I have to break my rule

[whvick]

Netmage,

Disaster is a scarey word. I think Michael has a very good point for me...KISS..especially as I will not be held to a professional level.

I will probably lean to his rational and do most of the shoot with the 50D and bouncing the 430ex. I will have the 20D there though and try to grab a few to be sure that all shots are covered. Although I really like IS, I feel that although old, the 24-85/f3.5 has consistantly given very sharp results...almost L quality, so it will be the main lens, with the 85 used some for the staged shots afterwards, probably in the hospital atrium and marble staircase.

I really wish that i could bring a back up photographer, but as the family wants to make this a very private service It is all on my narrow shoulders. }

I have several old flash units that are not digital, and although it is tempting to try to go to manual flash so I could slave them with poppers, it gets far away from the KISS principal. So I will use the better bounce card and or my Gary Fong wanna be.

I wanted to post the shots of the small chapel so you guys could get a feel for it, but as luck would have it i apparently have deleted them.

I am going to take several newly formatted cards and change them sometime along the way

I am hoping to get the couple away after the service for some staged photos. I really do pretty well with those and that should help to make things better.

I am going over my equipment and charging batteries and formatting cards tonight. I am going to get my stuff down to my small bag, trying to KISS.

Again to everyone, thanks for the advise.
whvick

 

[Michael Thomas Mitchell]

If you read about the need for backup in the pro forum, I'm sure you would have seen my posts front and center of the argument. But having a backup system at the ready and having two cameras in hand at once are two totally different things.

When I shoot a wedding, I actually carry FOUR cameras total, including two 1D-series bodies. I also carry backup lenses, flashes, batteries, stands... you name it. When I keep a backup handy, it is a virtual duplicate of the primary body, ready to pick up where the other one left off.

But again, this is different than juggling two different cameras for two different purposes. Having two completely different camera rigs for two different purposes is probably better than nothing, but a telephoto lens is NOT a backup for a mid-range zoom.

Yes, the OP should have a second camera on hand. I'm only advocating NOT trying to use them both at once!

I would think having two cameras, or at least switching multiple flash cards, would make sure you can recover from a disaster when something doesn't work.

I'm pretty sure I've read some backup camera wedding stories in the pro section.

--
-- Please remove the Quote option!
-- Why can't you edit more than once???
-- How about switching to real forum software?

 

[whvick]

Thanks again for all advice and help.

Below are pictures taken with the 20D and 24-85EF/f3.5-4.5. two with direct 220ex and one with available light.

I think it would be easier to flash if it were vaulted all the way, but alas it is not.

I do have several old optical slave flashes, but they are not digital so that I would have to go to manual, which although it works great for a single shot would be too clumsy for the ceremony.

And will the video guy be bothered by my flash or do they deal with that all the time?

If I try for the shots over the shoulder of the bride and groom, I assume I should do those with available light, and it looks like the 85 will be too long for in there, so that leaves me with my very old nifty fifty.

As I said before, once I get out of the chapel, I can stage shots in the hospital atrium, and a marble staircase, and a glass overwalk. I can use the 85 and fill flash and will be in much more my comfort zone.
Comments and advise are appreciated. You guys have been helpful.
Thanks again
whvick

 

[Michael Thomas Mitchell]

The chapel is both much smaller and also much brighter than I would have thought. The ambient shot is much better than the direct flash (no surprises). I see, too, that the 20D did quite well at ISO 800 with 1/80 and f4. Seems like the way to go.

Bear in mind that all that tungsten lighting is really going to cast amber onto your subjects, so get a good manual/custom white balance up front. That 24-85 is going to be the most versatile, too. Just minimize your walking around... maybe starting with the aisle in the center, then moving to one side for some facial shots of the bride, then to the other for the groom, and then back to the middle for the first kiss and exit.

Good luck. Let us know how it goes.

Thanks again for all advice and help.

Below are pictures taken with the 20D and 24-85EF/f3.5-4.5. two with direct 220ex and one with available light.

I think it would be easier to flash if it were vaulted all the way, but alas it is not.

I do have several old optical slave flashes, but they are not digital so that I would have to go to manual, which although it works great for a single shot would be too clumsy for the ceremony.

And will the video guy be bothered by my flash or do they deal with that all the time?

If I try for the shots over the shoulder of the bride and groom, I assume I should do those with available light, and it looks like the 85 will be too long for in there, so that leaves me with my very old nifty fifty.

As I said before, once I get out of the chapel, I can stage shots in the hospital atrium, and a marble staircase, and a glass overwalk. I can use the 85 and fill flash and will be in much more my comfort zone.
Comments and advise are appreciated. You guys have been helpful.
Thanks again
whvick

 

[whvick]

As I told you, I do not enjoy the pressure, even when it is not really put on me. It was a very simple wedding, the most complex thing being the complex lighting. I really like the KISS rule, and if I had had a 24-70/2.8L I could have done it easily. If I ever get caught like this again I will rent one if time permits. My old 24-85 was more up to the task than my shaky hands, but I did get out of the chapel with many good and usable pictures. I also had the nifty fifty on the 20D and afterwards used the 85 some for the staged photos. I should have used it more for better bokeh, and I will continue to save for a 50/1.4 and 35/1.4 or an L lens 2.8 zoom.

I would have forgotten to set a custom white balance if you had not reminded me, and that was a life saver. The mixed lighting would have completely defeated me otherwise.

I went back to the 430ex with the homemade Gary Fong when we did all the family shots and did fine. I cannot post them as I did not get permission from all present and it was a very private setting. The bride and groom had no problem with me posting their pictures for the benefit of all those who helped me decide how to tackle this shoot. I would say that the family pictures were somewhat better than the two chapel pictures posted here.

Everyone was quite relaxed and the bride and her sister knew what shots they wanted, and also used the list you guys had given me to chose from.

There is a very special story from this event that I felt justified in posting on a separate thread, and I really feel you will enjoy reading it!
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=39020055

Here are some of the shots from the wedding. I do not know why but my shots here always seem softer than on my computer...prehaps because I downsize them some. Regardless they are acceptable in real life, although not up to professional standards.

This experience again reinforces my desire to never do another wedding, and increases my respect for good pro photographers. For something with such slow music, the event goes too fast for me to photograph!
Thanks again everyone for your help!
whvick

 

[Y0GI]

Looks like you got some really nice shots there! Congrats!
--
Yogi

When you get down to the nuts and bolts of photography, the results depend on the 'nut' behind the camera!

See the 'Plan' in my 'Profile' for my current equipment.

 

[whvick]

the list was a help!
thanks
whvick

 

[Paul Farace]

IMHO you don't need more gear. The 50D and your 430 bounced off the walls/ceiling @ISO 800-1600 will deliver fantastic pictures! Shot lists-SMAHT LISTS... the couple with their family and MOM! No brainer. And you get a gold star and heaven points for breaking your rule... who knows you may become the next wedding shooter to the stars at $50K-per after this!
--

Holding a camera, any camera, reduces my blood pressure, calms my nerves, and gives me a sense of opportunity!

 

[whvick]

Thanks Paul!

Really the old 24-85 Ef is a very good lens even being 16 years old. It was one of the earlier USM lenses, but is quite sharp and at 3.5-4.5 faster than some lenses. But I think I could have worked more on good bokeh with an even faster lens, when I did get out in the open spaces. Still the limiting factor was much more my skills than the equipment.

The 85/1.8 is a great lens, and the old 50/1.8 adequate. And the 50D is an exceptionally good camera. And for me the big bright screen makes it hands down better than the 20d, which is still a good functional performer.

And the 430ex had more than enough power for that very small chapel. I did run through what I thought was a fresh set of lithium batteries though, and had to change when a couple of shots were underexposed. (also my fault for not watching the charge indicator, but there had been enough time to recharge) It seems that when I check them later there is always one that is a little low while the other three are still quite live.
Does that make any sense?

It was quite an experience, but I really do prefer to leave the weddings to the pros.
Thanks again
whvick
PS be sure to read the other thread:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1019&thread=39020055