Juggling Cameras

[eddie f]

i've been reading this forum for some time, so i thought i'd ask a

question.

 

When i photograph weddings i try to keep it as simple as possible,

but i like to mix color digital, color film and film b/w.

 

i could keep it to color digital and b/w film, but i have some

problems trying to move from one medium to the other.

 

the b/w is with leica m so i need to focus fast and i need to shift

from af to manual focus when i'm using digital af.

 

any suggestion how to simplify this?

[picturesque]

Except for more practice with differing cameras, nope. The only other alternative is keeping the ISO and camera brand and model the same so you don't confuse yourself, but even so, you would have to develop habits like putting all the controls back to a "home base" position so you wouldn't have to remember "where you were" when you go from one camera to another. From that standpoint, it might even be better for the cameras to be very different from each other, or be after very different kinds of shooting (automated digital vs. no flash, manual only, low light black and white) so that there is no confusion when picking up a camera.

[karl_knize]

I think you need to go to the mountain and seek advice from Mohammed on this one. Ask Marc Williams. If anyone can illuminate you on how to manage six systems and two technologies I'm sure he can.:-)

[cjogo]

We just eliminated B&W film --- client just orders a B&W image from the color...we used to have an assistant, for B&W but, the budget no longer seems to afford both.

[steve_levine]

The key is to always have a "smart" assistant that can hand cameras back & forth. The "smart part" is so they can anticipate your needs & moves.

 

I shoot with 2 cameras that are on Stroboframe Pro RL brackets. Having 2 "rigs" this size clanging around my neck isnt going to happen, they are just too bulky/heavy. I do sometimes shoot with one, while the 2nd is hanging off the other shoulder. At the least, I can move around like this, even if shooting this way is a pain.

 

 

The last alternative is to use the floor/ground below. A quick knee bend is all thats required to change.

[fotografz]

Nadine is correct IMO. Practice.

 

While Karl is right that I use a number of formats, types of cameras, and both film and

digital, I didn't always do that. For years, I exclusively used a Leica M for street and travel

photography. As a result I can load, focus and shoot those cameras in my sleep. Load a

Hasselblad a thousand times doing commercial work, and it's nothing to do it at a hectic

wedding. When I first got the digital cameras, I took a million shots of everything in my

house and a trillion shots of my long suffering wife ... before ever using one at a wedding.

 

 

Practice.

 

Currently use digital for color candids, Leica M for B&W exclusively, Medium Format (film

or digital) for formals, portraits and some outdoor shots I want to make display prints

from. I have these choices separated by their unique contributions to the over-all story

flow.

 

Focusing: practice.

 

Here's a way to look at it: all cameras are boxes. There are 2 basic controls to worry about:

shutter speed and aperture. Focusing manual lenses can be easier and faster IF you learn

to crank the focussing ring to infinity after each series of shots. That way you always will

move the focussing collar the same direction when you go to shoot the next series. It'll

become automatic after ... practice. From infinity to focus is usually just a slight

adjustment, unless you're right on top of the subject.

[djphoto]

I've been there, done that, and have a drawer full of bloody T-shirts. I used to go to weddings armed with a pair of Canon A2s, an EOS-1, a Leica M3 & CL, and a Hasselblad. What an incredible, non-productive, time-wasting hassle! Shooting all digital makes my life and work simpler, my load lighter, and my photography better. Prints from my 20Ds look at least as good as medium format, and my clients get whatever they want -- color, B&W, or even sepia.

[hugh_jaramillo]

Elmar,

 

FWIW, I use a combination of digital, MF and BW 35mm. What works for me is that each camera is for an specific use and rarely if ever do I change lenses.

 

The digital is an all purpose unit, while the MF is only for portrait and formals (or anything else that has the potencial to go above the couple's mantle) and the BW for BW candids.

 

As long as I don't confuse those facts I'm ok.

 

Hugh

[picturesque]

Hugh--are you getting optically printed large prints (for above the mantle) from your medium format negatives, and if so, where? Machine large prints (11x14 and above) are now being digitally printed at my lab, and are nowhere near the quality of optically printed enlargements. It is almost not worth it to use medium format film anymore.

[hugh_jaramillo]

Right now I only give the negs to people who want that option, and if they came back for albums or enlargement I can take them to Dodge color in Rockville or ABC in Manassas.

 

Hugh

[karl_knize]

Interesting how equipment is both the stimulus and response to shooting requirements and approaches, isn't it? Chicken or egg? I've done the Nikon, Hasselblad and Graflex route myself and in the end, for me it created too many variables and too many choices between being focused on the life spinning by and taking pictures. But for others it seems to work fine. I guess it ends up being about your style, your shooting goals and how well you can compartmentalize. I tend to keep things as simple as possible because I don't handle chaos well, and weddings and people shoots are chaotic by nature or so it seems.

 

So do you have the Hass. in your bag because you really need it to shoot formals as part of your style, or are you shooting formals because you have the Hass. in your bag and should use it after hauling the dammed thing around, grasshopper?

[fotografz]

Exactly Karl, the Grasshopper is the one lugging the bag around, not me ; -) When I'm

shooting alone it's all in a rolling bag.

 

There are really only two cameras I like the tactile feel of, and makes shooting a pleasure for

me ... Leica M and a Hasselblad. The rest could come and go and I wouldn't know the

difference, nor care much.

 

BTW, love using the Hasselblad for a lot more than formals ...<div></div>

[karl_knize]

I used to do a lot more portrait and street work, and for a while worked a lot with my 501 on a monopod. Hassy on a stick. What a great way to work. But I never got comfortable with hand holding it, maybe too many ad shots with lighting,or just the sense of formalism the format gives me. I was a best man 100 years ago and the photographer shot the whole thing with a Rolliflex TLR. The guy had some serious chops and the stuff looked great for the time period.There's an idea. Maybe I'll give hand holding w/flash another try down the line.

[karl_knize]

BTW-- Nice shot Marc. Tough to beat film, MF or otherwise, for the look.

 

I'm realizing though (perhaps a little slow on the uptake) that one of my beefs with dig capture perhaps has more to do with the chip than the overall technology. I have no issue really with the image quality and look of the work I do in studio with the Imacon and CCD. The edge transitions and tonalilty look pretty good to me. But when I occasionally shoot with a 1DsII for ad work I'm less than enthused about how some shots have a cut and paste quality to the edges. I've held off on the big DSLR purchase because of this, and perhaps I should simply upgrade to a newer Imacon/H2d or try out the upcoming Mamiya ZD. In either case though, the slow capture rate and slower lenses become an issue. Nothing that $50K and two new systems won't fix though. Shooting dig. commercially is like owning a racing boat, only worse.

[fotografz]

Ditto Karl.

 

Just upgraded to the H2D/CFH (including the CF Adapter). Ouch!

 

Nice files though ; -)