Weddings with a G2?

G

Gray Fox

Well-known
Local time
1:40 AM
Joined
Jul 11, 2006
Messages
214
Is anyone currently shooting weddings with a G2? If so, are you happy with the results and what camera, lens and flash configuration do you use? Also, are you scanning your negs and if so with which scanner? Thanks in advance for your input.
 
Hi Gray Fox

I'm not shooting weddings with the G system, so I can't help out there, but I can add my 2 cents as to scanners. I've been using a Minolta 5400 and the results have been great. Extremely crisp scans with a lot of detail. The 5400ppi scans give roughly a 16x20 file at 300ppi. The learning curve is a little steep at first if you've never scanned before, but there's a lot of workflow suggestions on the net. The Minolta scanners are no longer produced but are excellent and reasonably priced... kinda like the G systems :) For really large prints, I'd go with drum scans.

On another note, a close friend who shot weddings for years with a Hassy and then digital has gotten the G addiction lately and is considering using it for journalistic style weddings. Integrating it into her existing workflow and then transitioning over when it is proves itself is the plan I think...
 
I did one wedding with a G2, with a Vivitar 285HV mounted on a Stroboframe Press-T. I used the 45/2 mostly, used the 28/2.8 and the 90/2.8 least of all. Fuji NPH was the film used, pro lab did the prints. The wedding was very informal, very small, and I was an invited guest(no hired pro), so the G2 fit the bill nicely. The Vivitar felt huge with the G2 and bracket, but I don't like the TLA200 that I have, and I've used the 285HV for years with a variety of cameras. Results were fine.
 
G series weddings and scanners

G series weddings and scanners

Hi :)

May be able to offer you some help / advice here. I shoot alot of events (weddings, christenings, bands etc) for my business. I generally use my set of eos 1s (film and digital) for the set pieces. But my G1 (my little baby :rolleyes: ) always comes into her own for the reception, its small, relatively quite and very unobtrusive. I blend into the background and look like one of the family walking about with my compact camera. I generally choose to use the 35mm but the 21 & 90 also get used. I shot mostly on fuji velvia colour slide (underexposed half a stop for my tastes) and kodak CN400 transgenic black & white. Im always blown away by the results.
If my customers want the images as a digital output I then put them through my minolta dimage scan 5400. I use a mark 1 over the mark 2, had a chance to play with both and preffered the build qaulity of the one. They are getting short supply now but if you are lucky you can pick them up new for about £250 GBP which is a bargain.
This combo has gained me alot of work and Id recomend it to anyone.
 
I do not use a G2 but can see no reason why not for a wedding. I use OM4Tis, a Ziess Ikon and an M7 (with a combination of ZI and CV lenses). The best camera to use for such a job is the camera you like using best. The G2 lenses are reputed to be wonderful (and will knock any zoom into a cocked hat). Quality will not be an issue. Your work will look especially good compared to the complete garbage produced by most digital wedding shooters who seem to have little clue how to use their (albeit complex and demanding) equipment and even less of a clue how to develop their files.

I guess the only drawback would be if you feel the need to blast everything to death with fill flash - but I guess that is unlikely given the camera choice. Some noteable wedding photographers have used "non-mainstream" cameras - Geoff Ascough and his Leica Ms for example. Sadly, he recently went digital - the drop in quality is very noticeable, even online - the depth, three dimensionality, the sparkle...all gone.

Go for it!
 
All the time...

All the time...

Hi there

I've been using a G2 w 28/45 & 90 lenses to shoot weddings professionally for almost 2 years - no regrets at all. I use 2 cameras but I mainly put Ilford XP2 thru the Contax. Flash is a TLA 280 (contax) and I scan the negs that I need to enlarge on a Minolta SE 5400 II (with Vuescan) which gives really nice results. As with previous posters, I find the G2 is fairly quiet & doesn't attract attention if you're after candid shots, & is also extremely quick & easy to change film with. Also, don't forget the 4FPS motordrive which I haven't really explored yet, but could be very handy in particular situations during a wedding. One problem tho - once the low battery signal comes up in the top display, you've got about 6 more shots until the camera just stops working - ALWAYS carry spare batteries (but I'm sure you don't need to be reminded) On the whole, a great little unit for weddings - you can't really go wrong IMO.

Cheers,
Evad
 
Weddings with a G2

Weddings with a G2

Thanks for the input, guys. I'm shooting various sports gigs 5-6 days a week with Nikon digitals, and am having the usual fits with apposing players wearing very dark and blazing white uniforms in the same shot. One shot in bright sun, the next in full shade, and wishing for the lattitude of a 400 iso color neg film. these jobs require editing and burning to CDs a couple hundred images each night, which I just could not do with film, but to get back on subject, this would not be the time limit for a typical wedding. Also, I think that a G2 with 800 Portra or the Ilford chromogenic B&W exposed at that ISO might be just the ticket for the church shots where flash is not allowed or preferred.

A bit of dark humor for you folks. I'm doing the sports gigs at American middle and high schools and have been told I cannot even utter the word "shoot" or any variation of it on a campus or any nearby public place just in case someone may think I'm planning a Columbine-type attack at a school---and I'm an old guy with white hair and a beard to match!
 
I am a fairly new RFF member and just as new to range finder cameras and I have been reading over this thread with great interest. I have purchased two G1's and two Electro 35 Yashicas in the past three months. I must say that it has been quite a journey of dicovery. Up until then I had always used 35mm SLR's and eventually digital SLR's for all of my jobs. This past week end I spent a day at the local botanical gardens just playing with one of the G1's and my Nikon F5. I reviewed the slides and frankly I am dumbfounded:eek: The G1 produced images that are markedly better than those from the 5. Friday I have a wedding portrait to do and for the first time I am torn as to which camera to use. I will most likely use both just to insure good results.:rolleyes: I am also considering using the G1 for the candids in upcoming weddings. Wow. It will change the work flow some but I can't help but feel that it is the way to go. :)
 
Speaking of Jeff Ascough... I always wondered why he has one of his first wedding portfolio pictures be the one of the little boy crying being comforted by an slightly older girl? I mean kids that age are usually upset because they have to wear a suit not because they are happy because their sister is getting married or whater...

Don't mean to thread jack... it's just always bothered me
 
In response to keeds question, if you are lucky you can get minolta 5400 scanners from jessops for around £250. Wether they will have any left now is another matter. For some reason when Minolta ceased jessops dropped all the products like a stone, they do this alot actually if your buying not quite cutting edge kit. Its worth checking there web pages regularly, or even better, pop into a store and get to know one of the staff. At my local store they know what I use and let me know if something I might find usefull turns up.
 
Geoff Ascough and his Leica Ms for example. Sadly, he recently went digital - the drop in quality is very noticeable, even online - the depth, three dimensionality, the sparkle...all gone.
Click to expand...
Just curious, but I'd like to know how you came to this conclusion? Looking thru my website portfolio, can you indicate to everyone which images you think were shot on Leica and which were shot digitally? We'll see how close you are. If you can't, then I cannot see the point in posting comments such as yours in the first place.

Normally, I wouldn't worry about replying to a thread like this, but this thread is fairly high in google when searching for my name, and easily accessible to my clients.
 
Jeff,

A very resonable comment. You can click on the user name and send a private message to the forum member. He could be asked to edit the post. You can also ask a moderator to remove the post.


I enjoyed you website, Have you indeed switched to digital? I couldn't see it.
 
rhogg said:
.


I enjoyed you website, Have you indeed switched to digital? I couldn't see it.
Click to expand...
I've been shooting digitally for 18 months. Most of the portfolio galleries are mixed Leica and Digital. The first gallery is 100% digital, and there are three Leica shots in the second. After that everything is pretty mixed up.
 
Weddings with a G2?

Last week I had a chance to conduct a little field test to add some some info to address my original question. As a lark last week while providing digital coverage for a school's homecoming festivities, I threw my contax G2 loaded with Fuji Reala and fitted with the 45mm f2.0 into my vest pocket. I shot two rolls more or less in tamdem with my Nikon D70 and a 28-200 zoom. The next day I took the film to the local Sam's Club for develop only (30 minutes and $3.20 total) and returned home to scan the results. I had forgotten how easy scanned negative film is to run through CS2 compared to fiddling with digital images. The results were beautiful, took about 30 seconds each to process, and had I needed large print sizes there would have been more than enough image data to do great 11x14s from a 3200 dpi scan on my Epson 3170. My Microtek 4000 would have done even better, but I was in a hurry. I think I'll do some more side by side testing like this to see how the two compare. Perhaps something like Fuji's GA645zi rangefinder would be fun to work with in a similar setting.
 
Hi guys, I just agreed to shoot a wedding next thursday, my first and the grooms third :)

The couple want's to have shots in the park near the registry office which is a good thing as I live just some 100 yards from there and allready have some places in mind which might fit and which I know quite well. The fall leaves should add some and the weather should be fine on thursday.

I'll pack up a Contax 167MT with 35/2.8, 50/1.7 and 135/2.8, a Contax G2 with 28/2.8, 35/2, 45/2 and 90/2.8 as well as a TLA30 and a TLA200 and a Metz 45CT5 in case I need FLASH (good enough for fillflashishing a group of 30 people).
I'm not quite clear on film, probably BW400CN and APX100 for the G2 and HP5 for the MT, there's another friend of the couple with a dSLR who can take care of colour and I just stuff a few rolls E100 and E400 in bag because one never nows.

The wedding will end around noon and the light in the park should be pleasing, I know the pub for the reception very well and shot a lot there.

That'll be fun!
 
"the drop in quality is very noticeable, even online - the depth, three dimensionality, the sparkle...all gone."

Oh come on. Jeff's work is quite wonderful, film or digital, Leica or Canon (or anything else he chooses). Jeff knows his art and makes his gear choices for good reasons. You're imagining that Leicas gave his work greater quality. Gear is important, but it doesn't make the photographer, as we all should know.
 
No flash was used. I had almost optimum mid-to late PM sunlight while covering the homecoming parade. I was really pleased with how well flesh tones were rendered, even with an African American and Caucasian girl side by side in an open convertible. Shadows and highlights were so much easier to handle than the ones shot with my D70. And this is with a low end scanner. the new V700 sure is tempting. Since time is money and if I were in a situation where either paper or digital proofs did not have to be delivered within a few days, I think scanned Kodak Portra NC would be the way to go in 35 and 120 formats. In the long run it would also be a lot cheaper than buying digital SLRs that are updated every 6 months at premium cost.
 
Gray, you don't have to upgrade a digital SLR, I'm still waiting for the Canon bullies raiding my home and forcing me to upgrade my nearly five year old D60 :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom