DSLRUsers.com

Hi

Helped out on my first wedding at the weekend, the main photographer uses one of those carlos fandango super duper c@nnon D1s things. I used my trusty D70 for most of the pictures I took, but whilst we were at the millenium bridge with the bride and groom, Phil (the photog.) asked me to go and stand on the balcony of the bar opposite with his D1s (almost brand new) with his brand new 70-200 f2.8 (with C@nnons VR equivalent) and shoot the bride and groom whilst they wre'nt expecting it. I should also add that he didn't have a camera strap at all, so there are probably finger marks on the lens and body from were I gripped it so hard!

Anyway, here is one of the pictures, not fantastic as far as pictures go, but after feeling the weight of camera+lens I couldn't belive you'd get a sharp image without a tripod.

If the C@nnon lens is this good how good must the Nikkon be??

Also, isn't 8.5 frames a second fast!!??

right heres the pic...

i like, great angles and lines. its very well sharpened too.

CC - great pic considering that you were probably shaking like a leaf

And isn't the viewfinder sooo big and clear on those things!

I think the photo is terrific, with one little nit-pick: the bent upright post near the bride looks a bit like it's intersecting with her head and turning into a lock of hair.

--Chuan

sirhc55 wrote:CC - great pic considering that you were probably shaking like a leaf

That's where the VR (or in this case, the Canon equivalent of it) comes into play.

Charlie, nice piece of hardware, isn't it?

Nice pic and its fun having a play with other gear isnt it.

The 2 minute play I had with a 70-200VR showed an amazing difference in the viewfinder with VR on v's VR off. My coffee-buzzed induced shakes just vanished, leaving the image steady as.

We couldnt have some more pics of the bride could we

Hmmm... Nice Colours / Composition etc.
Technically fine, but it looks as if her head has been impaled on the hook in front of her..

As a concept for a wedding pic it doesn't work for me. Why would she want that image in her wedding album? I am ready for any discussion.

Matt. K wrote:As a concept for a wedding pic it doesn't work for me. Why would she want that image in her wedding album? I am ready for any discussion.

Maybe it was the photog's clever way of getting Charlie out of the way for a while

I agree, as far as pretty wedding photo's go, its not great. But at the time I was hanging over the veranda of a bar, two floors up wth tipsy 40 year old women making jokes about 'how big it was' .

The idea was to get the bride and groom when they turned round and faced towards me, hopefuly having a 'special moment' together. Unfortunatley they stayed looking the other way.

I posted the image as I was amazed at how sharp it was considering the size/weight of the camera and the location/distance I was shooting from.

If Phil (the Photog) wants me out the way again, all he has to do is hand me the D1s and 200 f2.8 and I'll be happy to leave the area! (Sorry to the gods of Nikkon, please don't strike me down!!)

CC