Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="lokatz" data-source="post: 647600" data-attributes="member: 43924">Hi bikeit,&nbsp; I had the same challenge at a wedding a few weeks ago.&nbsp; Shot with my D500 and f/4 lenses, so you have an advantage over what I had.&nbsp; The 70-200 is going to be useful since you can shoot from further away without disturbing the ceremony.&nbsp; I used ISOs of mostly ~3200, at times up to 9600, and underexposed continually by one stop so that the resulting speed was still fast enough.&nbsp; All of this meant noise, but with good noise reduction (the free NIK Define plug-in in Photoshop) and lots of other post-processing, I still got many shots the wedding couple likes and wants to keep.&nbsp; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Oh, and don't forget to set your camera to Quiet shooting.&nbsp; You'll be much less of a nuisance that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="lokatz, post: 647600, member: 43924"] Hi bikeit, I had the same challenge at a wedding a few weeks ago. Shot with my D500 and f/4 lenses, so you have an advantage over what I had. The 70-200 is going to be useful since you can shoot from further away without disturbing the ceremony. I used ISOs of mostly ~3200, at times up to 9600, and underexposed continually by one stop so that the resulting speed was still fast enough. All of this meant noise, but with good noise reduction (the free NIK Define plug-in in Photoshop) and lots of other post-processing, I still got many shots the wedding couple likes and wants to keep. :) Oh, and don't forget to set your camera to Quiet shooting. You'll be much less of a nuisance that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification