Digital or film for wedding photography?

[jwyatt]

Hi, I am a keen amateur landscape/travel photographer and a friend has "persuaded" me to shoot her wedding, which she claims is informal but of course wedding shots are always important. I've traditionally used film SLR's (OM1/2 and EOS 50E) but scanned the slides or film into my PC with a dedicated scanner and have done my own printing, in low volumes (I only print the best stuff).

I was going to buy a second EOS50E body on ebay (very very cheap now) and use one body for B+W, one for colour, for the wedding. I'll need a proper flash unit too. Neg film appeals for this job as it has a large exposure latitude, and I'll not be able to do my own printing in the required volumes with my home PC setup.

HOWEVER - I'm going to be buying a DSLR soon (probably a EOS 20D) and I'm wondering if I should just use that, and a dedicated flash unit, for the wedding and just use my EOS50E for B+W prints. My two concerns with digital for this job are a) getting the correct exposure for an indoor winter wedding on digital (especially as I'm new to using flash units), and b) getting the prints done afterwards commercially, and the quality of these prints.

So (apologies for all the words!) is an EOS20D going to be fairly foolproof with a good Canon flash unit, even indoors in low light? And can I get commercial prints done easily (at maybe 10x8" size) from a DSLR?

[Lionheart]

Quality of film versus digital is very subjective. First things first. Ask your clients what their preference is just in case they prefer one over the other. Personally, I prefer the digital workflow over traditional film, and I personally think todays 6+ Mp dslr's can shoot images that appear more grainless than film, especially at the higher ISO settings, but I have no empirical data to support that. It's a purely subjective stand I take on the issue.
On the subject of foolproof, no camera is foolproof, some cameras just make it easier to avoid errors than others, Murphy still rules when least you expect him. However the 20D is a pretty easy camera to use in Program mode (any camera is easy to use in Program mode). The biggest pitfall in digital is still flash photography, even with Canon's ETTL II, you still get a lot of highlight burnouts from flash, something I rarely got shooting film on my EOS-1V/550EX combination.
I haven't shot a wedding on film in close to 3 years. The biggest advantage to film is that the developing and printing of proofs is done by someone else. Digital workflow is 100% your time until you and your clients have decided what prints, what size, etc...then you can print them yourself if you have the equipment, or you take your images to a place that can print them for you. I do all my own printing on a dye sub printer except for anything over 8x10", then that goes to the local printer.
Good luck

[paulnj]

Both mediums are used extensively throughout the wedding industry, but!!!!!!....

Learning digital AND flash may be a bit much ;)

Learn indoor flash to your liking FIRST, then MAYBE introduce DIGITAL.

[another view]

I shoot weddings with film. The two main reasons are that I'm not ready to buy a second DSLR (gotta have a backup) and the exposure latitude is much narrower.

Far as the exposure latitude goes, the advantage doesn't have anything to do with exposure inaccuracy. Underexpose neg film and you've got a grainy mess. If you're outside in harsh light (or using direct flash), think about the contrast of the scene when you're shooting the bride and groom. The bride is in a bright white dress, probably with a sheen to it and a lot of detail. The groom is in a very black tux. That can be too much for neg film to handle, much less digital. It's too easy for the highlights (and all of that detail in the bride's dress) to get blown out.

Also, like Paul says, digital and flash aren't as foolproof as 35mm SLR's with TTL metering. It will take awhile to get the hang of it - I'm getting my best results with the DSLR and flash with the flash in "A" mode (like what's been used for years in flashes like the Vivitar 283). Now, if the flash is less accurate but the overall exposure has to be more accurate... Then of course throw in a healthy dose of stress on the day of the shoot too!

I'm sure I'll be using digital for weddings before too long and hopefully by the time I do the cameras and flashes will get even better. I'm planning to use my Fuji S2 a little for some I have coming up next year - but only in certain situations. The new Fuji S3 has a more exposure latitude, and the newer Nikons have a much-improved digital TTL flash system. But it's not there yet...

[drg]

How much time before the wedding? That should also factor into your decision. If there is a enough time for you to be comfortable with a new camera, thats one thing. Otherwise for an important event stick to what has worked and has garnered the attention that makes someone want you to be their photographer.

A Canon EOS 20D is a great machine! Yeah, you can turn it on, and take very nice images within 10 minutes of opening the box (charging batteries not included!) but I wouldn't have thought of shooting a wedding with one until (personal experience) I worked with it for a few days. But then again I wouldn't shoot anything really important with a new camera until I'm comfortable. The goal is take as good a photographs as you can and not worry about figuring out the camera.

Now should you happen to aquire your DSLR prior to the wedding you certainly should take it and use it, but plan ahead what you want to use it for.

I generally suggest trial runs to new event/wedding photogs to make sure they have a plan. Not only shot lists, but to know how quick they need to do things like change film or flash cards, if battery life is an issue, are you shoes comfortable, will you need to change lenses (this can be hard on equipment in a crowd or bad environment, (Nikon and Canon have removed a lot of rice, cake, and even beer from wedding photogs cameras I am sure). The list goes on and on.

Simply, if you are comfortable with what your currently using and its all in good shape (do get your camera CLA's or at least looked over by the techs before the event) go for it.

If you change the way you do flash, plan on shooting a few (two or three ought to do it) rolls of film in different settings to make sure you going to get what you think you are. And use film that you will use at the wedding (same type if not batch). Oh, take lots of extra film beyond what you think you'll use.

Best wishes and Happy Holidays.

- C

[Lionheart]

Oh, take lots of extra film beyond what you think you'll use.

- C

A hearty second to that!!!! I used to pack a minimum of 20 rolls, half portra 160, half 400.
And lot's of AA batteries if you don't have a Quantum pack for your 420EX.
Never hurts to pack too much. Major eggface when you don't have enough ;)

[Franglais]

Hi, I am a keen amateur landscape/travel photographer and a friend has "persuaded" me to shoot her wedding, which she claims is informal but of course wedding shots are always important. I've traditionally used film SLR's (OM1/2 and EOS 50E) but scanned the slides or film into my PC with a dedicated scanner and have done my own printing, in low volumes (I only print the best stuff).

I was going to buy a second EOS50E body on ebay (very very cheap now) and use one body for B+W, one for colour, for the wedding. I'll need a proper flash unit too. Neg film appeals for this job as it has a large exposure latitude, and I'll not be able to do my own printing in the required volumes with my home PC setup.

HOWEVER - I'm going to be buying a DSLR soon (probably a EOS 20D) and I'm wondering if I should just use that, and a dedicated flash unit, for the wedding and just use my EOS50E for B+W prints. My two concerns with digital for this job are a) getting the correct exposure for an indoor winter wedding on digital (especially as I'm new to using flash units), and b) getting the prints done afterwards commercially, and the quality of these prints.

So (apologies for all the words!) is an EOS20D going to be fairly foolproof with a good Canon flash unit, even indoors in low light? And can I get commercial prints done easily (at maybe 10x8" size) from a DSLR?

I'm just in the process of learning how to use my D70 (2000 images so far, mostly by flash). I would NOT use it for the core wedding ceremony at this time. Some things must not be screwed up. I have much more confidence my ability to use a quality film SLR + flash with 400 ISO colour negative film than in my current skill with a DSLR. You can't tell when you're going to get difficult light. Modern negative film can just soak up overexposure and excess contrast and give presentable results. And after all, it's only 2-3 films at maximum.

I would use a DSLR for less critical events like the reception, dinner and dancing. Simple lighting (flash), lots of pictures to do, lots of time to change my settings and repeat the shot if necessary.

Charles

[jwyatt]

Thanks, some useful advice there. The wedding is in March, and as I'm on the verge of buying a 20D and a speedlite 580 I think I'll familiarise myself with it and then pop to the wedding location (luckily local) to take plenty of shots indoors and out. I'll take my wife along wearing something white! Then I'll have at least a feel for the capabilities of the metering system/flash. Because I've scanned slides to digital forthe last few years I'm well aware of the issues of dark areas and highlights, it could well prove tricky with digital given that I've little experience of flash work at all!

[Franglais]

Thanks, some useful advice there. The wedding is in March, and as I'm on the verge of buying a 20D and a speedlite 580 I think I'll familiarise myself with it and then pop to the wedding location (luckily local) to take plenty of shots indoors and out. I'll take my wife along wearing something white! Then I'll have at least a feel for the capabilities of the metering system/flash. Because I've scanned slides to digital forthe last few years I'm well aware of the issues of dark areas and highlights, it could well prove tricky with digital given that I've little experience of flash work at all!

I scan a lot of slides myself. Shooting digital requires as much care as shooting slides - digital burns out in the same sort of contrasty light conditions but it looks even worse. Highlights go unpleasantly off-colour without the clean washed-out look of slides. (Shooting RAW probably improves things).

On the other hand, under the right conditions, digital can look brilliant. It's sharp, precise, hyper-realistic.

This is not the same subject, but here's an image I did a couple of weeks ago on the way to Calais - one of the first digital images that I'm actually pleased with. No real subject, just the figure poised there at an instant in time. Everything is perfectly clear. It wouldn't have worked on film.

(Taking details: D70 at 200ISO onto JPG, 18-70 kit lens)

Charles

[jwyatt]

Right, I now have a EOS20D with speedlite 580EX, and also a Speedlite 540EZ for my EOS 50E.

Time to learn about flash!

For a landscape photographer it all seems a bit complicated !