For Wedding Pros, What Camera do you use?

If I really earned money doing weddings and a good arm, I would have considered the mkiii, but really, the 40D is just fine. Some pros I've worked with have said that Canon announced the 40D right after they bought their mkiii's and they wish they had waited. The 14 bit is just a tad better to work with after the shoot.

5D ! plus 24-70 mm 2.8 L plus 580 flash makes a lot off money at weddings

When you say your 1Ds mark III and an "L" lense is not good enough for you, then I'm afraid there is no system that is currently good enough for you from the digital SLR cameras. I thought the 1Ds III is supposed to be the best camera Canon makes right now with the best focusing system. I would love to be able to get my hands on one of those, but have not had the chance.

I also don't understand what you mean when you said you want to print something at 16x20 and afraid it would not look good. I don't know how good is "good", and if you print your pictures at more than 100% the size of the picture. But I was able to print some hand held shots (from my 30D) at 24x30 or 24x36 (close to 100% of the picture) and you can see the person's hair on their face (and things that you might not even wanto see)with a very minimal touch up. Of course that is given with plenty of light and high speed shutter. But I'm not a pro or anything like that. So I might not know what the heck I'm talking about here:p.

LT

SuzyView wrote in post #4942145
Some pros I've worked with have said that Canon announced the 40D right after they bought their mkiii's and they wish they had waited. The 14 bit is just a tad better to work with after the shoot.

Isn't the 1DmkIII also 14 bit like the 40D?

statsman wrote in post #4942926
Isn't the 1DmkIII also 14 bit like the 40D?

Yeah, it has 14 bit Analog to Digital as well.

I use a 1D2N & 35L and 1D3 & 70-200/2.8 IS for my wedding work. Never was really that bothered about the weight but in a very dimly lit church at the end of last year, being able to shoot clean ISO 3200 shots from the Mark 3 was brilliant.

Yes, it is, and some have commented that if they had known a 40D was coming out so soon after the mkiii was introduced, they would have waited, not needing to spend that much.

SIMPLEPHOTOLT wrote in post #4942872
When you say your 1Ds mark III and an "L" lense is not good enough for you, then I'm afraid there is no system that is currently good enough for you from the digital SLR cameras. I thought the 1Ds III is supposed to be the best camera Canon makes right now with the best focusing system. I would love to be able to get my hands on one of those, but have not had the chance.

I also don't understand what you mean when you said you want to print something at 16x20 and afraid it would not look good. I don't know how good is "good", and if you print your pictures at more than 100% the size of the picture. But I was able to print some hand held shots (from my 30D) at 24x30 or 24x36 (close to 100% of the picture) and you can see the person's hair on their face (and things that you might not even wanto see)with a very minimal touch up. Of course that is given with plenty of light and high speed shutter. But I'm not a pro or anything like that. So I might not know what the heck I'm talking about here:p.

LT

What I was saying is that I’m afraid that I compare the MF Sinar, Phaseone backs I work with to the DSLRs out on the market. What I’m interested in is what is being used out there and what issues do any have with them.

I did get back this weekend a 16x20 from my 20D, and I was OK with it and now don’t think the enlargement issue will be part of my decision.
It has been one of those things that I have been too busy to really test.

My first thought is the 1DS MIII due to its 22 MB FF 14 bit files. Possible overkill? Or a new 1Ds MII 17MB FF 12 bit. Technically I like the 14bit much much more. That is why I’m also thinking about the 1D MIII with the smaller chip but 14bit which might be ultimately better than the 1DSMII. Those of you with the 5D, was your choice due mainly due to cost of it vers a 1D series camera?

BTW when using the dig cameras I was testing, I was using my 580 and sometime my 550 with a turbo bat, so my fill flash problems were not due to power and recycling times of the flashes.

I have used the 1DsMII and the 1DMIIn on a wedding a few times. Once both cameras were used with the 24-105 and two other times the 1DSMII with the 24-70. The both days with the 24-105 were contra sty open light shoot with the B&G. I was shooting mainly with the Hassy and picking up the Dig after each hassy shot. Even though I had set the exp on manual and then set the flash comp exp, the exp were not consistent shot to shot regardless of the fact that the lighting did not change and the 580 was using my Turbo for power. I gave up after a few sets.

The reception were as normal in a very dim dark reception hall. And they both had problems with the focus whereas the 20D and 16-35 I was using at the time was not. At this point I’m very convinced that that problem was the F4 lens.

I guess the main thing I’m looking to see is what most others are using, and why that choice of camera?

Thanks again,
Pete

I use a 5D and a 40D. Everything I have is currently in my "signature."

If I could have any rig I wanted, I'd grab two Mark III's without even blinking. Toss that along with 85mm 1.2, 24-105mm f4L, 70-200mm 2.8 IS, and a Quantum digital flash with some battery packs and you'd find me a happy clam. Oh, yes, and a maybe a 17-55 2.8.

im just getting into the wedding area. DO YOU HAVE TO GO FULL FRAME ?? i know guys that shoot wedding with 2 40d's, 30d&40d combos, AND THIER WORK IS AWESOME. and they make a decent income at it. i keep reading 5d/40d combo is the best bet, but why cant 2 crop camera's do the trick. i dont think the clients really know the difference b/t the 2 bodies anyway (well maybe some do).

I think Canon's weak link is their flash system.

1D Mark III for me: great ISO 3200, file-size is just right, dual media slots, fast and responsive, sRAW, weather sealing, etc.

The only thing I don't like is the compromises that come with 1.3x crop (lack of ultrawide and DoF flexibility).

A FF version would be perfect @ 12-16MP with all the latest improvements over the 5D and 1Ds Mark II.

slowdad wrote in post #4945490
im just getting into the wedding area. DO YOU HAVE TO GO FULL FRAME ?? i know guys that shoot wedding with 2 40d's, 30d&40d combos, AND THIER WORK IS AWESOME. and they make a decent income at it. i keep reading 5d/40d combo is the best bet, but why cant 2 crop camera's do the trick. i dont think the clients really know the difference b/t the 2 bodies anyway (well maybe some do).

I think it's the DoF control and high ISO performance mainly. At least that's what attracts me.

Tapeman wrote in post #4945736
I think Canon's weak link is their flash system.

I agree.

jr_senator wrote in post #4945833
I agree.

Me too. They could definitely learn a thing or two from N*k*n there.