Home Forums Gear Photography Pro DSLR suggestions?

It might be a good idea to check out the wedding forum or post a poll between the FF and crop bodies in that forum.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/48

A refurb is on the Canon web site. I'd rather pay full price but many see this as a good buy. It won't last long!


http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_10051_10051_214217_-1

Have shot both bodies and would rather poll me.

You ever gunned the 1D3?....................

I'll admit to being a Nikon shooter all the way and while I'd never think of shooting a wedding (to many hormones involved) it's my impression that most of the pro's who shoot "35mm" shoot a Canon of some sort -- but to take advantage of the increase in mega-pixels affored by the high-end Canon's you need to be able to nail the exposure 100% of the time otherwise you're just wasting them. I also don't care for the auto-focus on the Canon's I've tried --- slow and it's not always accurate and there isn't anything worse than an otherwide perfect image that is both over or under exposed AND out-of-focus.

I don't know how it would be for weddings but I can't think of a camera I'd rather have than my Nikon D3s but I shoot sports for my own enjoyment and it might be hard to justify a $5000 camera and a couple of $6K lenses if I had to live on the photos I sell -- it's a labor of love to take 500 to a 1,000 shots each week-end of my grand-daughter's club soccer team and then sort thru them culling out the one's that are 1st rate and editing them for color etc. I do recoup something selling bigger prints, I probably average $350 to $400 per game after I pay for the cost of prints but considering the time I spend doing it I doubt it's much above the minimum wage.

The D3s is a Speed-King that sees in the dark better than any camera I know.

Curious,have you shot any of the 1D or 1Ds DSLR's? Tough to miss focus and being able to separate metering from the focus point,do tend to minimize exposure woes.

What's your favorite glass,that you are driving currently?....................

What about the 1D III up against the 1D IV? Much of a difference? Worth the extra $$

I don't have the 4,so cain't say. Would say that at 1800 clams used,the '3 is a full fledged steal in Today's market.

Gut hunch is that there's not $2k difference in the bodies...............

On my D300 (crop body) my 70-200mm f2.8 VR-II basically lives on it and when needed I'll stick a Nikon TC 1.4EE between it and the camera which basically gives me a 135-390mm f4.0. Fast focusing with great IQ.

With the D3s I've been shooting a 300mm f4 quite a bit and will toss the TC 1.4 EE on it once in awhile depending on the angle I'm shooting --- the 300mm f4, by itself, focuses quickly but with the 1.4 TC I can notice the difference.

I've also been borrowing one of the Big Boys --- thw 200mm-400mm f4. It's a beast and needs to live on my monopod but on the FX body it nicely covers most of a soccer field. On days when I have some problems getting on the sidelines I'll sometimes sit in the stands and stick on the 1.4 TC and get a different angle. The TC has very little impact on the IQ as long as I nail the exposure.

I was also shooting some night high-school football games using the Nikon CHUB - the 200mm f2 --- but it got to be a pain-in-the-butt -- and once they started asking for insurance and free photos I quit as by the time the kids got to high school the parents weren't buying pictures anymore so the CHUB got sold.

My favorite shooting is for my grand-daughter's U12 Gold team but the best sales come from the U8 and U9 teams --- these parents aren't used to quality sports pics.

And I haven't had any problems with the focus on any Canon body but I do hear my friends who shoot Canon's bitch and complain -- I can learn from the mistakes of others without experiencing them 1st hand.--- but you're right about being able to separate focus and exposure points.

If I was starting over today I would buy a D3s and never look back. Nearly dumped Canon last fall for one after viewing images shot at ISO 102,400!! A used D3 for a wedding shooter would be leaps and bounds over a 1DMKIII (IMO) based on the recall and AF problems of the MKIII alone. Sure you might get lucky and score a good copy..... then again you might get an expensive headache. Take time to know what the factory colored dots in the body and on the box mean before you think about taking that risk.
Used D3's are running in the $2800 range. All of these are as much or more than a new 5DII.
No idea where the OP is headed with price but depending on what state you live in if you did opt for a 5DMKII you might be better off buying new. Canoga Camera has them right now for just a hair over $2300 (have to add it to shopping cart to see sale price). As long as your not in CA no sales tax so that would be a much better buy than a refurb since Canon charges freight and sales tax.


http://www.canogacamera.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=86659

The 200-400 might could be Nikon's bestest glass.

So good...they shamed Canon into trying to match it,though I'm dubious.

Hang some pics................

There's no way I could begin to put the 5D2 in a league ANYWHERE nearing the 1D3. I'd go 1Ds2,if I thought I was enthralled with FF(but I ain't,despite shooting one). The AF issues are largely hyped nonsense on the 1D3 and CPS will happily put the cure on a "bad" one,for free.

I'd liken the ISO Wars akin to bragging up digital zoom in camcorders. Buncha fluff there.

Though in fairness,I gun an open mind.....................

Speakin of exposure woes

Only have (3) 1D-Series bodies.

You've not heard me swoon the 40D.

Hint...................

Fair 40D poke though,if only to cheer you up.....................

Stetson --- I'm seeing some of the D3's with over 100,000 actuations going for less than $2800 but I haven't seen any D3s's below $4,000. And, here in Southern California it's only been the last couple of months that stores have a decent supply of them. If you know the location of low actuation D3s's anywhere below $3,000 please let me know as I'll buy a couple and pay you a finder's fee.

Everyone is getting hyped about what they're calling the "D4" as they expect it to be a wonder camera -- a D3s with a lot more megapixels and I'm guessing the way some who just bought a D3s are wringing their hands they're hoping for price around $5,000 --- Yeah! Right!

DB Bill most of the D3's I'm seeing have under 10k on the shutter @ $2800 and look new. Over 100k should put them at least a few hundred less. I have seen a few used D3s models but nothing under 4k. Don't worry about the finders fee. If I find a D3s for 3k the $1,250 finders fee will already be built in the sale price.

You guys have been putting a lot more energy into the question than the OP(who seems to be in "fire and forget" mode, not even replying to request for clarifications that would yield him a better answer). Sounds like a tire kicker that might have been scared away after seeing that being a wedding photographer ain't so cheap and easy.

The worst part being,that as of late...Canon and Nikon Model Numbers seemingly interchange................(grin)

I was a sport photographer for kids sports, back in my 'Army' days I did weddings on the side, back in the late 80's early 90's.
For weddings get NIKON. Why their flash systems works, dead on, all the time. Canon comes close but there always seems to be those shots that are over or under.

1. Especially with weddings White gowns, Black Tux's big reception halls and churches, no bouncing the light, a lot of different color light, with a flash for quick informal shots it makes color balancing easier, unless you go black and white.

2. I have been out of pro photo for three years now but at last look Nikon has the edge on high ISO. If you don't want to use flash high ISO is the way to go. Actually you should use both. No flash during the ceremony, other times Yes.

I have a both Canon and Nikon at this moment. My favorite for sports is still canon, I had/have 1D, 1DII, 1DIIn, and the 1DIII (A good one without the focusing problems many had.)Also have a Canon Ti for the car. My favorite lens for sports in an old Canon 35-350, Nikon doesn't have anything like it. Canon has more variety of lens, but you don't need much more then the basics for weddings or 'party' photography. My Nikon is the D200. Along with a pile of lens for each. I have top of the line flashes for each and the Nikon is easier to use and always dead on.

To learn about the 'equipment' go to DPReview.com.

But there are wedding photographers out there that use other stuff. Many use Olympus in fact I have a 420, great little camera. My niece 'borrowed' it a couple of years ago. Her brother wants to 'borrow' a couple of my rifles now.

But again shoot with what you know how to use, that is more important then anything else if you are taking once in a lifetime shots that people are paying you for, they're counting on you.

Good Luck

Matt

Man that was a long post.

Oh let me add something else. You don't need the newest top of line equipment. Then big 1D's and D3's are great especially if you are shooting sports fast multiple shots, weather proofing and all that. And those things are HEAVY. A wedding lasts ALL DAY. I know its ALOT of work. Good lens, a small portrait light group, Alien Bees and real good and relatively inexpensive, find a second had one generation old camera, better two bodies and you'll be set.

Matt

I just realized this other post was my first.

I joined this site for the rifles and hunting and I'm talking cameras.

About all I shoot anymore,is my 1D3.

Digging the Siggy 50mm 1.4 aboard it,for chasing ambient light...................