what do I buy?!

<p>Maybe I missed something but WHY do you feel the need to go digital? Film is still a perfectly viable solution for many photographers.</p>

<p>Pete S, film is like the dinosaur, slowly but surely going extinct in professional photography. Laugh at me now, but look back in years to come and it will be all but gone with just a few die-hards holding the fort. Just my opinion...</p>

<p>Digital offers so many advantages over film once the initial outlay and learning curve have been met. Very hard to argue against, but of course we still have a choice and if your preference is film then of course that is fine.</p>

<p>Melissa, you will not make a mistake if you buy a full format Nikon, You use nikon and have nikon lenses. You only need to decide which one. Looking at you budget you need the D700 this will leave you money for a new lense if needed. I have Canon but if I were you I would buy Nikon. Its a head on head call both are equal. Take your pick.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>WHY do you feel the need to go digital?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Workflow? Cost of film? Cost of processing? Honestly, I love my F100 to death, but it seems to me that wedding photography is a "business" and that business owners need to make decisions that lead to making "profits".<br /> <br /> Speaking of digital vs film..... The OP is probably going to need a copy of Photoshop. Tack on around $500 to that budget.</p>

<p><em>"The OP is probably going to need a copy of Photoshop. Tack on around $500 to that budget."</em></p>

<p>That's for bare minimum starters. A couple of backup external hard drives. A more powerful PC and better display. She's going to need digital darkroom lessons and buy some reference books. $2500 on top of that $600 for Photoshop CS4... if not $1,500 more. </p>

<p>I am not even talking about a printer and all of their $$$ inks & papers yet either. ;-)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I will add here that there is a good selection of 3rd party stuff for Sony without the need for VR or IS lenses and high quality glass with the Zeiss lenses from Sony.</p>

<p>Stay with film and you have low cost for very few weddings: the modern bride wants modern.</p>

<p>Go with digital and work weddings to pay off the initial start up costs which need to be paid by anyone who starts a digital era business.</p>

<p>Keep it simple.</p>

<p>I agree with many others on this. The only thing I would say is buy a couple of cheap compact flash cards somewhere, go to a camera store where they will really let you play without pressuring you a lot to buy. Ask if you can take some pictures on your compact flash cards (1 for Nikon, 1 for Canon, 1 for Sony if you really want to) and then take those cards home and look at the sample images you took.<br>

This way you will know<br>

-how the camera felt to work<br>

-what you can expect for image quality from each camera you tested<br>

-you'll start to get somewhat of a feel what its like to work with digital AFTER taking the pictures</p>

 

<p>Someone who is used to shooting film is used to having someone else make the proofs and do the lab work. There is no reason, whatsoever, that Melissa has to arm herself with a soup-to-nuts full-on super-duper speed digital darkroom. A simple ($<500) PC or laptop and a couple of $100 external drives, and she can do what she needs to do in order to back up her work, and burn the optical media she needs to hand the post production work over to someone else, just as she <em>used</em> to do with film.<br /><br />If she wants to get more directly into it herself, she can take advantage of a tool like Capture NX2 (which she'll get for free with a D700, and which will work very well with the files she'll produce with that camera). Yes, she'll want to spend $100 or so on a display calibration widget, and probably $50 on some more RAM so that her computer can move along quickly enough when dealing with a wedding's worth of files. You do NOT need a $500 copy of Photoshop and $2000 worth of computer in order to fly WELL past the level of image handling that Melissa was used to with flim. A used ("last year's") gaming computer from the local neighbhorhood nerd is going to be PLENTY of machine. A decent display, backup media, and she's good to go, especially for now.<br /><br />Or, she can simply get a third party involved, just as she's used to. It's not that hard, folks. With the revenue from a few weddings in hand, she can decide how much IT infrastructure to purchase, and how much schooling she wants along those lines. </p>

<p>Well said Matt Laur - I agree totally. No need for a Porsche when a VW will do. Both German, both excellent, the one is just faster than the other and a load nicer to drive. But both get you to point B!</p>

<p>The downside of buying the most expensive bodies can be that you have to keep them longer and can fall behind in terms of having the most up-to-date image chain. <br>

Every new camera has probably been tweaked all through the chain from sensor to card. If you are two generations behind you are very behind.<br>

That said, I wouldn't buy any new body until it's been on the market for a year. I have worked in manufacturing so I know new products can be tweaked quite a bit during the first year.</p>

<p>Melissa;<br>

my recommendation is to go to a store that rents camera's and rent the D700, D3, D300(not full frame), and see what you think. Play with them for a weekend and learn digital by doing.... it's a lot like film.... an aperature is an aperature is an aperature :)<br>

-mat</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>my recommendation is to go to a store that rents camera's and rent the D700, D3, D300(not full frame)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's like $400 per day in rentals (for all 3). But I do agree.... it probably wouldn't hurt to rent one of them for a weekend (especially if you get Sunday free) and go have some fun with it.</p>

<p>Canon 5d is full frame and does not have a built in flash: cost approx. $2200. Now you can practice and shoot with a lovely camera; if you like it then it becomes a backup as you grow your system and eventually buy a slightly higher level Canon and you have a great camera, the 5d, as a backup which you'll certainly need.</p>

<p>Buy a nice 580ex II flash unit for this camera: $420 and you've go some light. Get some rechargeable batteries and a charger to for a few more bucks.</p>

<p>Purchase a Demb Diffuser to soften light from the flash:$39.95</p>

<p>A battery pack (cp-e4) to help supplement the flash batteries: $150</p>

<p>Get several CF Cards and you can go out and shoot a wedding for less than your stated price for just the camera. Maybe: Sandisk Extreme III cards are very nice and reliable: cost appox. $30 for a 4 gb card and you should get several which could cost a total of $300 - $400 to start and add more as needed. Definitely will need more eventually.</p>

<p><strong>All the above would cost you Approximately: $3,140 </strong> and add some for tax ... that leaves you with some left over for a nice lens: like a fish eye which looks lovely on the 5d full frame sensor or a nice wide angle like a 24mm f1.4 which is also lovely with the 5d full frame sensor. Of course there's the camera bag and a lot of little stuff but you're ready to go. Full frame sensor is a good thing imo.</p>

<p>Of course: you could get higher ISO in your camera by buying the newer Canon 5d MkII but that has video capability which is probably not a function you need or want (yet): cost: ~$3000 but I really think the full framed Canon 5d is a great starter and eventual backup so that you can get started and see how it all feels before you make your next move.</p>

<p>Melissa:<br>

I would not leave the d300 off your list. It is exceptional and exceptional glass for it is reasonable in cost.</p>

<p>-Owen</p>

<p>Melissa,</p>

<p>What computer are you using? Cheap monitors are hell; you'll need a decent monitor .iMacs have great displays, and the new iMacs are out. Maybe you can score a discount on an <em>older </em> 20" or 24" iMac.</p>

<p>Hi Melissa,<br>

I agree with Owen. Do not rule out the Nikon D300. I have shot with Nikons for years. Before I switched<br>

to digital I was using my F6's for all my event photography. Last year I bought two D300's with the vertical<br>

battery grips. They have been outstanding! My files are beautiful. You can purchase two of them for the<br>

price of one D700. That would leave you plenty of money leftover for CF cards, a couple of SB800 or SB900<br>

flash units, if you need them. BTW, I didn't take any digital shooting classes. Just practice heavily before you<br>

need to use them for a job. As it was pointed out earlier, learning the capture is the easy part, establishing<br>

the work flow takes much more effort. One more thing, the pop up flash will only engage if you choose to do<br>

so, it does not pop up on it's own.<br>

My current wedding kit consists of:<br>

The two D300's, Lenses- Nikon 17-35 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 VR, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 180 2.8 and Sigma fisheye.<br>

along with 3 SB800's and 12 Sandisk 4gb extreme III cards. Works for me.</p>

<p>As of right now...</p>

<p>If you want video, the 5D2</p>

<p>If you want the best files in a small form factor, the D700</p>

<p>If you want nearly the best files, with dual card (self backing up your images) and a Pro size body, the D3</p>

<p>Overall, if you can handle the weight, the D3 is the best camera for the job IMO.</p>

<p>I have all of the above and still mostly use the D300's though. Why? well here is my criteria.</p>

<p>Weight (got to be able to lug it all day w/out back ache or dreading bringing it up to your face to shoot)/ size.<br /> Files (need clean iso up to 1600 for weddings IMO).<br /> Accurate auto focus (D300 nails it more consistently than even the D700 IMO).<br /> Lens choice (again, this relates to weight and size, but also means more options). I love using the Tokina's I have for the crop bodies.<br /> Pop up flash (can save your butt in a pinch where your on cam fails, not that mine have, but they could), which can also be used in commander mode for off cam units.<br /> Price for features, the D300 is on top IMO. After having the D700 for six months now, and the 5D2 for a couple moths too, I still reach for the D300's 95% of the time. Can't wait for a D400 with video and decent 3200iso/usable 6400iso.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>No one can answer this question for you, but I have been looking at the Canon 5D II and I think I see its real strength: it is perhaps the perfect "compromise" camera of both the Canon and Nikon lines at present.</p>

<p>That is, whereas the D3/D700 choice gives the best fast shooting and low-light performance, and the Nikon D3X is superb with regard to (1) lots of megapixels and (2) superior in-camera processing, the Canon 5D II is not really slow (unless one really is in action photography), and its low-light performance closely rivals that of the D3/D700 cameras--with the added benefit that it does give plenty of megapixels. Considering the number of megapixels, the low-light capabilities are quite striking.</p>

<p>In addition, it is not really made for rough weather, but it should be okay for either wedding or studio work. The good side of that is that one does not have to pay the $6-8K for either the Canon 1Ds III or the Nikon D3X.</p>

<p>Therefore, though it is not the very best camera for anything, it is a very capable camera for just about everything--short of shooting in pouring rain.</p>

<p>In addition, it does meet your other stated criteria: "it must NOT have an on camera flash and must be full-frame."</p>

<p>Just my opinion, of course. I have never shot it, but I do have the 5D and the 1DsII. I am basing my comments on what I see on these forums as well as the very helpful reviews and comparisons of dpreview.com as well as the personal website of our own Bob Atkins.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

<p>I'm surprised that there are so many people who are discounting the built-in flash. While I do not use mine very often (D700) it has saved me in numerous situations where I have planned on using available light but could not get enough where I needed it. And...if you set it up correctly you will not get red-eye at all. Which brings me to another great feature on the D700 - auto ISO. It works, and it works very well.<br>

That said, the pop-up flash on the D300 saved a photoshoot for me as well. I used to shoot Canon. I was doing a family portrait on location and they really wanted me to shoot at their barn with their horses in the background. It was a hot, very sunny day, with glare and shadow all over the place. I had my 5D, 580EX, 24mm 1.4 & 35mm 1.4 plus a few more lenses. I tried every setting I had on the 5D and flash to get a decent exposure. No luck.<br>

I had just purchased a D300. I had it in the bag. I pulled it out, did not have my SB800 with me, put a 20-35 2.8D lens on, set the D300 on P mode...yes P mode...used the pop-up flash...and voila...evenly lit exposure from the very first shot. SOLD!<br>

I now have three D700 and one D300 cameras. There's nothing better in my book. Nikon metering has always been reliable for me from the old FTn days right up until today. With any system though the secret is to play with every setting that is available to you so you know what the camera can do for you and what it can't. Why spend thousands of dollars on sophisticated technology only to say....well I never use that feature?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Melissa, you HAVE to get your head around the technical side of photography...especially digital. A digital camera will only get you 2/3 of the way towards a shot that you can sell.<br>

Good photographers can make a great image from a point and shoot. Good equipment can't help bad photographers. You need to understand about light. Thats what its all about. Take some trouble to do that then go on a course and learn how to make your camera produce good images.<br>

All digital SLRs have the option to disable the on camer flash, so I would go with something cheaper than whats recommended here. Nikon's D90 is almost as good as the pro version, but you still have a dial to select different scenes, like Portrait. That will give you the best chance to get goos results.<br>

Put an inexpensive 50mm f1.8 Auto focus lens on it and you can shoot groups as well as tighter individual shots. Thats the combo for weddings. With your limited knowledge, there is no reason to spend any more money.<br>

If you want the canon equivalent, its the 50D, and the same sort of canon lens.<br>

(And if you are successful and get commercial engagements, then let us know, so we can all jump off the cliff together!)</p>

<p>If your current system was good enough two years ago, what's changed?<br>

The digital "revolution" happened several years ago, definitely more than two. Were you able to compete two years ago? If so, then you should be able to compete now.<br>

Stick with what you know. If people want digital, have your lab scan it and you're good to go.<br>

Of course, you could go digital and then you're not just learning a new camera, but post processing, printing, etc.</p>

<p>Priority #1) I would lean towards anything with a dual card slot.<br>

Priority #2) Depending upon the quality of your glass... choose that system.<br>

Having shot both extensively...<br>

I prefer Nikon cameras<br>

I prefer Canon Primes, otherwise flip a coin on zooms.<br>

I prefer Nikon flash systems followed closely by Metz. Canon... barf!</p>

<p>ughh do not get a sony lol.<br>

If I were you, I would purchase either a used 5d or a new 5d. Then I would buy a 24-70mm, 50mm 1.4, 135mm 2.0</p>

<p>My biggest concern is that you are starting from ground zero digitally.<br />Why shoot weddings? <br />Why not just shoot portraits, invest a quarter of what it will cost to enter the wedding arena, spend about a tenth of the time investment and probably net the same amount of money.<br />Most aspiring wedding newbies have no clue as to what they are getting into... and I mean this respectfully... I think you are one of them.</p>