|
Henrikw
Lives in
London, United Kingdom
Works as a
Photographer
Has a website at
http://www.uk-weddingphotography.com
Joined on
Jul 16, 2005
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| Nectar Dancing by Lensmate from A Big Year - birds | Foggy morning by LassiM from Fog | Sad clown by PEB from Clowns | Mtl Gen X 2015 DP by MarioSS from - Gen X - (In Full Colours+ Border) |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
2463FeatureWhat is equivalence?
Wow - £1680! Apart from the advantage of 1.8 and 1mm wider view, I would like to see how it compares to the 50% cheaper Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC USD.
I just ordered that lens
ShatteredSky: Sorry to say, but for me, personally weddings would be one of the most boring and annoying things to shoot (at least the traditional ones). Let us see how they arranged the documentation for an upcoming one I am going to attend.
(note: you might find it the best thing since sliced bread, and the stuff that interests me you might yawn about, and that is fine).
Well that's not really photographing a wedding then. It's just taking "mug shots" of people attending a wedding.
I have never been asked to do this - in what part of the world is that normal?
ShatteredSky: Sorry to say, but for me, personally weddings would be one of the most boring and annoying things to shoot (at least the traditional ones). Let us see how they arranged the documentation for an upcoming one I am going to attend.
(note: you might find it the best thing since sliced bread, and the stuff that interests me you might yawn about, and that is fine).
Each to their own, but I found architectural photography dead boring.
Weddings demand all skills you have as a photographer, I fail to see at what point you have time to feel bored.
During a 10 hour wedding I sit down for a maximum of 20 minutes - there is never a point during a wedding when you don't have anything to shoot, hence why "boredom" is completely foreign to me in this context.
smokinman88: I hated doing weddings, my partner and I were even sued for not getting all the photos at one event but the bride and groom changed from the agreed 3 hour shoot to just 30min of shooting time when we arrived. We settled out of course but wedding are a living hell in my opinion. If you are a wedding photographer then I bow down to you and your patience.
Did you have time to meet up with them for an informal chat in advance - for them to get to know you and vice versa? If so, did you "click"?
This would minimize the risk of them treating you like dirt on the day - you are not just a stranger turning up for their wedding to take photos. What they did sounds absolutely absurd and if this is exactly what happened, I find it even more absurd if you paid them. It's like being told by a mechanic that it will take 3 hours to fix your car - you then turn up after 30 minutes and demand a freebee because it isn't ready.
Jacob the Photographer: Part 1: Interesting to see times have not really changed. I did very intensive wedding photography between 1977 and 1996 - was a 'highly sought after photographer for weddings' YES!! Then deliberately drew a line - 'No More' - ... well only one : in 2013 for my best friend. Somewhere around 1990 it began to dawn on me how crazy my and Wedding photography in general had become. As if we the photographer were more important as say the Wedding officials. We created the most striking posed images. I won the Dutch national Wedding photo championship by Kodak 3 times (never repeated by any photographer) , yet I was not happy.
What was ( and still is ) wrong?
We photographers tend to milk every creative opportunity out of a wedding and bypass the real emotions of that day. Instead we create our own emotions and force those upon the innocent wedding couple & family.
Absolutely - I do creative shoots whenever the couples want it. But back to the initial point of "forcing it upon the couple" - never.
Jacob the Photographer: Part 1: Interesting to see times have not really changed. I did very intensive wedding photography between 1977 and 1996 - was a 'highly sought after photographer for weddings' YES!! Then deliberately drew a line - 'No More' - ... well only one : in 2013 for my best friend. Somewhere around 1990 it began to dawn on me how crazy my and Wedding photography in general had become. As if we the photographer were more important as say the Wedding officials. We created the most striking posed images. I won the Dutch national Wedding photo championship by Kodak 3 times (never repeated by any photographer) , yet I was not happy.
What was ( and still is ) wrong?
We photographers tend to milk every creative opportunity out of a wedding and bypass the real emotions of that day. Instead we create our own emotions and force those upon the innocent wedding couple & family.
"We photographers tend to milk every creative opportunity out of a wedding and bypass the real emotions of that day. Instead we create our own emotions and force those upon the innocent wedding couple & family."
Depends what kind of wedding photographer you are. I never take over the wedding and force my creativity upon people. I discretely photograph the wedding as it happens and do whatever I can not to spoil the precious moments of raw emotions. Couples are often vocal about how much they appreciate that they hardly noticed me on the day.
Jacob the Photographer: Part 2:
Towards the end of my wedding career I had noticed that most photos re-ordered where those with real intimate moments between Wedding couple and their family / friends , my creative poses in a park or crazy location where rarely if ever re-ordered. Yet I won prizes with just these images and thus thought 'I do well'. 
Slowly I changed my wedding photo strategy and focussed on the real emotions of the day. Made only a very few posed images of couple and family and friends. All in all I shot maybe 100 images (on film 35mm and 6x6 ) during a wedding. Out of it composed a wedding album with about 40 highlights all on large format. And tell you what: It was a runaway success. I could charge as much as I wanted.
Wishing you great success with my now 27 year old approach !
bingo!
Mariano Pacifico: Who needs weeding photographer every got cameras from cellcams to P&S.
yep - some couples want to ensure at least one person is competent with a camera
I have shot just over 300 weddings since I started in 2008, and Uncle Bobs have never bothered me. You are everyone's friend on a wedding day and have to work around guests who are eager to capture the special moments. Blending in and adapting has to be part of your skill set. Getting annoyed and telling people off means you have not quite understood you role. Furthermore, you have to consider each wedding a business opportunity - being grumpy and bossy will not get you any recommendations as people will remember you for all the wrong reasons.
Henrikw: most importantly for those who use their computers for editing; is there an option for a matt screen or only a mirror?
I hope my trusty old 30" Apple cinema monitor will last for a while. All my colleagues are forced to use the glossy mac screens and the same will happen to me if this monitor dies.
most importantly for those who use their computers for editing; is there an option for a matt screen or only a mirror?
janist74: I made some real life test photos with the A9 to see how far I can push the shadows at ISO100 and the conclusion is:
- A7rII is for sure better, but the A9 is still completely ok for (my non professional) needs of landscape photography. IMHO the difference between the 2 cameras one wouldn`t see even at A2 print size.
- the sharpening what I can apply in LR without amplifying the shadow noise is quite limited in comparison with the A7rII, but still enough to produce good Q images.
Sony stated, that the sensor is optimized for speed, but I think they made a good compromise and the camera can be used as an all-arounder without a problem.
ps.: the camera can track my chaotically running kids in all directions and EVERYWHERE in the frame without an issue at 10/15 fps. Just show me an other camera which can do it. :)
not ridiculous - interesting to hear different opinions on this topic. Nobody is angry or rude.
janist74: I made some real life test photos with the A9 to see how far I can push the shadows at ISO100 and the conclusion is:
- A7rII is for sure better, but the A9 is still completely ok for (my non professional) needs of landscape photography. IMHO the difference between the 2 cameras one wouldn`t see even at A2 print size.
- the sharpening what I can apply in LR without amplifying the shadow noise is quite limited in comparison with the A7rII, but still enough to produce good Q images.
Sony stated, that the sensor is optimized for speed, but I think they made a good compromise and the camera can be used as an all-arounder without a problem.
ps.: the camera can track my chaotically running kids in all directions and EVERYWHERE in the frame without an issue at 10/15 fps. Just show me an other camera which can do it. :)
I just happen to see a camera as a work tool. If I shoot casually - ie kids, holiday snaps - I am happy using my Samsung S7 or nex6000. If I buy a £4500 camera (+lenses) I want to put it to full/frequent use, using all my skills, it would have to be a workhorse and eventually pay itself back. Other cameras will do the casual stuff for a fraction of the price. But then again - if you are loaded - as many golfers are (to refer back to earlier examples), why not:)
janist74: I made some real life test photos with the A9 to see how far I can push the shadows at ISO100 and the conclusion is:
- A7rII is for sure better, but the A9 is still completely ok for (my non professional) needs of landscape photography. IMHO the difference between the 2 cameras one wouldn`t see even at A2 print size.
- the sharpening what I can apply in LR without amplifying the shadow noise is quite limited in comparison with the A7rII, but still enough to produce good Q images.
Sony stated, that the sensor is optimized for speed, but I think they made a good compromise and the camera can be used as an all-arounder without a problem.
ps.: the camera can track my chaotically running kids in all directions and EVERYWHERE in the frame without an issue at 10/15 fps. Just show me an other camera which can do it. :)
How can anyone justify buying a $4500 camera for non-professional work?!?
And the sniper's motivation for wanting to murder the journalist is....?
I was preparing myself to buy the S8, but the lack of upgrade in camera specs put me off. Sticking to my S7 for now. Battery life and camera are the main selling points for me. Maybe the S9 will see some sort of improvement.
Henrikw: Apart from the weight, not a word of comparison with the Canon 85mm 1.2L - would have loved to get some comments on AF performance. I hate the inaccurate AF on my Canon 85mm 1.2 and consider trying this Sigma
That's the feedback I was hoping for. Will try it out and hopefully I can comfortably retire my Canon
Amando: Why is a Sigma lens being compared to a Sony? Sigma does not make an e-mount so they are not compatible. Comments like "Personally, I would choose the Sigma over the Sony" don't make sense to me because it's not a choice a photographer has (a lens adapter (even Metabones) is not a serious option. You lose much functionality and speed and of course it adds $400 to the bill). To me it would have made more sense to compare it to say the Canon 85mm 1.2. Thank you.
PS: I so wish Sigma would make it E-mount
Embarrassing?!? Because the Sigma or the Canon will lose? I don't get it
Apart from the weight, not a word of comparison with the Canon 85mm 1.2L - would have loved to get some comments on AF performance. I hate the inaccurate AF on my Canon 85mm 1.2 and consider trying this Sigma
Looks great.
But only one portrait in the gallery? I would think portraiture is one of the main uses of this camera, but there is only one poorly lit shot. I assume this is to show it's low light capabilities. Noisier than I thought it would be given the sensor size.