sean_r2

<p>I've recently acquired two old Canon manual film cameras, and the little foam strips on each of them is totally shot. I wanted to find out: What was this for? Is it something critical that I need to get replaced? If so, what type of foam would work the best (I wouldn't even begin to know where to guess what type of foam they used to be, as they were super old and crackly before falling right off at the slightest touch).</p>

 

<p>There's certainly nothing wrong with staying to older gear to save money. In that regard, I've heard so many great things about the original 5D, that you'll likely enjoy that one a ton. I hope you enjoy the test run, C Jo!</p>

<p>The 20D is a great little workhorse. I'd still be using mine, except I bought it used, previous owner treated it wrong, and it isn't as reliable as I'd like. My 30D, however, is a wonderful camera. No need to go out and buy a 50D. For some reason people tend to forget the older technology was a marvel back in the day. Just look at old ads for the 10D or even the D30...those statements weren't false, the newer cameras just got more bells and whistles.</p>

<p>By the way, it's great to hear the higher end "gigs" want film.</p>

<p>"C Jo, aren't you a touch under-capitalised for work as a professional wedding photographer?"<br>

I think C Jo knows when he has a good camera, and sticks with it. No need to jump and buy a new camera when it comes out. Think of it this way--Keeping with the 20D, he's had the same great camera all these years, while suckers went out and bought the 30D, then the 40D, and now the 50D, all the while the 20D is still the same great camera.<br>

Though, to be honest, I'm surprised you've never tried the older 5D by now, C Jo. You shoot the fancy gigs with celebrities in the PG area, or so Don's told me. You'll love it if you rent or borrow one. ;-)</p>

<p>C Jo, doesn't Camera West in New Monterey rent out gear? I've never been in there to confirm that, but I had heard they do.</p>

Since it's a wish, I'd like to see at 8-1200mm f0.5L USM IS, that also had tilt shift capability and came with a mounting

adapter to fit EOS, FD, and Nikon cameras. ;-)

Just dress like the guests would, and try not to draw attention to yourself. Interesting that you're new to wedding shooting, and deciding to ask about attire. ;-D

Have never heard of this happening. Try contacting Canon for repair options.

The easy answer is it--film is no longer mainstream enough to support at big mainstream stores. They support what they can make money from, hands down. At least, for the time being, film is supported, thanks to the abundance of disposable cameras, but even those are being replaced by digital disposables.

While the shift in ISO and aperture mean that flash output would basically be the same, I have to concur with CJG that it would be better, since you don't really want to go over f9 with a tiny digital sensor (diffraction). I often find myself wishing for ISO 50 (in rare cases, the never-will-be ISO 25) with my digis in order to avoid having to close down that aperture into the horrid diffraction threshold. I think its a bad sign for digital overall when makers like Nikon make their new models with native ISO of 200. Great for indoor and action shooters, but I'm in agreement with CJG that outdoor posed shooters want that lower native ISO.

The first one, by miles! It has a happy bride, and overall looks more real and spontaneous than the very fixed and serious look of the second.

Congrats on the shoot! Film definitely has appeal, and I've been thinking over shooting with a film camera again as a member of my otherwise all-digital arsenal. I congratulate you on your courage in jumping back into film!

 

As for why we chimp? Well, film shooters taught us it's a good idea to check out important shots when Polaroid backs were developed. ;-) Digital just makes it much cheaper and quicker to "take a test Polaroid."

Yes, what others have said: Deal with it directly, but politely. Family and friends want to get their photos, too. You have a job to do, but do it professionally with a friendly side-talk to assess and address the situation.

 

I've dealt with this as a photographer on the other side, a few years back at my cousin's wedding. I had a DSLR and was taking my own photos during the ceremony. The hired photog, rather than talk to me or say anything, he just got in front of me to block my view of the ceremony! No problem, I put my camera on a monopod and shot over his shoulder. At the reception, he kept getting in my way, so I gave my DSLR to my cousin (bride's brother) and let him shoot, while I pulled out my film SLR and shot away. Never did we get in his way (we stayed on the sidelines with the rest of the family), but he sure had a headache trying to figure out which one of us to block all night. He sure did look bad, and the family got a laugh out of it.

A product from China/Hong Kong? Sounds like possible gray market stuff, and in that case, buyer beware. Then again, the collar is selling for what, $130 now?

 

I'm interested to see if anyone has anything to say about this, as I just got my 70-200/f4L, and am thinking of just spending the 130 for a true Canon collar.

It is possible the bulb is blown, or the capacitor is out. If it makes that whizzing power-up whine, then your capacitor should be fine, and its only the bulb. But I'm no expert on this, and when it happened to my 580ex I sent it to Canon and turned out to be the bulb.

 

Probably the bulb, most likely, and you'll need to get it taken to a shop or sent to Canon if you want it repaired.

Crissi, you don't sound like you have entitlement issues to me. It sounds like you had some sort of ambiguous verbal agreement that needs to be cleared up. An agreement where you give images in exchange for training is fine, as long as you agree to that. I'd say go with your gut and try to clear up your agreement, to make sure your terms. Begin with sometime not so confrontational such as asking how much more training he thinks you need before you can become a true assistant/second shooter for pay, or even handle one on your own. Get the steps figured out and agree to it, and agree to what will happen in the meantime.

 

Just make sure you're not getting ripped off. If he ever mentions anything about payment, make sure you get that in writing. If he says you're great and he'll pay you, and then suddenly starts mocking your work and saying you aren't producing anything of value, that's a huge red flag. That's why you need it in writing.

 

But please, make sure your agreement is more concrete. It feels real bad having a gut feeling you're being ripped off, and then finding out you're right. Trust me, "a friend of mine" had this problem.

I stand corrected. Thanks Nadine!

If you're going to shoot in direct sunlight, its not the end of the world. Just make sure to use your fill flash correctly. I had to shoot in direct sun for 7/7/7, atop a high mountaintop, with only one real tree and the ceremony wasn't under it, so...<div></div>

Holly, probably easier to do some forum reading on the subject than dump money into Fong's bank account. The basic idea should work fine: Coordinate your groups so each group flows right into the next, usually by a size scale, so that way everyone is comfortable, and the process goes faster.

 

Good flow example:

Everyone & BG >> Wedding Party and Parents & BG >> Parents w/BG >> BG only...

 

Bad flow example:

BG only >> Everyone >> Parents with BG >> Wedding Party w/ BG >> Child Attendants w/BG >> Wedding Party and Parents & BG...

You can't move the cake if its big (but easy to move the table when its smallish), but you can always ask the other vendors in charge if they can move the table before hand. Asking for just 2 feet away from one of the walls instead of a corner makes a world of difference.

 

Of course, this means scouting the cake table's placement and coordinating with the other vendors, but not a big deal, eh?

Will, it isn't that hot leads have so little value in the eyes of any wedding vendor, it is the fact that hot leads are not, thus leads are near worthless. This is, statistically speaking.

 

You're much too generous with a 25% chance of booking based on your theoretical "hot lead." Brides scout out as many photographers as possible to find the one that suits their artistic vision and budget the best. As said before in this thread, they aren't just using your theoretical lead-generating site, they're looking to local photographers, and checking out online directories. I'd be surprised if such a "such lead" would yield even a 1% chance of generating a booking, especially given the nature of delays in the system. Brides look more favorably on vendors who can answer them immediately, not sit and make an online payment before talking to them.

 

You're right, there are quite a few directories. Probably enough, in fact. The leads system you speak of, however, is not a solution, it's more of a one-way profit generating mechanism. In short, a lottery where the proprietor of the site is the only one who really comes out happy.

 

If your interest is in helping people find the right vendors for their wedding, and you are genuiniely interested in becoming involved in the wedding field, may I suggest that you look into becoming a wedding planner? You'll do more good for everyone that way.

As said earlier, you've ruled out the better lenses that would have fit your criteria, especially when you said budget wasn't a limitation.

 

As for the lenses you have as candidates, I really have to warn you against that 18-200, whether it be the Tamron or Sigma version. I saw the Tamron for sale in a store and asked to try it out of curiosity, hoping it would be a hidden gem. Reviews I read online of both lead me to believe they both perform the same, including their deficiencies.

 

Very slow focus, VERY noisy gears, horrible aperture with 6.3 being the minimum at 200mm, not a true 200mm maximum focal length (more like 180 or 190), backwards focusing spin, and most importantly, focus is merely decent and 70mm and mildly blurry at 200mm.

 

If all you care about is having one lens that has a huge range of focal lengths, get it. Most photographers care about other things, though, especially image quality, and the 18-200 does not perform well to that concern.

From the look of the sample picture, I highly recommend using your flash, as Nadine said: Pointed up, with a reflective white card attached via rubber band. You are going to need that bounced flash if the venue is as dark as it is. Set the flash to ETTL, and yes, have your friends learn about compensation to make sure your dress remains white and his tux remains black. This is a biggie, as if they don't understand compensation, both you and hubbie will end up looking gray, too dark, or too blown-out white, and not one of those three things is good at all.

 

If you can process it, shoot with RAW. It will give you some latitude in correcting any bad shots.

 

If your friends aren't familiar with camera settings, going with Program mode might be the safest, but what Nadine said about ISO400 with an f5.6 aperture is good. Although, I highly recommend using a faster shutter speed because it'll be hard to shoot at 1/30 of a second if your friends aren't used to it. I'm presuming you have the kit lens, which means (55mm x 1.6 = 88mm) an effective maximum length of 88mm, which means a recommended shutter speed of 1/90 of a second of faster. You're going to lose detail in the background, if the place is really dark. To compensate, you might want to push your ISO to 800, but try to avoid going to 1600, as the Rebels don't handle 1600 too well.

 

The main credo film photographers follow is "Get it right the first time," and even though you have a digital camera, try to follow that advice. Make sure to get the shots correctly the first time, every time, that way it saves you a lot of time on correction. Plus, going with the attitude of "Well, I can just fix this in Photoshop" is dangerous, because it leads to less deliberate shots and ultimately leads to sloppy photos. Try to have your friends practice with the camera early, days or weeks before the wedding if possible. Have them practice shooting from where they would, and have you or other friends stand at the altar, in order to see how well they can capture the room as a whole, as well as the altar area.

 

You said your cousin had a problem with shadows. This could mean a couple of things. First, if it means huge shadows behind people, then that's caused by lack of bounce flash. Use bounce flash pointed up at the ceiling, and have that white card on, in order to soften the shadows to the point of almost not being there. If it means people are lit up but rooms are so dark the shots were taken in a cave, then it means the manual settings need to be opened up to allow more exposure for the background. This usually means using a slower shutter speed, but with any speed lower than 1/90 on your camera, you're likely to run into shake. Still, if the room has a lot of white as in the sample pic, the light from your flash should be able to bounce around well at f/5.6 and 1/90 or even 1/25. You shouldn't have to worry about the cave look in that venue.

...but, I can shoot people better with my camera than my gun. Oh well.

 

"This is my camera. There are many like it, but this one is mine..."

You're right, Ian, wedding photography has evolved to come full circle. It started out as maybe 12 good shots, all formal thanks to the technology of the day. Then boosted over the years. 20 formals...30 formals...40 formals...50 shots mixed formals and ceremony...on and on until candid photojournalism became popular and couples expect many images, both formal and not.

 

But its evolving again, now, thanks to the easy access to photography, couples are saying, "Oh, I can save money and have my Uncle Bob shoot it" or "Oh, I can save money and put a guest camera on every row/table." Then they get squirrely amateurs shooting a ton, and thanks to their skill, getting maybe 12 total good shots.

 

Full circle.

Mark, I agree with your point of "shoot it right first, then if some post gives it a boost, great." Man, you made me laugh though with the popsicle sticks and holey cardboard. I'm so glad I don't have to do darkroom acrobatics to get a few neat effects anymore.