Affordable Wedding Gear Advice Please

[acroreef]

I currently do real estate/ architectural work in the U.S. I use a Sony A7r with a Sony 16-35 lens as well as a 24-70. I want to transition into wedding photography and would like to get gear advice for my transition.

While a Sony A7R is great for architectural work, I don't think it can focus as fast as needed for wedding work in low light. Also, I can't afford to have two Sony A7r or similar, bodies. I've researched somewhat about a Canon 6D as well as a Sony D750. (The 750 seems highly touted for this genre).

I plan on selling my Sony gear and then purchasing two of the same bodies and adding appropriate lenses for wedding photography. (I'm not opposed to buying refurbished to save money). After selling my Sony gear, I would have about $4000 - $6000 as a budget to purchase two bodies and appropriate lenses.

Any advcice is appreciated. Thank you!

Dave

[paintingwithlight]

Hi Dave,

I am not a professional photographer so take my recommendations in that context.

For tips on photographing low-light parties, see https://www.thestar.com/photos/maste...arty_pics.html .

A flash would be useful for low-light scenes.

I believe that mirrorless cameras will replace DSLRs. That being said, the demise of the DSLR is still over a decade away in my estimation. Currently you can buy DSLRs for 1/2 to 1/3 the price of a comparable mirrorless cameras, plus DSLRs have way more lens options.

If you want two bodies with lenses for under $6000 you are close to being limited to cropped sensor format as opposed to full frame. I think cropped sensor cameras will fit your needs.

If I was shooting a wedding as an official photographer with two cameras I'd be tempted to have one fitted with an 18-55mm zoom and another fitted with a 35mm or 50mm prime lens. The former would get the most use but the latter might give some great shots with shallow depth of field. Shooting a wedding with a lens longer than 50mm is just begging everyone to butt in front of you and ruin the shot (unless you are shooting from a balcony).

Again, I am just musing in this post. I defer to any pro's.

Michael

[William W]

I currently do real estate/ architectural work . . . I want to transition into wedding photography and would like to get gear advice for my transition.
Any [advice] is appreciated. Thank you

Apropos the gear . . . the key criteria are:
> System Redundancy
> Familiarity, Simplicity and Ease of Use
> Reliability
> Minimalist (quantity) to provide excellent results with a completeness of kit to suite your Artistic Style and Shooting Technique

***

"Architectural Work" does not imply the necessity to work under the pressure of time: "transition" is not a good idea. Better to master the requirements and then hang out your shingle.

I know an excellent Wedding Photographer who uses Sony. It is more about anticipating the best camera viewpoint, than AF Speed and AF Acquisition: having stated that I am not sure that the Sony would be “slow”.

***

I plan on selling my Sony gear and then purchasing two of the same bodies and adding appropriate lenses for wedding photography. (I'm not opposed to buying refurbished to save money). After selling my Sony gear, I would have about $4000 - $6000 as a budget to purchase two bodies and appropriate lenses.

I use Canon DSLRs.

Suggested consideration –

EOS 6D x 2
EF 24 to 70 F/2.8L (original or MkII) or EF24 to 105 F/4 IS as the main working lens.
EF 70 to 200 F/4 L IS USM - OR – EF 135 F/2 plus x1.4MkII or MkIII extender EF as telephoto lens
EF 50 F/1.8MkII and/or EF 35 F/2 and/or EF 85 F/1.8 as System Redundant Lenses: my preference being a pair - 35 and 85.
Suitable ‘Speedlite’ x 2 (prefer to have three).

(Maybe I have blown the budget?)

*

I suggest that you think outside the box and consider not having two bodies the same. But have an APS-C and 135 Format body, in which case the combination of a 17 to 40/4 (or 16 to 35 /2.8) and a 70 to 200/4 IS (or 70 to 200/2.8 IS) works really well. When considering FoV, using this Dual Format combination the “Standard Zoom Lens” is made superfluous and the 35 and 85 Primes fit very well, providing an effective (135 format FoV )of: 35, 58, 85 and 136 all at very fast apertures.

WW

[acroreef]

Thank you William and Michael. I do plan to "transition" slowly after having worked with a "mentor," studied "best practices" and maybe shooting a few weddings as a second shooter.

[Tronhard]

To me there are several main elements that will dictate your gear:
1. The lighting conditions of the environment within which you operate - e.g. the amount of physical space, lighting characteristics - intensity and colour.
2. The type of photos you are taking - inevitably there will be group shots, individual portraits of significant individuals, bride and groom shots before and after, the ceremony and general shots of the guests.
3. The type of output you will be offering. Will you limit yourself to electronic media, an album format with images no larger than say 10x8 for example, or do you plan to offer large prints/canvasses?

If you work in low light situations, as is often the case in weddings, it is worth considering a refurbished full-frame body. Bigger sensors are generally more forgiving in such circumstances and you are getting the benefit of a larger original image for blowing up to large prints if required. Also crop lenses reduce the Field of View, so you are losing spread compared to a FF sensor. Having two bodies with lenses attached allows you to switch quickly between formats as the need arises. I personally have battery grips on all my cameras with fully charged power cells to reduce the chances you will get a flat. Of course you want multiple cards, and in that respect a body that allows dual cards that can record simultaneously can be a life saver. You don't want to go to the married couple and tell them that their precious photos died with your one card.

Glass, as always, is the critical issue. In that respect Canon seems to hold the largest range of decent lenses, but doubtless others will dispute that! I recommend a fast medium telephoto lens because you are going to try to isolate individuals among groups and you want to be able to work from a reasonable distance. A longer lens is more flattering for portraiture and the focal length, combined with a fast f-stop will let you isolate individuals from the crowd. My experience has been that a f2.8, 70-200mm is regarded as the standard range for this.

For wider shots a 24-105mm f4 lens should cover most situations - note I am continuing to suggest zooms here because you gain by framing the shot before you take it compared to losing pixels afterwards. You may often find your ability to move backwards or forwards to frame a shot is constrained by furniture or people. As you frame you don't want to be backing into someone's prize Delft or knocking over the bride's mother. When you get much wider than 24mm you will have to consider the impacts of wide angle lenses - they won't thank you for warping their features. If you are going to take large group photos you need to get your subjects into an appropriate space to do so.

Shooting available light is probably nicest as most people choose an environment for their wedding that matches their aspirations, and that often includes the light. That said, fill-in flash and reflectors can be game changers to even out contrast. If you are going to use the latter you will need an assistant to handle that. In fact an assistant is pretty important to organize and arrange people into groups, arrange couture, and keep wandering guests out of the shot. They can also keep your spare camera on hand for quick changes.

So much of the success in such an event depends less on equipment than research. Meet with the wedding party or planners, establish expectations and locations. Scout out the locations before the event at the times you will be shooting and feed back to the party what you need to make a success of their images. I did a wedding where the party insisted on an outdoor venue at 1:00pm in baking sun - which they thought would render great images. I had to convince them to retire to a shaded area for their shots or I would have had massive contrast issues along with a lot of squinting faces and sunglasses! You also need to set ground rules about your rights to shoot vs. those of other guests. I know some photographers who will not take on a job if the guests are allowed to shoot with cell phones... why, they get in the way massively and create a lot of conflict! That ground rule is best negotiated with the wedding party to pass on to their guests before you come on the scene.

[Mike Buckley]

I'm curious to learn what motivated you to change from architectural/real estate photography to wedding photography.

[acroreef]

It seems VERY difficult to break into the architectural market genre. Real estate agents are usually just looking for the cheapest route, don't want to pay for (or care) about creating "stunning" images. I have found some exceptions, of course. I believe that although wedding photography is extremely competitive, there are so many opportunities to shoot weddings and break into that marketplace, that given enough time and working smart and creating beautiful work will garner as much business as I want with a much less price sensitive audience. My 2-cents as to why I want to switch.

[Manfred M]

I definitely would not recommend getting rid of your old gear and replacing it with Canon or Nikon equipment at this point; that is a money losing proposition. While the phase detect is definitely faster in focusing than your Sony's contrast detect, weddings are hardly "action shots" where it will make a difference. Don't forget, weddings were being shot in the pre-AF days, so focus speed is really not an issue. As Bill put things so well, anticipation, positioning and shot planning are far more critical.

I don't like shooting weddings, but have shot three over the past few years because I simply could not say no to some family / friend situations. I know a number of wedding photographers, so did consult with them and did watch some "pros" at other weddings.

Most serious wedding photographers are shooting full frame. Part of that is "marketing" as you don't really want someone in the wedding party to say "look he has the same camera I do". It does add an air of exclusivity. An identical second body is probably best, but I have seen photographers who do use a lower end and even crop sensor body as their backup. If you are planning to shoot two different bodies at the same time so as to not have to change lenses, this becomes even more important. If you are looking at the second body purely as a backup, then even a crop frame will do in a pinch.

Every full frame wedding photographer I know has two key lenses in their bag; an f/2.8 70-200mm and a f/2.8 24-70mm. They may or may not have relatively fast fixed focus lenses - 35mm, 50mm and 85mm are common. All are fast (f/1.8 and faster) just because of the limited light situations wedding photographers find themselves in and the shallow DoF that they create.

Off camera flash (speedlights) is pretty well mandatory, especially at receptions; minimum two required. Learn how to shoot in manual and automated flash modes and use flash exposure compensation. Get good at shooting bounce flash. Sony branded flash will be the safest, but most expensive route. I don't know anything about third-party flash for Sony. Be wary here as there is a lot of good stuff and a long off not so good stuff on the market. The third party flashes often have the same functionality as the OEM ones or can simply be "dumb" manual flashes, so you will need to do your research here. Metz and Nissin make excellent gear, but are not inexpensive. There are a lot of Chinese units on the market and here one has to tread very carefully; Godox (which are available under Bolt and Cheetah names in the USA) is probably the best of these. Yongnuo and Phottix have their followers as well, but are generally viewed as being more mid-range from a quality standpoint. Don't forget that if these Chinese units break under / out of warranty, they often have to be shipped back to China for repair work.

[Manfred M]

creating beautiful work will garner as much business as I want with a much less price sensitive audience.

In that case, I would suggest you stay out of the wedding photography business, as it is extremely price sensitive. Three of the wedding photographers (all have won major wedding photography awards) I know have gotten out of the business because it is so very competitive. Based on what I have heard and read, it is even more cut-throat than the architectural business.

[Mike Buckley]

I'm surprised that price sensitivity is your reason for changing your target market. Every market has its segments that are less price-sensitive than other segments and there's no reason to think the same isn't true for architectural photography, real estate photography and wedding photography.

My hunch is that your disappointment in the architectural and real estate photography businesses is due to a lack of staying power and/or business skills and that you're likely going to experience the same disappointments in the wedding business. That you have to ask questions about the tools needed to conduct your new business despite that you have a mentor speaks volumes about that. I wish you the very best in proving me very wrong by being wildly successful in your new venture.

[Tronhard]

To clarify - Architectural photography is not normally associated with selling houses, that is the area of real estate photography. Architectural photography is usually associated with architectural merit and expressionism. Such clients may be those who have ownership or lease of a building for their business purposes, by architects themselves to show off their designs or to associate artistic elements in a design or artistic context. It tends to engage a fairly exclusive range of photographers and is very hard to break into without a good grounding of architecture.

I think, from your comments, that you are engaging in real estate photography which is indeed a competitive market - as is indeed wedding photography. Both have things in common: a quick turn around and often a focus on economics as much as quality. However real estate photography does not delve anywhere as deeply into the morass of wedding politics, stresses and expectations of the clients and their relatives. Like Manfred and Mike, I would suggest you may be leaping from the frying pan into the fire...

Have you had any experience working with wedding photography or have worked with one at all?

It seems VERY difficult to break into the architectural market genre. Real estate agents are usually just looking for the cheapest route, don't want to pay for (or care) about creating "stunning" images.

[inkista]

As a hobbyist shooter, I just kind of blinked at the idea of changing from architectural to wedding, in the hopes that it would be less competitive. There are Craigslist folks who will shoot a wedding for $500 these days, and on messageboards, we often see newb dSLR owners thinking they're ready to go shoot a wedding now they have "pro" camera with an 18-55 kitlens. [facepalm]

But the pressures are going to be far worse with wedding photography. At least with real-estate you don't have a MoB breathing down your neck, Uncle Bobs popping up in front of your lens, and a forest of smartphones to shoot over, with no possibility of reshoots.

Have you considered learning VR photography to add to your real estate portfolio? That, at least, could differentiate you from the low-end competition. (I assume you've already figured out how to light like Hargis ). The equipment outlay wouldn't be nearly as intensive as selling everything and starting over, and you'd mostly be building on skillz you already have, rather than having to learn still-life (cake, flower arrangements), photojournalism (prep photos), event, and portraiture all at the same time as you also discover untold depths of patience in people-wrangling and nerves of steel. Just saying, real estate/architectural sounds a helluva lot easier to me than wedding.

But I already shoot 360x180 panos.

You'd basically just need an ultrawide or fisheye lens, a panorama head for the tripod, and good stitching software, and then about three to six months to learn how to do it both on the shooting and post-processing end. Maybe less.

[acroreef]

Thanks to all of you for your thoughtful responses. I have not moved past the thought experiment stage yet...and I posted here because it is a good way to get feedback from folks who have "been there." (I haven't worked with a mentor yet and that is something I would do, along with working as a "second shooter" or for free for another wedding photographer to learn the ropes before I made this jump. I would work with someone who would NOT end up being a competitor, maybe geographic location would be that determinant).

I certainly don't think I lack staying power or work ethic, but all things being equal, a competitive wedding marketplace, I would think, would yield better financial benefits than the competitive real estate genre...maybe I'm wrong. (That's why I'm here, to pick the brains of those in the know).

I do employ light and post processing techniques similar to Hargis, Kelley, and others.

To answer another response regarding selling my gear, my thought is that the A7R and the lenses I have are not best for wedding work. (Sony doesn't have a plethora of good choices yet, as does Canon or Nikon). So my thought is that, for example, a D750 could shoot weddings and architecture and I could possibly afford two, but having Sonys would not be a comensurate experience.

Your thoughts are appreciated, thank you.

Dave

[Manfred M]

To answer another response regarding selling my gear, my thought is that the A7R and the lenses I have are not best for wedding work.

Sony has both an f/2.8 24-70mm and f/2.8 70-200mm lens (both constant aperture). Both are the main workhorses for Canon and Nikon FF camera wedding photographers. They have applicable 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses. In other words they have all the lenses you might consider in both the Nikon and Canon lines. Lack of applicable lenses really is not the case here.

I personally would not have gone for the Sony for architectural / real estate work as Sony does not have perspective correcting lenses, which are critical for high end architectural work. Canon and Nikon do.

[acroreef]

I didn't realize that Sony had 2.8 aperture lenses for the A-series (A7R) cameras. Thank you, I'll look into that. Also, I do have a Canon 24mm T/S that I use with an adapter.

[rpcrowe]

Although I would have no hesitation to shoot a wedding with my 7D2 and 7D cameras, I would opt for full frame cameras if I were equipping myself specifically to shoot weddings.

Since I am a Canon guy, I would opt for an identical pair or a pair one generation apart: such as a 5D2 and a 5D3...

Redundancy in lenses would also be necessary. Two to three portable flashes would be my requirement - I'd like them to be radio controlled. The Adorama Flashpoint RC or the equivalent Godox units would be my selections...

However, unless I missed it, no one has mentioned studio lights for the formal portraits... Despite what some proponents of hotshoe flashes claim, I really think that you need professional lights for professional portraiture.

I'd like to bring up one point. In surveys of why new businesses fail, the overwhelming reason is that they are under-funded...

[Mike Buckley]

a competitive wedding marketplace, I would think, would yield better financial benefits than the competitive real estate genre

What data is the basis of your conclusion?

[rpcrowe]

There is a plethora of low-cost wedding opportunities which will give the part-time photographer an opportunity to earn some money (which can be reinvested in equipment). However, unless you have a portfolio of a dressy wedding (including formal portraits) to exhibit to potential customers , the chances of acquiring a big money wedding is pretty slim. Big money wedding planners (could be the mother-of-the-bride or a professional wedding planner) are willing to invest some money in documenting the wedding and usually hire established photographers (often with studios). However, when you are trying to shoot the nickle-dime weddings, your competition is always Uncle Charlie with his Rebel DSLR and kit lens. Sure, you can do a better job but,he will do it for free

The nice thing about shooting weddings part-time is that weddings most often occur on a Saturday (with exceptions of Muslim, Jewish and Seventh Day Adventist and possibly other groups), This is nice for the part-timer since many people work a five day week and have Saturdays off. On the other hand, unless you are shooting big money weddings, it can be very difficult to support yourself shooting one wedding a week.

About getting a portfolio built. There are some organizations (camera clubs mostly) here in Southern California that "stage" weddings for photographers. They will rent a venue, hire models in costume and do a reenactment of a wedding to give a photographer a chance to get a portfolio of a classy wedding. However, since there are a lot of costs involved, the prices for these wedding reenactments ae pretty stiff.

Here's a point which is simply my opinion. If you are assembling a wedding portfolio, ensure that your bride is not a BUFFARILLA (Bufarilla - definition: the product of the union of a buffalo and a gorilla). Brides and mothers-of-the-bride want to imagine "their" bride pictures to be beautiful. The saying that "all brides are beautiful" is not at all true.

Some of the worst images are of very heavy set brides who persist in wearing bare shoulder wedding dresses

Another concern with wedding photography is how to handle groups of people with courtesy yet firmness.

Of course, the business aspects of photography are also all-important.

The standard advice given is to become second shooter for an established photographer. However, that advice is like telling some one to "Zoom with your feet." in shooting landscapes. Often easier to suggest than to accomplish.

Finally, I would make a scrapbook of wedding pictures from the various magazines available and then do a written script to follow in shooting a wedding so you don't miss any of the all important shots during the confusion of the ceremony!

[acroreef]

Superb advice Richard. Thanks for sharing your time and advice.

[kazuyar]

its my daughters wedding in July and shes insisted i take the photos, talk about pressure
I've got a friend that's going to take the ones I've got to be in using my gear, but i cant say i'm looking forward to it