TP: How to photograph weddings?

Two things spring to mind for this shot chthoniid.

1 - Mirror/s, if available to get the font and back in at the same time.
2 - Make a photo of the bride wearing the dress, not the dress.

Also, for an alternative (additional shot) get the dress photographed hanging up before she puts it on.

Good ideas.

Personally I don't use shot lists anymore. The standard shots are in my head, the rest I go by the seat of my pants based on the venue. Seems to have worked thus far.

I like the mirror idea as well. May if no mirror, have her facing a window to catch a soft reflection with your focus on the back of the dress.

Octupi wrote: Good ideas. Personally I don't use shot lists anymore. The standard shots are in my head, the rest I go by the seat of my pants based on the venue. Seems to have worked thus far.

You're probably a lot better and more experienced than I am . I do find discussing the shot list first with the couple to be a good way of bringing expectations into line.

Nothing wrong with a bit of improvisation on the day of course.   

Oh, and that FredMiranda link is great value.

Great stuff in this thread, just what I was looking for after being asked to be one of the photographers at my brother's wedding in late May. I've taken photos at family and friends' weddings before but there's always been a professional photographer or at least several other DSLR wielding enthusiasts present so there's been no pressure and I've been able to concentrate mainly on candids and informal portaits of individuals and small groups rather than having to capture all the key moments and formal group shots. I'm not sure who the other photographers will be on this occasion so I am a bit nervous. One of the main issues that concerns me is my lack of suitable gear for indoor photography.

My current lineup is in my signature, and I think the lack of a fast standard zoom is likely to be a problem for photographing the ceremony as I'm expecting low light, I won't want to use flash and I'm unlikely to be able to move around enough to effectively frame shots with a prime. The Tamron 17-50 or 28-75 mm f/2.8 zooms look like decent, good value options here but I'm not sure which would be the most useful focal length range on my A100 for this sort of work.

The other obvious missing item is an external flash, it may be time I bit the bullet and got myself a proper flash gun and started practising with bounce flash and diffusers. I mostly photograph scenery and wildlife so haven't really done much with flash before.

Thanks JeffB95, good to hear about your good experiences with the 17-50 for shooting a wedding. I think the combination of a new 17-50 f/2.8 (indoors, ceremony and reception) the 18-250 (outside, long end for candids, wide angle for groups) and maybe the the 50/1.8 (when I can move around freely enough to use a prime) should cover things reasonable well. Ideally I'd have a longer fast zoom too but then we'd be talking $$$'s for something I might not need that often, so I'll hold off on that this time.

I'll definitely be investing in a flash though, I've been reading a lot of the articles about flash use and wedding photography on Niel Van Niekerk's website (starting here: http://neilvn.com/tangents/flash-photography-techniques/flash-photography-tips/) and I'm keen to try out some of his bounce flash techniques.

Thanks chthoniid, I'm already sold on the importance of an external flash and have in fact just ordered an F58AM.

I'm still not certain on what to do about lenses, I know I could do with a fast zoom but the question is which. Conventional wisdom says standard zoom, and based on reviews and price I'm seriously considering the Tamron 17-50 mm (25.5-75mm full frame equivalent).   But... perhaps it's just because I'm used to the reach my superzoom gives me but I can't help worrying that a limit of 50mm might just turn out to be a little too short in practice, if I find myself going for many 'head and shoulders' type shots. This gets me thinking that maybe I don't really need the wide end, and I might be better off with, say, the Tamron 28-75 mm (42-112.5 mm full frame equivalent) which spans a focal length range from just short of normal to the sort of focal lengths generally associated with portait photography. The 28-70 would also be a useful full frame lens if I ever go down that route and the extra reach might stop me thinking about the Sigma 50-150 when I've already spent far too much on camera equipment this year...

Edited by Dr Hotdog - 12 April 2010 at 13:18

Hi Mark L,

You didn't say whether you're using a full frame or APS-C body with those lenses, I'm guessing the former? For full frame the classic 28-70mm & 70-200mm fast zoom pair covers the vast majority of shots, but it's not so clear cut in my case with an APS-C body and a desire to get by with just one fast zoom for now.

One thing I find slightly surprising about the Sony Alpha system is the relative shortage of DT lenses corresponding to traditionally popular film / full frame lenses.   There's no f/2.8 standard zoom for APS-C from Sony, only the Tamron 17-50mm and the Sigma 18-50mm, the only f/2.8 70-200mm equivalent is the Sigma 50-150mm, and for a fast standard prime you've got the overkill of the full frame G series Sony 35mm or again you have to go third party.