What are your thoughts on AF Assist Beam being obtrusive during a wedding?

I sometimes feel self conscious of my AF assist beam when taking photos at a wedding. Especially during the first dance, I feel like the huge red stripes on the bride's dress kill the mood. I notice that the farther I am from the bride (noticed it on my Yongnuo flash) the less visible the beams become. Although I can't recall if it made it harder to focus... Anyway, just looking for thoughts on this; what you do to reduce it or any other tips. Thanks!

I'm not sure where you are coming from with this, so I'll provide two answers.

1.) If the bride is paying you for photos, give her what she wants.
2.) If the bride is paying someone else for photos, leave your flash at home, along with you camera.

If you insist on taking a camera (w/ or w/o your flash), do not take photos while the paid shooter is working a one-time only scene (cutting the cake, first dance, etc.). A personal bugaboo of mine is - don't take photos during the meal. Even the sexiest bride looks a bit off her game while packing her pie-hole.

As a professional shooting a lot of weddings, I've never worried about AF assist beams, flashes or camera noise. I'm being paid by the bride and groom to make a photographic history of their wedding celebration. They hired me to make pictures. I use the tools I need to do that. Realistically, the photographer is probably the only one noticing the AF assist beam. As for its being intrusive, the strobe and effect lights the DJs and bands use can be garish.
I doubt anyone notices.

This is a bigger problem with the YongNuo and Godox speedlites that use the laser style AF assist light, because they project a very bright and obvious pattern quite a distance, which everyone else can see as well.

The original Canon and Nikon flashes have a more subtle pattern and are considerably less bright.

The subject of your photo only sees a little red light.

Nobody else cares.

Do what is needed to provide the best service to the customer. A little red crosshatch before the photo is insignificant.

elv wrote in post #18023584
This is a bigger problem with the YongNuo and Godox speedlites that use the laser style AF assist light, because they project a very bright and obvious pattern quite a distance, which everyone else can see as well.

The original Canon and Nikon flashes have a more subtle pattern and are considerably less bright.

this is what i was thinking earlier today, but i was too lazy to pull out my YN triggers and Canon flash and double check.

we are getting to the point of such good AF performance that using AF assist, except in the most extreme situations, or with slow lenses, is often unnecessary.

elv wrote in post #18023584
This is a bigger problem with the YongNuo and Godox speedlites that use the laser style AF assist light, because they project a very bright and obvious pattern quite a distance, which everyone else can see as well.

The original Canon and Nikon flashes have a more subtle pattern and are considerably less bright.

Elv, I have a few other observations on this topic:

For one, I've noticed that the Canon and Nikon speedlights have a faster shut-off time for the AF Assist lamp than the Godox speedlights.

In addition to the above, there seems to be a logical and predictable reason why the AF Assist lamp's cross-hatch pattern might appear on your subject's face or body: The lamp's appearance and disappearance seems triggered by the camera's ability to lock focus. For example, upon half-pressing the shutter release button, you will see in your Nikon camera viewfinder your camera attempting to gain AF lock; meanwhile he AF Assist lamp of the V860X turns ON. This lamp will remain ON until either the camera acquires AF lock or until the camera fails and stops attempting to focus.

The problem is that there is some play in the camera logic. Even if you have your Nikon camera set to Focus Priority (via the camera's custom settings at a1 and a2), the camera can get a little "jiggly" and unsure, and CAN DEFINITELY trip its shutter even though a definite AF lock has not been obtained. If and when that happens, the AF lamp — which per the above can be a bit lagged in NON-Nikon flashes — can remain VISIBLE in the resulting photo, which may or may not be precisely focused.

At least this is my observation and understanding of what's going on. I've seen the same thing happen rarely with a Nikon speedlight... and definitely seen it with Phottix Mitros+ speedlights as well as with Godox speedlights. I'm guessing it happens with YongNuo speedlights, as well.

My solution is to simply shoot more deliberately and patiently. If I'm rushing the shot, the cross-hatch pattern of the V860X speedlights can more readily end up in the photo.

Isn't there usually enough light during the first dance? They leave them up so great grandpa and grandma can see? I don't have vast experience but I never went over that in the contract and don't recall shooting one that dark. Otherwise I just want to get the job done to the best of my ability and if it were that dark that I needed it I would use it and not worry about it. If there lot's of light you won't see it as much.

I agree with you. I do have the Canon 580EX ii and although I stopped using it (it failed on me) I do tend to notice more prominent red beams from the Yongnuo flash. Thank you for your input.

Really? I have a 5d mark ii and L lenses and still find it necessary to use when the lights are dimmed for the first dance. Perhaps I need to try without more often and see what happens.

What camera do you have?

Me? A 5D3

Luigi1234 wrote in post #18025865
Really? I have a 5d mark ii and L lenses and still find it necessary to use when the lights are dimmed for the first dance. Perhaps I need to try without more often and see what happens.

What camera do you have?

My recollection from the days when I shot with a 5DII is that it was poor lowlight focus. It was better in the center focus point. Also, use a reasonably fast lens. i.e. 2.8 That helps focus because it lets more light in. Even if you are shooting stopped down.

Also, use a point of contrast to nail focus. I tend to use the bride's dress and grooms coat. Or groom collar and coat.

dmward wrote in post #18027152
Also, use a point of contrast to nail focus. I tend to use the bride's dress and grooms coat. Or groom collar and coat.

Most auto-focus systems use contrast comparison to enable control - an in-focus target being of inherently higher contrast than one which is even slightly out of focus. As ambient light levels drop, the difference between a dark area and a pale one becomes less simply because the 'toneless' black doesn't get any darker as far as a sensor is concerned while a paler area does become darker. Hence the contrast is reduced. There comes a point where the sensitivity of the A/F focus point can't differentiate between the 'light' portion and the 'dark' portion of what you are trying to focus on.

If you simply point indiscriminately, you reduce the chance of an A/F focus point falling on an area where it can actually measure a brightness difference. Then the 'all-singing, all-dancing' auto focus fails. In the days of non-optional manual focus, photographer's eyes automatically selected the area of highest contrast (David's examples of the intersection of Bride' dress and Groom's coat or Groom's coat/shirt being old favourites even back then). With modern auto-focus cameras, photographers have to substitute the old technique of selection by eye for an alternative one of placing an A/F sensor over one of these points of highest available contrast. Same principle as we have always used, merely different implementation.

With regard to 'reasonably fast' lenses - an f/1.4 lens wide open (ie in viewing mode not at the moment of shooting) lets in roughly the same amount of light as the human eye. An f/2.8 lens would let in 25% of that amount of ambient light hence there can be occasions (less often than hitherto) when we photographers can still see reasonably well but the A/F sensor can't. Then the A/F Assist Beam comes into play. My attitude towards it being 'obtrusive' is simply ........ "would Madam prefer in-focus images with a momentary touch of red light or would she accept blurred images". The laws of physics offer only that stark choice, much though she/we may wish differently. It's much like trying to lever a size 16* Bride into a size 8* dress - wonderful concept but not a cat in h*ll's chance of it actually happening!

In practice, I think you being overly sensitive about this. If you get to a point where 2 out of 3 Brides actually complain, seek further remedy otherwise forget about it.

* British sizes