Wedding photography: Nikon D100 or Sensia 100 slide-scans with Super Coolscan 4000ED?

[auke bonne van der weide]

My equipment is a Nikon F80 and a Super Coolscan 4000ED. A friend of

mine asked me to photograph his wedding. What should I do? Buy a

Nikon D100 (or D70), or make perfect scans with the Super Coolscan

4000ED from Sensia or Provia slides?

 

The latter is more work, but currently cheaper for my wallet. But

anyone addicted to digital SLR and don't wanna return to good old

fashion pin-sharp slides?

[david_walker1]

I just shot my first wedding with digital (D100). I've always used a Hassy before. I shot the formals and aisle shots with the Hassy and everything else with the D100 (350 images). I'll never go back to film alone again.

 

Benefits (in my mind)

 

Don't have to change film.

Can change ISO and White balance on the fly (outdoor to incandescent to strobe)

Instant feedback on tricky shots

 

The jury is still out on doing formals and the aisle shots with digital.

 

Transparency density range is very limited. You may not maintain detail in black tuxedos and white wedding dresses at the same exposure. Plus you'll spend the rest of your life cloning out dust spots on the scans. Color negative is the tried and true way to shoot weddings with film.

[matt_moorlag]

Unless you really want a DSLR, I would stick to what you currently have for the wedding shoot. I have a N90s and LS-40 scanner, and a Fuji S2. The image quality is very similar, and I'm starting to use my S2 more than the N90s, however there is a learning curve when you switch to digital. Also, you'll need to purchase several compact flash or microdrive cards unless you'll be able to download pictures during the wedding. This can get very expensive. My 1GB Lexar card gets 77 images at full resolution (RAW mode). You'll get more than that on the D100 but not enough to be comfortable carrying only 1 card. I am really glad that I have my S2 and certainly recommend either the D100 or S2, I just don't think that the pressure of a wedding shoot is a good time to learn a new camera for the first time. Hope this helps.

[mark_thomas3]

Most wedding photographers I know, and I used to be one - will SHUDDER at the thought of slide film for a wedding - as stated above, it has very limited latitude and for a formal wedding with black suit and white dress, your metering is going to be put to an enormous test!! Sensia is probably the only film I would even think about using, as it has better latitude than most transparency film, but even so - it's a scary thought.

 

I would strongly suggest you forget the slides and go with a pro grade negative film that is optimised for wedding photography - like the Fuji NPS/NPH/NPC/NPZ's and the Kodak Portras.

 

Digital has a bit more latitude than slides, but is still short of good pro film. However at least when shooting digital you can be watching, and correct any disasters immediately.. But stick to the devil you know - bad idea to be learning new equipment while shooting a wedding. You could easily lose a friend.. ;o)

[auke bonne van der weide]

This friend of mine is getting married at 6-5-4. Catch my drift:) So I don't think he will be noticing any latitude-differences between slides or negatives. Besides still 5 months of time to consider, and the newest rumor is that Nikon will come up with the D70. Besides they asked me for budget-reasons....

 

When scanning negatives I have alway have the impression that they aren't as smooth and sharp as slides can be. Slides also have a lot less grain. But then again I have never shot with pro-negatives. My genre is landscape, so have to practice more on portrait before shooting the wedding. Especially have to practice with fill-flash with my Metz 54mz3

[bruce_rubenstein]

If you are using flash you will notice the exposure latitude difference between print and slide film. Weddings are very dynamic and unless you've done several of them, you will not be able to pay enough attention to exposure to the +/- 1/2 that you need to with slide film. Or, you will spend so much time checking metering that you will miss many shots. The are some very real reasons why people who do this for a living shoot print film.

[bas_van_den_boogaard]

Hello,

 

I just got my first stock of prints back, made with my Canon 10D (+500mm/f4 IS lens). The files were printed by a "ordinary" photoprocessing shop (what I mean: not a professional lab). They use light sensitive photo-paper, exposing the file on the paper with a laser.

 

Up till 3 months ago, I had my Fuji Sensia slide film being scanned and printed. I must say though, that the quality I just got with my Canon 10D files really surprised me (in a positive way!). The shop uses Fuji paper and a Fuji machine for exposer of the paper.

 

Anyway, if I compare the results with what I used to get from scanned slides and then printed on film, I don't see a reason to use slide anymore.

 

Colors, saturation, crispness, detail etc are all of very high quality. I don't have experience with wedding photography (i'm a birdphotographer), but I would not be concerned about getting real good prints for your friends wedding! Of course a bit of "after-care" is needed in Photoshop, but that's live with digital photography. Together with a wider latitude and ease of use (no more dust etc), I would definitly switch!

 

cheers,

Bas van den Boogaard

netherlands

[photodom]

Hi A.B.

 

I bought my D100 just over a year ago and have used it to shoot 40 weddings in that time plus some commercial work. I have gone through 17,000 - yes thousand - frames in a year and in general I am impressed with the output. I shoot exclusively in Fine Jpeg and use the Adobe 1998 colour space. The quality is so good that if occasion demanded, I would be happy to shoot an entire wedding at 1000 ASA (I actually did this by mistake once just after I had bought the camera and even at 10"x8" nobody noticed.) At anything up to 800 asa I am happy to produce 20"x16" prints. The camera does have it's quirks but you need to get used to them and work around them - fill in flash even with an SB80DX is a bit haphazzard to say the least.

 

In my opinion, the enlargements I am able to produce even using the fine jpeg mode are significantly better that the 400 asa Fuji Superia that I used in the past to shoot my weddings (Scotland can be very dull.)

 

Before I bought the camera I shot everything on an F100 - but I haven't used film once since November 2002.

 

Just one thing, I use a Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 EX zoom. I have noticed some focusing errors when I use the lens at the wide angle setting that I hadn't picked up on film. I thought it was the camera but when I tried the lens on my F100 I was getting the same focusing errors with that camera as well. I also tried a Tokina wide angle zoom and got the same problems. I would recomend buying Nikon lenses therefore if you can afford them as focus compatibility will be assured. Either that or zoom in, focus, zoom out then take the photo.

 

Buy it. It can be hard work but you won't regret it.

 

The enclosed photo was taken at 800 asa.