cardens

<p>d40 or d60 both have auto modes and other modes you can play with as a beginner. <br>

No to the d200, its not a starter camera and is heavy to carry around for fun. </p>

<p>My suggestion: d40 or d60 with the 18-55 and 55-200vr. This is a great "starter" system and you will get very nice pictures and learn more about photography without breaking the bank</p>

 

<p>I would say the 30mm is a bit short for a portrait lens. 85mm 1.4 is a great portrait lens. If you think that is too long, I would suggest the 50mm. 1.8 or 1.4</p>

<p>For a wedding I take anywhere from 1000 to over 2000 (with 2 shooters). I have the proofs up in a week for the bride and groom to see. I use lightroom and shoot 100% RAW. <br>

I only use lightroom and edit every image.</p>

<p>Very true Dean! </p>

<p>I use nikon but figured I would answer anyway.</p>

<p>I agree with Kay. When I first began I got the 24-60, 50mm 1.8 and 17-50. I just sold my 24-60. Basically I use<br>

30mm 1.4<br>

50mm 1.8<br>

85 1.4<br>

70-200 2.8 and for 17-50 for wide shots like churches and ceremony sites.</p>

<p>I would have raised my aperature and iso, no flash. I may have tried an aperature prioirty, at about 640 iso to compensate. Personally I like blown out backgrounds lol</p>

<p>70-200 no questions 85mm 1.4 rocks too. but the 70-200 is essential IMO</p>

<p>It ALL depends on what the couple wants. Its not a photoshoot. Its their day. So if they want to travel around to cool locations thats awesome for the photographer and the couple. Some bride and grooms simply want you to capture the day as it is. Not into the shots or photoshoot. Talk with the couple before hand and feel out what they want. :)</p>

<p>I use a 32gig, 16 gig, 2 8 gigs and sometimes a 4gig. I hate having a ton of cards floating around. More things for me to lose. Plus I hate swapping cards all the time at long weddings.</p>

<p>I made the mistake of renting a nikon 85mm 1.4 last weekend for 2 weddings I had. I fell in love with it and really want to get it. However I am curious if anyone knows if there is a huge difference in the 85mm 1.4 and 1.8? The price difference is about double. I am sure there is a difference, my question is just how much and is the 1.4 worth the extra 500-600 dollars?<br>

I shoot about 30+ weddings a year, so this is obviously why I am looking to purchase this. Also any advice on other brand 85mm 1.4 would be great.</p>

<p>Thank you!</p>

<p>I do not let other people take photos during the formals (unless I am <strong>done</strong> with that particular grouping then they can). There should be no doubt the pro photographers images are better and should not really even be a question as far as losing sales.<br>

I give my assistant the CF card and collect it when I am done. This helps rid the problem you had with your assistant. After I edit my images and give them to the bride, I give them their un edited images to do with what they want, but always ask for credit if they are using them in their port, facebook etc.<br>

Sometimes you learn the hard way with these issues, but atleast you are learning!!! :)</p>

 

<p>lol Lou.<br>

I love my d300, I do hate the af switch and do bump sometimes. Sometimes it bothers me how, the d300 HAS to be focused on something before it takes the pic. I guess it is a good thing, but it annoys me sometimes.</p>

<p>I have the d300 and love it. </p>

<p>My husband has been getting into photographer and I just yesterday ordered a used d200 for him as an anniversary gift. Good luck with yours, I think you made a good decision.</p>

 

<p>I would suggest getting another body like a d300 and using the d40 as a backup. <br>

Im not sure how much money you have to spend.<br>

17-50 2.8 (I have the tamron and really like it for the $)<br>

70-200 2.8 (essential at large churches and outdoor weddings)<br>

50mm 1.8 or 1.4 (great lens that every wedding photographer should have)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>One of the best ones was the uncle was dancing and he began stripping. Took off his shirt, pants<br>

and finally he was just dancing around in his tighty whitys. Then he started to take off the pants and needless to say I got some butt shots. GROSS</p>

<p>Im suprised they had a 2.8 nikkor there! Lucky you!!!<br>

I picked up another sb600 at my circuit city for about $20 less than amazon, so not a huge savings but it was nice.</p>

<p>17-50 2.8 tamron is on my d300 most of the time. Great price and I really like the lens</p>

<p>I figured why. I shoot in raw 98 percent of the time. That is why not all the image data is coming up</p>

<p>i tried the opanda and it works for my d40x, but not for the d300 and d70</p>

<p>I just got a tamron 17-50 2.8. It is very sharp and gives me a wide enough angle and a good enough zoom for most shots I take indoors. plus it is only about 400 bucks</p>

<p>I agree with the other posters. Look around your area at other photographers. See what they are charging and be honest with yourself, how do you compare to them? It is hard to really compare, since you have done only 1 wedding, but try. I would suggest trying to find some gigs as a second shooter or assisitant. It will help you get more experience and experience is priceless. <br>

I would not go free again, no one should work for free thats for sure. I would talk it over the couple and see what they have in mind for their needs, then figure how much of your time you will be putting in.</p>

<p>I LOVE my d300. My only complaint is the fact it is not full frame. The ISO gets a little grainy at 3200 and 2.8 a lot. So if that were improved I would be happy/<br>

However I am a wedding photographer and if a d400 comes out I will be tempted to buy it and use the d300 as a backup. We will just have to see.</p>

<p>24-60 2.8 for my nikon and then 55-200 VR outside. I will be getting the 70-200 soon hopefully.<br>

I also love my 50mm 1.8 for small receptions</p>

<p>Right now I use the 24-60 2.8 for the bulk of my wedding shots. But find it isnt wide enough. I am leaning toward the 17-50 but would rather get the non motorized version which is hard to find. Im thinking the 17-50 would be wide enough and could pretty much replace the 24-60 (use 24-60 as a back up)<br>

I have a fish eye extenstion I use for church and room shots now but its not the best.</p>

<p>I agree with starting with a lens like the 16-85 which is great indoors. Once you play with the a while I think you will get a better idea what focal lengths you require.</p>