Nikon D810.

Raymond Lin · 2 Aug 2014 at 18:35

Stupid iPad loves AT&T....

Vertigo · 2 Aug 2014 at 18:39

Raymond Lin said:
As much as I do want to sneak a few snaps, I do not want to interrupt the service and be the focus of attention.

Quite, although if you get a very restrictive officiant and the couple are unaware of this until the day it can get rather awkward. In my case the couple were having the actual ceremony video'd and weren't actually that bothered about stills so wasn't an issue.

D.P. · 2 Aug 2014 at 19:09

Vertigo1 said:
Had one a couple of months ago where photography was only allowed from the very back! They said it was church policy as they'd had intrusive photographers with noisy cameras too often. Explaining I'd stay out of the way and demonstrating how quiet the camera was made little difference.

It's the getting in the way or being seen at the front of the church that was the issue from the togs I spoke to (and the vicar at my parents church). Sound had nothing to do with it, they just don't want someone standing a rounding, moving about and want the couple and the audience to respect the ceremony.

D.P. · 2 Aug 2014 at 19:17

At my wedding a friend hid his camera at the back of the church and took some photos with a remote shutter., so at least I have a series like this:

9designs2 · 2 Aug 2014 at 21:01

Not just weddings on shutter noise.... while back I was shooting from a bird hide of a squirrel and birds on a near by feeder... every time my 5Dc fired it spooked them and they fled!!! so I had to wait till they came back each time.... very annoying.. Sold it now and have a D7000....

Rojin · 2 Aug 2014 at 21:38

D.P. said:
It's the getting in the way or being seen at the front of the church that was the issue from the togs I spoke to (and the vicar at my parents church). Sound had nothing to do with it, they just don't want someone standing a rounding, moving about and want the couple and the audience to respect the ceremony.

To be honest that's a given, especially during the service.

Energize · 2 Aug 2014 at 22:10

An Exception said:
Maybe you don't have much experience shooting weddings but what Rojin said is actually very common.
You will also find even the Vicars that 'allow' you to take pictures will get annoyed if you take too many. This is a time to be discrete as possible, anticipate and pick off worthy moments.

I'm not a wedding photographer but at every wedding I've been to half the church audience must have been taking photos at some point.

I guess my relatives were just lucky enough to have a decent vicar, what a horrible experience it must be to not be allowed photographs at your own wedding!

Shutter sound is totally moot anyway if the vicar doesn't allow photographs so I still can't understand why it's desirable.

Raymond Lin · 2 Aug 2014 at 22:50

Energize said:
I'm not a wedding photographer but at every wedding I've been to half the church audience must have been taking photos at some point.

I guess my relatives were just lucky enough to have a decent vicar, what a horrible experience it must be to not be allowed photographs at your own wedding!

Shutter sound is totally moot anyway if the vicar doesn't allow photographs so I still can't understand why it's desirable.

That's whats gripes me sometimes.

There i am with a silent shutter, no flash and can't take photos and up comes uncle Bob with his bridge camera with a flash !

I tried to explain to some vicars about the silent shutter and they just don't want to hear it. Their experiences tell them that DSLR = Loud and that is that.

At the end of the day, their house, their rules and I am privilege to be there to photograph the wedding, he could place some restrictions on me or ban me completely. I rather to be able to take some pictures than none.

An Exception · 2 Aug 2014 at 23:19

Energize said:
Shutter sound is totally moot anyway if the vicar doesn't allow photographs so I still can't understand why it's desirable.

I don't know what is hard to understand than sometimes it's desirable not be heard taking pictures, and in numerous circumstances. I'm a little surprised you are unable to see the benefit of such a feature, but then if every photographer thought the same, I guess photography would be boring.

Energize said:
Shutter sound is totally moot anyway if the vicar doesn't allow photographs so I still can't understand why it's desirable.

Perhaps you missed some examples others have highlighted. For example Rojin was told 'no photographs'. He showed the vicar how quiet his x100 was. Vicar heard how silent it was and let him take pictures. Do you see any benefit now?

Energize · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:13

An Exception said:
I don't know what is hard to understand than sometimes it's desirable not be heard taking pictures, and in numerous circumstances. I'm a little surprised you are unable to see the benefit of such a feature, but then if every photographer thought the same, I guess photography would be boring.

It's just hard to imagine a non-stalker scenario where you would be noticed taking photos simply because of the shutter noise.

Photography has never been boring since the Victorian era when it was introduced. I doubt the lack of consideration of shutter noise would really affect how interesting photography is...

Perhaps you missed some examples others have highlighted. For example Rojin was told 'no photographs'. He showed the vicar how quiet his x100 was. Vicar heard how silent it was and let him take pictures. Do you see any benefit now?

The vicar may have said the same thing about the D3200 shutter. Even then it's only one case, I'm asking why there seems to be a larger number of people interested in it.

Energize · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:17

Raymond Lin said:
That's whats gripes me sometimes.

There i am with a silent shutter, no flash and can't take photos and up comes uncle Bob with his bridge camera with a flash !

I tried to explain to some vicars about the silent shutter and they just don't want to hear it. Their experiences tell them that DSLR = Loud and that is that.

At the end of the day, their house, their rules and I am privilege to be there to photograph the wedding, he could place some restrictions on me or ban me completely. I rather to be able to take some pictures than none.

Privilege? I thought you were a paid wedding photographer? Why not just stand with everyone else and masquerade as a wedding guest?

Raymond Lin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:19

Energize said:
Privilege? I thought you were a paid wedding photographer? I'd just stand with everyone else and masquerade as a wedding guest.

Privilege as in that is not my building nor it is a public footpath, i can shoot there as long as he allows me to be. Whether i am paid or not is not the question.

And no, I am not hiding amongst the guests, I introduce myself when i first arrive, ask the vicar for the rules and if possible, get to the front of the church if i am allowed. That way, i know the boundaries and work within it, sometimes I pushes over it a little, but not too much.

Energize · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:22

Each to their own but I don't consider it a privilege to be doing work. Tesco's isn't a public building either but I doubt it's employees consider it a privilege to be stacking shelves there.

Raymond Lin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:25

Energize said:
Each to their own but I don't consider it a privilege to be doing work. Tesco's isn't a public building either but I doubt it's employees consider it a privilege to be stacking shelves there.

You are misunderstanding me.

It is his house, at anytime he can tell me to leave.

So I end up with no photos, now who is going to be mad? me? no....but my clients will be.

Energize · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:31

Raymond Lin said:
You are misunderstanding me.

It is his house, at anytime he can tell me to leave.

So I end up with no photos, now who is going to be mad? me? no....but my clients will be.

Well either way you can't take any photos.

The wedding party are the customers of whomever is performing the service, they should cater to their wishes to have a wedding photographer.

Rojin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:33

Everytime I use the 1Ds2 in public people notice the shutter. Street shooters like silent shutters and shooting from the waist to remain inconspicuous. It IS a big deal for wedding shooters, not just in the church but at the reception and during speeches as well. Wild life shooters working in a hide also find it very useful. There are products (blimps etc.) targeted purely at stopping shutter noise being heard. As with anything, if it's something you need then it's a big deal. If you don't need it don't worry about it

Raymond Lin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:34

Energize said:
Well either way you can't take any photos.

The wedding party are the customers of the whomever is performing the service, they should cater to their wishes to have a wedding photographer.

I can take photos from where i can be and when he lets me.

I try to "negotiate" but there is a fine balance and it can be pushed too far very easily. I am not a religious person but they are !! They take the ceremony VERY VERY seriously naturally and when they say no photo, they do mean it. It is easy to see it from just a photographer's POV but if you see it from their shoes and how many photographers down the years he must have seen with their loud shutter and moving around with loud shoes, they don't want it happening again and understandably so.

Rojin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:34

Energize said:
Well either way you can't take any photos.

The wedding party are the customers of whomever is performing the service, they should cater to their wishes to have a wedding photographer.

LOL, the venue makes the rules, never the client.

Energize · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:37

Rojin said:
LOL, the venue makes the rules, never the client.

Indeed, the hallmark of bad service that is so prevalent nowadays.

Rojin · 3 Aug 2014 at 00:40

Energize said:
Indeed, the hallmark of bad service that is so prevalent nowadays.

What are you on about? You obviously have some sort of agenda here. I'm finished playing your game, ta ta.