Sony a6000 - My First Wedding Kit

[TVProducer]

Hello Everyone,

I'm new here but I figured I'd ask some other fellow shooters what they think. So I got my Sony a6000 around April 2017. Came with Kit Lens 16-50mm, Zoom 55-210 f4.5/6.5 Variable. I then after shooting and researching realized my shots were the equivalent of a point and shoot. I decided to get my First Prime the 35mm f1.8. DEAR GOD IT WAS A LIFE CHANGER. My first shoot was an engagement shoot for my friends on the beach. I watched a few videos on youtube and realized on a sunny day i would have serious light issues without a flash with High Speed Sync. So, I invested in a Godox TT685S HSS Flash. I took the pictures and for my first shoot i was so happy. You'll see some of those photos below.

I quickly took to portraits which many of my friends loved how they came out. Recently on a horse farm, I decided to test the 55-210 and on a cloudy day with the right combination of Shutter Speed and ISO most shots came out beautiful. I shot until Golden hour where on a cloudy evening it just couldn't take photos without noise. I'll include examples below, of course, shot in raw, converted to JPEG.

So, my friends are getting married in February and they had me do engagement photos when i first got the 35 (The beach photos). They loved them. Said they were better than the photographer they hired for like 7K. (Yes I know, i choked too - their package includes Video and 2 shooters..at the wedding and the engagement shoot... still high in my opinion) Anyway, they said they want me to take photos at the wedding anyway because they are just in love with my work. First off, I said, inform your hired photographer about this, because i do not want to step on toes here and I know how other Photogs can be when an amateur shooter gets in the way. They said they would tell them because if they are paying the amount they are paying, they will get what they want (its their special day anyway).

So, my question is, do i need any more lenses to have a fully covered photo spectrum (Macro, telephoto, wide) and how do I work with the Hired Photog to not get in their way, but at the same time still take quality shots. Also, Should i invest in a pole mount for my flash for wireless flash in the venue or will that anger the other photog? Thank you guys so much for the help!!

 

[davect01]

Charming shots.

 

[JohnNEX]

I am not a wedding photographer, but the answers to your questions will be that it depends on the wedding. Is it indoors or outdoors? Do the couple want shots of the ceremony or just posed shots before and after. etc. etc.

If you are indoors (e.g. a church) and you have to be discreet, you may need some more heavy-duty equipment. If you are outdoors in good light then you will get very decent shots with the equipment you have.

Make sure you fully understand the event and plan out where you will need to stand to get the shots you want. Scope out the locations beforehand. Have a backup plan if it rains.

Let us know how it goes! I would find it terrifying!

 

[AdVeen]

If inside you might want a lens with F2 or 2.8 with a more reach than the 35 (85, 90?). As you are the extra photographer next to 2 pros, might want to be discreet with flash - could screw up other photos. If you want full wedding party shots inside you might need something wide with F2 or 2.8, as the kitlens only goes as low as 3.5. Might work though...

as said already, scout out location beforehand. Discuss with the pro photographers beforehand. Could save a lot of trouble and irritated faces...

 

[caterpillar]

The standard for events/weddings is the holy trinity - 16-35/40, 24-70, and 70-200, all f2.8, if possible in 35FF terms. Some go for 24-105 f4 or other oddball combinations. Some go for

You will need the ff:

- 10-18 - for wide shots. Large groups of people, interior of churches and venues

- 35 f1.8 OSS - you already have that.

- 50 f1.8 OSS - for tighter portraiture. Equiv to 80mm in 35FF.

- 18-105 f4 or 16-70 f4 - I wish there was a 16-50 f2.8, but there isn't yet. So these are your options. You can go with sigma 18-35 f1.8 for canon and just use an mc-11 or metabones adapter.

Optional, but may be needed if you cannot go near the couple in ceremonies - 70-200 f2.8 or f4 at least. Or buy an 85 f1.8.

FYI - I use mostly Canon lenses for now. I have the 50 stm and 85 f1.8. I also have a 70-200 f2.8L IS mk1. I use the ef-s 10-22 for my wide. But remember you may lose some features if you use non-native lenses. Maybe you don't have eye-focus. Or you don't have continuous AF. Just check to see what you are willing to compromise.

There is no one way to skin the cat as the saying goes. Some wedding shooters like primes more than zooms. Some use zooms with some primes from time-to-time. Depends on your style and shooting preference. Explore other lens brands too. Samyang, meike, etc makes some lenses now for the e-mount. some you lose AF, but are easy to manually focus.

Lots of options really.

--
------------------
- Caterpillar
'Always in the process of changing, growing, and transforming.'

 

[TVProducer]

I am not a wedding photographer, but the answers to your questions will be that it depends on the wedding. Is it indoors or outdoors? Do the couple want shots of the ceremony or just posed shots before and after. etc. etc.

If you are indoors (e.g. a church) and you have to be discreet, you may need some more heavy-duty equipment. If you are outdoors in good light then you will get very decent shots with the equipment you have.

Make sure you fully understand the event and plan out where you will need to stand to get the shots you want. Scope out the locations beforehand. Have a backup plan if it rains.

Let us know how it goes! I would find it terrifying!

 

[TVProducer]

The standard for events/weddings is the holy trinity - 16-35/40, 24-70, and 70-200, all f2.8, if possible in 35FF terms. Some go for 24-105 f4 or other oddball combinations. Some go for

You will need the ff:

- 10-18 - for wide shots. Large groups of people, interior of churches and venues

- 35 f1.8 OSS - you already have that.

- 50 f1.8 OSS - for tighter portraiture. Equiv to 80mm in 35FF.

- 18-105 f4 or 16-70 f4 - I wish there was a 16-50 f2.8, but there isn't yet. So these are your options. You can go with sigma 18-35 f1.8 for canon and just use an mc-11 or metabones adapter.

Optional, but may be needed if you cannot go near the couple in ceremonies - 70-200 f2.8 or f4 at least. Or buy an 85 f1.8.

FYI - I use mostly Canon lenses for now. I have the 50 stm and 85 f1.8. I also have a 70-200 f2.8L IS mk1. I use the ef-s 10-22 for my wide. But remember you may lose some features if you use non-native lenses. Maybe you don't have eye-focus. Or you don't have continuous AF. Just check to see what you are willing to compromise.

There is no one way to skin the cat as the saying goes. Some wedding shooters like primes more than zooms. Some use zooms with some primes from time-to-time. Depends on your style and shooting preference. Explore other lens brands too. Samyang, meike, etc makes some lenses now for the e-mount. some you lose AF, but are easy to manually focus.

Lots of options really.

 

[dankwok]

I am not a wedding photographer, but the answers to your questions will be that it depends on the wedding. Is it indoors or outdoors? Do the couple want shots of the ceremony or just posed shots before and after. etc. etc.

If you are indoors (e.g. a church) and you have to be discreet, you may need some more heavy-duty equipment. If you are outdoors in good light then you will get very decent shots with the equipment you have.

Make sure you fully understand the event and plan out where you will need to stand to get the shots you want. Scope out the locations beforehand. Have a backup plan if it rains.

Let us know how it goes! I would find it terrifying!

 

[kli]

I have some very eccentric advice. Feel free to completely ignore it.

But, if it were me being a GWC (guest with camera), I'd first look up the hired photographers. Take a look at their website, see what they do and get a sense of how they're likely to be working. If they're like most wedding shooters, it's probably going to have a lot of lighting, and a more magazine formal-portrait type feel. If that's the case, I'd go ambient-only, no flash (or only a modest on-camera bounce setup, preferably with a BFT), with two or three fast primes.

You don't need to "cover" the wedding, the way the pros do. You are, in fact, basically there to get the shots the pros won't. Pros are probably going to do the 24-70/70-200 2.8 equivalence thing. And there are likely to be two or three shooters, if they're doing both stills and video and know what they're doing.

You can go with a 24e/50e/90e setup, (so, maybe, a 50/1.8 and 16/2.8 with your 35) and just do candids. Maybe make the guests your subjects more than the B&G. This will help you avoid the pros (and being an Uncle Bob), while still grabbing stuff the B&G will want. Ask them which relatives/friends they particularly want photos of.

And if you're good, maybe you can pull it off, Jeff Ascough style. Dude used to shoot weddings with film Leica M rangefinders.

Also, decide ahead of time what your balance of photographing and attending is going to be. If you spend all your energy/thought/time shooting, you can't actually be there to celebrate. What's more important to you? Grabbing pics? Or sharing in their special day? Find a balance. You can't sit and eat the reception dinner or listen to toasts if you're running around shooting. Talk to your friends about what you may not be willing to do as much as what you are.

 

[TVProducer]

I have some very eccentric advice. Feel free to completely ignore it.

But, if it were me being a GWC (guest with camera), I'd first look up the hired photographers. Take a look at their website, see what they do and get a sense of how they're likely to be working. If they're like most wedding shooters, it's probably going to have a lot of lighting, and a more magazine formal-portrait type feel. If that's the case, I'd go ambient-only, no flash (or only a modest on-camera bounce setup, preferably with a BFT), with two or three fast primes.

You don't need to "cover" the wedding, the way the pros do. You are, in fact, basically there to get the shots the pros won't. Pros are probably going to do the 24-70/70-200 2.8 equivalence thing. And there are likely to be two or three shooters, if they're doing both stills and video and know what they're doing.

You can go with a 24e/50e/90e setup, (so, maybe, a 50/1.8 and 16/2.8 with your 35) and just do candids. Maybe make the guests your subjects more than the B&G. This will help you avoid the pros (and being an Uncle Bob), while still grabbing stuff the B&G will want. Ask them which relatives/friends they particularly want photos of.

And if you're good, maybe you can pull it off,Jeff Ascough style. Dude used to shoot weddings with film Leica M rangefinders.

Also, decide ahead of time what your balance of photographing and attending is going to be. If you spend all your energy/thought/time shooting, you can't actually be there to celebrate. What's more important to you? Grabbing pics? Or sharing in their special day? Find a balance. You can't sit and eat the reception dinner or listen to toasts if you're running around shooting. Talk to your friends about what you may not be willing to do as much as what you are.

This is fantastic advice! I hope to be able to capture more candid moments than close ups. Also a 70-200mm 2.8 isn’t a cheap lens but 2 more primes may make it worth while to me.. I was thinking of also possibly acquiring a macro. Any thoughts?

 

[kli]

... Also a 70-200mm 2.8 isn’t a cheap lens but 2 more primes may make it worth while to me..

Just me, but a 70-200/2.8 is more if you plan on turning pro as a portrait/event photographer. When you're a pro, you can write gear off on your taxes as a business expense, so the cost, weighed against profitability for the business (particularly on cutting down your post-processing time) is a different kettle of fish than a hobbyist digging coin out of pocket.

I was thinking of also possibly acquiring a macro. Any thoughts?

A macro lens is a nice thing to have, but I personally don't like doubling its usage as a portrait lens, like a lotta folks do. Macros tend to be sharpest lenses in any lineup, and that can actually get uncomfortably sharp (think hairs, wrinkles, warts, etc.) when used for portrait work. Obviously, you can mitigate this with post-processing, it's always easier to make a sharp lens softer, not so much in the other direction.

But I'd also say make sure you shoot enough macro to justify the cost to yourself. The wider the lens you use, the closer you can get to a subject. If you take an 18-55 kit lens, and put it at 18mm, and stop down, you can actually get pretty close to stuff, if not macro distances. Be sure you really need 1:1 magnification.

Also, with macros, the focal length will also indicate your working distance. Match that up against your fieldcraft and subjects if you plan to use this with things that hop/crawl/slither/fly away. I once shot a tarantula hawk with a 60mm macro, and only later found out what it was (largest hornet species ever. They're called tarantula hawks because when reproducing they'll capture a tarantula, paralyze it, and lay their eggs in it so when the young hatch it will have live food).

At which point I vowed only to shoot one with my 400mm if I ever encountered one again.

For wedding shooting, though, a macro will come in handy for any "still life"/product shots you might want to get of rings, boutonnieres, bouquets, place cards, etc.

 

[hungrylau]

I just want to say good luck but also want to make a few observations:

• using flash is a no-no because you'll kill the other photographer's pics that are taken at the same time
• learn to use the ambient lighting around you to light your subjects
• shooting grip and grins with a 35mm works very well, but you might inadvertently get in the other two togs way because of your shorter FL
• I find 35mm to be great for portraiture of 1-3 people
• it also works quite well doing detail shots esp of the wedding cake
• your 1650 stopped down can still take good mise en place shots
• my 35mm f/1.8 hunted in low light low contrast scenarios (worse than my nikon d3100 tbh)
• you definitely want more than 1 sony battery (3-4 at least)
• Try and make your work complimentary to what the other togs are doing by filling in whatever gaps their coverage is doing

Lastly, hearing your friends say your work is better than their hired tog's at 7K is very concerning. If I'm paying 7k for a wedding tog, I expect them to turn out a fantastic set of pics that would be much better than your posted examples.

If the hired togs are just about the same level as you, or actually worse than you, then I think your friends should look at can cancelling without any penalties (if possible) and finding someone else (if possible).

To be clear, I'm not saying that you should be the main tog taking over the wedding, I'm saying that the paid togs should be closer in output to something like this:

https://www.instagram.com/evanrphotography/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/portolesephoto/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/kevinmullinsphotography/?hl=en

--

--
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/anthony_lau/
24z mini review and impressions: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/59433273
1670z usage report: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4127102

 

[mikan]

Also, decide ahead of time what your balance of photographing and attending is going to be. If you spend all your energy/thought/time shooting, you can't actually be there to celebrate. What's more important to you? Grabbing pics? Or sharing in their special day? Find a balance. You can't sit and eat the reception dinner or listen to toasts if you're running around shooting. Talk to your friends about what you may not be willing to do as much as what you are.

This is a very good advice. A very good friend of mine got married a few months ago. And the day before her wedding, she told me that the hired/paid photographer (also her friend) said she was not very good with indoor shooting, and suggested to leave it to me (hobbyist) for all indoor photos. I asked her how much activities would be done indoor, and she said 100%. WHAT?? This totally threw me off. If I was going to be the main photographer, I would wear mostly black, so that the bright color would not show up in the eyes of the subjects (for portraits). I would not wear a dress, I would wear pants. I would carry a couple of lenses, and a flash with extra batteries. It's totally a different game, to be the main photographer or to be a guest photographer. After chatting with her, I decided to be a guest photographer with only a couple of extra gear than I had originally planned to bring. And I wore a bright dress. And I was going to eat and drink all I wanted. When I arrived at the party, I chatted with the hired photographer and asked her for her plan. I told her I didn't want to be in her way, and would use flash only if it was okay with her. She told me she was very happy I was there, because she was so nervous the night before and her hands were shaking, and my presence put less pressure on her. This turned out to be a great oportunity for me, because I got to try wedding photography without the pressure that comes with it.

 

[TVProducer]

... Also a 70-200mm 2.8 isn’t a cheap lens but 2 more primes may make it worth while to me..

Just me, but a 70-200/2.8 is more if you plan on turning pro as a portrait/event photographer. When you're a pro, you can write gear off on your taxes as a business expense, so the cost, weighed against profitability for the business (particularly on cutting down your post-processing time) is a different kettle of fish than a hobbyist digging coin out of pocket.

I was thinking of also possibly acquiring a macro. Any thoughts?

A macro lens is a nice thing to have, but I personally don't like doubling its usage as a portrait lens, like a lotta folks do. Macros tend to be sharpest lenses in any lineup, and that can actually get uncomfortably sharp (think hairs, wrinkles, warts, etc.) when used for portrait work. Obviously, you can mitigate this with post-processing, it's always easier to make a sharp lens softer, not so much in the other direction.

But I'd also say make sure you shoot enough macro to justify the cost to yourself. The wider the lens you use, the closer you can get to a subject. If you take an 18-55 kit lens, and put it at 18mm, and stop down, you can actually get pretty close to stuff, if not macro distances. Be sure you really need 1:1 magnification.

Also, with macros, the focal length will also indicate your working distance. Match that up against your fieldcraft and subjects if you plan to use this with things that hop/crawl/slither/fly away. I once shot a tarantula hawk with a 60mm macro, and only later found out what it was (largest hornet species ever. They're called tarantula hawks because when reproducing they'll capture a tarantula, paralyze it, and lay their eggs in it so when the young hatch it will have live food).

At which point I vowed only to shoot one with my 400mm if I ever encountered one again.

For wedding shooting, though, a macro will come in handy for any "still life"/product shots you might want to get of rings, boutonnieres, bouquets, place cards, etc.

My company is registered as a sole proprietorship for now, originally dove in as a Commericial drone Pilot now offering services in still photography so your note about tax write offs is a definite thing I’d do if I planned on shelling out 1500 for a lens. I think I would not purchase it until my business grew to the point where I needed it. Most of my clientele for now I can do with my kit. But if I need the 55-210 I can always rent the lens for $100/3 days. Good thought about macro. There are so many avenues. I’m also researching adapting canon on Sony and seeing if there is cost savings before I go all out Sony native. Eventually I’d want to upgrade my body to full frame so the lenses I purchase will be full frame so I can future proof

 

[Bradrobb]

Hi

Wedding

I was asked to shot at a wedding with my A6000 for a friend of my wife's.

I shot in black&white jpeg and raw so I had colour photos. The link is the photos on my blog.

Go with b&w so your photos are different the from the pros.

I used my 55210 lens to stay out of the way of the photographer.

If you click on the the to the photos on my drive I used these photos to make a photo book for the bride and groom.

Brad

 

[hungrylau]

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58465297

Just wanted to share his post and link back. Some great images!

http://jeroenselderslaghs.com/weddings.html

 

[Switcheroo]

You got some great advice already. Just wanted to share my experience as a guest photographer.

So I went to a wedding of some friends and I thought let me take the camera (they are very poor so I kinda thought maybe I can help them out with some shots). Of course they did not have a photographer, jsut a friend with a (bad) cellphone who was also the DJ. So I tried to help out and after the wedding I was actually approached to make an album out of my shots.

Anyways the most annoying thing for me was when the couple was posing after the ceremony everybody and their dog took out their cellphones to take pictures of them. So most of my posed shots were ruined by either cellphones in the frame or people with cellphones in the frame or the couple looking in another direction (to a cellphone -.-).

So this would be my advice: when the pro takes posed pictures, stay out of his way. Maybe help him by telling the guest to not take pics with their cellphones or you could assist by arranging the people for the posed shots. But if you take pics at the same time they will look in your camera (because they like you) and the poor pro will have a hard time to get everybody looking into his camera.

Just my 2 cents.

P.S. And yes, portrait lens for the win! I used my Sigma 60mm almost exclusively.

 

[caterpillar]

The standard for events/weddings is the holy trinity - 16-35/40, 24-70, and 70-200, all f2.8, if possible in 35FF terms. Some go for 24-105 f4 or other oddball combinations. Some go for

You will need the ff:

- 10-18 - for wide shots. Large groups of people, interior of churches and venues

- 35 f1.8 OSS - you already have that.

- 50 f1.8 OSS - for tighter portraiture. Equiv to 80mm in 35FF.

- 18-105 f4 or 16-70 f4 - I wish there was a 16-50 f2.8, but there isn't yet. So these are your options. You can go with sigma 18-35 f1.8 for canon and just use an mc-11 or metabones adapter.

Optional, but may be needed if you cannot go near the couple in ceremonies - 70-200 f2.8 or f4 at least. Or buy an 85 f1.8.

FYI - I use mostly Canon lenses for now. I have the 50 stm and 85 f1.8. I also have a 70-200 f2.8L IS mk1. I use the ef-s 10-22 for my wide. But remember you may lose some features if you use non-native lenses. Maybe you don't have eye-focus. Or you don't have continuous AF. Just check to see what you are willing to compromise.

There is no one way to skin the cat as the saying goes. Some wedding shooters like primes more than zooms. Some use zooms with some primes from time-to-time. Depends on your style and shooting preference. Explore other lens brands too. Samyang, meike, etc makes some lenses now for the e-mount. some you lose AF, but are easy to manually focus.

Lots of options really.

 

[val1]

Need? Nothing...suggest a flash. Ideally on a bracket.

18-105 would not hurt if you wanted it anyway.

 

[TVProducer]

The standard for events/weddings is the holy trinity - 16-35/40, 24-70, and 70-200, all f2.8, if possible in 35FF terms. Some go for 24-105 f4 or other oddball combinations. Some go for

You will need the ff:

- 10-18 - for wide shots. Large groups of people, interior of churches and venues

- 35 f1.8 OSS - you already have that.

- 50 f1.8 OSS - for tighter portraiture. Equiv to 80mm in 35FF.

- 18-105 f4 or 16-70 f4 - I wish there was a 16-50 f2.8, but there isn't yet. So these are your options. You can go with sigma 18-35 f1.8 for canon and just use an mc-11 or metabones adapter.

Optional, but may be needed if you cannot go near the couple in ceremonies - 70-200 f2.8 or f4 at least. Or buy an 85 f1.8.

FYI - I use mostly Canon lenses for now. I have the 50 stm and 85 f1.8. I also have a 70-200 f2.8L IS mk1. I use the ef-s 10-22 for my wide. But remember you may lose some features if you use non-native lenses. Maybe you don't have eye-focus. Or you don't have continuous AF. Just check to see what you are willing to compromise.

There is no one way to skin the cat as the saying goes. Some wedding shooters like primes more than zooms. Some use zooms with some primes from time-to-time. Depends on your style and shooting preference. Explore other lens brands too. Samyang, meike, etc makes some lenses now for the e-mount. some you lose AF, but are easy to manually focus.

Lots of options really.