the end!!

Creative session/Park: If they are hired you for YOU, then you should be able to direct and take the photographs. If you can't step to the side to take a photograph YOU think is going to be great or you can't even see that, maybe wedding photography is not your field...

Reception, dinner, dancing, speeches: Those are all journalism. Again, 2-3 photographs for per speech is more than enough. Maybe 10 for the first dance.
During a 3-5 minute song, I have more than enough time to pick the best spot and take the pictures. And I cover people mingling throughout the whole evening and don't sit and eat for 2 hours like most photographers and videographers do. At dozens of weddings I've attended as a guest, photographers eat way more than they work. Some don't even get up and shoot from their table. I suppose that's when you really need a second as it's hard to cover everything by sitting down...

Ego? I say it's more of my personal style. If you don't like what and how I do - that's great! I hope you like what YOU do, AND it is making you money, as at least I am running a successful business and my clients are happy with the results I provide -solo coverage. I could care less what another photographer is thinking of my style.

Take care of your own business before attacking another photographer's way that IS WORKING.

And if you want another thing to attack, just know that I only own 2 lenses and I've been shooting with the same lenses for many years.

I don't use a second shooter, though sometimes have my assistant grab images that I consider 'bonuses' for the couple (e.g. the shot of the groom as I'm getting the bride going down the aisle).

It's pretty clear, though, that the wedding market is broad enough to be able to accommodate both those who shoot with a second and provide 1000's of images and the photographer who shoots solo and provides a couple hundred. Both are valid options. Where am I in all of this ? I'm headed toward the latter and will likely never use a second.

Second camera, not second shooter.

^the topic says 'second camera shooter', no ? It's ambiguous--you're right.

photopro456 wrote in post #16097894
Members how many of wedding photographers have used a second or even a third camera at weddings?

The 1st post clears it up

^Whooops. We got all worked up over nothin' !

I moved this thread to TALK as you don't have an IMAGE to share. And more people may answer this for you here.

For now, I rock two bodies- one over each shoulder/cross strap with a 24-70 and 70-200 on. Flexibility and means I don't have to change lenses as much. But I am a new wedding photog.

Though the idea of a 35/135 combo intrigues me almost daily. I'd just be strapped on the wide end then.

I use two... A 35 glued on one.. an 85 or 70 to 200 on the other.

i use two during the ceremony only. one has a 70-200 glued to it, and the other camera will swap between 24/45/50. after the ceremony, the second body gets packed away to be used in case of backup.

Lol. That is all. If you think a second shooter is useless, clearly you haven't shot very many weddings with and without one. In between the ceremony and reception, I almost always take the wedding party and bride and groom else where for a location shoot or two meanwhile, the second shooter can go to the reception and cover everything I cannot.