Going to my first wedding the the new 5d3

[KKCFamilyman]

I am going to a wedding where all my family will be in. I am not the pro here but my family expects me to get decent shots. I am bringing my 5d3 with 24-105 to travel light with the 600ex. I was thinking using AV starting with f4 and auto iso up to 3200. Any other suggestions?

 

[Drizzt321]

I am going to a wedding where all my family will be in. I am not the pro here but my family expects me to get decent shots. I am bringing my 5d3 with 24-105 to travel light with the 600ex. I was thinking using AV starting with f4 and auto iso up to 3200. Any other suggestions?

Outdoors, you can start at higher f-stop (if there's enough light). In terms of where to start indoors, if you're using the 600EX as either either direct or bounce, you should take a couple of test shots to dial in the ISO (I wouldn't go directly to 3200), shutter (for the ambient light), and f-stop. You should also dial in the 600EX with FEB (flash exposure balance). Once you have that set, you can pretty easily dial in the EV as the night goes on.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, choose what AF mode you are comfortable with, although I would recommend not using all of the points, since you never know which point it'll grab. I've found zone is quite handy, or 1+8. Easy to move where you want the focus to be around the points, and gives it an opportunity to find focus with more than just a single point.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

I went to rehearsal and found the church is low light and huge. The alter is bright with lots of white. My flash left something to be desired with the size of the room and I cannot shoot over 1/200 when they are walking by fast. I finally started bouncing it off the floor. I was able to get pretty decent shots with iso 5000 and no flash. My problem is I don't know where to get it to meter from because of my mixed results. I will post when I get a chance. I will try zone tommorrow and auto iso used iso 400 and over exposed my shot.

 

[robbymack]

If its truly that dark maybe time to consider taking your 70-200 2.8 as well. With the 5d3 you should be safe up to iso 12k and since this is for family use probably up to 25k as well. Probably don't need to worry about the flash then.

 

[DCM1024]

I understand you're doing this for family, so perhaps it won't matter but take backup lenses and body if possible. I had a two day old 5d2 fail at a wedding this June. Fortunately I had my 7d so I packed up the 5d and kept shooting. The bride never knew anything was wrong.

 

[CanonFanBoy]

I went to rehearsal and found the church is low light and huge. The alter is bright with lots of white. My flash left something to be desired with the size of the room and I cannot shoot over 1/200 when they are walking by fast. I finally started bouncing it off the floor. I was able to get pretty decent shots with iso 5000 and no flash. My problem is I don't know where to get it to meter from because of my mixed results. I will post when I get a chance. I will try zone tommorrow and auto iso used iso 400 and over exposed my shot.

Hi KKCFamilyman,
Just my few cents .... photography is all about controlling, playing and painting with lights. To be good, one have to understand the Quality, Directivity and Colour of lights and use them well to create that moment or tell that story you have in mind! If you know all these elements well, you will be surprised to find some of the best weddings or any photography around are taken with natural lightnings or sometimes co-mixed artificial with natural lightnings together to create that story or moment ... whether in creating a dramatic shot with highlights or creating a mood shot with shadows! All the Shutter Speed, Aperture, ISO and Flash Controls are just the elements you mix and match to create your "photo-paintings"! Perhaps these will give you some inspirations .... http://www.jasminestarblog.com/index.cfm?catID=2&weddings ... Good luck and Have Lots of Fun

 

[Chris Geiger]

The 5D3 works very well at iso 6400. Just shoot raw and process the noise out later in photoshop or lightroom. Direct flash will kill most photos you get and it will disable the auto iso fuction in the camera (setting it at iso 400 if the flash is pointed forward). I normally shoot full manual in churches. For dark churches go with 6400 iso, and a speed of 100. If you shoot off angle you will see more blur but if you shoot strait on you see very little, maybe a bit in the hands. Fast glass like an 85 1.4 would help a lot.

Get away from the auto settings and learn to shoot in manual. Get to the church early and shoot and adjust settings until you get a good look in camera.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

Thanks everyone. I had a hard time with the flash and balancing fec with my iso to keep a good shutter speed. Some were terrible. Also when they where walking down the aisle I found the light coming in from the windows screwed with my exposure I tried partial center and eval metering. I even tried HP and still some were ok and some were bad but I was fighting the paid photographer for shots. Surprisingly she shot all night with some Uwa that looked like a fish eye by tamron on a Nikon d7000 she just shot without looking like it was a weapon. Am I trying too hard is that not what composition requires you to actually look thru the viewfinder? Anyway I will post a few pics to get anyone's opinion.

 

[picturesbyme]

...I even tried HP and still some were ok and some were bad but I was fighting the paid photographer for shots...

I thought you were there to shoot the wedding... (?)

She prob. did what Gene Ho shows here: youtu.be/e-WxCoDewbY
I wonder how those turned out.. (saw Gene's shots and those are awesome but haven't seen others doing it..)

 

[PeterJ]

Surprisingly she shot all night with some Uwa that looked like a fish eye by tamron on a Nikon d7000 she just shot without looking like it was a weapon.

I saw a similar thing a while back at a wedding, she was using what looked like a 60D and an UWA I couldn't identify. For pictures of couples she was shooting from really close and I thought the examples I saw on the bride's Facebook page made her look a bit fat even though she's quite slim. Sort of the result I would have expected using a UWA :. She probably agreed, I noticed about 80% of the photos she posted were mine even though part of the deal was a CD she was allowed to post online.

 

[Chris Geiger]

If you and the paid photographer are that close, maybe you should sit down or shoot somewhere else? You were invited as a guest. The paid photographer is there to shoot the wedding.

There are many ways to handle sun coming through the glass. Often it is setting your camera for the light or the shadow. Sometimes I will set one body for the sun coming through the windows and the other body for the rest of the walk. Other times I may skip part of the walk. Most of the time I find using the auto settings will comprimise one or both lighting enviorments. It is better to get one outstanding photos of her walking down the isle than 10 so-so images. I always shoot the whole walk but I think ahead and setup each camera body for one part of the walk. I use the 70-200 when she starts out and the 24-70 as she gets closer.

I often shoot without looking through the view finder. I do both ground shots and overhead shots this way. The shot below was taken this weekend with the camera sitting on the floor. I set the focus point using liveview and then pressed the shutter release.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

Here is my son walking down the aisle. I do realize that the picture could be aligned better vertically but either way its for an example of the lighting I struggled with. She was right behind me here but I wanted pics since my whole family was in it.

 

[KKCFamilyman]

My Daughter again was difficult.

 

[nightbreath]

Here is my son walking down the aisle. I do realize that the picture could be aligned better vertically but either way its for an example of the lighting I struggled with. She was right behind me here but I wanted pics since my whole family was in it.

This shot is very good. Don't think that vertical alignment will do better job here, because you'll loose the dynamic feeling that makes it more than just a snapshot.

P.S. For better composition from my point of view it would be great to have some space where the boy is going to put his leg

 

[EYEONE]

The one of your son is a great shot. I agree that it needs to be straightened up. But, I'm extremely picky about alignment (maybe too much so). I did an engagement shoot this weekend where the couple was sitting on a bench that was not level compared to the brick wall behind them. It was a nightmare for me.

I also agree with the above that more floor below your son's foot would be better. Just for future reference.

Also, don't be afraid to crank that 5D3 up to ISO 6400. The amount of detail it retains in RAW is amazing. I wouldn't even hesitate too much going to 12,800. If you nail focus and exposure it is still usable.

 

[Dylan777]

ADD the 70-200 f2.8 IS II with you.

 

[unfocused]

If you and the paid photographer are that close, maybe you should sit down or shoot somewhere else? You were invited as a guest. The paid photographer is there to shoot the wedding.

I know this particular event is over and the point is now moot, but I have to echo this sentiment. When a paid photographer is shooting an event, they are on the job. I don't allow anyone to come into my office during the day, stand over my shoulder and type on my computer.

I feel very strongly that we should not be interfering with the work of a paid photographer. It's inconsiderate. At the very least, you should visit with the photographer beforehand and tell them what your purpose and intent is and make some ground rules. For example, staged events like the cutting of the cake, first dance, etc., most wedding photographers expect that family members will also be taking pictures. But, during the actual ceremony when the paid photographer absolutely must capture fleeting moments, is not the time for a family member to be getting in the way.

Just my two cents.

 

[Chris Geiger]

I see You shot auto. Everything worked great for the first shot of your son. But in the second shot the iso was droped from 6400 to 2500. When the camera saw the direct light from the windows and thought it had too much light and closed down. It would have better to blow out the window light so your daughters face was properly exposed.

I would have set your camera (in manual) for the position your son was at. Keep the camera in manual, and shoot each person as they pass that point.

 

[sleepnever]

Last year my sister-in-law got married and she had an official photographer. I was asked to take candid photos the photographer wasn't getting (I had a T2i, 28-135mm and no ext flash). We talked the prior evening at the rehearsal dinner about my intentions and I said I would not be in her way. I was just going to roam. She was totally OK with this and said she might need my help at some point as her assistant wasn't going to make it. Sweet!

During the ceremony and important parts, I stayed in the back and around the edges. She had the gear, the know how and it was her job to get those important shots. If I had some better lenses, I could have captured some angles she forgot but oh well.

My youngest sister-in-law is getting married next year and asked me to be THE photographer. I declined, but I'm happy to do what I did above, especially now that I have my new 5Dmk3 and 24-70L mkI. =)

Edit: The shot of your son is great. If you shot RAW, you can probably bring up the shadows of your daughter a little. One thing people forget about is being paid to take the shot or just taking the shot. Candid photos can come out just as good or better sometimes than the ones that were heavily thought through.

 

[qwerty0]

I even tried HP and still some were ok and some were bad but I was fighting the paid photographer for shots. Surprisingly she shot all night with some Uwa that looked like a fish eye by tamron on a Nikon d7000 she just shot without looking like it was a weapon. Am I trying too hard is that not what composition requires you to actually look thru the viewfinder?

It's probably just a misunderstanding of your words but I am assuming you just mean that the paid photog was getting in your shots and not the other way around right? You weren't actually getting in the paid photographer's way? Because if you were - you were screwing with someones living for no good reason. If you mess up your pride is hurt and you write on an internet forum. If they mess up it costs them money / reputation / future income. You don't have to be impressed by them or even their photography. It's just courtesy.