Are there settings that will work better in the dark/moving environments?

@msmoto Your shots were totally acceptable to me...even those that you shot at 12,000+ ISO (i.e the one post a remark on...could not put the link here). Would a flash help, yes...specially if you had the Gary Fog Collapsible Lightsphere.

I was allowed to shoot some supplementary photos at my son's wedding this past weekend. And following my PAD posts for the last couple days will take someone to the "set" on Flickr.

My plans were to shoot two bodies, but the fact I had to be in the wedding at times, and was not allowed to wear my jeans and t-shirt, I decided the D4 with 24mm f/1.4. No fill. At times I utilized the videographers lighting..and at the cake cutting, where I was almost certain the mush in the face was to occur, I shot 8 FPS....

OK, the point....there are no doubt some of the photos on Flickr which are IMO marginal...needed a fill flash. But, the majority can be managed in LR 4.2 or other PP program and again, IMO are a more accurate representation of the situation than if I had added fill flash.

Conclusion: Two cameras, one with fill flash for the "lighting from H***" situations. And, while one needs big ISO, the second with fill might be only 6400 ISO.

Please understand, I have no problems with seeing a small amount of noise....

msmoto said:
I noticed a no budget restraints suggestion.... so D4, D800, 24mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, and if the lights are horrid, a soft box fill on camera with about a 1 f/stop down on the flash exposure, i.e., just for a fill...

+1, +1.5? :)

A lot of cameras will do the business. I'd be far more uptight about lighting.

I couldn't believe it, but I saw a used D600 for $1700 in the window of one of my favourite camera stores this afternoon! Even crazier was the fact that a used D800 was placed right next to it for $2750. Apparently the D600 will drop like a stone in pricing especially for used bodies and will register below a used D700 because of the body structure differences if you can believe it. Both bodies were mint and had 2,900 and 3,000 actuations respectively. andens grab a D600 it is super light and takes great images. The 24-70 will serve you perfectly as well.

I'd probably lean to a D600 backed up by a D7000. They share a lot of accessories - batteries, cable release, SD cards only, etc. And functionally, the shape of the body and placement of controls are similar. The D700 is a good camera, but I would choose the D600 and related updates at a little more money. The D700, D300, etc have accessories that are not compatible so the savings is not what you would like.

I would more to the pro lenses which is where your money will go. The 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 are the classic combination but you might try the 70-200 f/4. You'll probably want a couple of flash units - one for each camera and to make sure you have a backup.

I noticed a no budget restraints suggestion.... so D4, D800, 24mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, and if the lights are horrid, a soft box fill on camera with about a 1 f/stop down on the flash exposure, i.e., just for a fill...

R8R said:
I've shot a friend's wedding with the D7000 and it was totally usable. The images came out great. You need to know that thing inside and out though to make shooting fast and flexible. Put good glass on it.

+1

I've shot a friend's wedding with the D7000 and it was totally usable. The images came out great. You need to know that thing inside and out though to make shooting fast and flexible. Put good glass on it.

If I were committing to Nikon as a wedding photographer my choice would be D800 with a D600 backup. If you are strapped for cash at the moment, you should go for D700 to which you could add a D600 later then D800 when you are rich and famous (;-/). The important thing is that you are exclusively full frame and so your camera body will not affect the style of photo you take, just the ultimate resolution. Next decision is glass - start with 14-24 and 24-70 f2.8's if you can - you'll never sell them to upgrade.

Even if you do get a D7000 (DX sensor) body which is very cheap right now, you should get FX (full frame) glass so you can upgrade the body later.

HTH.

ask anyone you know if you can shoot their wedding casually. then rent a body and some lenses (stay out of the main photog's way).

then see if what you have shot is anywhere near good enough.

then think real hard about wedding photography and what you'll need.

I have $30000 worth of gear and years of experience and would still be nervous shooting a wedding by myself.

If you really can't afford a D800 look at the D600 and get the D800 later but if you are on very tight budget the D7000 will be fine. forget the D90 and the D300 both now very dated, the other option is a S/H D700

Used D7000? Or a used D300s? Or D90, used. I am thinking one might want to start out inexpensively and when the new iterations of the model come out...add a body. One needs a couple lenses. The kit lenses with a flash for weddings may be fine. Then as the price goes up, so does the quality. I am shooting a wedding on full frame with a 24mm, and on DX with an 85mm. No zoom.

There is no doubt a lot of folks have done extremely competent jobs at weddings with the D7000. I suppose it depends on whether someone is spending $500 or $5000 for the photos...

More to come from the experts.....

I would suggest using a D600 ($1,000 less than a D800 and available now - plenty of images from it on NR PAD) combined with the replacement for the D7000 (likely to be named the D7200 and likely to be out early next year).

Hi,

Apologies, if I'm in the wrong place, I have used this site intermittently before so may need guidance as to which is the best forum. However, my main question is relating to 'What is a good Nikon camera, to begin photographing weddings with? As a bit of a background to assist, I have for many years used film and still do almost all the time (current camera's include Nikon F3, Minolta Dynax 7 and 9, and a Mamiya RB67) in addition to digital I have been a Sony A100 user, since they came out. However, I'm not ready to commit to the new translucent sensor technology, as it is still new, and as Sony have stopped making standard DSLR's I'm reluctant to commit the the A900 if that is the end of the road for Sony Dslr's. I have been asked to photograph a number of weddings later in the year and next, I realise that one digital is not a good idea, and hence I am thinking of changing platforms to Nikon and have been looking a the D7000 as the my first digital Nikon. Probably to use as them main camera to begin, supported by the A100 if need be, although i recognise all the issues with lenses and flash I have a full compliment of these for the Sony, I would look to get these for the Nikon as soon as practical. I have also looked at the D800, but that for the time being is a little out of reach. So the question really is do you thing that the d7000 id an adequate camera fro weddings, whilst supported with the Sony and the RB for the portraits and art photo's - if the time allows. Many thanks for your thoughts.

OK, another note....for mhphoto.... go to a couple weddings you are not invited to and just watch from afar ( with permission). Or, if someone is getting married, and you are a guest, maybe you could help, as a volunteer, the official photographer. Like carry a backdrop or something. I do not let anyone be my grip unless they understand exactly what I want and can work like a surgical nurse. Hang around and ask questions when the photog is packing up...NOT during the shoot. If you can attend some weddings and just watch with permission, you can observe the sequence of events which takes place and is orchestrated by the photographer. And, if there is a wedding planner in your area, see if you can talk with them and ask how they like to have the photographer interact. Sometimes this can be a turf war and this you do not want. Allow the wedding planner to give you some ideas as to what they expect from the photog.

And then after learning about the horrible conditions you will be forced to shoot in, do a simulation or two of a wedding and shoot photos of the janitor, or any others who may be in the church or other...

Weddings seem so easy, yet you will need IMO, three bodies, two on you and a third within reach, all mounted with lenses. If flash is your game, three flash units all with new or charged batteries. Memory cards. Every system needs to have a redundancy. And, I would shoot a lot of exposures with the group photos as folks tend to look the other way, close their eyes, or whatever.

The wedding party is going to do this only once. And you have to get it right the first try.

Thanks for the up mhphoto

Out of interest, how do "light" your senior and family pictures,

I typically only shoot senior and family pictures, obviously I am new to weddings and I know the only way to become a wedding photographer is to practice and learn what the heck I am doing! They wedding that I will be the main photographer at is not in until one year from now and I plan to use that time to do what I need to in order to preform my best, both for myself and the couple.

All honesty appreciated and thank you for the tips so that I can begin practicing and experimenting over the next year

+1 for spraynpray & TaoTeJared

@ mhphoto: With all do respect...proceed with caution. This task takes lots of skill (and equipment) to get done correctly. Given what you have shared with us..you are not ready.

msmoto - I certainly agree.

Also, if you are a friend of the family photographer (not the official photographer), DO NOT take photos of the people the offical photog has posed until he is finished. Nothing more aggravating than having posed a group and to have another photog walk up near me and lift his camera. Even if he doesn't take a picture until after I do, guess what .... one of the people I've just posed will invariably be looking at the other photog, even when I repeatedly ask them to look at me, or look to the left, whatever. Grrrrrr.

@TaoTeJared +1

My experience suggests discussing with the "official" wedding photographer who you are at a wedding, and asking the photog to let you know if you are interrupting. I usually shoot some of the photog as well. And, finally, I rarely let my photos out of the bag until I have seen the work of the hired photographer.

I think the "nonofficial" photog should avoid flash. This is my personal preference as it will then in no way interfere with the other person's work. Also, no direction giving except in an isolated local away from the official shooter.

My approach to wedding photography is based upon Fonville Winans who taught me wedding shoots in the early1960's at a PPA school in Elkhart, Indiana. I do not remember if he was shooting Nikon, Leica, or other, but it was 35mm B & W. And, he was so phenomenal.

And as TTJ has suggested practice, practice, practice....

spraynpray said:
...
I may not need to say this - but I will anyway - you should not be doing wedding photography as 'the' photographer unless the quality of your work is going to make your client completely happy. The fact that you are asking pretty basic questions tells me you are not yet proficient enough to photograph weddings as the main photographer. For your own and (mainly) the happy couples sake, wait until you have everything from posing to techniques right. If you aren't the main photographer or assisting the main photographer, try not to get in his/her way, while you watch and learn. The problem with wedding photography is there is no second chance.
...

OUCH! So true though. I don't like weddings at all-there are great photogs out there so I let them take all them.

Considering the wording of the OP leads me to guess at two things;
One just getting going &
Two, either a family or family friend is getting married and they are allowing them to shoot at the reception along with a primary photographer or the primary is just doing the formal shots and they are getting ambient shots of the reception.

If you are shooting along side a primary photog, Make sure the couple getting married lets the photographer know who you are and they (the paid photog) are ok with it. Some contracts open the couple who hired them and you to be sued. I just had a friend pull that cr@# on me when I was asked to get some shots (non formal) at mutual friend's child's wedding. And that was a friend (photog) I went to school with and knew for 15 years. Some photographers do get really paranoid about it. Hadn't seen that particular contract before, but it was rock solid,very threatening and particular. She downloaded it from somewhere. Most photographers are fine with it as long as you are not formally posing people, etc. Everyone has been at the beginning point and has had those opportunities granted to them. If you are polite and ask, it shouldn't be a problem.

Once that is settled (may not happen to the day of the wedding) or if you are just shooting the reception, and/or to be prepared, do a google search on wedding receptions and copy some photos you would like to take as a reference and then look at the Strobist site above and learn how they took them and then see how you can use cls, and different modifiers to create something similar. The Gary Fong stuff is good (I use the collapsible pro kit), as well as a LumiQuest ProMax System that I like as well.

If you just want to get started and play, shoot indoors with the camera set to manual, aperture @ F/8, 1/15 shutter, ISO 200 (auto iso off), and flash at 1/1. Then start varying all the settings. F/5.6, 11, 16, 3.5, whatever your lenses can do) with the same shutter of 1/15th. Then leave the aperture at f/8 and do the same tests with different shutter speeds. Do test shots on a single subject at 6ft-ish away. Then you can move the light around, bounce it off of walls, etc. Buy a pack a batteries first though. :)

Many people trying to describe flash photography just plain stink and get overly technical for a beginner - or hell even me, and I think I know what I'm doing. When it really comes down to it, we all learn by trying a ton of settings and see what we like. Just because you are shooting in your basement with with a stack of pillows with a hat, doesn't mean you aren't gaining experience.

Oh, and read the manual - it really is quite good and not all that boring - well kind of.

spraynpray said:

Some very good advice .......................

..... I may not need to say this - but I will anyway ..........................

........more very good advice

On behalf of Wedding Photographers all over the wold

Thank you

Basic rules:

1/ R.T.F.M.

2/ If 1/ Hasn't answered your questions, visit Amazon and type SB-700 in the books section and buy a book on the CLS. That should get you heading in the right direction.

3/ DON'T do any weddings before you have rehearsed and mastered the best techniques for the job.

I may not need to say this - but I will anyway - you should not be doing wedding photography as 'the' photographer unless the quality of your work is going to make your client completely happy. The fact that you are asking pretty basic questions tells me you are not yet proficient enough to photograph weddings as the main photographer. For your own and (mainly) the happy couples sake, wait until you have everything from posing to techniques right. If you aren't the main photographer or assisting the main photographer, try not to get in his/her way, while you watch and learn. The problem with wedding photography is there is no second chance.

Sorry if that reads harsh, I didn't mean it to be it is just that there is a world of difference between being a wedding photographer and wanting to be one.

The short answer to your question is never use flash bare out of or in your hot shoe. There are many ways to use it that change the final image vastly. Buy and read a book to get the picture. Go to the strobist site too.

Hope I helped!

A popular misconception is that a diffuser (like the one which came with your sb-700) will soften light. This is wrong.

There are three properties of light which will affect your photos.

1. Strength
2. Direction
3. Size in comparison to subject

A diffuser changes the basically uni-directional flashgun light into a multi-directional lightsource. This MAY soften the light if some of the light then hits a large surface (eg. a wall or ceiling) and reflects back onto the subject. The diffuser is not emitting a softer light. The soft light is coming from the reflection off the large surface (the larger the light source in relation to subject, the softer the light). If you use a flashgun with a diffuser where there is nothing for the light to reflect from, the diffuser will not soften the light whatsoever (eg. outside). If you use a diffuser in an area with many different coloured surfaces to reflect from you will end up with many different colour casts in your photo.

Essential wedding kit would be an sc cable (pref the one with the af) a small flashgun softbox and a flash bracket.

Learn how to use them.