# Ideal Wedding Setup



## WDodd (Oct 2, 2007)

I recently shadowed a photographer in my area while he did a wedding who shot purely film with somewhat older gear. We were talking about going digital and what he would want to do it "right" as he put it. 

I am curious to see what everyone's dream setup would be for shooting weddings. :thumbup::mrgreen:


----------



## Sideburns (Oct 2, 2007)

he would need exactly the same stuff, just he'd need a digital body instead of a film body.  Nothing is different, unless he gets a camera with a crop factor.


----------



## WDodd (Oct 2, 2007)

Yeah we talked about what his setup would be if he switched over. I was just wondering what everyone else's was.


----------



## thebeginning (Oct 2, 2007)

Here's my 'ideal' setup, some of which I have, some which I dont:

two bodies, a 1d3 and a 5d (1ds3 is probably overkill).

3 zooms, 3 primes:
canon 16-35 2.8L
canon 24-70 2.8L
canon 70-200 2.8L IS
canon 35mm 1.4L
canon 85mm 1.2 IIL
canon 135mm f2L

2 580ex II speedlights (i'd probably have 2 more for backups too), with battery packs 

that's just the straight up camera equipment


----------



## Peanuts (Oct 2, 2007)

Ditto what Daniel said and throw in a T&S


----------



## subimatt (Oct 2, 2007)

dream setup?

1Ds MIII, 5D, 5D

24-70L 2.8, 70-200L 2.8IS, 35L, 85L, 15mm fisheye. 3x580EX's


----------



## thebeginning (Oct 2, 2007)

Peanuts said:


> Ditto what Daniel said and throw in a T&S




ohh that's a nice point.  i'd probably stick with the 90mm, not positive though


----------



## Big Mike (Oct 3, 2007)

That sounds like a good list to me...maybe add a Macro lens and a few more 580EX II units.


----------



## sabbath999 (Oct 3, 2007)

Not that I am doing weddings, but here's what I would get if I were:

2 Nikon D3's
Nikkor 18mm f/2.8d
Nikor 28mm f/2.8d
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4d
Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 VR Macro
Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED
Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G VR
5 SB800's with 3 lightstands, umbrellas, etc
Pocket Wizards for all remote strobes.

If I were taking wedding pictures, this is the rig I would use as a minimum. This isn't a dream package either, this is actually what I would buy (waiting, of course, until the D3 is released next month).


----------



## Peanuts (Oct 3, 2007)

How about a Quantum battery pack for the flash there we go, now we are all perfectly outfitted (and/or squished)


----------



## Big Mike (Oct 3, 2007)

Don't forget about an assistant to carry all of that stuff


----------



## AprilRamone (Oct 3, 2007)

This discussion is very interesting to me.  
I'm sure this question should probably go under the equipment discussion area, but I'll post it here for the sake of convenience

Can someone explain to me why you would want to have a 35mm fixed lens and an 85mm and 135 mm fixed lens in addition to the zoom lenses  (the 16-35 and the 70-200)  that you have listed there?  
I thought that I had read somewhere on here that fixed lenses are better because they are sharper.  Is this a reason?  Is it because the fixed lenses that you have listed are also slightly faster?  (Are they sharper because they are faster?) Are there other reasons I am missing?
-April


----------



## wildmaven (Oct 3, 2007)

Big Mike said:


> Don't forget about an assistant to carry all of that stuff


 
Top of MY list!!!


----------



## Big Mike (Oct 3, 2007)

> I thought that I had read somewhere on here that fixed lenses are better because they are sharper. Is this a reason? Is it because the fixed lenses that you have listed are also slightly faster? (Are they sharper because they are faster?) Are there other reasons I am missing?


That's pretty much it...sharper (also better color & contrast) and faster.  Being faster allows for faster shutter speeds, which is especially good when you can't (or don't want to) shoot with flash.  

I wouldn't say that they are sharper _because_ they are faster...however, most lenses are sharpest when stopped down a stop or two.  So if you have an F2.8 zoom lens, your sweet spot might be F4 or F5.6.  If you have an F1.4 or F1.8 prime lens...the sweet spot may be at F2 or F2.8.  So you can shoot with a wider aperture and also be in the sweet spot.

If that doesn't convince you...then try out a top of the line prime lens for yourself...the results may be surprising.


----------



## AprilRamone (Oct 3, 2007)

Thanks Big Mike!  I was just curious because I'm trying to figure out what I need most first and just didn't want to miss any other reasons there might have been.  
And, I HATE using flash so I'm obviously convinced 
It's too bad that most receptions are so dang dark!


----------



## sabbath999 (Oct 3, 2007)

Big Mike said:


> Don't forget about an assistant to carry all of that stuff



I never once shot a wedding without one. Trust me, this new stuff is compact compared to carrying around a fully kitted out pair of Hasselblad C500's, a billion or so film backs, the big Metz strobes of the day with their 3 pound battery packs, and a Speedotron Blackline lighting setup, etc. No such a thing as a "Hassy zoom lens" back in the day.

Digital cameras today with their fast zooms, small primes, and tiny speedlights are a cakewalk when it comes to having to tote it around.


----------



## JIP (Oct 3, 2007)

sabbath999 said:


> Not that I am doing weddings, but here's what I would get if I were:
> 
> 2 Nikon D3's
> Nikkor 18mm f/2.8d
> ...


This hit it pretty close for me but I would switch a D3 for a D300 (don't want to get greedy) and take out the 18, 28 and, the 50 and a couple SB-800's and add in a 12-24 and a 17-55


----------



## sabbath999 (Oct 3, 2007)

I understand where you are coming from JIP, but I have kind of a different take on the D3's. Wedding photography, to me, screams big sharp prints from images shot in low light, and what I have seen (so far that is) from the D3 is absolutely unbelievable high ISO performance. I haven't seen D300 high ISO shots yet, but I am betting with the 12mp resolution on a smaller sensor, there's no way it is going to be nearly as clean as a D3.

So that means D3's over D300's. When I am doing a shoot, I don't want to mess around with cameras that are different. When I shot weddings "back in the day" I would always shoot two of the same exact cameras. Most I shot with C500's after I traded up from a matched pair of RZ67's (which were the absolute bomb in the 80's), which in turn had replaced a rather battered pair of RB67's that I started out with. I want to be able to pick up a camera and handle it flawlessly, knowing exactly where everything is by feel, and I can't do that with different bodies... I am always reaching for a switch or button that is in a different place.

As far as the primes go, I love primes for shots I can take time on... they are simply sharper than the (wonderful) zooms you mentioned. I don't feel the need in my proposed setup to have an 18 wide zoom, since the D3's are full sensor, the 24-70 would be my "ceremony" lens.

The reason I went with five flashes is that it gives me three to put on stands in the church to fully illuminate the wedding party and alter, plus one more each to keep on each camera at all times... very useful for the big wedding party shots.


----------



## JIP (Oct 3, 2007)

Well I really was just altering your list to fit me because yours was so close to mine it was easier that way.  And yes I agree I started with twin Brinica Etrsi's.


----------



## S2K1 (Oct 3, 2007)

thebeginning said:


> Here's my 'ideal' setup, some of which I have, some which I dont:
> 
> two bodies, a 1d3 and a 5d (1ds3 is probably overkill).
> 
> ...


Make it two 1d3's, a fisheye, and 1 more 580EX II with light stands for two of them, and you've got my setup.


----------



## WDodd (Oct 10, 2007)

Very interesting everyone thanks a lot! I was thinking as I was reading everyone's posts that maybe I should've made a bare minimum to do a wedding thread. But that probably wouldn't of been as fun.


----------

