# Wedding question



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 8, 2014)

My friend has asked me to shoot her wedding, I've never done weddings and the thought of it makes me nervous. I was wondering what your typical go to lenses are for a wedding?


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 8, 2014)

all of them. 
depends on the venue and amount of people.


----------



## ronlane (Jul 8, 2014)

I don't have a "go to" lens for weddings. I politely decline the offer and tell them that I will help them find a good photographer to shoot it for them.

Now from what I've seen on here the answer to your question varies greatly, but the usual suspects are the 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, a 50mm, 85mm, and the 100 mm are ones that I recall people using most often.


----------



## e.rose (Jul 8, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> My friend has asked me to shoot her wedding, *I've never done weddings* and the thought of *it makes me nervous*. I was wondering *what your typical go to lenses* are for a wedding?



REFER THIS WEDDING TO A REAL WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHER.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 8, 2014)

There you go... good advice in big letters! From what I remember seeing of photos you've posted it seems like you're still learning; it might be better to decline and maybe offer some suggestions as to where the friend could find a photographer if you know of any.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 8, 2014)

e.rose said:


> SamiJoSchwirtz said:
> 
> 
> > My friend has asked me to shoot her wedding, *I've never done weddings* and the thought of *it makes me nervous*. I was wondering *what your typical go to lenses* are for a wedding?
> ...



Shhhh.. quiet folks.  I think E.Rose might be trying to tell us something here.  It's ok.. use your words.. tell us.. 

Rotfl


----------



## tirediron (Jul 8, 2014)

vintagesnaps said:


> There you go... good advice in big letters! From what I remember seeing of photos you've posted it seems like you're still learning; it might be better to decline and maybe offer some suggestions as to where the friend could find a photographer if you know of any.


Or, better yet...  see if you couldn't come in as a second shooter for the hired gun!


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 8, 2014)

tirediron said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > There you go... good advice in big letters! From what I remember seeing of photos you've posted it seems like you're still learning; it might be better to decline and maybe offer some suggestions as to where the friend could find a photographer if you know of any.
> ...



You know I think there's a plot for western movie in there somewhere.  Sadly though I think it starred Don Knotts.. lol


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jul 8, 2014)

I supposed your friend approach you hoping to get lower pricing?


----------



## e.rose (Jul 8, 2014)

tirediron said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > There you go... good advice in big letters! From what I remember seeing of photos you've posted it seems like you're still learning; it might be better to decline and maybe offer some suggestions as to where the friend could find a photographer if you know of any.
> ...



There's nothing wrong with never having done a wedding. We all start somewhere, but John is 100% right.

Refer the wedding out, and then contact the photographer and see if they'll let you assist and shoot in-between helping schlep equipment, or see if you can be a non-paid third shooter.

My VERY first wedding, I came into Nashville to visit for a week, before we moved here, and my friend hooked me up with Myrick Cowart, who was super nice and awesome and let me tag along as a third shooter on a wedding, just to get some wedding experience.

He didn't need me there. He had a second shooter, but he was totally willing to let me hang out and shoot, and he had me assist him in between shooting, and taught me a lot. I gave him my images when I was done, but he was kind enough to let me use them for my second shooter portfolio if I wanted.

If shooting weddings is something you want to do, then you need to do is start networking with photographers who will let you assist, third shoot, or second shoot with them, before you take on one of your own.


----------



## KmH (Jul 8, 2014)

A lot of B&G's do not have the financial means to hire a "real wedding photographer", let alone pay for a nice venue, catering, flowers and such.

Not withstanding the unfortunate fact that some of the "real wedding photographers" that shoot for pay (low pay especially) are actually real wedding fauxtographers.

Like Ron said, the go to lenses are typically 24-70 mm and 70-200 mm zooms. Though those are typical focal length ranges, a photographer may have a 24-85 mm zoom and an 80-200 mm zoom to cover essentially the same focal length ranges.
For indoor venues and a lack of light, 'fast" lenses are often preferred. Fast lenses also tend to have higher quality optics.
A lack of light can be overcome with a hot shoe or off camera flash - like maybe on a bracket.
Note that many wedding officiants do not allow flash photography during the wedding ceremony.


----------



## TCampbell (Jul 8, 2014)

1)  As Keith succinctly described... typically just two lenses...  a 24-70mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 (the f/2.8 bit is important ... particularly in the church.  If you check the dictionary, you'll find the definition of it is "a venue designed to ensure inadequate lighting for photography in which religious ceremonies commonly take place."  You don't have to take my word for it... check it yourself.  It really says that!)

2)  Back in "my day" a serious wedding photographer would use a medium format camera with an appropriate "normal" focal length lens for the format.  These were virtually never zoom lenses.  I used a Hasselblad 500 C/M medium format camera with an 80mm lens.  But 80mm is considered a "normal" focal length for that format size.  For a full-frame 35mm camera, a 50mm would be considered equivalent.  For an APS-C camera, a 35mm lens would probably be about the closest.   We would shoot the entire wedding with this -- at no point would we need to switch lenses.  The whole world of photography somehow managed to survive without a zoom lens back in those days and the results weren't just good... they were fantastic.    This is to say... I could shoot an entire wedding with a full-frame DSLR and 50mm lens and be completely in my element as I did this and confident of good results.

HOWEVER... we did have to use a few techniques to get some shots.  We generally could not approach the altar (not very close anyway) "during" the ceremony.  Many shots were re-created after the ceremony was completed.  This is something which is not often done today given that photographers can use long low-focal ratio lenses and get the shot during the ceremony.

3)  Lighting is a really big deal.  No wimpy flashes!  I used a Norman Lights flash off-camera and a Lumadyne flash on-camera.  These were very powerful units (and not cheap) with large wearable battery packs that you sling over your shoulder (about the size of a lunchbox... perhaps just a tiny bit smaller).   Those would get us through the day with no fear of running out of power (we always had spare gear including spare battery packs but never actually needed one... we never ran out of power even doing two weddings in one day.)

Could I do this today with speedlites... sure, I could.  But it needs to be couple of HIGH END speedlites... no entry-level models because they're too wimpy and unreliable.  Also bring plenty of spare batteries because as you use the speedlites, the recycle time will start to slow down and then you'll start to miss shots when the flash didn't fire because it was still waiting for the batteries to recycle the internal capacitors.

With all that said... much of wedding photography is psychology, knowing how to interact with strangers and get them to do what you want them to do (many of whom will not be particularly cooperative); knowing how to "model" people who are not professional models; and knowing the entire flow of a wedding and being able to anticipate "what comes next" and how to set the camera up and capture the next shot.  We were never "reactive" -- everything is anticipated and the camera is pre-set for what's coming next. 

Without that experience, you'll be getting surprised quite a bit.  You want to be able to rely on experience rather than luck to get you through the day with a bounty of great shots.

I can also tell you that psychologically there are certain shots that you had BETTER capture or the bride and bride's mom won't be happy.   I was at two different weddings (not as the photographer) in which neither photographer actually bothered to capture a solid photograph of the bride wearing her dress ... a full shot showing it all off.  When you think about how much time a bride spends picking out that dress only to wear it just ONCE... you can understand why they'd be upset to have no photographs of it (only parts of it.)

They usually want a photo of the cake... but little kids (and sometimes adults) cannot resist the urge to put their finger into the frosting.  You have to capture the cake before anyone can do that.  

These are the sorts of things that every experienced wedding photographer knows but photographers who don't shoot weddings often just don't think about.  

For this reason, while I realize that couples who can't afford an expensive top-notch in-demand wedding photographer would rather have a friend shoot it (usually for free... "it'll be your wedding gift to us") the BRIDE has NO CLUE that you need a considerably more than a camera to capture a good looking wedding album.  So when she asks her friends to do this, and the photos don't turn out... she BLAMES THE FRIENDS and then the friendship is ruined.

That is why as soon as someone says "my friend asked me to shoot their wedding".  I immediately respond with "convince them to get an experienced wedding photographer."

I don't recall the last time I saw the thread in which someone said "my friend asked me to shoot their wedding" -- with a follow-up post that explained how well it all went and how incredibly happy the bride is with the photos... because that almost never seems to be the result.  :-(


----------



## Tee (Jul 8, 2014)

I would be a hypocrite if I said to find another photographer as I found myself in your shoes 2 years ago.  I did a write up about it here:http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...learned-photographing-wedding-first-time.html

Now, I did turn them down a year prior to the wedding so I did tell them "no" but when I learned they didn't have anyone I couldn't fail my best friend.  After 2 years I've learned so much more I wish I could have a do-over.  They're still happy they got images and that's all that matters I guess.  

My biggest takeaway?  I didn't tell a story.  I took photos instead if that makes sense.  Also, I should've shot wide much more than I did.


----------



## Designer (Jul 8, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> I was wondering what your typical go to lenses are for a wedding?



Hey, there!  Are you considering obtaining some new glass for this?  If you are renting, that is understandable.  What lenses do you already have?  

Besides lenses, we might ask about flash, modifiers, a second camera, a second shooter, and how much is this worth?  I mean; is the bride so poor she cannot hire a photographer?  Is she going to pay you?  If so, how much?  What are you going to give her?  Is there going to be a written contract?  There are many questions yet to be answered.


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 8, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> My friend has asked me to shoot her wedding, I've never done weddings and the thought of it makes me nervous.



You should be nervous photographing a friends wedding even if it is not the first wedding you have shot. 

Are you prepared to no longer have this person as a friend if you screw up photographing the wedding?


----------



## manaheim (Jul 8, 2014)

Like tcampbell (who is always a good dude to listen to, btw), I primarily use the 24-70 and the 70-200. I do bring a second body with a super wide angle lens as well, but I used it fairly rarely.  I'll also sometimes use my 105 macro, but mainly just for giggles, since it's such an awesome lens.

And yeah, you might wanna consider not doing this, but 80 million other people are going to tell you that, so I won't add to the ruckus.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 8, 2014)

No guts no glory.  If you do shoot it, make sure you find another photographer friend who wants to get their feet wet in wedding photography to shoot together with you.  24-70 is the most versatile lens you can have.


----------



## elizpage (Jul 9, 2014)

Don't be discouraged based on the fact that you haven't shot a wedding before. Seeing as how none of these people have seen your images, you might just be better than they are. I know I've seen some work from "experienced pros" that is absolute garbage. But eh, it's all in the eye of the beholder I suppose.

I would say your basic lenses would be a 24-70mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.4 That's at least what I brought with me. I also had a 24 mm f/2.8 I had bought. If you have a place where you can rent the lenses, I would do that. borrow lenses.com is great if you want to have it shipped to you. I don't know how far out the wedding is though, time wise though.. But this would be a great thing to do if you have the time and money to do so.

I did the same thing that you did.. shot a wedding for a friend and was super nervous.. but instead of doing it alone, I brought along a photographer I knew had photographed weddings before. Many people on this website discouraged me from doing it, but I kept on trucking and the photos actually turned out okay! The bride loved them, and I got a lot of compliments on my use of composition. I also ended up learning a lot from the photographer who helped me and we're now good friends.

You never know what you are capable of unless you try. I would say to put out an ad or ask around to see if anyone in your area could help you photograph it. If you ask nicely, they might even do it for free (that's what happened to me!) I would recommend though definitely not doing it alone... that could end up disastrously in the situation that a battery dies (which happened to me twice, but I had a second to take all the family photos!)

Although it may not normally turn out this way, my friend was incredibly happy with the shots--even the really bum ones. She gave me $100 for my effort, and recommended me to all of her friends. After that, I was very encouraged, so I started my own business! I still use a lot of the shots from her wedding on my portfolio today (even though I'm new  ) 

So TLDR: Do it. Bring someone else though and make sure you have the right equipment.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

ronlane said:


> I don't have a "go to" lens for weddings. I politely decline the offer and tell them that I will help them find a good photographer to shoot it for them.  Now from what I've seen on here the answer to your question varies greatly, but the usual suspects are the 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200 f/2.8, a 50mm, 85mm, and the 100 mm are ones that I recall people using most often.



She doesn't want another photographer.. Lol she wants someone in her price range and I wouldn't charge her.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

Vince.1551 said:


> I supposed your friend approach you hoping to get lower pricing?



I wouldn't charge her, she doesn't have the budget to hire someone and pay them 2k. We've been close all of my life.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

KmH said:


> A lot of B&G's do not have the financial means to hire a "real wedding photographer", let alone pay for a nice venue, catering, flowers and such.  Not withstanding the unfortunate fact that some of the "real wedding photographers" that shoot for pay (low pay especially) are actually real wedding fauxtographers.  Like Ron said, the go to lenses are typically 24-70 mm and 70-200 mm zooms. Though those are typical focal length ranges, a photographer may have a 24-85 mm zoom and an 80-200 mm zoom to cover essentially the same focal length ranges. For indoor venues and a lack of light, 'fast" lenses are often preferred. Fast lenses also tend to have higher quality optics. A lack of light can be overcome with a hot shoe or off camera flash - like maybe on a bracket. Note that many wedding officiants do not allow flash photography during the wedding ceremony.


  Thank you for all the input! Also, her wedding is being held outside.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

Designer said:


> Hey, there!  Are you considering obtaining some new glass for this?  If you are renting, that is understandable.  What lenses do you already have?  Besides lenses, we might ask about flash, modifiers, a second camera, a second shooter, and how much is this worth?  I mean; is the bride so poor she cannot hire a photographer?  Is she going to pay you?  If so, how much?  What are you going to give her?  Is there going to be a written contract?  There are many questions yet to be answered.



Right now I have a 50 1.4, 70-300, 580 ex II flash.    The wedding is in 2016, however she is getting everything planned early.. As most would.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

Light Guru said:


> You should be nervous photographing a friends wedding even if it is not the first wedding you have shot.  Are you prepared to no longer have this person as a friend if you screw up photographing the wedding?


  I wouldn't lose her as a friend, she's very fond of what I do and I have done plenty of shoots for her before hand.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

Robin Usagani said:


> No guts no glory.  If you do shoot it, make sure you find another photographer friend who wants to get their feet wet in wedding photography to shoot together with you.  24-70 is the most versatile lens you can have.


 Thank you answering my question.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 9, 2014)

elizpage said:


> Don't be discouraged based on the fact that you haven't shot a wedding before. Seeing as how none of these people have seen your images, you might just be better than they are. I know I've seen some work from "experienced pros" that is absolute garbage. But eh, it's all in the eye of the beholder I suppose.  I would say your basic lenses would be a 24-70mm f/2.8 and a 50mm f/1.4 That's at least what I brought with me. I also had a 24 mm f/2.8 I had bought. If you have a place where you can rent the lenses, I would do that. borrow lenses.com is great if you want to have it shipped to you. I don't know how far out the wedding is though, time wise though.. But this would be a great thing to do if you have the time and money to do so.  I did the same thing that you did.. shot a wedding for a friend and was super nervous.. but instead of doing it alone, I brought along a photographer I knew had photographed weddings before. Many people on this website discouraged me from doing it, but I kept on trucking and the photos actually turned out okay! The bride loved them, and I got a lot of compliments on my use of composition. I also ended up learning a lot from the photographer who helped me and we're now good friends.  You never know what you are capable of unless you try. I would say to put out an ad or ask around to see if anyone in your area could help you photograph it. If you ask nicely, they might even do it for free (that's what happened to me!) I would recommend though definitely not doing it alone... that could end up disastrously in the situation that a battery dies (which happened to me twice, but I had a second to take all the family photos!)  Although it may not normally turn out this way, my friend was incredibly happy with the shots--even the really bum ones. She gave me $100 for my effort, and recommended me to all of her friends. After that, I was very encouraged, so I started my own business! I still use a lot of the shots from her wedding on my portfolio today (even though I'm new  )  So TLDR: Do it. Bring someone else though and make sure you have the right equipment.


. Thank you for the encouragement and HELPFUL comments!!


----------



## Designer (Jul 9, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, there!  Are you considering obtaining some new glass for this?  If you are renting, that is understandable.  What lenses do you already have?  Besides lenses, we might ask about flash, modifiers, a second camera, a second shooter, and how much is this worth?  I mean; is the bride so poor she cannot hire a photographer?  Is she going to pay you?  If so, how much?  What are you going to give her?  Is there going to be a written contract?  There are many questions yet to be answered.
> ...



You've got some time to get organized.  Get yourself familiar with the venue, the ceremony, the timing, and make a list of all the required photographs.  Practice at the venue as much as you can.


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 9, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> We've been close all of my life.



The closer you are with the person the harder things will be if you don't do a good job.  Even if they say it doesn't matter, it really does matter, you would not just be shooting this wedding for your friend but your friends spouse and foe family on both sides.  Even if your friend can look past a poorly shot wedding and keep a friendship can their spouse? Because if even one of them are not pleased with them then your friendship will never be the same.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 13, 2014)

So sick of SOME of the people on here where you only come on people's posts to bash them! It's my first wedding, so what? You ALL started somewhere and were once in my position. So before you go and say "DON'T do the shoot." Would you have? Have you ever done a shoot for a friend? Probably! I don't want to hear negative comments, I'm my own person and I'll do as I please and will not tolerate people who just bash my posts all day. So for those of you who were helpful, thank you!! Don't even bother commenting unless in regards to my question.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 13, 2014)

I've never done a wedding but I did a prom shoot for a friend.  I was contacted the day before they needed pictures (they couldn't find an affordable photographer), and it was at their venue (where other kids were going to be .. and the location kept changing due to the weather).  Ooh . and I only had about 15 minutes before they had to leave from when I got there.

I took a versatile lens - a Nikon 35-70/2.8 (24-70/2.8 is better as mine is an old school lens).  You want a 2.8 lens no matter what as even outside, heavy cloud cover could cause lower light.  If your camera has high ISO capabilities that's a plus too.  The f/2.8 also allows you to get subject isolation in the correct circumstances.

The hardest thing, once you know your camera and capabilities, was making sure you got the shots that people wanted, and how they wanted.  If you're artistic then having the time and their attention to do the things you want to do.

From everything I've read .. weddings are basically planned to the wazoo but come the day the plans go out the window in regards to time schedules, etc etc etc.  So you have to be quick on your feet and thinking alternatives.  Good Luck


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 13, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> So sick of SOME of the people on here where you only come on people's posts to bash them! It's my first wedding, so what? You ALL started somewhere and were once in my position. So before you go and say "DON'T do the shoot." Would you have? Have you ever done a shoot for a friend? Probably! I don't want to hear negative comments, I'm my own person and I'll do as I please and will not tolerate people who just bash my posts all day. So for those of you who were helpful, thank you!! Don't even bother commenting unless in regards to my question.



I don't think anyone on this thread has done any bashing. I know that has not been the intent of any of my comments.  The purpose of my comments has been to make you aware of what could happen when photographing your first wedding especially when it is done for a a close friend.  It's a bad enough situation when you mess up photographing any wedding and if that happens when photographing a close friends wedding the issue if even worse.  Weddings are a BIG deal to people and not something you want to mess up on. 

Nobody is saying you should not photograph weddings the people on here just want you to be ready and be capable of doing a good job.  We don't want you to become one of the growing number crapy wedding photographers out there. 

If you want some experience and are looking to add some images to your portfolio you can always offer to do bridal shots and engagement photos for them. If you mess up on those they can be redone unlike images from a wedding.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 13, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> So sick of SOME of the people on here where you only come on people's posts to bash them! It's my first wedding, so what? You ALL started somewhere and were once in my position. So before you go and say "DON'T do the shoot." Would you have? Have you ever done a shoot for a friend? Probably! I don't want to hear negative comments, I'm my own person and I'll do as I please and will not tolerate people who just bash my posts all day. So for those of you who were helpful, thank you!! Don't even bother commenting unless in regards to my question.


Hold the 'phone.... NO ONE is bashing you!  What you have received here is a LOT of good advice, either based on mistakes that have been made first-hand and/or mistakes we've seen others make and hope to prevent you from repeating.  Yes, there is a LOT of negative commentary about someone taking on their first wedding as a solo act, and with limited gear?  Why, because this is a one-time, no do-over event, and every wedding photographer here has seen or knows of someone in your situation who has taken this on and had it go horribly wrong!  There's no shame in 'just starting out' we all did (and many would say I still am!), but there's starting, and then there's starting smart.  

Working for friends and family seems like a natural thing to do, but it has caused more broken friendships and family squabbles than you can count.  

Good luck!


----------



## shutterbug77 (Jul 13, 2014)

When and where is the wedding to be held??


----------



## TCampbell (Jul 13, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> So sick of SOME of the people on here where you only come on people's posts to bash them! It's my first wedding, so what? You ALL started somewhere and were once in my position. So before you go and say "DON'T do the shoot." Would you have? Have you ever done a shoot for a friend? Probably! I don't want to hear negative comments, I'm my own person and I'll do as I please and will not tolerate people who just bash my posts all day. So for those of you who were helpful, thank you!! Don't even bother commenting unless in regards to my question.



I'm assuming you're having some sort of bad day.  The irony is... you appear to be collectively _bashing_ "some folks" (I'm not sure who those are) for _bashing_ you.

But the confusing bit is that I went back and re-read through the threads on this post... and I actually don't see _anyone_ bashing you.  So I'm not sure what elicited this response.

From time to time I have to write papers and articles.  Many years ago, it was a regular part of my job.  So I once asked a wise mentor how he comes up with the subject matter for his articles.  He answered that he uses two things:

1)  What questions to people ask you about ... over and over.  (that happens here all the time)
2)  What questions do people NOT ask you about ... but based on your experience, you realize that they should have.  (again... that also happens here all the time)

You asked about wedding lenses for a first-time wedding.  Specifically (and I'll just copy paste your quote here):



SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> My friend has asked me to shoot her wedding, I've never done weddings and the thought of it makes me nervous. I was wondering what your typical go to lenses are for a wedding?



You made it pretty clear that (a) you've never done a wedding and (b) you're nervous.

Ok... based on that, everyone responded with the best advice they could give -- both for the question you _did_ ask, but also... based on their experience, they offered things that perhaps they wished they'd known before a "first wedding" (things you "didn't ask... but should have".)

How is this _bashing_?

But just to be clear... I have a few rules, and I suspect that I am not alone in my thinking on this topic.  One rule is this:  When someone asks for advice ... they should be prepared to listen to the answers provided -- whatever those answers happen to be and regardless of whether or not it's the answer you were hoping to hear.  

You're not paying for the advice.  You asked to have it freely provided... and it was freely given in response to your request.  And yet for some reason, you're hostile to those (or at least some of those) who took the time to read your request and write a reply.


----------



## manaheim (Jul 13, 2014)

TCampbell said:


> But just to be clear... I have a few rules, and I suspect that I am not alone in my thinking on this topic. One rule is this: When someone asks for advice ... they should be prepared to listen to the answers provided -- whatever those answers happen to be and regardless of whether or not it's the answer you were hoping to hear.



I always love the advice TCampbell provides, but AMEN to this one in particular.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 15, 2014)

TCampbell said:


> I'm assuming you're having some sort of bad day.  The irony is... you appear to be collectively bashing "some folks" (I'm not sure who those are) for bashing you.  But the confusing bit is that I went back and re-read through the threads on this post... and I actually don't see anyone bashing you.  So I'm not sure what elicited this response.  From time to time I have to write papers and articles.  Many years ago, it was a regular part of my job.  So I once asked a wise mentor how he comes up with the subject matter for his articles.  He answered that he uses two things:  1)  What questions to people ask you about ... over and over.  (that happens here all the time) 2)  What questions do people NOT ask you about ... but based on your experience, you realize that they should have.  (again... that also happens here all the time)  You asked about wedding lenses for a first-time wedding.  Specifically (and I'll just copy paste your quote here):  You made it pretty clear that (a) you've never done a wedding and (b) you're nervous.  Ok... based on that, everyone responded with the best advice they could give -- both for the question you did ask, but also... based on their experience, they offered things that perhaps they wished they'd known before a "first wedding" (things you "didn't ask... but should have".)  How is this bashing?  But just to be clear... I have a few rules, and I suspect that I am not alone in my thinking on this topic.  One rule is this:  When someone asks for advice ... they should be prepared to listen to the answers provided -- whatever those answers happen to be and regardless of whether or not it's the answer you were hoping to hear.  You're not paying for the advice.  You asked to have it freely provided... and it was freely given in response to your request.  And yet for some reason, you're hostile to those (or at least some of those) who took the time to read your request and write a reply.


 I understand, thing is.. I never asked for advice shooting my first wedding. I asked for advice on the gear I should buy.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 15, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> I understand, thing is.. I never asked for advice shooting my first wedding. I asked for advice on the gear I should buy.



Ok, so lets say you went and asked a guy who spent half his lifetime jumping out of airplanes and said, hey, I've never parachuted before and I need to know what sort of parachute I need to buy.

Do you think he's doing you some huge favor by not mentioning that it might not be a bad idea to take some classes, some basic instruction on what a backup chute is and how to deploy it if you primary gets fouled, etc - or do you really think he's being rude unless all he tells you is the brand name of what chute you should order?

I mean to be fair you really didn't divulge that your friend couldn't afford a professional photographer from the outset.  A lot of the people who have shot weddings here are well aware of the fact that weddings are a very emotionally charged event, one that is (well at least should be) a once in a lifetime deal and there are no do overs.  The pressure on everyone involved for everything to be absolutely perfect can be pretty intense.

This is the sort of thing that can blow up in your face pretty easily - friendships have been lost over far less.  A lot of the folks here were trying to relay some of that too you, some of the pitfalls involved.  You may not have cared for the presentation, but they were not trying to run you down, they were honestly trying to help.

Ok, that having been said, you might want to seriously reconsider shooting this wedding - just based on the fact that if the responses you received in this forum were enough to cause this much emotional trauma, then I have to say I really wouldn't recommend involving yourself in an event as stressful as a wedding shoot.  Just my two cents worth of course, take it for what it's worth.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 16, 2014)

robbins.photo said:


> Ok, so lets say you went and asked a guy who spent half his lifetime jumping out of airplanes and said, hey, I've never parachuted before and I need to know what sort of parachute I need to buy.  Do you think he's doing you some huge favor by not mentioning that it might not be a bad idea to take some classes, some basic instruction on what a backup chute is and how to deploy it if you primary gets fouled, etc - or do you really think he's being rude unless all he tells you is the brand name of what chute you should order?  I mean to be fair you really didn't divulge that your friend couldn't afford a professional photographer from the outset.  A lot of the people who have shot weddings here are well aware of the fact that weddings are a very emotionally charged event, one that is (well at least should be) a once in a lifetime deal and there are no do overs.  The pressure on everyone involved for everything to be absolutely perfect can be pretty intense.  This is the sort of thing that can blow up in your face pretty easily - friendships have been lost over far less.  A lot of the folks here were trying to relay some of that too you, some of the pitfalls involved.  You may not have cared for the presentation, but they were not trying to run you down, they were honestly trying to help.  Ok, that having been said, you might want to seriously reconsider shooting this wedding - just based on the fact that if the responses you received in this forum were enough to cause this much emotional trauma, then I have to say I really wouldn't recommend involving yourself in an event as stressful as a wedding shoot.  Just my two cents worth of course, take it for what it's worth.



You have a point except for my life isn't on the lines. Like I said, everyone starts somewhere. &#128522;


----------



## robbins.photo (Jul 16, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> You have a point except for my life isn't on the lines. Like I said, everyone starts somewhere. &#62986;



Your life isn't on the lines.. hmm.. Think I heard that expression from a guy once before.. sadly I think he was run over by a bus right after he said it.  Lol.  In all seriousness though, it's your life and certainly you can do whatever makes you happy, that's not my call or even really any of my business.   I'm just suggesting that if you are that easily bent out of shape by a getting a couple of answers you didn't care for on an internet message forum, then something as stressful as shooting a wedding where your dealing with people face to face that are under far more stress might not be the best choice in career paths.


----------



## TCampbell (Jul 16, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> You have a point except for my life isn't on the lines. Like I said, everyone starts somewhere. &#62986;



I think that, as I read back through the thread, most people did offer the lens advice you were seeking.  But they also offered the opinion on the first-time-wedding-shooter experience.  

Indeed everyone does start somewhere.  But "somewhere" could be by being an assistant or second shooter for another photographer.  I'll offer an example.

I don't do weddings anymore, but I used to.  I worked for a studio starting as an apprentice when I was 15.  I've done somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 weddings (I never kept careful count... but as I reflect back on the years I realize the number is very close to 500.)  When you do that many weddings you get experience on your side.  My boss was also professionally trained.  He didn't plunge in either but worked as an assistant to other photographer's before him ... back when he was much younger -- just as he was now showing me the ropes back when I was younger.    

We knew the flow of the wedding.  We knew the repertoire of shots that needed to be captured.  We knew the best techniques to capture _each_ of those shots.  But we also always anticipated (based on knowing the flow of the event) which shot was coming next and what settings would be best for taking that type of shot.  Those settings were dialed into the camera even _before_ we approached the subject.

For example... suppose it's time for the bridal party to begin the dance.  We'll need to photograph the bride & groom dance as well as each of the couples in the party as they are introduced.

What's going through my mind at this moment is:

I'm planning to take a half-shot (waist up) of the couple dancing closely.
I'll be standing about 6' away when I take the shot.
The lights will be dim and I'll need flash.
Due to light fall-off I don't want a severely underexposed background so I'll want to set a shutter speed which "drags the shutter" to collect more ambient light.  This may put me down in the 1/50th second speed (or somewhere near that).
A slow shutter has a strong potential for motion blur and I don't want that... SO...
I'll approach each couple and gently tap their hands (which they're holding as they dance close) and guide them to face the camera ... but ALSO I'll ask them to pause and hold for just a moment while I take the shot.
I'll thank them and move on to the next couple.

This isn't all of it... I may or may not be able to "bounce" the flash... that depends on if the ceiling is white and the ceiling height.  If my flash is manual instead of TTL then I'll need to vary the aperture to control the light from the flash.  With my equipment, I'd pre-focus the camera to 6' and set the aperture to f/16 for that distance.  

This technique results in beautiful blur-free shots with very nice balanced lighting, a well-focused subject and pleasant background.  The technique provides me with consistent results.  That consistency is key (especially when I'm shooting film and I can't review the shot after taking it.  I have to be able to bank on the fact that my technique worked and I won't be in for any unpleasant surprises.)

Now here's my point... I wish I could say I came up with this and take credit for it.  But I didn't.  I know to do this, because I didn't jump in and start shooting weddings hoping for the best.   I apprenticed with a professional photographer starting at a young age.  I didn't hold the camera... t hauled the gear, held and moved the lights, reloaded the film magazines, etc.  But most importantly... I watched and learned from my boss.  He didn't always have time to explain what he was doing.  Often when he was done and we were driving from the wedding to the reception ... or just taking a break at the reception... he'd explain what he was doing and why.

Consequently, I'm not a nervous wreck when shooting a wedding because I've been well-trained to know what to expect and always anticipate what should be coming up next, what to dial-in as my exposure pre-sets (sure... I might need to adjust, but when you've done hundreds of weddings you get pretty good at anticipating what works best), and what techniques work best to capture the shot.  These techniques get "burned into your brain" like muscle-memory.  These photographers follow them almost instinctively.  (This is why you want to pay $3000 for a photographer instead of $300.  The expensive photographer with the impressive portfolio is going to get consistent results.  The $300 photographer isn't relying on their wedding photography business in order to eat.  The $3000 photographer is.)

There's a lot more.  I just used one example (capturing bridal party dance photos).  Someone who has never shot a wedding before is more likely to just take the photos and let the camera figure it out.  They "wing it".  More than the likely, the resulting photos will _look_ like they decided to "wing it".

You may, and probably will, shoot your friend's wedding anyway.  But it's not that everyone here is just trying to be a "Negative Nancy" about what _may_ happen.  The collective observational experience that so many of us here tend to witness is that the results from the "first wedding" photography tends to come in far below the initial expectations of the bride and the friend shooting the wedding.  THEN it becomes a "I wish I had that known that." and "I wish I had done ___ when getting this shot."  Then the "hindsight is 20/20".  Sometimes this results in hard feelings... even from people who were good friends.  It's an outcome that happens surprisingly (and unfortunately) often.


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 16, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> You have a point except for my life isn't on the lines. Like I said, everyone starts somewhere.



You physical life is not on the line but your relationship with a lifelong close friend just might be.  I'll take a life long friend over "starting somewhere" 
Even if I had been photographing weddings for 20 years I would still not be the photographer for a family member or friend.  Accidents happen mistakes are made I would not want to risk the relationship.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 16, 2014)

TCampbell said:


> I think that, as I read back through the thread, most people did offer the lens advice you were seeking.  But they also offered the opinion on the first-time-wedding-shooter experience.  Indeed everyone does start somewhere.  But "somewhere" could be by being an assistant or second shooter for another photographer.  I'll offer an example.  I don't do weddings anymore, but I used to.  I worked for a studio starting as an apprentice when I was 15.  I've done somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 weddings (I never kept careful count... but as I reflect back on the years I realize the number is very close to 500.)  When you do that many weddings you get experience on your side.  My boss was also professionally trained.  He didn't plunge in either but worked as an assistant to other photographer's before him ... back when he was much younger -- just as he was now showing me the ropes back when I was younger.  We knew the flow of the wedding.  We knew the repertoire of shots that needed to be captured.  We knew the best techniques to capture each of those shots.  But we also always anticipated (based on knowing the flow of the event) which shot was coming next and what settings would be best for taking that type of shot.  Those settings were dialed into the camera even before we approached the subject.  For example... suppose it's time for the bridal party to begin the dance.  We'll need to photograph the bride & groom dance as well as each of the couples in the party as they are introduced.  What's going through my mind at this moment is:  [*]I'm planning to take a half-shot (waist up) of the couple dancing closely. [*]I'll be standing about 6' away when I take the shot. [*]The lights will be dim and I'll need flash. [*]Due to light fall-off I don't want a severely underexposed background so I'll want to set a shutter speed which "drags the shutter" to collect more ambient light.  This may put me down in the 1/50th second speed (or somewhere near that). [*]A slow shutter has a strong potential for motion blur and I don't want that... SO... [*]I'll approach each couple and gently tap their hands (which they're holding as they dance close) and guide them to face the camera ... but ALSO I'll ask them to pause and hold for just a moment while I take the shot. [*]I'll thank them and move on to the next couple.   This isn't all of it... I may or may not be able to "bounce" the flash... that depends on if the ceiling is white and the ceiling height.  If my flash is manual instead of TTL then I'll need to vary the aperture to control the light from the flash.  With my equipment, I'd pre-focus the camera to 6' and set the aperture to f/16 for that distance.  This technique results in beautiful blur-free shots with very nice balanced lighting, a well-focused subject and pleasant background.  The technique provides me with consistent results.  That consistency is key (especially when I'm shooting film and I can't review the shot after taking it.  I have to be able to bank on the fact that my technique worked and I won't be in for any unpleasant surprises.)  Now here's my point... I wish I could say I came up with this and take credit for it.  But I didn't.  I know to do this, because I didn't jump in and start shooting weddings hoping for the best.   I apprenticed with a professional photographer starting at a young age.  I didn't hold the camera... t hauled the gear, held and moved the lights, reloaded the film magazines, etc.  But most importantly... I watched and learned from my boss.  He didn't always have time to explain what he was doing.  Often when he was done and we were driving from the wedding to the reception ... or just taking a break at the reception... he'd explain what he was doing and why.  Consequently, I'm not a nervous wreck when shooting a wedding because I've been well-trained to know what to expect and always anticipate what should be coming up next, what to dial-in as my exposure pre-sets (sure... I might need to adjust, but when you've done hundreds of weddings you get pretty good at anticipating what works best), and what techniques work best to capture the shot.  These techniques get "burned into your brain" like muscle-memory.  These photographers follow them almost instinctively.  (This is why you want to pay $3000 for a photographer instead of $300.  The expensive photographer with the impressive portfolio is going to get consistent results.  The $300 photographer isn't relying on their wedding photography business in order to eat.  The $3000 photographer is.)  There's a lot more.  I just used one example (capturing bridal party dance photos).  Someone who has never shot a wedding before is more likely to just take the photos and let the camera figure it out.  They "wing it".  More than the likely, the resulting photos will look like they decided to "wing it".  You may, and probably will, shoot your friend's wedding anyway.  But it's not that everyone here is just trying to be a "Negative Nancy" about what may happen.  The collective observational experience that so many of us here tend to witness is that the results from the "first wedding" photography tends to come in far below the initial expectations of the bride and the friend shooting the wedding.  THEN it becomes a "I wish I had that known that." and "I wish I had done ___ when getting this shot."  Then the "hindsight is 20/20".  Sometimes this results in hard feelings... even from people who were good friends.  It's an outcome that happens surprisingly (and unfortunately) often.



Oh I definitely wouldn't be doing it alone... I should have read more thoroughly. That is my mistake.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 16, 2014)

TCampbell said:


> I think that, as I read back through the thread, most people did offer the lens advice you were seeking.  But they also offered the opinion on the first-time-wedding-shooter experience.  Indeed everyone does start somewhere.  But "somewhere" could be by being an assistant or second shooter for another photographer.  I'll offer an example.  I don't do weddings anymore, but I used to.  I worked for a studio starting as an apprentice when I was 15.  I've done somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 weddings (I never kept careful count... but as I reflect back on the years I realize the number is very close to 500.)  When you do that many weddings you get experience on your side.  My boss was also professionally trained.  He didn't plunge in either but worked as an assistant to other photographer's before him ... back when he was much younger -- just as he was now showing me the ropes back when I was younger.  We knew the flow of the wedding.  We knew the repertoire of shots that needed to be captured.  We knew the best techniques to capture each of those shots.  But we also always anticipated (based on knowing the flow of the event) which shot was coming next and what settings would be best for taking that type of shot.  Those settings were dialed into the camera even before we approached the subject.  For example... suppose it's time for the bridal party to begin the dance.  We'll need to photograph the bride & groom dance as well as each of the couples in the party as they are introduced.  What's going through my mind at this moment is:  [*]I'm planning to take a half-shot (waist up) of the couple dancing closely. [*]I'll be standing about 6' away when I take the shot. [*]The lights will be dim and I'll need flash. [*]Due to light fall-off I don't want a severely underexposed background so I'll want to set a shutter speed which "drags the shutter" to collect more ambient light.  This may put me down in the 1/50th second speed (or somewhere near that). [*]A slow shutter has a strong potential for motion blur and I don't want that... SO... [*]I'll approach each couple and gently tap their hands (which they're holding as they dance close) and guide them to face the camera ... but ALSO I'll ask them to pause and hold for just a moment while I take the shot. [*]I'll thank them and move on to the next couple.   This isn't all of it... I may or may not be able to "bounce" the flash... that depends on if the ceiling is white and the ceiling height.  If my flash is manual instead of TTL then I'll need to vary the aperture to control the light from the flash.  With my equipment, I'd pre-focus the camera to 6' and set the aperture to f/16 for that distance.  This technique results in beautiful blur-free shots with very nice balanced lighting, a well-focused subject and pleasant background.  The technique provides me with consistent results.  That consistency is key (especially when I'm shooting film and I can't review the shot after taking it.  I have to be able to bank on the fact that my technique worked and I won't be in for any unpleasant surprises.)  Now here's my point... I wish I could say I came up with this and take credit for it.  But I didn't.  I know to do this, because I didn't jump in and start shooting weddings hoping for the best.   I apprenticed with a professional photographer starting at a young age.  I didn't hold the camera... t hauled the gear, held and moved the lights, reloaded the film magazines, etc.  But most importantly... I watched and learned from my boss.  He didn't always have time to explain what he was doing.  Often when he was done and we were driving from the wedding to the reception ... or just taking a break at the reception... he'd explain what he was doing and why.  Consequently, I'm not a nervous wreck when shooting a wedding because I've been well-trained to know what to expect and always anticipate what should be coming up next, what to dial-in as my exposure pre-sets (sure... I might need to adjust, but when you've done hundreds of weddings you get pretty good at anticipating what works best), and what techniques work best to capture the shot.  These techniques get "burned into your brain" like muscle-memory.  These photographers follow them almost instinctively.  (This is why you want to pay $3000 for a photographer instead of $300.  The expensive photographer with the impressive portfolio is going to get consistent results.  The $300 photographer isn't relying on their wedding photography business in order to eat.  The $3000 photographer is.)  There's a lot more.  I just used one example (capturing bridal party dance photos).  Someone who has never shot a wedding before is more likely to just take the photos and let the camera figure it out.  They "wing it".  More than the likely, the resulting photos will look like they decided to "wing it".  You may, and probably will, shoot your friend's wedding anyway.  But it's not that everyone here is just trying to be a "Negative Nancy" about what may happen.  The collective observational experience that so many of us here tend to witness is that the results from the "first wedding" photography tends to come in far below the initial expectations of the bride and the friend shooting the wedding.  THEN it becomes a "I wish I had that known that." and "I wish I had done ___ when getting this shot."  Then the "hindsight is 20/20".  Sometimes this results in hard feelings... even from people who were good friends.  It's an outcome that happens surprisingly (and unfortunately) often.


 Also, I should thank you for all of the helpful advice.   I guess I should have clarified.. Again that was my mistake.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 16, 2014)

Don't let shooting for friends totally scare you. We have shot engagements and weddings for two of our close friends and things went very well. We helped out friends,  they got good wedding pictures, and everyone was happy.


----------



## SamiJoSchwirtz (Jul 17, 2014)

pixmedic said:


> Don't let shooting for friends totally scare you. We have shot engagements and weddings for two of our close friends and things went very well. We helped out friends,  they got good wedding pictures, and everyone was happy.


 thanks pixmedic!


----------



## studio460 (Jul 17, 2014)

I shot my first wedding only a few months ago, and am about to shoot my second in a couple weeks. Here's the lenses I used:

&#8226; AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4.0G VR on a flash-fired body (used for general coverage: processional, first dance, cake, etc.).
&#8226; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 (used for available-light wide shots during the ceremony, and for the couple's full-length formals).
&#8226; AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G (used for available-light close-ups during the ceremony).
&#8226; Sigma 150mm f/2.8 OS (used for tight headshots in the bride's ready-room).

So, basically, I had an "all-purpose" short-zoom on a flash-fired body, the 24-120mm (which can just as easily be substituted with a 24-70mm f/2.8). My on-camera flash was typically bounced into an assistant-held foldable reflector (achieved by merely rotating the flash head to the side, or backwards). Note that my 24-120mm probably shot more than 80% of the images.

Although I also brought a 70-200mm f/2.8, I didn't use it since I was able to get fairly close to the altar, and used my 35mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 primes instead (I had multiple FX bodies--one prime on each for the ceremony). That said, I also brought quite of bit of lighting gear. In addition to my camera-mounted SB-800 (plus, multiple back-up Speedlights), I also had three AC monolights, all powered by AC inverters for both speed and mobility (this also alleviates the problem of people tripping over long AC cables, or wasting time taping them down). I triggered everything using PocketWizard TT1/TT5 transceivers.

So, as far as lenses go, basically, a good short-zoom, a couple of fast primes for when you're not allowed to use strobes (e.g., the ceremony), a 70-200mm f/2.8 in case you're too far from the altar, and perhaps an ultra-wide or rectangular fisheye for "special' venue shots (kind of a one-trick-pony, but can add "breadth" to your coverage). Also, maybe a macro lens for super-tight ring shots, etc.


----------



## studio460 (Jul 17, 2014)

Ah . . . selective memory! I shot the close-ups at the altar with an 85mm, but I just looked at the original files, and my "tight" altar images were actually cropped by about 50% after the edit. I suppose I could've used the 70-200mm instead, but then I would've had to halve my shutter speed, and double my ISO (or, some combination thereof). I measured the ambient in the church, and if I remember correctly, there was only 0.5 footcandles present. Even though I shot RAW, these were converted to B+W because the ambient color temps were _super_ weird, and _very_ mixed (mercury-vapor, incandescent, daylight, candlelight):

Available-light altar images from my first wedding shoot:






Nikon D3s + AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 [50% crop]; ISO: 2,000; f/1.4 @ 1/200th.





Nikon D3s + Sigma 35mm f/1.4; ISO: 2,000; f/1.4 @ 1/200th.

So, I think fast lenses (in my case, f/1.4 primes) are pretty much a prerequisite for dimly lit interiors since most venues don't allow strobes during the actual ceremony (procession/recession, usually, yes). But in answer to your original question, aside from the ceremony coverage at the altar, my 24-120mm short-zoom (or, 24-70mm f/2.8, if that's what you own) was my "go-to" lens for the majority of the rest of event (as it is for my other non-wedding, flash-fired event shooting).


----------



## studio460 (Jul 17, 2014)

studio460 said:


> I shot my first wedding only a few months ago, and am about to shoot my second in a couple weeks. Here's the lenses I used:
> 
> &#8226; AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4.0G VR on a flash-fired body (Nikon SB-800/SC-17 on a Newton rotating bracket, plus a Quantum Turbo battery).
> &#8226; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 (used for available-light wide shots during the ceremony, and for the couple's full-length formals).
> ...



Now, you may be wondering if I'll change my lens line-up for my _second_ wedding . . . and, actually, I think that original lens selection worked out pretty well. For that first wedding, in the bride's ready-room, I set up a Nikon SB-800/TT5 into a 45" Westcott soft-silver umbrella (the available-light level was very low, and also consisted of mixed color temps). I shot all the ready-room coverage with two primes: the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 and Sigma 150mm f/2.8 OS--each on its own FX body, each body with its own TT1 trigger, firing the same off-camera flash (for smaller spaces, I might switch the 150mm for an 85mm).

Now your approach will probably be different from mine, but I just really love these two Sigma lenses (they're kind of the _only_ two lenses I shoot for personal work now). The 35mm f/1.4 is a great documentary focal length, and the 150mm f/2.8 OS is now my favorite portrait lens (plus, both lenses are _super_ sharp). But many pro wedding shooters do just fine (and, shoot a lot), with only a 24-70mm f/2.8 as their primary event lens, so don't let my particular affinity for these fixed-focal length lenses divert you from benefitting from the speed and convenience a fast short-zoom offers (_especially_, if shooting with only a single body). Good luck!


----------



## studio460 (Jul 17, 2014)

SamiJoSchwirtz said:


> Thank you for all the input! Also, her wedding is being held outside.


Sorry, I didn't see that. Oh well, forget about the part about f/1.4 lenses! Now you need to hone your fill-flash technique, and perhaps invest in some scrims (Westcott makes some excellent foldable, and aluminum-framed scrims).


----------



## jowensphoto (Jul 17, 2014)

manaheim said:


> TCampbell said:
> 
> 
> > But just to be clear... I have a few rules, and I suspect that I am not alone in my thinking on this topic. One rule is this: When someone asks for advice ... they should be prepared to listen to the answers provided -- whatever those answers happen to be and regardless of whether or not it's the answer you were hoping to hear.
> ...





YES! I call the opposite of his advice "being an askhole."

I did a wedding one time with no experience. If I could go back, I'd have NEVER done it. Seriously, worst experience of my life. I was only beginning to learn how to shoot in manual and had no concept of proper exposure or really even composition. I did it free, for a friend, and we are no longer friends. 

2016 - gives you a lot of time to learn. I would be networking with all the local pros the best I could and second or third shoot with them if they're willing. While any bride will tell you a wedding day is chaotic, the vendors and people running the wedding really get the full blown experience. 

If you get paid for any second'ing gigs, I'd invest in some better glass or set up a lens-rental fund. Your zoom, if it's the one I'm thinking of, will not do well in low light (in fact, it's the same one I used for that horror show I mentioned above).


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 17, 2014)

oh, I guess i totally forgot about the actual question the OP was asking....sorry 'bout that.

we actually have two sets of lenses that are used at pretty much every wedding.
my wife favors the 17-50 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8, and I typically favor the 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8 (sometimes if i have to do a lot of moving around i will use the 28-75 f/2.8)

but generally speaking, those are what we use the most lens wise.


----------



## studio460 (Jul 18, 2014)

jowensphoto said:


> 2016 - gives you a lot of time to learn . . .



Yes, that is a long timeline. I started preparing to shoot weddings for about the same length of time. The first thing I did was to buy a second body. Then, I slowly built up a significant inventory of back-up lighting equipment (everything I own is now backed-up between 2x-4x-deep). Also, throughout this time, I attempted to simulate every type of lighting set-up I might encounter at a typical wedding--I especially concentrated on the most challenging lighting scenarios (e.g., bright daylight with the sun high in the sky, etc.).

There's a lot of lighting involved in most wedding photography, so mastering both fill-flash daylight exterior lighting, as well as interior lighting technique is important to becoming a well-rounded event photographer. I think in addition to asking questions on photo forums, I would invest in some good wedding photography books. There's quite a few on Amazon, and most are very well written, full of technical tips, practical advice and good creative ideas.


----------



## greybeard (Jul 19, 2014)

I shoot weddings from time to time, mostly for friends and not for profit. I use my Nikon D7000 and I use a 35mm f1.8 and a 50mm f1.8 for the available light  stuff  and my 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 for outside or with flash. When I need flash I use a Yongnuo 565ex. It is a good idea to have a backup camera body and flash incase something goes wrong and of course extra batteries, etc. Back in the day I used a Mamiya C330 TLR with an 80mm normal lens with a potato masher (big handle mounted flash). If need be I could do it all with the 35mm f/1.8 and a flash but, zooms make things easier. Be sure to make a list with the bride and groom of shots they want. There are lists available on the net of "must shoot wedding pictures" that can be helpful. More than anything I think you should use equipment you are as familiar with as the back of your hand. When shooting a wedding you have to take charge of the situation at times and organize and direct your setups so you can get things over with quickly so the bride and groom can get on to the reception etc. Fumbling around with unfamiliar equipment can really slow things down.


----------



## chuasam (Jul 31, 2014)

Just use what ever lenses you have since you're probably doing it for free anyway.


----------

