What to buy as a wedding kit?

Julesie

Hi guys, I am looking to get into wedding photography. I understand the importance of being capable of shooting weddings before committing to a couple to record their big day so I'm not looking to start charging anyone yet, but I figure I may as well have at least some of the correct kit as I build up my experience levels.

Frankly my current gear will not cut it..

Nikon D40x
Nikon 18 - 55mm f/3.5 - 5.6
Nikon 55 - 200mm f/4.6 - 6.5

I am willing to invest some money in this to get a proper level of equipment but obviously there is a balance to be struck between cost and performance. I'm in the states at the moment and will be in New York this weekend. I'm hoping to visit B&H, J&R and Adorama and possibly make some purchases.

My current thinking is to buy the following

Nikon D90 (refurbished) - $799
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 - $135
Nikon 80 - 200mm f/2.8 - $1099

I would also need to get a flash possibly a Nikon SB600 but not sure if I may be able to get away with a Sigma branded one.

So, anyhoo, what do you think about the above elements. Are obvious others I would need? Anything you would change? Something similar I could spend more or less money on?

Any advice is much appreciated.

melekalikimaka

24-70 2.8

sb 900

85mm 1.4

30mm 1.8

d700 body

back up, maybe a d90

for starts

MagicMarker

I'd go for a 50 1.4 over the 1.8.

And you'll need something a little wider imo.

Julesie

melekalikimaka wrote: »

24-70 2.8

sb 900

85mm 1.4

30mm 1.8

d700 body

back up, maybe a d90

for starts

Mele, while I don't doubt that all of that is good kit is a D700 really necessary. I understand it is a FX sensor but it is also 3 times the price of the D90, which I think can be a capable camera if it is teamed with good glass.

Dodgykeeper

There is no need for a d700, or indeed an sb900, I know ppl shooting weddings with d200.

I agree with Mele re the glass but as you said you need to balance cost v performance. (Personally I would go d300 over d90)

Nforce

melekalikimaka wrote: »

24-70 2.8

sb 900

85mm 1.4

30mm 1.8

d700 body

back up, maybe a d90

for starts

Initially, would you really need a full frame camera to capture a wedding? Maybe it'd be handy to have down the line when funds allow, but not a necessity when starting out?
I'm planning on doing a wedding in September (not paid work...only as a favour). My equipment for the day will be a nikon D300 (with spare cards/batteries,as backup a D80, nikon 50mm f1.8,nikon 80-200mm f2.8,Sigma 28-70mm f2.8 and a nikon SB600 (also with a bunch of spare batteries).
I don't plan on making any prints...pics will be on a DVD, though I may have a photobook done up.

Slidinginfinity

There was a thread started a little while back. Started by one of our resident professionals. Lightly discussing what he brings for a wedding shoot (with photos).

Here is the thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055623558

MagicMarker

Here's a few shots I took at my brothers wedding.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/danielbyrne/sets/72157610646687184/

AFAIC the most important thing is fast glass and as little noise as possible. My shots were taken with a 400D and 50 1.8. Although I'm sure there's a couple in there that were with the kit lens, but I found the reception incredible hard in terms of light, so they all look rather soft.

Personally, if I wanted to get into wedding photography seriously, then I'd invest in top quality gear.

Julesie

Thanks for the input so far guys.

Would adding a 24 - 70 f/2.8 give me the extra width I need, or is it something else I require?

eas

Hi Julesie,

It's your ability as a photographer that you should be relying on mostly, not the equipment. Not to say that good kit isn't important, but knowing how to use modest kit is much better than not knowing how to use expensive kit.

By the sounds of things you're not quite sure what you need and more importantly you don't seem to know why you need some of the equipment. Take it in steps.

My advice would be to get yourself a flash and a fast prime (50 1.8) and practice as much as you can with your existing gear until you're confident. By then you'll know what you need to improve and why.

Do you have a wedding lined up already?

eas

actually - maybe the nikon 50 1.4 would the better choice with your d40 due to the auto focus limitations with the 1.8...but then again learning to deal without auto focus is a key skill in itself.

Julesie

eas wrote: »

My advice would be to get yourself a flash and a fast prime (50 1.8) and practice as much as you can with your existing gear until you're confident. By then you'll know what you need to improve and why.

Do you have a wedding lined up already?

Hi Eas, the problem with my existing camera is that the D40x doesn't have an internal AF motor so I am very restricted in lens choice, if I want auto focusing. I have been using my D40x and two kit lens for nearly 3 years now and I'm comfortable with what they can offer and think I am at a point where I would actually benefit from the better body and faster lens.

If i'm upgrading I want it to be to something I can use for some time to come but at the same time isn't completely beyond my current needs.

---- Sorry had that post pending for ages and didn't see your follow up. You are right on the manual focusing skills but I think it is a definite impediment of the camera rather than a character building trait!

eas

I'm not sure really how limited you are with lens choice - it's really only the Nikon 50 1.8 that's going to be a problem in that sense. I know there are others, but nothing that comes anywhere close to being a must have. I'm not overly familiar with the d40x, but it's probably not a stretch to say it's close to performing as well or better than a d1x would have in it's day.

I can tell you one thing from experience : You'll take much better photographs with your current gear after a day or two of proper training then you would after buying all new gear without the training. I believe that goes for any photographer at any level. And, training is much cheaper than a fast zoom.

Anyhow, there's no two ways about it, if you want to pursue wedding photography you'll need to invest in new gear at some stage, but if I was to go back I'd pay much more attention on training then gear.

CabanSail

I have a Sigma Flash as well as the SB600.

The Sigma was not 100% compatible with the iTTL. The results were quite hit & miss. I chose the SB600 over SB800 at the time as I would never use the extra features it offered. One of the advantages of the Nikon Flashes is that they will work in Commander Mode which allows you to move the flash off the camera, wirelessly controlling the exposure of multiple units from the menu on the camera.

dudara

Here are some photos I took at the weekend at a wedding with my D40 and the Nikon 55 - 200mm f/4.6 - 6.5 lens.

I'm pretty pleased with the set overall, but you can see the limitation of the lens in low light situations and the slow autofocus speed was annoying on occasion.

This set has convinced me of the need for a prime lens.

Julesie

dudara wrote: »

I'm pretty pleased with the set overall, but you can see the limitation of the lens in low light situations and the slow autofocus speed was annoying on occasion.

This set has convinced me of the need for a prime lens.

Thanks Dudara, you got some nice images there! I definitely agree with you on the prime lens and also the relatively slow autofocusing which is something I've noticed with my other work on the D40x. Not a problem for stationary objects but unfortunately people seem to move about a little more unpredictably!

Borderfox

Prime lenses all the way if you can, most Churches are very dark and the more you can open the lens up the better. I would be trying to get the best glass first and bodies afterwards. I have another Wedding tomorrow and just charging all the batteries now, should be fun and I really know what I want from the day and how to get it. The gear is always secondary to the experience.

You can pm me if you have any other questions and maybe meet up for a yap?