Thanks, Peter. The best photographers I have seen operate just like that. You definitely sound like a pro.

Since your original question has yet to be answered - even by me - you may find yourself alone on this one, at least on this forum. I would think, however, that there are plenty of helpful reviews out there in cyberland. I know this is not a good replacement for the personal experience of those who actually use the camera, but good research is always helpful. Good luck!

Understood. When I got my Oly, I was more interested in something that would go in my briefcase. You might check out the m43 forum(s). A lot of info there.

Really? I've never been to a wedding where an envelope wasn't given/ and expected by the officiator.

Other than that, Been shooting weddings since the mid 80's, and you can tell who the pros are by their responses. I don't believe in all those years, that I ever shot a wedding without asking for the rules in advance. Being a fairly recent convert to digital, I always did reinactments after the fact (with flash) before I jumped in with the wedding party. With not being able to see what was on my film, and to make doubly sure that I didn't miss or screw up the exposures. Honestly, I think I was a better wedding photographer in the days of film than I am now. I had to be. How many times do you think you'll hear someone admit that little fact?[/quote]

Really. I am aware that some in my,profession do charge for such things as weddings and funerals. I do not because I did not choose this way of life - obviously - for the money. That does not mean I don't accept honorariums, if the people involved choose to give me one. But I do not charge for what I do.

If you haven't already, check out the Olympus OMD E-M5. Viewfinder and interchangeable lenses.

Rolenz, CaptainC, and Treehugger... thanks so much. I thought my comments (okay, complaints) would be met with a lot of criticism. Your responses have been very affirming.

Well, I certainly hope I'm not coming across like a jerk, though I'm fully aware that my profession is not immune from some. I will say this: I'm not one who uses the same ceremony every time and just fills in the blanks with new names. I customize each service to fit the personalities of the couple involved. In other words, I work hard at what I do and want each wedding to be a memorable occasion for the people involved, if for no other reason than I usually have a close personal relationship with them as both pastor and friend.

But when i introduce myself to the photographer and ask her not to use flash during the ceremony and not to intrude herself into the proceedings, and am met with, "You've got to be kidding! How am I supposed to take pictures?" I figure we're in trouble. Then, when we are about to convey the vows and I find her prone on the chancel steps, situated between the bridesmaids and the matron of honor, I can't help but decide that she really has no true respect for what we're trying to do.

In the 40 years I've been doing this (which means I'm somewhat past middle age!), I've had very positive experiences with true professionals. It just seems to me that things are deteriorating, and I'd like to take back the farm, so to speak... if it isn't too late.

Note that in the rules we state that we will do all we can to reduce that. Most of our wedding parties provide a printed bulletin. We ask the couple to include a statement that asks the guests not to use their flash cameras during the ceremony, and to silence their cellphones. Alas, in our digital age, it is becoming increasingly difficult to govern such things. The photographers I work with, who have come out of the film age, are generally more understanding.

But I do not charge for my services, and the integrity of the worship is my responsibility. My duty to the couple and their family is to see that their wedding ceremony is done with dignity. If you could have seen the photographer I dealt with last week, I think you would agree with me that dignity was thrown out the window. Regardless of how much they paid her, whether it was substantial or not, they did not pay her to disrupt the service as she did.

As a minister and photography enthusiast, and having had yet another difficult encounter with a wedding photographer, I have established the following set of rules in regard to wedding photography in my church. I am prepared for the inevitability that some of you who take wedding photos for a living will take exception to them. However, in the effort to ramp up civility in this area, I will take that chance.

WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY AT
____________________ CHURCH


Statement of Purpose

Church weddings, first and foremost, are worship services in which we bow before God expressing our gratitude for the love of two people who have come together in the desire for marriage. It is understandable that such sacred moments are meant to be remembered and celebrated for many years to come. Thus, the recording of this special occasion by means of photographic memories (video and still) is both allowed and embraced. However, we want to make it clear that such recordings are to be done in keeping within the framework of certain rules. These rules are governed by the original statement above, namely, that the wedding is a service of worship.

Rules for Photographers and Videographers

• No flash photography is allowed during the ceremony. Flash is allowed during the processional and recessional, but once the wedding ceremony has begun photographs can only be taken by means of available light. It is understood that, in this digital age, a number of guests may be carrying small cameras in their pockets or purses. We will do everything we can to discourage their use. We do expect the professional photographer to set the example for restraint.

• No excess movement by the photographer is allowed in order to keep distractions to a minimum. If certain desired pictures (e.g. the exchange of rings, the kiss, etc.) cannot be made during the ceremony due to these restrictions, they can be simulated after the ceremony is completed.

• No one besides the wedding party is allowed in the chancel (including the choir loft) during the ceremony.

• We request that the photographer’s camera(s) be set to quiet, if that option is allowed. Most professional cameras do provide this capability.

• If a video camera is set up in the chancel area, it must be remotely accessed.

• The balcony is available for use by the photographers. Again, no flashes are allowed during the ceremony.

It is our desire to be as reasonable as possible in asking the photographer to abide by these rules. If the photographer does not work within the framework outlined, at the discretion of the officiating minister, he or she will not be allowed to work any future weddings at _______________ Church.

If you subscribe, you can also receive the digital version at no extra cost. That's generally true for all mags that provide digital versions.

I don't have one (opted for the more expensive Olympus OMD E-M5), but the Nikon 1 V1 just went WAY down in price, lower than the J1. Nikon is either coming out with the V2 or they're just not selling... or both. You can get one for about $400.

I have a Nikon D7000, but 3 months ago got an Olympus OMD E-M5 to carry daily in my briefcase. For it, I purchased the 17, 12-50 kit, and last month the 75-300. With a 2x crop sensor, that provides a lot of reach. I would recommend it to anyone looking for the smaller size. Saw yesterday that Cameta has refurbished for $849. That's a $150 savings.

For regular updates to Arkansas fall foliage, simply connect via the Internet to arkansas.com, or call (800-628-8725). Good luck!

Generally, we're into early Nov for colors to show much. With the drought this year, who knows?