Digital wedding gear

[d_purdy]

<p>Hello, I am a digital photo virgin but have decided to get myself up to speed and I have booked a wedding in a couple months and the wedding couple say they just want high rez files. Before investing in gear I want to rent the necessary camera and accessories to do the wedding. <br>

My question is, would the Nikon D90 be a good enough camera to be the main camera for the wedding.</p>

<p>Question #2 is because I have the offer of a free usage of a Nikon D1X .. which I have on hand and am learning to use. Is the Nikon D1X a good enough camera for candid photos at the wedding.. something like 5.6MP? I notice when I load images from this camera on my computer I get roughly 6x9 inch images with 300dpi. Is that large enough for a wedding?<br>

thank you for any response or thought<br>

Dennis</p>

<p>PS yes I have shot a lot of weddings... analog</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Yes and yes. If you continue to shoot weddings digitally, you will probably want something like a D300, D700 or D3, but I could be wrong. Not sure you can rent a D90 anywhere, but I could be wrong there too.</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>My local shop does rent the D90 and accessories as well as the D300 and I think D700. However I am trying to make a profit on this wedding if I can and the D90 is the least expensive. thanks Nadine.<br>

Dennis</p>

[picturesque]

<p>OK then--I know a photographer who uses a D90 for weddings. It is fine.</p>

[tsuacctnt]

<p>I normally shoot with a D200 but this last weekend used a D90 along side my D200. Aside from the controls being a little slower to get around to it's a great camera, and the newer technology blows my D200 images out of the water. The D90 feels like a bit of a toy compared to the pro-sumer models.</p>

[luis_g]

<p>The D90 is fine. The D1x will make an OK back-up to take along. The D1x is capable of making decent 11x14s and bigger with uprezzing.</p>

<p> </p>

[trevans]

<p>FYI the D90 can be rented at lensrentals.com<br>

(I don't work for them, just a satisfied customer)</p>

[john_deerfield]

<p>The D90 will do better at ISO 800 & above, no doubt. As such, I think this might make the better camera for the candid shots. The D90 images will hold up better if you want to do a lot of cropping. But I agree, if purchasing a camera the D300 can't be beat (unless you get a D700!). And the price should come down soon with the announcement of the D300s!</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>Thanks for the responses. I have another question to add on. Can I expect with my limited knowledge of digital controls to go with programmed auto on everything including white balance? I notice while playing with the D1X I have here that sometimes the white balance is way off. That is one thing that is making me nervous. Another thing is that the D1X is often giving me dark looking exposures.<br>

Dennis</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I'd hope someone with specific camera experience can answer, but one could use Program on just about any camera and come away with probably 80 percent OK exposures. OK meaning, within a range that is 'fixable' in post processing without a lot of quality loss or noise build up or highlight loss. Whether it is advisable to do so is another question.</p>

<p>I hope you shoot RAW, because this gives you the best chance at retaining quality, particularly if using Program or auto modes, both on exposure and on white balance. Using auto white balance is OK when shooting RAW, because it is easy to correct in post. Using auto white balance with JPEGs is not advisable, IMHO.</p>

<p>If using Program or auto modes, of prime importance is finding and using the compensation controls for both the ambient exposure and flash exposure and being able to read the histogram so you know when to make them.</p>

<p>Let me say, having gone through the experience myself, that going from film, where you have a lot of latitude with exposure (esp. with flash), to digital is a big adjustment for some people. I didn't comment about it before, but 2 months isn't too long for taking up digital before actually having to perform on a paying job. I'd get out there and rent, rent, rent...read, read, read...practice a lot.</p>

<p>Each camera model will have its own quirks, so experience with the D1x may not tell you a lot about using the D90--they are quite a distance apart sensor technology wise.</p>

[reda_salhani]

<p>Nadine... you're a genius and always a ton of help :)</p>

[d_purdy]

<p>I am reading a D90 user manual and I do plan to rent at least one time before. Beyond that I might as well buy one. Which I am seriously considering. However I don't feel knowledgeable enough to invest a whole lot of money. Up to now my weddings have been shot all manual MF for portraits and a Nikon F100 on program auto for ceremony and candids. Playing around with this D1X I am seeing that in one way making interesting images that look great on my monitor is almost too easy. I am also seeing that it would be a pretty good tool just for doing some web site ideas I have. A D1X is so inexpensive now used that I will at least do that. Uh oh I am starting to talk like a digital guy.<br>

Dennis</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Well I don't see why you'd change your methods from film to digital, EXCEPT for the fact that you do have to be more accurate on exposure for digital. If you overexposed film with flash by 3 stops, you can still pull a decent (well, maybe OK) print from a negative, but you sure can't do that with digital. So shooting on Program with a film camera works fine. It may not work as 'fine' with a digital camera, particularly if you blow the highlights. If the D1x is what you intend to use for the candids (in place of the F100), and you want to use it in Program, I'd be practicing a lot and using my compensation controls to familiarize myself with the way that camera reacts.</p>

<p>If you are comfortable using manual camera mode for the portraits, do so with the D90. In any case, be sure to use the flash units you intend to use for the wedding, with the rented and borrowed cameras.</p>

<p>Another note--if by monitor, you mean LCD, you shouldn't judge by the LCD, but withhold all judgement until you can view the images on your computer and processed them in the program you intend to use.</p>

[c._f.]

<p>D90 is fine for weddings but you should remember that it doesn't have pcsync connection on it thus if using remote lights you'll need either an adapter for hotshoe-pc-flash or SB800 or SB900.<br>

For image sizes in print, check this link out <a href="http://www.mpix.com/support/Help.aspx?id=3#anchor_97">http://www.mpix.com/support/Help.aspx?id=3#anchor_97</a><br>

Good luck<br>

adam</p>

[dave_wilson1]

<p>Dennis just so you know you're not alone, I've been going through this whole thing myself. I decided to go digital around February and maybe start taking some work again. The biggest thing is to practice with the exact gear you're going to use so as to test and get used to the menus and settings and results. There will be surprises and results you didn't expect. The white balance and ISO settings are of particular interest because the results can be really different from what you thought. I'm not so keen on the Auto WB, so I set it manually. I've also been keeping my ISO at 200 for normal stuff and going no higher than 600 on my D200 bodies. My friend uses D300 and his upper ISO is a little better. Eventually I think the D700 will be a sound purchase as my primary body, but I am very fond of these D200 and we are learning well together. So far I haven't taken any $$ jobs but I have photographed macro flowers, my dogs, various musicians, a school play and a fair/art show and some other stuff to test things out. Mostly looking good, but still too many surprises to feel ready to go and produce the level I can shoot with my Hasselblads. Practice, practice.</p>

[lou korell]

<p>The tricky part is that while the principles of photography remain the same, the attributes of digital capture differ in many ways than that of film. A sensor is a different medium than film emulsion and will react to light in ways that require careful study to understand. The good news is that the learning curve really isn't too extreme. It just takes practice with the tools and a little patience. But the caveat is, walking right into a wedding without the required practice will not give you the results you want. You will be disappointed. A lot of folks think that they can adjust settings and what they see on the LCD is what they got. Until you have really gotten to know what your camera will produce in its files, you don't have the complete story on the LCD. It is a bit deceptive.<br>

Play with your new digital gear and go through processing the files and studying the settings you used. That will give you a leg up on understanding what you will need to do in the way of settings for the wedding. I learned the hard way. I was shooting with my Hasselblad while carrying a brand new digital camera as well. All of my Hasselblad images thank goodness were properly exposed, but less than 10% of my digitals were close to being acceptible. Glad I didn't use it for the really important stuff.<br>

Blowing highlights is one of the most common errors for new digital shooters. Digital is not forgiving and has almost no latitude compared to film. The beauty is though that a perfect exposure in digital is a wonderful thing and the images can be stunning. Enjoy your new tools, but play a lot before going to work. Also practice going through a processing workflow which takes you through uploading your files and doing the edits. That takes a lot of practice too!<br>

Good luck!<br>

Lou</p>

<p> </p>

[lou korell]

<p>One more thing, if you have shot a lot of weddings you will probably be happier with a D700 or a D3. The features will be extremely useful for you if you are used to high end film cameras.</p>