amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I would recommend using your camera's Evaluative Metering mode, instead of "old school" Center Weighted. They work similarly. The difference being that Center Weighted does just what it says... it measures the entire scene, but puts extra emphasis on the center of the image. Evaluative instead puts the extra emphasis measuring right around whatever AF point(s) is(are) active. If you are using only the center AF point, it won't matter which you use. But if you choose any of the other AF points, perhaps because you're framing a shot with the primary subject(s) off-center, with Evaluative Metering the emphasis will be correctly placed. With Center Weighted, the wrong part of an off-center image is likely to be metered and can cause exposure errors.

In conjunction with that, if you don't already do so, it would be great if you could learn to use Exposure Compensation (E.C.). This is especially true at weddings where you might be photographing a bride in a white or light colored gown or a groom in a black or dark colored tux. When both are in the image, the scene averages out and no E.C. is needed. But if you're shooting just the bride andmuch of the scene is brighter than average, when using any of the auto exposure (AE) modes the camera will want to underexpose the shot and some + E.C. is used to correct for that. It might be only a little (+ 1/3 or +2/3 stop) or a lot (+1.33 to + 2 stops) depending upon how much brighter than average the shot will be. Conversely, shooting the groom alone can be just the opposite... darker than average so that the camera will try to overexpose and some - E.C. is needed. (Note: Manual + Auto ISO is an AE mode... as are Tv, Av and P in your camera. E.C. applies to all of these, but not to fully manual mode: M without Auto ISO.)

Another possible tactic - if you don't want to mess with E.C. - is to shoot RAW images (or JPEG + RAW, so long as you have plenty of memory cards because they will fill up fast). RAW files have a lot more latitude to adjust exposure later in post-processing. JPEGs are very limiting. Of course, RAW files require some sort of post-processing before they can be used for anything.... while JPEGs are usable for many purposes straight out of the camera.

You mention using smaller apertures such as f/8 to help cover up any focusing mistakes. There are a couple things to consider. First, don't go smaller than f/8 or, at most, f/11. There's an optical effect that occurs at smaller apertures called "diffraction", which robs fine detail from images. With an 18MP camera like the 60D it starts to occur at f/7.1... There's slightly more, not really noticeable, at f/8... and a wee bit more, though usually tolerable so long as BIG prints aren't being made from the images, at f/11... but any smaller aperture is likely to cause more noticeable loss of fine detail in images. Things start to look "plasticky".

Besides diffraction, most wedding photographers do the opposite and use larger apertures to make for a more "dreamy" or romantic look in their images. In fact, lenses with super large apertures like f/1.2, f/1.4, f/1.8 and f/2... and zooms with f/2.8 aperture... are the "bread and butter" of most wedding photographers. This isn't a hard and fast rule, by any means. A "journalistic" style is another approach to wedding photography... a more "hard edge" look that might use middle apertures such as you planned.

It also depends a lot on the lens(es) you have to work with. There's a great deal of variation in those. Some work very well at large apertures, while others really need to be stopped down a little for best image quality. For example, I use a Canon 50mm f/1.4 that's naturally slightly soft wide open, so I usually stop it down to f/2 or f/2.2. The cheaper Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens usually needs to be stopped down a little farther to f/2.8. Another Canon 85mm f/1.8 lens I use works great wide open, sees little improvement stopping down, so I don't hesitate to use it at f/1.8 or f/2. And I love the shallow depth of field effects of my 135mm f/2 Canon lens wide open. When it comes to zooms, my Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 lens also is great wide open. My older Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 is good, but improves a wee bit stopping it down. Newer versions of that lens and the 70-200mm f/4 I also use are just as sharp wide open as they are stopped down. So is my 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 "II", but that's sort of to be expected since it's not a particularly large aperture lens.

You mention a 15-70mm lens and I'm not familiar with any lens like that, so I can't really comment or make any suggestions. You might be wise to do a series of test shots at different apertures and different focal lengths and different distances, to see for yourself how your lens performs. Use a "target" like a brick wall or weathered wooden fence, with lots of fine detail, take a series of shots at different settings, then compare the results. (It can help to make up a series of note cards with the settings written on them, to include in the shots, for quick reference.)

Finally, if at all possible, go to the venue where you will be shooting in advance to check out the lighting and locations you might want to use. It also can be really helpful to develop a "shot list" with input from the bride & groom, then print out and use the list at the event to check off the shots you've taken, to be certain you capture all they want. You might be able to find a sample "wedding shot list" online somewhere. I've seen them in books about wedding photography, too. If they want some formal shots, work with the B&G to arrange some time either before or after the ceremony, when you can get them aside for some shots. Often this is preferred or even best done after the ceremony and can give them a bit of a rest between that and the reception.

Be sure to have extra, fully charged batteries and plenty of memory cards too. Personally I wouldn't shoot a wedding without at least one backup camera.... in fact, I can't recall ever having less than three... as well as spare lenses and extra flashes.... just in case. There are no "do overs" with wedding photography and "stuff happens"!

Hope this helps. Good luck with the wedding shoot. Take 2X or 3X the number of shots you think you need, to be sure you get as many "keepers" as possible. There are a ton of variables and weddings are challenging!

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Suggest you check out youtubes by Richard Barley, a UK wedding photographer who uses the old 5D which may be usable for what you are looking for to work on your 60D.
Setting everything at f/8 - f/10 may not be the best "rule" but it depends on your style and if it works for the available light assuming no flash is used. Flash changes everything.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Very true!

Canon ETTL flash is pretty simple though. It doesn't matter if using the wimpy flash built into the camera, or a much better and more powerful external flash....

Basically, it's either "FILL" flash or "FULL" flash, depending upon how the camera is set.

Whenever you use ETTL flash with any of the auto exposure (AE) modes, it's automatically treated as FILL. The camera still makes the exposure according to the ambient light, as if the flash weren't there, but fires the flash at a reduced power (-1.66 stops typically, unless you override it)... "Fill" flash to open up any shadows and augment ambient light.

On the other hand, with ETTL flash if you set the camera to manual exposure mode (M without Auto ISO), it will treat the flash as if it were the only light source and fire FULL flash, no power reduction. You can adjust the camera settings to make backgrounds go completely black or to be darker than actual behind the subjects being lit by the flash... or you can adjust camera settings so that flash and ambient light are more balanced, as you see fit.

It's important to remember that ETTL with M is still a form of auto exposure. The camera will adjust the flash output to render what it deems to be a "correct" exposure.

Either way.... AE and FILL flash, or M and FULL flash... there is FEC or "Flash Exposure Compensation", which the photographer can use to override what the camera wants to do, to increase or decrease exposure in certain situations. How you apply FEC is different, depending upon the flash being used. With the built-in, it might be the same as E.C. (see above), buttons and dials on the camera. On the other hand, with many of the Canon accessory flashes, FEC is adjusted using a dial or buttons on the rear of the flash itself.

Finally, the 60D has a 1/250 flash sync. That's the fastest speed to use with flash, unless it's been set to do "High Speed Sync" (HSS). You can use any slower shutter speed you wish, as well as any lens aperture and whatever ISO you prefer, that makes the type of exposure you want. HSS allows shutter speeds faster than 1/250 to be used.... BUT, it also significantly reduces the distance the flash can reach. Exceptionally slow shutter speeds are possible with "full flash", because the flash itself acts like a fast shutter speed... often with a duration equivalent to 1/720 or faster. Some special flashes can emulate a 1/10,000 or even up to 1/60,000 or faster shutter speed. But even "normal" flashes can be quite good at freezing movement. HOWEVER, if using the flash as FILL, with moving subjects you'll tend to get "ghosting". This can look odd unless the flash is set to "Second Curtain Sync", where the flash fires at the very end of the overall exposure, so that the ghost appears behind the moving subject, instead of in front of it. It's obviously not a wedding shot, but here's an example where I deliberately used that flash ghosting effect to give greater appearance of movement in the image, using 2nd curtain sync, fill flash and a relatively slow 1/30 shutter speed:

SonyBug

Paul, I really respect both your opinion and your inclination to build people up. But in this case it may be better for this person to "shadow" a pro wedding shooter for a while and then take on a wedding as sole shooter. From experience, it is never a good thing to miss shots that the bride will want later! My opinion of course.

aellman Loc: Boston MA

[quote=Vietnam Vet]Based on just what you posted here you should probably pass on photographing the wedding[/quoteI

Enthusiastic agreement from a retired wedding photographer: If
this your first wedding, don't do it. The risks to your reputation are too high.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Yet another "I'm gonna cover a wedding...what should I do, use, etc." thread. And the same typical answers. Some folks warn the OP as to the difficulties, responsibilities, and ramifications of shooting a wedding without the requisite skill sets, experience and professionalism. Others post what amounts to a "tutorial" on what to do and what equipment to employ, Some of their advice is kinda alright and some of it is patently incorrect.

Of course, all if this is well-meaning advice and folks wanting to help. Many times, however, the OP never returns to the scene and usually won't take any discouraging advice. Folks will do what the want to do. If someone has no wedding or even remotely related experience such as photojournalism, other kids of candid coverage of events, formal portraiture, group photography, etc. and don't even know what lenses or focal lengths to employ for any of the aforementioned areas of photography, even a book on the subject is not gonna provide sufficient knowledge and savvy.

If the OP is concerned about focusing errors, he or she is in trouble.. Worrying about diffraction at smaller apertures is the least of the problems the image are not gonna be view on the Jumbotron at the local arena and diffraction is not gonna be an issue in a wedding album.

It's really difficult to advise people in this kind of circumstance. I have no idea of the OP skills, talents, or previous experience. For all I know he is a crackerjack shooter and all he needs are a few tips- or not! I also have no idea of the kind of wedding he has been asked to cover- size, venue, culture, and what are expectations if the bride and groom. Some weddings are easy to cover, move along a moderate pace and some can be extremely hectic.

Exposure, lens choices, equipment issues, and lighting aspects are all important but equally important is understanding the structure of the wedding, being able to anticipate the action and always be in the right place at the right time to capture all of the "must have" images. Oftentimes working under the pressure of restricted time frames and limited windows of opportunity to come up with excellent results can be a daunting job even for a seasoned professional.

If the wedding couple can not afford the services of an experienced professional, some pictures are better than no pictures and the OP is donating a valuable service.

There is also an ongoing misconception that a professional wedding photographer can not capture the intimate, funny, family aspects of a wedding and somehow the pro will only come away with stiff, impersonal or overly contrived images. not so! Myself and many of my professional cohorts, competitors and old wedding pros work diligently to capture every nuance at every wedding. We plan ahead with the couple, find out who's who and discuss family dynamics, plan private time for formal portraits and groups and spend the entire day creating a very detailed and in-depth coverage.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

👍👍 A very balanced and insightful post - kudos.

Vector

If the OP is still on this thread, and hasn't found a photographer yet, here's an option. Perhaps hiring one, or two (maybe 3) photography majors from a local college(s). It's a risk, but probably less risky than trying to learn how to shoot a wedding in two months. They get experience and money, you get someone who has studied this for a few years. Also, having 2 or 3 gives you some backup in case one of the students' pictures aren't up to snuff.

Comments?

watersedge Loc: Bristol UK

18 - 70 i think

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Use “Quote Reply” when addressing a specific post so we know which one you are responding to.

Having been a pro for over 40 years and based on your initial post, I think you’re in way over your head.
For what it’s worth, if there are no photos, they’ll still be married, everyone will have memories of the ceremony and you can be present for it, rather than experiencing it through a viewfinder. My daughter recently got engaged and I plan on being fully present for her wedding. Got a friend (who is a pro) to shoot it.

hpucker99 Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I did the same at my wedding, no professional photographer, just some people with P&S, some DSLRs and many cheap disposable one-time use cameras on each table. There were enough good shots from the better cameras and many from the disposable camera (although good to fair) were usable and more spontaneous.

watersedge Loc: Bristol UK

thanks for replys
i can take some ok photos just being cautious over the finer things i guess. wasnt anytime to book a pro.

Hamltnblue Loc: Springfield PA

Since you have little time ahead of the event, I would suggest good ole Auto. Make sure it saves in JPG and Raw.
You will probably get acceptable and safe results.
Trying to mess around with the manual and semi-manual modes will probably result in bad results.
Many cameras have different modes such as landscape, sport, etc. You may want to practice with those as well.
Good Luck

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

This is the best advice that you are going to get here!