Equipment Needed For Professional Wedding Photography

..............I'm sure you didn't take all this kit on your very first shoot though?

You need very little kit to start with. (you can then decide what you need as you grow).

Like i said previously it depends what standard you set when you start out. Price according to that standard and there will be many satisfied customers who just want a 'cheap' record of the day. Judge what the couple are after when you meet them and if it is initially beyond what you can do turn the job down. (most people are reasonable and only get upset if you promise something you can not deliver!)

So many of the pro's on here will try to put you off - It's your business and do what you want; don't be dis-heartened by the replies on here.

I've shot ten Weddings in my film days and everyone was extremely happy with the results; they wanted an 'affordable to them' product that I provided.

Kit I used:
Nikon FE2
Nikkor 50mm f1.8
Tamron Adaptall 2 70-210mm
Metz CT45 flashgun
Tripod
Reflector
A bag to put it in.

If you actually read my post the first thing I said was that the kit he had was suitable.

For my first wedding I used these.

Camera Bodies

Nikon D700 x 2

Lenses

Nikon 24-70 f/2.8
Nikon 50mm f/1.8
Sigma 85mm f/1.4
Tamron 70-200 f/2.8
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro

Lighting

Nikon SB-600
Nikon SB-800

Accessories

Bags
Battery Grips
Spare Batteries
Multiple spare cards
Reflector
Lens pen and lens cloth
 
If starting out as a 'bargain basement' photographer I think it's a case of managing expectations; for budget rates (or freebies) the couple (and their close relatives) need to fully understand that they aren't going to get Norman Parkinson, and perhaps only a set number of shots of the key moments, and anything else is a bonus!

The only wedding I ever did as main photographer was a registry office do for a couple (the groom was a work colleague) who couldn't afford a professional photographer. I didn't want the responsibility in case it went pear-shaped, but the couple said if I didn't do it then it would be down to what their guests could take with their instamatic and 110 snapshot cameras. So I did it as a wedding present for them and luckily the films didn't go missing at the lab and turned out as intended, the results from the Mamiya C330 (with flash where necessary) medium format camera I used looked the part, so everyone was happy.

These days, with modern 'documentary' style wedding photography of pretty much the whole the event, and some people expecting Vogue quality photosets from Beano type budgets and venues, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole as I don't know the job - I'd have to put a lot of time in to learn and get good enough, despite having kit that could do it. Also, aside from not wanting to let the bride and groom down, with social media use being as popular as it is, I know my first bad job could well be my last!
 
Last edited:
The lists that come out of these discussions are always way, waaaay longer than anything I would ever consider. Then I remember it's a fools game taking the advice of pros as - rightly so - everyone has their own way of working and there is no right or wrong answer, well except for not having a contingency plan if things break.

See also, prime vs zoom.
 
The lists that come out of these discussions are always way, waaaay longer than anything I would ever consider. Then I remember it's a fools game taking the advice of pros as - rightly so - everyone has their own way of working and there is no right or wrong answer, well except for not having a contingency plan if things break.

See also, prime vs zoom.

It’s because often when you starting out your bar is “what gear can I get away with” but the more you shoot the bar goes to “what gear can make my life easier and photos better”.
 
:D so many people willing to offer advice on setting up a wedding photography business when all he asked was if his equipment was suitable.

The answer to the actual question is that yes it is suitable although maybe not ideal.

Having 2 camera bodies the same can make it easier to get the files all looking the same and can make it easier to switch between bodies. Lens choice is a matter of your own personal style and how you like to shoot.
No, the question was i'm looking to get into wedding photography is my equipment suitable.

The extra responses were made along the same ilk as....

I'm looking at getting into Formula 1

I own the following equipment:

F1 W09 EQ Power+

I want your opinions on what I am missing and what is most important. Would I need a set of Pirelli Super Soft Tyres? Idea's of what wheelgun to buy etc.

Having that doesn't mean you are going to qualify for a race.
 
Redundancy.

Plain and simple, not that those lenses would be my 1st choice, nor indeed do we know which 35mm it is, so whether it’s a wide for ff or std for the crop, or both.
Ah yes...
My choice is typically the 24-70 and 70-200, backups are 16-35, 85, 150 macro. There's enough redundancy, but also additional capabilities... (2 FF bodies, but annoyingly different in layout).
 
Apart from the other terrible pieces of 'advice' you've given in that post, this is by far the worst:





Yes, nothing apart from screwing up the unrepeatable day of a couple getting married.

And it's 'lose' not 'loose'.

These things happen - to many people think the photographs are the most important part of a wedding; a high proportion of Couples now just let their friends take the pictures and they are happy with that. (The only people I can see think they are THE major part of the day are the jumped up wedding photographers who think nobody else on the planet is capable of doing their job! They charge stupid prices and hence the market is shrinking)

If the Couple tell you that the pictures are the most important part of their wedding then you don't have to take the assignment on.

............and @DemiLion, your previous advice on this thread??
DemiLion said:
Punch the $%^& repeatedly in the face until the blood covering it is the same colour as his $%^*ing coat.

plus pointing out a spelling mistake - well done :)
 
Last edited:
If starting out as a 'bargain basement' photographer I think it's a case of managing expectations; for budget rates (or freebies) the couple (and their close relatives) need to fully understand that they aren't going to get Norman Parkinson, and perhaps only a set number of shots of the key moments, and anything else is a bonus!

The only wedding I ever did as main photographer was a registry office do for a couple (the groom was a work colleague) who couldn't afford a professional photographer. I didn't want the responsibility in case it went pear-shaped, but the couple said if I didn't do it then it would be down to what their guests could take with their instamatic and 110 snapshot cameras. So I did it as a wedding present for them and luckily the films didn't go missing at the lab and turned out as intended, the results from the Mamiya C330 (with flash where necessary) medium format camera I used looked the part, so everyone was happy.

These days, with modern 'documentary' style wedding photography of pretty much the whole the event, and some people expecting Vogue quality photosets from Beano type budgets and venues, I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole as I don't know the job - I'd have to put a lot of time in to learn and get good enough, despite having kit that could do it. Also, aside from not wanting to let the bride and groom down, with social media use being as popular as it is, I know my first bad job could well be my last!

Charge high enough then those people who are on a budget won’t be your client. If your prices are low then it’s likely everything else on the wedding is on the lower end scale.

But your photos should reflect the quality, I’ve been told I am too cheap by my clients years later!
 
There is nothing wrong with being cheap and competitive!

Budget airlines have done well from this business model. Offer a different service at a lower price point.

It's all about managing expectations of the Couple.

The market will decide if you are good enough.

Look through the replies on this thread and see how many of the pros are encouraging you to give it a go?
 
These things happen - to many people think the photographs are the most important part of a wedding; a high proportion of Couples now just let their friends take the pictures and they are happy with that. (The only people I can see think they are THE major part of the day are the jumped up wedding photographers who think nobody else on the planet is capable of doing their job! They charge stupid prices and hence the market is shrinking)

I happen to believe (seemingly unlike you) that photography, when offered as a product, should be delivered with care and be of a passable quality.

I'm not a prima donna and accept that the market has various price points, however the advice that 'it doesn't matter as you have a regular job' is fatuous to say the least.
Are you aware that the sector of the market most likely to sue/take legal action for breach of contract (normally poor quality photos) is the cheaper end?

A wedding is a wedding, not a photoshoot. However to provide passable quality images of a wedding you need a certain amount of experience. The best advice on here so far is the recommendation to go and second shoot for a season or two.

You seem to have something against wedding photographers. Maybe you are the wrong person to be handing out advice?



.
...........and @DemiLion, your previous advice on this thread??

I consider that to be fairly accurate given what a pain in the bum most toastmasters are.


plus pointing out a spelling mistake - well done :)

It shows lack of attention to detail.
 
There is nothing wrong with being cheap and competitive!

Budget airlines have done well from this business model. Offer a different service at a lower price point.

It's all about managing expectations of the Couple.

The market will decide if you are good enough.

Look through the replies on this thread and see how many of the pros are encouraging you to give it a go?

TBF the difference between your opinion and the pros is experience and hindsight.

There always has been and there always will be cheap wedding photographers. But... unlike budget airlines, it’s rarely a sustainable business model. So advising someone to approach wedding photography on the cheap is plain old stupid advice.

They will soon realise that the return isn’t worth the effort and either:
  • Find a way to up their product to justify increasing their prices
  • Or just give up.
But there’ll be a queue of wannabe photographers to take their place, which is fine for you but probably less use for those photographers or the customers they shot when their mojo had gone. We’ve seen plenty come and go :) and I wouldn’t want the OP to be one of them.

So the difference between you and I is that I’d like the OP to succeed, but like every other uninformed forum gobs***e you think that our blunt advice is to do the opposite.
You haven’t got a clue how many people the likes of Dave, Raymond etc have helped, your cynical goggles can’t see the wood for the trees, doesn’t stop you offering an ill informed opinion though. :thinking:

There’s hundreds of ways of shooting a wedding, but running a successful business is a bit more of a limited set of options.

Meanwhile... the OP left this thread having had several people tell him his gear was enough. :D
 
My take on prices is that it doesn't matter if you pay me £1 or £10,000, I work just as long, just as hard. The point is I want to do it properly so I don't want to be one of those photographers who shoots 100 weddings a year, but I rather shoot 20 weddings a year and earn the same what 100 weddings can do. Now the question is how do you get there, you can go out and ask for thousands from day 1 with no portfolio, nothing to stop you, but if you don't deliver for their expectation then you won't get another job. The last point is important, another job.

I got this email last week out of the blue, delivered the photos a year ago.

UtAYwyg.png
 
TBF the difference between your opinion and the pros is experience and hindsight.

There always has been and there always will be cheap wedding photographers. But... unlike budget airlines, it’s rarely a sustainable business model. So advising someone to approach wedding photography on the cheap is plain old stupid advice.

They will soon realise that the return isn’t worth the effort and either:
  • Find a way to up their product to justify increasing their prices
  • Or just give up.
But there’ll be a queue of wannabe photographers to take their place, which is fine for you but probably less use for those photographers or the customers they shot when their mojo had gone. We’ve seen plenty come and go :) and I wouldn’t want the OP to be one of them.

So the difference between you and I is that I’d like the OP to succeed, but like every other uninformed forum gobs***e you think that our blunt advice is to do the opposite.
You haven’t got a clue how many people the likes of Dave, Raymond etc have helped, your cynical goggles can’t see the wood for the trees, doesn’t stop you offering an ill informed opinion though. :thinking:

There’s hundreds of ways of shooting a wedding, but running a successful business is a bit more of a limited set of options.

Meanwhile... the OP left this thread having had several people tell him his gear was enough. :D

Get a grip Phil - you need to step outside, realise that in the grand scheme of things your chosen proffespro isn't life changing to anyone, most don't make careers from professions and if they come and go that's fine but at least encourage people to have a go. We all start somewhere.
Now stop being so rude to people that have a different viewpoint to you - you act like a playground bully!
 
Aaaaaahhhhhh. The voice of the photographic lowest common denominator.
 
Get a grip Phil - you need to step outside, realise that in the grand scheme of things your chosen proffespro isn't life changing to anyone, most don't make careers from professions and if they come and go that's fine but at least encourage people to have a go. We all start somewhere.
Now stop being so rude to people that have a different viewpoint to you - you act like a playground bully!
I’m not discouraging anyone, that’s your assumption and your clear prejudice.

Again, what every wedding photographer in this thread has done is positive, realistic and supportive.

You OTOH have been unrealistic, rude and disparaging. A classic case of once more believing your opinion should prevail when it’s the most ill informed in the thread.
 
Get a grip Phil - you need to step outside, realise that in the grand scheme of things your chosen proffespro isn't life changing to anyone, most don't make careers from professions and if they come and go that's fine but at least encourage people to have a go. We all start somewhere.
Now stop being so rude to people that have a different viewpoint to you - you act like a playground bully!

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, except our opinion is one who has gone out and done it. It’s not an opinion of a keyboard warrior and armchair expert.

We are telling you the truth, it’s not meant to scare you, it's meant to ground you and prepare you. If you think what we've said is something you can do and confident that you can deliver, go for it, have a go as you put it. I just hope you don't end up on the Daily Mail as one of those wedding photographers, you know the ones I am talking about.
 
It’s because often when you starting out your bar is “what gear can I get away with” but the more you shoot the bar goes to “what gear can make my life easier and photos better”.

I think I've gone the opposite way and I've also seen this quite a bit with others. Start in full paranoia mode with a bag full of gear weighing you down, then as you grow more confident (and your back gets worse) really strip that down to a more manageable core.

I've gone from zooms to the classic 35/85 combo to shooting almost entire weddings with a 50. I think my bag is half the weight compared to wedding number one but I actually have more relevent/useful redundancy now and faster/higher quality glass.

Again it completely depends on the photographer though, i.e.some will have a macro in the bag solely for a still life ring shot, others might shoot them perfectly well with their standard gear on the B&Gs hand, or not feel the need to shoot them at all (I haven't for months).
 
I think I've gone the opposite way and I've also seen this quite a bit with others. Start in full paranoia mode with a bag full of gear weighing you down, then as you grow more confident (and your back gets worse) really strip that down to a more manageable core.

I've gone from zooms to the classic 35/85 combo to shooting almost entire weddings with a 50. I think my bag is half the weight compared to wedding number one but I actually have more relevent/useful redundancy now and faster/higher quality glass.

Again it completely depends on the photographer though, i.e.some will have a macro in the bag solely for a still life ring shot, others might shoot them perfectly well with their standard gear on the B&Gs hand, or not feel the need to shoot them at all (I haven't for months).

I am not just talking about what you carry but more what you have.

In the morning when I arrive at a place, I generally walk in with a 35/50/85. But I would normally like to take a wide shot with a ultra wide, depend on the room, it may be the 16mm end of my 16-35 or the 20mm or just the 24mm. Then put it back in the car.

For illustration, this is from the same wedding.

35mm

kBQqqyO.jpg


50mm

XLPwjfI.jpg


85mm

2hceLrX.jpg


The handful of wider angle of the room

JZGpF2P.jpg


That generally will do me until wedding breakfast where I break out the 100 macro for 1 photo. The wide angle will come out again for the shot of the grounds

100L Macro

4p8Fg62.jpg


24mm

I6VzwYL.jpg
 
Last edited:
Then in the evening I break out the 20 or 24mm because dance floor are tight spaces and the 50 and 85 goes in the car.

ghZlR6c.jpg


8pMlaHB.jpg


However, the more gear means I can do this…

45mm TSE, I wanted a dead straight facade of the building, and I had time to kill as I arrived early and just because i can.

YjJsBpm.jpg


I broke out the 135mm because the bride asked me to get a photo of the bull in the grounds and I didn't want to get too close !

HDMYs2I.jpg


But as you can see the stats, 35/85 all day long.

lDXN3IQ.png


You learn when you need what, even though I have more gear, I don't technically carry a lot around at any one time.

But the last wedding I did, I used the 50mm a lot more, because the spaces were righter so 85mm didn't work as well.

Z63QGTF.png
 
Last edited:
I think the above two posts packed with classy photos (and thats the key here that the market Raymond seems to go for is the classy well planned, well budgeted wedding) illustrate the point of this thread. If you want a set of photos DELIVERED that every one you can ponder over and absorb the whole frame then you're going to be looking at higher end prices because the experience of the photographer to deliver time after time.

If you want a Facebook album of 500 photos that you flick through in less than a second then yes go for the less accomplished photographer or collate the iphone photos from friends.

As has been mentioned you get one chance at a wedding and whilst you may go on to the next one or pursue other avenues if it doesn't work out there is the B&G to consider if they want a lasting memory record of their special day.
 
Never done a wedding as a prime but I have done a few christenings, and they were done with a film camera OM1n.

Know your equipment, really know your equipment.
One off occasion, anything fails, be sure to have a backup or you're rep is toast.
Learn what lenses you need from someone who has done it before.
It's not just the lenses, it's the guiding people, knowing whats next and the whole organizing of the wedding.
It's not a job I want to get into.
 
Back
Top