Convenient modifiers for a flashgun?

Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
I've been frustrated with attachments for my flash - I've tried the Fong dome which kept falling off which looks completely unprofessional when it does + a pain to remove and attach + lots of lost power. Had the flash diffuser that came with my Nikon SB-700 and that also wouldn't clip on easily and eventually got lost. Now I'm too afraid to point my flash at my subjects in high ceiling situations due to the horrible results I get. Thinking about investing in a system which will allow me to fit various modifiers quickly and securely. I've been looking at Magmod's solution, and possibly even a Profoto A1 with it's magnetic attachments. What's people's opinion? Currently I have a Nikon SB-700 which I'm planning to flog and also a Godox V860ii with Godox X1 system which I could also sell in favour of a system that's a breeze to use.
 
Messages
4,697
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
I pretty much agree with Soeren

But what is it that you're shooting and in what sort of environment? If we understand the problem that might help with an idea for a solution :)

Posting a few examples of what & where you shoot too would be even better

Dave
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#5
I dont bother with small on flash (on camera) atachments, they are generally a waste of money.
I'm not sure the alternatives for Wedding photography. I don't have an assistant and for the documentary style photography I do the flash would need to move around with me. In high ceiling situations I've been using natural light and a tripod / monopod to take the shutter speed down (no VR on my prime lenses) and in some close up situations my flashes bounce card which sometimes falls back in the flash head :-(
 
Messages
23,256
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#6
As above, much rather bounce than use any modifier, off walls as much as ceilings, also hand hold the flash in my left hand sometimes and use directly.
But I do have the better bounce card and find it better than any other modifier,
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#7
This one as you can see is not as flattering as I had hoped for. Dark outside, the car had a black top so dark inside. Water droplets on my lens, parked car outside? This is probably as bad as it gets
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#8
This is another example where I am not at all happy with the results - the room was very low ceilinged (the opposite of what I had described above) - I could only shoot from he opposite end of the room due to space restrictions. The room was crowded and the only open space was down the aisle. As far as I can remember I directed the flash at the subject without a diffuser - and these are the results. Father and son with the registrar behind. Ugly shadows
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#9
From the examples you have shown above neither of those needed flash. You would have gotten a better result by just upping your ISO and accepting a little bit of noise. Using an on camera flash for these has made them more unflattering than if you hadn't used a flash at all.

Couples never complain about noise. At 95% of the weddings I have photographed I have only ever used flash for the first dance.

On very bad weather days where we need to shoot indoors we use Godox AD200's and various modifiers.

Everyone has their own way of doing things though.
 
Messages
8,323
Name
wayne clarke
Edit My Images
Yes
#10
The two I've used most (the fong kept falling off mine too) was a small soft sort of cloth thing off flebay which does a nice job of softening without killing the power or half a carex plastic bottle I cut to fit. I used that for about 2 years. You need to find a white bottle not a clear one.
The only other thing I used to swear by was a big white card bounce board, I used that for years as a press tog.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
From the examples you have shown above neither of those needed flash. You would have gotten a better result by just upping your ISO and accepting a little bit of noise. Using an on camera flash for these has made them more unflattering than if you hadn't used a flash at all.

Couples never complain about noise. At 95% of the weddings I have photographed I have only ever used flash for the first dance.

On very bad weather days where we need to shoot indoors we use Godox AD200's and various modifiers.

Everyone has their own way of doing things though.
I have been finding natural light to be much more pleasing and have to say that I have been shooting more and more with wider apertures. Combining the faster lenses I'm using and having moving to the D750 which has great dynamic range giving more scope in PP. I just don't know where the limit is with ISO and acceptability. Where do you see your maximum ISO being before you say that some sort of artificial light is necessary - maybe 2000?
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,256
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#12
Depends on the photo - there's no maximum - if the light level is low but it looks good - it's a photo, if it's high enough for 800 ISO but looks crap - it's not a photo.

Stop thinking about flash as adding light for a decent exposure (frankly that's a noob attitude), and start thinking about it as a tool to use to create a different shot.

At a wedding I'd use flash:
For some dramatic portraits (think sunsets)
For the first dance (usually including at least 1 flash off camera)
For the dancing (party) shots; balancing with disco lights to create a well exposed image whilst keeping the 'atmosphere'
 
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#13
I have been finding natural light to be much more pleasing and have to say that I have been shooting more and more with wider apertures. Combining the faster lenses I'm using and having moving to the D750 which has great dynamic range giving more scope in PP. I just don't know where the limit is with ISO and acceptability. Where do you see your maximum ISO being before you say that some sort of artificial light is necessary - maybe 2000?
There is no limit, yeah files at 6400 and above will have noticeable noise but personally that doesn't annoy me at all. We have never had a client who has ever mentioned noise as being an issue. I would much rather have noise than the flat images taken using an onboard flash. Not sure when we had those if we ever needed to shoot above 8000 ISO. Depends on your lenses really. If you are able to shoot between f/1.4-f/2 in low light situations ISO is easily managed.
 
Messages
4,697
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
Yes
#14
I'm with f2.8 on this - no flash was needed in either of your examples and in trying for better 'quality' you'd destroyed those shots' potential to be lovely

I too shoot with a D750 and wide aperture primes, and 2000 ISO as a max ??? Are you kidding ??? lol

The D750 is one of the very best at higher ISO and I don't even bother with noise reduction until I get above 4000 ISO - its really not an issue. I'm not saying there isn't any, I'm saying it doesn't matter

When I first started I used flash a lot, but rarely now as - as others have said - noise is really only an issue for photographers !!!

Step away from that mindset that noiseless is where you need to be, stop using flash so much and your photography will improve HUGELY :)

On my darkest venues I regularly shoot all day at 4000 ISO or higher and still don't need flash

Dave
 
Messages
5,707
Edit My Images
No
#15
hi Gil
not the best wedding pics I've seen
maybe go as a second photographer before you start
taking bookings yourself even try to get on a wedding photo tuition course
as some of the uptight customers you will get will
try to sue you for substandard pictures
cannot see the difference if you buy a magnetic diffuser ? its just the same as any other diffuser you can knock it off !!
im not slagging you im just telling you as i see it
i have seen a lot of pro togs who are shocking at what they do
and i have seen lots of camera club members who are brilliant togs
pro tog means nothing really its not a qualification that proves you know what you doing
its a title anyone can use !!
 
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#16
hi Gil
not the best wedding pics I've seen
maybe go as a second photographer before you start
taking bookings yourself even try to get on a wedding photo tuition course
as some of the uptight customers you will get will
try to sue you for substandard pictures
cannot see the difference if you buy a magnetic diffuser ? its just the same as any other diffuser you can knock it off !!
im not slagging you im just telling you as i see it
i have seen a lot of pro togs who are shocking at what they do
and i have seen lots of camera club members who are brilliant togs
pro tog means nothing really its not a qualification that proves you know what you doing
its a title anyone can use !!
What an odd post, to be fair you make quite a lot of similarly odd posts.

This thread is about flash use not the o.p's wedding photography business or the quality of their work.
 
Last edited:
Messages
5,707
Edit My Images
No
#18
thats why i said try a bit of tuition would not hurt !
hope this is not not an odd post
maybe your just take it oddly
it all depends on how you read it and interpret it
hope thats not to odd
 
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#19
thats why i said try a bit of tuition would not hurt !
hope this is not not an odd post
maybe your just take it oddly
it all depends on how you read it and interpret it
hope thats not to odd
It is extremely odd.

This thread is in the lighting section of the forum and is about the use of flash.

At no point did the o.p ask for any advice about running her photography business, training etc. and the other things you mentioned. You have also critiqued the example photographs they posted as an explanation for the flash issues they are having when not asked too.

Your post is rude, ignorant and pretty unsavoury to say the least.
 
Messages
5,707
Edit My Images
No
#20
just like the bible 1 book but 100;s of interpretations
now thats odd
im not slating the op at all just giving some advice about getting some tuition thats all
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#21
Depends on the photo - there's no maximum - if the light level is low but it looks good - it's a photo, if it's high enough for 800 ISO but looks crap - it's not a photo.

Stop thinking about flash as adding light for a decent exposure (frankly that's a noob attitude), and start thinking about it as a tool to use to create a different shot.

At a wedding I'd use flash:
For some dramatic portraits (think sunsets)
For the first dance (usually including at least 1 flash off camera)
For the dancing (party) shots; balancing with disco lights to create a well exposed image whilst keeping the 'atmosphere'
Valuable info, I need to accept higher ISOs as opposed to going for flash all the time
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#22
hi Gil
not the best wedding pics I've seen
maybe go as a second photographer before you start
taking bookings yourself even try to get on a wedding photo tuition course
as some of the uptight customers you will get will
try to sue you for substandard pictures
cannot see the difference if you buy a magnetic diffuser ? its just the same as any other diffuser you can knock it off !!
im not slagging you im just telling you as i see it
i have seen a lot of pro togs who are shocking at what they do
and i have seen lots of camera club members who are brilliant togs
pro tog means nothing really its not a qualification that proves you know what you doing
its a title anyone can use !!
These are the worst examples I can find. They were extremely happy with the photos that I delivered. I know these photos are unacceptable :)
 
Messages
5,707
Edit My Images
No
#23
as long as the client is happy thats what matters
we photographers are more critical of there own work as you know
we always strive for perfection :)
hope you don't think my reply's ODD ;)
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#24
There is no limit, yeah files at 6400 and above will have noticeable noise but personally that doesn't annoy me at all. We have never had a client who has ever mentioned noise as being an issue. I would much rather have noise than the flat images taken using an onboard flash. Not sure when we had those if we ever needed to shoot above 8000 ISO. Depends on your lenses really. If you are able to shoot between f/1.4-f/2 in low light situations ISO is easily managed.
Valuable info, thanks for taking the time to answer. I find that at wider apertures the focus plane is such that for a couple shot (side by side) they aren't both sharp, and I have a lot more throw aways. Maybe I'm too close. I realise for the above car photo, I had the wrong lens for the job, I think it was a 50mm on a cropped sensor. But even with my 35mm on my D750 I wouldn't try to shoot with an aperture lower than f7.1 in order to make sure both subjects eyes are nice and sharp. I've even found that when shooting the bride on her own and filling the majority of the frame - the flowers in a large bouquet held in front of her are not sharp unless I'm closing in on f8, so have been aiming for smaller apertures which in turn gives me high ISOs without flash. So I guess I need to practise on where to focus to make wider apertures produce acceptable results particularly when couples are involved. For that reason I've been afraid to explore wider apertures and in turn flash has been used more than perhaps necessary. I do like the effects of f2.5 however I need to be stood quite far back in order to have couples both to look acceptable sharp when both are equal subjects in the photo.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#25
I'm with f2.8 on this - no flash was needed in either of your examples and in trying for better 'quality' you'd destroyed those shots' potential to be lovely

I too shoot with a D750 and wide aperture primes, and 2000 ISO as a max ??? Are you kidding ??? lol

The D750 is one of the very best at higher ISO and I don't even bother with noise reduction until I get above 4000 ISO - its really not an issue. I'm not saying there isn't any, I'm saying it doesn't matter

When I first started I used flash a lot, but rarely now as - as others have said - noise is really only an issue for photographers !!!

Step away from that mindset that noiseless is where you need to be, stop using flash so much and your photography will improve HUGELY :)

On my darkest venues I regularly shoot all day at 4000 ISO or higher and still don't need flash

Dave
Thanks for opening my mind!! :)

I guess it's very much dependant on how much of the frame the subject takes up, and how much cropping you do after the fact. I'm guessing that the less cropping you do, and the more space the subject occupies the frame, the higher the ISO you can get away with. I have found for example - with primes - taking photos of the wedding couple walking down the aisle - the photos without flash taken with the couple at the far end of the aisle are normally discarded in preference to the ones where the couple reach the point where they are closer to the camera and occupy more of the frame. The noise is less of a problem with the detail you can appreciate.

So I guess what I should take away from this is to shoot with the frame filled in such a way to avoid cropping, and to accept higher ISOs and to use natural light as much as possible
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#26
Valuable info, thanks for taking the time to answer. I find that at wider apertures the focus plane is such that for a couple shot (side by side) they aren't both sharp, and I have a lot more throw aways. Maybe I'm too close. I realise for the above car photo, I had the wrong lens for the job, I think it was a 50mm on a cropped sensor. But even with my 35mm on my D750 I wouldn't try to shoot with an aperture lower than f7.1 in order to make sure both subjects eyes are nice and sharp. I've even found that when shooting the bride on her own and filling the majority of the frame - the flowers in a large bouquet held in front of her are not sharp unless I'm closing in on f8, so have been aiming for smaller apertures which in turn gives me high ISOs without flash. So I guess I need to practise on where to focus to make wider apertures produce acceptable results particularly when couples are involved. For that reason I've been afraid to explore wider apertures and in turn flash has been used more than perhaps necessary. I do like the effects of f2.5 however I need to be stood quite far back in order to have couples both to look acceptable sharp when both are equal subjects in the photo.
Hi, you need to trust your equipment more, for that same shot in the car I would have shot that at f/2-f/2.8 with a 24mm or 35mm lens. I also would have shot it from the drivers seat rather than through the window and that way they would have been on the same focal plane and perfectly in focus without having to step down as much as you have done. Getting sharp photos at large apertures is partly down to technique in terms of how you handle your camera and partly down to how good the equipment is. The D750 is a good dslr but as with all dslr's lenses can often fractionally front or back focus unless they have been tuned to the body correctly and this can cause issues when shooting at large apertures where it will be more noticeable. This is one of the reasons so many wedding photographers now use mirrorless systems.

Thanks for opening my mind!! :)

I guess it's very much dependant on how much of the frame the subject takes up, and how much cropping you do after the fact. I'm guessing that the less cropping you do, and the more space the subject occupies the frame, the higher the ISO you can get away with. I have found for example - with primes - taking photos of the wedding couple walking down the aisle - the photos without flash taken with the couple at the far end of the aisle are normally discarded in preference to the ones where the couple reach the point where they are closer to the camera and occupy more of the frame. The noise is less of a problem with the detail you can appreciate.

So I guess what I should take away from this is to shoot with the frame filled in such a way to avoid cropping, and to accept higher ISOs and to use natural light as much as possible
To be honest I am quite shocked that you would be using flash during the ceremony, that is so old school and I am surprised you haven't run into issues with this. I guess the couples that decide to book you do so because they like what you do. This is a complete no, in my book no matter what the lighting conditions are I would never consider it okay to use flash during the ceremony.

Surely you should always be shooting with the aim of not having to crop in post?
 
Last edited:
Messages
10,691
Name
Garry Edwards
Edit My Images
No
#27
As above.
Personally I use flash a lot, for outdoor photos, but always to add that little something extra, not to create extra light, and would never use it during a ceremony.

On the subject of noise, I don't know the D750 - far too modern for me:) but even with my elderly D3 - which admittedly has a much larger sensor - I'm happy to shoot at at least ISO 2000 when necessary for people pictures, especially when the scene is busy. Sometimes I've shot at 6400 and it's been good enough.

On the subject of cropping, the only significant cropping should occur when the shot is taken in landscape but ends up in portrait, it's always better, for weddings, to shoot in landscape. The rest of the time you just need to adjust either the focal length or your feet - it's basic skills - to fill the frame. Very many years ago I worked for a famous photographer who shot a lot of high end fashion. Vogue insisted that he used a 5"x4" camera but he didn't have one and so he shot on 35mm Kodachrome and then had his trannys put on to 5"x4" for submission, and they never noticed. I once asked him how he got away with it, his answer was that he had 864 sq mm of film and didn't waste any of it on cropping, plus he made sure that his exposure was always spot on. . .
 
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#28
As above.
Personally I use flash a lot, for outdoor photos, but always to add that little something extra, not to create extra light, and would never use it during a ceremony.

On the subject of noise, I don't know the D750 - far too modern for me:) but even with my elderly D3 - which admittedly has a much larger sensor - I'm happy to shoot at at least ISO 2000 when necessary for people pictures, especially when the scene is busy. Sometimes I've shot at 6400 and it's been good enough.

On the subject of cropping, the only significant cropping should occur when the shot is taken in landscape but ends up in portrait, it's always better, for weddings, to shoot in landscape. The rest of the time you just need to adjust either the focal length or your feet - it's basic skills - to fill the frame. Very many years ago I worked for a famous photographer who shot a lot of high end fashion. Vogue insisted that he used a 5"x4" camera but he didn't have one and so he shot on 35mm Kodachrome and then had his trannys put on to 5"x4" for submission, and they never noticed. I once asked him how he got away with it, his answer was that he had 864 sq mm of film and didn't waste any of it on cropping, plus he made sure that his exposure was always spot on. . .
The sensor in the D750 is the same size as the sensor in the D3. They are both full frame cameras and the D750 handles noise much better than a D3.
 
Last edited:
Messages
10,691
Name
Garry Edwards
Edit My Images
No
#29
The sensor in the D750 is the same size as the sensor in the D3. They are both full frame cameras and the D750 handles noise much better than a D3.
Thanks for that, I knew it was too modern for me . . .
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#30
Getting sharp photos at large apertures is partly down to technique in terms of how you handle your camera and partly down to how good the equipment is
Yes, it's something I need to get some experience with. Placing the focus spot becomes more critical - I've been used to aiming somewhere around the points of where the shoulders meet for 2 people stood side by side and when I use an aperture too wide - I find that both people are equally soft in the eyes. Certainly in circumstances like during the first dance - even at smaller apertures it's fairly difficult to get focus to be where you want it to be - and so I've found that Automatic AF can give more keepers than manually selecting the AF point and using AF-C. Perhaps I should be using Automatic AF in situations where I'm using wider apertures? - particularly for people in motion where a higher shutter speeds are needed as opposed to situations like exchanging vows where there is little to no motion

The D750 is a good dslr but as with all dslr's lenses can often fractionally front or back focus unless they have been tuned to the body correctly and this can cause issues when shooting at large apertures where it will be more noticeable. This is one of the reasons so many wedding photographers now use mirrorless systems.
I've spent quite some time with my lenses and the lenscal calibration tool, and think they are pretty close. It is fairly difficult to get it bang on - as there is quite a lot of human interpretation going on - and I'm using the lens at close to the minimum focus distance which isn't typically how I use the lens. I'm finding that the further away it becomes harder to intemperate when you have it perfectly central (neither front or back focusing) due to the increased size of the in focus area on the scale. Fairly close to minimum focal distance with a wide open aperture seems the easiest way. Perhaps I need to find an alternative way of doing it - and get one of these pieces of software to do the interpretation of whether it's marginally back or front focusing for me.

To be honest I am quite shocked that you would be using flash during the ceremony, that is so old school and I am surprised you haven't run into issues with this. I guess the couples that decide to book you do so because they like what you do. This is a complete no, in my book no matter what the lighting conditions are I would never consider it okay to use flash during the ceremony.
The only time where it's not been possible to use flash is when I've been in church, and I've managed with a monopod - however I do agree, flash - particularly repetitive is distracting, and I do feel obtrusive and try to be sparing with my shots.

One thing I do find though - is particularly in a ceremony room with windows down one side. When it comes to the vows, I like to alternate from side to side to get the faces of each of the couples as they repeat their vows to one another. The problem is when the windows are particularly large - which seems to be quite common - and in the summer - the dynamic range is so great that the windows are blown out, and the faces are quite dark. It's often this that is the deciding factor on using flash or not. Using the flash to bring up the subjects so that the dynamic range is reduced - making the photos look less blown out / grainy after lowering the highlights / raising the shadows. So based on that I end up shooting the whole ceremony with flash to keep consistency from photo to photo.

The other benefit of flash - is at the smaller apertures you get the expressions of the people on the first row as the ceremony progresses. At the wider apertures you do lose this added 'bonus' as the expressions become less discernible

QUOTE="f/2.8, post: 8484106, member: 65633"]Surely you should always be shooting with the aim of not having to crop in post?[/QUOTE]

I do try, but it does become more difficult with primes to be in the right place at the right time. Primes do mean that cropping becomes a more common practise. I've found the quality at lower ISOs to be able to accommodate quite aggressive cropping, as opposed to zooms which don't seem to offer as much scope for cropping
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#31
Yes, it's something I need to get some experience with. Placing the focus spot becomes more critical - I've been used to aiming somewhere around the points of where the shoulders meet for 2 people stood side by side and when I use an aperture too wide - I find that both people are equally soft in the eyes. Certainly in circumstances like during the first dance - even at smaller apertures it's fairly difficult to get focus to be where you want it to be - and so I've found that Automatic AF can give more keepers than manually selecting the AF point and using AF-C. Perhaps I should be using Automatic AF in situations where I'm using wider apertures? - particularly for people in motion where a higher shutter speeds are needed as opposed to situations like exchanging vows where there is little to no motion



I've spent quite some time with my lenses and the lenscal calibration tool, and think they are pretty close. It is fairly difficult to get it bang on - as there is quite a lot of human interpretation going on - and I'm using the lens at close to the minimum focus distance which isn't typically how I use the lens. I'm finding that the further away it becomes harder to intemperate when you have it perfectly central (neither front or back focusing) due to the increased size of the in focus area on the scale. Fairly close to minimum focal distance with a wide open aperture seems the easiest way. Perhaps I need to find an alternative way of doing it - and get one of these pieces of software to do the interpretation of whether it's marginally back or front focusing for me.



The only time where it's not been possible to use flash is when I've been in church, and I've managed with a monopod - however I do agree, flash - particularly repetitive is distracting, and I do feel obtrusive and try to be sparing with my shots.

One thing I do find though - is particularly in a ceremony room with windows down one side. When it comes to the vows, I like to alternate from side to side to get the faces of each of the couples as they repeat their vows to one another. The problem is when the windows are particularly large - which seems to be quite common - and in the summer - the dynamic range is so great that the windows are blown out, and the faces are quite dark. It's often this that is the deciding factor on using flash or not. Using the flash to bring up the subjects so that the dynamic range is reduced - making the photos look less blown out / grainy after lowering the highlights / raising the shadows. So based on that I end up shooting the whole ceremony with flash to keep consistency from photo to photo.

The other benefit of flash - is at the smaller apertures you get the expressions of the people on the first row as the ceremony progresses. At the wider apertures you do lose this added 'bonus' as the expressions become less discernible

I do try, but it does become more difficult with primes to be in the right place at the right time. Primes do mean that cropping becomes a more common practise. I've found the quality at lower ISOs to be able to accommodate quite aggressive cropping, as opposed to zooms which don't seem to offer as much scope for cropping
In terms of tuning your lenses have a look on YouTube for the dot tune method. We found it pretty reliable and easy.

When we used D750’s we never had any issues using single focus point in A-FC.

As for the venue layout, yes we often also have venues with strong windows light on one side, we have never needed to use flash just alter the exposure for each side as needed.

I don’t mean to be rude so I hope this doesn’t sound that way but at the moment you seem to be working in the old school way of shooting everything at f/8 and using flash for everything as a bit of a crutch. You need to learn how to control your exposure regardless of the situation and to do that you are going to have to step out of your comfort zone.

What lenses are you using?

Do you only have the one D750?
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#32
In terms of tuning your lenses have a look on YouTube for the dot tune method. We found it pretty reliable and easy.

When we used D750’s we never had any issues using single focus point in A-FC.

As for the venue layout, yes we often also have venues with strong windows light on one side, we have never needed to use flash just alter the exposure for each side as needed.

I don’t mean to be rude so I hope this doesn’t sound that way but at the moment you seem to be working in the old school way of shooting everything at f/8 and using flash for everything as a bit of a crutch. You need to learn how to control your exposure regardless of the situation and to do that you are going to have to step out of your comfort zone.

What lenses are you using?

Do you only have the one D750?
I do shoot at f4 but not often wider. I use all of my lenses in my signature. Yes just one new D750

Will definitely look at that method.

I've been using this

https://www.datacolor.com/photography-design/product-overview/spyderlenscal/
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#33
I do shoot at f4 but not often wider. I use all of my lenses in my signature. Yes just one new D750
Okay

Realistically to make the best use of natural light as a one man band wedding photographer you are going to need 2 full frame bodies with one wide and one long lens. The most popular options tend to be a 35/85 or 20 or 24/50 combos. I have used both of these combos at one time or another and both will be fine for weddings. You always have the option of swapping out a lens if needed.

In an ideal world you probably want f/1.4 lenses for to give you a little bit of extra leeway. Don’t be afraid of shooting wide open when you need too. Master your hand holding technique and use a fast enough shutter speed to allow for movement. Don’t worry at all about your ISO creeping up.

It will take a while to relearn, maybe it wouldn’t be a bad idea for you to arrange a few portfolio building sessions with models to practice before jumping in with a different style at weddings.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#34
Okay

Realistically to make the best use of natural light as a one man band wedding photographer you are going to need 2 full frame bodies with one wide and one long lens. The most popular options tend to be a 35/85 or 20 or 24/50 combos. I have used both of these combos at one time or another and both will be fine for weddings. You always have the option of swapping out a lens if needed.

In an ideal world you probably want f/1.4 lenses for to give you a little bit of extra leeway. Don’t be afraid of shooting wide open when you need too. Master your hand holding technique and use a fast enough shutter speed to allow for movement. Don’t worry at all about your ISO creeping up.

It will take a while to relearn, maybe it wouldn’t be a bad idea for you to arrange a few portfolio building sessions with models to practice before jumping in with a different style at weddings.
Thanks for giving me some direction. Do you recommend a monopod - or is handheld the way to go even in challenging light?
 
Messages
2,896
Name
Tommy
Edit My Images
No
#35
Thanks for giving me some direction. Do you recommend a monopod - or is handheld the way to go even in challenging light?
Personally I wouldn’t want the hassle of a monopod especially if you are already carrying 2 bodies to switch between focal lengths.

You should t need one if you are using a quick enough shutter speed for such small lenses.
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,256
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#36
I've spent quite some time with my lenses and the lenscal calibration tool, and think they are pretty close. I
Not really relevant to your point here - but the whole of post #30.

I'll be blunt - it reads like a list of excuses to justify some rather half hearted practices.

I've only ever micro adjusted one lens - but the key point is to adjust it at your regular focus distance - it's never advisable to adjust a lens at a distance that's not relevant to your general use. it's maybe more difficult - but there's really no point in adjusting at the wrong distance.
Likewise using smaller apertures to ensure 'focus' or using auto focus point selection.

I feel a bit sorry for you - a few years ago the business and technical sections were full of wedding photographers openly discussing working methods, giving technical help etc. But moaning from non - pro's (and worse) closed down those opportunities by driving away most of the pro wedding shooters. Just know that most of us rarely shoot at f4 or smaller - there's a recent post where shooting groups at 1.8 is discussed. Though the other side of that is you'd have been roundly criticised for shooting with only one camera. we'd have told you that you needed backups for everything - and that by miles the easiest way of working is with 2 cameras with different focal lengths.

There were many discussions about shooting in less than ideal surroundings; it's the stock in trade of shooting weddings. I have used flash to shoot the recessional - but never during a ceremony. And as for noise - I've delivered ISO6400 images from a 7d; your priorities are skewed by an ill conceived mindset. Good images with noise don't just 'beat' bad images; bad images are undeliverable, good noisy images are perfectly acceptable to clients.

In 2003 when I started shooting weddings digitally - the D750 was beyond the imagination of even the most ambitious of us. I might look back at the low light quality now and shudder - but photography has always been about delivering the best images that current technology allows. And the 'best' images you can get from your D750 are lots better than what you're delivering with flash.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#37
Not really relevant to your point here - but the whole of post #30.

I'll be blunt - it reads like a list of excuses to justify some rather half hearted practices.

I've only ever micro adjusted one lens - but the key point is to adjust it at your regular focus distance - it's never advisable to adjust a lens at a distance that's not relevant to your general use. it's maybe more difficult - but there's really no point in adjusting at the wrong distance.
Likewise using smaller apertures to ensure 'focus' or using auto focus point selection.

I feel a bit sorry for you - a few years ago the business and technical sections were full of wedding photographers openly discussing working methods, giving technical help etc. But moaning from non - pro's (and worse) closed down those opportunities by driving away most of the pro wedding shooters. Just know that most of us rarely shoot at f4 or smaller - there's a recent post where shooting groups at 1.8 is discussed. Though the other side of that is you'd have been roundly criticised for shooting with only one camera. we'd have told you that you needed backups for everything - and that by miles the easiest way of working is with 2 cameras with different focal lengths.

There were many discussions about shooting in less than ideal surroundings; it's the stock in trade of shooting weddings. I have used flash to shoot the recessional - but never during a ceremony. And as for noise - I've delivered ISO6400 images from a 7d; your priorities are skewed by an ill conceived mindset. Good images with noise don't just 'beat' bad images; bad images are undeliverable, good noisy images are perfectly acceptable to clients.

In 2003 when I started shooting weddings digitally - the D750 was beyond the imagination of even the most ambitious of us. I might look back at the low light quality now and shudder - but photography has always been about delivering the best images that current technology allows. And the 'best' images you can get from your D750 are lots better than what you're delivering with flash.
I'm in no way rejecting what has been recommended by Tommy & Dave, or intentionally making excuses, I'm absorbing what they have said with open arms and will definitely apply what they have said. I respect their opinions, and I have already learnt a lot from Dave Tommy & Garry in previous threads.

Me explaining my experience with regards lens calibration is just my way of looking for more information - I'm not refuting what they have said. I'm just saying that in my experience with a 35mm f1.8 lens - using the instructions supplied with the Lenscal tool - that is shooting wide open at f1.8 at a distance of 35cm from the tool I find it extremely hard to accurately define whether the lens is either front focusing or back focusing unless is miles out. So I could be +-3 units away from optimum. I can identify shifts when making larger changes the value, but not when making single unit adjustments which leads me to believe my practise is not accurate enough.

Tommy suggested the dot tune method which I will definitely try in favour of my current method.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#38
I very much doubt I'm taking away work from pros - as a lot of people avoid me because I'm too cheap, and pros get a lot of their work from exhibiting which I can't afford to do. I know I'm miles better compared to photographers who charge similarly in my area. My clients recognise this which is why I'm becoming popular. I wish I could show you my work, and you would understand I am becoming quite accomplished at what I do albeit not all of my photos work out - which is why I seek help from you all which I very much appreciate. The photos I showed you earlier are not a true reflection of what I deliver - they were the very worst examples when things go wrong.
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,256
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#39
I very much doubt I'm taking away work from pros
You're charging for your services - you're not taking work from pro's - you're a pro (like it or not).

Sorry to break it to you - please don't be one of those guys. If you're good enough to hang out the 'for sale' sign, then you're obliged to accept the responsibilities that go with that. All of them - and the simplest responsibility is that if they've paid you; they get pictures - excuses that your gear failed aren't an option - you've taken the money so you have to deliver. No if's no but's; just the pictures that they paid for.
 
OP
OP
gilbouk
Messages
1,971
Name
Gil
Edit My Images
Yes
#40
You're charging for your services - you're not taking work from pro's - you're a pro (like it or not).

Sorry to break it to you - please don't be one of those guys. If you're good enough to hang out the 'for sale' sign, then you're obliged to accept the responsibilities that go with that. All of them - and the simplest responsibility is that if they've paid you; they get pictures - excuses that your gear failed aren't an option - you've taken the money so you have to deliver. No if's no but's; just the pictures that they paid for.
And that's what I do. I've delivered a service to 23 couples and they have all been extremely happy.
 
Top