nixphotopix
Member
I have to say, I checked out your website and I love your style of photography. Im considering taking my M8 along with me next time a wedding pops up, however id only use it say, at the brides house while shes getting ready and its a bit more relaxed, and use the canon while its hectic!! until at least im more praticed.
Do your clients typicaly request candid shots looking at your site?
However, if a client want a documented wedding and not a posed one like you said, then this is the way to go. quality over quantity(taking time to get the right shot)
Also, camera shy people are a lot more at ease with a fairly unassuming rangefinder, rather than a huge dslr with flash and zoom lens.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
What is 'known to get the job done' is the photographer, not the camera.
Frances and I have shot several friends' (and friends' children's) weddings, as a wedding present, and there may be a couple more in sight. I'm happiest using Leicas, so that's what I use, and that's what gives me (and the happy couple) the best pics. If you're happier using great big DSLRs, they'll give you better pics -- though as others have said, many people are less camera-shy when you point a smaller camera at them.
The fact that only a 'tiny percentage' of wedding photographers use Ms is irrelevant. Only a tiny percentage of photographers are any good. Only a tiny percentage use Noctiluxes. Only a tiny percentage shoot mono. So? If you're happy in any of those percentages, and you're getting good pictures, it's all you need.
Cheers,
Roger
Frances and I have shot several friends' (and friends' children's) weddings, as a wedding present, and there may be a couple more in sight. I'm happiest using Leicas, so that's what I use, and that's what gives me (and the happy couple) the best pics. If you're happier using great big DSLRs, they'll give you better pics -- though as others have said, many people are less camera-shy when you point a smaller camera at them.
The fact that only a 'tiny percentage' of wedding photographers use Ms is irrelevant. Only a tiny percentage of photographers are any good. Only a tiny percentage use Noctiluxes. Only a tiny percentage shoot mono. So? If you're happy in any of those percentages, and you're getting good pictures, it's all you need.
Cheers,
Roger
Riccis
Well-known
Thank you very much for visiting my site and for your kind comments about my work.
The type of client that commissions my work does not want any or very little posed images. I'll shoot about 10 minutes of family portraits for those that request it but 95% of my clients just want me to document their day without any interference as they just want to enjoy the company of friends and family.
I have gone back to film for all my work since I was starting to hate the digital workflow and I shoot about 90% in B&W anyway. My tools of choice include a 24 or 35 lux, Noctilux and 75 lux or 90 cron. The long lens only comes out during church ceremonies where I have limited mobility but most of my coverage is done with the Noctllux.
I have converted a few of my peers to use Ms as part of their coverage and they usually do what you are planning, use it for the getting ready and reception leaving their Canons/Nikons and long glass for the ceremonies.
Hope this helps and feel free to post any questions.
Cheers,
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Sorry, Andrew, I didn't mean to attack you by quoting you out of context. Rather, I quoted from memory what had stuck in my mind from the whole thread.
What I really meant to say was that merely because most people use a particular tool, it doesn't mean that it's the best tool for everyone. Nor does it even mean, necessarily, that it is the best tool for the job in hand.
The DSLR is treated as a 'universal camera' today, just as the Leica was in the 1930s, and of course, there is no such thing as a universal camera...
Once again, my apologies.
Tashi delek,
R.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
You'd be surprised what percentage of camera buyers would think of that as a revelation.
Toby
On the alert
Not as true as it once was. I shoot a lot of weddings in Sussex and you really need the best high ISO performance you can lay your hands on to shoot in dim Saxon churches, where the vicar won't allow flash during the ceremony. And these days that's entirely down to the camera rather than the film choice and careful processing. My vote would go to the newest best performing high ISO digital camera you can lay your hands on. I think a rangefinder with the ISO perfomance of a D3 would be an excellent choice for my style of wedding photography, but of course it doesn't exist.
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
I was assisting my friend who did the photoshoot in a wedding where I was invited as a guest. I was holding reflector, drinking champagne and of course I had my M8 hanging from my neck - and I took these:
Series
Wonderful color in these. How did you process for this effect? It's almost a cross between normal color and cross processing. Did you use one of the Nik filters?
Riccis
Well-known
I understand what you are saying but the D3 and the 5D are recent cameras that have not been around that long... Are you implying that the images shot on film or with the first generation of DSLRs are no longer good because you were not able to get super clean files at ISO 3200 or 6400?
IMHO, this is the problem with a lot of wedding photographers, they get too hung up on the technical qualities of an image and not in its content (which is what actually sets you apart rather than your tools)... I'll take a grainy, technically imperfect image that moves people (even strangers unrelatd to the wedding client) any day, but of course YMMV.
Cheers,
bobbyrab
Well-known
I shoot weddings with both 5d's and an M6, I had an m8 for a month but sold it on as if the colours were good they didn't look that different from the 5d files, but they could also be very poor, whereas images shot on B&W film from the m6 give me something the 5d can't do, so I went back to film for the Leica's. That and some lens calibration issues, it was just too many hurdles to overcome. Much as I love using my M's, if I had to go with one system for weddings it would be dslr, if only for the high iso, I try and avoid flash and with the mark11 5d at 3200 there's almost no room too dark to shoot in, but if Leica ever do crack it I'd certainly have another go at it......Robert.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
At the risk of sounding naive - I'm wondering how and why a £4000 camera has "black clothes going red/purple"?......I think I'd be a little p*^#ed off!
Cheers, Dave.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
At the risk of sounding naive - I'm wondering how and why a £4000 camera has "black clothes going red/purple"?......I think I'd be a little p*^#ed off!
Cheers, Dave.
Dear Dave,
Laws of physics.
Short film/flange distance = thin IR filter in body (because the angle at which light strikes the outer areas of the sensor means that otherwise there'd be worse problems) = inadequate IR suppression = need for UV/IR filter on the lens. Problem solved.
Yes, it's a nuisance. But as I say, you can't repeal the laws of physics. And there's no other choice if you want a digital M, except a second-hand 6-megapixel Epson with an even smaller sensor.
Tashi delek,
R.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I gotta agree with Riccis. If you don't have the people skills and the ability to "catch the moment" technical quality means nothing.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Thanks for the enlightenment Roger, ( and I apologize for being a little off topic ) I asked purely out of curiousity - being someone who will probably never possess a digital r/f camera - the condition you describe does not look very favourable for the introduction ( if ever? ) of the longed-for full-frame sensor in a r/f.
Cheers, Dave.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Dave,
They reckon they'll be able to do a full-frame (24x36) sensor, eventually, but I have not pressed them on the IR issue.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
JohnTF
Veteran
As I shot my first wedding for hire with a Graphic, camera and flash, and quickly moved to TLR's, and years later going AE; the experience of handling people, arranging shots, and just knowing what happens at weddings would not make the use of the M8 exactly a stretch.
If I want to make it easy on myself though, an AF, AE, and a fast flash with some pop in it might be the way to go.
If I am a guest at a wedding, then I look for more of a journalistic style, and guests can often capture the shots a pro cannot, the personal ones of people he does not know are the most important. It is often a waste if someone just wants to mimic the pro's shots when they can capture so much that is outside of his pond.
One thing I think is a bit odd, and perhaps it is just me, but taking thousands of shots of a social event in one day is not a sign of being professional. Seems commonplace today?
First studio I worked with was always apprehensive of some failure on the part of the equipment or photographer, plus they wanted to push larger packages, so they sometimes would ask me to shoot a dozen rolls at a three hour wedding and I thought that over kill at times.
I would prefer the guests remember the event more than the photographer.
If someone is going for a discreet and candid package, certainly the M8 would be in the wheel house for such an approach.
Lot of opinion here, so I suppose it depends on what everyone is looking for.
Funny, the more things get automated, the more apprehensive I get about equipment failure, so I suppose I would also do my share of chimping today. ;-)
Still, I do not think I will be burning a DVD at the reception to deliver to the B&G before they leave. ;-)
Regards, John
If I want to make it easy on myself though, an AF, AE, and a fast flash with some pop in it might be the way to go.
If I am a guest at a wedding, then I look for more of a journalistic style, and guests can often capture the shots a pro cannot, the personal ones of people he does not know are the most important. It is often a waste if someone just wants to mimic the pro's shots when they can capture so much that is outside of his pond.
One thing I think is a bit odd, and perhaps it is just me, but taking thousands of shots of a social event in one day is not a sign of being professional. Seems commonplace today?
First studio I worked with was always apprehensive of some failure on the part of the equipment or photographer, plus they wanted to push larger packages, so they sometimes would ask me to shoot a dozen rolls at a three hour wedding and I thought that over kill at times.
I would prefer the guests remember the event more than the photographer.
If someone is going for a discreet and candid package, certainly the M8 would be in the wheel house for such an approach.
Lot of opinion here, so I suppose it depends on what everyone is looking for.
Funny, the more things get automated, the more apprehensive I get about equipment failure, so I suppose I would also do my share of chimping today. ;-)
Still, I do not think I will be burning a DVD at the reception to deliver to the B&G before they leave. ;-)
Regards, John
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear John,
The last wedding Frances and I shot (my oldest friend's daughter) was from the hairdressers' and bride dressing (Frances shot those!) to the end of the reception.
We freely admit that after about 8pm we shot several rolls more than we needed (the last hour or two on Rollei point-and-shoot -- we neglected your advice on another thread not to drink, but hey, I've been getting drunk with her father since I was 16 and he was 15). Even at that, the 'serious' shots were maybe a dozen rolls each.
I've not shot a wedding on my own for years -- Frances is always there too -- but if I did I'd probably shoot 15-20 rolls (say 500-700 pics).
Reportage has often meant burning a lot of film...
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
eef
Established
I was taking pictures with my RD-1 at a friend's wedding. I liked a lot of them, but I was really glad to be "a" photographer, not "the" photographer. After "the" photographer left, and someone realized that some group shots had not been taken, my rangefinder and I were pressed into service.
Hats off to those of you who do this for a living. How is possible to get ten to fifteen people all to have a reasonable facial expression at the same time? Boy do I prefer candids.
Hats off to those of you who do this for a living. How is possible to get ten to fifteen people all to have a reasonable facial expression at the same time? Boy do I prefer candids.
user237428934
User deletion pending
My oberservation is that 90% of the people prefer technical, clean and noise free images over grainy technically imperfect images. So it's not a problem of wedding photographers being too technical oriented, but the demand of customers.
If I married again, I chose a photographer whose portfolio I like AND who is able to deliver the devloped files very fast. I don't need prints, I want to produce a photobook myself.
I know two wedding photographers. More and more customers of them just order the processed files and no printed pictures.
And customers sometimes know the camera brands. A wedding photographer with a big Canon or Nikon must be a pro. A photographer with Olympus, Pentax, whatever can't be a real pro. That's no joke. That's real life experience of wedding photographers.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Even the photographers during the heyday of Life Magazine didn't shoot as much on a two week asignment as a lot of today's digital shooters knock out on one wedding. For some reason the "I shoot 2,000 pix minimum at a wedding!" has become a sales tool. I'd rather book a job with one of the bride's friends who thinks the photos turned out fantastic "but I never saw you taking any pictures!"
What's that old saying? "If you sit enough chimpanzees down with typewriters eventually all of the world's greatest literature will get written." ...or maybe that's why it's called "chimping".
What's that old saying? "If you sit enough chimpanzees down with typewriters eventually all of the world's greatest literature will get written." ...or maybe that's why it's called "chimping".
Alex Krasotkin
Well-known
Guys, thank you very much for your thoughts and opinions! I truly appreciate your input! Sounds like I am going to end up buying Nikon D700, 20-35/2.8, 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 for colour plus I will couple this with my beloved M7 and 35, 50, 75 all /1.4 for BW job.
best regards,
Alex
best regards,
Alex