Long, long ago, when I occassionally did weddings, I usually used one MX with the M35/f2.0, another MX with the M85/f2.0, plus a 200/f2.8 in the bag for balcony shots. I usually shot 400 speed film available light. I preferred B&W but he clients usually wanted color. That combination never left me feeling unable to cover a ceremony well.
The only problem I see is that many clients have come to expect a CD with a thousand or so proofs on it, that is kind of an expensive way to work with film. PS: I still love my MXen. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" ----------------------------------- drew wrote: > Hi there, > I'm relatively new to this list, but I would like to ask about a > scenario I have not been able to find much discussion about in the > archives. > > I nearly always use available light in my photographs, and I still use > film. I do work for a weekly newspaper and use a Nikon DSLR as time > restraints and deadlines dictate, but my love is shooting with my pair > of Pentax MXs and soon, a Pentax 645, which will replace my Mamiya C33 > as my primary medium format rig. (I also have a few Brownie Hawkeyes and > a Graflex 22 TLR that round out my low-budget yet fun to use MF gear.) > > To the scenario... I have been commissioned by some acquaintances to > shoot their wedding this fall. Ceremony will be outdoors, mid September, > at 4:30 p.m. at a mountaintop resort in West Virginia. (About three > hours before sunset, according to the US Naval Observatory.) > > Weather permitting, it should be a beautiful event, the light that time > of year is wonderful, and the backdrop will be a panorama of mountains > with leaves beginning to change. > > I'm also being asked to photograph the first hour of the reception, > which will be indoors, in a typical banquet hall setting at the > resort--the luminescent and aesthetic antithesis of the ceremony. Guests > are being provided with disposable cameras for the remainder of the > reception. > > Browsing this list's archives and a number of other respected forums, I > see the vast majority of folks shoot weddings using zooms (typically > ~28-70 and ~80-200) and flash (often using a stroboframe or similar > bracket). My style, as mentioned before, however, is natural light and a > collection of prime lenses, excluding my "new" SMC-A 35-105mm f3.5. > > While it's not the way the majority of folks shoot weddings, this couple > approached me because they like my work. (And I've offered a reasonable > fee, since this is my first wedding gig. I warned them of the risk of my > inexperience, encouraged them to shop around for other photographers, > they did, and they came back to me.) > > I'm rather inspired to see that until recently, Jeff Ascough was > shooting by available light and on film, with Leicas, of course, rather > than the much under-rated MX. ;) He has since gone digital. > > The glass I plan to use includes the SMC-M 50mm 1.4, an Elicar 90mm 2.5, > and I'd like to pick up a SMC-M 34mm f2 for something wide, fast and > affordable that won't distort group shots. For the 645 I have the 75mm > and the 45mm. I may consider picking up the 150mm. This camera will > probably be relegated to the formal portraits, as I think the MX is more > suited to the PJ coverage of the wedding and reception, being > inconspicuous and less intimidating to people on the other end of the > glass. > > I'd like to hear folks' thoughts on lenses appropriate for the job, film > recommendations for such a scenario (I'm thinking Portra 160 and 400 -- > likely 800 for the reception and Ilford XP2 Super), and if I'm being a > crazy for eschewing flash. > > I look forward to hearing what folks have to say. > > Thanks, > Drew > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
