@@OmarHamdoun-op9jk I do slight editing. Usually just temp, contrast and blacks. Nothing beyond that. I think these were all shot with the Canon EF 85mm 1.8.
I work for the brand full time so it wasn't a freelance gig. Just another day in the office haha. But if I was quoting it, you have to think about usage, travel costs, day rates, what the client's budget is. A lot of factors go into it. Most important is trying to get the client to tell you what their budget and scope is for the project, then you can build accordingly.
at 19:39 a point here, the Hasselblad H lenses (HC\HCD) are in fact Zeiss glass! and I have a H1 (AUD$9,000)-that was second hand, with HM16-32 film back x2; 80mm f2.8 std lens, which also has a Phase One P45+ digital back, all came in a pelican case with foam dividers, its great, Love the thin dof a great system, I also splurged on a 35 mm f 3.5 and a 300 mm f3.5 WELL worth the money, they are leaf shutters, and the H1 has a flash meter on it to ( a special feature which measures flash without taking a shot, esp. with a film back on, giving a sense if the exposure is right); and like the Contax has film magazines which allow digital as well as mid roll mag changes, so convenient, esp. if you only have 16 shots and a bright glary scene, so you can switch to digital, assess the histogram, and know exactly if things will work out.
I started on an Olympus OM1, and while in my opinion the build and tactility of the OM1 wins. The AE1 is incredibly quick to compose and I'm excited to see how it performs in rugged areas I don't want to bash up my favorites in! Put it through its paces.
I’ve been using a sony alpha camera for my photography … now film photography has been in my interest because I love the colors of films and the textures and I have been eyeing on Canon AE1-P… i know we can try to edit our digital photos in LRC to make it look like films but the aesthetic of film is just so different… I am not a fan of too sharp photos produced by digitals.
Hey Tony, long time photographer here (probably since b4 you were born, lol). I've also shot video all over the world. Respect to you for delivering real usable CONTENT, not trendy FX. You are very well paced, easy to follow, not a lot of jump cuts (which means you probably know your stuff and don't have to edit a lot of stuff out). I'm researching the Q2 as my first Leica (I've never even shot with one). It will be my personal travel and street camera and reviews like yours are helping me more than I can say, so thanks for your help.
Thanks so much for the kind words. You will be stoked with the Q2. I sold mine a year or two back to get some other gear and I miss it everyday. The Ricoh GRiii filled the void a bit but it’s not the same.
Fantastic video. I shot my last wedding on film and your insight helps quite a bit. I do have a question about the cost…you mentioned you shoot Portra 400 on 35mm and the cost for 5 rolls is $30. Where I live (Canada), a single roll costs almost $20.
Thank you for this excellent overview with all the right amount of details! Yours is the only helpful "how weddings are shot" tutorial I've come across. I'd recommend this to anybody who is just starting out (or has an interest in) shooting weddings. Most other tutorials online seem to assume the viewer already has a general idea about how weddings flow, only giving a narrow view into one aspect of the process. I'm sure I'm not alone in my appreciation for your honesty and straightforward teaching. I'm excited to see/hear more of what you have to pass on to us! Thank you!
Thanks so much. I just rewatched this to see how it holds up as it’s over 4 years old. This is still exactly how I cover a wedding. I’ve shot over a 100 weddings with this method and made over 1/2 a million dollars. Every couple has been ecstatic. It’s a proven method and I’m grateful it still holds up. Hahha.
Nice review. Whether you have to hand wind or wait for the auto film rewind, you and your clients still have to wait. But, the hand wind does draw more attention LOL
Can anyone tell me what the polarity is on the 9 volt socket. The manual doesn't state it. Is it normal (center +) or like early Sony (center - )? Thanks.
1:10 "better feel in the hand" Really? That surprises me since Canon usually have really good ergonomic grips & the Q2 not really having a grip at all? (classic style)
The material, build, quality, weight, size feels better in the hand. It’s like driving a Porsche over a Honda Civic. You can tell better materials were used. The ergonomics of the Canon are more comfortable per se, but with the grip added (which I speak about later) makes the Q2 feel better in the terms mentioned before.
I love this camera, but the focusing challenge would be a dealbreaker for me, especially with that many out of focus shots and the cost of film these days.
I owned both, the 1v is definitely the pinnacle of the analog SLRs from Canon, both a sculpture and a statement of the ultimate 35mm film solution for the EF-world, however I sold it, because for me as an average shooter it gave no additional benefits. I believe, the EOS 3 offers an incredible vlaue for the money.
I just picked up an old Canon AE-1 today at a flea market for $85 plus tax. It has a 50mm lens on it. The only thing I saw wrong with it is inside. I took the lens off and at the top of the mirror box was a little but if black foam that is deteriorated. A tiny piece of it was hanging down. It may cause some light leaks or may not. I'm not sure if it's there to keep light from coming in around the lens or from the viewfinder. I think it'll be OK. I have to buy a battery and film for it. Suppose I want to shoot black and white and want it with more contrast? Would I slightly under expose it? Also, why 400 film if you have good light? Or is portra 400 the type of film? Is been a while since I've bought film to shoot. I usually just bought Kodak or Fujii film. I've seen Fujii film at Walmart so I know I can get it in most big cities.
Hi. Quick question. Couldn’t you shoot with the ASA set one stop down and get the same results? IE, 400 ASA set to 200 ASA; wouldn’t that also overexpose your 400 speed film? I just use the internal meter of my AE1. I shoot street and landscapes. I can’t possibly meter for every shot.
Yes you can do that. And yes it would overexpose your film. I would suggest going in between 200 and 400 (320). That overexposes each shot by a half a stop.
@@TonyWodarck perfect. I’m using TriX 400 now, so I set my ASA to a little under 200. Since its nominal speed is closer to 320. Hope thats right. I can always more it back to 200
I heard it’s better to let the f to 2.8 (program mode) to avoid vignetting. Is that true from your experience? Also heard contrary statements P mode usually sets more open aperture. Which could be negative for street photography where I usually set to f8 on a 400 speed film
Got one on bid on ebay right now. Should win. I also just scored an origional bag with 3 lenses and a flash. Goona be an excellent deal. Amd worth a ton.
