Gear - what would you do?

jmphotocraft · August 11, 2009

I will be shooting my cousin's wedding next summer. I don't have much direct wedding experience (I do sports and some senior portraits), but please assume for now that I am capable of delivering a final product that will make the couple very happy, but might not stand up to intense scrutiny of the Wedding Jedi Masters here. This is my gift to them and I have been up front with them about my level of experience and skills. They want me to do it.

Anyway, I have a 1D-IIN, a 40D, a 24-70/2.8L, a 17-55/2.8IS, a 70-200/4LIS, a Sigma 10-20, a 430EX and the Canon remote transmitter, and I plan to buy a 580EX.

I think I could do a good B+ wedding with that... Is there anything glaring I'm missing?

Now the what-would-you-do part. I am planning to upgrade a body after this next round of Canon announcements. If Canon announces something like a "1D lite" (pro AF, hopefully APS-H) in or around the same price point as the 5D2, I'd sell my 1D2N and get that. If they don't, I'll probably sell my 40D, 17-55, 10-20 and get a 5D2. Thoughts?

Also I'm very tempted by the 135/2L. But would the 200/2.8L be a better "spy" lens for weddings? Or is the 135 more versatile? Or is my 70-200 enough?

Thanks!

Swartzy · August 11, 2009

What you have in your arsenal now is very good. The only lens I would strongly suggest is the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Weddings...indoor ceremony stuff require fast glass as flash is typically not allowed. Try your hardest to take custom white balance in the sanctuary at least. The MKII is a nice camera but realize the magenta hue exists. Shoot RAW as it will make life easier in post production....especially color balance/exposure. The MKII as you already know has higher noise levels at anything over ISO 800 but the 1.3 crop factor is a plus.

The 40D does nice work and I have one and use as a second body. There are times I'll flip on the 70-200 for ring exchanges and close ups with the 40D. Since you have that wonderful 17-55 IS, that would be the one to keep on the 40D on one shoulder. Not knowing the sharpness of your copies (24-70 vs. 17-55) you'll have to make that call. The IS I find very usefull. Since shutter speeds will range between 1/60th to 1/125th, the IS will insure sharp images.....providing you expose to the right...which you already know.

The 580EX is a great flash and don't be so concerned with getting it off camera. If you aren't all that fimiliar with how to bounce flash and balance it with ambient that is a MUST. I generally have my flash on board the entire day and you'd never know it was flashed in most cases. A flash bracket is helpful but combersome....but will allow for non existent shadows when in portrait mode as it keeps the flash head in the correct position to the lens (as in landscape orientation).

The 5D2 is a very nice camera but I personally haven't seen the need for 23mpx on the same sensor size. The 5D I's are abundant as many are upgrading. They are going for a song these days and you can't miss with that camera. ISO 3200 in RAW is still very very clean compared to any crop body in the Canon line. Here's one example of all the things I've mentioned thus far:

ISO 1000, 125th, f/4, bounced flash (24-105 IS)

ISO 1600, f/2.8, 125th sec., bounced flash (on camera) (70-200 f/2.8 IS)

Understanding light is paramount as a photographer. How to control artificial with natural is equally important. Immerse yourself in flash knowledge, then you can do anything you can imagine. So to answer your primary questions about gear..you have enough for any job. Any upgrades equipment wise will be an added bonus but your equipment at present is more than enough to create stellar imagery.

Thanks for reading my long winded doo dah

:D:D

mmmatt · August 11, 2009

Ah yeah... what he said!!! That's all real good advice. You have a great rig there and you will be fine. I love my 5d and although I would like some of the mk2 features, there was nothing else on that body that made me want to sell my mk1 and spend another $1500. As for the 135f2L... I personally have that and a newly acquired 85 1.8. They are my go-2 lens's for anything low light or if I want to devour a background.

5d, 135f2L, 1/50th, f2, iso 1000, side wall bounce flash

I routinely shoot my 5d at iso 1600 and 3200 if I have to. If you nail the exposure the results are beautiful even at 3200. (Sorry for the non-wedding sample here but it was handy) 5d, 135 f2L, 1/125th, f2, iso 3200, no flash

If you under expose you may have to sell that one as a black and white but still can be real nice.
5d, 135f2L, 1/50th, f4, iso3200, no flash

I owned a 70-200 f2.8 IS for a short time but went back to the f4 because the 2.8 boat anchor just isn't fast enough for some of what I shoot. 2.8 to 4 is only 1 stop as is 2 to 2.8. I'll take the full 2 stops (over the f4) and zoom with my feet a bit or do a quick lens swap. Even when you don't need f2 it makes a big difference in focusing speed because the camera focuses wide open. With your 1d that is less of an issue because the focusing system is equally good at all the side points but every other non 1D canon body has the goods in the center and lesser on the outsides.

Good luck and work on your flash techniques if they arean't already dialed in. Also you should have about 32GB of CF cards, and if you do a lot of bouncing it is nice to have an external bat pack for your flash. I usually go through about 30 2600 Mha AA batts at a wedding because I change them out when they start to slow down and I wall bounce almost every room I shoot in.

Matt

FedererPhoto · August 11, 2009

The only big 'hole' that I see in your setup for wedding coverage is a fast tele. Maybe upgrade to the 2.8 70-200 or maybe even just rent the 200f/2 for the day. You might want some flash modifiers/lightstands for the formals... but it wouldn't be critical for a first and only wedding. Quaruple the CF and batteries you think you might need.

The main thing you should focus on, technically, is flash work and low light work (and, actually, the combo of the two).

But really, just immerse yourself in wedding info... the hardest part is the 'flow of the day', being ready at the right times and in the right places with the right gear. What would REALLY help you would be to shadow another pro (even a low-end pro would give you the experiece of actually trying to shoot a wedding) for a wedding or two - and then try to process the images to figure out what worked, what didn't, what was worth the extra trouble, and what wasn't.

(and it goes without saying: backups)

jmphotocraft · August 11, 2009

thanks
Great feedback everyone, much appreciated. Hmm... 2 votes for the 70-200/2.8LIS. I want that lens anyway... as long as I don't have to sell my f/4 to get it. I wouldn't be able to get both a 135/2 (or 200/2.8) AND a 70-200/2.8. Decisions decisions.

Interesting comment about not really needing an off-camera flash... so if I had a bracket could I get away with just my 430EX? Or do I need two flashes for some reason other than backup?

As luck would have it, my 17-55 AF's better on the 40D than the 24-70 does on the 40D, but the 24-70 on the 1D is superb...
http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/gallery/9036456_phBzH#601332484_UEvnM-A-LB

I like the 5D1 idea, but I'd have to sell my 40D setup to get it. But if they come out with my dream "1D lite" for $2700, I'm all over that.

Amazing photo behind the veil (manual focus?) and the couple walking down the aisle is priceless. Swartzy, thanks for saying "as you know". I did know those things, but thanks for assuming so! Good vibes.

Keep the comments coming! Thanks!

Swartzy · August 11, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

Great feedback everyone, much appreciated. Hmm... 2 votes for the 70-200/2.8LIS. I want that lens anyway... as long as I don't have to sell my f/4 to get it. I wouldn't be able to get both a 135/2 (or 200/2.8) AND a 70-200/2.8. Decisions decisions.

Interesting comment about not really needing an off-camera flash... so if I had a bracket could I get away with just my 430EX? Or do I need two flashes for some reason other than backup?

As luck would have it, my 17-55 AF's better on the 40D than the 24-70 does on the 40D, but the 24-70 on the 1D is superb...
http://jmphotocraft.smugmug.com/gallery/9036456_phBzH#601332484_UEvnM-A-LB

I like the 5D1 idea, but I'd have to sell my 40D setup to get it. But if they come out with my dream "1D lite" for $2700, I'm all over that.

Amazing photo behind the veil (manual focus?) and the couple walking down the aisle is priceless. Swartzy, thanks for saying "as you know". I did know those things, but thanks for assuming so! Good vibes.

Keep the comments coming! Thanks!

You could get away with just the 430 EX but you'll need to have lots of batteries on hand. The 580EXII is much more efficient in that regard and omits more light (hence, more powerful). When shooting events, like sports you're on the move so an additional flash somewhere set up is tough...unless you have specific shots in mind using such.

There are pros and cons on a flash bracket but they do help with the portrait orientation. When shooting film I used it all the time but now, fly by the seat of the pants. Also, check out some gels for matching your flash with the ambient present. CTO, CTB, etc. (color temperature orange, blue and so forth). Even when shooting outdoors later in the day in the shade, gelling your flash will make color balancing a breeze.

Hope this helps.

mmmatt · August 11, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

I like the 5D1 idea, but I'd have to sell my 40D setup to get it. But if they come out with my dream "1D lite" for $2700, I'm all over that.

I would definately ditch the 40d for a 5d... hands down better camera for anything but maybe sports, especially if you have a 1d to shoot sports with and to get a little more length out of your glass.

jmphotocraft wrote:

Amazing photo behind the veil (manual focus?)

Nope. bottom focus point (right in vertical) on the corner of her eye. I had room to fudge it a bit. I think there was at least a 1/2" inch of dof in there! I think I may have shot 2 or three of them to make sure I got it.

That's another point to make to you. For this kind of shooting you will probably want to set your camera to use the multi-controller to adjust your focus points. You may already do that but if not it will help you keep your subjects out of the center of the frame. Things happen fast so it is nice to have that control on your thumb. As I said though, with anything other than the 1d you will get less reliable focus in really low light when you go outside of the center point. That's only a factor in really low light though.

Matt

jeffreaux2 · August 12, 2009

In your shoes, I doubt Id be selling the 40D to "gear up" for a single event. The advantages of IS with the 17-55mm 40D combination make it a serious tool for what you will be shooting...and the lighting conditions you can expect. It is PLENTY capable.

...and you already know that a 5D or 5DII cannot keep pace with a 40D on a sports field. If THAT is where your bread and butter are.....well....why consider a switch?

The 70-200 F2.8IS might be worth renting though....and when you see the difference in how the F2.8 "isolates" a distant subject you may be tempted to buy one for sports later on. It can REALLY carve out your subjects from the clutter.

For some interesting reading Im going to supply you with a link to Scott Quier's thoughts for beginning wedding photographers. It may raise a point or two that you havent considered.

jmphotocraft · August 12, 2009

jeffreaux2 wrote:

In your shoes, I doubt Id be selling the 40D to "gear up" for a single event. The advantages of IS with the 17-55mm 40D combination make it a serious tool for what you will be shooting...and the lighting conditions you can expect. It is PLENTY capable.

I agree my 40D/17-55 combo is very reliable and capable. I'm not sure I'd want to get rid of it in exchange for older tech.

...and you already know that a 5D or 5DII cannot keep pace with a 40D on a sports field. If THAT is where your bread and butter are.....well....why consider a switch?

I thought the 6 invisible helper AF points around the center point of the 5D actually made it a little better than the XXD for servo, no? Also I have a 1D Mk IIN for sports.

The 70-200 F2.8IS might be worth renting though....and when you see the difference in how the F2.8 "isolates" a distant subject you may be tempted to buy one for sports later on. It can REALLY carve out your subjects from the clutter.

Yeah, I'll probably do that, or just buy one. We'll see.

For some interesting reading Im going to supply you with a link to Scott Quier's thoughts for beginning wedding photographers. It may raise a point or two that you havent considered.

Thanks!

mmmatt · August 12, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

I thought the 6 invisible helper AF points around the center point of the 5D actually made it a little better than the XXD for servo, no? Also I have a 1D Mk IIN for sports.

Yeah, I think he meant the frames per second. 5dmk2 is about 1/2 the 40d. Not sure how the AF is different but I know they did make a few changes from 5-40-50D's. Still only a 9-point though.

Matt

Shima · August 12, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

I agree my 40D/17-55 combo is very reliable and capable. I'm not sure I'd want to get rid of it in exchange for older tech.

I thought the 6 invisible helper AF points around the center point of the 5D actually made it a little better than the XXD for servo, no? Also I have a 1D Mk IIN for sports.

Yeah, I'll probably do that, or just buy one. We'll see.

Thanks!

I've had great experience w/ using the 5D2 at basketball, the invisible AF helper points are nice, though you have to remember to enable them in the custom function settings.

That being said, before I went all full from the 17-55 on the 40D was a great combination! The 70-200 is nice for receptions but a bit heavy... I like doing the 135L at receptions for the lighter weight and beautiful images it creates at f2.

jeffreaux2 · August 12, 2009

mmmatt wrote:

Yeah, I think he meant the frames per second. 5dmk2 is about 1/2 the 40d. Not sure how the AF is different but I know they did make a few changes from 5-40-50D's. Still only a 9-point though.

Matt

Yup, I was referring to FPS.

JohnBiggs · August 12, 2009

I recommend a flash bracket, joe Demb flipit, and the 70-200 2.8 IS. You need the speed and the IS in the church.

I typically don't shoot tele in the reception so I mostly have 28-75 2.8 and 10-22 on camera. 135 may not be bad, but I've become very selective on the weight I carry now.

jmphotocraft · August 12, 2009

Shima wrote:

That being said, before I went all full from the 17-55 on the 40D was a great combination! The 70-200 is nice for receptions but a bit heavy... I like doing the 135L at receptions for the lighter weight and beautiful images it creates at f2.

See that's one of my dilemmas... 70-200/2.8LIS or 135/2? I guess I could just buy one and rent the other.

jmphotocraft · August 12, 2009

mmmatt wrote:

Yeah, I think he meant the frames per second. 5dmk2 is about 1/2 the 40d. Not sure how the AF is different but I know they did make a few changes from 5-40-50D's. Still only a 9-point though.

Matt

Ah, gotcha. Although the 40D is "only" 6fps. Also the 5D1 and 2 both have 9 visible + 6 invisible AF points, which I hear actually performs better than the XXD in servo.

jmphotocraft · August 12, 2009

mmmatt wrote:

I would definately ditch the 40d for a 5d... hands down better camera for anything but maybe sports

Up until this moment I would not have questioned that statement, but then I went and read the review at dpreview...

"Noise levels are essentially identical to the EOS 20D as is dynamic range,"
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page32.asp

Huh? If that's true I'll keep my 40D!

jeffreaux2 · August 12, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

Huh? If that's true I'll keep my 40D!

Whatever you decide....for whatever reason...

There have been many, many, many weddings successfully shot with cameras that are FAR inferior to the 40D.

It can "get er done".

Shima · August 13, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

Up until this moment I would not have questioned that statement, but then I went and read the review at dpreview...

"Noise levels are essentially identical to the EOS 20D as is dynamic range,"
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page32.asp

Huh? If that's true I'll keep my 40D!

Look at the 5D Mark II, it will blow you away with it's low noise at crazy high ISO's

It works magic

jmphotocraft · August 13, 2009

Shima wrote:

Look at the 5D Mark II, it will blow you away with it's low noise at crazy high ISO's It works magic

Yeah, if I'm going to go to the effort and anxiety of selling a camera and lens that I love, I want a quantum leap.

Also I'm of the mentality that buying "good enough" now only to sell it and buy what I really want later is a waste of money.

Shima · August 13, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

Yeah, if I'm going to go to the effort and anxiety of selling a camera and lens that I love, I want a quantum leap.

Also I'm of the mentality that buying "good enough" now only to sell it and buy what I really want later is a waste of money.

Totally agree. Never settle for half baked. Either go all the way, or wait until you can!

mmmatt · August 15, 2009

jmphotocraft wrote:

Up until this moment I would not have questioned that statement, but then I went and read the review at dpreview...

"Noise levels are essentially identical to the EOS 20D as is dynamic range,"
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page32.asp

Huh? If that's true I'll keep my 40D!

At 100 iso that is true. High iso is where the 5d's shine.

Jeffs coment is right though... MANY people have produced awesome results with far lower quality equiptment than what you already have.

Matt

Gear - what would you do?

Comments