Two shooters question

[KyleE]

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I have a question with regards to wedding photography. A good friend of mine was asked to shoot a wedding recently for a friend of his and he asked me to assist him.</p>

<p>My question is when it comes to gear at a wedding do you gear yourself up independent from the second shooter or do you tailor your gear to fit to what the other shooter already has. For example if the other shooter at a wedding already has a 70-200mm zoom do you leave that at home and use a different lens so you both get different photos with different styles?</p>

<p>We will be doing this wedding in June and I wanted to pick up some more gear before then and I wanted to know where the best bang for my buck would be. I don't really have a budget at the moment I am just trying to get a general idea.</p>

<p>His camera gear:<br>

Nikon D40<br>

Nikon D200<br>

50mm f1.8<br>

and he will be picking up a 70-200mm f2.8 the sigma I believe before the wedding.<br>

He also has an N80 film camera as well as a couple other lenses.</p>

<p>My gear:<br>

Nikon D3000<br>

55-200mm AF-S VR<br>

50mm f1.4<br>

18-55mm (kit lens)<br>

N80 in the mail on its way to my house.</p>

<p>I am for sure going to invest in another camera body before June either a d300s or a d90 as well as another fast lens. Would it be worthwhile for me to get the 70-200mm f2.8 or would it be better since he is going to get the 70-200mm to get something different that will fill a different purpose? I was thinking of picking up the 105mm VR micro for detail shots maybe. I was also thinking that the 14-24mm f2.8 or the 24-70mm f2.8 might be good lenses to get too. I just want to make sure I am well prepared and have a versatile enough equipment set so that we can get all the shots we need.</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

[KyleE]

<p>I should add, the wedding is in the middle of the day so it will most likely be very bright and sunny. The ceremony does take place in a church though which we have not visited yet but will visit well before the day of the wedding to scout it out and check exposures and lighting conditions.</p>

<p>(Unrelated question but I noticed that there are several sub-forums in each forum category, how do you navigate to them specifically? I noticed there are two newbie sections under the wedding forums.) I couldn't find them in the forum list. It only shows the main top forum but not the sub categories.</p>

[neilambrose]

<p>My view is you each need to be equipped to provide decent coverage just as if you were working alone.</p>

<p>You can't guarantee that you'll have access to the other shooter unless you're standing right next to them. And if you are standing next to them then you're doing it wrong! So don't plan on being able to share lenses. If you're working well as co-shooters you may find you're not even in the same room very often.</p>

<p>Looking at the list above neither of you have anything workable for less than 50mm. That's a serious omission. The 18-55 kit lens should be left at home as it's not in any way adequate.</p>

<p>You each need something solid around the 20mm and 35mm mark (full frame), whether that's a zoom with a range that covers those lengths, or a pair of primes. Primes would be better if you're on a budget, as they're cheaper and optically superior to the budget zoom lenses. So on crop sensor cameras you'll need something round 15mm and 28mm.</p>

<p>If you're planning on getting the Nikon 14-24 and 24-70 I would wonder why you're considering sinking $5000 into lenses for your first wedding. You might your needs and preferred approach will change after you've had a chance to practice a bit. You also want your lenses to be the limiting factor, not your photography skills. Flagship lenses won't take good pictures unless you can ....</p>

[marisa_leanne]

<p>Kyle,<br>

I would not buy a 70-200 2.8, because it is a less versatile lens and you will use it less than most of your other lenses overall. However, when you are shooting weddings I would highly recommend renting that lens just for the day even if the other photographer will be using that same lens, because even though you will be shooting the same thing, you will be shooting from a different vantage point, therefore allowing you to capture a different shot.</p>

<p>I would highly recommend investing in a wide or medium range lens like the the 14-24mm f2.8 or the 24-70mm f2.8 that you were talking about. You will find that you shoot a lot more with these two lenses not only at the wedding but in general. The wide is a must have, especially if you don't have a full frame camera, and the medium range lens is a great portrait lens when you need to focus on a wider depth of field than will be allowed by your 1.4 (an excellent lens!) If you don't end up buying the 14-24 2.8, you definitely want to rent it when you are shooting a wedding. And don't worry about what the other photographer has, gear yourself up as if you are shooting alone - because even when shooting together, you will always be shooting from a different perspective.</p>

<p>Hope that helps!</p>

[KyleE]

<p>Thank you for the great advise Neil that is exactly what I was wondering. Also I am not planning on getting multiple lenses and I was for sure planning on leaving the kit lens at home, I was just listing it for the purpose of disclosure of my gear. I agree with what you said at the end.</p>

<p>So what do people typically do in a situation like this? There is somewhat of a chicken/egg scenario when it comes to gear it seems with regards to weddings. What is the bare minimum gear that would be required for your first wedding to get the job done but still leaves you room to grow and doesn't waste your money if "your needs and preferred approach" changes after you have more practice? This is one question that does not seem to be answered in all the searching I already did on this forum and I did not see it answered in the wedding gear guides.</p>

<p>I am really looking to get gear that will be useful for me outside of weddings as well, which is why I was looking at the 14-24mm f2.8 because I like to shoot landscapes or the 105mm VR because I was interested in doing some macro work.</p>

<p>Thank you Marisa,<br>

It seems like it would be a good idea for sure for me to gear myself up completely separate from my friend. I am seeing the value in that after both of your posts. I am also beginning to think that a good wide angle lens would really be versatile and helpful for me to have.</p>

<p>Again thank you very much for any help. These forums are extremely helpful and a great place to learn.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Kyle, when you are on the "Wedding and Social Event Photography" Forum page, look to the extreme right and you should see a heading called 'Show Archives". Click on that and the pull down menu shows all the sub categories. Click on whatever category you want and the previous threads are shown.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>You can shoot this wedding with what you both have, plus possibly renting. However, if you want a lens or two that you can use at the wedding and use later, for whatever else, you can consider a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. The Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 if you want to spend more money. With these (either one) plus an 85mm f1.8, you would be well equipped to cover any wedding well.</p>

<p>As for this particular wedding, while I understand Neil's opinion completely, and agree with it, for people who <strong>are</strong> wedding photographers and used to working together, I think some division of work at this wedding, given both your situations, is both practical and desirable. Given this, efficient use of existing lenses makes sense, as well as certain other lenses being rented by person A to cover X part of the wedding.</p>

<p>How you divide things up is up to you. If you both want to be equipped to do all of it, that is fine too. While your existing lenses will work just fine in brighter light, the fact that the ceremony is to be in a church adds a wrinkle. You may perhaps look up previous threads. But if you want specific advice, find out whether flash is allowed during the ceremony, the processional/recessional, etc., and tell us how big the church is, what color walls it has, and when you take a meter reading of the ambient light at the time of the ceremony, what that is. You also need to talk to the officiant to find out not only about the flash, but about whether you can move around, how close you can get to the altar--particularly since there are two of you. See--this is where having one person be lead photographer is a good thing. Two people running around during the ceremony acting as if they were the only official photographer is probably not a good thing.</p>

[neilambrose]

<blockquote>

<p>Two people running around during the ceremony acting as if they were the only official photographer is probably not a good thing.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Totally agree! And one photographer running around is just as bad :-)</p>

<p>But I think that's quite a good example of why you need to think about the lenses as individuals, not treat them as a shared set of assets. If you suddenly realise that the vantage point you end up in offers a brilliant wide shot of the roof and stained glass windows, but you took up station with only a long lens because you'd intended to do altar shots, then there's no scope to run back to your partner and get the lens you're missing.</p>

<p>I shoot pretty much all my weddings as a pair and have learned some lessons the hard way. A macro is the only one I personally would be happy sharing, as the occasions for close up shots are limited, and usually tied to the rings/jewelry or table decorations. Both of which only need one person and can easily be agreed in advance.</p>

<p>Probably worth noting that I'm saying this from a reportage mindset. I guess if the coverage is more formal, with the principal attention on portraits and planned photography moments, then lenses are perhaps more easily shared.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>You are exactly right, Neil. I wasn't thinking of sharing lenses, particularly, but person A having the lens that is right for his duties doing the traditional procession shots, for instance. Person B being at the back of the church with the tele, etc.</p>

[KyleE]

<blockquote>

<p>But if you want specific advice, find out whether flash is allowed during the ceremony, the processional/recessional, etc., and tell us how big the church is, what color walls it has, and when you take a meter reading of the ambient light at the time of the ceremony, what that is. You also need to talk to the officiant to find out not only about the flash, but about whether you can move around, how close you can get to the altar--particularly since there are two of you. See--this is where having one person be lead photographer is a good thing.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I am definitely going to be coming back and bumping this thread as soon as I have more information. I believe in the next month we will be meeting with the Bride and Groom and setting up a meeting at the church where the ceremony is with the pastor to ask all of this info. We will also be heading to the other church where the reception is as well. I think the B&G were interested in stopping by the river on the way to the reception to do the formals outside so we will visit any outside locations as well.</p>

<p>This is all really great information and help. I believe my friend will be the "Primary" shooter and will be positioned up by the alter and I will be at the back by the door so we can get two different vantage points. I do know there is also a balcony at the back overlooking the church that I might be able to use to get a different perspective as well. I will post as soon as we have our meeting and I know how the light in the church is as well as if flash is allowed. That will definitely change things.</p>

<p>This advice is great because I just want to be as well prepared for different scenarios as possible which is why I wanted to invest in one more camera body and one more lens before the wedding.</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>Kyle, whatever else comes along, I would strongly recommend against flash during the ceremony if you can possibly avoid it. A faster lens like the 50/1.4 will give you enough light with the D3000 at ISO 1600 (most likely).</p>

<p>I have a second all the time, and currently he uses similar lenses to me. Sometimes he will use a long where I am using wide, but thats usually due to restrictions during a ceremony.</p>

<p><br /> As for adding a lens like the 14-24/2.8, or the 24-70/2.8, I would suggest another path there too. If you want a quality lens that covers the "standard" range, The Tamron 17-50/2.8 will work much better on you crop body. However, the Nikkors are excellent lenses.</p>

<p> </p>

[KyleE]

<p>David,</p>

<p>The reason that I was considering those two lenses is that I do plan on investing in a full frame body eventually and since I would like to hold onto my lenses as long as possible (as long as they will last me) I was trying to avoid investing in DX lenses. Plus I still like to shoot film and do so quite frequently I was hoping to invest in lenses that will work with my N80 too.</p>

<p>That is another question that is equipment related. I fully understand the necessity for a backup body as well as backups of any equipment you can. Is a film camera a suitable backup to a digital body? Or is it advisable to have 2 digital bodies?</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I believe that if you need a DX lenses and are going to use it a lot, it is well justified. Some, such as the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, hold their resale value very well because they are good.</p>

<p>A film body is totally suitable as a backup. You just have to deal with bringing film and keeping it cool, etc. Obviously, if you can afford it, 2 digital bodies make sense, but my first 2 years shooting digital, I had a film camera back up.</p>

[rayt]

<p>Use what you know. A wedding is not the time to experiment with new equipment and lenses. I would also not advocate sharing equipment. Use your equipment as best you know how.</p>

<p>I often pair with another photographer at weddings. It makes it much easier as the duties are split. Also in our case our methodology is marked different, she is more creative, I am more traditional. It provides a good mix.</p>

<p>Establish what each is going to do, responsibilities, before the wedding. Don't be getting in each others way. During formals or other such events when you both will be in close proximity establish who is in control with the other acting as a gopher. My partner and I swap roles for each wedding but during the wedding only one is always in control.</p>

<p>And one final point. Synchronize the clocks in your cameras as precisely as possible. This will make sorting through the images much easier during post processing.</p>

[ted_laszlo3]

<p>One thing that I have not seen on PN, especially for those new to wedding photography, is going as a spectator to the church to observe a service and look out for shooting positions.</p>

[j_traveller]

<p>Instead of buying all this new gear, why not rent it? It's an awful lot of money if you're only planning to do one wedding.</p>

[KyleE]

<p>Wow lots of great advice over night.</p>

<p>Raymond,<br /> I definitely agree with you 100% and I would NEVER experiment with new equipment at such an important event. I would plan on getting the gear far enough in advance and use it extensively before the wedding. I also will not be sharing gear with my friend each of us will be our own unit. He will be the primary photog and in charge of formals and such. My job will mostly be candids and detail shots. I will also assist him in any way needed. The tip about the camera clocks is really great I will remember that one as it will help in the post processing.</p>

<p>Ted,<br /> That is a really good idea to attend a service I had not thought of that. I do know we will be meeting with the pastor and the B&G well before the wedding to go over the rules as well as scout the location. It probably would not be too hard for us to attend a service though which would be a good opportunity to see the church full of people which will give us a more realistic view of good shooting positions.</p>

<p>J Traveller,<br /> The main reason why I want to purchase gear rather than renting is that I am very into photography and plan on continuing it for a long time. I love to go out shooting all the time and I want to continue to invest in equipment that will help me with my photography. Some of the suggestions for getting a wide angle lens were really great because while I rarely use my kit lens anymore when I do I usually have it all the way at 18mm and often find myself wishing I had wider. The second reason is that I don't want to go into this with gear I am not 100% familiar with and I am worried that renting gear I will be floundering with new unfamiliar equipment on the important day. Though I am taking all the advice here to heart and will scale back what I think I will need in preparation for this event. I definitely don't want to spend more than what I need to and I know my wife certainly appreciates that sentiment even more than I do.</p>

<p> </p>

[Sunset-Lounge]

<p>the photographers at my daughters wedding did a bang up job. The main guy, his second (wife) and the third assistant. They divided the workload up before and each knew what they needed to do. <br>

Before the wedding they split up to cover the "behind the scene" scenes individually. Bridal party prep, etc. At the facility, the main guy did the set pieces with the wedding party (groups shots, family shots, etc), what the second (his wife) did was kind of cool and surprised me. She simply stood about 60 degrees off to the side and shot the same scenes but with an enitirely different angle - and with a more casual, off camera look to them. meanwhile, the third guy went about the facility and took "detail" shots of the cake, table settings, flowers, etc, and when that was done he acted as assistant to the others.<br>

The only thing they did not do was get shots of friends and family that were not in the wedding party. We had people we rarely see, some traveled thousands of miles... and not a single picture of them. Grrrrrrrr.<br>

I would be sure all the photographers and customers know beforehand exactly what to shoot and who shoots what.</p>

 

[steve_hovland]

<p>If you have the 18-55mm kit lens with image stabilization by all means take it. Objective testing reveals it to be very usable and quite excellent at f8 and 35mm.<br>

For the posed shots of the B&G and family shoot shoulder-to-shoulder so you have backups of these key images. Same thing for cake-cutting, garter toss, bouquet toss and other key events.</p>

[Dave Gardner]

<p>Don't forget to sync the time on both cameras....helps with file flow. I also agree with Neil...don't set your-self short on the lenses....prepare like you were doing it your self....but let him be the lead, and don't shoot the same shot.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

[KyleE]

<p>I am so glad I made this thread. Everyone has been such a huge help.</p>

<p>Which Tamron 18-50mm lens is the one that everyone would recommend the most? I am having trouble finding comparisons between them and they have the AF 17-50mm F/2.8 SP XR Di II VC ( I am not familiar with Tamrons nomenclature) or the SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD SP ZL and then there is the SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF)</p>

<p>The first lens I listed is in the $600 range, the second two are in the $400 range.</p>

<p>What are the differences? Which one would you recommend?<br /> I am having a hard time finding websites that compare them. Also how do their quality compare to the Nikkor lenses or the Sigma lenses?</p>

[picturesque]

The Tamron is a 17-50mm f2.8, not 18-50mm. Sigma has an 18-50mm f2.8 which is supposed to be good too. I have the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8--the last one you list. Don't know what the ZL version is. The VC version has image stabilization.

 

I can tell you that the lens is extremely good, image quality wise, and compares extremely well with Nikkor lenses. I'd say it is on the same level or better than the comparable Sigma, but since I don't own the Sigma, I can't say that definitively. The build quality is one step down, of course, from a Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8, and it probably doesn't focus as fast, but for the money, it is an extremely good value. You can do a search for the VC version. David Wegwart, who posts here on photo.net has previously posted info about the VC version (he likes it).

[fotografz]

<p>Start at the beginning not the end.</p>

<p>You didn't mention whether you are shooting the reception also. The ceremony is usually the smallest part of the shoot in terms of time. </p>

<p>If it is full coverage, your friend should have an itinerary from the Bride, (and if not should get one). This will provide a rough road map for the day. Then you and your friend can plot out shared responsibilities for coverage. Those areas of coverage will provide clues as to what gear you may or may not need.</p>

<p>The chief question in need of an answer is whether you are shooting back-up for security, or shooting as a second to expand coverage?</p>

<p>For the most part, my second shooter does not have duplicates to my gear. She covers important shots from a different angle and a different perspective ... like I'm on the floor with a 24-70 for the procession, she is up in the balcony with a 70-200. I may cover the ceremony with my 135, she's up next to the altar (if allowed) with a 50/1.4. She covers reception details while I shoot some cocktail party candids. I shoot a wide of the bouquet toss, she shoots tight to those catching it. And so on. </p>

<p>If you do a simple "Preproduction" plan, you will both know what is next, what you each are going to do, and be equipped to do it ... with plenty of room left for spontaneous creativity. </p>

[KyleE]

<p>Thanks Nadine for the correction I did mean 17-50mm. Now I guess the question is, is it worth the extra $200 for the Image stabilization? (More of a rhetorical question I know it would be impossible for a definitive answer)</p>

<p>Marc,</p>

<p>This will be full coverage, Ceremony, Formals, Reception. I know my friend will be getting a full itinerary from the B&G with a list of specific shots needed. I will be partially shooting for backup security but we will be covering different things as well. One of us will have to go with the bride for her getting ready photos and the other will go with the groom for his getting ready photos.</p>

<p>During the ceremony we will be in two different spots for two different vantage points, probably one up close in the front and one in the back. During the formals we will be together maybe doing something similar that was mentioned above where my friend is the primary posing people and I will be taking "candid" style shots from the sides of the whole process.</p>

<p>Again we will both cover the reception for the candids and photos of the guests. Each of us will be responsible for taking detail shots so that we have some variety there.</p>

<p>I think that is how we will break it up. We will make sure to be very prepared before hand with all the necessary information on timing, shots needed, and who is covering what and doing what part.</p>

<p> </p>

[picturesque]

This is up to you. I'd research image stabilization vs. non in the Nikon forum (I guess that's VR). As everyone says, you can't stop motion with VR. On the other hand, during a ceremony, people aren't exactly running up at the altar. On the other, other hand, 80mm (on the long end, non cropped sensor), isn't all that long. Using the hand holding guideline, that means possibly 1/60th shutter speed to hand hold without image stabilization, and that is also about the threshold for pin sharp results (subject motion) when people are just standing still. So if it were me, if I was really strapped, or treating the lens as a stop gap measure til I went full frame, I might go the non VR. I hope you've read David Wegwart's old posts about this lens, and the possibility of having to try a couple before settling on one.