70-200 f/4 IS vs. 70-200 f/2.8 IS

bpuppy wrote in post #2491699
I shoot 2000-2500 at a given wedding ... and I don't shoot EVERYTHING 3 times. But if I see a good moment happening, I pop-pop-pop it.

that's what i shoot too. on my most recent wedding event it lasted 12hrs and i shot 2200 RAW.

i do the same thing too.. when a good moment comes.. pop pop pop and sometimes even more pop to get some more.

Fact of the matter is, flash CAN be very disruptive if not down right disrespectful at some ceremonies. But at others it's open field and the clergy does not care: I've shot a both types. I am suggesting that we act like pro's and follow "house rules," and not act any way we want to because we are the official photography; that's just a lame excuse for being rude.

I don't know how many weddings you've shot and/or attended over the past 30+ years, but I've been to more than one where the priest halted the ceremony to ask guests to stop taking flash pictures.

ryleung wrote in post #2493972
You know, leaving the issue of whether we comply with them aside, I always find it funny that the priests does not want / allow flash photography in the chapel for weddings. It's a wedding, for crying out loud! If anything, it is the day of photography. And guess what people do when there isn't enough light to take pictures?

sapearl wrote in post #2495481
Fact of the matter is, flash CAN be very disruptive if not down right disrespectful at some ceremonies. But at others it's open field and the clergy does not care: I've shot a both types. I am suggesting that we act like pro's and follow "house rules," and not act any way we want to because we are the official photography; that's just a lame excuse for being rude.

I don't know how many weddings you've shot and/or attended over the past 30+ years, but I've been to more than one where the priest halted the ceremony to ask guests to stop taking flash pictures.

Whoa... halting the ceremony to ask guests to stop flashing? I dunno who is more disruptive and disrespectful to the married couple here.

For the sake of discussion, here is a question for you, sapearl: As the official photographer, if you can't pull off that first kiss or ring picture without flashing, are you going to toss aside the fact that you've been hired by the marrying couple to deliver these shots, and listen to the priest to keep the flash off?

Agreed - it's very disruptive.... but then it's his place, not mine nor that of the guests. I just want to make sure I'm welcome the next time I return.

Regarding the ring shot, if flash is permitted I'm usually reasonably close by getting a series of shots, trying to keep low to block as few guests as possible. If flash is not permitted, I'm at my second camera which is usually tripod mounted, back center of the church, or off to the side, covering the entire ceremony. A lot of times I'll be sharing space with the videographer.

As for the "first kiss", to me that marks the end of the ceremony (which it does in about 98% of them) and I will flash along with about everybody else.

I have never had a problem from the B&G regarding photography restrictions, and it's something we will know about in advance prior to to the start of the ceremony. In my contract, I ask if there are photography restrictions. This is followed up by the statement: The PHOTOGRAPHER cannot be responsible for errors in instructions provided by the wedding party, for church or synagogue restrictions regarding photography..... ", etc. In this way there are no surprises and all are accountable.

ryleung wrote in post #2495628
Whoa... halting the ceremony to ask guests to stop flashing? I dunno who is more disruptive and disrespectful to the married couple here.

For the sake of discussion, here is a question for you, sapearl: As the official photographer, if you can't pull off that first kiss or ring picture without flashing, are you going to toss aside the fact that you've been hired by the marrying couple to deliver these shots, and listen to the priest to keep the flash off?