That’s the Wedding-kit of FXF member Antony – Fuji X Wedding Photography Chat
_ _ _
Any X-wedding photographer out there? Then this Poll is for you:
Inspired by the X-wedding photography Chat at our Forum, I was curious to hear from you guys, which Fujinon lenses you put in your bag, when you shoot a wedding. But since I want you to suffer a bit, you can select just two Fujinon lenses in the following Poll … so think carefully about it and vote the 2 lenses you consider a Must Have!
And why not, tell us in the comments if there is a lens for weddings you still miss in the X line-up…. you know it: Fujifilm will be very interested to read what you think & vote. 😉
P.S.: Another related Forum thread: FXF member mart46 shares his experience at the FXF here, after shooting his first wedding with the Fuji system. Quote: “I had more keepers than ever before with the Canons“!
[poll id=”122”]
31 Responses
Problem with weddings are not lenses but the Fuji AF which focus poorly in dim/low light in any subject move. I tried for weddings X-E2/X-T1 and 50% of shots in dim/low loght have gone to trash because of missed focus, t’s not acceptable for paid weddings. The reason is 0EV AF sensitivity only in Fuji cams while most other cams offer -2EV to -4EV. 56/1.2 AF is not also fast.
Many people have adapted and/or figured out how to successfully photograph weddings with the X-system. And some can even do it without AF at all. So the fact that you haven’t figured out how to successfully use this system for this kind of photography says more about you as a photographer and less about the system. The X-styem is fine for weddings, you just have to know how use it.
This is typical answer of some fanboys. You probably have never shooted wedding with Fuji in low/dim light with people in move without flash. Using manual focusing on by-wire lenses in action is a joke, you do not know what you are talking about. Ask these wedding photograhers who use Fuji how many shots they have taken in low/dim light using AF, have gone to trash. If they are honest and not bind brand fanboys, they will tell you truth. Try Panasonic or Olympus cams, or DSLR, than you will note how poor AF is Fuji in low/dim light in any subject move and when time counts. I noted that all blind fanboys belittle poor AF performance existing in Fuji cams, they do not want to know Fuji cams focus down to about 0EV only.
Poor schmuck, always going through the same “Fuji sucks unless you’re a fanboy” routine. What happened between you and Fuji, did she dump you?
And what happend to you if you never answer to questions but you share only your mockery, cynicism and boorishness? Let us know how you successfully focus by-wire with Fuji lenses on weddings in low light with f/1.4? Or maby you will share with some your shots taken with 56/1.2 in church on newlyweds entering? Let me know your tips using fuji lenses in low light on weddings? Do you have any answer or only your haughtiness to share with?
That reminds me of the scene I oversaw once upon a time in AMS. A fat kid was stalking Delta pilot, asking all sorts of nonsense questions (“What you gonna do if you have a frontal collision with UFO?!”)… In went on and on for about an hour. The pilot was silent and seemingly patient, but the look on his face… Oh dear.
Answering your theoretical (as you’re not a Fuji shooter or a wedding photographer) questions… In short:
1. I only use fly-by-wire MF when I have to very quickly switch between somewhere-near-infinity and closeup. That’s why I have my clutch lenses set to the closest possible focus. Pull the clutch – macro; push the clutch – back to where I was.
2. Most of the time when I’m in MF, I use a back button focus. It works, and it works fast.
3. Shooting grand entrance with 56/1.2 is extremely easy. Easier than with Canikon’s 85mm glass, actually. What’s the problem?
4. Speaking of giving you tips on using Fuji lenses for weddings… Why the fuck would I do that? Like I said, you’re not a Fuji shooter, nor you are the wedding photographer. Want some entertainment? Watch a movie.
I do not care if you think I am or not Fuji shooter or also wedding photographer. What I know for sure is you see things that are not existing… because I still shoot with Fuji and did a few weddings with Fuji.
MF with by-wire Fuji lenses is possible but never fast and accurate when shooting with fully opened apertures in low/dim light and people in move. Because of EVF it’s even worse compared to DSLR. I commiserate with people who will take your advice and will use it in low light on paid weddings in any move.
Everything what I was refering to is Fuji poor AF performance in low light in any subject move. It also means using fast aperture. Recommending in this case by-wire MF with Fuji lenses is unreliable. Unless someone – like you – can accept many missing shots.
Yes, keep your rest tips for yoursefl.
ZZZZzzzzzzzzz……..
Love Fuji but seriously af is not in the same league as d750 or D4s. Why are you guys arguing? Fuji has many plus points and the xpro2 should be faster in low light fingers crossed.
Save yorself the headache and buy a Sony for Pete’s sake. Fuji is constantly working on its AF. They are aware of its shortcoming. Now, if you are not patient enough, buy another brand.complaining over and over won’t speed things up. Unless, you have the money to finance its development or a software engineer of one of the camera brands ready to jump ship.
FYI: This IS a Fuji fanboy site. Still surprised?
Fanboy? What makes me a fanboy? Because I own and enjoy using a fuji camera? I also own and enjoy my Mazda…am i a Mazda Fanboy? I also enjoy watching movies on my Sharp TV…am I a Sharp fanboy? And your right…I have never shoot at a wedding , nor do i deserve to . I don’t pretend to be a great photographer, Im not. But unlike you…I don’t blame my lack of knowledge and experience on the equipment . You probably blame a paint brush if you can’t paint the Mona Lisa, or its your ovens fault you can’t bake an award winning cake.Unlike you …. I am aware that just because I’m not capable of doing something , doesnt mean others can’t either.I know fuji doesn’t have the best AF, it doesn’t even have a great AF. But people have been photographing weddings for a long time now, and many were done with cameras with just a fraction of what is capable of today.
As a full time wedding photographer I’ve been using 35 f/1.4 & 85 f/1.4 for some years, one per body. Over the last year it’s been two XT1s with 56 and 23.
To say it works great does not make me a fanboy. The pluses for me make up for the minuses. It’s now much, much better for focussing in low light and I’m very happy with it.
To have cameras that are so unobtrusive, quiet and unintimidating is a joy for a wedding photographer and I know of quite a few wedding photographers who are using them more and more.
I quite miss the Nikon flash system, particularly for fill at high shutter speeds, but I don’t miss the weight and the noise. And I certainly don’t miss the longer time spent processing those files taken in poor and mixed light.
So yes, I’m very happy to use Fujis in dark churches, low light receptions and for everything wedding. When it boils down to it, it’s just a tool, but it’s a seriously good one in the right hands.
A 33 f/0.8, to rival the equivalent DOF from the Canon 50mm f/1.2 I shot my last wedding with! That lens, when you did use its one trick pony feature, was revelatory. That and the 56 f/1.2 are all you’d ever need, (at least until your first 20-member bridal party group shot in a small, cramped venue!)
Wedding photographer with just 2 lenses? That’s unheard of.
They are rare but I have actually heard of them. And let’s be honest, there’s not much that can’t be done with 24/85 or 35/85. One additional UWA and a tele zoom and you can cover every need.
All the rest is usually just GAS that the customer pays for.
But the question never asked for “only” two primes but rather the must-have two (which you probably know).
There are 3 basic types of wedding photographers by their shooting preferences:
1. Formal shooters. Oftentimes they’ll shoot the ceremony and formals, or even “getting ready”, but their main focus is always formals. They might delegate the rest of the wedding to apprentice, intern or a subcontractor.
2. Photojournalists. These tend to concentrate on candid moments, preferably without any formals at all.
3. Jacks-of-all-trades.
First category can do with just one lens, in most cases a moderate tele. Second needs at least 2 lenses. And for the third category…
http://www.jeyping.com/journal/images/1manband.jpg
Very few wedding photographers fall solely into one or other of those categories. The vast majority are a blend of 1 & 2.
What about only one lens?
http://www.briankraft.com/Blog/fuji-x100s-wedding-photography-colorado/
http://neilvn.com/tangents/review-fuji-x100-photographing-a-wedding/
I’ve seen experiments in a pinhole wedding photography, technically making them the “no lens” photographic experiences. Anything is possible and doable, but not necessarily should be done.
Ha ha, good one! Didn’t realize that there’s even a “no lens” option… 🙂 Anyway, although I’m not into wedding photography, I surely think a two-lens solution should be possible (especially on two bodies). I could imagine, for example, that a 23/56mm combo would work great.
If someone somehow convinces me (at gunpoint perhaps?) to bring just 2 lenses to the wedding, I’d choose 23 and 56. And extension tubes for the ring shot. And a split lens for the bouquet shot. And… oh, don’t get me started on lighting gear!
Heck- I’ve shot a whole wedding with a Hasselblad and one 80 mm lens. On 120 film, no less, reloading every 12 shots. And you know? It came out GREAT. (I wasn’t doing this with bravado, by the way.)
Cool story bro.
Several of the top wedding photographers in the world shoot with two primes all day long…
At every wedding I’ve ever been to and observed the camera gear, there is always two bodies, one with a 24-70 and one with 70-200.
Yes, those are the usual tools of wedding/journalistic photograpers. I can imagine, however, that a two-prime approach could be more convenient (in terms of weight) and may make you more creative.
24-70 is a beginner’s choice. Seasoned pros usually skip that range altogether (or compensate for it with the 50mm prime) and take 16-35 as a companion zoom to their 70-200.
The 24-70 & 70-200 is a standard for most wedding photographers. I don’t use one myself, but to call the 24-70 a beginner’s choice is presumably just trying to stir up controversy for fun.
Isn’t that what Trenton is here for?
Workhorse combination for me is 16-55 and 90. I skipped the 50-140 and am waiting for that rumored 33/35 f/1.