Wedding togs. A question for you

powell7

powell7

Suspended / Banned
Messages
731
Name
chris
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,my wife's a wedding photographer and she is now in here second year and looking to upgrade her camera.

She's currently using a pair of Sony @580's with sigma 2.8 glass,which paired up together work exstreamly well.

My question is are any of you using the @99 ???

If not what are you using ???

I'm looking to spend around the 2k mark for the main camera and would continue using one of the @580's with the 70-200 on.

Any advise would be appreciated
Thank you chris:)
 
Thanks for your reply, and what Nikon will you be upgrading to?
 
Shoot with an old school Nikon D300 (pair). Will be upgrading to a pair of D00e's in the new year. The A99 isn't a bad camera if you don't want to go for a complete change. Best bet is to get your wife down to the camera store so she can try out the various size / shapes / control set ups and find what works for her. I have shot Nikon since day one but did once use a Canon when seconding for a friend. Hated it.
 
Hi, If you can stretch to it then go for a Nikon D800, I assure you you'll not regret it. Once you have used one of these FF cameras you will not want to use anything else.:)
 
G.K.Jnr. said:
Hi, If you can stretch to it then go for a Nikon D800, I assure you you'll not regret it. Once you have used one of these FF cameras you will not want to use anything else.:)
Click to expand...

We have been looking at these but not sure if there suited to wedding work ??

The main reason we are looking to up grade is better low light and image quality above ISO 3600 and more focus points.
 
I've not used the a99 but I do own an a77 which is a great camera.

I do not regret buying it but if I had the funds the a99 would of been on the cards.
 
Nothing wrong with Sony, or other camera manufacturers for that matter, they have cameras that are quite capable of producing nice images, however the advantages of moving to Canon or Nikon is that between them they have the biggest market share of DSLR sales and have done for some time now.

If you did a poll of professional wedding photographers to find out what gear they were currently using I think you would find that a very large percentage were either Nikon or Canon.

It doesn't mean they are necessarily better (I am sure plenty would argue they are though :)) but it does mean that a lot of other things like training courses and third party equipment (thinking lighting courses, pocket wizards etc.) are primarily designed for Canon and Nikon shooters so if you use another manufacturers gear you may find yourself limited with these things moving forward.
 
powell7 said:
We have been looking at these but not sure if there suited to wedding work ??
Click to expand...


LOL, I think if you look at some of the pros using the D800 then I'm sure if it is good enough for them you/your wife will be very happy with the results :)

http://www.cmphotography.com/blog.cfm is one such person using a mix of D4 and D800 and was one of the first to use a pre release D800 and he ended up ordering his own off the back of that.
 
Then dont make a statement based on your ignorance, the D800 has the exact same amazing Auto Focus system as the Nikon D4 which has probably the very best AF system available on any camera in current production, i really dont know how many AF points you want, the D800 has 51, the high ISO performance of the D800 is also amazing, one of the top 3 DSLR's on the market in fact, it is as well if not more suited to wedding photography than just about anything else on the market yet you choose to disregard it when it more than meets the expectations you stipulate.

You could also Look at the Canon 5D MKIII, however and in all honesty if i were going to use a top end body like a D800 or 5D MKIII i wouldn't be putting Sigma glass on the end if i wanted the best out of it, nothing wrong with Sigma glass per say but both of those cameras really benefit from the best glass.
 
I was meant to also talk about the A99, it gives pretty similar noise results at the higher ISO settings to the D800, but the D600, Canon 5DmkIII and 6D are a little better in this area.

If your wife is going to move forward in the photography game then getting onto either Nikon or Canon is going to give the best expansion options as already mentioned by others. I wouldn't want to invest in a system where I will be limited as my needs grow and then have to make a switch, it will be a lot less painful to do that now.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Then dont make a statement based on your ignorance, the D800 has the exact same amazing Auto Focus system as the Nikon D4 which has probably the very best AF system available on any camera in current production, i really dont know how many AF points you want, the D800 has 51, the high ISO performance of the D800 is also amazing, one of the top 3 DSLR's on the market in fact, it is as well if not more suited to wedding photography than just about anything else on the market yet you choose to disregard it when it more than meets the expectations you stipulate.

You could also Look at the Canon 5D MKIII, however and in all honesty if i were going to use a top end body like a D800 or 5D MKIII i wouldn't be putting Sigma glass on the end if i wanted the best out of it, nothing wrong with Sigma glass per say but both of those cameras really benefit from the best glass.
Click to expand...

I'm not a Nikon user that's why I'm asking for advise I'm a Sony user so know fock all about Nikon or canon

Thanks for your advise anyway!
 
powell7 said:
I'm not a Nikon user that's why I'm asking for advise I'm a Sony user so know fock all about Nikon or canon

Thanks for your advise anyway!
Click to expand...
No worries, i just found your statement about the D800 a bit sweeping particularly as you yourself say you know nothing about Nikon
 
powell7 said:
We have been looking at these but not sure if there suited to wedding work ??

The main reason we are looking to up grade is better low light and image quality above ISO 3600 and more focus points.
Click to expand...

The D800 is ideal as a wedding camera.

The only downside, though many don`t find it to be one,is the slow FPS, one would hope that a wedding photographer could cope with a mere 4 fps.
 
fracster said:
The D800 is ideal as a wedding camera.

The only downside, though many don`t find it to be one,is the slow FPS, one would hope that a wedding photographer could cope with a mere 4 fps.
Click to expand...

Yep - I run to with no issues at all, and I cope (just ;) with 4FPS
 
Why are people spewing Nikon and Canon advise when Chris and his wife have already invested in a Sony system? Pffft, brand snobs! Chris, the Alpha A99 has had rave reviews and the IQ looks stunning. The low ligh performance of the newer Sony's is also rather competitive. Combined with your Sigma f/2.8s it sounds like a perfect setup for wedding shoots.
 
Eddzz!! said:
Why are people spewing Nikon and Canon advise when Chris and his wife have already invested in a Sony system? Pffft, brand snobs! Chris, the Alpha A99 has had rave reviews and the IQ looks stunning. The low ligh performance of the newer Sony's is also rather competitive. Combined with your Sigma f/2.8s it sounds like a perfect setup for wedding shoots.
Click to expand...

An 'interesting' reply, which is probably there to get a rise out of people, but if you read the OP's first post he asks what else is being used by the wedding photographers and as the vast majority are with Nikon or Canon then logically this would be the answer received. Also reading a little further down in post #6 referring to a point on the Nikon D800 he says:

powell7 said:
We have been looking at these but not sure if there suited to wedding work ??
Click to expand...

so doesn't that suggest the talk of Nikon (and thus Canon or any other brand people want to mention) is valid?

Lastly, I mentioned in the 13th post I talk about the A99 and where is currently sits in the stack and possible reasons why it might not be a good option long term.

Really lastly, I don't think we know what f2.8 glass is there (apart from a 70-200) so possibly apart from that lens the other options might not even work on full frame.
 
mark1616 said:
Really lastly, I don't think we know what f2.8 glass is there (apart from a 70-200) so possibly apart from that lens the other options might not even work on full frame.
Click to expand...

She has the sigma 17-70 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8
Sony 50mm 1.8

After doing loads of reading the @99 seems to fall short about 1600iso

The d800 from what I read and don't rip into me for saying this but it seem to have too many pixels and this apparently shows in the higher iso shots.

Finally the 5d rates the highest in 95% of the tests done.

I'm not writing any of them off at the moment and not slagging any off before anyone take offence to what iv said.
I'm just here to try and find the best set up I can with the help of you guys.
 
powell7 said:
She has the sigma 17-70 2.8
Sigma 70-200 2.8
Sony 50mm 1.8

After doing loads of reading the @99 seems to fall short about 1600iso

The d800 from what I read and don't rip into me for saying this but it seem to have too many pixels and this apparently shows in the higher iso shots.

Finally the 5d rates the highest in 95% of the tests done.

I'm not writing any of them off at the moment and not slagging any off before anyone take offence to what iv said.
I'm just here to try and find the best set up I can with the help of you guys.
Click to expand...
Youre 5% right, but if you resize the 35mp image to the same size as say the 5D MKIII then the noise disappears, you can only judge effective noise when all samples are resized to the exact same pixel dimensions.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Youre 5% right, but if you resize the 35mp image to the same size as say the 5D MKIII then the noise disappears, you can only judge effective noise when all samples are resized to the exact same pixel dimensions.
Click to expand...

Also on the D800, the shadow detail is quite a lot better than the 5DmkIII at low ISO, as we go higher they even up.

How about considering the D600 or 6D, both really great options for the price, the 6D does even better at high ISO than the 5DmkIII and the centre focus point rocks, the downside is the rest of the focus system isn't great, but if you/your wife only use centre then it is well worth a look.
 
Can I ask my wife's using a 2.8 lens,would the canon f4L give the same amount of light input to the sensor as its on a full frame body?
 
Ah, missed the SLT part.

In that case, the light getting into the sensor isn't the same, but I believe that Sony has increased their sensitivity ratings so as far as the user is concerned then you set the same exposure.

In general though the aperture will give the same exposure results no matter what size sensor etc.
 
Why not hire a few differing bodies, with a few differing lenses.Take some mock shots and see what floats your boat.
 
fracster said:
Why not hire a few differing bodies, with a few differing lenses.Take some mock shots and see what floats your boat.
Click to expand...

Good idea but could get expensive, how about going to a local camera club as there are likely to be many there with 'toys' to play with who would likely be more than happy to let you have a go.
 
If the lady in question is a professional wedding photographer, then she writes the cost off ,not expensive in any way.
 
powell7 said:
Can I ask my wife's using a 2.8 lens,would the canon f4L give the same amount of light input to the sensor as its on a full frame body?
Click to expand...

For the wedding I shot on Saturday, the church was so dim, at 2.8 ISO 500 I was getting a shutter speed of 1/10th sec and worse. So in this real world scenario, you either need a 1.2 / 1.4 lens in the bag as well as a tripod/monopod, and a sensor that performs way above ISO 500
 
powell7 said:
Hi all,my wife's a wedding photographer and she is now in here second year and looking to upgrade her camera.

She's currently using a pair of Sony @580's with sigma 2.8 glass,which paired up together work exstreamly well.

My question is are any of you using the @99 ???

If not what are you using ???

I'm looking to spend around the 2k mark for the main camera and would continue using one of the @580's with the 70-200 on.

Any advise would be appreciated
Thank you chris:)
Click to expand...
What issue are you having with the 580?
 
No real problems but she's not really confident in the quality about 3600 ISO.

She's not a fan of flash and preferres to use natural lighting.

My thinking was a full frame with a 2.8 lens could give a faster shutter speed being a bigger sensor, better image quality and better focusing ?
 
powell7 said:
No real problems but she's not really confident in the quality about 3600 ISO.

She's not a fan of flash and preferres to use natural lighting.

My thinking was a full frame with a 2.8 lens could give a faster shutter speed being a bigger sensor, better image quality and better focusing ?
Click to expand...

Alternatively, there are the rather good 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 Zeiss lenses available in the Alpha mount, which are sharp wide open and just generally lovely.

I'm not a professional wedding photographer.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Alternatively, there are the rather good 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 Zeiss lenses available in the Alpha mount, which are sharp wide open and just generally lovely.
Click to expand...

For those who use full frame, how much difference is there over a cropped sensor in your opinions in low light/image quality?
 
Last edited:
I used to shoot with Sony A77 as my primary and an A55 as my backup.

There is a lot to be said about shooting a wedding with SLT's. I love the fact having an EVF means I can check my photos without having to move my head away, whilst everyone is still stood there. Also sunny days aren't an issue when reviewing photos for the same reason.

I'd saved up really hard for the A99 and had the pennies ready to go. Then it came out. And I bought a D700.

Why? Because frankly the cost of the A99 was too high compared with Nikon FF. You can get a D700 for < £1k now and D600 for £1400ish, less if you don't mind grey imports.

For me upgrading to the A99 would have also meant upgrading my lenses. My Tamron 17-50 f2.8 & even my 50mm prime would all have to be upgraded. The only lens I had which was full frame was the Tamron 70-200 which isn't brill in low light anyway. So changing became much more attractive.

So I priced up the cost to change and it just worked out better to switch. I do miss some of the SLT features and especially now I'm dabbling with video, i really miss my Sony.

But for photography I don't regret moving to Nikon.

Oh lastly bear in mind that SLT's suck up loads of batteries. I used to go through three batteries for a full day's wedding. With Nikon I use about half. That also adds to the cost.

Just some thoughts for your other half to consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top