keithdunlop Posted February 21, 2010 Share #1 Posted February 21, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Greetings, Back in June 2008, there was a thread about wedding photographers incorporating the M8 into their work, and I ended up testing one for myself last year alongside my usual D700 kit. Being a former M7 user for PJ work, I welcomed the chance to include a digital M in my wedding work. However, the relatively poor battery performance and extremely limited buffer capacity of the M8 made it a poor choice for weddings, IMHO. The crop factor was also a turn-off for using wide lenses; an issue obviously solved with the FF M9. I would like to hear from professional wedding photographers who have used the M9, and what your impressions have been. Thanks in advance! Keith Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 21, 2010 Posted February 21, 2010 Hi keithdunlop, Take a look here M9 wedding performance vs. M8.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted February 21, 2010 Share #2 Posted February 21, 2010 Buffer capacity and battery performance of the M9 are similar or slightly less than the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morten Grathe Posted February 21, 2010 Share #3 Posted February 21, 2010 I use the M8 for wedding-photography, and I am quite happy with it. My widest lens is a 24mm - and that's fine for my style of shooting. I don't think i have ever hit the buffer-limit and the 400 shots i get from a fully charged battery is also fine. I don't think that the M9 will do you any better regarding buffer or battery. Maybe a bit better in high ISO. Morten Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 21, 2010 Share #4 Posted February 21, 2010 Buffer capacity and battery performance of the M9 are similar or slightly less than the M8. Yes, I agree - not ideal. My shooting style is very far from the apocryphal 'machine gun/motordrive' approach much derided here but I've filled the buffer a few times when trying to earn a crust. Battery is okay. If you like to chimp the focus be prepared to wait an age for the LCD to display at 100%. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted February 21, 2010 Share #5 Posted February 21, 2010 I do a few weddings a year and have done one so far with the M9. If you liked the M8 for weddings you'll like the M9 more. If you didn't like the M8 for reasons other than image quality you probably still won't like the M9. If anything the M9 is slower than the M8 and the buffer fills as fast or faster. The battery life seems a bit better to me but not much. It's not an issue as I carry lots of spares. The image quality of the M9 is amazing, and it's great to be able to use my 35 'Lux Asph the way it was intended. But I'm also not a motor-drive kind of guy and I still hit the buffer from time to time. I shoot with two cameras to minimize the problem--if one gets full I switch to the other. Often they have 28 + 35mm lenses so I can switch at will. I'd prefer three but they're too expensive. As I get more experience with weddings and raise my rates a bit more, I'll probably switch to film:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted February 22, 2010 Share #6 Posted February 22, 2010 As I get more experience with weddings and raise my rates a bit more, I'll probably switch to film:D Switch to film and you'll have no choice but to raise your prices. :-D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 22, 2010 Share #7 Posted February 22, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) One DP Review reader from UK bought M9 especially for weddings. And he sold it and came back to analog. He was unhappy with moire, visible often on clothes. I also found recently two shots in my sets, made inside, with a lot of moire, making these shots useless... One on trousers, one on window shade. Anyone could recommend a software removing that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morten Grathe Posted February 22, 2010 Share #8 Posted February 22, 2010 I have also had my part of problems with moire. I use Capture One to reduce it. However if the moire is bad it can't remove it completly, and if the filter is cranked up high, it will also visibly affect other parts of the image. The problem typically occur in high-contrast situations. Try to do the posed shots in shade - this also eliminates harsh shadows in the faces. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 22, 2010 Share #9 Posted February 22, 2010 I can imagine moire could be a significant problem if you typically shoot weddings at F5.6 with the sharper ASPH lenses and can maintain a high shutter speed (or are using flash). I tend not to be troubled by moire but I usually shoot this kind of subject matter at F2 to F2.5-ish (nor am I the steadiest handholder in the world). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted February 22, 2010 Share #10 Posted February 22, 2010 What's 5.6? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 22, 2010 Share #11 Posted February 22, 2010 One shot was in studio (like eg. after church ceremony) @ f/8. Second was with flash. Not all receipients want to have paper DOF on every photo. Some want to see sharp group of people Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted February 22, 2010 Share #12 Posted February 22, 2010 I think the crop factor is just a word in itself. If you have to go wide you just have to use a 21 instead of a 24 and so on. I'm not a pro, of course, but I've been shooting weddings for friends with my M8 as a second chance and in the end they always preferred my pictures to those of the big-Canon pros in charge of shooting the wedding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted February 22, 2010 Share #13 Posted February 22, 2010 Hi There I've shot three weddings primarily with the M9 (also with a Sony A900 where necessary). I've not found the battery life or the buffer to be a problem . . . but I agree with others that it's certainly no better than the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 22, 2010 Share #14 Posted February 22, 2010 In general terms for weddings, concerts, theatre, event, documentary - all paid work - I've NEVER found battery life or buffer speed an issue on the M8 or M9 - and this is shooting along side 5 Series Canons. I have had 2 M bodies with me for most of this work, starting the day with fully charged batteries and carrying two charged spares. I've never needed to swap batteries on a full day's shoot. Maybe this is my style of shooting (I work pretty well permanently in discreet / single shot) + I have a 2 second preview set as default showing highlight and histogram. I almost never chimp unless I'm concerned to check histogram - almost never bothering to go to 100 to check focus. In terms of the total number of shots at an event, sometimes the M's work hardest (usually because I'm working close - and then the 28 cron asph is the main tool), sometimes it's the 5D2 (+85 or 70-200 usually). But battery life? Buffer size. Non-issues for me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted February 22, 2010 Share #15 Posted February 22, 2010 Hi ThereI've shot three weddings primarily with the M9 (also with a Sony A900 where necessary). I've not found the battery life or the buffer to be a problem . . . but I agree with others that it's certainly no better than the M8. Fully agree. Small battery, small camera. Changing batteries every 350 shots is quite simple compared to changing film every 36... and the buffer handles my style of shooting without problem. Still miss the frame counter on top... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted February 22, 2010 Share #16 Posted February 22, 2010 One shot was in studio (like eg. after church ceremony) @ f/8.Second was with flash. Not all receipients want to have paper DOF on every photo. Some want to see sharp group of people Good point. I never use flash and only use 5.6 for the group shot. All other groups I keep 'em in a straight line! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted February 22, 2010 Share #17 Posted February 22, 2010 Keith: I've shot a few weddings with M9s already and aside from the obvious advantages over the M8 (FF, no need for IR filters) the more important for me are the lack of the green streak (even though I rarely saw it in the M8 is was always in the back of my mind) and the lack of reflective light sources all over the frames induced by the IR filter. I also think the high ISO is about a stop and a half better and have been able to use ISO 2500 more than I ever did before (although when shooting the f/0.95 Noct I have stayed at 1250 - 1600 tops ). Of course, this is my own opinion and based on the resulting prints instead of 100% screen pixel peeps (which I never cared for ). Battery life is about the same and I can cover a whole wedding with a battery and half or less per camera. I hope this helps but please post any follow up questions you may have. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted February 22, 2010 Share #18 Posted February 22, 2010 Of course, this is my own opinion and based on the resulting prints instead of 100% screen pixel peeps Ricci - would that there were more like you around sir! It's the print that's the test ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted February 22, 2010 Share #19 Posted February 22, 2010 Ricci - would that there were more like you around sir! It's the print that's the test ... Correct, never seen a wedding album printed at 100%...! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted February 22, 2010 Share #20 Posted February 22, 2010 Yes, prints are by far the best way to judge image quality. I don't know of any genre of photography where the finished product is a 100 percent crop on-screen. (Except perhaps professional photo-reviewer!). Even if you do mostly present your work online, it's probably not at 100 percent. But for most of us the print is the final result and so it stands to reason it should be the way we judge the technical quality of our photographs. I'm printing a solo exhibition of some recent work that was made with M8, M9 and D700 images and frankly they all look great at 21x14in. The difference comes in when you want to go bigger. The M9 files look amazingly good at 36x24 and still quite good at 40x26in! In a wedding context (or other event-type work) the high-iso advantage is definitely a big improvement with the M9 as compared to the M8. As Riccis said, I think there's around a 1.5 stop improvement. And the addition of third-stop ISO increments is a big deal, since sometime you may need to be faster than 1250 but not as fast as 2500. Being able to set 1600 is a real advantage. My last wedding was a super dark wintertime indoor event, and I would not have felt nearly as confident with the M8+24/1.4 as I did with the M9+35/1.4. In general for weddings with the M8 I was using one and a half batteries in my main body (24mm) and one battery in the secondary body (50mm). For the last one I believe I nearly finished off two batteries in my main (35mm) and one in the secondary (21/90mm). For a busy day of documentary work I may use two batteries, but they're quite small and light and battery life just isn't an issue. I have six and carry them all for a wedding or big assignment, just to be sure. Switch to film and you'll have no choice but to raise your prices. :-D Well, I only started shooting weddings last year and I'm not charging bargain-basement prices but still, to shoot film now would cut into my profit margin too much. But I do plan to work my way up and charge higher prices, and at that point I'd love to shoot more film for weddings. Primarily because I like the look, but also for workflow reasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.