will_akandou

<p>DoThe few AF points of a 5D or even a 5D mark II compared to the D300 and D700 51 AF points enough to allow to "never" miss a focus?</p>

<p>That's really hard decision choosing between Nikon and Canon<br>

After one more day of reading etc.. i get to the conclusion that i don't want the 40D or 50D and so that it will be between Nikon D90, D300, D700 and Canon 5D mark I and canon 5D mark II (no matter what i need two bodies and it will be 2 FF or 2 APS-C ...if canon full frame maybe 5D used + new 5D mark II.</p>

<p>The problem is that each one of them has pro and cons.<br>

The D90 seems to give an image quality very close to D300 and seems to be better than D300 in many points<br>

The D300 has a more solid build the 51pts AF...but like as Mike told me, it can be a problem.<br>

The D700 is a D300 in full frame and seems to manage noise very very well... but is it better than the 5D II? That's the question :/ And it lose its 100% viewer whereas it s FF</p>

<p>Generally about Nikon, i prefer the feel in my hands + the Flash system seems to be better than canons' has we told me</p>

<p>About 5D and 5D mark II they seem very nice but what scare me is the lot less AF points that make that i'm afraid to maybe miss a focus because of that and so miss my shot.<br>

Except that, the feel in my hand is not as good as nikon but i can get used to it very easily, that is really not a big concern for me.<br>

Generally, Canon has a big big thing for itself > it has plenty of prime lenses, and they are cheaper...</p>

<p><strong>Well, reading all i just wrote, i guess it would be better to ask a question that will determine my choice between canon and Nikon, is: Does the Canon 5D mark I and mark II autofocus system (limited to 11 pts vs 51 pts for D300 and D700) are enough for wedding photography to don't miss pictures because of lazy / slow / "less points" autofocus? (i'm not talking about my skills only about inner autofocus performance in every conditions we can meet during wedding (church, very poor church light, very poor recpetion light, wedding at night etc.)</strong><br>

<strong><br /> </strong><br>

<strong>Thank you for all those answers, hope you'll give me too this answer about AF :)</strong></p>

 

<p>i'm sorry but nobody except william understood my question :/</p>

<p>Hi<br>

Are the f/2 prime lenses enough lighty for wedding photography (such as inside church in poor light conditions or during the little inside fiesta) or the f/1.8 - f/1.4 are "must have" for low/poor light conditions such as inside church photography and inside fiestzz (maybe even in the evening) photography?)<br>

thx</p>

<p>Thanks for your answer!<br>

Now i'm hesitating between D90 and D300 (note that i would like to make wedding photography my main activity) i compared both images on imageressources (and 50D too) i found D90 and D300 giving more detailed images than the 50D + i found on many review that 50D AF is a bit slow... which can be a real problem for weddings when you haver to be as reactive as you can :/</p>

<p>I prefer the feel of Nikon, but prefer the gear of canon (and they have lot of real lights lenses while it's harder with ikon to find something under f/2.0 at reasonable price)</p>

<p>Im' interesting in full frame but it's cleary too expensive for me for now (maybe when i'll have earn enough money with my weddings) but i'm not sure the difference of price worth it to have full frame and i waas much more interested in 5D mark II than D700 (because twice the megapixels, 12.7megapixels can be short if i wzant to do a big big print no? like A2 and more (but not my main concern for now and not even sure i'll do more than A4 or A3 one day)<br>

About renting them, like i said, i can't, too much money. Camera + gear will be a big investment for me, i can't afford to rent them all even for a day but i already tried them at my resseller (but hard to see all the pro and cons in these conditions)</p>

<p>As far as i'll order the camera in Hong Kong and can have the D300 for only 150$ more than the D90 it will be a better choice right?<br>

Do you think that, except my photographer skills, the D300 image quality and performance are enough for the future clients? i don't want them to be disapointed by image quality still not talking about how i take pictures but only the "inside" D300 (or D90) image quality? I want something</p>

<p>Thanks for your answer :)</p>

<p>Well maybe the D90 too (reviews say quality is very close to D300...and it has more AF points than the Canon (11 vs 9.6)</p>

<p>Hello<br>

After have been for a while now on Pentax, i sold all my gear and want to go for Canon or Nikon and would like to start some paid wedding photography (i've done few weddings and the result was nice)<br>

As far as i don't have the money for a full frame camera and/or L lenses, i will stick to the "semi-pro" Dslr.<br>

I'm hesitating between the Canon 50D and the Nikon D300 (only between these 2).<br>

Actually, the 50D seems to have almost eveyrthing for itself, except the only 9.6 pts of AF....whereas the D300 as it's very fast 51pts AF...<br>

In your opinion, and/or assuming you campared in real situation both which one is the best camera for wedding? (i will try to do some models books in studio and outside just like that, if i can find some clients, and will do other type of photos syuch as landscapes and portraits ( i lvoe that) but as far as it will be jsut for my pleasure and not a "paid job" (except maybe model books) my main consideration is really which one performs better on wedding situation (and other types events such as anniversaries etc. obviously)</p>

<p>Does the 6x more AF pts of the D300 will "help" me in weddings (inside churchs, low light situation etc.) or the 9.6pts of the 50D are enough for this job? <br>

The 50D is much more cheaper, has cheaper lenses, seems to perform as well in high ISOs, has extra megapixels etc. while the only advantage i see in the D300 now compared to the 50D is the feel in hand (i prefer Nikon for that, but i'll get used to canon without problem) and this fast 51pts AF</p>

<p>Thx if you can help me, i'm so lost and don't have the possiblity and the money to try both or rent them...</p>

<p>This post is the sequel of the one i posted yesterday about "what you think about the choice i made. :D<br>

http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00Rk2X</p>

<p>I come with new questions :)<br>

Imagining i don't go for the 40d or 50d but buy 2x5D (mark2 is two expensive) (you make me hesitate)</p>

<p>1) What do you think about this first lenses choice (that fit my budget)?<br>

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM<br>

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM</p>

<p>2) i need something around 28-35mm (only prime)<br>

I thought about the Canon EF 28mm USM f/1.8 .... would like the 35mm L but it's very expensive. Do you know this lens? does it give good resuts? if i open it @ 2.8 knowing it's not a L lense and not as popular as other canon non-L lenses (like the 50mm f/1.4) will it give me better results than taking a zoom @2.8 (just for the comparison)<br>

3) Do i need something wider like a 20mm?<br>

4) Knowing i'll have the 85mm, will the 105mm be usefull for wedding photography or can i sacrify it?<br>

5) is a 135mm usefull for wedding photography?<br>

6) will i need something longer than a 135mm ... like 200mm, for wedding photography? or a 135mm is long enough to cover the candid/disntant shot i could make?</p>

<p>This gear will be only dedicated to weddings.</p>

<p>Thanks again :D</p>

<p>Bob > thanks, i totally agree. I just wanted a complete gear like i said, to be « ready » for every situation i could face.<br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> Conrad > Why don’t they use sigma? If I chosed sigma it is for a simple reason > they are the only one proposing a 20mm f/1.8 and a 30mm less expensive than the gwonderful and very expensive 35L from canon<br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> Mike > no, unfortunately I don’t have the money for 2x 5DII (not even one I think). Maybe 2x5D but I hesitate. I can have it for 1300 euros. For this price I got 2x40D :/ And also for lenses that would be more expensive to buy. So it’s an overall money addition that is finally quite important<br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> Rainer > I gave up the idea of using converters after answers on my other post<br /> <br />  <br /> <br />  <br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> Generally to everybody > Talking about zoom, I am afraid to don’t have enough light that’s why I gave up them.<br /> <br /> I thought about getting only 2x5D + 2 canon L zooms covering 24 to 200 f/2.8 + the tokina but knowing I’ll work in mexico I thought it was a wrong idea because:<br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> -          Civil weddings happen in very small space generally with very low light, and sometimes there is just 1.50 meter from the subjects :/<br /> <br /> -          99% of the wedding will happen too in churchs… churchs from mexico (well from all around the world to oi think) are very very poor in light<br /> <br /> -          I think about diners, receptions, or general weddings that could happen at dusk or at night<br /> <br />  <br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> But if I was sure to have very good image quality and NATURAL with 2x5D + those 3 zooms + 2x580 EXII flash light I’ll go for this. It is just that I am afraid to lose the natural of the colors :/<br /> <br />  <br /> <br /> Saying it is not about the gear, ok, we all know it s about how to take good picture, composition etc. but there is length you have to cover to be ready.<br /> <br /> That’s why I asked too if there are lenses I can remove from my wish list (if you give answer please don’t forget to tell me if you talk FF o APS-C way when you talk about lenses :)</p>

<p>ok i think i will give up the converters if it downs the quality :( that was just the only way i found to have a 105mm giving more light than using a 70-200mm f/2.8 on a crop body</p>

<p>4) will the image quality go down from the original lens when it comes with the extender?</p>

<p>Hi, I made my choices about my future wedding equipments. 2x Canon 40D or 50D + the following lenses >> (i want to use only prime lenses, no zoom, even if it is more versatile). I'll cover from 18 to 190mm. I give you my list with the Full Frame equivalent, because i get crazy with crop factor)</p>

<p>Aprox 18 to 26mm FF >>> Tokina AF 11-16 f/2.8 Aprox<br>

35mm FF>>> Sigma 20mm f/1.8 HSM DC Aprox<br>

50mm FF >>> Sigma 30mm f/1.4 USM Aprox<br>

85mm FF >>> Canon 50mm f/1.4 USM Aprox<br>

105mm FF >>> Externer x1.4 + Canon 50mm f/1.4 (gives me 112m f/2<br>

Aprox 135mm FF >>> Canon 85mm f/1.8 USM Aprox<br>

200mm FF >>> Extender x1.4 + Canon 85mm f/1.8 (gives me 190mm f/2.52)</p>

<p>1) What do you think about my choices? are there lenses that wont be usefull to cover every case i can encounter in wedding photography? If i can save money removing lenses that's not that usefull, i'm in :D<br>

2) Due to the crop factor the most "lighty" wide angle i'll have...is 35mm (still taking like if we were on full frame huh) wide engough to cover group shots? I'm afraid the tokina won't be enough "lighty" with his f/2.8 ... what do you think?<br>

3) I didn't find anything lense that will give me a 105mm FF equivalent on my future 40D or 50D so i choosed the extender...do you think it's a wrong idea?<br>

4) do you think 190mm is long enoug for "far" wedding photos we make generally, or will i need to buy a longer lens? i chosed the extender to get a 200mm also, because a) i'll buy it to have the 105mm equivalent and b) it's cheaper than buying a 200mm f/2.8<br>

I really would like your opinions :) thanks</p>

<p>1) I will acquire soon 2x40D or a 50D for wedding photography.<br>

I made my choice for almost all prime lenses (i want only prime lenses with good aperture to go from 35mm to 135mm)<br>

But due to his 1.6 crop factor, it gets a bit complicated because i miss a 105mm Full Frame equivalent.<br>

To get on those APS-C bodies a 105mm, i need to find a 65mm lense (or 70mm) and it doesn't exists (the 600m does, but only 2.8).</p>

<p>So i thought about buying a 1.4 extender and use it when i need a 105mm, with my 50mm, because (tell if if i'm wrong...all that crop and extender stuff mixed up make me confused) the 50mm is actually a (aprox) 85mm on my futur bodies. So if i understand well, adding an extender on my 40D or 50D + 50mm will give me this:<br>

50mm x1.6= 80mm the real lenght of the lens of the 40D * 1.4 (extender) will give me 112mm on the 40D is that right?<br>

And knowing the 50mm is f/1.4 i will have 1.4*1.4= 1.96 so a 112mm f/2 is that right?</p>

<p>Same thing to get a 200mm with the same extender. I will uwse the 85mm f/1.8 i'll buy.<br>

So i'll get 85*1.6(crop)=136mm > 136*1.4 = 190mm is that right?<br>

And for the aperture i'll have a 190mm f/2.52 is that right?</p>

<p>That's a bit complicated all that :/</p>

<p>2) What are the stuff i'll lose with an extender except the stops? Will i lose the HSM ou USM of my lenses? will i lose something special?</p>

<p>3) The name of those extender are Canon EF (without the S like EF-S) are they reserved only to full frame or can i use them with APS-C bodies?</p>

<p>Thanks :)</p>

<p> </p>

Hello

 

Could you help me to choose the good books? i'm looking for book talking about the wedding photogrphy... well, in

clear, i'm looking for one or many books that will cover all the aspects of wedding photography (from shooting,

to techniques like lightning, speedlite techniques, photojournalistic style etc., to how to make people feel

confortable and the way to tell them what i need them to do in some cases, the way to capture interesting candid

moments etc. ... everything)

 

I have checked a bit books on amazon.com (the deliver in france, that's why i need to buy there) but there is so

much that i don't know which one talk about the same thing, which ones are the best in their category etc.

I've read some reviews, but i would like some advices of pro wedding photographer who bought books like that.

 

Thank you

Hello

 

I'm hesitating between 2x 580EX II (one flash on each body, not 2 flash on the same body) or 2x430 EX (much more

afordable / one flash on each body). Is the 430 EX enough for wedding shots in all kind of light conditions? The

difference of price is important beween the 2 models, does somebody had the chance to compare both of them in

wedding conditions?

What the 580EX II is giving more about final image quality compared to 430EX (i'm not talking about 580EX II

functions comapred to 430EX, that i think i'll never use)

 

Second part of my question: i've seen people using 2 flashs on a single body...is it really useful (it wil make

me buy 4 flashs...) for wedding photography? Do we need external artificial source of light in wedding

photography or one flash on a body is enough?

 

thank you :)

thx for the answer conrad :)

i don't live near philapdelphia, no, i live near Paris (france) and soon i'll live in Guadalajara (mexico) :) but thx for the invitation, i appreciate :)

intersting answer... :) i'll read the links you have me :)

Hi again,

 

I'm back with my questions...sorry

 

Few months ago, i asked if f2.8 was enough "faster and lighty" to don't be able to buy faster prime lenses than

that, for al lall outdoor shots, even when the weather is cloudy, and people answered me that yes.

 

For wedding photography, the ideal wil lbe to have large zoom lenses with high aperture (f2 at least) but we know

that it's not tommorow we wil lsee that. to do'nt have to buy lots of prime lenses.

 

Im about to buy prime lense, for hard situation in churchs, or if the wedding happen the night etc. to be able to

don't use that much (or the less that is possible) the speedlite flash because it makes pictures looks very ugly

and not natural....but i just discovered something called gary fong lightsphere 2, it's a difuser you put on the

flash speedlite...and i was impressed about how the picture look with that, when they are taken in hard light

conditions...

so i was wondering if it was necesary to buy prime lenses (for me it's only prime lenses or only zoom lense)

knowing that at f2.8 is enough opened for any day outdoor shots as oyu told me, and no matter what, if i shoot

the night, i'll need to use the flash, and same thing in the church...

 

won't it be a better idea to buy a good f2.8 zzoom lens and in case of low light shoot use the 580EXII + gary

fong difuser instead of buying more expensive prime lenses knowing that no matter what, i'll have to use flash too??

 

Just a question, that i'll be interested to know the naswer :)

thx for the answer (and the advice) but there is no posiblity to rent slr camera where i live...

 

So do you think buying a 5D twice the price of a 40D for wedding and events photography (i want image quality that will satisfy 99% of my future clients? (honesty, if you tell me a 40D give very good image quality that will satisfy 99% of my client, maybe it's better to take that, knowing it's much more cheaper...and for my personal use it's 100% enough for me but i would like you tell me in your opinion (because you seem in wedding photography since a long time and know the slr camera)... i really want that... well, at least 95% of my future clients (lambda clients) are satisifed by the image quality it offers (i'm not talking about how i take the pictures, but pure image quality) ...and also that it supports warm because i'll be living in mexico, and also that it's enough good in all points to don't risk to miss something by the mistake of the slr (because it's slow, or lack of reaction, or lazy AF etc. i don't know what could be the reason...because i've used a pentax K10D that people say very good, and i can guarantee you that it made me lose few shots and it was not my fault)

 

thanks if you can answer me

Hello

 

I know i'm boring with my question, but im about to make a ver y important (for me) investment, and i don't want

to do a mistake...

I wasn't follwoing news about dsl since few months, and i've seen thant canon 5D mark 2 was finally

release...which means that the 5D is now sold at a much more reasonable price...

 

I planned to take 2 canon 40D bodies...but now i hesitate with 2 5D bodies.... the problem is the price (twice

much expensive for 2 5D bodies....) but if it's really a big step to do wedding and event shoots, maybe i'll ruin

myself.

 

So i wanted to know what are the difference between these 2 bodies that could justify to spend twice the price of

a 40D, or if you prefer, is the 5D gives a real PLUS for wedding and event photography compare to the 5D

 

1) is the 5D image quality (not talking about how i take picture but pure image quality) is much more better than

40D (enough to justify twice the price), and is a real plus for wedding photography?

 

2) What gives me a full frame sensor compare to APS-C (except the fact that i can use lenses liek they are (the

35mm = 35mm) and i don't care about that, i want to know if it gives a real Plus for wedding photography

 

3) auto-focus is much more better than 40D AF

 

4) etc.

 

thank you!

Hello,

 

With your experiences in wedding (and events such as birthdays etc) shooting, can you tell me if the following

accessories are useful or not really necesarry?

 

 

1) A polarizing filter (i'm talking only about its anti-reflect function, for the color saturation, if i want

that, i'l ldo it with lightroom)

 

2) A UV filter (maybe just to protect the sensor right?)

 

3) A monopod (i'll have a tripod, but i wonder if buy also a monopod could help me in some shooting or be useful

in original shoots)

 

4) A remote (wired or wireless)

 

5) A flash diffusor stuff

 

 

Thank you!

hi again

 

For my future group photos and other photos i plan to buy a 20mm than will be a 35mm more or less on my 40D

(x1.5)...i'll take it no matter what, but i was planning to also buy the tokina 11-16 (17.6-25.6mm on my future

camera)...but i'm not sure if it really necesary.

 

does the 20mm (don't forget, actually 35mm for me) is enough wide to shoot every case of wedding people group

(when they pose for me or candid) or do i need wider (liek the tokina)?

 

thanks

do you think i could miss some photos due to the slower focusing of the 40D compared to pro cameras? (i'll use only prime lenses with my 2 bodies)

Hi,

 

I'm looking since few months for a dSLR camera...Actually, i will use the camera for my personal use (so i don't

need the top of thge top, because i've used a little nikon D40 and was very pleased with the image quality,

quite enough for my personal use) but also for wedding shoot (i would like to start profesionnaly this activity).

As a professional use, it will be used only for wedding shoots (won't do as a professional fashion photos,

animals, sports etc. just weddings)...so i was thinking about buying a canon 40D but....

 

I can see here and there people telling there using canon 5D, nikon D3, canon markIII etc.for their wedding shoot

... so very expensive cameras...

Why people buy that kind of cameras? is it really a + to buy that kind of expensive camera for wedding shoot?

When i look a photo from a 40D/D300 and a photo from a bigger camera like the one i said, with the same lens, i

don't see any noticeable difference, just sometimes that seems a bit sharper or something like that, and

sometimes nothing at all (don't know if i'm crazy hehe)...and when i see the difference, it's only comparing 2

photos...i'm unable to say from which camera is a photo. Sometimes the photo is a bit noisy or seems darker, have

less sharp etc. and so i imagine it's from a novice camera (and most of the time i am right) but i have seen lot

and lot of samples from 40D/D300 and 5D/D3 and most of time, i can't say if the photo is from 40d, 5d etc. (when

i think that the photo is amazing and must be from D3 or 5D actually it's from a 40D or D300 for example. (and i

see most of the time the difference between a 450D and a 40D for example).

 

But if people buy that kind of expensive camera for wedding shoots, there must be a logical reason no? What is it?

Could my clients be disapointed by image quality (im not talking about how i take my pictures, but the original

image quality we get from camera)? Could they be able watching the photos, and guess im not working with a

"professional" camera (such as 5D, D3 etc.)

Do you think a 40/D300 give enough image quality (still not talking about how i take picture) for most of the

lcients (at least 95%)

If a 40D or D300 give enough image quality for 95% of clients eyes (i don't know, i would liek to know if people

are working withg afordable camera and do real professional wedding and live from that)...why people buy 5D, D3

etc. to do wedding shoots? do we feel more professional shooting with expaensive camera? do we feel more

professional, having a bigger camera than another guy who shoot wedding with a more afordable camera (40D/D300)?

 

Sorry for my english

thx for the answers

p.s: i really thought you'll tell me that 40D is not enough for the kind of fashion photos i want to make, especially for me to have maybe a chance one day, to have special orders from magazines etc. who could be affraid that i work with "just" a 40D

But that's a good new :)

thx everybody! Like always :)