Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Any recommendations for a DSLR for professional wedding ph..

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 2:45:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
a camera body in the future).
Thanks!

Lisa
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 6:07:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9 Dec 2004 11:45:49 -0800, "lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
>BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
>back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
>lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
>repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
>many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
>expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
>choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
>group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
>photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>a camera body in the future).

Canon EOS 1DsMark2
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 6:56:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Several wedding shooters of my acquaintance use the Fujifilm S2 Pro. In
the USA, the S2 and a 24-85mm AF-S Nikkor-G would run you about $2150.
Keep the film Nikon as backup.
Tom Nelson
Tom Nelson Photography

In article <1102621549.876143.53970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
lisa.ireland <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
> a camera body in the future).
> Thanks!
>
> Lisa
>
Related resources
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 10:31:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1102621549.876143.53970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of
> traditional group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of
> each recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for
> around $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably
> upgrade a camera body in the future).
> Thanks!
>
> Lisa

Canon 20D, 28 - 135 mm IS Lens, 550 or 580 EX flash. This will jump a bit
out of your budget but will do everything you want plus. My bet is that
within a short period of time the 20D will become the primary camera and the
film cameras will become the backup.

Once you get the digital learn to custom white balance and learn how to use
the flash for fill with bright backgrounds.
--
"Your money does not cause my poverty.
Refusal to believe this is at the bottom of
most bad economic thinking." --P. J. O'Rourke
http://www.bobhatch.com
Anonymous
December 9, 2004 11:58:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
news:rkfhr0d41uh6226p5janlbelfjols546e2@4ax.com...
> On 9 Dec 2004 11:45:49 -0800, "lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
>>BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
>>back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
>>lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
>>repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
>>many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
>>expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
>>choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
>>group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
>>photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
>>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>>a camera body in the future).
>
> Canon EOS 1DsMark2

Besides the budget that the OP mentioned, this camera is overkill for
weddings.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:08:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>
> Canon EOS 1DsMark2

By any chance did you read the price range of the OP???
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 7:07:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 2004-12-09, lisa.ireland <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
> a camera body in the future).
> Thanks!
>
> Lisa
>
I think I'd give them all a try. Handle them and see which ones make
sense to your hands. Reason is that you're going to have to produce
with whatever you get, and I doubt that the differences between Canon
and Nikon are enough to be more important than what feels and works the
best for you.

When you shoot people, wherever they are, you're working with a moving
target. Expressions, body positions, event timing and all that are
important, "decisive moments" or something like that. So one of the
things you should consider is shutter lag. How quickly does the camera
respond? Half press for auto-focus... how does that feel with the
various cameras you try?

The balance of the rig in battle dress, with lens and shade and battery
pack and all that, has a lot to do with whether or not it works for you.
Guys sometimes tend to muscle stuff to make it work, so weight
distribution might not be important for them. I can do that too, but
I've found that doing unnecessary work doesn't make for the best
results.

How about the controls? Are they laid out so that they make sense, or
are you going to wind up constantly fiddling to get what you want.
Those are the kinds of things I'd be thinking about, if I were you.

HTH

Will D.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 8:14:07 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Will D." <willd@no.spam> wrote in message
news:10ri87l434lg028@corp.supernews.com...
> On 2004-12-09, lisa.ireland <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
>> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
>> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
>> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
>> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
>> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
>> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
>> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
>> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
>> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
>> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>> a camera body in the future).
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Lisa
>>
> I think I'd give them all a try. Handle them and see which ones make
> sense to your hands. Reason is that you're going to have to produce
> with whatever you get, and I doubt that the differences between Canon
> and Nikon are enough to be more important than what feels and works the
> best for you.
>
> When you shoot people, wherever they are, you're working with a moving
> target. Expressions, body positions, event timing and all that are
> important, "decisive moments" or something like that. So one of the
> things you should consider is shutter lag. How quickly does the camera
> respond? Half press for auto-focus... how does that feel with the
> various cameras you try?
>
> The balance of the rig in battle dress, with lens and shade and battery
> pack and all that, has a lot to do with whether or not it works for you.
> Guys sometimes tend to muscle stuff to make it work, so weight
> distribution might not be important for them. I can do that too, but
> I've found that doing unnecessary work doesn't make for the best
> results.
>
> How about the controls? Are they laid out so that they make sense, or
> are you going to wind up constantly fiddling to get what you want.
> Those are the kinds of things I'd be thinking about, if I were you.
>
> HTH
>
> Will D.
>
All the recommendations are good. You also may want to look at the Olympus
E1, it is considered to be a professional camera. Many will question this;
however it has a professional construction, with water resistant gaskets all
around. It is only 5 MP, but that shouldn't be a problem unless your
looking to do a great amount of prints larger than 16 X 20. A number of
wedding photographers used the E20 in the past and have upgraded to the E1.
The new EVOLT(E300) is probably not for you. It has 8 MP, but is considered
a consumer grade SLR, and is probably not rugged enough. Also it is not
available yet. It's supposed to be released this month, but no ones has
seen it.
Go to your local Camera shop and try them all out and find the one that
feels right to you.
Ron
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:45:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1102621549.876143.53970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
> a camera body in the future).
> Thanks!
>
> Lisa
>
I think you already know the answer, Lisa. Nikon. A nice choice too would be
Minolta's new DSLR but this is probably more expensive than your budget. The
Minolta lenses are cheaper because the focus motor and stabaliser is in the
camera. Don't concentrate too much on sensor size. 5 Megapixel and over is
fine. You can get sharp, clear enlargements to 16"x20" from any DSLR now.

The problem with Canon DSLRs is that to achieve the same functionality as
Nikon, the cameras become unreliable. Whatever you do, don't part with the
film body because DSLRs are not as reliable as 35mm SLRs. I have a 20D and
it is too unreliable to use as my only camera. If I had my time again, I'd
go the Minolta.

Doug
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:45:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ryadia <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote:

> The problem with Canon DSLRs is that to achieve the same functionality as
> Nikon, the cameras become unreliable.

Interesting comment, please could you explain your reasoning.

Many thanks.

Tony
--
Newcastle upon Tyne, England

(Email address is valid ... for now)
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 9:45:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote in message >
<snipped>
> The problem with Canon DSLRs is that to achieve the same functionality as
> Nikon, the cameras become unreliable. Whatever you do, don't part with the
> film body because DSLRs are not as reliable as 35mm SLRs. I have a 20D and
> it is too unreliable to use as my only camera. If I had my time again, I'd
> go the Minolta.
>
> Doug
>
>
My wife and I have hammered away at 8 weddings plus sundry other shoots
(about 5000 images, each) since we bought our 20Ds for the purpose. The
only unreliability issue I ran into was with a CF card, not the camera, at
least since the 1.0.5 upgrade. But, after I turned off the "sleep mode" on
the cameras, I only had one lockup before the upgrade, my wife, none.
The Canon 20D exceeds the functionality of the Nikons, and, most feel,
leaves nothing to be desired in reliability. I've carried my D30 as a back
up for 4 months now, and it's never left the bag, nor has my wife's Élan or
my 1n that we used as backups, too.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:39:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 9 Dec 2004 11:45:49 -0800, "lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com>
wrote:

>I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
>BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
>back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
>lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
>repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
>many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
>expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
>choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
>group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
>photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>a camera body in the future).
>Thanks!
>
>Lisa

Hi Lisa

Canon 20d with 18-55 zoomkit = $1499, 1gig mem card = $60
a flash unit and tax should take you up to around 2k ..US anyway.

D70 is probably more bang for buck all around.

grandmum was irish - (smile)
rgds

Ken
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 4:39:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <p39jr01ivsqjcrvfiuu9a8erjl9drqciru@4ax.com>, Ken Ellis
<kenellis@nycap.rr.com> wrote:

> Canon 20d with 18-55 zoomkit = $1499, 1gig mem card = $60
> a flash unit and tax should take you up to around 2k ..US anyway.
>
> D70 is probably more bang for buck all around.

You're comparing two completely different things. The 20D is beyond
the D70 in many respects. The D70 should be compared to the Canon
Digital Rebel. The proper comparison for the 20D would be the Nikon
D100 which is lacking in comparison.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 6:22:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote in message
news:q8aud.146$2r.142@fed1read02...
I've carried my D30 as a back
> up for 4 months now, and it's never left the bag, nor has my wife's Élan
or
> my 1n that we used as backups, too.
>
> --
> Skip Middleton
> http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
>
>
Some people are just born lucky I guess.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 6:22:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31sq73F3g4o9aU1@individual.net...
>
> "Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:q8aud.146$2r.142@fed1read02...
> I've carried my D30 as a back
>> up for 4 months now, and it's never left the bag, nor has my wife's Élan
> or
>> my 1n that we used as backups, too.
>>
>> --
>> Skip Middleton
>> http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
>>
>>
> Some people are just born lucky I guess.
>
>
Or unlucky... ;-)
Your experience, though undoubtedly valid, isn't enough to label the camera
as unreliable. There are many photographers out there with the same camera
and no problems. Besides my wife and myself, I personally know 4 others
with the same camera and with pretty much the same experience we've had.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 6:22:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

As an addendum to my reply, when you say "Canon DSLRs" you also include the
1D, 1D mkII, 1Ds, 1Ds mkII and Rebel/300D, among others, and those cameras
you've not had experience with, nor are thay known to have reliability
problems, even to the extent of the 20D. There are a lot of Canon DSLRs out
there besides the 20D...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 6:26:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steven Wandy" <Swandy@si.rr.com> wrote in message
news:nG6ud.22927$Yh2.9514901@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> >
> > Canon EOS 1DsMark2
>
> By any chance did you read the price range of the OP???
>

The contributors to this thread are all dyslexic. They can't read, won't
read or don't bother to read the original post. They just fire off a comment
here and there in the hope it might be relevant.

Fancy someone walking into a car dealer:
Customer: Hi, I've got $5k in my pocket and need a car.
Dealer: Well come on over here my lovely and feast your eyes on this Roller
for $50k+!!!
Same deal with people recommending cameras, I imagine.

Doug
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 7:32:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

lisa.ireland wrote:
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of
> traditional group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of
> each recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for
> around $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably
> upgrade a camera body in the future).
> Thanks!
>
> Lisa

Have you got the other end of the process sorted out?
If you havent got your digital darkroom set up then whatever camera is
recommended is going to be degraded by commercial processing unless you are
very lucky. Do you want your fledgling business to depend on it?
You need to allow $500-1000 for your darkroom and printer.
--
Tear out HAIR to Reply.
Press any key to delete. Press ENTER twice to save.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 7:56:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

KenH wrote:
>
> Have you got the other end of the process sorted out?
> If you havent got your digital darkroom set up then whatever camera is
> recommended is going to be degraded by commercial processing unless you are
> very lucky. Do you want your fledgling business to depend on it?
> You need to allow $500-1000 for your darkroom and printer.

No you don't, depending on where you live, or if you can afford the time
lag of using over-the-net processors.

Certainly there are many digital processors out there who will degrade
the product, but some are excellent.

You raise an excellent point, however.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 7:56:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <lzkud.238278$R05.130089@attbi_s53>,
John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

> Certainly there are many digital processors out there who will
> degrade the product, but some are excellent.

Any recommendations as to which is which?

Shutterfly?
Ofoto?
Snapfish?
Other?

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 10:26:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Michelle Steiner wrote:

> In article <lzkud.238278$R05.130089@attbi_s53>,
> John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Certainly there are many digital processors out there who will
>>degrade the product, but some are excellent.
>
>
> Any recommendations as to which is which?
>
> Shutterfly?
> Ofoto?
> Snapfish?
> Other?
>
Shutterfly is the only one of the above that I know has a professional
'section'. Others are: Printroom.com and dotphoto.com.

This is not to say you can't get great prints from the others, but I am
thinking of color management. Most places will run your pix through
their own "enhancement" procedures as I understand it.

--

John McWilliams
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 10:26:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <DLmud.217994$HA.63573@attbi_s01>,
John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote:

> Shutterfly is the only one of the above that I know has a
> professional 'section'.

That's good. I used to work for them; I retired four years ago. I'm
still waiting for their IPO so my stock options will be worth something.

--
Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 9:12:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 2004-12-10, KenH <ken@marush1HA.IRfsnet.co.uk> wrote:

<snip>
> Have you got the other end of the process sorted out?
> If you havent got your digital darkroom set up then whatever camera is
> recommended is going to be degraded by commercial processing unless you are
> very lucky. Do you want your fledgling business to depend on it?
> You need to allow $500-1000 for your darkroom and printer.

Yep, you need to decide how you are going to do this. One nice thing
about the digital darkroom is the turn-around time. Read somewhere
about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.

With a digital darkroom, you have absolute control. And if you spend
the time and effort to get your equipment and processes dialed in, you
can whip through a take in a few hours time, choosing and printing at
the same time. All done with a mouse...

For printers, the first price point is at 8x10. Nice gear for a few
hundred dollars. The next price point is 13x19... nice gear for under a
grand. I hear good things about the HP Design Jet, prints up to 24 by
whatever, but you're talking thousands of dollars. I have the Epson
2200 with pigment colors, paid $700US for it.

Even the lower priced computers have the power to do what you need, and
the issue there is software (can't advise you there, as I don't use
Microsoft products). If you offer CDs of your images, make really sure
you put them on Mitsui gold foil disks, though. At the moment, they're
the only kind that have a chance at being archival.

Whatever you do, this is something you need to figure out before you go
much further, I think. comp.periphs.printers might be a good place to
visit. Some pros don't fuss with the post "click" stuff, as they figure
their time is better spent chasing images. Others like total control.
Your mileage will be your own.

HTH

Will D.
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:38:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 06:45:27 +1000, "Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote:

>The problem with Canon DSLRs is that to achieve the same functionality as
>Nikon, the cameras become unreliable. Whatever you do, don't part with the
>film body because DSLRs are not as reliable as 35mm SLRs. I have a 20D and
>it is too unreliable to use as my only camera.

I have a 20D and have already done a number of weddings with it, without any
problems at all and to the satisfaction of all concerned. Without any
hesitation I use it as my main camera. It is now my third Canon camera and
none have ever given any problems at all.

-
Lansbury
www.uk-air.net
FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 1:45:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 13:39:54 GMT, Ken Ellis <kenellis@nycap.rr.com> wrote:

> with 18-55 zoomkit

while that isn't a bad lens I don't think it produces the results of other
lens in the Canon range. Bearing in mind for wedding shots you want the best
you can get to produce the best results.

I use a 50mm and 28mm prime lens and move the tripod. Having said that I am
waiting for a 17-40 L lens which is in transit to arrive to use for locations
which are more cramped in space and don't allow what are effectively a 44mm
and 80mm lens to be used.


-
Lansbury
www.uk-air.net
FAQs for the alt.travel.uk.air newsgroup
Anonymous
December 12, 2004 11:54:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Ryadia" <ryadia@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:31rrh4F3euf4nU1@individual.net...
>
>
<snip>
> The problem with Canon DSLRs is that to achieve the same functionality as
> Nikon, the cameras become unreliable.
<snip>

Baloney. You had bad luck is all. My D30 still functions perfectly fine
alongside my 10D, which has also been nothing but reliable.

Mark
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 6:48:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <10rl3umg8npr662@corp.supernews.com>, willd@no.spam says...
> Read somewhere
> about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
> official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.

With an inverter, a laptop with photoshop and a printer in the
car/truck/van, you could do this in the parking lot.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 12:20:37 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Randy Howard <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> writes:

> In article <10rl3umg8npr662@corp.supernews.com>, willd@no.spam says...
> > Read somewhere
> > about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
> > official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
> > by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
> > them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
> > whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.
>
> With an inverter, a laptop with photoshop and a printer in the
> car/truck/van, you could do this in the parking lot.

If you are going to be running a laptop, printer off of an inverter, you
probably should check the specs of both the printer and the inverter to see if
it was possible. I blew the fuses on my car when I tried to use a high power
laptop on a cheap inverter (rather than buying the proper car power adaptor).

I would suggest getting an HP 375B or Canon 330, both of which have internal
batteries. I have the 375B, and one of the reasons I got it was the battery
support. Note, on the HP, you probably want to use nanoporous paper in an
environment like a wedding, since people will spill drinks, etc.

IIRC, one or more of the HiTouch dye-subs also had support for using a car
power adaptor, and you could presumably use a 12 volt battery that provides the
power. For large use, I would imagine the HiTouch printers to be more rugged
than the HP/Canon.

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 2:19:35 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Will D. wrote:

> about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
> official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.

There is a helicopter tour operator around Niagra Falls who takes phots in
flight with a wide angle lens, including the passengers in the shot and the
falls in the BG. The images are relayed to the ground by datalink and the
prints are waiting before you get out of the helicopter. This is a higher
margin business component than the helo tour alone.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 2:21:01 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Michael Meissner wrote:


> If you are going to be running a laptop, printer off of an inverter, you
> probably should check the specs of both the printer and the inverter to see if
> it was possible. I blew the fuses on my car when I tried to use a high power
> laptop on a cheap inverter (rather than buying the proper car power adaptor).

Make sure that the inverter is sine wave. This is usually specified. For a
given power output, a sine wave inverter is about 2 to 4 times the price of a
chopper.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 2:50:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Thanks to everyone for the tips. Now I have to decide between the Nikon
D70 and the Canon 20D. I'm attracted to the Canon because it has 8
megapixels. What do you think of the quality of an 8 megapixel print
vs. a 6 megapixel print? Does anyone know if Nikon is introducing a 8
megapixel successor to the D70 soon?

About printing...
I wasn't planning on printing myself at the beginning. I'm not sure I
can get the same quality with paper and printer at home? Wouldn't it be
better to have them printed at a professional lab? Will labs print the
same image that I had touched up in Photoshop? Someone had recommended
printing from iPhoto via an iBook. It would be nice to have control
over my own images though...

Again, I appreciate everyone's help. It's great to hear from the
photographers here in Ireland especially!

Lisa
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 6:07:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

lisa.ireland wrote:

> Thanks to everyone for the tips. Now I have to decide between the Nikon
> D70 and the Canon 20D. I'm attracted to the Canon because it has 8
> megapixels. What do you think of the quality of an 8 megapixel print
> vs. a 6 megapixel print? Does anyone know if Nikon is introducing a 8
> megapixel successor to the D70 soon?

Inevitably, the race for pixels will continue. The 20D is remarkably 'quiet'
(image noise) for its density and this will allow either larger prints at a
given print density and/or more cropping.
At a constant print size of 300 dpi, the 20D will give you 11.7 x 7.8" prints
the D70 10.0 x 6.7" prints.

Not really that much of a difference, but may tell when attempting to blow up
further.

The 20D also gives you 1 more stop of slowness for the outdoor shooting. Canon
are the forerunner in this class of camera and will likely remain in front of
the pack. That is to say they will probably be first with higher resolution and
they overtly support full frame digital (at a high price), whereas Nikon do not
(presently). OTOH, with your Nikon lenses, you have a choice of Nikon, FujiFilm
and Kodak products. Kodak do do full frame (at a high price).

Since you will be doing a lot of handheld shooting, then you might consider the
Maxxum 7D as well (6 MPix) as it has built in anti-shake without requiring
specific IS or VR lenses be bought (as is the case with Canon/Nikon).

> About printing...
> I wasn't planning on printing myself at the beginning. I'm not sure I
> can get the same quality with paper and printer at home? Wouldn't it be
> better to have them printed at a professional lab? Will labs print the
> same image that I had touched up in Photoshop? Someone had recommended
> printing from iPhoto via an iBook. It would be nice to have control
> over my own images though...

It will be cheaper in most cases to setup an agreement with a local finisher and
use their printer. Ask them what their printer resolution is and enter that in
the resize dialog in photoshop such that whenever you're adjusting the size of
the work for specific output, you can get it in the dimensions required. You
might also need the color profile of their printer.

When you finish editing in Photoshop, save the images in TIFF-Macintosh format
(even if you hav a PC). Burn a CD ROM (or record on a CompactFlash if large
enough) and take it to the finisher to print.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 13, 2004 8:08:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1102621549.876143.53970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of traditional
> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of each
> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
> a camera body in the future).

Hi Lisa,

I think you should stick with Nikon if you're definitely going to use the
Nikon film body as backup. You don't want to have to carry around 2 sets of
lenses. I personally prefer Canon, but that's just personal preference. If
you go with one of the Canon DSLRs, change the film camera to Canon as well.
I wouldn't recommend going outside Canon or Nikon in Ireland because market
penetration of other brands is so low you'll have trouble getting
repair/replacement in a hurry if you ever need it.
It may be worth your while buying locally to get the level of aftersales
service you need. This will cost a lot more at the outset but could save you
a fortune if you ever need backup in a hurry. If you're buying online, have
a look at pixmania.com for the cameras. They're based in France so there's
no import tax for you to pay. It's working out cheaper for us to buy from
there than B&H or Adorama at the moment. 20D is under euro1500. Delivery is
next day. If you go Canon, lenses are reasonably priced from 7dayshop.com
who are based in Jersey. Again there's no import duty. DHL and UPS et al
will hit you with the duty if you import from the US.
Canon 10D, Nikon D70 and Canon 20D are all within your range and all
suitable for the job. You can't really go wrong with any of them.

--
Colm
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 2:51:08 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

> Will D. wrote:
>
>> about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
>> official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
>> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
>> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
>> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.
>
>
> There is a helicopter tour operator around Niagra Falls who takes phots
> in flight with a wide angle lens, including the passengers in the shot
> and the falls in the BG. The images are relayed to the ground by
> datalink and the prints are waiting before you get out of the
> helicopter. This is a higher margin business component than the helo
> tour alone.
>
What are the rates for the two components?

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 2:51:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> Will D. wrote:
>>
>>> about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
>>> official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
>>> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
>>> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
>>> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.
>>
>>
>>
>> There is a helicopter tour operator around Niagra Falls who takes
>> phots in flight with a wide angle lens, including the passengers in
>> the shot and the falls in the BG. The images are relayed to the
>> ground by datalink and the prints are waiting before you get out of
>> the helicopter. This is a higher margin business component than the
>> helo tour alone.
>>
> What are the rates for the two components?

I don't know precisely. The fact that the phots return a higher margin was told
to me by the then editor of a large helo magazine. Said ed. had recently
visited them for a story.

But it's not hard to believe. Helicopter tour operators have always run on thin
operating margins (way too many operators) so anything additional is a ripe area
to make higher numbers.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 11:53:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> writes:

> Thanks to everyone for the tips. Now I have to decide between the Nikon
> D70 and the Canon 20D. I'm attracted to the Canon because it has 8
> megapixels. What do you think of the quality of an 8 megapixel print
> vs. a 6 megapixel print? Does anyone know if Nikon is introducing a 8
> megapixel successor to the D70 soon?

I suspect until you are doing radical crops or printing at 16x20, the
difference between 6 and 8 megapixels will matter more on other factors, like
the quality of the lens & sensor used.

In terms of futures, the rumor mill is Nikon will introduce a replacement for
the D100 at PMA this year (Feb./March time frame). Obviously those that know
what the specifics are are problably under NDA (non-disclosure) at the present
time.

> About printing...
> I wasn't planning on printing myself at the beginning. I'm not sure I
> can get the same quality with paper and printer at home? Wouldn't it be
> better to have them printed at a professional lab? Will labs print the
> same image that I had touched up in Photoshop? Someone had recommended
> printing from iPhoto via an iBook. It would be nice to have control
> over my own images though...

I print a lot of my pictures at home because of the convenience and control
factor. However, for prints I give away or sell, I will send out one of the
good internet vendors (current favorite is mpix.com, I have used shutterfly.com
and ezprints.com with good results in the past).

As an amateur I used to be a fan of using the local Walmart for printing, until
they changed their process and ruined the colors (IMHO) at my local Walmart.
However, I suspect no matter how good their pictures are, there might be a
stigma with your customers if they get pictures saying Walmart on the back.
Shutterfly does have an option that you can specify what gets printed on the
back of your pictures if you need it (ie, contact/copyright information).

For a wedding photographer, I would think printing 4x6 snapshots from your
prints on site during the reception might be a popular option (though
presumably you wouldn't do the money shots that way, particularly since you
wouldn't have time to do post processing), but without an assistant, it is
probably too much work for not enough return.

> Again, I appreciate everyone's help. It's great to hear from the
> photographers here in Ireland especially!

--
Michael Meissner
email: mrmnews@the-meissners.org
http://www.the-meissners.org
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:49:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>
>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>
>>> Will D. wrote:
>>>
>>>> about a guy who was shooting a friend's wedding, though not as the
>>>> official photographer. On the way to the reception, he decided to
>>>> swing
>>>> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
>>>> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
>>>> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is a helicopter tour operator around Niagra Falls who takes
>>> phots in flight with a wide angle lens, including the passengers in
>>> the shot and the falls in the BG. The images are relayed to the
>>> ground by datalink and the prints are waiting before you get out of
>>> the helicopter. This is a higher margin business component than the
>>> helo tour alone.
>>>
>> What are the rates for the two components?
>
>
> I don't know precisely. The fact that the phots return a higher margin
> was told to me by the then editor of a large helo magazine. Said ed.
> had recently visited them for a story.
>
> But it's not hard to believe. Helicopter tour operators have always run
> on thin operating margins (way too many operators) so anything
> additional is a ripe area to make higher numbers.
>
Oh, it's not that I don't believe it. Just wanted to know how much they
get for their aerial photos, primarily.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
December 14, 2004 6:49:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:

> Alan Browne wrote:

>> I don't know precisely. The fact that the phots return a higher
>> margin was told to me by the then editor of a large helo magazine.
>> Said ed. had recently visited them for a story.
>>
>> But it's not hard to believe. Helicopter tour operators have always
>> run on thin operating margins (way too many operators) so anything
>> additional is a ripe area to make higher numbers.
>>
> Oh, it's not that I don't believe it. Just wanted to know how much they
> get for their aerial photos, primarily.

On the order of $25.00 for a med. size print. Bear in mind that in season the
helicopters are flying from morning to night and each ride will result in a few
phots being sold. The print price is small compared to a family ride (20 -25
mins.) price on the order of $350 - $400.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 3:23:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:45:18 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>On the order of $25.00 for a med. size print. Bear in mind that in season the
>helicopters are flying from morning to night and each ride will result in a few
>phots being sold.

I talked with the folks who run the photo concession stand at the
Hearst Castle, they said that they typically sold about 33% of the
photos they printed (one out of every 3 customers). I was amazed that
they had that big of a buy rate, it's just a stupid posed photo in
front of a backdrop by the bus loading area, it's not as if the *real*
Castle is even in the photo.

I can see how an extra $50-$100 in sales per helicopter ride could be
a significant boost to the profits from the day's flying.

jc
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 7:51:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Can't remember where i saw it but someone did a comparison of the
20d's *meg shots and a 6mex shot and there was a diference.
You get a "little" better detail. Also, the higher iso's are
quieter..soemone mentioned that previously. I personally went
with the 20d...but it cost more.

But if ya already got nikon glass....

rgds

Ken
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 2:48:38 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JC Dill wrote:

> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:45:18 -0500, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>On the order of $25.00 for a med. size print. Bear in mind that in season the
>>helicopters are flying from morning to night and each ride will result in a few
>>phots being sold.
>
>
> I talked with the folks who run the photo concession stand at the
> Hearst Castle, they said that they typically sold about 33% of the
> photos they printed (one out of every 3 customers). I was amazed that
> they had that big of a buy rate, it's just a stupid posed photo in
> front of a backdrop by the bus loading area, it's not as if the *real*
> Castle is even in the photo.

Hilarious. My first Paris Air Show (long time ago) a photog takes my photo
outside for some reason. I decline and I don't tell him where to find me. He
must have glanced at my badge, for he tracked me down the next day at our stand
and offered to sell the photo. I declined again. The next day after running
around again there's an envelope waiting for me... the photo. No charge.

> I can see how an extra $50-$100 in sales per helicopter ride could be
> a significant boost to the profits from the day's flying.

Oh yeah. I doubt they sell for $100/ride, but certainly $25 - $50 per ride.
(My "few" above was maybe over the top).

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 8:46:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:48:38 -0500, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>JC Dill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 11:45:18 -0500, Alan Browne
>> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>On the order of $25.00 for a med. size print. Bear in mind that in season the
>>>helicopters are flying from morning to night and each ride will result in a few
>>>phots being sold.
>>
>> I talked with the folks who run the photo concession stand at the
>> Hearst Castle, they said that they typically sold about 33% of the
>> photos they printed (one out of every 3 customers). I was amazed that
>> they had that big of a buy rate, it's just a stupid posed photo in
>> front of a backdrop by the bus loading area, it's not as if the *real*
>> Castle is even in the photo.
>
>Hilarious. My first Paris Air Show (long time ago) a photog takes my photo
>outside for some reason. I decline and I don't tell him where to find me. He
>must have glanced at my badge, for he tracked me down the next day at our stand
>and offered to sell the photo. I declined again. The next day after running
>around again there's an envelope waiting for me... the photo. No charge.

The Hearst Castle photo concession stand is on the right side of the
tour center lobby as you exit, in an excellent location. They have
display space to show the best photos of the passengers who have just
returned from a tour, so it's likely/possible (depending on how
photogenic you are) that you will see a photo of yourself in the
display as you go to exit the building.

>> I can see how an extra $50-$100 in sales per helicopter ride could be
>> a significant boost to the profits from the day's flying.
>
>Oh yeah. I doubt they sell for $100/ride, but certainly $25 - $50 per ride.
>(My "few" above was maybe over the top).

I didn't mean an extra $50-$100 per passenger, I meant an extra
$50-$100 in total sales per trip, i.e. 2-4 passengers from each trip
buy a single ~$25 print. Once you have the equipment (camera and
printing equipment is trivially cheap compared to the cost of a
helicopter), the cost per print is low enough (I'm sure they aren't
spending the big bucks for archival quality) that most of that price
is profit. If the average helicopter tour flies hourly, flying 8
trips a day, then that's an extra $400-$800 income a day, an extra
$144k-$288k per year per 'copter, most of it profit.

jc
Anonymous
December 15, 2004 8:46:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

JC Dill wrote:

> is profit. If the average helicopter tour flies hourly, flying 8
> trips a day, then that's an extra $400-$800 income a day, an extra
> $144k-$288k per year per 'copter, most of it profit.

Were it only so. Their season is mainly the summer, with a bit of spring and
fall. So while it does make more money, I doubt it is that much. Whatever it
is, it is surely profitable.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.
Anonymous
December 17, 2004 12:08:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <10rl3umg8npr662@corp.supernews.com>, willd@no.spam (Will D.)
wrote:

> On the way to the reception, he decided to swing
> by his house and print out the pick of his take. IIRC, he presented
> them to the various people at the reception and they loved it. Dunno
> whether that's marketable, but maybe something to think about.

When I did weddings a lot in the 70s we had a guy on a motor-bike collect
the films from us after the church shots and take them to the lab - he'd
return a proof album to the reception an hour or so later (together with a
bunch of order forms). Worked like a charm. There's nowt new!

Actually, the typical day was something like:

Wedding 1 church
Wedding 2 church (helps if it's the same church!)
Reception 1
Wedding 3 church
Reception 2
Reception 3.

Peter
Anonymous
January 17, 2005 7:37:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

>I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland

If you plan on making poster-size enlargements, you may not be happy
with a dSLR. With nice slide flim, you can get a beautifully sharp
2-foot by 3-foot print. With a dSLR, you'll get much less detail.

>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>a camera body in the future).

For about $2,000, you can get a $1,500 body and a $500 lens. This is
the setup most people have, and it's fine. The quality will be
somewhere around what you'd get from consumer print film and consumer
processing. Some people think this is good enough for wedding; some
people don't.

-Joel

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please feed the 35mm lens/digicam databases: http://www.exc.com/photography
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
January 17, 2005 7:37:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel@exc.com> wrote in message
news:_QRGd.682$dx7.538@fe11.lga...
> >I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
>>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
>
> If you plan on making poster-size enlargements, you may not be happy
> with a dSLR. With nice slide flim, you can get a beautifully sharp
> 2-foot by 3-foot print. With a dSLR, you'll get much less detail.
>
>>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
>>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
>>a camera body in the future).
>
> For about $2,000, you can get a $1,500 body and a $500 lens. This is
> the setup most people have, and it's fine. The quality will be
> somewhere around what you'd get from consumer print film and consumer
> processing. Some people think this is good enough for wedding; some
> people don't.
>
> -Joel
>

Methinks you are living in the days of the 3 megapixel camera. Today's 8 mp
bodies give more than enough detail for a 2'x3' print.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
January 17, 2005 8:32:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Skip M" <shadowcatcher@cox.net> wrote in message
news:sMWGd.9666$ru.3794@fed1read07...
> "Dr. Joel M. Hoffman" <joel@exc.com> wrote in message
> news:_QRGd.682$dx7.538@fe11.lga...
> > >I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> >>the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> >
> > If you plan on making poster-size enlargements, you may not be happy
> > with a dSLR. With nice slide flim, you can get a beautifully sharp
> > 2-foot by 3-foot print. With a dSLR, you'll get much less detail.
> >
> >>recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> >>$2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably upgrade
> >>a camera body in the future).
> >
> > For about $2,000, you can get a $1,500 body and a $500 lens. This is
> > the setup most people have, and it's fine. The quality will be
> > somewhere around what you'd get from consumer print film and consumer
> > processing. Some people think this is good enough for wedding; some
> > people don't.
> >
> > -Joel
> >
>
> Methinks you are living in the days of the 3 megapixel camera. Today's 8
mp
> bodies give more than enough detail for a 2'x3' print.
>
Also he thinks a beautiful 2x3' print from a slide is easy. The Kodak Type-R
commercial prints I've seen were dreadful. The Ciba(Ilford)Chromes were too
contrasty and too glossy for most subjects.
Anonymous
January 17, 2005 9:16:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In message <_QRGd.682$dx7.538@fe11.lga>,
joel@exc.com (Dr. Joel M. Hoffman) wrote:

>If you plan on making poster-size enlargements, you may not be happy
>with a dSLR. With nice slide flim, you can get a beautifully sharp
>2-foot by 3-foot print. With a dSLR, you'll get much less detail.

Have you used both extensively? Many who have say they get more detail
from the DSLRs, especially at higher ISOs. In fact, it is generally
only at ISO 50 and 100 that people with experience claim any equality or
benefit for 35mm slides.

Is you opinion based on projected slides vs projected digital at
800*600?
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
January 18, 2005 8:48:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

lisa.ireland wrote:
> I'm looking for a DSLR for wedding photography. I haven't started in
> the business yet and am building up a portfolio (I'm based in Ireland
> BTW). I usually shoot with a Nikon F80/N80 film SLR. This would be my
> back-up camera when I start professionally. I only have the 50mm 1.8
> lens for it. I have a 28-105 zoom, but it's scratched and needs
> repairs. So I'm not wedded to any particular brand since I don't own
> many lenses. The Nikon D70 has been recommended, along with the
> expensive VR zooms. Should I stick with Nikon, or is there a better
> choice for wedding photography? I would want to do a mix of
traditional
> group shoots (this is Ireland...traditional) and some
> photojournalistic/artsy shots. Please tell me the pros and cons of
each
> recommendation. I would like to buy a zoom and the camera for around
> $2000 or so (since I'm starting out and would have to probably
upgrade
> a camera body in the future).

I have shot two weddings with a Canon 300D with kit lens and learnt
that you need:
- a fast lens, preferably f/2.8-4 if not a constant f/4
- a good flash

To accomplish the task of shooting a wedding and budget of $2000, I
would get myself:
1. Canon 300D aka Digital Rebel ($600) or the Nikon D70 ($800)
Why - Both provide excellent image quality with the Canon giving the
ISO 100 option. The Nikon D70 is faster and has a spot meter.

2. Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD ($420)
Why - the specs say it all alongwith reviews that you can find online.
Also, the price. Canon 17-40mm "L" might be better but also
significantly costlier.

3. Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Super II macro ($200)
Why - Several choices in this range but you need to pay mega-$$$ to get
a great quality telephoto zoom. On a budget (as we are), this seems to
do a good job.
The other option is the Canon 75-300mm IS USM III for $350.

4. Sigma EF 500 Super flash ($200)
Why - Again, gives you most features of the Canon 580EX at half the
price. Several people report issues with Sigma's build quality but on a
budget we can't afford the Canon 580EX. Also consider the $149, Sunpak
PZ5000.

5. A nice tripod with a ball head ($100)
Why - Coz you need a tripod :) 

If I could extend the budget a bit I would get the Canon 20D ($1500).
For a wedding, the Nikon D70 or the Canon 20D would be preferable given
their faster shooting speeds and better response. But if prices in
Ireland are the same as UK then my guess is that the Canon 300D is your
best (and cheapest) bet.

As far as image quality is concerned the Canon 300D and Nikon D70 are
at par with the Canon 20D being superior. In any case, you can't go
wrong with either brands. My suggestion would be to lock on the lenses
you want, first.

HTH,

- Siddhartha
Anonymous
January 18, 2005 10:22:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <1106056080.691888.223480@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
Siddhartha Jain <losttoy2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I have shot two weddings with a Canon 300D with kit lens and learnt
> that you need:
> - a fast lens, preferably f/2.8-4 if not a constant f/4
> - a good flash

There's a lot more you got to be learnt

> To accomplish the task of shooting a wedding and budget of $2000, I
> would get myself:
> 1. Canon 300D aka Digital Rebel ($600) or the Nikon D70 ($800)
> Why - Both provide excellent image quality with the Canon giving the
> ISO 100 option. The Nikon D70 is faster and has a spot meter.
>
> 2. Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD ($420)
> Why - the specs say it all alongwith reviews that you can find online.
> Also, the price. Canon 17-40mm "L" might be better but also
> significantly costlier.

Stick with OEM

> 3. Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Super II macro ($200)
> Why - Several choices in this range but you need to pay mega-$$$ to get
> a great quality telephoto zoom. On a budget (as we are), this seems to
> do a good job.
> The other option is the Canon 75-300mm IS USM III for $350.

Mmmm...Smegma

> 4. Sigma EF 500 Super flash ($200)
> Why - Again, gives you most features of the Canon 580EX at half the
> price. Several people report issues with Sigma's build quality but on a
> budget we can't afford the Canon 580EX. Also consider the $149, Sunpak
> PZ5000.

Yeah, stick that flash right on top of the camera
!