Weddings with the D800 as main ( real world experience )

P

PeteStewardson

Messages
2,481
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
Before I start yes I know I can go and find many examples of top celeb togs using a D800 at weddings, but most of them use a D4 D800 combo so difficult to gauge what I'm after.

OK so I've not shot a weeding for over a year, in fact a bit longer. I took my foot off the gas and did no marketing as we were planning a second child, so I let my business slide. I know these things are all about momentum so I'm probably screwed getting back up to speed but I've formed a plan to work on. Now my daughter is 9m old I'm looking to start up the business again and hopefully start shooting more weddings, so realistically next year being the main start unless I get late bookings sooner.

Right now I have a D3 and D700 + top Nikon glass. As a gift to myself to get myself a kick up the backside I've been considering selling the D3 and D700 and getting a D800. I want to do a bit of studio photography as personal work and I loved the resolution of the D3x when I tried one out. So my plan was to get a D800, and then a second body when I need one ( hire at first if needs be but it could take a while to get back up and running business wise. ) I'd love to go for a D4 to be honest as I love my D3, but funds wouldn't allow that now.

So my question is, how is a D800 as a main camera at weddings? I only carry one body on me and swap lenses as I found carrying two bodies was distracting me. Low light wise, if I use a D800 at similar ISO to the D700/D3 but then down sample will I notice extra noise? Mostly for low light I'd get away easily downsampling as these are rarely the image couples want cropping and blowing up to large prints.

Anyone here currently or previously used a D800 as a main camera at weddings and have any experience to chip in?

Pete
 
while not being a pro, i did take my D800 to my sisters wedding last year. I had a 35-70 2.8 and a 135mm DC but i kept the zoom on all day in the end. It worked flawlessly inside a dim church and throughout the day in all sorts of conditions. Nothing was printed out bigger than 10x8 but i couldnt see any noise on any of them.
 
I shot my sister's wedding last year too, using only a D800 and a couple of lenses. I was allowed to use flash in church, but took many shots without also, just using ambient lighting. Not a bother to it. Good glass, of course, helps a lot. I mostly used the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. I shot 2 christenings too, where I wasn't allowed use flash, and in darker churches. I felt comfortable enough shooting at ISO 2000 - 4000, I don't know any churches where you'd require more.
 
Ryan is right. I do use two for weddings. I've never found them wanting in low light and I'm more then happy with them. I love the DR and the image quality. I wouldn't want to swap them for another DSLR at a wedding. That said, there are a couple of issues with them.

1. File size. Its not a major issue for me (though it is for some I know). A typical wedding (with Album designs etc) comes in around 4.5gb with a pair of D3S's, with a pair of d800's its nearer 15gb. For me anyway. Thats after I've delivered the album and cleaned up the wedding - I always delete rejects and after everything is finished convert RAW to lossy DNG for long term storage.

2. Output file size, when I work on my own I tend to restrict JPEGS for wedding couples to 3600 pxls and 90% quality. This seems to give a file size of around 10mb jpeg which most printers can deal with. The unrestricted size 100% quality jpegs can be 35-40mb which they can't. This seems a bit of a waste.When I work with a second who is using a lesser camera ;) (joke before anyone bites my head off) I need to add a step to my workflow to get the file sizes roughly matching. Not always an issue but can be.

I don't find processing times with the files an issue. I use a reasonably high end iMac to process but nothing unusual. Once previews are generated in LR its as quick as anything else.

Having said all that, I do think it needs some care to get the best at weddings. Very good glass and I've increased my minimum shutter speed from 1/80 to 1/160 regardless of focal length. I also think its a flawless performer in the studio and for boudoir work. I would say consider carefully for weddings if it is really right for you, for studio and boudoir I'd just say go for it. I love it for commercial stuff to. I followed a bus home at lunchtime which had one of my photos used for the advert on the back. It was a stupidly good feeling ;)
 
Hi, Up until early last year we were shooting weddings and a lot of our studio work on medium format. We then bought several D800 units and now use them exclusively on weddings. The only thing we tend to miss is the high flash sync that we could use with medium format (fill in flash etc). Other than that we have no regrets, the image quality is as good as anything we have seen in that format and is very close to medium format quality. We have had no problems with low light images and have pushed the ISO up quite a bit and still obtain excellent images.

When shooting studio work that does not require large format images it is not uncommon for us to use a D800 and we are very satisfied with the results produced.

Hope this helps.
 
I shoot weddings with a D800 and D3S. Most of the time I use the D800.

You'll be fine. Apart from the only carrying one body bit.
 
Thanks for the replies. Glass isn't an issue, I already use Nikon 2.8/1.4 lenses. The only thing lens wise I was thinking was my wide angle Tokina may not be the best, and I am half tempted to trade the 85/1.4 for the new AFS version.

File sizes don't worry me, I just need bigger memory cards and maybe change to deleting the raw rejects as I don't currently. I shoot my D3 down to 1/40 but the D700 I don't seem to consistently be able to do the same which worries me a little with the D800. I was using my D3 as the main camera, and the dual slots for backup is a great safety net which the D700 doesn't have. As with most I think if there was a D800 with the D4 sensor I'd be all over it, in fact I'd just get the D4 if I thought I could justify the spend but it's too much cash right now.
 
icecavern said:
Why do you say that about carrying one body?
Click to expand...

Many people will suggest it's courageous to shoot a non repeatable event with one piece of equipment.

Personally, I've had total camera failures on 3 separate occasions. Not the D800 so far (though its SD slot did break just before a very heavy week so I had to choose whether to use another camera or shoot on one card.)
 
Ah a slight misunderstanding :) I always have a backup body etc, I just don't carry it on me. It's always close by in case I need it though. I found my work was better when I wasn't lugging two cameras but I'd never shoot one without backup kit.
 
icecavern said:
Thanks for the replies. Glass isn't an issue, I already use Nikon 2.8/1.4 lenses. The only thing lens wise I was thinking was my wide angle Tokina may not be the best, and I am half tempted to trade the 85/1.4 for the new AFS version.

File sizes don't worry me, I just need bigger memory cards and maybe change to deleting the raw rejects as I don't currently. I shoot my D3 down to 1/40 but the D700 I don't seem to consistently be able to do the same which worries me a little with the D800. I was using my D3 as the main camera, and the dual slots for backup is a great safety net which the D700 doesn't have. As with most I think if there was a D800 with the D4 sensor I'd be all over it, in fact I'd just get the D4 if I thought I could justify the spend but it's too much cash right now.
Click to expand...

The Nikon Df uses the D4 sensor.
 
Laudrup said:
The Nikon Df uses the D4 sensor.
Click to expand...

Indeed it does, and I will have a hold of one, but I suspect the controls wont suit me and I think it may be uncomfortable for me to hold for any length of time.

wave01 said:
quick question whats wrong with what you have now
Click to expand...

Absolutely nothing at all. This isn't about needing to upgrade, it's about buying myself a new bit of kit as a kick start for me getting back up to speed.
 
I sold one of my D3s's a while back and picked up a D800. Long story short I hated the combo, nothing wrong with the D800, its a great camera, but I preferred the ergonomics and the files the D3s produced. I'm now back to shooting just with D3s's (I have three and love em). With the D4s on its way I'm sure there will be plenty of D3s around FS soon. Personally I don't see the DF as a professional wedding camera, shooting with single SD memory card is just asking for trouble IMHO. I shoot 50-60 weddings per year btw, so this is real world experience!
 
Last edited:
When you say you prefered the files the D3s produced what do you mean by that?

I understand the ergonomics of the D3s, I much prefer my D3 over the D700, but a D4 is just too much outlay right now.
 
Sorry...

But are you crazy???

Getting rid of a D700 and D3 to shoot with one (very similar) body???

I'm no expert but I'd bet money on better covering a wedding with 2 bodies (even if they were D90's!) than one.

You have two very good bodies there, I'm baffled as to what you'll gain to justify getting rid...
 
icecavern said:
When you say you prefered the files the D3s produced what do you mean by that?

I understand the ergonomics of the D3s, I much prefer my D3 over the D700, but a D4 is just too much outlay right now.
Click to expand...

The files from the D3s are obviously easier to work with due to the size, you simply don't need 36mp for weddings, but I just preferred the tones mainly I think, especially when shooting in difficult low light situations with mixed light sources. I'm sure it is just the way I was processing the RAW files, but getting the D800 files to look how I wanted them to took a lot more effort than the D3s. The D3s also seemed to be a lot more forgiving in terms of camera shake/sharpness that can sometimes happen when you are trying to grab a shot you weren't expecting. IMHO the D800 is the perfect studio and landscape camera, it certainly wasn't right for me and weddings. When I was thinking about getting a D800 for weddings Cliff Mautner (who knows a thing or two) told me not to do it, D800 not as suited to weddings as a D3s. I ignored his advice only to find he was right.

As Phil mentions above, don't go down to one body for weddings, that would be a mistake. I shot a mix or D3s and D3 for a while and it worked perfectly, D3s for longer lenses where I could push the ISO to get the higher shutter speeds, D3 for the wider stuff where 1/60 - 1/80th was not an issue.
 
Last edited:
psenior1 said:
As Phil mentions above, don't go down to one body for weddings, that would be a mistake. I shot a mix or D3s and D3 for a while and it worked perfectly, D3s for longer lenses where I could push the ISO to get the higher shutter speeds, D3 for the wider stuff where 1/60 - 1/80th was not an issue.
Click to expand...

I have never had an issue shooting with one body, changing lenses doesn't take much longer than moving from one body to another and it is much easier to work without a second camera hanging from my body.

I'm not saying I don't have a backup, but I have never felt carrying one body held me back.
 
icecavern said:
I have never had an issue shooting with one body, changing lenses doesn't take much longer than moving from one body to another and it is much easier to work without a second camera hanging from my body.

I'm not saying I don't have a backup, but I have never felt carrying one body held me back.
Click to expand...
Here's a scenario...

You're up close and personal with the B&G with your 24-70 and you notice in the 3rd row, a parent is pointing to them showing her 2 year old where to look. This shot requires a 70-200mm or similar.

You just missed it.

Changed lens to the 70-200mm? - not only did you miss it, but now you missed the moment the B&G look at each other and give that perfect smile because your 70-200 is too close to capture it how you wanted to frame it.

Personally, if I was shooting weddings all the time, I would have 3 bodies - not because I think one will give up on me, but for the scenario and reason above.
 
icecavern said:
I have never had an issue shooting with one body, changing lenses doesn't take much longer than moving from one body to another and it is much easier to work without a second camera hanging from my body.

I'm not saying I don't have a backup, but I have never felt carrying one body held me back.
Click to expand...

whatever works for you and how you shoot. Personally I like to have two bodies with me, one that has either 70-200 or 85, and the other with either a fast, wide prime or 14-24 if space is tight. Everything covered and no having to switch lenses halfway through a ceremony.
 
Last edited:
OK here's a counter scenario.

You're at the brides home before the ceremony. You have your body with 70-200mm on your shoulder, you see another shot and turn to grab that, knocking the badly placed glass of red wine over with the 70-200, covering your brides dress in red wine. Wedding ruined.

Or as has actually happened to me before I started shooting with one body.

I'm walking through some trees following the B&G to get a shot in just the spot I want light wise. I get that shot but then get the strap of my second camera caught on a low branch. As I untangled it I missed a shot of the bride and groom in an embrace and kiss that could not have been recreated emotionally afterwards. I missed it.

We could go around this argument all day long and neither of us would agree. Some photographers carry two cameras, others one. There's no right or wrong way about this, just different styles. So could we get back to the original point of the thread please :)
 
talking about certain scenarios is pointless, there will always be good and bad to everyway of shooting. If there was a perfect solution everyone would be doing it.

Back to the question at hand, why don't you see if you can rent/borrow/try a D800 and see how it goes? I'd also consider a D610.
 
Phil Young said:
Here's a scenario...

You're up close and personal with the B&G with your 24-70 and you notice in the 3rd row, a parent is pointing to them showing her 2 year old where to look. This shot requires a 70-200mm or similar.
Click to expand...

Or a LOAD of pixels in your 24-70 camera so you can crop. Oh.
 
icecavern said:
OK here's a counter scenario.

You're at the brides home before the ceremony. You have your body with 70-200mm on your shoulder, you see another shot and turn to grab that, knocking the badly placed glass of red wine over with the 70-200, covering your brides dress in red wine. Wedding ruined.

Or as has actually happened to me before I started shooting with one body.

I'm walking through some trees following the B&G to get a shot in just the spot I want light wise. I get that shot but then get the strap of my second camera caught on a low branch. As I untangled it I missed a shot of the bride and groom in an embrace and kiss that could not have been recreated emotionally afterwards. I missed it.

We could go around this argument all day long and neither of us would agree. Some photographers carry two cameras, others one. There's no right or wrong way about this, just different styles. So could we get back to the original point of the thread please :)
Click to expand...
Is that a joke? Is anyone actually that clumsy???

It's a very relative point to the thread because when you put it simply: the op is thinking of dropping 2 bodies for 1. Forget the technicalities of what the bodies can do, that's the backbone of the thread. This is a very big mistake - unless he's clumsy with his 70-200mm that is ;)
 
icecavern said:
Low light wise, if I use a D800 at similar ISO to the D700/D3 but then down sample will I notice extra noise? Mostly for low light I'd get away easily downsampling as these are rarely the image couples want cropping and blowing up to large prints.
Click to expand...

No, in fact the noise level and everything else would be a little better than the D700/D3 at any ISO as long as you're not cropping and you are printing "at the same size."

But for your use that kind of makes recording such huge files kind of pointless... a lot of hassles/effort/expense for relatively minor gains.
 
Last edited:
psenior1 said:
can open, worms everywhere!
Click to expand...

I know. I was bored with writing HTML ;)

Also, kid shots are cute and all that, but they are 10 a penny (obviously not when I'm selling them). I wouldn't lose sleep if I missed something like that. Odds are cousin Bob got it on his Nokia. I'll wait until the ice cream van comes.
 
Phil Young said:
Is that a joke? Is anyone actually that clumsy???

It's a very relative point to the thread because when you put it simply: the op is thinking of dropping 2 bodies for 1. Forget the technicalities of what the bodies can do, that's the backbone of the thread. This is a very big mistake - unless he's clumsy with his 70-200mm that is ;)
Click to expand...

This is going off topic but where did I say I was dropping from 2 bodies to 1? For a year of shooting weddings I carried one, so I've already made that decision and as I said, it hasn't held me back, I can only think of one shot that I've missed and wished for a different lens on the camera, and to be honest I can live with that for the lowered restriction I have carrying two.

Oh and as for being that clumsy, not every bride prep room has room. It's not unusal to be cramming through between the end of a bed and a dresser with little room to move and people moving stuff around everywhere.
 
Last edited:
Phil Young said:
Here:
Click to expand...

And then you stopped reading? It was only one sentence further that I also said "So my plan was to get a D800, and then a second body when I need one ( hire at first if needs be but it could take a while to get back up and running business wise. )"

And the second body I was talking about was a backup, not a second camera to carry at all times which is what you are meaning by having 2 cameras.
 
Last edited:
Confused as to how this seems to be going downhill now..... I thought the op wanted real world experiences, not a discussion on the benefits or otherwise shooting with 1 or 2 bodies?????
 
boyfalldown said:
Confused as to how this seems to be going downhill now..... I thought the op wanted real world experiences, not a discussion on the benefits or otherwise shooting with 1 or 2 bodies?????
Click to expand...

Despite the the downhill-ness of the thread, I have had a couple of useful replies ( yours included ). It is sad that the thread has gone downhill though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top