Minimum handheld shutter speed w/ bracket?

I am going to be shooting my first wedding using a bracket. Does the use of a camera bracket typically effect (either positively or negatively) the minimum hand held shutter speed that it wise to use?

My primary lense is likey to be Nikon 18-200 VR and/or my 18-70 which is not VR. But not taking into account the VR, how does using a camera bracket effect the lowest wise shutter speed to use?

Thanks for your assistance.

Rich

How strong are you? It adds some weight to the rig that you have to
manage for a whole day. Otherwise it has no effect.

Keep your shutter above 125 for most of the wedding. 60 will be
marginal in low light for sharp pictures. I know, many go below that
but that does not render sharp pictures.

18-200mm is not a good wedding lens. What is that 5.6 or more on the
high end? Ouch..... 18-70 is a common range for weddings. Use that one
as the 1st choice.

Brackets are necessary for shadow control. Try to get your flash high above
the lens but not so much that you can not control the camera because of
balance.

Here is the perfect rig.

Rliotta said:

I am going to be shooting my first wedding using a bracket. Does
the use of a camera bracket typically effect (either positively or
negatively) the minimum hand held shutter speed that it wise to use?

My primary lense is likey to be Nikon 18-200 VR and/or my 18-70
which is not VR. But not taking into account the VR, how does
using a camera bracket effect the lowest wise shutter speed to use?

Thanks for your assistance.

Rich

Click to expand...

Thanks, very helpful Aperturepro. I think I'm fairly strong, but noticed in experimenting with the bracket that it makes the camera feel much heavier, so how it will be for several hours straight, Im not sure.

In regard to the lens, I have read that people like the 18-70 for weddings-I guess that means I have to get closer! My 18-70 is a 3.5 to 4.5, the 18-200 is 3.5 to 5.6, neither spectacularly fast. But 18-70 still seems better in your opinion though its not a great deal faster?

Rich

Well, People like the 18-70 for weddings because it´s the only lens they have. Try a 17-55, which is all 2.8 and much more suitable for wedding photography.

The 18-200 sucks for wedding photography because it is not lightfast enough. Yes, you have VR, but VR is no help in wedding photography, as it only cures blur from camera movement but not the blur if your subject moves. Inside the church, the lens will be sufficient, but for everything else you should use a different lens.

For a 2.8 lens I have a 50mm prime. Maybe I should just use this as the primary lens and just put on the zooms in situations where they are needed. Has anyone done this in weding photograpy?

I figure I could use the other lenses more later, during the reception etc. When I want telephoto to zoom in for candids, but the bulk of the time I don't need the telephoto (or probably the wider angle for that matter). Does this logic make sense?

hendrikm said:

Well, People like the 18-70 for weddings because it´s the only lens
they have. Try a 17-55, which is all 2.8 and much more suitable for
wedding photography.

Click to expand...

The 17-55mm is relatively new. Do you have one and how do you like it.

Have you compared it to the 24-70mm which most wedding pros have given
good reviews. Might as well add in the 24-105 although it is f4 L

We enjoy the 24-70 and have an older 28-80 as well as the 20-35. We avoid
changing lenses at weddings and prefer to have each lens dedicated to a
camera. The 24-105 is a good choice for day time outside lens and move to the
faster/wider for lower light.

The new 17-55 look intriguing. If it were one lens IMHO, it would be the 24-70
for weddings.