Reading mode: Light Dark

which m4/3 gear for weddings? help needed

Go to last post
How do you 'visually' compose the shot without a viewfinder?

Sorry. Not trying to be difficult but not quite understanding what you said.

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
 
GH1 has a electronic viewfinder and a LCD screen, I choose to use the LCD screen...
Griffo59 said:
How do you 'visually' compose the shot without a viewfinder?

Sorry. Not trying to be difficult but not quite understanding what you said.

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
Click to expand...
--
'the rule of 4 thirds'
 
Griffo59 said:
Griffo59 wrote:

Yes the M system has no AF which is why I would never use it for a wedding shoot.

Years ago you could get away with it. Not these days.

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
Click to expand...
Well, this pro photographer uses Leica M for weddings, gets away with it and his images are lovely (I have also been on one of his seminars; he's a nice guy and a wonderful photographer).
 
YouDidntDidYou said:
the GH1 is fine for wedding photography, performance is good upto ISO 1600, it has controls that you can change quickly, the lenses are small enough that you can carry i2-3 in your spare hand, it has fast accurate autofocus, easy to use manual focus, great live view, various aspect ratios...
Click to expand...
...... than mine!

Mine is rubbish at ISO1600 - in fact I can't print anything at a reasonable size (A3 and up) from an ISO800 file if there is any shadow in the image - the noise and banding is dreadful. My G1 is the same.

The autofocus is a joke in low light - especially if anything is moving, the only 2 fastish lenses are the 20mm and 45mm primes, and have you really tried to manually focus a moving subject with a "legacy" fast (read shallow DOF) prime with or without the magnified view?

My entry-level Canon 550D leaves it for dead in all these departments, so would the entry-level DSLRs from Nikon, Pentax and Sony. My 5DII and 1DIV are on a different planet in comparison. The range of inexpensive fast lenses is huge on the Canon and Nikon systems and almost non-existent on M4/3.
Nice little cameras ..... BUT !

--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '
 
"What aperture and shutter speed do you usually use for weddings?" .... GEEZ !
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '
 
lots of examples on my flickr and blogs...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou

I tend to use the Leica f1.4 (depth of field can b less than an inch) or wide angles such as the 7-14mm or 8mm Olympus with adaptor.

I use manual focus when photography subjects in low light when I don't want my subjects alerted by the AF beam, it's quite easy to do, also on first dance shots



manual focus on joined fingers of moving subject (dancing to the Libertines)

btw all our packages come with large prints and packages

and one more thing my second shooters all use Canon or Nikons...
PhillipA said:
YouDidntDidYou said:
the GH1 is fine for wedding photography, performance is good upto ISO 1600, it has controls that you can change quickly, the lenses are small enough that you can carry i2-3 in your spare hand, it has fast accurate autofocus, easy to use manual focus, great live view, various aspect ratios...
Click to expand...
...... than mine!

Mine is rubbish at ISO1600 - in fact I can't print anything at a reasonable size (A3 and up) from an ISO800 file if there is any shadow in the image - the noise and banding is dreadful. My G1 is the same.

The autofocus is a joke in low light - especially if anything is moving, the only 2 fastish lenses are the 20mm and 45mm primes, and have you really tried to manually focus a moving subject with a "legacy" fast (read shallow DOF) prime with or without the magnified view?

My entry-level Canon 550D leaves it for dead in all these departments, so would the entry-level DSLRs from Nikon, Pentax and Sony. My 5DII and 1DIV are on a different planet in comparison. The range of inexpensive fast lenses is huge on the Canon and Nikon systems and almost non-existent on M4/3.
Nice little cameras ..... BUT !

--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '
Click to expand...
--
'the rule of 4 thirds'
 
Its not really all about the equipment.

As you say, art can be done with almost anything.

But, shooting a wedding professionally means asking someone to actually pay you for recording a day that's very important to them & CAN'T BE REDONE!! You can't say: "Ooops! Sorry! I screwed up the photos. Can we just do it all again next week?"

To know how to do something like this requires, believe it or not, taking the time to learn from someone who already knows. If I'm hiring a photographer who's competent, I really don't care what equipment they use. What I don't expect (and wouldn't accept) is some naive guy (or gal) who shows up and says, "Hey! I've got a pretty good camera. I can push the shutter release. Why don't I shoot your wedding for you? If I take enough shots, some are bound to be pretty good!"

Wedding photography is not the most difficult photography around, nor is it the most demanding on the technology, Try real architectural or real wildlife photography for tough and/or sometimes scary days. Or shoot in the Gobi Desert with micro dust getting into everything. Nevertheless, it takes knowledge & skill to be able to be done well, and just grabbing a decent camera then pointing it at the Loving Couple is a disservice to someone who deserves more.

I love my GF1 (and I'm looking forward to seeing a pro-level m4:3's body sometime. I hate weddings & bar mitzvahs & other events like that. i don't like shooting them, either & don't do it anymore unless its a favor for someone. And, even then, I'd rather not do anything except the candids (and then in B & W).
--



http://s176.photobucket.com/albums/w177/mfurst_photos/Surmang%20and%20Yushu%202009/?albumview=slideshow
 
If it's sort of wedding where you can command people, and ask them to gather and stand still, then sure.

However, in the modern world...

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
 
Yeah, I thought that was a rather curious thing to say (being charitable, here).

Just for the record, one of the best known wedding photographers who's work I've seen, Sean Reed, shoots many weddings with "only" a Leica M9 (well, with lots of lighting equipment, an assistant, and all kinds of other stuff). But that's Sean Reed. I'm sure he could also shoot a wedding with a GF1. But, again, he's a guy who really knows what he's doing. And, besides, an M9 is not only FF, but has suberb (and fast) lenses.
--



http://s176.photobucket.com/albums/w177/mfurst_photos/Surmang%20and%20Yushu%202009/?albumview=slideshow
 
It's all theory, isn't it?

I'd love to see how some of you pontificators would cope in a small venure, on a hot June afternoon, with blindingly bright, overhead sun, hard shadows, and sweat.

Of course you'd just whip out your trusty GH/GF/EP whatever m4/3 and shoot away.

I've been there. I do not want a dinky m4/3 camera with me in that situation. I want a relaible, if unfashionable, workhorse camera from Canon or Nikon - sorry.

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
 
I get my 993 Turbo serviced at the Porsche dealer. Its costs more, but I like the car.

For a wedding, most people want it done right, despite the rising divorce statistics.

Still there are people who get their old 911s serviced by a backyard guy. They might pay for it in the end, but so what. They are only cars.
 
M9 is a perfectly suitable camera for weddings providing you have the right sory of client.

Unfortunately, modern weddings rarely lend themselves to this kind of considered approach.

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
 
Griffo59 said:
This idea that you can do video too is just bull.

It's hard enough working on a wedding shoot doing stills.

The video guys seem to work pretty hard too - everyone using top pro stills and vidoe gear.

And you suggest it can all be done in one go with a GF1?

Gimmee a break! :LOL

--
Concatenation : the process of glueing one cat's nose to another cat's tail.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. While having not done a wedding, I've done a few local events shooting video and photo at the same time, using a DSLR and a video camera slung around my neck, swapping between the two quickly as and when the occasion arose.

I've done a few weddings too, and didn't find it necessarily 'that' difficult, having done plenty of planning.

With the new GH2 with it's ability to record 1080p/24 while simultaneously being able to capture a 14MP 16:9, without disturbing the video, makes me think I could really use that when doing local events and tournaments. And I can't see why it couldn't be used for a wedding...I know I would.

Now, I'm not a professional photographer, and I've only done friends and friends of friends special days. I've not ruined anybodies day, and my friends have had their photos done for free (or at least cost), and enjoyed the memory that I was there doing it for them. However, I do appreciate that when money is involved, people are a little more demanding...so my mileage will vary.

Either way, I didn't mention a GF1, I said GH1/GH2...so you made that bit up, perhaps purposefully...or you just didn't read.

One thing I have noticed in abundance, and I partly don't blame them. But professional wedding photographers don't half get arsey when someone comes along and says 'I'm doing my first wedding', 'What camera for weddings', 'A friend of mine.....'. As I said, I get it, but you do need to have a bit of latitude for honest folk that are having a go, and are going to do it a little different. As long as the photographer isn't showing samples of 0.5cm DOF on the brides eyes at 35mm in his samples, and then turning up with gear that will look different to what he's advertised, then I can't see the problem.
 
YouDidntDidYou said:
lots of examples on my flickr and blogs...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/youdidntdidyou

I tend to use the Leica f1.4 (depth of field can b less than an inch) or wide angles such as the 7-14mm or 8mm Olympus with adaptor.

I use manual focus when photography subjects in low light when I don't want my subjects alerted by the AF beam, it's quite easy to do, also on first dance shots
Click to expand...
Well, you had to use manual focus didn't you. Its an F1.4 lens, on a Panasonic four thirds camera. I can list the here the person who got married too.

An F1.4 on a D3s would have stopped the motion blur, and you'd have got a good exposure too.

You can take a photo with any camera, but that is not a guarantee it will come out well.
 
Melbourne Park said:
Well, you had to use manual focus didn't you. Its an F1.4 lens, on a Panasonic four thirds camera. I can list the here the person who got married too.

An F1.4 on a D3s would have stopped the motion blur, and you'd have got a good exposure too.
Click to expand...
http://photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00QziN?start=10

even these pros found that D3s can have issues with focus lock in these conditions.
Manual Focus looks like a good choice in this circumstance
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top