Carterofmars
Well-known
What lenses would you use with these two bodies and in what combo if you were considering a wedding? Would you shoot a wedding with these?
M9 & M8 for a wedding...
- Thread starter Carterofmars
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 28
- Views 3K
twopointeight
Well-known
I've only had an M8.2 , and I shoot a few weddings a year. I personally wouldn't do it, based on my experience. The wedding moves fast and the M8/M9 can't keep up. It will probably lock-up or the battery will suddenly drain. I'm using an Olympus OMD now and depending on my testing may use two of these for weddings this summer? But I have a feeling that it will be in addition to Canon DSLRs. Too bad about the digital Leica not being a professional tool. My film Leicas were.
swoop
Well-known
I have and would again shoot a wedding with an M9. I didn't bother with weddings when I had my M8. You'll burn through a least 3 batteries. So make sure you have enough.
My recommendation would be a 35mm on the M9 and a 75mm on the M8. It's a good spread of focal lengths between the two. As for which lenses specifically, that's all depending on much you're willing to spend. M mount lenses now run the gamut of $400 for a VC 35mm f2.5 to $5k for a Leica 35mm 1.4. I owned the 75mm Lux for a few years and it was a beautiful lens, I've also seen samples of the Nokton 75mm f1.8 and they were great.
My recommendation would be a 35mm on the M9 and a 75mm on the M8. It's a good spread of focal lengths between the two. As for which lenses specifically, that's all depending on much you're willing to spend. M mount lenses now run the gamut of $400 for a VC 35mm f2.5 to $5k for a Leica 35mm 1.4. I owned the 75mm Lux for a few years and it was a beautiful lens, I've also seen samples of the Nokton 75mm f1.8 and they were great.
Carterofmars
Well-known
I was thinking 35mm on the 9 and a 90mm on the 8 with a pocket full of batteries and a few cards. Just a little worried about low light and fast motion situations.
raid
Dad Photographer
I mostly use these two cameras in one compact bag. I have today on the M9 the 35/1.4 Lux and on the M8 a rigid Summicron. It is a great combination. The Summicron is cropped to a short tele.
swoop
Well-known
The issue with using a 90mm on the M8 is the focus accuracy. With a .68 magnifier it can really effect the accuracy of your focusing with a 90mm. If you're ok using a 1.25x magnifier I say go for it. But using it as is can be really touch and go especially for moving subjects. And as far as that goes you really just have to have your technique down.
Carterofmars
Well-known
How about flash? Anyone have any experience attempting flash on the M for wedding? I was reading about using the SF24D with a Nikon or Nissin SC cable.
Or a SF58.
Are Nikon Speedlights compatible with an M9? This is an SB800 which I don't own. I do have an SB600 but not sure that is compatible.
Also read that a Olympus FL-36R is a good match for the M9... can anyone attest to this? Don't want to fry any electronics. 😱
Or a SF58.
Are Nikon Speedlights compatible with an M9? This is an SB800 which I don't own. I do have an SB600 but not sure that is compatible.
Also read that a Olympus FL-36R is a good match for the M9... can anyone attest to this? Don't want to fry any electronics. 😱
Richard G
Veteran
I used to frequent the wedding forum on photo.net. I can't take the excitement and terror anymore and no longer go there. Some pros say they can shoot a whole wedding with a 35 1.4. I used a 50 on an M6 and a 90 on an M2, the one wedding I did, many years ago. That 90 was OK for formal shots but I wouldn't want to have to fast focus a 90 at a wedding. I would use a fast 50 on an M8 I reckon, but have never used an M8. The ergonomics of the lens (e.g. tabbed Summicron that I am familiar with) would be a significant factor.
swoop
Well-known
A neat side effect of Nikon flashes is that they will activate the flash ready light in the M8/M9 viewfinder. But they don't work as a TTL flash. The last Nikon flash I owned was the SB-80DX which was sadly stolen from me but it had an auto exposure mode on the flash itself independent of the camera. I'm not sure if current Nikon flashes also have an auto exposure mode.
Here's a synopsis of some small non-dedicated flashes. Auto exposure flashes can work just as well as TTL.
http://www.rangefinderworkshop.com/?p=346
flash
Member
I shoot weddings full time using a pair of M9s and a pair of Olympus EM5s. I usually have a 50mm on one and a 90 on the other. I'll also switch out to a 21mm or a 135 during the day. I use the Olympus bodies for parts of the ceremony and parts of the reception but all of the bridal and location are done on the M9s.
I use a Metz flash with a SCA3502 mk5 adaptor. I usually prefer auto mode to TTL though on fhe M9. I have used the Oly flashes including the FL36r and 60R and they are a nice size match to the M. I get about 450 to 500 shots on a battery. I have four but never need more than two or three. One of the advantages of a Leica is that it'll keep your shot count down. Its nice being able to carry your entire kit in a waist bag.
The M9 is more than capable as a pro wedding camera but it demands a different approach to a DSLR. it suits the way I work. But it's not the easiest way to shoot and so not suitable for many. In a dim church I can manually focus as well as af worked on my Canon 5d2s. I never need to shoot over 1000ISO as I have a f1.1 lens if needed. At 640 Im reaching for a flash gun anyway. Personally any light where I need Iso 1600 or above is pretty horible light anyway.
Although I do use the Olympus bodies I could easily shoot the whole event on the M9s except for the lack of macro.
Gordon
I use a Metz flash with a SCA3502 mk5 adaptor. I usually prefer auto mode to TTL though on fhe M9. I have used the Oly flashes including the FL36r and 60R and they are a nice size match to the M. I get about 450 to 500 shots on a battery. I have four but never need more than two or three. One of the advantages of a Leica is that it'll keep your shot count down. Its nice being able to carry your entire kit in a waist bag.
The M9 is more than capable as a pro wedding camera but it demands a different approach to a DSLR. it suits the way I work. But it's not the easiest way to shoot and so not suitable for many. In a dim church I can manually focus as well as af worked on my Canon 5d2s. I never need to shoot over 1000ISO as I have a f1.1 lens if needed. At 640 Im reaching for a flash gun anyway. Personally any light where I need Iso 1600 or above is pretty horible light anyway.
Although I do use the Olympus bodies I could easily shoot the whole event on the M9s except for the lack of macro.
Gordon
Lax Jought
Well-known
The only thing holding the M8 back is the ISO. Good useable ISO would be 320. ISO 640 could still be ok under certain circumstances. Anything above that would be difficult.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
If you get the exposure right ( a basic skill a wedding photographer should have) there is nothing wrong at all with ISO 1250 on the M8, especially if your copy of LR or CS is up to date.
Carterofmars
Well-known
Lax Jought
Well-known
I think that depends on how much light there is too, ISO 1250 at very low light is so incredibly noisy on my M8.2 (say in very darkly lit restaurants or bars for example).
ISO 640 in low light isn't too bad.
ISO 640 in low light isn't too bad.
ray*j*gun
Veteran
I use the M8u for close ups because I find the Leica lenses deliver better and sharper results than DSLR's. I use my Nikon 50mm 1,4 Millenium with Amedeo adapter for that work. For the rest I use Nikon DSLR or Nikon film.
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
Check out the work of riccis valladares. He has used Leica film and digital bodies for years. 35, 50 and 90 lenses...but mainly 35 and 50. The M8 and M9 are just fine for wedding work.
Carterofmars
Well-known
Amazing work.
hepcat
Former PH, USN
I've shot weddings for years with Hasselblads, Mamiya C330s, Leica Ms, and then Canon EOS1s. I switched to Olympus DSLRs when I went digital. I recently sold all my Olympus E-system gear and returned to Leica digi Ms, an M8 and M9P. I bought two Metz 32 Z3 flashes and I have a belt battery pack for them.
The digi-Ms are more than competent to do weddings. The question is whether or not you can adapt your shooting to the eccentricities of the bodies. Of course, they're no more eccentric than Hassy or MamiyaTLRs... the primary difference is that you're shooting primes and you have to consider things (like your exposure and focus) yourself rather than letting the body do it for you and hoping it's right. The primes will force you to work differently than zooms...
Frankly, the DSLRs allowed me to be a little lazy, but I never really changed how I shoot from the "old days" of using 120 roll film cameras, so it's no big deal for me. If you think it through, it shouldn't be a big deal for you either. What makes Leica really amazing in that kind of setting are the large aperture primes available. They give the isolated depth of field that few can match, and they allow for relatively fast shutter speeds in most situations, even in fairly dark churches. Again, its just a matter of re-thinking your product output, and using the equipment to its strengths.
Good luck!
On edit... I remembered that I attended a wedding as a guest a few years ago, and took a small Panasonic P&S camera with me. I didn't know it until well afterwards, but the couple hadn't hired their pro to do the reception. I shot the recepton, mostly from my seat, and just for fun with that palm-sized P&S with horrendous shutter lag and slow auto-focus. I didn't move around, and I didn't look for the "good" angles I'd have been doing if it was my wedding to do, but as it turned out, it was the only coherent reception coverage the couple had.
Here's the link... Again, the shots aren't what I'd have done if I'd been working it, and nothing has really been post-processed; they're really just snapshots. But if I can make 'adequate' quality images from my chair with a P&S, I don't know why anyone would have a second thought about shooting a wedding and reception with M bodies.
The digi-Ms are more than competent to do weddings. The question is whether or not you can adapt your shooting to the eccentricities of the bodies. Of course, they're no more eccentric than Hassy or MamiyaTLRs... the primary difference is that you're shooting primes and you have to consider things (like your exposure and focus) yourself rather than letting the body do it for you and hoping it's right. The primes will force you to work differently than zooms...
Frankly, the DSLRs allowed me to be a little lazy, but I never really changed how I shoot from the "old days" of using 120 roll film cameras, so it's no big deal for me. If you think it through, it shouldn't be a big deal for you either. What makes Leica really amazing in that kind of setting are the large aperture primes available. They give the isolated depth of field that few can match, and they allow for relatively fast shutter speeds in most situations, even in fairly dark churches. Again, its just a matter of re-thinking your product output, and using the equipment to its strengths.
Good luck!
On edit... I remembered that I attended a wedding as a guest a few years ago, and took a small Panasonic P&S camera with me. I didn't know it until well afterwards, but the couple hadn't hired their pro to do the reception. I shot the recepton, mostly from my seat, and just for fun with that palm-sized P&S with horrendous shutter lag and slow auto-focus. I didn't move around, and I didn't look for the "good" angles I'd have been doing if it was my wedding to do, but as it turned out, it was the only coherent reception coverage the couple had.
Here's the link... Again, the shots aren't what I'd have done if I'd been working it, and nothing has really been post-processed; they're really just snapshots. But if I can make 'adequate' quality images from my chair with a P&S, I don't know why anyone would have a second thought about shooting a wedding and reception with M bodies.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
That means you are underexposing. Yes- that can be noisy.
Similar threads
