Wedding lens choice?

[steamboat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Keep it simple. Leica and a 35mm. It"s all you need. You're the father of the bride. You have the best access of anybody. Photograph what moves you. Don't worry about the other stuff. Good luck on that special day. One lens, one camera. 35mm lens is best.

Edited June 27, 2017 by steamboat

[ECohen]

+1 to Steamboat

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hockey44]

Thank you all for your advice and I am a huge believer of KISS-- keep is simple stupid.BUT I have a thing about the Nocti aka now Nuptilix! Now I am thinking, if you had a "simple' camera in your pocket albeit the Q is bloody expensive or god forbide Sony RX100? Given there are 5 interactions of the RX it offers lots of price points at 25% of the Q. Any thoughts about a compliment of the M240 and "hid if"... thanks

[ru2far2c]

another +1 to steamboat

 

Be the father of the bride enjoy the event. Try not being the uncle Bob of the wedding. Let the hired photographer or photographers do their job. (let's hope the pros are pros and have plenty of experience.) I'm not saying don't take photos. Just keep the kit simple and enjoy your daughters wedding so you can enjoy the moments of the day and take few happysnaps along the way. 

 

If you take two lens with one body I'd suggest looking at these combo's 35/90, 50/28, 50/35.

Edited July 5, 2017 by ru2far2c

[tsleica]

I'd probably just bring a fast focus 35 or 50..and a small flash just in case..to stop down freeze the action..and just have fun..taking pics here and there..as inspiration arises..instead of making it a big project..

[AceVentura1986]

I just returned from the wedding of a friend's daughter where there was a photographer present. I took my M9M anyway but mostly stayed in the background, not wanting to crowd the photographer. I've shot many weddings professionally and cannot stand when a guest decides he's ( yes, it's always a he) gonna play photog or videographer. They just end up being a nuisance at best or an embarrassment at worst.

 

My advice, stay in the background, remember that you don't have to document the event, and mount either a 35 or a 50, depending on your preference. Don't take a spare lens, don't take a bag, don't take a tripod, just one camera and one lens.

Edited July 10, 2017 by AceVentura1986

[mwilliamsphotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I will echo Ace's advice. Stay in the background ... unless you are in front of the Pros camera. 

 

Everyone is good at telling you what to do ... let me advise what not to do.

 

Do not use your exalted position as the Bride's father to stand next to the photographer when taking group photos as advised by others here. It results in confusion as to who the subjects are suppose to look at ... you or the pro. Half the pro images will have people looking at you rather than his/her camera.

 

Do not neglect your daughter in your rush to insert yourself into the photo taking frenzy ... with cell phones there is already more than enough of that narcissistic activity going on at a wedding. You are a very important subject, but as a loving father ... not as a photographer.

 

Unless you are with your daughter and your new son-in-law, or interacting with people that you, your wife, and the groom's parents are hosting, do not shadow the pro or be in the distance shooting photos in half the shots he/she is taking.  

 

HOWEVER, if you take a M and one lens (fast 35mm or 50mm),  you do have some inside information regarding some people that are important to your daughter ... candid pics of them enjoying her wedding would be treasured. When the pro is busy doing the expected shots, you can be shooting a few candid snaps he/she cannot be doing.

 

This raging sense of entitlement and self-important aspect of amateur photographers is growing evermore disrespectful, and makes the photographer's job even harder than it already is.  "My photos were better than the pro's" is easy to say and do when you do not have the responsibility to deliver, nor face any consequences if you don't.

 

Marc Williams, Fotografz, LLC ... 30 years a wedding photographer ... now semi-retired.

 

https://fotografz.smugmug.com/Fotografz-Weddings-Events/Wedding-Samples/The-Unconventional-Eye/

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

  

 

 

[AceVentura1986]

Do not use your exalted position as the Bride's father to stand next to the photographer when taking group photos as advised by others here. It results in confusion as to who the subjects are suppose to look at ... you or the pro. Half the pro images will have people looking at you rather than his/her camera.

 

Do not neglect your daughter in your rush to insert yourself into the photo taking frenzy ... with cell phones there is already more than enough of that narcissistic activity going on at a wedding. You are a very important subject, but as a loving father ... not as a photographer.

 

This raging sense of entitlement and self-important aspect of amateur photographers is growing evermore disrespectful, and makes the photographer's job even harder than it already is. "My photos were better than the pro's" is easy to say and do when you do not have the responsibility to deliver, nor face any consequences if you don't.

 

Marc Williams, Fotografz, LLC ... 30 years a wedding photographer ... now semi-retired.

Totally agree. As father of the bride you will already have an "exalted" role. Don't abuse it. Also, primary attention should be placed on the bride. By being the father shadowing the photog you risk diverting attention from her.

 

Years ago I photographed a very high end wedding where with absolutely beautiful people everywhere. You'd think the photos would have been extraordinary but many were ruined by an uncle who insisted on walking around DURING THE CEREMONY to video the event on his iPhone. Don't be that guy.

Edited July 10, 2017 by AceVentura1986

[steamboat]

Thank you all for your advice and I am a huge believer of KISS-- keep is simple stupid.BUT I have a thing about the Nocti aka now Nuptilix! Now I am thinking, if you had a "simple' camera in your pocket albeit the Q is bloody expensive or god forbide Sony RX100? Given there are 5 interactions of the RX it offers lots of price points at 25% of the Q. Any thoughts about a compliment of the M240 and "hid if"... thanks

 

 

You are way overthinking this. Leave the Noctilux at home. Just the 240 and the 35mm FLE. On your shoulder. I have been best man at a wedding and "father" for when my sister-in-law got married. Both times I had my Leica on my shoulder w/35mm. There will be no need to "insert" yourself in any situations as some wedding pros seem to think you might. 'Just do your "father" stuff. Your Leica will be on your shoulder when a picture calls to you. BTW, I know you want to take the Noctilux. You do NOT want to shoot anything at the wedding at f0.95. You want depth of field so that faces will show and be somewhat sharp. Oh, one more thing. Don't discount the power of the chair. While you're sitting around you can probably shoot some good stuff. It's a nice angle since you're waist level with people standing. NatGeo photographer Dave Harvey says he gets some of his best photographs while sitting.

[Ozytripper]

Greetings,

Would welcome thoughts on 'best' lenses for wedding of my of my children.  Yes, as "Dad" I should be 'in the moment' and there will be a photographer, but given my Leica tendencies, I can't 'miss this' opportunity as well.  I am thinking 35 Lux FLE and .95 Nocti.  I also have a 50Lux and 90 Elmarit but thought 35 for group type shots and since I love the Nocti rendering, and low light this was best combo.  But welcome any advice.  I have EVF just in case for Nocti and do have a Sekonic light meter but not sure about lugging that around. Wedding in Portugal so will be light and probably need to use ND filters during day I assume.  Any links appreciated-- want to try to capture this moment (first of 5 children) as best I can without shooting too much....already getting warned by other children....bet you have heard that before!  Many thanks

I photographed my own wedding used 90mm mainly to "stay out of the way". No Pro. Just a few friend photographers doing their bit. i had fun as the groom too.

Good luck and congratulations

[bocaburger]

I was admonished not to take pictures at our child's wedding.  My family wanted me to mingle and attend to other duties.  I did bring my 5D's and a couple zooms and flash in a bag in the trunk of my car though, but mainly in case the "pro" (a young couple, friends of my kid, just starting out) had an equipment failure and insuffient backups.  

 

I have informally shot many weddings for friends and family, and my shots have always been favorites of theirs.  Not because I'm such a great photographer or have great gear, but because I know the people and how to predict or elicit their expressions.  My choice when shooting Leica is 2 bodies, one with a 28 and the other with a 90. 50 in the bag. 

[hockey44]

Thanks again for all your collective wisdom. I am the grooms father, not bride. Not that that changes anything.

 

I will try to temper the burning urge and "Cool it". This is the first of my 5 children getting married, so I might get some practice--hah.

 

Sounds like FLE and maybe Nuptilux for Pre and post.....

 

Not for this occasion, just curious if anyone has any experience with R80 Summilux on M. I loved my Canon 85mm 1.2, but a beast.

[evikne]

I think you have already taken the best choice with the 35 Summilux and 0.95 Noctilux. 

[michaelwj]

I'm going to third or fourth steamboat's advice.

I just returned from being best man at a wedding, and I took my M4 with a 35 summilux and a few rolls of Portra. I shot some moments where it was just me and the groom before the ceremony when the pro was with the bridal party, and a few after the ceremony. I'm all 2 1/2 rolls. During the ceremony I hung it on a chair nearby, and then it was hanging on my shoulder/across my chest. Sure, there are some photos of me with a camera on my shoulder, but I always have a camera on my shoulder. (I did put it down for some official staged portraits).

 

It was simple and easy. I would advise against taking a bag or having anything in your pockets. Suits are pretty hard to hide a lens in without looking ridiculous. One lens on the camera, with a nice strap. Actually the perfect occasion to get a formal camera strap!

 

Enjoy the special day!

Edited July 14, 2017 by michaelwj

[M11 for me]

I think that documenting or co-photographing implies that you have only one chance to succeed. Besides my Leica I have 2 Canon 5D bodies with fast zooms e.g. 24-70 or fast primes as 50 or 135mm. I would not dare to use the Leica as I have to relay fully on a fast AF. Mainly in low light FOR ME it gets more difficult to focus. Further people are always moving around. Are there not better options than the Leica M?

 

When I say this I have to remember that I am a Leica shooter since 3 months only and certainly still practising. I was recently at a public party that I had to document. I did everything with my Conon except for the first evening when I took the Leica as my wife was with me. And at the end of the evening I was so disapointed that I had not the DSLR with me. In the lower light situations with people moving all around and dancing it was extremely difficult FOR ME to focus fast enough. As a result I had much too many shots that were not sharp.

 

Maybe these are now statements of an unexperienced Leica boy. A few decades ago I would have been very lucky to have a Leica M at all. I am actually very interested in learning what experienced Leica shooters think. Do they really ALL THE TIME shoot with Leica M and not use fast AF cameras at all (it could be the Leica SL of course)?

Edited July 14, 2017 by Alex U.

[Simon]

75 and/or 90 mm lens so you can stand back and "catch" people enjoying the occasion without realising they're being photographed. Be a fly on the wall.

 

Also, a wide angle (21-28 mm?) for inevitable group shots. 35 mm is obviously very versatile as well.

[Ko.Fe.]

Best way to ruin group photo is to take it in low light and on large aperture. How many are going to be in focus? It is wedding, after all, not reason to buy new toys and practice on people, having good memories time. 

Yes, 35mm will do group portraits, yes, here is nothing wrong in buying missing focal length.  But, please, make sure you know what are you going to do and how it is going to looks like.

Group portrait taken on f1.4 is going to be disaster. While f8 and flash used with knowledge or at least test shot will make it.

Same with 90. Same DoF issue. Large aperture will give one, two eyes in focus. Is this what person in the portrait wants to see on the photo. Usually they are not. 

Skip 90. 50 and 35 are already enough to juggle. And get real Leica TTL flash and get used to it. If not already.  

 

Sorry to act like party pooper here.

[LocalHero1953]

You should be able to assume that the pro will get all the formal wedding photos anyone could want: groups, the ceremony, speeches, cutting the cake, the first dance etc. So you don't need lenses for those. Then you have to decide what YOU want to record. In my case, it was memories of individuals and couples, little details of the day (dress, decorations....) and possibly action late in the evening after the pros have gone home. For my daughters' weddings I took the Apo-Summicron 75, which has good close focus and is small, and a wider lens (28 or 35). I used the 75 almost all the time, with a wider angle late in the evening as the dancing got more energetic.

Edited July 14, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[Ko.Fe.]

I think that documenting or co-photographing implies that you have only one chance to succeed. Besides my Leica I have 2 Canon 5D bodies with fast zooms e.g. 24-70 or fast primes as 50 or 135mm. I would not dare to use the Leica as I have to relay fully on a fast AF. Mainly in low light FOR ME it gets more difficult to focus. Further people are always moving around. Are there not better options than the Leica M?

 

When I say this I have to remember that I am a Leica shooter since 3 months only and certainly still practising. I was recently at a public party that I had to document. I did everything with my Conon except for the first evening when I took the Leica as my wife was with me. And at the end of the evening I was so disapointed that I had not the DSLR with me. In the lower light situations with people moving all around and dancing it was extremely difficult FOR ME to focus fast enough. As a result I had much too many shots that were not sharp.

 

Maybe these are now statements of an unexperienced Leica boy. A few decades ago I would have been very lucky to have a Leica M at all. I am actually very interested in learning what experienced Leica shooters think. Do they really ALL THE TIME shoot with Leica M and not use fast AF cameras at all (it could be the Leica SL of course)?

 

I switch to DSLR if I need bang-bang-bang spray shootout. Which is not in my nature.

With Leica I shot if have frame and the moment right in front of me. To get it I move a lot and tend to get close to people and action. This is why I ditched bulky 5D series and heavy L zooms after getting M-E and keeping 500D with pancake just for AF and bang-bang-bang. It is so much easier to move around with Leica and get close. 

 

Even if you are moving and subjects are moving... Big DSLR AF rig was never something I was thrilled about it. My entire face was blocked and it was simply safety issue for me. With Leica not only my face is open and I could see and even shot with both eyes open. If objects are moving it means framing and moment is changing. Framelines adding advantage to it as well. Pre-focus on the spot where you expecting wedding couple to be, usually it is the spot where it is good framing, light, background  and so on and after it you'll be waiting. Having extra out space in VF makes difference.  

 

And here is no mirror flip. I photograph our kids at office swimming pool for 10+ years. Different cameras were involved. I remember how I took Zorki RF camera to take jumping into the pool kids photos. To my astonishment I have one frame one keeper ratio. Why? No flipping mirror. I prefer it over AF sometimes for fast moving objects. Focus is all about DoF after all . 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Peter H]

You should be able to assume that the pro will get all the formal wedding photos anyone could want: groups, the ceremony, speeches, cutting the cake, the first dance etc. So you don't need lenses for those. Then you have to decide what YOU want to record. In my case, it was memories of individuals and couples, little details of the day (dress, decorations....) and possibly action late in the evening after the pros have gone home. For my daughters' weddings I took the Apo-Summicron 75, which has good close focus and is small, and a wider lens (28 or 35). I used the 75 almost all the time, with a wider angle late in the evening as the dancing got more energetic.

 

 

 

Agreed.

 

Whenever I've done weddings the overwhelming majority of favourite shots come from a 28 (or 35) or a 75.

 

Now I just take a 28 and 75, Summicrons both, and I never want for anything else. The fewer lens decisions you have to make the better the photos you'll get, in my experience anyway.