Is a Nikon d80 good enough to do weddings?

Hi everyone this may seem like a daft question but please give your honest

opinions. I am a keen photographer and am considering turning pro. Assuming I

am up to the job as I believe I am, can you tell me do you think the nikon d80

is good enough as a primary camera for wedding photography? Also can you

recommend suitable flash equipment to go with the nikon. Thanks

D200 would be better but a D80 will do the job. The flask, an SB600 or 800.

D80 is sufficient as long as you can keep the ISO below 800. Above 800 the D80 (like all pre-D3/D300) Nikon's suffers from noise that some find unacceptable. Noise Ninja or other noise reduction packages can help, but then you lose detail.

 

Also, 1 camera is not sufficient for wedding work. You need a minimum of 2. (1 primary and 1 backup) The backup doesn't have to be the same model as the primary, although I suspect a lot of us do that. It should however be of the same system as the primary (ie Nikon / Canon / Pentax, etc...) and use the same accessories / batteries etc... Nothing is more embarrassing then having to tell a bride on her wedding day that you missed a shot because the camera died and you don't have a plan B or C or D.

 

Dave

Hi Sean,

 

If you're "up to the job" you will KNOW whether the D80 is "good enough as a primary

camera for wedding photography"....

 

But FYI: it is if the tog knows how to handle it. And get a Nikon flashgun. The bigger the

better. The SB800 is numero uno. Not cheap. But then you generally get what you pay for,

of course.

 

With the exception of http://abetterbouncecard.com/. It's more effective and efficient

than those tupperware 'spheres', 'tails' and other diffusors that cost an arm and a leg.

This one is a couple bucks and some elbow grease.

 

Have fun!

Hey there. I use a D70s and some of the images on my website were taken with my

trusty-dusty n50 that is over 10 years old. I guess what I'm getting at is it doesn't matter

what you use, it's how you use it. I have spoken to wedding photographers that upgrade

their cameras because they see guests using the same equipment or better and feel the

need to get more expensive equipment to look like a "pro".

 

I have a Lomo fisheye and that's coming with me next year on my weddings just for fun.

 

So, long winded but of course a D80 is good enough. It's been said many times many

ways Merry Christmas.....err I mean invest in great glass like the 85mm 1.4 ( ahh).

From all thr reading and stuff. :-) D80 can do the job but you need a good lens-a fast lens for the low-light or no flash ceremony... If flash is ok then that is a plus. I'm not a pro btw.

 

I once posted a question here about the things that I wanted to buy and d80 was on my list and many nice people here recommended it and I was going to get a d80 but decided to get the d300 and d200. A big jump-I know, since I'm still learning...

The D80 body will work, along with a pair of flash cords, and a flash bracket. Add in 2 or 3 batteries for the D80, and enough memory cards to get you through the wedding and reception. If you go with a Nikon SB-800 speedlight, you would do well to consider a pair (should one overheat, become troublesome, Murphy's Law would apply....) to be prepared to shoot weddings.

 

 

 

Unless you are planning to have 16x20-inch prints made, the NEF (Nikon RAW) files should keep you in business.

What about the Canon Rebel XTI? Is that good as a primary?

A D80 is not sufficient for wedding photography.

 

Two might be...

 

What would you do if something goes wrong?

The better question is.... Are YOU good enough to do weddings?

 

Most modern DSLRs are great cameras. With a good lens lineup, they can do fine work.

However, the better the equipment, the more options you have, and likely, the better your

work.

 

Would I recommend it? No. But, if David Jay or Kevin Kubota offered to shoot my wedding

with a D80 or XTi, I'd don't think I'd turn them down.

The biggest issue with any of the "prosumer" cameras from either Canon or Nikon is their ability to operate effectively in low light situations. Here in the south, most of our weddings are in churches that do not allow flash during the ceremony. This means that we must have fast lenses and be able to produce great quality at 1600 - 3200 ISO.

 

This issue is not about technique or experience, it is where the limitations of the equipment will bite you... I would not consider shooting weddings with anything less than a 5D or the Nikon equivalent.

You can photograph a wedding with a D40. The body doesn't matter. Post-production these days can handle almost anything. I've just started doing weddings and just jumped into it with my D70, without any advice or suggestions or anything. Just freaking do it. everettchristopher.com if you want to see D70 results. lens 18-70 kit lens, $100 50mm 1.8, and $140 70-300mm 4.5. I'm getting a D300 for Xmas :), but I'll be using my D70 for backup. the D70 is bad ass, even still today. later.

Read some books on wedding photography. I've got Bill Hurter's "The best of Wedding Photojournalism." I've read and liked Cantrell & Cohen's "The art of wedding photography". There are many others.

 

I don't think the choice of camera body is all that important important. I would stay away from the cheapest body by any manufacturer if you can, so avoid the Rebels and the D40/D50 - these typically have unacceptable omissions in features. I would get the 17-55/2.8 DX zoom as a primary lens on the D80 (or D200/D300) if you can afford it. Add some fast primes if you can.

 

Lighting is really important. I would get at the minimum two SB-800 flashes, reflectors/diffusers for the flashes, an umbrella, two stands, and the SU-800 to control the flashes. A bracket so you can place the primary flash above the camera for vertical shots when you're shooting without much set-up time. If you do more work with formals or want to really get fabulous lighting for the dance floor, rent two studio flashes. These take more setting up but they're so powerful you can do things that you can't do with two SB-800s, such as light the whole room in a magical way.

 

A second body is important when you start shooting as a primary photographer or if you're the only photographer. It's important that everything in your bag is compatible with everything else in case an individual piece breaks.

 

I don't think a body in the 5D class is necessary. People have been shooting weddings for decades with no faster ISO than 400 and there is no reason great work can't be done that way today. The D80 is very good up to ISO 800 and can be used at iso 1600 in a pinch although I would convert to B&W at this point. The 5D is full frame, which means that it has really low noise at high ISO, and can take better advantage of fast lenses, but all of this is a bit too expensive for someone getting into the field (IMO). And you'd need two 5Ds so that you have a backup, which adds to the cost. For Canon the 40D you can get the excellent 17-55/2.8 IS lens, which is wicked sharp and has IS, which might be useful for some shots in a church/during the ceremony. No, it won't stop motion but not everyone is moving at every point in time ;-)

 

It's fashionable to shoot a lot with available light and take advantage of it now that cameras are more sensitive than they used to be. This doesn't mean that you should neglect providing your own lighting.

Thanks for the advice everyone, and hope you all have a fantastic christmas.

I've shot most of my weddings on a Canon film SLR. I cut my teeth on that. My backup was a Minolta SLR. Now I shot weddings with a Rebel XTi and the Rebel G (film SLR) is my backup. I plan to go full-frame dSLR sometime, but for now this works well for me. Bottom line? It's not so much the tool but the worker...

<p>That's my 3 cents ;)

<p>Mark :]

Often there were a few average people, guests, showing up with 5D canons. The price is getting so low. There's places offering 1ds Mark 2's for $4000. If you don't mind people showing up with better cameras then you, well the results will be about the same up to 8X10's. It's a hard call to justify. If someone asks for a 24X30 wall print, will your camera and your lens choice make the grade? We actually push to sell large wall prints, because framed and mounted brings wonderful smiles to couples.

Well if a guest can take better photos than you then the camera is the least of your problems :-) If you're on top of what you do then this doesn't happen. Or you can have the client ask guests not to get in your way, most people have enough sense to understand that without asking.

Absolutely cheapest setup I can think of:

 

D80 + backup (maybe a used D70)

Tamron 17-50 2.8 + Nikon 50 1.8 (as backup. You'd be better off with a 35 2.0 if you want to use it to shoot the reception)

SB800 + backup(maybe an auto vivitar)

bracket, cord & diffuser

 

The SB600 just doesn't have the juice you will need.

I have not used the D80 however I wouldnt shoot a wedding with it. I stuck with my film based F100 untill the D200 was released as IMO the Nikon bodies other than the D2 werent up to it in terms of build quality and performance. For a lot of reasons I wouldnt use anything less than a D200. It ultimately depends on your skill and confidence. I am sure there are people that could shoot a wedding with a Sony Cybershot. I couldnt, and wouldnt. I would get a D200 and keep the D80 for a backup if I were you. Dont waste your money on anything but an SB800 - they are so versatile.