Jump to content

M8 & Pro Wedding photography

M'Ate

By M'Ate
in Leica M8 / Leica M8.2

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 204
  • Created
  • Last Reply
NB23

NB23

Posted
Posted

Nice pics. But I don't believe any of it would have been different with a slr, especially the non-intrusive part. Many similar pics have been shot with a big, loud dslr without problem.

 

But this isn't the point. You are clearly at ease with the M8 and that was the point of this thread. I'm not sure I could be such at ease with a M8, though. Any film M yes, but not with a M8 (too sluggish for me)...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Riccis

Riccis

Posted
Posted
Nice pics. But I don't believe any of it would have been different with a slr, especially the non-intrusive part. Many similar pics have been shot with a big, loud dslr without problem.

 

You are right, you can be very non-intrusive with a big telephoto but, like I said, that is not my style. Trust me, people really do drop their guards when you don't have a big SLR pointed at their faces, but I guess we can disagree on that.

 

How about capturing an image at its most pivotal moment? I think the one below is a perfect example (remember the non-blacking out of the viewfinder deal you get with rangefinders?). I saw the flower girl stand up for a moment to play in the middle of Mass and I knew to wait for the shot. Right at the moment before mom pulled her back into the pews, I took this one shot. Pressing the shutter a second too early or too late (or praying for a good capture if shot-gunning with a DSLR) would have rendered an image for the trash, instead I see one of those decisive moments we all strive to capture... BTW, this was a wedding shot on film with M7s and I always knew this image was in the bag.

 

stop-that.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
NB23

NB23

Posted
Posted

Riccis,

 

I remember you once asked to see some of my wedding work at another forum... Here it is. None with a rangefinder but I promise to start trying on my next assignments. I said start trying (which means 3rd camera).

 

I'm not sure where you are going with all your explanations. I had no trouble being unnoticed with my huge DSLR artillery.

My lenses are the Noct, 28 1.4, more primes and Zooms. No telephotos, and no scared people. No scared children as you intended. No scared adults. Everyone looks normal.

And the mirror slap is fast enough not to miss the action during Blackout. Like the yawning child. So no need for a rangefinder to get all the action in the viewfinder.

 

Let's not lie to ourselves; The decisive moment is exactly the same with any camera.

 

Really, it's just a matter of being confortable. You certainly won't make me change ideas about how a Rangefinder is best and yet, I respect rangefinder wedding shooters.

 

Web-Wed-13.jpg

 

Web-Wed-12.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
NB23

NB23

Posted
Posted

Hey sorry! I don't mean to be argumentative but I found some of the M8 pros to be a huge stretch. Especially when they sounded like a dslr wouldn't have done the job, or scared people away unless they we're done with a telephoto lens.

I'm always up for a good conversation. If I sound like argumentative, then I'm sorry. But at the same time, why not, eh? It's a forum, after all!

 

:)

 

In the end, this whole conversation makes me think about the next M9, which I hope will be better, more rugged. If it's good for a war zone, a thing the M8 isn't, then it's good for weddings. That's what I say! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
M'Ate

M'Ate

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Having been an M film camera user for 20+ years including many weddings, currently a Canon Pro DSLR user I do know that DSLR's can produce whatever output you need at a wedding without causing an adverse reaction from the subjects. Indeed, it's clear from the guys on DWF that using a rangefinder at a wedding is a very rare thing to do. It's not wrong, just very few choose that as a tool.

 

From all I've seen on the internet, none of the top guys, or girls, use a rangefinder for wedding photography and I'm talking of hundreds and hundreds of quality shooters. I'm actually quite surprised by the low number of M8 wedding shooters that have posted here. Most that have are using a DSLR for aesthetic and reliability reasons and I can fully understand that if there's any doubt about keeping going then the event photographer has to select reliable tools. For me, Pro DSLRs are reliable and can be relied upon and backup gear can be left in the car. M film cameras can be relied upon, but I have always used two at a time to avoid lens swopping, so the system is bullet proof.

 

However, I happen to like shooting M's at weddings, or wherever, and would prefer to start the process with a digital file rather than film stock. IMO, the film M's have big advantages over the M8, but creating a digital image isn't one of them. :D Two M8's and a film M for security is probably where I'll end up in the near future.

 

Many thanks for your responses to this thread. It's good to talk here. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
dcsang

dcsang

Posted
Posted

Nice images Ned !! Really like the brides and bridesmaids shot.

Riccis, as always, awesome work!!

 

I know that I've stated the whole "camera awareness" thing in a lot of forums but I honestly think that it's a fact nowadays. You cannot get away with the whole Dennis Regie "subject is camera unaware" thing anymore unless you are shooting with a DSLR from clear across a football field using a really really long telephoto :D. Everything and everyone has a camera these days. So the subject being camera "unaware" is difficult to capture imho.

 

That said, I did notice that at the last wedding, while I was walking around with only the M8 people did approach me more than they would if I was carrying my 5D. Why? Well, curiosity really. As M'Ate said above, there's nary a handful of people who would or do use an M8 (or film M's nowadays) during weddings. I got comments like "Hey, that's a neat little camera" and "What type of camera is that??" - people, in general, don't really know what to think about the M camera. They've been led to believe that if it's not big and huge it's not professional. You know, the whole "size matters" thing :D

 

The one thing I can say I would certainly try, if I could afford to do so, is two M8's (as M'Ate stated) slung on my bod with a wide and telephoto; I'm thinking the 28mm and 75mm would be all I would need. The advantage is no neck/back problems *smile* - the 5D, grip and 70-200mm IS lens is heavy.

 

I mean, look how perturbed and surly I appear when I've got all that gear on *laugh*

surly.jpg

 

Yes, good conversation...:)

 

Cheers,

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
M'Ate

M'Ate

Posted
  • Author
Posted
They've been led to believe that if it's not big and huge it's not professional. You know, the whole "size matters" thing :D

Yes, good conversation...:)

Cheers, Dave

 

There's some truth in that. Wedding photography is NOT street photography. The B&G, priest and guests are fully aware that you're there to record the event and in the main are delighted to participate.

 

I've had the good fortune at two of my last three assignments to have a second shooter along with his two M8's (making sure he's happy with them before taking them main stream). I've now got 1,000 files from an M8 to compare with the Canon using the same subjects.

 

I asked one B&G what they felt about the two different camera systems being pointed at them, if any. The response was that the big DSLR, (Canon 1D MkII N + 24-70 L zoom) looked more professional, so they were happier with it.

 

Interesting, to me anyway, the M8 shooter had the responsibility for shooting the guys getting ready and their meet at the bar. When I met the Groom at the church and enquired how the the shooting had gone, he was uncomfortable and not really happy because he felt that no pictures had been taken - he's just taking snaps, he said.

 

Now, that was not the case at all and is a real credit to the photographer because the proof of the pudding ....... is in the images, and the images are great.

 

Different hearses for corpses, I suppose. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Riccis

Riccis

Posted
Posted

Just in case I was misunderstood, I did not mean to imply I wouldn't get the same images with a DSLR but instead they may have a different look and it would have taken me at least 3x the amount of frames to ensure I had the shot I wanted... Call me lazy, but I don't like to shoot thousands of frames or machine gun in hopes of getting the image I saw in the first place. Shooting with rangefinders allows me see and compose better. That, coupled with a very lean kit is what brought me to shooting Ms for weddings in the first place.

 

BTW, it is very nice to see exchanging of ideas (even if sometimes we don't agree) in a civil manner that does not resort to name calling and members getting booted... I also love and appreciate everyone's contributions. Thank you!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Susan_NYC

Susan_NYC

Posted
Posted

quote:

Interesting, to me anyway, the M8 shooter had the responsibility for shooting the guys getting ready and their meet at the bar. When I met the Groom at the church and enquired how the the shooting had gone, he was uncomfortable and not really happy because he felt that no pictures had been taken - he's just taking snaps, he said.

 

I'm shooting my first wedding this week (and this thread has been GREAT - and reassuring), with my M8 and a backup rented 5D, so I'll have a chance to test out people's reactions to each camera. I'm guessing the M8 shots will be a lot more natural.

 

An aside: I shoot mostly on the streets and in the subways in NYC, with my M8, and few people are bothered by me - that's if they notice me. They think I'm a grey-haired tourist snapping away. Another reason I love the M8.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamie Roberts

Jamie Roberts

Posted
Posted
{snipped}

BTW, it is very nice to see exchanging of ideas (even if sometimes we don't agree) in a civil manner that does not resort to name calling and members getting booted... I also love and appreciate everyone's contributions. Thank you!!!

 

Yes, it's very refreshing, to be sure...

 

It's true that if you discount Riccis (which I'm personally not going to do) then you can say most of the top wedding photographers in the field shoot dSLRs. Many of the younger ones I've talked with don't know how to manually focus (and are proud of it) but all are really interested when they see how easy it is to nail focus with a rangefinder in very low light ;)

 

At WPPI Joe Buissink in his stage presentation even said, in horror, "imagine all the great photographers of the past--having to shoot with rangefinders!" Right then, I was chuckling and wanted to give him an M3 and an M8 :)

 

I think that if the M8 didn't have the green streak artifact that Jeff A. unfortunately ran into on some key shots, he would be using M8s, though now he's using 1ds3s and evidently likes them a lot. I can't blame him; I loved my 1ds2 as well.

 

But I do think the rangefinder has a stealth advantage, especially over the large white Canon L series zooms!

 

Heck, not only have I scared kids with a 1 series and a 70-200 (nice pic, there, Dave!!) but I've nearly scarred them too--they run around right at lens hood level when that thing is on my shoulder.

 

So YMMV. I know when I'm wearing the M8 only, people mistake me for a guest at large weddings, so they ignore me, and I do get better moments. Some people--large or small--are camera shy. When I'm wearing the DMR or 5d (or both, LOL!!) they invariably pose or purposely look away.

 

Anyway, IMO the actual files, too, from the M can't be beat yet, except by the DMR or in the extremities of high ISO. In adverse lighting, the M8 just sings (as does the DMR) and I have the side-by-side 5d files to compare with. Small differences, but important, as I said. Coupled with the right processing, the M8 files just rock. This is workflow dependent though, so YMMV.

 

And nothing looks like a Nocti shot wide open or close to it (1.2). Not the 50 1.4 Nikon, not the 50 1.2 Canon, not even the 85 R Lux (though it's really close!). There is a huge difference in the way the Nocti gathers and "concentrates" light while maintaining very high contrast. At 1.2, the Canon is a very nice lens, don't get me wrong, but it's not the same.

 

PS--these are all proof quality--right out of C1. They haven't been colour corrected. The print versions are much better, and if I had time, I'd make them smaller and post... but I should be processing weddings... :)

 

28 cron @ 3PM in June :) Lots of backlight; very little flare:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

90 cron pre ASPH at f2.0, used with a Canon 580 V2:

 

Nocti @ 1.2:

 

21 Elmarit pre-ASPH--so nicely corrected, and wonderful detail when blown up:

 

Nocti @ 1.0 with a Canon 580V2:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...