Called to take some photos at a wedding.

[patrickv]

Well .... I did read actually. To make my point I just underlined the prices from the sites you mentioned. Notice it is in RED so that you can see it.
Go on www.ebay.com.au and look for "Yongnuo YN-468 II" - it's a reasonable flash WITH E-TTL. It has a 33 GN and it costs $89, handling/shipping included.

I completely believe the OP will be much better off with a 1100D + kit 17-55 + 50 1.8 + sub $100 flash WITH e-ttl + time to try to do some shots than with some new stuff, than with some new rented gear he hasn't had time to get comfortable with.
Why rent a low end camera while already having the 1100D anyway? It doesn't make sense either.
The OP also already has the kit lens, did you read? While it doesn't have a fantastic image quality or super wide aperture, is a 17-55 which is equivalent in angle of view to a 27-88mm on FF.

Everything seems very out of context. This is going nowhere. I'm out of here.

[JM Tran]

Well .... I did read actually. To make my point I just underlined the prices from the sites you mentioned. Notice it is in RED so that you can see it.
Go on www.ebay.com.au and look for "Yongnuo YN-468 II" - it's a reasonable flash WITH E-TTL. It has a 33 GN and it costs $89, handling/shipping included.

I completely believe the OP will be much better off with a 1100D + kit 17-55 + 50 1.8 + sub $100 flash WITH e-ttl + time to try to do some shots than with some new stuff, than with some new rented gear he hasn't had time to get comfortable with.
Why rent a low end camera while already having the 1100D anyway? It doesn't make sense either.
The OP also already has the kit lens, did you read? While it doesn't have a fantastic image quality or super wide aperture, is a 17-55 which is equivalent in angle of view to a 27-88mm on FF.

Everything seems very out of context. This is going nowhere. I'm out of here.

I was replying before during a wedding shoot.

Did you bother checking out the 4 prime lenses kit I listed earlier? $160 for 4 prime lenses doesnt seem like a better alternative than an average prime lens on an awkward crop for wedding work? Makes sense to a lot of wedding photographers doing it. I dont know about your standards, but if I wanna do a good job, then I will seek the best possible solution. Maybe we have differing standards.

Notice that - if you had ever bothered to HIRE SOMETHING - 1 day does not mean morning till afternoon, it is usually 24 hours - hence 1 day rates are what wedding photographers go by - commercial/editorial shoots usually require a few days. You really expect a wedding photog to hire something for a day then suddenly have to return it in the afternoon in the midst of shooting? Same for cars etc?

A daily rate is a full 24 hour period, which begins when the item is collected. That item must then be returned by that same time the following day.

Since you probably mistook 1 day hire as a rip off and believe weekend rates are what is needed. Here are some good sites that I have also used.

http://www.benshire.com.au/hire/digital-slr-cameras/ - $125 for Mark 3, $84 for Mark 2 - bargains!

http://totalphoto.com.au/?page_id=1376 - $130 - Mark 2, Pentax 645D + 2 lenses = $250 - bargains!

http://www.brisbanecamerahire.com.au/pricelist - $140 - Mark 3, $110 - Mark 2 - bargains!

Oh and the previous sites I have listed, thank you!

Yeah I have a YN468, gave it to an assistant to use tonight actually, its been in my bag for 2 years now - why did I not recommend to purchase it? Differing standards once again. As I prefer to recommend a Nissin for double the price with more powers and features, sorry.

[patrickv]

For actual pro work I wouldn't recommend a 50 1.8, a low end flash or a Canon 1100D. I wouldn't recommend an inexperienced photographer either...
Given the conditions where the OP only has experience with the kit lens, practice with the new stuff is definitely needed (how to use the DOF of the 1.8, realizing that you need to close it to about 2.5 to get pictures to look OK, then using the flash, bouncing it, and so on)
In this specific case, with a very low budget, adding to an already owned 17-55 the 50 1.8 and a low end flash allows practice and in my point of view is the best compromise for $200 or less. I believe it will give much better results than better rented gear and less experience with it.

If you disagree on that, it's completely fine. We will just agree to disagree.

Thanks for the info on renting. I guess I've been so used to these car rental places that close on the weekends and force you to rent from Saturday morning to Monday morning that I assumed that it would be the same for photo equipment. The word "bargain" seems a bit strong though. If when I rented a car it was 1/20th of its price per day ... wow ... To rent a car worth several times the price of a high end camera is around $50/day. I'm not saying it's not economically justified, as cameras probably have a lot more "unrented time" than cars and the rental places have to make up for it, but it's not a bargain either.

[JM Tran]

The word "bargain" seems a bit strong though. If when I rented a car it was 1/20th of its price per day ... wow ... To rent a car worth several times the price of a high end camera is around $50/day. I'm not saying it's not economically justified, as cameras probably have a lot more "unrented time" than cars and the rental places have to make up for it, but it's not a bargain either.

If you are keen on being pedantic and keep wanting to split hairs, then it is a bargain sorry. We charge the rental fee into the initial fee for the shoot and is also tax deductible for work purposes. For amateurs and hobbyists, many use the rental ability to try out equipment without the cash outlay of thousands of dollars per pop - and selling it later out of regret. Or in this case, I was comparing the duration of hire of a day hire for camera or car - at which you clearly misunderstood, not comparing the value and percentage of hiring a car vs. a camera which is ridiculous - so please - lets not split more hairs to increase your post count.

I just read your other posts also. Welcome to the DSLR world, hope you stay and enjoy it!

[ricktas]

The OP stated "I have been asked to take some family photos at a wedding I am to attend soon"

He did not say he was the official photographer. Maybe the family have decided it would be a good time, with everyone dressed up, to get some family photos. Perhaps while the Wedding Party are off doing their shots?

This was how I read it, not that the OP was going to photograph the actual wedding, as THE photographer. I think your suggestions are great, IF they are photographing the wedding officially, but the OP has not stated that.

Until the OP replies and clarifies, I think we might be going a bit over-board. The OP might just be an invitee who is going to take some photos at a wedding.

[kiwi]

That's the way I read it and responded accordingly

Get drunk.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk