Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/05
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Tom Wrote >Same answer to both comments. They don't care that it's a Leica, but they >like how much I don't hide behind my camera. I don't know how anyone can >have a relationship with a subject behind that Canon 28-70 zoom. I borrowed >one once from CPS and was shooting kids and actually had one kid point at >it and run away. The M cameras allow me to talk with them about the >photographs, look them in the face and then quietly involve a camera. I'm >not sure my photographs look any different except that the people in them >seem honest and relaxed. Excuse me while I snicker. We are talking about photographing a wedding, not street people in Nairobi. In all of the formal shots, I'm directing people, making them feel at ease. For many of the other candid shots I would just as soon that they not be aware of my presence. During the ceremony they are in never-never land and you can't talk to them anyhow. Let's put an end to one of the Leica M myths, You can hide behind an M-camera just as easy as an EOS or R8. Talking is talking, building a relationship with the subject has absolutely nothing to do with whether you use a M camera or an EOS 1. You will be at the identical distance from the subject with a 50 Noctilux as with a 50mm CaNikon. I go out into the hills of Ecuador all the time and I can tell you that the relationship often starts before any pictures are taken. Kids love to look through telephoto lenses. Some don't like to have their picture taken (if their parents are around at least) and will run away whether you are using a M-6 or not. But many will beg you to take their picture. If you are the type of person that hides behind a camera, FORGET about shooting weddings. You can't direct people if they can't see you. >That's exactly what I hate about the AF cameras. There's all that fumbling >with controls and modes. (EOS are better because you can separate the AF >function from the shutter release). With all due respect, the exposure >profile for shooting neg film in wedding situations is pretty basic, and >not something to fret about. If the M6 synced at a 1/250th I'd never even >change my shutter speed. Focus is much easier with the Leica M cameras. Get >it and forget it. AF cameras give you the impression you need to constantly >refocus to get that little green light. My guess is you haven't used a good AF camera in a while. For me, a 28-70 zoom means I'm not fumbling with changing lenses. The AF means I'm not fumbling with focus, the motor means I'm not fumbling with advancing the film. The TTL flash means I'm not fumbling with exposure. The studio lights mean I don't end up with distracting shadows and the exposure is constant for all of the formal shots before the wedding. Plus I have modeling lights to boot in case the wall behind them is reflective. If you are fumbling with controls while shooting a wedding, FORGET about shooting a wedding until you know how to use one without fumbling. I use the EOS1N in the manual exposure mode both with TTL FLASH as well as with studio lights. The only thing I have to do camera-wise is frame with the zoom and shoot, hardly fumbling. Wedding photography is not about cameras and technique, It's about capturing the expression of emotion, joy, laughter, tears etc. It's about preserving moments from that one very special day for the rest of their lives. >>no idea how anybody can follow focus a moving subject with an M camera >Are we talking weddings or basketball? In this context, I like to get a series of shots when the bride comes down the aisle as well as the rest of the wedding party. It's also your best chance to get good shots of the flower girls or ring bearers. The last thing I want to do is to have to worry about focus or having the wrong lens on the camera or waiting for the flash to recharge midst getting everything else right . I'm having a hard time adjusting to using my M-6 with anything that moves as I can't focus where the action or the subject really is. >>and 540 EZ flashes with a Quantum Turbo Battery. >I tried the quantum and I still don't get why people need them. 4 fresh AA >batteries give me all the flash I need for a most weddings. With 400 ISO >film at close range you don't need a lot of fire power. Still, I keep 4 >extras in my jacket pocket, and can change them in an instant. No cords, No >charging. It works for me. I shoot 6 or 7 36 exp rolls of VPS rated at a 100 ASA at a typical wedding. The Quantum means I can shoot another shot almost immediately if I want and I never have to worry about whether the flash has recharged or not. I never turn the flash off and I never have to change batteries either. The turbo eliminates fumbling. I also do some of the shots before the ceremony using a speedlight in a extra small Chimera soft box. That uses quite a bit of power but the results are superb. Everybody has a different style of shooting weddings, My style is a mix of formal and informal portraiture, informal candids as well as numerous traditional and non-traditional shots. As much as you might think a close-up shot of the rings is so stereotypical........ Ask the couple if they want a shot and I'll bet they'll say yes! I try to pose anything important that will happen during the ceremony beforehand, so I can get nice close-ups from better angles around the platform. If you want to use an M-series camera to shoot a wedding, be my guest. I shot my first wedding with F-1n's and fixed focal length lenses. I was very frustrated and missed too many shots. Having shot with both systems I can say without any hesitation that I will never shoot another one with anything else less than an AF TTL system. I'll say it again, weddings are not about the photographer, they are about the couple getting married. Wedding photographers are about making people look good and capturing moments that the bride and groom and family will want to remember. Duane Birkey HCJB World Radio Quito Ecuador