# HELP, first time Wedding Photo Shoots



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

I have two friends wanting me to take professional photographs of their weddings in July and August of 2008.  They have seen my nature photography and figure I can take wedding pictures as well.  I have little training in portrait photography, much less the psychological/socialogical aspects of wedding photography.  It makes me nervous to think I could mess up a friends wedding by not taking the right shots.

My friend said he would buy the digital camera for me, a Canon Rebel XTi two months in advance so I can get familiar with it and make sure it works.  I will get the extras, such as flash, lens and what not and charge only cost for the prints that they choose.  I have a Canon Elan 7NE and Canon Rebel GS and will use those for Black and White photos as well as Infrared.  I have a Canon 20-35 USM f/3.5, Canon Macro 100 USM f/2.8 (love the background blur!), Canon 35-80 f/4 III (came with rebel g) and a Sigma 100-300 f/4.5 DL (not that great at full zoom and super slow, obviously).

My question:  OMG!  Where do I start???  I have no idea how to take a flattering picture of a person, much less me being under stress...  What is considered ethical when taking the shots as far as "getting in the way" during the ceremony?  Where do I position myself?  They are both outdoor weddings (provided the weather is ok).  What flash units can I buy that are not too expensive (do I need one?) and most important, what lens should I buy that doesnt go beyond $600 or $700???

Is there anything that I should be prepared for that may be unexpected?  Should I bring all three cameras?  

Any particular books to read that I can buy?

ANY suggestions would be of great help!
Thanks!
Dan


----------



## JIP (Apr 3, 2007)

I don't wanna be a jerk here but if your friends want professional wedding photographs you should start by telling them to hire a professional wedding photographer especially if you are not confident in yuor abilities to do it.  If they are going to pay the money to buy you a camera they should just pay someone a little more to have them shoot it.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Apr 3, 2007)

Exactly, do yourself, and your friends a favor and DO NOT PHOTOGRAPH THEIR WEDDING. They WILL be disappointed, and you will regret doing it.


----------



## Leo (Apr 3, 2007)

I would suggest attending a church wedding of somebody you don't know. Normally the church announces church weddings in their newsletters. Sit in the back and observe the photographer(s) and how he shoots the wedding. This is how I started, watching other photographers do the work. I also would suggest reading a book, Wedding Photography (Art, Business and Style) by Steve Sint. Excellent book, IMHO.

Good luck.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

JIP said:


> I don't wanna be a jerk here but if your friends want professional wedding photographs you should start by telling them to hire a professional wedding photographer especially if you are not confident in yuor abilities to do it.  If they are going to pay the money to buy you a camera they should just pay someone a little more to have them shoot it.



I anticipated this response. I have mentioned this to my friends as well - as far as hiring a "professional" photographer to do it, but they insist and encourage me. I do not doubt that I have the ability to learn and am willing to take the extra steps to do it. I am a talented individual that may lack only in a business sense (I am not professional because I have not made money with my photography yet). Yes, I do put forth a shy nervous front - but WHEN does one jump into the cold water to learn? I only feel nervous and if I did not, it would only be then that I would mess it up, when I do not care. That is why I am here on this forum. Asking advice. Making the first steps. Have any suggestions as where I should start other that run with my tail under my legs???
I am glad that my friends have faith in my abilities.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

Sw1tchFX said:


> Exactly, do yourself, and your friends a favor and DO NOT PHOTOGRAPH THEIR WEDDING. They WILL be disappointed, and you will regret doing it.



Have you ever done wedding photography?  If so, when and how did you start?  I need to know.
Thanks!


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

Leo said:


> I would suggest attending a church wedding of somebody you don't know. Normally the church announces church weddings in their newsletters. Sit in the back and observe the photographer(s) and how he shoots the wedding. This is how I started, watching other photographers do the work. I also would suggest reading a book, Wedding Photography (Art, Business and Style) by Steve Sint. Excellent book, IMHO.
> 
> Good luck.



Thank you!  So far the best informational response. I will get that book and read it front to back.  Awesome.  I have watched wedding photographers before but not with enough focus.   I have a friend that might let me shadow him.  Any lens suggestions?


----------



## dewey (Apr 3, 2007)

Okay this is the opinion of someone who shoots weddings professionally, so don't take it too harsh - it's not personal it's a business question.  

I can see two options:

1) say thanks, but no thanks and continue to be friends.

2) say thanks, take the camera (that's a wierd one) and try to learn.

Please note you should only choose option 2 if it won't hurt too much when these friends are no longer your friends.  The very questions you are asking screams you are nowhere near ready for this.  It's like me saying I'll buy you a gun if you'll be the sheriff in my town... having the gun doesn't make you a cop.

If the wedding is in 08 and that's not a typo I would get with a local professional and start learning - it's the only way you'll do really well.  Also if you choose to do it get some books - go look at them at your local bookery. 

If it is a typo and it's 07 I wouldn't even think about it.

Reality check:  None of the euipment you speak of in your post, except maybe the macro is built for a wedding.  You also keep saying "nothing too expensive".  Anything worthy of wedding duty is expensive.  You need at the very least a fast lens and memory and a good flash and lots of battery power... on and on the list is long.  You even ask if you even need a flash.  It's just silly to consider this with your current level of photogaphic experience.

In the end if you do decide to do it make sure they know they are not going to get professional results - but hopefully your studying will get them some good shots.

"It makes me nervous to think I could mess up a friends wedding by not taking the right shots."

It should make you nervous.

I have invested a lot of time, sweat, tears and a *whole* lot of money to be a wedding photographer - it's a business and not a hobby.


----------



## JIP (Apr 3, 2007)

If you really want a book stay away from Art Business Style it has some good posing guides but they ae nothing ou can't get online with a little looking.  The photos and techniques in that book are also extremely outdated.  A really great book is [ame]http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Wedding-Photography-Capturing-Beautiful/dp/0471790176/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-9350429-6777424?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175654712&sr=8-1[/ame] I usually just flip through books of this nature and skim the text this one I did actually read cover-to-cover.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

dewey said:


> Okay this is the opinion of someone who shoots weddings professionally, so don't take it too harsh - it's not personal it's a business question.
> 
> I can see two options:
> 
> ...



Well, Im not sure if i post a response that anyone who has responded will know...  but here ' goes.

DEWEY
Thanks for the info. That does help. I do think I am willing to dive in and it is in fact in 2008. I am in school for Web Programing and am thinking about taking and elective Photography course in fall of 2007... even though I have been a photographer for 15+ years. It couldnt hurt. I would be ready by the wedding dates.

Yes, I know flash is invaluable even in outdoor situations (the weddings are outdoors) to light subjects in the foreground. Im just wondering WHAT should I purchase. Brand, type etc. Diffuser, reflector etc. Considering that I do know more than the basics of photography, what tips can I find in regards to dealing with people, setting up... etc. OK... so I might have to spend a bit on memory as well. 8 Gigs is a bit... however I will have my laptop to upload should the need arise and I will have two film cameras for back up and IR shots as well. Im thinking this lens as a purchase:Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO.

Although for years it has been a hobby of mine, it is time that I make money from it. If you are interested, here is what I am capable of http://quixoticsage.deviantart.com/gallery/  but not even a full line of what I photograph.  If I scream amature, let me know... I will take anything into consideration.

Thanks again for you input! I know that I cant be perfect at first, and realizing the consequences only make me want to learn harder and climb further. Thanks for your encouragement!
Dan


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

JIP said:


> If you really want a book stay away from Art Business Style it has some good posing guides but they ae nothing ou can't get online with a little looking.  The photos and techniques in that book are also extremely outdated.  A really great book is http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Weddi...6777424?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175654712&sr=8-1 I usually just flip through books of this nature and skim the text this one I did actually read cover-to-cover.



Thanks again.  You rock.  BTW, uh...  do you get these responses from me?  Not sure if I have to "quote" to respond directy or if I just "post" eh... im tired.  Thanks again!
Dan


----------



## dewey (Apr 3, 2007)

With that much time I would say you'll be fine.  A good way to get ideas about weddings is simply search the web and look at photographers websites.  From there of course you just have to fill in the blanks and learn how to get consistant results in less than ideal conditions.  Bad lighting conitions abound in weddings so practice in the dark... learn how much you can boost the ISO before noise becomes an issue... Outside weddings have bad lighting issues too... be ready for the bright sun with a white dress.

The flash is critical - the wedding being outside means you will need to learn how to get a good balance with the flash.  Also practice shooting something shiney and white on someone in the sun... you have a razor thin exposure target... shoot RAW for sure and start learning RAW software.

I think with that much lead time you will be able to learn enough to achieve what they are looking for... just read up and practice practice practice. :thumbup:


----------



## NJMAN (Apr 3, 2007)

I agree with dewey. Even though your friends say they have faith in you, do they really know what they are asking of you when you have no prior wedding photography experience? I got a lot of good feedback on equipment and technique in the post similar to this one, but only as a relative who is going to be practicing at 2 weddings this spring and summer. I wouldnt dare think about taking on a job like this yet. 

I do quite a bit of portrait photography, and I am very comfortable with that, but I know I am not even close to being ready to take on a wedding by myself. I admire your eagerness to learn and not wanting to let your friends down. Its quite an honor to be asked. For the wedding in July I will be practicing at, I was actually asked to shoot the wedding first, but I was smart enough to respectfully decline, because I knew I would not be ready in time.

And as far as the camera goes, a Rebel XTi is the bottom of the line for advanced amateur/beginning professional. If you really want to grow in photography, you might want to consider the next levels of Canon, the 30D or the 5D. As dewey says, it gets expensive, but if you are really committed to learning all ins and outs, it is well worth it.

I also have the book by Steve Sint (got it as a gift), and I like it. But I have to agree that it focuses on a lot of generalities, and you can get updated info on methods and techniques on websites.

Oh, and a very important study tool, if you can find some, is to examine the EXIF data on indoor church shots with no flash!  You will start to get an idea of how your camera willl work in that type of lighting (or lack of).


----------



## dewey (Apr 3, 2007)

Yeah don't get me wrong - everyone has to start somewhere.  But the equipment you list is still going to make it that much more difficult on you.

I would track down local wedding photogs and see if you can get a gig as an assistant... before I got the more permanent assistant I use now I always used to use local photog students.

You really just have no idea what to expect until you participate in one and the first should be your friends.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

NJMAN said:


> ...
> And as far as the camera goes, a Rebel XTi is the bottom of the line for advanced amateur/beginning professional. If you really want to grow in photography, you might want to consider the next levels of Canon, the 30D or the 5D. As dewey says, it gets expensive, but if you are really committed to learning all ins and outs, it is well worth it.
> 
> I also have the book by Steve Sint (got it as a gift), and I like it. But I have to agree that it focuses on a lot of generalities, and you can get updated info on methods and techniques on websites.
> ...



The Rebel XT is the bottom, XTi is quite a step up with 10+ megapixels (yeah, I know megapixels doesnt make the camera - but its canon optics...).  I would like the 30D, but I think... why?  If it was full frame, heck yeah... but the only advantage I can see is that it is a light bit faster... im probably missing something though.  Its only 8+ megpxls.  SO i dunno.  More research to do here!  EXIF data noted.  Thanks!


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

dewey said:


> Yeah don't get me wrong - everyone has to start somewhere.  But the equipment you list is still going to make it that much more difficult on you.
> 
> I would track down local wedding photogs and see if you can get a gig as an assistant... before I got the more permanent assistant I use now I always used to use local photog students.
> 
> You really just have no idea what to expect until you participate in one and the first should be your friends.



Thanks man!  I will update my equipment with some research and look into assisting local photogs - accent that with study, reading and lots of forum posting, web surfing and constant thinking of how and what to do (I drive myself nuts and cant sleep sometimes due to OCD... even dream it).  I have more than a year to start but glad I posted tonight for sure!  Good stuff.


----------



## Leo (Apr 3, 2007)

danchevalier said:
			
		

> Im thinking this lens as a purchase:Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO


 
that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 3, 2007)

Leo said:


> that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.



You are satisfied with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8?  Not too soft?  I just worry about consistancy with Tamron lenses (same model, different build quality between purchases)... however would consider this a big option since I have a 100mm canon lens to cover the longer end.  Hows the background blur on that lens?  Hmm hmm hmmmm... Another option!


----------



## dewey (Apr 3, 2007)

I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.


----------



## quixoticsage (Apr 4, 2007)

dewey said:


> I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.



Well, I think you disagree with the tamron lens being overkill?  Well, if I can get the money for the big guns, then why not get the Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO I suppose.  If I already have a 20-35mm than 70-200 just makes sense... the only thing I am missing is a fast 50 mm....  not sure if I can come up with that cash, but who knows in a years time.


----------



## Garbz (Apr 4, 2007)

dewey said:


> I disagree - a lens in that range is perfect for ceremony and reception shooting.



It depends entirely on how you will work. As the photographer you have freedom to move around during the wedding. Although do it VERY discretely. My 18-70mm would have been great for the last wedding I was at. Unfortunatley the only thing I had on hand was an old manual 50mm f/1.8 which caused big problems for the group photos but worked fantastically for pictures of the couple.


----------



## dewey (Apr 4, 2007)

That's very true - I just think the 70-200 range is perfect for a wedding no matter what your style.

I carry a 17-55 on one body and a 70-200 on the other body, so I can grab those candid moments without running across the room.


----------



## Mike_E (Apr 5, 2007)

Take what you have and find a wedding pro that will let you tag along.  After you have seen what you need to be doing, find some one who will let you be a second shooter.  In the mean time go here and get started on classic posing. 

http://jzportraits.home.att.net/ 

Every thing starts from there (if you can't tell what you're doing wrong, you'll never know what exactly you are doing right)


----------



## Moxi (Apr 5, 2007)

Ive been in the same position and if they are asking you to do such an important thing for them, relax and do it. Get on the web and familiarize yourself with at least 10 of the standard wedding poses. You know, Bride/Groom alone, B/G with B's family, then with G's family. Then Best Men alone, Bridesmaids alone, then all together. Then one of the whole wedding party. 
Go early and take pictures of everything set up but before people arrive. Take lots of pictures of the wedding elements such as flowers, rings, veil, tux and tie, shoes, cake, presents, church altar, etc. 
Some of the things I found that helped alot was to make sure you understand about preventing redeye. Even if you can eliminate it in post-developing its still a horror to see. Then make sure the rest of the shots are candid. For the most part just wander around and take pictures of guests, of couple holding hands, or holding babies. 
During the ceremony make sure you get the exchange of rings and dont you dare miss the kiss! 
Youre going to do fine!


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 5, 2007)

Leo said:


> that lens is overkill IMHO, you won't need a zoom lens, I suggest the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens.


 
Leo..... You do realise the 17-55 is a zoom lens too :lmao: 

I say get both.  A telephoto zoom is a fantastic lens to use at a weddding. Great for candids and portraits.  A long lens used close up to the subject and away from a background is the perfect way for those shots with smooth bokeh (background blur).

You need 2 fast zooms.  A 17-50 and a 70-200 are perfect and used on 2 cameras you can switch quickly.  I'll add more comments as I read more but listen to Dewey as he makes a lot of sense.


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 5, 2007)

OK here's my 2 cents.

Why buy a digital camera at all?? 

You have been shooting film for years and have some great images in your gallery all shot with film! Use your film cameras. Learning digital takes time and it's easy to forget things that you would not normally need to think about on a shot by shot basis (ISO springs to mind).

Regards equipment my basic setup is as follows..... Work out the cost yourself. I've also added some tips on what you should think about.

20D
XT (2nd body and backup)

Zooms - You need 17-200 coverage over 2 or 3 lenses. If I was to choose again I'd have the 17-55 f2.8 IS and would still use the 70-200 f2.8L IS

I use the following
Canon 10-22 f3.5-4.5 - (Used for creative wide angle shots)
Tamron 28-75 f2.8 - Fast zoom for use in church and as a backup for the 24-105
Canon 24-105f4L IS - My preferred formals lens for groups
Canon 70-200 f2.8L IS - Fantastic all-rounder and always on one of my cameras. Church, formals (particularly single portraits), reception - amazing!!!

Primes - You need at least 2 fast zooms for dark churches, receptions and low evening light use without flash. As your weddings are outside this may not be so much a priority but will help later in the evening when light is low.

I use the following

50mm f1.4 - You can also look at the 50mm f1.8 - canon's cheapest lens (and a great one)
85mm f1.8 - Another great portrait lens.
100 f2.8 Macro - Use this for detail shots of the cake, rings, flowers etc. Also a great portrait lens in good light.

Use of flash I try no minimise however in bright light outside you may find dark shadows very difficult to live with. Use of a flash that has high speed mode will really help and you can add just a pop of flash to lighten these shadows.

The canon 580EX flash is probably a must have item - preferably 2
I also use a Sigma 500DG super as a backup flash but it's not as well built or easy to use as the canon.

Diffusers - Sto-Fen or a fong will help soften the light from your flash. Everyone has different ideas on the best. A cut off milk carton taped to the head works amazingly well!!! Buit perhaps you don't want to look that daft 

I now have 8Gb of CF memory (very easy to shoot this amount) and I have an Epson P-2000 for backup. Laptops are too slow and while you try to use these for backup you are missing shots. Think about hiring an assistant for the days (a wife/friend etc) who can backup for you and carry your gear. I also have other lenses like the Tamron 17-35mm f2.8-4 and the amazing Canon 300f4L IS - I don't use this at weddings though and use a 1.4 converter if I need to be close and have enough light.

Depending on the situation, you may also need a decent tripod as well.


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 5, 2007)

danchevalier said:


> You are satisfied with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8? Not too soft? I just worry about consistancy with Tamron lenses (same model, different build quality between purchases)... however would consider this a big option since I have a 100mm canon lens to cover the longer end. Hows the background blur on that lens? Hmm hmm hmmmm... Another option!


 
To further add the 17-50 is not soft by most of the accounts I've heard although I can't testify as I've not used it but it's a pretty decent lens.  

The 100mm Macro is not that long a lens!  The 70-200 will be much more use.

You ask about background blur on a lens?? The Bokeh is a factor of 4 things.  Focal Length, aperture selected, distance to subject and subject's distance to background. Most (if not all) f2.8 and faster lenses will be able to blur a background better than smaller aperture lenses but it's how you use the camera and position your subject to get great bokeh this that makes the difference.


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 5, 2007)

danchevalier said:


> Well, I think you disagree with the tamron lens being overkill? Well, if I can get the money for the big guns, then why not get the Sigma 70-200 f 2.8 EX DG APO MACRO I suppose. If I already have a 20-35mm than 70-200 just makes sense... the only thing I am missing is a fast 50 mm.... not sure if I can come up with that cash, but who knows in a years time.


 
The 20-35 3.5-4.5 lens is slow for a wedding lens but as you are using outside it may be ok. How's the sharpness?

The 50mm f1.8 is the cheapest lens Canon make. Not a fab wedding lens but sharp and very fast - great for low light use.  Any Canon user should have the nifty fifty in his bag - unless he has the 50f1.4 or the 50f1.2L


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 5, 2007)

danchevalier said:


> The Rebel XT is the bottom, XTi is quite a step up with 10+ megapixels (yeah, I know megapixels doesnt make the camera - but its canon optics...). I would like the 30D, but I think... why? If it was full frame, heck yeah... but the only advantage I can see is that it is a light bit faster... im probably missing something though. Its only 8+ megpxls. SO i dunno. More research to do here! EXIF data noted. Thanks!


 
8-10Mp is nothing really. The 30D is an easier camera to use than the XTi.  THe XTi has functions located in menus and the 30D can change things by pressing one button and rotating a dial. the 30D is built better and feels more robust in use.  It's a close choice between the two and I suspect by the time the weddings come around there will be a new kid on the block..... 40D or something similar.....


----------



## dewey (Apr 5, 2007)

That's a great point.  Having commands at easy reach is much easier to work with than digging through menus.


----------



## Leo (Apr 5, 2007)

EOS_JD said:


> Leo..... You do realise the 17-55 is a zoom lens too :lmao:


 
Ddooohhhhhh.....yeah i know....you know what i mean! :blushing:


----------



## Leo (Apr 5, 2007)

EOS_JD said:


> 8-10Mp is nothing really. The 30D is an easier camera to use than the XTi. THe XTi has functions located in menus and the 30D can change things by pressing one button and rotating a dial. the 30D is built better and feels more robust in use. It's a close choice between the two and I suspect by the time the weddings come around there will be a new kid on the block..... 40D or something similar.....


 
I totally agree on this one, I just recently upgraded my camera from an XT to a 30D. The 30D is much easier and faster in changing camera settings. I had a customer who also got the XTi, bigger screen, but missing the thumb wheel.


----------



## Leo (Apr 5, 2007)

danchevalier said:


> You are satisfied with the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8? Not too soft? I just worry about consistancy with Tamron lenses (same model, different build quality between purchases)... however would consider this a big option since I have a 100mm canon lens to cover the longer end. Hows the background blur on that lens? Hmm hmm hmmmm... Another option!


 
I am very happy with my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens. It's not too soft, great in low light conditions. It's half the price of a similar Canon lens, that's the only reason why I bought it. I would love to have the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens but I am on a thight budget here. 

Like Garbz said it really depends on how you work, I like to work up close, it doesn't bother most of my clients, so the Tamron 17-50mm lens is good enough for me. If the lighting is not too bad, I just switch to my Canon 28-135mm IS lens. Not a very fast lens but it works on most situations.


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 6, 2007)

Leo said:


> Ddooohhhhhh.....yeah i know....you know what i mean! :blushing:


 
I know you know 

As you mentioned above it's down to how you shoot. In a wedding I believe a f/l like 17-50 is just too short - especially for close ups of exchange of ring and capturing the real emotion.  Sure you can do a posed shot after the ceremony but you lose that real emotion.

I love the 70-200.  You can also be a little more remote to stay out of the way and capture those wonderful candid moments.


----------



## thebeginning (Apr 7, 2007)

interesting thread indeed. 

I fully agree with dewey's posts and suggestions, but like he said, if this is in 2008 you should have enough time to learn what you need to know.  

as far as equipment goes:

the 30d is definitely a better wedding camera than the XTi.  not only does it have spot metering, a more robust body, and better ergonomics, but it also has a faster fps speed (which can be important) and a better AF (verrry important).  I would definitely recommend it.  

secondly, the lenses you use can depend on how you shoot a wedding...but generally speaking, the following lense ranges are *the best* for shooting weddings:

fast wide zoom:  17-50 2.8 tamron is a great choice
ultra-fast medium prime (s):  50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 from canon would be great (the 50 1.8 is sharp and all, but you'll want fast AF)
fast long zoom: 70-200 2.8  (the sigma you mentioned would work)

and no, the 70-200 would NOT be overkill...in fact it's practically the workhorse for weddings it's such a perfect range.


you'll also need at least one flash. I'd recommend the 580ex and the 430ex if you're on a budget, two 580ex's if money's not really an issue.  if money is ultra tight and you can only get one, get the 580.


----------



## NJMAN (Apr 10, 2007)

> The Rebel XT is the bottom, XTi is quite a step up with 10+ megapixels (yeah, I know megapixels doesnt make the camera - but its canon optics...). I would like the 30D, but I think... why? If it was full frame, heck yeah... but the only advantage I can see is that it is a light bit faster... im probably missing something though. Its only 8+ megpxls. SO i dunno. More research to do here! EXIF data noted. Thanks!


 
Even though the Rebel XTi has more megapixels than the XT, it is still a smaller, lighter camera than the 10D/20D/30D class.  I like the magnesium alloy body of the 30D.  It feels SOLID, something you can really hold on to.  Also, 8.2 megapixels in the 30D provides plenty of detail for 8x10, 10x13, 12x16, and even 16x20 prints if the focus is good enough.  I have seen samples of beautiful crystal clear prints in 16x20 with just a 20D.  

I will say though that the self-cleaning sensor in the XTi is a pretty sweet feature.  But I am learning how to clean the sensor effectively myself on the 30D.  The 30D is my starter camera, which also gives me plenty of room to grow.  My next goal is to eventually get the ever popular 5D, and make the jump to full frame.


----------



## Unreal Tuner (Apr 17, 2007)

Sounds like your friends are just trying to save some money which is understandable.  But like everyone else says, just practice and shadow another photographer to get the feel.  Good luck in whatever happens!


----------



## Deminia (Apr 18, 2007)

Hi! I posted in a previous post a couple days ago Pricing of wedding photography question??ethical and just wanted to make you aware of some insight from a recent bride's perspective. 

The wedding will go by fast (well mine did) and you have to be ready for any changes and a lot of people watching you work... as well as trying to photograph your setups and possibly getting in your way. You have to be aware of the time constraint that you are going to be under in order to get those shots done properly... and asking people to get out of your way is part of it.  Be prepared to work under a bit of pressure.

I've never photographed a wedding but as I said, I was just married (March 10th). I think as long as you have made it clear that you are not a professional wedding photographer and that their images are not going to be like "Bill and Judy's down the street"  you might be okay and also if she's not an uptight bride. 

Also - you really need to talk to the bride about what she wants - please her and it'll be ok. Be sure you're aware of any insecurities she may have about how she wants to be photographed. 

On a side note, and just my opinion, if you're going to stand to make money on the prints (outside of deal with bride and groom)... offer to shoot the family's of the wedding party together (like say the bridesmaid with her husband, child boyfriend or whatever) - I'll guarantee they'll buy a print. May sound silly but my photographer asked me if there were any shots that I would like to have photographed and I asked him if he wouldn't mind photographing my bridesmaid with her family so they could have a photo of them later, considering all 3 of them were in the wedding (bridesmaid, vibist ((played wedding music)) and flowergirl). This picture is something the would have never done outside of the wedding and something that they will cherish forever. Remember that people outside of the bride and groom WILL buy prints, especially if their child or family member was in the wedding party.  Most people are prepared to buy prints - so don't just cover costs.  Just food for thought...

Sorry if I went a little long but I'm trying to think of anything I could suggest from a low maintenence-photographer-bride's perspective.

On that note, and from a techinical/creative aspect - I think it's great you're thinking of taking along your old standbys (such as IR)... I think the bride will value those photos moreso then she may realize once she gets back the 1000's of old standard "pose and shoot" and "smile for the camera with Aunt Betty" shots that she'll get back from various sources.  

A bride wants her wedding to be special and unlike any other bride's wedding out there and to stand out (which a lot are alike).  The photos are going to be the ONLY thing in the end that are going to represent that day.  Sure there will be a video but a video doesn't sit out on your desk at work for your co-workers; nor does it sit in your living room on your mantle for your entire life and looked at almost everyday.  So... really...no pressure 

Best of luck...
~Demi


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 18, 2007)

Great points Demi.


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

EOS_JD said:


> .......
> 
> The 100mm Macro is not that long a lens!  The 70-200 will be much more use.
> 
> You ask about background blur on a lens?? The Bokeh is a factor of 4 things. Focal Length, aperture selected, distance to subject and subject's distance to background. Most (if not all) f2.8 and faster lenses will be able to blur a background better than smaller aperture lenses but it's how you use the camera and position your subject to get great bokeh this that makes the difference.



Hey, for some reason my subscription never emailed me all of these reponses...  but yes, background blur.  I know about focal length, aperature (wider=narrower fl, smaller= greater fl), circle of confusion, etc.  However, quality varies from one lens to the next.  I can only describe the background blurr with my Canon 100mm macro lens as gewy eye candy that you dont want to stop looking at.  THAT is what I am wondering about Tamron.  I own a tamron zoom that is abslutely horrible.  Background blurr is mudd.  So, I wonder... another tamoron lens?  I have heard that even within the same model and manufacturer that lens quality varies alot with Tamron.  Thats why I will opt for the Sigma or even shovel out the extra dough for the canon EF 70-200 2.8 (w/o IS) because I am postive that the background blurr will be superbly juicy as well as an infocus subject.

Yeah, the 100mm is not that long... you are right!

thanks!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

EOS_JD said:


> The 20-35 3.5-4.5 lens is slow for a wedding lens but as you are using outside it may be ok. How's the sharpness?
> 
> The 50mm f1.8 is the cheapest lens Canon make. Not a fab wedding lens but sharp and very fast - great for low light use. Any Canon user should have the nifty fifty in his bag - unless he has the 50f1.4 or the 50f1.2L



Yeah.. the 20-35 3.5 is slow... fast focus.. but slow.  Sharpness... WELLLL, honestly it takes alot of work and patience to get it SHARP unless its B&W photog.  Talking 3200 speed sharp.  Really good for that but with slide film, VERY persnickity (sp?).  Worked very well with my friends digital rebel XT (old version)... sooo...


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Mike_E said:


> Take what you have and find a wedding pro that will let you tag along. After you have seen what you need to be doing, find some one who will let you be a second shooter. In the mean time go here and get started on classic posing.
> 
> http://jzportraits.home.att.net/
> 
> Every thing starts from there (if you can't tell what you're doing wrong, you'll never know what exactly you are doing right)



Thanks!  Sorry it took awhile to respond... I was not getting email notifications... much appreciated!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Moxi said:


> Ive been in the same position and if they are asking you to do such an important thing for them, relax and do it. Get on the web and familiarize yourself with at least 10 of the standard wedding poses. You know, Bride/Groom alone, B/G with B's family, then with G's family. Then Best Men alone, Bridesmaids alone, then all together. Then one of the whole wedding party.
> Go early and take pictures of everything set up but before people arrive. Take lots of pictures of the wedding elements such as flowers, rings, veil, tux and tie, shoes, cake, presents, church altar, etc.
> Some of the things I found that helped alot was to make sure you understand about preventing redeye. Even if you can eliminate it in post-developing its still a horror to see. Then make sure the rest of the shots are candid. For the most part just wander around and take pictures of guests, of couple holding hands, or holding babies.
> During the ceremony make sure you get the exchange of rings and dont you dare miss the kiss!
> Youre going to do fine!



You rock!  Thanks!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Holy smacks... thats a grail of good info!  thank you sooo much!  I am inspired!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Thank you Daniel.  I have my notebook out and handwriting this (the best way for me to have it in my mind and easily accesed).  Greatly appreciated!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Thank you NJMAN!  duely noted!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

Thanks, Unreal!


----------



## quixoticsage (May 28, 2007)

WOW!  Demi, thank you soooo much for this info.  It is a good insight to what I should expect.  Sorry it has taken awhile to respond, but I had no idea that you or anyone had written since I did not recieve any email notifications.  Ooops.

They know my amateaur status with wedding photography, but they do know my creative side and have faith in that.

I think the IR will save me, but I have no doubt that I will catch the popular shots.  I have contact with the brides mother.  I think that should help alot!    SOOO, yes, please the bride, and all will be ok.

You can write anytime you want as much as you want.  You are a good writer/teacher.  Thanks again for putting effort into helping me.  I do hope to produce a good collection from this and will share it with you when I do.

Thanks again.  OH, and congrats!!!!

Dan


----------



## Duchan (May 30, 2007)

I covered my first wedding last June, having been asked to do so by my girlfriend's sister, who was the bride.  I thought my coverage of the wedding would amount to a decent wedding gift.  I used the Rebel XT and - yes, it is true - the kit lens, which, to state it mildly, does not at all compare favorably with my current choice in lenses.  I had no back up gear with me, because then I had no clue whatsoever of what a wedding photog needs and how to cover a wedding.  While the results of the coverage didn't turn out to be the absolute disaster, I would encourage you - strongly encourage you - not to rush in where angels fear to tread.  As a matter of fact, I just recently turned down an offer to cover a church wedding, because I lack the experience, mine being confined to covering town hall weddings in my community.  Don't rush in, despite your belief in your own talent, maybe try the second shooter option.  A church wedding is a very - very! - major event in the life of those getting wed, don't provide the couple with images that, when they look at them in their mutual days to come, will leave them disappointed.  And really, forget about the Rebel XT, toss the idea into the wind and invest in a more sophisticated cam and especially fast glass.  I didn't want to sound like a jerk in this message, just wouldn't want you to crash like Icarus.

Greetings from D.


----------

