Gear question?

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

I am shooting a wedding in about a month in a pretty dark church. I have shot in churches before without issue but this one is going to be very dark. I am guessing it will most likely be a candle lit type (except with Christmas lights) atmosphere with the stage lit somewhat by house lights.

The church is rather small and I won't have a ton of room to move around as it will most likely be packed.

My D300 isn't going to cut it so I am renting a D700 for the better high ISO performance. I will have it for a good week before the wedding and plan to shoot everyday to be sure I am comfortable with it and I have used it a few times already.

My question is...do you think my 24-70f2.8 is going to be enough or should I think about renting a 35mm 1.4 along with the d700. Will I need to go beyond the f2.8 and need the prime lenses? I have no problem renting whatever I need for this wedding.

Foques · July 21, 2011

i'd rent a d3s if you are looking to rent a camera of that level for how dark you are describing.

I love my d700, don't get me wrong, but I found that the d3s gave a much better high ISO quality.. (and way bigger price tag..)

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

Foques wrote: »

i'd rent a d3s if you are looking to rent a camera of that level for how dark you are describing.

I love my d700, don't get me wrong, but I found that the d3s gave a much better high ISO quality.. (and way bigger price tag..)

Yeah, I know I said I was willing to rent anything but I am not sure I want to go that far.

I was under the impression the D700 was pretty impressive at very high ISO.

I have used it a couple times but never under those conditions. I mean, even a D3 can't shoot in the dark...I really just need the shots of the stage to be clean and it will be lit somewhat by the house lights. I figured I could shoot wide open for the procession etc and they may come out a " little " less sharp but that is the price you pay for it being so dark. They already understand that and are ok with it. I am doing my best to manage expectations. They just want the stage shots to come out good and that will be lit much better than the rest of the church.

Foques · July 21, 2011

d700 is fantastic, and I shoot local bands more than anything.. and do not shoot weddings, yet..

one of the shows I shot with a friend of mine we were in a "basement" environment.. where his 16000K iso came in quite handy..

I guess what I am saying is my take on wedding is to be overprepared, rather than under. that's the only reason why I suggested that.

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

Foques wrote: »

d700 is fantastic, and I shoot local bands more than anything.. and do not shoot weddings, yet..

one of the shows I shot with a friend of mine we were in a "basement" environment.. where his 16000K iso came in quite handy..

I guess what I am saying is my take on wedding is to be overprepared, rather than under. that's the only reason why I suggested that.

I totally agree with the overprepared part of it and now you got me thinking about going for the d3. I will have to think about it. The ceremony is going to be something like 20 min and the rest of the day is outside including the reception. Do I really want to go that far for just those few shots...but again those shot are priceless so maybe the answer is yes.

How much noise do you get with 160000k?

Foques · July 21, 2011

for now : http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d700-d3-vs-d3s-high-iso-noise-comparison

I'll have to ask him if he still has any of the images handy. It's been a while.

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

Foques wrote: »

for now : http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d700-d3-vs-d3s-high-iso-noise-comparison

I'll have to ask him if he still has any of the images handy. It's been a while.

Not overly impressed with those results for the D700. Kinda surprised. HUGE step up from the D300 but another pretty big step to the D3. I am thinking that you can shoot differently to better performance. The pictures are a little underexposed to begin with...

Foques · July 21, 2011

I find that I end up overexposing images when shooting with high ISO, just so I could reduce the noise in PP.

i'm really anxious to see the d800 specs.. one more month..:)

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

Foques wrote: »

I find that I end up overexposing images when shooting with high ISO, just so I could reduce the noise in PP.

i'm really anxious to see the d800 specs.. one more month..:)

yeah, no kidding. That is my plan. The D800. Thanks for you help

tenoverthenose · July 21, 2011

My recipe for dark environments is my 5dII & fast glass. I would say that flash glass is more important than hi iso (1.4 is two stops faster than 2.8 - lots of light) but if you are not familiar with it, a dark church is not the place to experiment. A fast wide & tele will do wonders in a dark church. And with the lighting you are describing, it will look great opened up.

mpriest13 · July 21, 2011

tenoverthenose wrote: »

My recipe for dark environments is my 5dII & fast glass. I would say that flash glass is more important than hi iso (1.4 is two stops faster than 2.8 - lots of light) but if you are not familiar with it, a dark church is not the place to experiment. A fast wide & tele will do wonders in a dark church. And with the lighting you are describing, it will look great opened u.4 p.

Yeah, that is kinda what I was wondering but the problem I have with shooting primes wide open is I can't seem to get them very sharp. The depth of field is so thin that I get too many less than tack sharp pictures. Do you think that would improve with a D700 when compared to the D300.

I have a 501.4 that I use on occasion around the house with the kids but when I shoot at 1.4 I get some nasty halo effects and less than sharp pictures. I LOVE the lens most of the time but I am scared to use it for a wedding. I would rather use the pro 35 1.4 and 85 1.8 for something as important as a wedding.

tenoverthenose · July 21, 2011

Yes, shooting at 1.4 or 1.2 is tough - there is no way around it. With modern bodies, I can't recommend calibrating your lens/body combo perfectly. Shooting wide open on a fast prime will often reveal slight flaws with your autofocus. With such a shallow DOF it will be tough at best to nail your focus, and you will need to.

A higher quality lens will reduce CA (haloing) a bit, but shooting wide open in with bright contrasty scenes will be problematic. Of course, each lens is totally different. Some lenses will be acceptably sharp at 1.4, others might need to be stopped down just a bit.

All of this to say that you need experience knowing what tool to use when. For example, I know that sometime I may be better off to use my 85 1.2 at f2 and 3200 iso because of lighting conditions instead of f1.2 and iso 1200. You need to know your gear inside and out.

Qarik · July 21, 2011

d700 with 24-70mm with good shooting technique should be fine. If you want to make sure you can try iso 3200-6400 on your D300 at 2.8 and 1/50 sec in a similar lighitng scenario to check for exposure only..3200 on D700 is fine, 6400 needs some attention to technique.

Matthew Saville · July 21, 2011

Honestly, when the light gets really bad, I don't mess around with f/2.8 or stabilization. I go to f/1.4, and if necessar I shoot wider and closer. (A 35 f/1.4 will let you shoot at a slower shutter speed than an 85 1.4, I mean...)

=Matt=

bnlearle · July 21, 2011

I agree with Matt. F/1.4 or f/1.2 are key for low light situations.

NeilL · July 21, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

A 35 f/1.4 will let you shoot at a slower shutter speed than an 85 1.4, I mean

=Matt=

...and with more dof

Neil

Gear question?

Comments