Fuji Using a Fuji x10 & x100 for a wedding?

BBW

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 7, 2010
123
betwixt and between
BB
Are you doing this as a paid job or are you the main photographer? Will you be photographing formal photos as well as candid? I know there are people who have used the X100 for weddings. Here are a couple of blog/web essays about how it worked: Ian Wilkinson Reviews the Fuji X100: Real World Use Shooting a Wedding | Enticing the Light and http://neilvn.com/tangents/2011/06/13/review-fuji-x100-photographing-a-wedding/

Personally, I am not an accomplished enough photographer to do anyone's wedding..so it is difficult for me to give any firsthand advice rrobinson.

By the way, rrobinson - why not stop by our Welcomes and Introductions forum for a quick intro when you have the time?
 

Iansky

All-Pro
Dec 8, 2011
123
Cotswolds, UK
There is a photographer in the UK called Brett Harkness, he has been shooting weddings with a Leica M Digital and a 50mm lens - his images are superb and are more "Human & natural" than many posed wedding photos we see today.

He use the Leica M as it is less intimidating than large DSLR's and allows him to get close to the action without people feeling as if they should stop / pose / resume.

His website is - Wedding Photographer Manchester, London , UK & Europe | Professional Wedding Photography | UK Training Courses | Brett Harkness Photography worth a look.

The reason I put this information in is to demonstrate that once again, the camera does not produce the goods it is only a tool, it is the person operating the camera and their eye that makes the difference - it could end up being a refreshing change for both you and the wedding party who have preconceived ides based on the "Norm" -step out and be different.

Good luck
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Lili

Hall of Famer
Oct 17, 2010
123
Dallas, TX
Lili
A few years back I shot a friends wedding on film, as a backup to the paid guy. He wanted this recorded on B&W film since it lasts far longer and he told me I was the best B&W shooter/ printer he knew. I used a Black GSN Electro I had found at a flea market and had had gotten restored.
The rangefinder allowed me to be fast silent but I had to run around a lot to get the shots i wanted.
This experience led me to get my Hexar AF.
BTW I would not wish to be the sole photographer, too much pressure and too much work!
 

Landshark

PhotoDog
Jul 15, 2010
124
SoCal
Bob
it is up to you there can be a lot of pressure and expectations, and while you can shoot a wedding with a Holga, it may not be the most universal tool for the job.
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
123
Houston, Texas
Jack
I have never shot any weddings professionally. I own/use both the X10 and X100. The X100 has awesome IQ, but it operates rather slowly. The AF can be quirky and slow in indoor lighting situations. That may translate into missed opportunities. Unlike a Leica M rangefinder, manual focus on the X100 is HORRIBLE. So you have to rely on the AF of the X100. The 35mm focal length is going to be very limiting as well. For example, if you want to get a close up of the couple while on the steps of the altar, you'd have to get fairly close with the X100. You may end up impeding the view of the videographer and the wedding guests.

As far as the X10, it's an awesome point and shoot. But it's still just a point and shoot, with point and shoot picture quality. The X10's AF is faster than the X100 and let's you get a little closer due to the zoom lens. But it's still just a point and shoot.

I think either camera would work for taking candids during the reception. Although, the X10 would still be limited in image quality wise. Just my 2 cents as an amateur who has never taken any wedding photos professionally.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
123
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
I'm all for pushing new boundaries, but I wouldn't want to make shooting a wedding any harder than it needs to be, particularly if you are going to be THE wedding photographer as opposed to someone taking photos at a wedding. You can poke fun at the size of the big Canon and Nikon gear but geez it can make your life easy in this kind of environment (in capability, if not easy on your back :wink:).
 

soundimageplus

Top Veteran
Jul 6, 2010
103
I'm all for pushing new boundaries, but I wouldn't want to make shooting a wedding any harder than it needs to be, particularly if you are going to be THE wedding photographer as opposed to someone taking photos at a wedding. You can poke fun at the size of the big Canon and Nikon gear but geez it can make your life easy in this kind of environment (in capability, if not easy on your back :wink:).
Agree totally.

When I was shooting weddings, I would use something like a Leica X1 or m4/3 as a second (or third) camera, but never as the main one. Flash Gordon over at mu-43 uses a Leica and mirrorless cameras, but he works with a partner, I believe, who uses DSLR's.

The problems are - The Fuji X100 has great quality, and good low noise performance. but is a somewhat sluggish camera, and sometimes you need to react pretty quickly. If the wedding was 100% outdoors, then the X10 might be useful, but the high ISO performance isn't really good enough.

If you have shot a lot of weddings then you can use what you like, and Brett is a very good wedding photographer, but he has a lot of experience, and also a clientele who are probably aware of what he does, his style and the way he works.

The simple answer to your question, is yes you could get decent results if you know your cameras inside out, how to get the best out of them and you have been had experience of doing it many times before. If not, then I would suggest you use something more versatile. A Fuji X100 for indoor work is somewhat restricting to say the least. If you are taking shots in addition to another "official" photographer then fair enough, if you are the main photographer then you owe it to the couple to do the best job you can, and a wedding isn't the time to experiment, or try things out to see if they work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

flash

Veteran
May 6, 2011
103
Gordon
Agree totally.

When I was shooting weddings, I would use something like a Leica X1 or m4/3 as a second (or third) camera, but never as the main one. Flash Gordon over at mu-43 uses a Leica and mirrorless cameras, but he works with a partner, I believe, who uses DSLR's.
And he's here too :)

The short answer is yes, yes, yes.

And if you can get your vision across then I'll hire you to shoot my wedding regardless of the camera you use. I've seen great weddings shot on iPhones and crap ones shot on Nikon D3x's. Anyone who chooses a wedding photographer based on the gear they have rather than the images they capture is making a huge mistake.

However, here's the rub. The camera will affect the way you shoot. Saying that the gear doesn't matter is also rubbish. While great photos can be taken with any camera, the camera does have a huge influence on the style and type of photos. The X100 will lend itself to a different style of shooting than a DSLR. Neither is better but if you choose the one that doesn't suit your shooting style then you're in trouble.

I moved to rangefinders because I was shooting fast primes and manual focus on huge DSLRs. A rangefinder was an obvious choice for me. On my last wedding with a DSLR 62% of my photos were shot with a 50mm 1.2. Why carry 15kg of gear when i can carry 6? My partner likes to shoot candids and he likes to shoot long. A rangefinder is the wrong tool for the job. One of my backups shoots only mirrorless. Awesome images but different to my partner. But they both shoot with the cameras that work the way they see the world.

The camera you choose will influence the images you take. You can work with the gear or against it. One is easier than the other.

The X100 and X10 are going to lend them selves to a more thoughtful methodical approach to shooting. If you try to shoot motor drive sequences or you love the look of long lenses then you're going to fail, big time. If you like to shoot at a slower pace, close in then your going to nail it. You'll focus and then wait for the moment. You'll probably shoot at high ISO on the X100 in natural light at the reception because that's where the sensor excels. These are not cameras where you'll shoot 3000 frames in a day. These are not cameras that will give you loads of telephoto compression or razor thin DOF. You'll be shooting more environmental style portraits. The settings and background will be part of your compositions. You'll probably keep your prints to a medium size as you have enough pixels to get to about 14". You'll be in close, so you'll need to be sure of your settings and react well as if your not confident you'll get noticed too much. You should blend into the background. The X10 should be a very useful little camera. Detail shots (brides LOVE detail shots), small groups at the reception and even the odd short telephoto shot. Try a really tight shot of each bridesmaid from a slightly high shooting angle at the long end of the X10 zoom. Personally I'd have a Fuji flash permanently attached to the X10 and shoot natural light with the X100. You've got two cameras from Fuji so your going to have a nice consistency of colour and tone.

Batteries on the Fujis are only average so you'll need a few spares. You'll NEED an external hotshoe flash. And you'll need plenty of memory.

Just shoot to the cameras strengths and around the weaknesses. If you're the primary then make sure the couple are ready for what you can shoot and aren't expecting heaps of candid telephoto shots.

I fully intend to getting down to 2 M9's and three lenses soon. The way I shoot that should be pretty easy. For someone else it would be hell. The only reason I don't shoot an X100 at weddings is that I don't prefer the 35mm focal length. If you've bonded with your cameras you'll be fine. The X10 and X100 are fine image making tools and more than capable of sensational wedding images, in the right hands.

Gordon
 

S Noel

All-Pro
Oct 5, 2010
124
Casey County, KY (Liberty)
Stephen Noel
Gordon,
Thank you for some very good information. Wedding photography for an amateur (me), is tough. To get the images you want, that you aren't embarrassed to show to the bride and groom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Iansky

All-Pro
Dec 8, 2011
123
Cotswolds, UK
I used to shoot groups of up to 1500 people and have been lucky enough to shoot The Queens Flight and the Bishop of Lambeth Conference as well as military groups, University freshers/survivors to name but a few all of these can be a little daunting as you as the photographer (limited to 3/4 shots on 10x8 film) have to control the group sometimes through a megaphone as well as getting them all to smile - challenging.

I would have to admit to preferring a group of 1500 people to a wedding any day and I take my hat off to those who do, especially those who also cover the reception often with drunken attendees!

I have attended weddings and sometimes taken very informal images (in B&W), I have also out of courtesy introduced myself to the official photographer and ensured I do not get in their way or attempt to duplicate their images - I would not however be interested in being a primary shooter.

Good luck & good shooting to those who do - I also agree that the X100 / X10 would encourage any shooter to be slower and more deliberate in their captures so they are not really the tools for primary shooting.
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Jul 13, 2011
124
Lexington, Virginia
Steve
Just found this wedding photographer online who uses the x100 for weddings. Check out his photos.

http://www.kevinmullinsphotography.co.uk/tag/x100
Wow. Of course, all this proves is that a really good photographer can use a camera with really good IQ to get really good images in spite of AF speed, FL limitations, etc. Heavy emphasis on "really good photographer". I certainly couldn't do this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom