bruce_stenman1

Ben,

 

It really depends on how and when you got your 500 images. I shoot most of the time with a second photographer. While I am doing the formals and group shots they are photographing the reception. If I am shooting alone, only the guests are photographing each other.

 

During the first dances I am mostly photographing the couple's expressions and taking some shots that show then with their guest looking on. A second photographer would either be getting shots from the other side (if there is not a videograper in the way) or getting shots of the couple's family members.

 

At the end of the day when I shoot with a second photographer they are in a most 3 of my frames out of over 2000 shots. That is because we not only take care to keep each other out of our frames we also take care not to be in the others frame. Easier said than done.

 

When a guest is taking a picture of something happening I will go somewhere else to get the spontaneous unposed shots for the couple and their family. The B&G may get the pictures that the guest has taken, and they may be correctly exposed without a lot of flash, or they may not. That is why couples pay for a pro to come.

 

The digital P&S users actually cause more problems because most people have gotten in the habit of using the LCD to frame the subject, then take the shot, and then want to stand and look at the resulting image. So instead of a film camera where the guest takes 10 seconds to get the shot and then gets out of the way, they may be standing there for several minutes and the moment has long since passed before they get out of the way.

 

So the best advice I can give is to stay out of the photographer's way and go to where they are not as this really adds to what the couple and their families will have at the end of the day.

Consider the size of your macro subjects. With FF cameras a 60mm was the better choice for objects larger than a golf ball, as with flower photographer, and the 100mm or longer was better for small subjects like insects or coins. On a DX camera the 60mm has the picture angle of a 90mm so it is not a "short" macro lens.

 

The longer the lens the less DOF you will have, and with a 180mm on a DX camera (where it works like a 270mm macro) it may be 1/8" in many situations.

 

Working distance is a convenience but depth of field can mean the difference between a interesting image and one that does not cut it.

This lens is the most commonly one mentioned for focus problems on every Canon camera, and especially the 20D. The best solution is to send back a bad lens to the reseller and get a new on and keep doing that until you get a good copy. Or do like a lot of pros do and get either a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 or the Canon 24-105mm f4 IS lens.

 

A wedding pro has been trying to get a good copy of the Canon 16-35mm f2.8 II lens and after getting 4 bad copies from Canon he sent the 4th lens to Canon's service center hoping they could adjust the lens.

 

It is far easier to keep sending bad copies back to the reseller than to attempt to get a Canon lens re-calibrated by their service center.

Check all the posts about people sending in the same Canon 24-70mm or 17-55mm f2.8 IS lens multiple times.

 

There are lens test charts that people have posted for download after all the publicity about the AF problems with the Mark III when using long telephoto lenses. Find one and test your lens.

 

I have decided the best way to get a pro quality 24-70mm f2.8 lens for my wedding work is to buy the new one from Nikon (along with a D3).

For weddings the 17-55mm f2.8 provides top image quality and a great lens for both individuals and group photographs. It also provide a good range for landscape with a DX camera as the 17mm setting provides the same picture angle as a 24mm lens on a film body which is the most frequently used one for landscape photography.

 

You do not need the f2.8 for landscape photography but for weddings it is a must.

There are two aspects to the AF sensor placement. The one already considered is providing a AF conveniently over the subject in the frame. The other, for objects in motion is to be able to hand off the tracking from one sensor or group of sensors to another when a subject is moving within the frame. A tighter grouping or clustering (which Canon also employs with its Mark II/III cameras) makes this process work more efficiently and permits a more gradual adjustment of the lenses elements to continually re-focus on the subject.

 

The larger the gap between sensor points the faster the lense motors would need to react. You could address this with larger motors than consumer more power but the approach taken by Canon and Nikon seems more effective and able to provide 10fps and 9fps with their two top cameras.

Consider the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 constant telephoto. Fast AF and more usable focal length range with a DX camera. Half the size and half the weight of the 70-200mm f2.8 lens.

Get the 17-55mm f2.8, the 70-200mm f2.8 and the Sigma 30mm f1.4 and you will be in great shape for your wedding photography and only the Sigma is a lens you are not likely to use for your personal photography. Add a +4 closeup filter and the 17-55mm makes a passable macro lens.

The 28-70mm or the newly announced 24-70mm would work great for most portrait work or for a less expensive option the 24-85mm f3.5 G lens would work quite well. You want focal lengths between 30mm and 70mm on a D40 camera for photographing people.

 

A zoom is much better than a single focal length lens. You want to be able to take head shots or torso or full body or couple/group indoors and unless you have a very large space to work in a zoom will provide the most flexibility as well as the ability to adjust perspective which is often overlooked by people recommending a single focal length lens.

There is also a problem with the amount of surface area exposed to the wind with large lenses. The lens becomes a sail for the tripod and the windage induces motion no matter how well it is locked into the tripod. If the tripod feet are encased in cement no problem or if the camera shutter speed is 1/1000 or faster again no problem.

 

In particular for wildlife shooters with a lens like the 600mm (which will be more popular now with the D3) it is not unusual to be shooting at f4 and wanting to use a low ISO of 100 and finding that the shutter speed is not anywhere near 1/1000 but more like 1/100. This is when VR is invaluable.

 

I use the 200-400mm f4 VR and have been able to hand hold shots at 1/30th at the 400mm setting and produce sharp images. So the VR really does work as advertised (at least with the latest generation of VR lenses).

Where the extra focus points may help is with predictive focus where the subject moves from one focus point to another or to enable a group of focus points to form a focus cluster which again helps with subjects that are moving. When selecting a focus point with the Canon Mark III, which is state of the art for Canon, the camera has often been fooled by a brighter object in the background. The new firmware is supposed to correct this problem. Where the Mark III is really fantastic is in using the AF point to adjust the exposure setting as the AF point is used to weight the exposure.

 

The D3/D300 with 51 AF points is following the Canon lead but making a substantial improvement in using color to help differentiate a subject from its surroundings. This is all theoretical until the camera has been used in the field by many users in many different situations.

 

Total AF points also do not tell the whole store. TheD200 has 9 AF points but only one cross type that can deal with the horizontal and vertical planes. The Mark III has AF sensors that are twice as sensitive as those in the Mark II and the result is autofocus in low light situations that is remarkable and twice as fast as the D2X.

I have found no mention of how sensitive the AF points are in the new Nikon cameras.

I don't agree with your friend's 5 lens belief. If I am going to Alaska/Yellowstone, or Africa, I will take a 10.5mm, 12-24mm, 70-200mm, 200-400mm, and 1.4x and 1.7x teleconverters. For weddings I take the 10.5, 12-24mm, 17-55mm, 70-200mm, 30mm f1.4, 50mm f1.4, and 85mm f1.4 lenses, and if a large church ceremony, the 200-400mm lens. Going to Europe or Asia on vacation I will take the 10.5mm, the 12-24mm, Sigma 30mm f1.4, and the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8. For dive trips I take the 10.5mm, 17-55mm, 60mm macro, 105mm macro, and the 24-85mm zoom.

 

So for play I will try to get by with as few lenses as possible, 2-3 in total. For weddings I take almost everything I have but use only 2-3 lenses on two bodies during any one segment.

The TSA is focused on shampoo bottles these days. You are much more likely to have problems with your toiletries and the TSA these days than any amount of camera gear. So leave your lens cleaning solution at home and especially your Eclipse solution if you use it. Take a Artic Butterfly instead.

At a bare minimum I would take the 70-200mm f2.8 lens and a 1.7x teleconverter. The 18-200mm is a terrible wildlife lens. You need a big lens both for small critters and for large dangerous critters.

 

The best overall lens would be the 200-400mm f4 VR along with the 1.4 and 1.7 teleconverters. Take a look at www.lensprotogo.com which rents lenses at very reasonable rates by the week or by the month.

 

A 10x zoom in addition to being very slow at the 200mm end is not going to be very sharp at the 18mm end either. I would buy or rent the Nikon 12-24mm f4 lens.

 

In addition a 2 and a 3 grade split neutral density filter is a worthwhile investment along with a polarizing filter.

You need to look at more than just the camera in looking at the D3 versus the 5D or the Mark III. With the 5D there was very good image quality in a non-weather sealed body that is prone to failure, though very light weight. A body that needed a vertical grip added like the D200.

 

With the Mark III comes the Canon quality control baggage. Even the Mark III has ongoing problems with regard to both autofocus and with ERROR99 that shuts the camera down necessitating sending it in for repair. Canon lenses have a high failure rate and so many problems with calibration that Canon decided to add the ability for users to calibrate their lenses themselves with the Mark III.

 

Many pro Canon users have switched from the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 lens to either the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 or the f4 24-105mm lens due to autofocus problems and bad copies (even with 3 different copies). The same has been reported with the 16-35mm f2.8 II lens. And Canon flash has had reliability problems, problems with the feet breaking off, problems with the battery packs, problems with meltdowns. Canon lenses come with a 1-year warranty and then the user gets to foot the bill unlike Nikon lenses with a 5-year warranty.

 

Now with the Mark III and the 580EX-II Canon users finally have flash that performs as well as the D2h/D2x/D200 cameras in most situations though at a higher price. But this comes with the question marks about the Mark III autofocus and the problems with lens quality control.

 

Many pros reluctantly switched to Canon and bit their lips while dealing with the reliability problems but happy with the better image quality and greatly reduced need for image post processing. The D3 promises to provide 5D image quality, FF, and Nikon lenses and the Nikon flash system all in one package. IF the D3 really performs up to its specs it will cause many pros to switch back to Nikon.

 

What is unknown is how well the new AF system in the D3 and D300 will actually work, both in normal lighting conditions and in very low light level situations. High ISO capabilities are of limited value if the camera cannot AF quickly and accurately. This is one area where the Mark III really shines. It is substantially better than the D2x. I hope the D3 is as good as the Mark III in terms of low light autofocus as that is essential to the images I need to provide my clients.

The key difference between the D2x and the D200 was the autofocus systems. The D2x had more points and also more cross type sensors (the D200 has only the center one). Low light autofocus or autofocus with moving subjects or low contrast subjects is mediocre with the D200. The D300 shares the D3 AF system which will be a vast improvement.

 

The D200 has a real-world max ISO of 1250 before noise starts to really jump. I expect with the D300 it will be double that of the D200 based on the specs. This means double the shutter speed or a smaller f-stop and greater depth of field in low light situations. Both factors contribute to having the subject(s) in focus and sharper images overall.

 

More focus points means fewer situations where one needs to use an available AF sensor, use the AF lock and then recompose the frame so the subject is positioned where desired. It also means better predictive focus in a range of situations which was not really practical with the D200. Nikon appears to be providing a Mark III level AF system in a $1700 camera which is fantastic.

Nikon realized that the Canon strategy of 12MP on a FF sized sensor made for larger photosites and less noise at all ISO settings and usable images at much higher settings. When Nikon produced a 12 megapixel sensor on the APS-C sensor it surprised people as the pixel density was twice that of the 5D. Although the D2x provided higher theoretical resolution it was not able to produce better image quality and in fact delivered inferior image quality compared to a camera costing a third less.

 

Nikon, considering the capabilities of current technology, chose to produce a camera with 5D image quality in a Mark II body. As a result the 3D is unique at the present time. The Mark III may be a better camera, no one outside of Nikon really knows, but the APS-H has not really been supported by Canon with its lenses. The 24-70mm f2.8 becomes a 31-91mm f2.8 while the Canon 30D users have the use of the 17-55mm f2.8 that does provide the same picture angle range as a 24-70mm lens on a FF camera.

 

The 14-24mm f2.8 and the 24-70mm f2.8 are both usable focal ranges even on a APS-C camera. I would gladly give up the 12-24mm with its f4 max aperture for the slightly narrower perspective of the 14-24mm lens if I gain a full f-stop.

 

In terms of primes what is missing most are fast 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm lenses. I would also expect Nikon to replace the 85mm f1.4 with an AF-S version. With only the Sigma 20mm f1.4 and 30mm 1.4 DX lenses available the wide angle situation was already bleak though the 14-24mm f2.8 is a big step in the right direction when mounted on the D3. The wide angle situation is likely to get better for D3 users long before it does for Canon Mark III users.

The easiest trick is to have her tilt her head towards his. It looks affectionate and it reduces her apparent height by at least 2 inches. One advantage of an engagement shoot is you can see what works with a couple before the day of the wedding.

Take a flash and a rain cape and a waterproof covering for your camera and largest lens. The cape is a great way to cover up without being bundled up in the heat and it will cover your camera bag while still providing access. In the jungle areas it is full shade and a flash with sync cord (or without if you have a D80 or D200) is great for both birds with a telephoto (to show their true colors) or for macro subjects.

 

I always take some type of external flash as it is more versatile than a tripod for many situations.

The nice thing about the R1C1 is that in addition to being small enough to get in to tight places to provide light for small subjects or ones very close to the end of the lens is that with two small flash units you can vary the output and the distance to provide ratio lighting just like in the studio with large subjects and just like in the real world where there is seldom light coming from only one direction. A lot of the time with small subjects it is difficult to light the underside and with the little flash units of the R1C1 you have more options.

 

It is a far superior approach to a ring flash for a natural look with small subjects.

D2x - better durability if you plan on hundreds of thousands of shutter activations, longer battery life (if D200 is not used without optional battery pack), faster capture rate, faster autofocus in all conditions, faster low light autofocus with or without the SB800 for IR AF assist.

 

The D200 has better image quality, especially for skin tones with tungsten light sources, and provides good results above ISO 640, where the D2X starts to rapidly break down and noise climbs dramatically. The D200 by way of comparison is very good with regard to noise up to ISO 1250.

 

I would also expect but have not tested it that VR lenses would perform better on the D2X.

 

Menu structures are very similar so it is easy to move between bodies.

The D2x does not have the problem of the D200 with accidental shifting of the S/M/C lever and provides more accurate autofocus in difficult situations, i.e. backlit or low contrast subjects. I also find I get sharper images hand held at slow shutter speeds with the D2x. It may be due to the greater mass of the camera or it may have better internal dampening of the mirror slap, but regardless it is quite a bit better in this regard than the D200.

 

There is no anywhere near the gap in performance as was the case between the D100 and the D1X.

You mention low light portraits, but in many situations a tripod can be used so the speed of the lens is much less important.

 

If you subjects are in motion VR adds nothing and you need a faster shutter speed. OK for subjects sitting or standing still.

 

For portraiture the longest possible lens you can use given the space available will be the most flattering. Commonly with 35mm film lenses in the 85-135mm focal lengths were used. On a 1.5 crop DSLR that would tranlate into lenses in the 65-90mm range. Options are limited to zooms or the 85mm prime in that focal length range.

 

Zooms provide a great deal more flexibility at little loss of sharpness. You can crop with the camera or choose the optimum focal length for the subject.

 

For indoors and groups the 17-55mm f2.8 is a great lens. Outdoors the 70-200mm f2.8 IS though large and heavy works quite well. An alternative is the Sigma 50-150mm f2.8 lens that is fast and half the size and half the cost of a 70-200mm lens.

 

For flash a SB600 will work fine. The light is "softer" the closer it is to your subject (i.e. 3 feet or less) and so a powerful strobe is the last thing you really need even when bounced off a reflector which is a great and inexpensive way to have a large near light source for a portrait. You can control one or more SB600's with the D80's internal flash to setup different lighting ratios or just move one further back from the subject (if space permits).