church photography

P

photoshot

Messages
5
Edit My Images
No
Hi there,
I'm doing some photography at a wedding and I am not allowed to use flash in the church. What setting should my camera be on in-order to get bright non-blurred shots?
Many thanks x:bang:
 
Manual, iso 1600 and f2.8 and as fast a shutter as you can get with those for a decent exposure.... thats my guess at a start point..but all anyone can do is guess without knowing how much light you have available.

Also you might want to say what body and lens you have... the above setting would be ok for a high spec body and lens..

But then again I dont do weddings... I bet I aint far off though :)
 
5d should save you with all them mega pixels :) helps with the noise... the lens I would have thought will be poor.. itsa varyiable aperture so Manual is out unless you dont zoom and if you do zoom your going to f5.6 which is very poor for indoor no flash phtography..

Someone will ahve a fantastic picture with the same lens :) But normally it wouldnt be the lens of choice for that situation.
 
Anything with a fixed f2.8, eg 24-70 or a 70-200, f2.8 is highly reccomended for indoor photography with no flash..
 
if you can go into the church days before the wedding and have a play, im sure if you ask they wont mind, that way you can pretty much work out what you will need on the day, give or take a little.
 
same here, for those dreaded indoor no-flash ceremonies i use my 70-200mm @ f/2.8, gets some great stuff.
 
my nift fifty wouldnt focus whilst being used with the 5d when i had a play with it recently after a long while! :(
 
40D, 185mm, manual exposure, 800 ISO, f/2.8, 1/100, tripod, no flash. This got a 0.5 stop exposure boost in Lightroom, so the base exposure was actually insufficient...

20080829_142942_7906_LR.jpg


As churches go I'd say this one was fairly bright. f/5.6 is really just asking for disappointment. It is not the right tool for the job. What if the weather clouds over and everyting is dim and gloomy? You might get away with f/5.6 some of the time, but you will not get away with f/5.6 all of the time. If you're shooting weddings you need to be able to get the shot all of the time.

Here's a better idea of what the church was like inside. This was shot with my 30D at 400 ISO, f/2.8, 1/100. That's 2/3 stop dimmer than the settings for the long shot, to try to hold some detail in the glass. I ended up adding 0.5 stops in post processing and then applying some highlight recovery....

20080829_132224_2597_LR.jpg
 
tdodd said:
You will find little love for the Nifty 50 in this thread - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=563606. My comments are at the bottom of page 1 of the thead. See posts 21, 28 and 30 on page 2. I am sure many feel the same way. Add post 37, 46, 64 (me again), 77 (maybe), 85, 92.

Another thread, again with input from me - http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=473649.
Click to expand...

Ouch! Thanks for that. Suppose the 5D is worthy of better glass anyway. The 85/1.8 seems to get great reviews - any experience with that lens?
 
I haven't used the 85/1.8 or the 50/1.4 but both have had my finger hovering over the buy button. However, I'm still not 100% convinced that I wouldn't want the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 instead. I know there is a massive price difference between the L lenses and the non-Ls but lenses last a very long time (hopefully) and if I can afford the best, which I can, then why not buy the best?

From what I've read and seen, if you're really never going to cough up £1,000+ then the 85/1.8 is an absolute steal. It will make a superb portrait lens, but is pretty long, at least on a cropper, for general wedding photography. When the B&G are signing the register you'll likely want something a good deal wider than 85mm. If you're the pro then you'll need something wide so you can get in close and fight your way past the elbows of Uncle Bob and the other pap wannabees. Then again, for the signing, once the service is over, you'll probably be OK to use flash, so you won't really need f/1.8 anyway, but 85mm will be no use.
 
tdodd said:
I haven't used the 85/1.8 or the 50/1.4 but both have had my finger hovering over the buy button. However, I'm still not 100% convinced that I wouldn't want the 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 instead. I know there is a massive price difference between the L lenses and the non-Ls but lenses last a very long time (hopefully) and if I can afford the best, which I can, then why not buy the best?

From what I've read and seen, if you're really never going to cough up £1,000+ then the 85/1.8 is an absolute steal. It will make a superb portrait lens, but is pretty long, at least on a cropper, for general wedding photography. When the B&G are signing the register you'll likely want something a good deal wider than 85mm. If you're the pro then you'll need something wide so you can get in close and fight your way past the elbows of Uncle Bob and the other pap wannabees. Then again, for the signing, once the service is over, you'll probably be OK to use flash, so you won't really need f/1.8 anyway, but 85mm will be no use.
Click to expand...

Had some great results with the - dare I say it - 50/1.8 on a 1.6x cropped body, which is obviously near the 85mm range, so I'm used to the distances you need to be (next camera will be full frame). For that kind of money, I'd go for the 24-70/2.8 without a doubt, following with a 70-200/2.8.

The great thing about the 85/1.8 is that you can buy it, use it, then decide if the 1.4 (1.2 if you're on Canon) is necessary. If not, you've not lost a great deal!

On your other comment, if you can afford it, go for it. Definitely :)
 
I'm getting confused now as to whether your research is regarding a Nikon Nifty or a Canon Nifty. All my remarks (about performance/quality) relate to the Canon Nifty. For all I know the Nikon version is a different beast. Ditto the 85/1.8 - are you talking Nikon or Canon? I know you said elswhere you were planning on a D700 but I don't know which body you are talking about for this discussion.

If you want to see some wonderful work with the Nikon 85/1.4 then you should check out this guy (he posts here, I think, and certainly on POTN)....

http://meninenuotrauka.lt/
 
tdodd said:
I'm getting confused now as to whether your research is regarding a Nikon Nifty or a Canon Nifty. All my remarks (about performance/quality) relate to the Canon Nifty. For all I know the Nikon version is a different beast. Ditto the 85/1.8 - are you talking Nikon or Canon? I know you said elswhere you were planning on a D700 but I don't know which body you are talking about for this discussion.

If you want to see some wonderful work with the Nikon 85/1.4 then you should check out this guy (he posts here, I think, and certainly on POTN)....

http://meninenuotrauka.lt/
Click to expand...

Canon nifty. Hence the move to Nikon is possible - very little brand investment (yet!).

Gone though that website many times - his work is absolutely fantastic!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top