Is F2.8 enough for wedding

If you can't get a keeper beyond ISO800 on a 60D I think you are probably doing something wrong...but that's another topic.

auroraskye's recommendation to scope the venue out is the best advice you'll get.

SOK wrote in post #14723069
If you can't get a keeper beyond ISO800 on a 60D I think you are probably doing something wrong...but that's another topic.

auroraskye's recommendation to scope the venue out is the best advice you'll get.

I'm not a pro but have some experience with the 60D and starting to take my long term hobby into some paid work.

Firstly, which I'm sure you know, in low light you will start to see noise above ISO800 on the 60D, but in reality your going to struggle to take a photo in a typical church without flash less than ISO3200 and an F2.8 lens on a crop body.

I suggest you go and check out the location first, and speak to the minister and find out where you'll be positioned. At the back of the church you will need a long reach?

I don't like the 70-200 2.8 personally but most people seem to use it and it probably makes sense. I'm considering a 135 f2 on my second body and keep my 24-70 on the other. Your 100 Macro may have enough reach on a crop but remember the focus may be a little slower.

You images will turn out noisy at that ISO but its important to make sure you get the focus and the composition right. Shoot in RAW on AWB and then in light room after you can fix the white balance and reduce the noise.

Best of luck, and hope all goes well.

tim wrote in post #14720158
I shoot up to ISO6400 on F2.8 lenses for ceremonies, I rarely have a problem. My cameras are pretty good at high iso though.

This, except we only have f2 and f1.8 lenses.

tim wrote in post #14720158
I shoot up to ISO6400 on F2.8 lenses for ceremonies, I rarely have a problem. My cameras are pretty good at high iso though.

I would just rather deliver a f/1.4 1600 or f/2 3200 shot over a 2.8 6400 shot. Even if you are using a great high ISO camera, 1600 is still going to be cleaner.

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #14740697
I would just rather deliver a f/1.4 1600 or f/2 3200 shot over a 2.8 6400 shot. Even if you are using a great high ISO camera, 1600 is still going to be cleaner.

both these iso's are too much for this camera and unless you are a real pro (which the op'er isnt) chances are you are going to mess up a shot shooting at 2.8 or greater

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #14740697
I would just rather deliver a f/1.4 1600 or f/2 3200 shot over a 2.8 6400 shot. Even if you are using a great high ISO camera, 1600 is still going to be cleaner.

Pixil Studio wrote in post #14740715
both these iso's are too much for this camera and unless you are a real pro (which the op'er isnt) chances are you are going to mess up a shot shooting at 2.8 or greater

What body are you using, fancy posting an example of 6400 for my own interest?

I'm using a 5DII at a limit of 3200 and wouldn't like to above this and still present an image.

Scooby888 wrote in post #14741112
What body are you using, fancy posting an example of 6400 for my own interest?

I'm using a 5DII at a limit of 3200 and wouldn't like to above this and still present an image.

I don't have any examples with me right now, but I've shot at 6400 with my 5DII in the past with no issues. If you want to pixel peep then, yeah, you'll see some noise. But to the average person it's really not noticeable, even in prints, if you expose correctly.

he is using the 60d and in my opinion tops out at 640 but could be pushed to 800
5dmark 2 limit is 2500-3200. iv scene it at 6400 and its not good enough for me to resale

PeaceFire wrote in post #14741196
I don't have any examples with me right now, but I've shot at 6400 with my 5DII in the past with no issues. If you want to pixel peep then, yeah, you'll see some noise. But to the average person it's really not noticeable, even in prints, if you expose correctly.

I agree. Jamie Wexler has an awesome 12000 ISO 5Dii shot from a wedding that looks amazing. Like others have said, exposure is key.

I would totally use the 60D up to 3200. It tops out at 640? I completely disagree.

When I was shooting with two 50Ds I went to 3200 all the time for professional work. I've yet to have a client pixel peep and complain. Clients care about emotion and memories, not a little iso noise. Just my humble opinion.

Scooby888 wrote in post #14741112
What body are you using, fancy posting an example of 6400 for my own interest?

I'm using a 5DII at a limit of 3200 and wouldn't like to above this and still present an image.

We use D700s. This wedding has several shots between 6400 and 12800 during the reception.

PeaceFire wrote in post #14741196
I don't have any examples with me right now, but I've shot at 6400 with my 5DII in the past with no issues. If you want to pixel peep then, yeah, you'll see some noise. But to the average person it's really not noticeable, even in prints, if you expose correctly.

I'm going to stand corrected here. Since your post I was intrigued to test my theory and yours and I would like to say you know best.

I tried the 5DII at 6400 making sure i nailed the exposure and it is fine for normal size prints. 12800 showed some streaking in the colors but I guess usable at smaller sizes if your desperate.

I also tried the 60D (relevant to this thread) up from 800 to 1600 and 3200 and was quite surprised how usable they still are.

Yes I was pixel peeping and probably forgetting that in the real world at the size they will be viewed at by your customer, they probably won't pick up on this.