Wedding help.

[NickMelson]

I have been asked to shoot a wedding on Saturday the 1st october, i've never shot at a wedding so im nervous, any pointers?
I have spare cards and batteries etc. Going to make a list of the main things i need to shoot.
Been thinking i need a more prime/sharp lens ( Current lens are nikon 18-55vr 55-200 70-300 )
Have Been looking into the nikon 24-70mm f2.8 to hire for a few days, but any other recommendations would be great.
Also what's the best place to hire from, im looking at lenspimp and lensesforhire.

http://www.facebook.com/nickmelsonphotography
http://www.nickmelsonphotography.co.uk/Nick_Melson_Photography/Home.html

Thanks Nick

 

[Danny133]

Say no.

Spare body in case yours goes bang.

Low F stop lenses to get decent shots indoors with no flash (most churches don't allow flash)

Its a mega ballache - hardwork and people expect too much for nothing.

 

[DanFreemanPhoto]

Having just shot a wedding yesterday, if you don't have lens with AT LEAST f/2.8 max aperture, then forget it.

I was using natural light in the church, and I was at minimum ISO1000 (on a D3) and max aperture almost throughout.

The 24-70mm is a cracking lens, that's my main workhorse, which is pretty much always attached to one of my bodies throughout a wedding.

The 70-200mm is another essential wedding lens, the VR is amazing and a life saver in relatively low light situations.

 

[NickMelson]

Say no.

Spare body in case yours goes bang.

Low F stop lenses to get decent shots indoors with no flash (most churches don't allow flash)

Its a mega ballache - hardwork and people expect too much for nothing.

Thanks, but its something i want to try and it will give me some experience.

Having just shot a wedding yesterday, if you don't have lens with AT LEAST f/2.8 max aperture, then forget it.

I was using natural light in the church, and I was at minimum ISO1000 (on a D3) and max aperture almost throughout.

The 24-70mm is a cracking lens, that's my main workhorse, which is pretty much always attached to one of my bodies throughout a wedding.

The 70-200mm is another essential wedding lens, the VR is amazing and a life saver in relatively low light situations.

Thanks, Would you recommend hiring the 24-70 then? I have a spare body so im going to leave the 55-200 attached to that and if i use the 24-70 use my body with that.

 

[Sym0n]

Braver than me.

 

[Revels]

I've done one after a fair bit of persuasion from a mate. I have no intention of doing anymore.

My photos weren't bad and certainly better than some people that charge a lot of money but I couldn't do it for someone on that basis, I'd want mine to be perfect. Look at Dan's thread. His are brilliant.

I think two bodies is essential. You'll miss a lot if you're changing lenses. I missed things just swapping from one body to another and they were both around my neck.

I had 17-50mm f2.8 and 50-150mm f2.8. I wouldn't even consider any of the three lenses you have.

 

[SamP]

Say no and get someone else to do it. IF something fails of yours you're f**ked. I wouldnt dare shoot a wedding and my camera bags pretty 'complete'.

 

[Sym0n]

Say no and get someone else to do it. IF something fails of yours you're f**ked. I wouldnt dare shoot a wedding and my camera bags pretty 'complete'.

This is the reason I will not do one, I've been asked many times and been offered quite a bit of money to shot them...but it's not worth it. If I f**k something up it's their whole day done, you only have one chance and yeah I'd shoot thousands of frames but there's still only one chance. This is made even worse for me as it's always close friends that ask, so not only would I f**k up their photos I'd also lose some very good friends.

Not worth it.

 

[NickMelson]

I just spoke to them and its not a '' proper wedding'' Just renewing there vowels at a local church.
So i think i may go for it.

 

[Feirny]

Agree with the 2.8, I had the 24-70 f2.8 and my 50mm at hand.

I enjoyed the wedding I shot, proper nerve racking but I think I did alright. They were chuffed with the shots, anyway.

I also took another person with me, who also shot the wedding.

 

[ukaskew]

Say no.

Best advice so far!

I did day 2 of a couples epic 48hr wedding (they had a pro for day 1) and even though they preferred my pics and used one for their thank you cards etc, I would never ever do it again. At that time I had two bodies and a Nikon 80-200 2.8 AF-S in my collection, but even so it pushes your kit to the absolute limit.

My brother-in-law is getting married soon so I've agreed to take my camera along for the 'blokes getting ready' bit (the pro is doing the ladies warm-up!) and a bit of candid stuff during the day, but unless I had a full frame camera (D3 and a D700 back-up), 24-70mm 2.8, 85mm 1.4 and 70-200 2.8 VR I honestly would never touch a wedding again as the only paid photographer in attendance.

 

[Ay Ay Ron]

I think a lot of it depends on how confident you are about getting it right and how much they expect from you. If you have told them that you are amazing and fail to deliver then you risk losing the friendship. Or you might say that you are not that good but they want it done on the cheap so its better than nothing. Have they seen any of your pics before? Do they know what to expect from you?

My brother paid £500 ish for a friend of her family (supposed pro) to do their wedding last year. I got chatting to him and he had apparently done tons of them. To this day, I have no idea how he managed to get any work. He didn't even know how to preview the pics. He rocked a kit lens on a mid range Nikon and the package was 1 picture badly printed and a CD (hand written) with the images on. Also he was wearing an old pair of jeans and a tatty shirt. Didn't look the part and was pissed at the reception before they even cut the cake! My brother was far from impressed and rightly so.

Last weekend I was at a wedding in Yorkshire. It looked like they had spent an absolute fortune on everything but again the photographer's were far from impressive. There were two of them this time but they never left each others side apart from when they took the group picture (and they literally spent 15 minutes getting everyone in to position for them to take 1 picture each. 1 ffs!) Also they were taking pictures for 4 hours after the service in the reception. A tad too long if you ask me.

I was toying with the idea of doing some next year. I have some 2.8 lenses but i would need more range. The missus has done a few for her friends in the past but not charged (they did give her money as a thank you though). I am confident that I would do a better job than the ones mentioned above but I think I would still be nervous as hell about getting everything right.