Canon 350D for weddings.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by bikerb422, May 18, 2005.

  1. bikerb422

    bikerb422 Guest

    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
     
    bikerb422, May 18, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bikerb422

    Guest

    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.
     
    , May 18, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    bikerb422 <> 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.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, May 19, 2005
    #3
  4. bikerb422

    Muffin Guest

    "bikerb422" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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/epartners/proPhotoProductS3.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?section_id=4&article_id=1342&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
     
    Muffin, May 19, 2005
    #4
  5. bikerb422

    Skip M Guest

    "Muffin" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:_Uie.1890$...
    >
    > "bikerb422" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> 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/epartners/proPhotoProductS3.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?section_id=4&article_id=1342&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/essays/digital-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
     
    Skip M, May 19, 2005
    #5
  6. "bikerb422" <> wrote in
    news::

    > 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.
     
    George Preddy, May 19, 2005
    #6
  7. bikerb422

    Colin D Guest

    Muffin wrote:
    >
    > "bikerb422" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > 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/epartners/proPhotoProductS3.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?section_id=4&article_id=1342&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
     
    Colin D, May 19, 2005
    #7
  8. bikerb422

    Paul Rubin Guest

    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?
     
    Paul Rubin, May 19, 2005
    #8
  9. bikerb422

    Skip M Guest

    "Paul Rubin" <http://> wrote in message
    news:...
    > 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
     
    Skip M, May 19, 2005
    #9
  10. bikerb422

    Colin D Guest

    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
     
    Colin D, May 20, 2005
    #10
  11. bikerb422

    Skip M Guest

    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc4.html

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
    "Colin D" <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> wrote in message
    news:428D6815.38649549@killspam.127.0.0.1...
    >
    >
    > 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
     
    Skip M, May 20, 2005
    #11
  12. bikerb422

    Whatevah Guest

    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?


    I had an inquiry last week for color and black & white, but haven't had
    any followups from them. Guess I should give them a call on Monday,
    should be a nice break from editing shots from the weekend.


    --
    Whatevah / Jerry Horn
    Jerry {at} Whatevah.com (working address)
    Freelance Photography and Web services.
    spambait:
     
    Whatevah, May 20, 2005
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. nonamegiven

    Digital for weddings.......

    nonamegiven, Aug 20, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    704
    Paul Heslop
    Aug 23, 2003
  2. Siddhartha Jain

    Shooting weddings with a Canon 300D

    Siddhartha Jain, Dec 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    38
    Views:
    791
    Bruce Murphy
    Dec 11, 2004
  3. vigape
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    373
    vigape
    Aug 18, 2005
  4. mysticmdjservices
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    313
    mysticmdjservices
    Nov 9, 2006
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,050
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page