Lighting Suggestions for Daughters Wedding

[Kayaker72]

Hi Pat,

Sounds like fun. But also sounds like you will be shooting in several different conditions. I am thinking that you might do best working with natural light given the bonfire and twilight wedding for candid shots and then the flash for indoors. Or maybe be prepared for a mix of flash/non-flash shots. Not to always be thinking of gear, but you might want to play with the 100 f/2.8 and 70-200 II to see if they let enough light in under "twilight" and "bonfire" conditions. They might. A few years ago I shot some fire dancers and looking at those shots and I did get some keepers at 1/60, f/2.8, ISO 3200. But I also remember wanting more light and throwing out a lot of shots as I tried higher ISO and slower shutter speeds. So you might consider something faster (85 f/1.2? 135 f/2?) and practice with it now. I think you have wider covered (24 f/1.4). Or maybe you feel good enough about ISO 6400/12,800 with the 1DX.

The other thing I would be prepared for is to be a little bold. For formal shots, tell people where you want them to be, how you want their hands and smiles. But, more important, even for a "journalistic" style of shoot, you still need to pose candids a little. Walk up to people, get groups together. You will know who is connected to whom so capture these people together for your daughter.

I think you can mix in both being the father of the bride and taking a few shots. But I would definitely do one or the other at a time. I like to have fun at weddings, so my camera often sits. But I try to make "rounds" about 3-4 times, every 45-60 minutes or so, and to capture major events. Also, capture the less obvious. The venue, the seats, the center pieces, a distinctive feature, etc.

Enjoy!

[neuroanatomist]

Not to always be thinking of gear, but you might want to play with the 100 f/2.8 and 70-200 II to see if they let enough light in under "twilight" and "bonfire" conditions. They might. A few years ago I shot some fire dancers and looking at those shots and I did get some keepers at 1/60, f/2.8, ISO 3200. But I also remember wanting more light and throwing out a lot of shots as I tried higher ISO and slower shutter speeds. So you might consider something faster (85 f/1.2? 135 f/2?) and practice with it now. I think you have wider covered (24 f/1.4). Or maybe you feel good enough about ISO 6400/12,800 with the 1DX.

Personally, I think I'd go with f/2.8 zooms for flexibility and raise the ISO as needed. I have both the 85L and 135L, my concern with using them at events is DoF – even with individual portraits, I generally stop the 85L down into the f/1.6-2 range, with >1 person in the shot you'll often need careful posing to get faces in focus at wider than f/2.8.

I get usable results with the 1D X at ISO 12800 with DxO Prime NR.

[conropl]

Personally, I think I'd go with f/2.8 zooms for flexibility and raise the ISO as needed. I have both the 85L and 135L, my concern with using them at events is DoF – even with individual portraits, I generally stop the 85L down into the f/1.6-2 range, with >1 person in the shot you'll often need careful posing to get faces in focus at wider than f/2.8.

I get usable results with the 1D X at ISO 12800 with DxO Prime NR.

My 24mm f/1.4L II gets pretty good DOF and will be good for wide shots. I think I prefer the 70-200 over the macro for everything else. Other that the weight difference, it is more versatile and focus in low light is faster.

I have not been real happy with ISO's above 3200 on my 1D X, but that has been night sky type shots and the noise on the blank background of the sky can be more noticeable. I think you may be correct with the type of shot we are talking about here. We have people coming over tomorrow night and plan to have a fire (and somors) - I will try a few shots with the ISO set at 12,800 and see what Lightroom can do. You have been using DxO NR programs for some time now, and have suggested it in the past... so you have a fair amount of experience with it at night (based on some of your night shots) - Is it that much better than the current lightroom (I actually have ver. 5.x)? I think it was HDNitehawk that had said a little while ago that he thought that the latest Lightroom versions had caught up to DxO in NR. I may be remembering wrong, but I think it was him and I think that was the basic point. I typically limit myself to 1600, but will go to 3200 if needed. I would like to use higher ISO's... 12,800 would be very helpful in the type of shots I like to do.

Pat

Edit: I was wrong - HDNitehawk was comparing Lightroom and DPP. Not DxO. Sorry about that.
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=8266&page=2