# Not the first time youve heard this...



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

Im going professional soon.....
Dont exit...just hear what i have to say...

I would like to start off on weddings (keep reading) and my cousin is having a wedding. I know i cant shoot at it since im not all that advanced so im going to do some free-lance for it just to start off.

I shoot 35mm and im not going digital so dnt try to talk me into it because i wont listen. I love film and developing it so there is no way im trading off to digital.

What camera would be good IN 35MM! that would be good for weddings/portrait photos? I am mainly looking at the Canons because I have never been let down with them.

Currently i own a Nikon EM with 80mm telephoto zoom lense, vivitar wide-angle, and stock lens and i also have a Canon Rebel G with Vivitar Telephoto zoom lens.
I would do most of my shooting with the canon since the EM is just kinda a camera i take with me for snapshots or school since it is very light an inexpensive.

Any ideas or questions i will be wide open to just dont flame me to much since im begining! to become pro.


----------



## dewey (Apr 4, 2007)

So it sounds like you've read the other daily posts from people who pop in and say "hey wedding photography looks easy and I have this fuji Qucksnap flash... give me advice quick the wedding is Sunday" 

Unfortunatly I cannot offer you any film advice, and no I have no interest in talking you into digital.  I still enjoy film for certain things but I cannot afford it for weddings anymore.  Shooting an average of 2000+ shots per wedding would kill me with film and developing costs... plus the time in getting that many shots transferred to digital for editing makes me shake.  I think you'll find to stay competitive in the wedding business you'll have to look at digital at some point - I'll leave that to you to discover.

BUT...

Since it looks like you have read all of the other threads the advice is the same.  The best thing you could do would be to work as an assistant or second shooter for another local photographer.  Also, film or digital you're going to need better equipment than you list.  And of course get some books and of practice practice practice.

Good luck.


----------



## mortallis288 (Apr 4, 2007)

ok i do not know a lot but i do know that if you do not know what kind of camera you need, you do not need to be doing weddings. i have been doing photography for about a year and i want to do weddings sometime in my life but even after a year of doing it constanly and taking a class in highschool i would be afraid to try to do someones wedding esp since a wedding is a once and a lifetime thing and if the photographer messes up then you do not have pictures from that day. That is a lot of pressure are you ready for that? I shoot film too, but like the person said who posted above me, cost for developing 2000+ negatives is outrageous. So you might want to look into digital cameras

But if not then what i would recommend for someone starting out is the n55. 216 dollars on amazon and wolf camera. has autofocus and other various nic-nacs for it. That is what i have right now and i am very happy with it


----------



## EOS_JD (Apr 4, 2007)

i agree 100% with Dewey.

I'll also add you will need a second body, a couple of decent flash guns, a couple of fast f2.8 zooms (preferably with IS) and a couple of fast primes. Plus there's lots more required. Film, diffusers, a tripod etc etc.

Weddings are expensive not only because of the skill of the photographer but because they have spent thousands on buying the best equipment to do the job.

By the way backups are essential because film cameras can break down just the same as digital cameras.

You also mention you have an 80mm telephoto zoom lens?...... There's no such thing..... If it's 80mm it's a prime lens - not a zoom. Zooms have variable focal lengths eg 70-200. The lenses you mention I've never heard of but any Vivitars I've seen have pretty small apertures. If that's the case you'll struggle badly.

I'm not trying to flame you but you have read other posts. you need experience and decent equipment before considering shooting as a pro.

Get a job with a photograpoher first and learn the trade.


----------



## Big Mike (Apr 4, 2007)

Do you find anything lacking with your Rebel G?  You can attach the same lenses to that camera that you can to a $500 Canon EOS 1n.  

When we are talking about film, the camera is basically a light tight box to hold the film.  It's the lenses that make or break the image.  As mentioned, if you want zoom lenses, get the ones with a maximum aperture of F2.8.  And/or look at prime (non-zoom) lenses with wide max apertures like F1.8 or F1.4.

You may want flash units, check out the Canon 430EX, 550EX or 580EX.  

You will need backup equipment as well.


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

well i do like the rebel and it doesn't lack anything so im thinking about getting many lenses for it but it i guess does cross my mind that you would have to shoot around or over 2000 shots and it would be better to digital but thats why im here....to learn.
The problem is i know nothing about digital and have no digital equipment accept for a 20$ family camera.
i wanted to go into film since its what i love to do in making shots but i think i can develop my own film shots and have a digital camera for a main.

so who wants to educate me on a dslr???


----------



## NJMAN (Apr 4, 2007)

> So it sounds like you've read the other daily posts from people who pop in and say "hey wedding photography looks easy and I have this fuji Qucksnap flash... give me advice quick the wedding is Sunday"


 
dewey, I hope you are not talking about me.  I have the highest respect for experienced wedding photographers who dont underestimate the level of skill and responsibility it takes to get the job done right.  If I ever decide to take on a wedding myself someday as a paid pro, it wont be with a Fuji Quicksnap, or whatever the heck that is... , and the decision wont be made lightly.  Good luck to anyone who thinks they can tackle a wedding successfully with little or no experience.


----------



## Jim Gratiot (Apr 4, 2007)

> I would like to start off on weddings (keep reading) and my cousin is having a wedding.


Isn't that a bit like having a 16-year old with a new driver's license startiing out in the Indy 500?


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

The words "Keep Reading" must mean alot more to me rather than you...


----------



## mortallis288 (Apr 4, 2007)

like i said i am no expert but mabye i can help you out some until some of the photo-gods can come back and enlighten you a little more.

DSLR is just like a SLR, correct me if i am wrong but it still has the mirror like the SLR, but it is digital (imagine that). I love my film, and i love the darkroom much like you have said. But the thing is a DSLR would be benefictial to you because of the amount of pictures you would be wanting to take. Instead of film the DSLR uses memory cards which can range from 128 mb (about 30 pictures more or less) to i think they have like 8gb (1000 or more pictures) out there now. Since you like the darkroom so much they have "darkrooms" on computers too. Photoshop CS2 or Photoshop elements might be a idea for you to look at if you get a digital camera or Adobe lightroom, if you have an apple i have heard the apeture is decent, but i would still go with photoshop. There is also a image editing program that is sponsered by google, but i totally forgot what it was called. I would go to best buy, wolfcamera, or your local camera store to look at different kinds of digital cameras you can find. They are gonna range somewhere between 700 - 10,000 dollars, without a memory stick. 

As for your wedding dream. i would start out taking a class, if you have not already and then i would try to get on with a wedding photographer as a gopher, but do not expect for him/her to let you shoot at all to start out with. Build a portfolio to show the photographers that you know the basics of your camera and photography and then go from there. This forum will help you out, but saying i want to photograph a wedding but i do not know much about photography is not a great idea.


----------



## tekzero (Apr 4, 2007)

ull stay behind in the game if u dont go digital


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

im already in a photograpght class and the dslr would be perfect. The main thing i want is a digital camera to function as a film camera because i know many techniques with the film camera alng with exposure and so on. As for photoshop, i already have since i transform a few cars when im bored or decide to spice up a few photos. Now as for the price...thats why i wanted to stick with film. I think it would pay off better in the end than a film but there still so bloody expensive...

I decided maybe to follow a few people at weddings to see what they do and maybe free ance out of the blue on top of the other hired photographer just to see if im liked or getting better.

Thanks for the info, i guess there is still hope in digital afterall....of course not in a good way for my wallet...


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

Can some people tell me about the Digital Canon eos cameras? Which to get which not to??

I think i would go for either the rebel xti, 5d, 30d, or one of the 1d's.


----------



## mortallis288 (Apr 4, 2007)

tekzero said:


> ull stay behind in the game if u dont go digital


that is not very fair to say.. wedding photography wise yes, but photography in general i am sure they are tons of people still using film.

if i was you rapid i would pick a up a beginner canon DSLR, i think they are about 600 dollars but once you do decide that you really want to do weddings that can atleast be your extra camera


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

well i know i will always be available for weddings and i always use my film which i would like to start selling those so at least ill still be making a little bit of money depending on what type of interest im going with.


----------



## dewey (Apr 4, 2007)

NJMAN said:


> dewey, I hope you are not talking about me.



Nope - not directed at you - do a search you're not the first to ask this question - it's a rather frequent question. 

Mortallis we ARE talking about weddings not general photography - we're not trying to start a film war. 

It's just rather funny to me how many people think they can buy a camera, take a class and be a wedding photographer.


----------



## mortallis288 (Apr 4, 2007)

well, this whole thread is about wedding photography yes, but he also said that he would not change from film to digital until later on in the thread. granted i know nothing about wedding photography but it is still the fact that he said  you WILL be behind the times. mabye someone is out there still doing film who knows.


----------



## rabidzoomer (Apr 4, 2007)

dewey said:


> It's just rather funny to me how many people think they can buy a camera, take a class and be a wedding photographer.


 
This has been a recent thought actually...i dont think im just going to pick up a camera and be a photographer....its because i think it would be a nice free lance job on the side and i would enjoy it...so get that outta here please....  :er:


----------



## dewey (Apr 4, 2007)

LMAO - I love the whip.  I wasn't addressing you specifically so relax.

Like you said - it's a fairly recent thought... spend some more time researching the idea and then go put your time and money into learning the craft if you decide to pursue it. :thumbup:


----------



## zioneffect564 (Apr 4, 2007)

rabidzoomer said:


> Can some people tell me about the Digital Canon eos cameras? Which to get which not to??
> 
> I think i would go for either the rebel xti, 5d, 30d, or one of the 1d's.



well that about covers the whole canon line...um as you've stated before you don't want to go too expensive so that eliminates the 1d's, 5d, and possibly the 30d. since you are starting out the xti is a good camera its it going to run you about $800-$1000 the 30d would be the next up camera from that and its going to be in the $1300 range. the 5d is a professional camera and you'll pay a little over $2k for it and then the 1ds is going to be extremely expensive. if i were you i'd get the xti or 30d and then a couple years upgrade to a higher level body.


----------



## danalec99 (Apr 5, 2007)

mortallis288 said:


> mabye someone is out there still doing film who knows.


Jose Villa. He shoots with medium format and 35mm. Here is the link to couple of his articles in Wed Shooter.


----------



## thebeginning (Apr 5, 2007)

ok i'm going to try to help out where i can here...i'll try to help you with the film side of things first then go into digital stuff too.  you're obviously having some second thoughts about shooting film (which i personally found kind of funny because you were so anti-digital on your first post  ) which is totally fine.

ok, whoever said you have to take 2000+ photos per wedding is crazy...that's never ever been the case.  that CAN happen but it's not a number you should base yourself off of.  first, that's based off of recent photogs shooting digital...most film shooters back in the day shot about 15-30 rolls of film (or less, perhaps more) per wedding...which is in the hundreds, not thousands.  IMO shooting film would help you to focus more on what you were shooting so you would come out with better composition in your photos and you wouldn't fall into the 'spray and pray' category.  




Big Mike said:


> Do you find anything lacking with your Rebel G? You can attach the same lenses to that camera that you can to a $500 Canon EOS 1n.
> 
> When we are talking about film, the camera is basically a light tight box to hold the film. It's the lenses that make or break the image. As mentioned, if you want zoom lenses, get the ones with a maximum aperture of F2.8. And/or look at prime (non-zoom) lenses with wide max apertures like F1.8 or F1.4.
> 
> ...



Big Mike gave some good advice here.  I honestly think that the rebel G might not be up to shooting weddings...you 'need' fast autofocus, accurate autofocus, and some good on-camera controls. if you're sticking with film i'd strongly recommend getting a 1 series like a 1n or 1v if you can afford it.  check used places like keh.com.  i got my 1n plus a battery grip/fps booster for $275 there and it was in great condition...

but i think Mike may have led you a liiiittle astray. he said that film cameras are basically light-tight boxes that hold film and that lenses will make or break the images.  first off, you're the one making the images and perhaps breaking them, although a camera messup could 'break' the image. second, when you're shooting for a client professionally, you need to be using gear that is reliable and can help you get the job done.  for instance, unless you are INCREDIBLY good at quick metering and manual focus, it would be unwise to shoot with a manual focus camera...so the camera can definitely matter alot, especially since having a shot in focus can make a huge difference.  it's not the camera that's getting the good shots, it's you.  but you don't want your camera to limit you.  many people could say "well what about 20 years ago when everybody was shooting manual focus, they still got weddings"!  Well that was 20 years ago...not only has wedding photography progressed ALOT, but brides and people in general expect alot more out of their pictures.  20 years ago, out of focus shots weren't a huge deal.  nowadays that can make a huge difference.

but yeah dude, like the guys said you're gonna need to invest quite a bit of money in equipment before you start seriously shooting weddings.  like said before, backup cameras are practically a must.  flashes are practically a must.  fast lenses are a must.  each one of those things costs money, and some of them cost quite a bit of money (be prepared to spend hundreds or over $1k on your lenses...each. ).  

I'm not against you starting with weddings or anything, it's just very hard to start off with.




rabidzoomer said:


> Can some people tell me about the Digital Canon eos cameras? Which to get which not to??
> 
> I think i would go for either the rebel xti, 5d, 30d, or one of the 1d's.



like the below poster said, that's basically all that canon offers   i'll give more details below...




zioneffect564 said:


> well that about covers the whole canon line...um as you've stated before you don't want to go too expensive so that eliminates the 1d's, 5d, and possibly the 30d. since you are starting out the xti is a good camera its it going to run you about $800-$1000 the 30d would be the next up camera from that and its going to be in the $1300 range. the 5d is a professional camera and you'll pay a little over $2k for it and then the 1ds is going to be extremely expensive. if i were you i'd get the xti or 30d and then a couple years upgrade to a higher level body.



the best digital camera(s) for weddings out there right now are the 1d2n and the 5d.  well actually even better is going to be the 1d3, which is set to arrive later this month or next month...but will be a good $1200 more than the 1d2n.  the 1d*s*2 is very good but is a little outdated at the moment and in my opinion is past it's 'good years'...there's little reason to buy it since its successor is coming out fairly soon.    now unfortunately both of the above cameras are pricey. the 1d2n is about $3300 and the 5d is about $2700.  and that's close to the best prices out there right now.   so those are pricey...and for your first dSLR (heck, and first pro cameras) that's pretty overkill.  in my opinion you'd be a little overwhelmed for a while.  

the 30d would be a great starter camera, because it's in between the rebels and the pro cameras.  it can definitely suffice for weddings (some of the top wedding photographers in the world have used the 20d/30d and have done quite well) and is a good price point.  that's your best consideration in my opinion.  if you want to save a little money, get the 20d over the XTi or XT. 



danalec99 said:


> Jose Villa. He shoots with medium format and 35mm. Here is the link to couple of his articles in Wed Shooter.



thanks Daniel, he's just the guy for this thread.  very helpful!




so i hope that gave you some information you can use!  sorry if i was harsh or anything, it's late and i'm a little tired


----------



## _SnapShot_ (Apr 5, 2007)

rabidzoomer said:


> Im going professional soon.....
> Dont exit...just hear what i have to say...
> 
> *dnt try to talk me into it because i wont listen.*


 
If you want to shoot for money and become a professional, you'll first have to learn to listen.

That's the best bit of advise I can give you on starting your journey.

Good luck.


----------



## dewey (Apr 5, 2007)

thebeginning said:


> ok, whoever said you have to take 2000+ photos per wedding is crazy...that's never ever been the case.



Yeah it's a real mystery who said it.  Oh right, it was *me*! (sorry I had to look at the name next to the comment to remember who said it... it was very difficult)  

What I said was:

"Shooting an average of 2000+ shots per wedding would kill me with film and developing costs"

Notice the keyword there?  it was ME.  it would kill ME.

I never said anyone HAS to shoot that much or base themselves on it.  On a large wedding with coverage the night before, the morning of, the ceremony, and the reception it's very easy to break 2,000 shots which would be very expensive for *ME*.

I love people with selective reading.


----------



## thebeginning (Apr 5, 2007)

dewey said:


> Yeah it's a real mystery who said it.  Oh right, it was *me*! (sorry I had to look at the name next to the comment to remember who said it... it was very difficult)
> 
> What I said was:
> 
> ...




whooaaa dude, calm down.  i wasn't making an accusation against you at all. it was because of the original poster's reaction to it (see below). 

and in all honesty, if you had a problem with what i say there are certainly more mature ways to put it.




rabidzoomer said:


> well i do like the rebel and it doesn't lack anything so im thinking about getting many lenses for it *but it i guess does cross my mind that you would have to shoot around or over 2000 shots*


----------



## dewey (Apr 5, 2007)

It was the way you said it... I'm very calm, it just annoyed me that you called me crazy and I think it was rude.  On second thought I'm not sure why it annoyed me... I am a little crazy.

And I have to be mature all day in real life, so this is my only break from maturity ...


----------

