Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Canon 350D for weddings.

Reply
Thread Tools

Canon 350D for weddings.

 
 
bikerb422
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2005
Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots? If so what lenses are
you using. Likes, dislikes, on board flash or hot shoe flash ( what
kind).

Thanks,
Bruce

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
paul.busse@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-18-2005
I recently used a 300D for a friend's parents' 50th anniversary
renewal ceremony/reception. Did ceremony by available light, with
50/1.7 and 28-135 IS. Switched to 420EX flash for reception, all with
28-135. Pleased with results!

Paul B.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Randall Ainsworth
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005
In article <(E-Mail Removed) .com>,
bikerb422 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots? If so what lenses are
> you using. Likes, dislikes, on board flash or hot shoe flash ( what
> kind).


There ya go...stick that flash right on the camera and do every shot
with one light.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Muffin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005

"bikerb422" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots? If so what lenses are
> you using. Likes, dislikes, on board flash or hot shoe flash ( what
> kind).


8mp is not nearly enough for wedding photography. Most wedding
photographers use medium format film. If they use digital, they shoot with
something like the Fuji S3, which Fuji says brings photography "closer" to
film at 12.3 million effective pixels, as you can see here.

http://fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartne...oProductS3.jsp

This Popular Photography article says it takes an $8,000.00 16.6mp Canon
EOS-1Ds Mark II to rival ISO 100 35mm color print film.

http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?...&page_number=1

If you are doing amateur work, the Canon 350D would be okay, but a pro would
not use it for this application. You could get by quite nicely with 35mm
film and high quality lenses, unless you can afford a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II.
If you are really serious about doing wedding photography, shoot medium
format film.

Muffin


 
Reply With Quote
 
Skip M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005
"Muffin" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news_Uie.1890$(E-Mail Removed) ...
>
> "bikerb422" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
>> Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots? If so what lenses are
>> you using. Likes, dislikes, on board flash or hot shoe flash ( what
>> kind).

>
> 8mp is not nearly enough for wedding photography. Most wedding
> photographers use medium format film. If they use digital, they shoot
> with something like the Fuji S3, which Fuji says brings photography
> "closer" to film at 12.3 million effective pixels, as you can see here.
>
> http://fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartne...oProductS3.jsp
>
> This Popular Photography article says it takes an $8,000.00 16.6mp Canon
> EOS-1Ds Mark II to rival ISO 100 35mm color print film.
>
> http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?...&page_number=1
>
> If you are doing amateur work, the Canon 350D would be okay, but a pro
> would not use it for this application. You could get by quite nicely with
> 35mm film and high quality lenses, unless you can afford a Canon EOS-1Ds
> Mark II. If you are really serious about doing wedding photography, shoot
> medium format film.
>
> Muffin
>
>

8mp is more than enough for wedding photography, and more than the S3 will
deliver, since it is a 6mp camera. I haven't seen any wedding photographers
using Fujis in my area, not to say that they don't, just I haven't seen
them. OTOH, I have seen them shooting with 10Ds, 20Ds, 1D and 1D mkIIs, 1Ds
and 1Ds mkIIs and Nikon D2x and D2h cameras. Very few use MF in the field,
just in the studio, or if they do use them in the field, it is for the
formals. The present desire for "photojournalistic" images sort of makes MF
difficult to utilize at its best, at 10-12 images per roll, it's hard to
keep spontaneity going.
We use 20Ds with stellar results. The biggest enlargement we've gone to so
far is 24"x36". And, to boot, film does not give the post production
control that digital does.
That article doesn't really say that 16.6 mp is the minimum to match film.
And some articles have said that 16.6 mp rivals MF.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...-thouhts.shtml
By the way, the first sentence is in no way meant as a slam on the Fuji, it
is a fine camera, and its innovative pixel arrangement gives better dynamic
range than what is available to normal Bayer sensors, but to call it a 12mp
camera is roughly akin to calling the Sigma SD10 a 10mp camera...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
George Preddy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005
"bikerb422" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com:

> Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots?


I suppose it would be OK if you only wanted to print black & white
wallet-sized photos.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Colin D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005


Muffin wrote:
>
> "bikerb422" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> > Is anyone using a Canon 350D for wedding shots? If so what lenses are
> > you using. Likes, dislikes, on board flash or hot shoe flash ( what
> > kind).

>
> 8mp is not nearly enough for wedding photography. Most wedding
> photographers use medium format film. If they use digital, they shoot with
> something like the Fuji S3, which Fuji says brings photography "closer" to
> film at 12.3 million effective pixels, as you can see here.
>
> http://fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartne...oProductS3.jsp
>
> This Popular Photography article says it takes an $8,000.00 16.6mp Canon
> EOS-1Ds Mark II to rival ISO 100 35mm color print film.
>
> http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?...&page_number=1
>
> If you are doing amateur work, the Canon 350D would be okay, but a pro would
> not use it for this application. You could get by quite nicely with 35mm
> film and high quality lenses, unless you can afford a Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II.
> If you are really serious about doing wedding photography, shoot medium
> format film.
>
> Muffin


I gather from your reply that you are not a wedding photographer, and
have no personal experience in the area.

Firstly, there are weddings and there are weddings. Where one couple
will spend a million dollars on a wedding and want mural-sized shots on
every wall, another more modest couple will want more family-type shots,
none over about 8x12, or maybe one or two at 11x14. For this second
couple, a 6 or 8 megapixel digital will amply fulfill the need.

Absolute needle-sharp definition is not required, just sharp-to-the-eye
prints with pleasing colors and accurate color balance, which is where
digital shines.

I shoot weddings with a 300D, and have no complaints.

Colin
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Rubin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005
Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> writes:
> Absolute needle-sharp definition is not required, just sharp-to-the-eye
> prints with pleasing colors and accurate color balance, which is where
> digital shines.


Does anyone ask for black and white?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Skip M
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-19-2005
"Paul Rubin" <http://(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> writes:
>> Absolute needle-sharp definition is not required, just sharp-to-the-eye
>> prints with pleasing colors and accurate color balance, which is where
>> digital shines.

>
> Does anyone ask for black and white?



We get a lot of requests for b&w. It's an easy conversion from a digital
file, but we've on occasion shot b&w film, too.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


 
Reply With Quote
 
Colin D
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-20-2005


Paul Rubin wrote:
>
> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> writes:
> > Absolute needle-sharp definition is not required, just sharp-to-the-eye
> > prints with pleasing colors and accurate color balance, which is where
> > digital shines.

>
> Does anyone ask for black and white?


As of this time, no-one has. Interesting thought, tho'

Colin
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon G6 v Canon 350D Alan McGrath Digital Photography 8 10-21-2006 09:35 PM
Canon 10D v Canon 350D News-West.Usenet.com Digital Photography 17 11-17-2005 08:10 PM
350d.org - Community of users of Canon 350D / Digital Rebel XT vigape Digital Photography 0 08-18-2005 03:41 PM
Canon D20 v Canon 350D Chalky Digital Photography 15 06-27-2005 04:50 AM
Canon will announce 350D on Feb14th Bill Wilder Digital Photography 12 01-28-2005 10:12 PM



Advertisments