What kit do you need to photograph a wedding?
Written on July 10, 2009 – 9:18 am | by admin

Unfortunately there’s no one answer to this. It really is tremendously varied. Plenty of photographers I know demand the latest, fastest DSLR and as far as they are concerned, nothing else will do. But that is not how we were working a few years ago. High speed autofocus is relatively new and some photographers are now rebelling against that and paying a small fortune for lenses designed with manual focus in mind, as they once always were.
It wasn’t that long ago that I was being told by many professional photographers that digital will never compete with film and was therefore a waste of time. At that time I had a Mamiya 120 roll film camera and an early Olympus digital in the camera bag. I ignored the advice of those photographers, who told me that there was no future in digital and showed pictures to my clients and my potential clients. Back then there was a bit of an argument going on and so many photographers were writing articles about digital quality being nowhere near as good as film. When I was asked whether I would shoot their wedding digitally or on film, I answered that that was their choice and showed them the results of my work from both cameras side by side. 100% chose digital 4 megapixel over medium format film. I never looked back. Curiously I have recently found myself defending friends who have chosen to stay with film. What they do works for them and whilst I wouldn’t do it myself I can see why it is good for certain business models and certain photographers. Digital is not necessarily easier or cheaper than film.
My personal opinion regarding cameras is that most mid-range and top end digital SLRs are more than capable of providing you with the basic tool to photograph a wedding. I don’t want to talk right now about what you need to know to photograph a wedding successfully because that subject is not one essay. The short version is a good few seasons of wedding photography. Then there is processing, digital imaging, album design, presentation, wedding service promotion. The book will have to come later.
So let’s do this simply and pretend that greys are actually black and white and I am going to talk a little bit more about my personal preferences now and how I would build a camera bag from scratch, if I just had money and my knowledge but not the great stack of equipment I presently carry. I guess for this scenario to work, we have to envisage some kind of event where my camera bags and kit is burned away and I have an insurance claim to start again. The thought of that fills me with dread but if it did and I were, here’s what I would probably do:
First get a hammerhead flashgun and batteries – Metz or Quantum
Then a few camera bags – a big one for lugging a full day’s kit around together, such as a Lowepro Commercial AW or similar. Also a smart rucksack, such as a Bilingham or Lowepro and then also some well padded satchels, such as the Billingham Hadley or one of the Tamrac shoulder types.
Tripods and monopods from Manfrotto. One really big tripod, one standard and a monopod.
All of the above is fairly straight-forward but now it stars to get complicated.
Lenses. I would want a variety, from fisheye up to about 300mm, a macro and a lensbaby for fun. I wouldn’t necessarily take every lens with me to every job. It’s going to vary depending upon what the location offers. The macro is unlikely to be with me in the evening. There is a strong argument for prime lenses but lenses are heavy and one does have to think about how useful you can be once carrying several of them, so perhaps one prime lens for low light level photography and differential focus, make the macro a prime and also the fisheye focus and then the rest on zooms or we are going to be like a broken camel.
I am personally very keen on the new 18-200mm zoom lenses. When you are working fast, you can do so much with one of these. You can be in a small area arranging a family group picture at the 18mm end but then if you find yourself waiting for one person to complete the group, you can make head shots of everyone with the same lens zoomed in to 200, whilst you are waiting.
Camera body: Whatever works. Something nice that fits in with all of the above, talks politely to my flashgun and has a good feel to it.
Then some cards – probably CF of some professional range with good reviews, rescue software and a 24hr helpline.
After that it’s really just toys. I am particularly fond of remotes and autometers at the moment. I also have a silent top-end snap-shot camera and between the autometer and the silent camera, we have made some pretty good pictures in churches where pictures during the service were not allowed upon the basis that clicking and flashing can be a distraction. Since the silent camera neither flashes not clicks, we think we are doing good by the church and the couple, as they get a good record of events, where they were told there would be none.
What do you carry with you when you are photographing?
Or what would you take if you were starting from scratch or building your fantasy camera bag?
Tags: arcurs, crestock, hasselblad, Manfrotto, monopod, photography, photos, stock, tips, tutorial, yuri






18 Responses to “What kit do you need to photograph a wedding?”
By Franko on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
The 241 Bogen Manfrotto suction cup has a blue knob, just turn it and the cup will release the pressure freeing the cup from the surface you stick it to. After that, there's a little notch that you can pull with your finger nail.
BTW, that cup only holds 4.41 lbs, good luck with your shooting.
By Vi* on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
the 501 fluid head is rated for 6 kg, so you should be good to go.
By Plethora on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
Finding a cheap fluid head is like trying to find a cheap HD video camera. No such animal.
Save your penies and buy a used Manfrotto 501 head. Try eBay.
By turtle dove on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
I agree with screwdriver, I have a 190CXPRO4, and I love that the center support articulates so nicely! But it looks like it's about 280 USD. It is carbon fibre.
I do have a 055XPROB, that has the same articulating center post as the 190CXPRO4, in a slightly heavier aluminum version, but still very rigid! Looks like it's about 145 USD, at Amazon. And a ball-head, runs between 55 to 109 USD, depending on the type.
If I wanted a nice tripod for a 150 pounds, I'd have to suggest the 055XPROB or as Screwdriver said the 190XPROB.
By Beatbot on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
You can adjust the fricton.
By atyl1972 on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
hey spearmint, lol what you doing on here, fancy meeting you like this,lol… i agree it looked as if it was slipping
By Mackadoo on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
too hold the camera
By suncai on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
I bought 488RC2. I think it’s not bad too..it’s easy to use.
By kilimats02 on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
it would cost around $250 for that hardware
By suncai on Oct 25, 2009 | Reply
hey, I bought it already. well not the 190CX, can’t afford the carbon fibre, instead I bought the 190PROB. thanks for the video!
By misterright on Oct 26, 2009 | Reply
attach the 222 head by screwing it on to the tripod there will be a slight shaking if its turned even slightly back. thats what the screws are for, tilt the tripod, or hold itupside down to access them and screw them in
By revo33kid on Oct 26, 2009 | Reply
BTW what head did you buy for your 190xProb??
By andrewconfused on Oct 27, 2009 | Reply
You need to have a "head" on your tripod. You may just be using the legs, with no head.
On the heavier duty Manfrotto tripods, the legs have a larger screw, which then fits into any Manfrotto tripod head, which has the universal 1/4"-20 screw that goes into the camera.
There are adapters too to go from the larger screw to the smaller screw. But I suspect you simply have a tripod with no head on it.
How do I know? I own and use a Manfrotto.
By Jmfiddie on Oct 27, 2009 | Reply
It is actually called the RC2 Quick Release.
Here it is at B&H Photo Video:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/179175-REG/Bogen_Manfrotto_3157N_RC2_Quick_Release_Plate.html
By glebec on Oct 27, 2009 | Reply
To Blueworks: I’m not the video author (obviously), but a ball head can of course tilt or pan. The problem is that releasing the lock allows the camera to move in ALL directions, so getting a really smooth and isolated pan would be difficult (since it’s so easy for it to shift up or down, or tilt, at the same time). Some ball heads (not the 322) have independent pan locks. The 488RC2 is one.
By misterright on Oct 28, 2009 | Reply
The tripod itself is a separate item from the head.
You buy the tripod and then fit your choice of head, although some places may make the choice for you and bundle them together.
So forget the tripod details and concentrate on the model of the head.
http://landscape-photography.suite101.com/article.cfm/ball_head_for_landscape_photos
By spearmintmonkey on Oct 28, 2009 | Reply
Does that head hold the camera tight?
Looks like it was slipping a little.
By genkibald on Oct 28, 2009 | Reply
you’ve sold it to me but how tall does it go?