So I'm trying to get together a setup to film weddings. I need help figuring out if there's anything I should change or if my current plan is adequate.

Already have:

Panasonic GH2
Panasonic 14-45mm (for stationary camera)
Panasonic 45-200mm (for manned camera)
2 x 16GB Sandisk Extreme SDHC cards
Zoom H2 audio recorder
Ravelli AVTP tripod (for manned camera)
Final Cut Express
LG Blu-ray burner
GH2 AC power adapter

Planning on buying:
Second Panasonic GH2
2 x 16GB Sandisk Extreme SDHC cards (for backup)
Rode Shotgun VideoMic
Ravelli AVT tripod (for stationary camera)
Extra GH2 AC power adapter (for second camera)
Toast 10 for burning Blu-rays

Is this sufficient for a basic wedding setup? I've thought about buying another H2 to tie into the audio board, but I'm not sure if I need to. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

You should consider adding Canon G10 video camera or equivalent and faster lenses for your GH2. The lenses you have are not close to what are needed for wedding environments. They are too slow.

Your present lenses are fine for outdoor work or any well-lit situation. I had the 14-42, and loved the little guy, but it was useless for wedding work.

If you have little or no experience shooting weddings, you should consider a good low light videocamera. I shot with 4 GH2 and GH1s for months before breaking down and getting a real videocamera, and am very glad I did.

Anyway, videocamera or not, your present lenses will produce grainy or dark video images in darker environments, and you will need to change them. If you've already tested what you have and think they are OK, then never mind.

I think I'll be sticking with the GH2 setup, since I've never been happy with the sub $1000 video cameras.
Wouldn't the GH2 with a slow lens would still be better than something like a Panasonic TM900, since the GH2 is much better at higher ISOs to begin with?

I'm having trouble finding a faster lens that is long enough for closeups. I suppose I could get the 14mm or 20mm for the stationary camera, but I need something with enough reach to get closeups of the bride and groom. What lenses would you suggest?

Thomas, I have used approximately 12 lenses of various speeds and angle with these cameras, and have shot about 20 weddings using them exclusively.

The G10/XA10 keeps up with the GH2 to a large degree, and as I said the lenses you have chosen are too slow for quality wedding video. I suggest you go ahead a shoot a few weddings with what you have, and see what you think.

Yeah like Jeff said, you need faster lens F 2.8 minimum, F 1.4 preferred, those lens you have only good for outdoor wedding during the day, and you need wireless mic for vows, strings quartet, vocalists or at least use mp3 recorders and plug a lav mic into it, I hope you don't plan on using the tripod at the reception the whole time, so you will need some kind of support, at least a mono pod, if you want better video you also need some kind of steady cam, slider, but those can wait until you get better. Good luck. btw if you closeup, get the Canon 70-200 2.8 and with your gh2 crop center zoom, it could become 600 mm with no quality loss, right Jeff?

What about getting, say, a Panny 14mm for the wide shot and the reception? I realize that the 20mm is faster, but I don't think it would be wide enough for the wedding itself, and I don't have the cash for both.
Would the 45-200mm be OK for the ceremony itself?
I do like the look of that Canon, but I don't have another $1k to spend on a lens.

Rent some lenses for the wedding day. It will give you the ability use some amazing glass without having to pay for it. After that, invest in some quality glass and you will be a happy camper.

Evan

I'll chime in with this bit of advice Thomas, make sure you check your H2 to see how well it will sync up with your video. I had to dump my H2 because it was such a PITA in post. The Zoom H1's sync perfect with video and not all H2's are the same I think.

If I am you, I would go with something like this
CANON FD 135MM 1:2.5 S.C. FAST LENS WITH CANON CAPS | eBay (http://www.ebay.com/itm/CANON-FD-135MM-1-2-5-S-C-FAST-LENS-CANON-CAPS-/250905297424?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item3a6b1f0210)
and get an fd to micro4/3 adapter and use that for close up along with your center crop, and also a Canon or other brand 55mm f 1.2, and a few more lens for wide and you still be way under $1000.00, you will loose auto focus but if you want to be good you don't want auto focus anyway. I shot all of my weddings with prime lens and rarely use zoom lens and if I do I want fix aperture not one that change when you zoom in.

That actually might work right there. I don't mind manual focusing as long as there's no zooming involved.

The only thing I'm worried about is the wide stationary camera. Since it would be unmanned, I don't know how well a manual focus only lens would work. Would I be better off with the 14mm Panasonic? Or do you think that I could just focus on a fixed point near the front and it would be OK for the whole service?

EDIT: Also, how would the crop factor work with an adapted lens? I'm assuming it wouldn't be 2x.

If you can find an old wide and fast lens then get it, you don't need auto focus, the wider it is the more dof you will have, example, my tokina set at f 2.8 and at 11mm, when I focus it at around 7 feet, it will give me good focus between 4 and 1/2 feet to 100 feet.
With a GH2, any lens you put on there will double the field of view, so if you put a 14mm on it, it will look like 28mm field of view.
If you decided to go with the old lens, make sure that you get the right adapter for it, there should be plenty on ebay.

Awesome.
I'm leaning towards this adapter, since it appears you can change the aperture while the lens is attached:
Amazon.com: RainbowImaging Canon FD Lens to Micro 4/3 Four Thirds System Camera Mount Adapter, Olympus PEN E-P1, Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1, GH1, G1, MSRP USD30.99: Camera & Photo

I personally would go with the 20mm, that will get you through a huge number of situations. I could shoot an entire wedding with the 20mm if I had to and I wouldn't bat an eye doing it. You can shoot the processional from down front with it, you can shoot the introductions of the bridal party, you can shoot the cake, toasts, everything if you had to. Obviously not ideal to use only one lens, but if there were only one, that is the one.

14mm is too slow for general wedding work. You could use it a lot, but it's too slow for many situations. I have the 12mm F/2.0 and there are times it is borderline fast enough.

I disagree about the tripod, I use a tripod for everything. I do go handheld, but when I do it's with the 12mm as it's so wide that it's smooth even when I walk with it carefully. You can follow people with it without a steadicam and it's amazing.

I have the 135mm F/2.5, if you want mine make me an offer. Go on ebay, find one, and I'll sell mine for $20 less and include free shipping. I will throw in the adapter. the lens has an aperture ring, you don't have to have an adapter that does that.

I just bought a Canon 50mm from Jeff here, so that should suffice until I can save up for an Olympus 45mm.
I decided to trade my 14-45mm for a 14mm, mainly because the 20mm just isn't wide for some of the buildings I'm in. The last wedding I shot for a friend was in a small church, and the lens I used then (Olympus 14-42mm) was just barely wide enough. I'll probably pick up a 20mm in the near future once the price drops.

I did check out the sync between my H2 and GH2, and luckily it was perfect.

Here's my updated setup.

Already bought:

Panasonic GH2
Panasonic 14mm f2.5 (for stationary camera)
Canon 50mm f1.8 (for manned camera)
2 x 16GB Sandisk Extreme SDHC cards
Zoom H2 audio recorder
Ravelli AVTP tripod (for manned camera)
Final Cut Express
LG Blu-ray burner
GH2 AC power adapter

Planning on buying:
Second Panasonic GH2
Olympus 45mm f1.8
Panasonic 20mm f1.7
2 x 16GB Sandisk Extreme SDHC cards (for backup)
Rode Shotgun VideoMic
Ravelli AVT tripod (for stationary camera)
Extra GH2 AC power adapter (for second camera)
Toast 10 for burning Blu-rays


The only aspect I'm still unsure of is the audio. Would I be better off just buying another H2 instead of a shotgun mic?

Thomas, you'll love the 14mm f/2.5 compared to what you have. But then after you get the 20mm you will then never use much else in low light when you can avoid it, unless you get the 12mm F/2.0.

14mm is a great lens overall for sure.

You know, I'm not a fan of manual focus lenses, but the new 12mm f/1.6 manual focus lens looks very nice. It's cheap too. It's mentioned around here somewhere. Have you looked at that one?

Hey I have a H4N in perfect condition if you are interested.
khoi@proeditproductions.com

Hey I have a H4N in perfect condition if you are interested.
khoi@proeditproductions.com

I might buy it when I get more funds, assuming you still have it by then.

While the GH2 is a more sensitive camera you have to keep in mind f3.5 or f5.6 vs f1.8 or f2.8 on a video camera. If you can use F1.8 lenses then yes the GH2 will beat the pants off a video camera also shooting at F1.8. As soon as you use F3.5 or F5.6 at the typical telephoto end for most DSLR lenses then most video cameras at F2.8 on the telephoto end will beat the GH2. Also remember zooming on a DSLR is a PITA. A video camera is still a darn good option for those long shots.

I second old Canon FD lenses. I have a Canon FD 50mm F1.8 and love it. It is so fun to work with. I also just purchased a FD mount Vivitar 75mm to 210mm zoom lens at F3.5. Yeah it is a bit slow but it is contant so even at 210mm it is still F3.5 which blows away any MFT lens at 200mm. FD Primes are a good option for fast lenses but you pretty much must use a tripod. I believe you can get a FD F1.8 at 85mm which may get you a bit closer and still be plenty fast. Above 85mm you are going to have a hard time finding a lens at lower then F2.5 for a decent price.

Personally my plan of action is to use a traditional video camera at the service and move to a DSLR for the reception where you can get by with fast wide lenses.

Ok maybe the Canon FD 75 - 210mm was a bad choice. lol

I received the lens today and it weighs a ton compared to my dinky GH1. The thing is massive. I'm also having trouble getting it to work on the FD adapter. I guess it uses a breech lock FD mount and my adapter just will not turn and lock. Looks like it may have been a waste of $30.00. oh well. While I hate how slow the Panasonic telephoto lenses are I'm thinking they may be the best option for M43. Due to the size and weight of other telephoto lenses they seem so odd when used on a M43 camera. Now to save up for the Panasonic 45 - 200.

Yeah, I think the micro 4/3 lenses are ideal unless you have no other option.

I'm considering buying a c-stand instead of a tripod for the stationary camera, mainly because I can't find a tall enough tripod.
Obviously they're designed for lighting, but with enough sandbags I would think they could double as camera stands, no?

How high do you want to go? My Bogen goes up to about 7.5 feet. I have to use a stepladder to operate my camera from it.

At least 7 feet (this is for the stationary cam).
The issue is finding a tripod heavy enough to be stable, but cheap enough to stay in my price range.

I could always get a cheapo aluminum tripod and use sandbags, but it would be a pain for me to have to move that to the reception when time is an issue.

This is the one I have, it's not as high as I thought, but it's high enough for me.

Manfrotto 028B Studio Pro Triman Tripod Legs (Black) 028B B&H

That is a lot of tripod for a tiny camera. But it is also very stable. If you need to put a larger camcorder on it you'd be set. It is a very nice piece of gear. For reception work I always put it up all the way and put a WA lens on it, or my main camera. You get everything from that height, it's great. You can zoom in on anything, and when you have a light on your camera at that height, it's lights up a much larger area and is not in peoples eyes. So it is in effect a light stand and tripod. I do take a black metal stepladder with me, can't use it otherwise fully extended. You will get very nice images with a cam and light from the high position.

Thomas, for zoom you'd be better to forget long lenses, IMO, at least for weddings and get a videocamera. If you're running muliple cameras by yourself. I've done been there, done that, but maybe you'll do better at it than I did. When you get a long enough zoom to shoot from the rear of a church, as soon as the people move 5 inches they are out of the frame, and nailing focus when live is next to impossible with a long lens without a monitor, because there is no focus assist while running. I have a wedding I'm working on now, and my FD 50mm (the one you bought) was out of focus the whole time, and I didn't know it, it was near impossible to tell at the time. I used it for a long shot it was a gorgeous shot, just out of focus. During a wedding I don't have time to fool with that crap. That's why I have run up to 5 cameras, so I can be sure to at least have one or two good shots at all time. Now that I've switched to select Olympus, Zuiko and two Panasonics (20mm and 12mm) everything looks near perfect all the time. I had to go through a lot of lenses to figure it out, at least in a way that worked for me.

On the other hand if you have an assistant running your primary camera, you can go crazy with the GH2 and do anything, but I work alone, so therein lies my problem. I do use an assistant sometimes, just not that often.

Thanks for the link. That tripod would probably work well for what I need.

I work alone as well (at this point).
I plan to use the 14mm or 20mm on the wide camera, and to eventually buy a 45mm Olympus for the main camera.
That would leave the wide camera unattended, but at least I could be closer to the subject.
I have yet to see how the AF performs on that lens on the GH2, but hopefully it would be adequate.

Or, I could buy the 20mm for the main camera, but that would make it imperative to be much closer, so I don't know if it's a good idea.

I kind of have to agree with Jeff on the video camera. Even if you did manage to find a decent long lens focusing is a major PITA with long lenses. Keep in mind these things are designed first and foremost as stills cameras. Being able to do an electronic zoom keep it fast (f2.8 or faster) and work with a zoom that is always in focus is worth gold after you have worked with DSLRs for awhile.

I have a Panasonic HMC40 which I use with my GH1 and I love it. It is about as bad as you can get in low light for this class of camera but as soon as you switch to telephoto situations it is at least equal or even better then DSLR telephoto shooting. The M43 lens top out at f5.6 at their longest reach. That is very dark and my HMC40 can beat it considering the lens as its longest range is at f2.8. I don't care how large of a chip you have f2.8 is a lot more open then f5.6 no matter how you look at it. This was why I was looking at fast FD telephoto lenses. They are really the only option if you want fast. Of course like Jeff points out the tighter you are on DSLRs the closer to next to impossible it becomes to actually hold focus on them.

The only way now I would consider a long M43 lens to be a better option then a video camera is if somebody made one at f2.8 or better at the longest range with electronic zoom and stabilization. Oh and it has to be under $2,000.00. That is not going to happen anytime soon. Leave the creative shots to the DSLR and keep the tele shots to a video camera on a balcony.

One other thing I should point out. Most video cameras only reach about what the 200 mm M43 does. My Panasonic manages to reach 490mm or what would be 245mm if there was a M43 that did that. The 300mm lens is actually insanely tight compared to almost every video camera with a built in lens that is out there. Even the new Panasonic video cameras coming out next month with a 22x zoom just gets over 600mm or equal to the 300mm M43 lens. The Canon XA10 only gets about 150mm in terms of M43 range. So keep that in mind when you look for a video camera for your tele shots. B&H usually lists the 35mm range for a lot of the cameras. Just double the M43 range to get the 35mm range and you will know how a particular video camera will compare for reach.

Good point Thomas, to get the equivalent zoom of a video camera you need a WAY powerful zoom.

The zoom most of the better shooters use, I think, is the Canon 70-200mm F/2.8. It was the first zoom I looked at for the GH2, and it would certainly work, but again at an effective 140mm to 400mm it's useless for everything but the ceremony, IMO. The non-IS model is around $900 to $1200, but it is too freaking large, and for that price you can buy a videocamera.

I'm throwing around the idea of picking up a Panny TM700 or TM900 and using that instead of the second GH2.....not sure if I need it though.
Pros:
F2.8 at 420mm end :wow:
Greater focal range

Cons:
Smaller sensor, so large DoF (could be a Pro in certain situations)
Worse in low light


I just don't really know if I need anything past 45mm, especially considering the ex-tele mode on the GH2.

Thomas, if you look in the GH2 forum, at the TM900 Vs the G10, Frederico just bought both cameras and got them yesterday. He pretty much sums it up by saying the Canon is in a different league. I shoot with it and it works VERY well with the GH2.

For wedding the extender mode is of limited use. You need plenty of light, and it won't turn off and on while recording. The Olympus 14-54 F/2.8-3.5 used is the best fast zoom for the money for the GH2, unless you can find the Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 for Olympus, which I have. It's F/2.8 straight through, and very useful, particularly for reception work.

Thomas, if you look in the GH2 forum, at the TM900 Vs the G10, Frederico just bought both cameras and got them yesterday. He pretty much sums it up by saying the Canon is in a different league. I shoot with it and it works VERY well with the GH2.

Except for the fact that the Canon only has an equivalent reach of 150mm compared to M43 lenses. Not a great length but every else is excellent. Finding a good balance between long reach, low light and low cost is a bit of a challenge and we seem to always have to sacrifice one of them.

Thomas, I think it's a tad confusing to cut in half a video camera lens specs since it's numbers are accurate, but I know what you mean. I think it's more accurate/efficient to say the Canon has an equivalent range of 30.4 to 300mm and it takes a 150mm still camera lens to produce same reach, but again what you say is true.

On the other hand, the autofocus operation on a videocamera that smoothly adjusts as you zoom is worth every penny to me. No still camera yet can do that, which is what makes a true video camera such a valuable tool. The new slow, powered zooms that are out or are that are coming out are a bit of a joke for professional use, at least for low-light purposes. So much simpler to just have a video camera for that purpose. When I do use a DSLR type zoom, it's not that big of a hassle to zoom manually, it's just not quite as smooth.

Just as an aside, it is funny how so many DSLR users discount the value of the powered zoom, saying that in Hollywood they don't zoom, but what is forgotten is most event shooters are shooting live, non--repeatable events, not feature films. I can't imagine a football game shot with a series of prime lenses, wouldn't work so well. The zoom feature of the video camera is an extremely powerful tool, it must simply be used judiciously and discreetly.

I should mention I did finally get my Vivitar 75mm - 210mm f3.5 Canon FD lens to work today. The tiny pin on the inside of the mount sticks and I had to pop it with a tiny screw driver first. The lens is beautiful and very long but a bear to use without stabilization. Basically there is no way at all to use it without a tripod. This thing will be fun to use in certain situations but without a doubt get a video camera for wedding work. I plan on using mine more for photos when I feel I need a bit more reach on my tripod.

If you're like me you'll have fun playing with it and then it will end up in the junk pile. For weddings I can't imagine F/3.5 being much use. F/2.8 seems to be the slowest useable aperture in many churches, and even F/2.8 is too slow at times for best images.

I think you both have convinced me to go with a video camera, since it's much more versatile.
I would like the Canon G10, but $1200 is definitely out of my price range.
The Canon M41 is supposed to have the same low light performance, but it doesn't have manual controls, and the lens isn't as good.

I'm still leaning toward the TM700 or TM900 at this point, due to the extra reach and much lower price.
If there are any other models I should consider, I'm open to suggestions. :)

My suggestion would be to wait and get the G10. At that price you are getting a professional grade lens and sensor, which is actually a good deal. It is the best deal on the market, if low light is important to you.

Whenever I know what I need to buy, but instead buy the next cheaper thing to save money, I'm sorry every single time I do it. And I've done it many times. After reading Frederico's direct comparison between the two cameras, I would find it hard to purchase the Panasonic knowing what we know about it, but that's just me.

Thomas.
If you can, try to test both the cameras yourself, as you know, its the only way to make the correct purchase.
The posts on any forum regarding cameras are very subjective. In this thread alone I have read that the Canon is in a different league to the Panasonic, absolute rubbish, I have both cameras, only had the XA-10 for a week, had the TM900 for several months.
I will try to be objective.
The Panasonic, at 1080/50p and PROPERLY set up, is stunning. Nothing at this price point comes close.
The Canon has a slightly better dynamic range, and colours hold up very well in low light.
The Panasonic menu system is much easier to navigate, all prime adjustments are easily accessable
The Canon menu system has an awful lot but most is buried deep
The OIS on the Panasonic is a country mile better than the Canon (almost like having a steadycam)
Build quality of the Panasonic is much better than the Canon.
They are both superb cameras, neither would disappoint. It really is a matter of testing for yourself. The HF M41 looks quite interesting I had a play with one yesterday, only able to grab some footage in daylight. Its hard to see any difference between the XA-10 and the HF-41, and its a third of the price. Would like to see how it performs in less favourable conditions.
Hope this helps.

Colin, at what amount do you get grain with one cam vs the other? I run the Canon at 18db max and get no grain that I can discern. I ran it at 21db or so and saw very little. What point does grain begin to occur with the Panasonic? Federico claims at 9db, I think he said. It is true these tests are subjective, but he bought both at the same time, and compared directly before making his posts, so your input would be most welcome as well.

To have two owners of both cameras giving your feedback would be excellent.

I see Colin you have gone into this before earlier in this thread, so never mind, unless you want to chime in again.

No problem Jeff.
I have never taken the TM900 above 12db, and its good. It is about my limit for any cam, anything above that and the lights come out. The set up of the TM900, as with any camera is critical. The detail is knocked down by -3 , colour -2 and exposure -3 for bright conditions (when in floating iris mode) These settings make a heck of a difference from the out of the box defaults.
I got the XA-10 last week, having used one on four or five occasions. I have a job on a commercial pheasant shoot in Wales in two weeks time, and needed something small that would take 2 wireless receivers. I considered a Juicedlink box for the TM900, but I am not a great fan of harnessing my audio via a non fixed jack plug, particularly whilst hiking miles through woodland and valleys. And as mentioned earlier, having used the Canon on a few occasions, and liking it, decided to buy one. The job will almost pay for it, and its a nice little cam to have in the kit bag. (Boys and toys!!!!!!!)
I hope to post some wedding service footage on Vimeo, with the TM900 and EX1 intercutting, it is very impressive, and the cameras match very nicely.
Looking forward to putting the XA-10 through its paces on a paying job, knowing Wales, as I do, it will probably rain for 3 days out of 4

Good luck on your shoot. Many of us would like to see the TM900 and XA10 in low light (wedding?) intercut, that too would be interesting. I love having XLRs again, it's priceless.

And trust me, you can easily run the Canon at 18DB, try it if you haven't. For that matter try 20, it's freaking amazing. For wedding work even with sufficient lighting it is absolutely necessary for me when shooting alongside the GH2 with fast primes on them.

Thanks for the input. I have ruled out the TM700/TM900 as I forgot it doesn't have a WA lens. I definitely want the option of using it for the wide shot and the GH2 for the manned shot.
If I decide go the video camera route, I'll probably have to save up for the G10.

I've picked up some more gear since the last time I posted my setup, including another H2, an H1, and a cheap lav mic (which sounds surprisingly good for the price). I'm also seriously considering picking up an HD1000 Glidecam. I would rather have something like the Glidecam than a monopod, since I don't want to have to rely on the wide shot.

I'd be appreciative of any more feedback.

Already own:

Panasonic GH2
Panasonic 14mm f2.5
Panasonic 20mm f1.7
2 x 16GB Sandisk Extreme SDHC cards
2 x Zoom H2 audio recorder
1 x Zoom H1 audio recorder
Audio-Technica ATR-3350 Lav mic
Rode VideoMic
Ravelli AVTP tripod (for manned camera)
Ravelli AVT tripod (for stationary camera)
Final Cut Express
LG Blu-ray burner
GH2 AC power adapter

Planning on buying:
Second video camera
Olympus 45mm f1.8
Toast 10 for burning Blu-rays

mate get more cards. A 16Gb card is good for 1 hour in the full hd movie mode on a GH1!!

I can actually shoot 2 hours on one 16GB on the GH2, but I probably should pick up some more just in case.
Are Transcend Class 10s fast enough for the GH2?

Pretty much any class 4 or higher card is fast enough as long as you don't hack the camera. Hacking typically bumps up a datarate to make the quality higher so it needs faster cards. If you don't plan on hacking your camera then class 10 is really a waste. You may copy files a bit faster to your computer but it will not make your footage look any better.

Thanks. I'll probably just pick up some 32GB Transcends Class 10s on Black Friday since they're actually cheaper than the Class 6 cards. I'm definitely not going to hack the camera for a wedding shoot for stability reasons.

I'm still looking into buying a steady cam for the reception. So far I'm liking the Glidecam HD1000.
I should think it would be OK for my GH2 since the largest lens I'll be using is the Oly 45mm.

Does anyone here use the HD1000?

I don't use it, but have read countless reviews, watched many videos, and read every comparison thread I could find.

If you go to the B&H website you will see the largest issue with this and all stabilizers is that many people after initially buying them can't get the hang of them and then blame the stabilizer.

The bottom line is the Merlin is considered to be more pro, and better built, but slightly trickier to balance. The HD1000 is considered a bit easier to use, but some don't like it's build quality, while others say it's very good.

It is the one I would get, but I don't know if you're ready for a stabilizer, but that is up to you. I personally would have my camera gear nailed down before buying a stabilizer, but that's just me.

Yeah HD-1000 is great, small, light, unobtrusive, so you can use it in many situation, I use it all the time, I like it so much I bought another one, the key is to spread the weight far apart as far as it goes then balance it right, then practice makes perfect.
The only negative is you will have to rebalance it often if you bang it around a lot, tiny bump can put it out of perfect balance, even when you are using quick release plate, and if you remove the camera and put it back on, it could sill goes off a little.