Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Below is a link to an interesting article which talks about the virtues of using the Rebel XTi vs the Canon 30D for wedding and professional shots.

http://www.abetterbouncecard.com/xtireportpart2.htm

Similar arguments can be made against the 40D and the new XSi.

The 30D, 40D, XTi are pretty similar in terms of noise. ISO 800 is pretty clean, and it's definitely easy to clean with post-production.

then rent whatever glass you need for the weddings until you've made enough to cover the cost of a new lens...

a new body is the way to go since you'll need a back up if you want to be serious about shooting weddings...

On a slightly different note, have you registered a business to run this under? do you have insurance? The buy vs. rent argument can also be mitigated somewhat by how you expense and depreciate the gear you buy. I recall reading somewhere that liability insurance is needed for a professional photographer but I can't be sure. I don't recall asking my wedding photographer all those years ago if she had insurance.

Running a business can be complex and to be honest I have no idea what would be involved in setting everything up as this is a hobby for me but good luck.

Rent the glass as it is more cost effective Vistek seems to have a good selection of lenses.

I use Neat noise reduction for high ISO shoots. Once you set up a noise profile adjusted to your camera and your preferences you can then quickly batch process all your images of the same ISO.

From the business end of things, keep these numbers in mind.

@ $150-approx per weekend rental of a DSLR body,
4 rentals = $600 or 1 used 30D body (there's 8hrs left on a 30D body on the Henry's ebay auction).
8 rentals = $1200 or 1 new 40D body

In other words, buying a used 30D body is cheaper than renting it for 4 weekends, or you'll break even on a 40D body in 8 weekends. And every rental after that will _still_ cost you an extra $150- and that comes directly out of your bottom line.

@ $36/wkend for the 24-70/2.8, you'll have to rent it 27 wkends before it's cheaper to own it.

Lens usually retain their value a lot better than camera bodies. If you have a few gigs lined up, it makes sense to get some used L glass. You can probably resale them back w/ little or no discount at the end of the season. Definitely cheaper than renting.

The problem is, if you spend it on the glass, you_still_ have to rent the other body, which is much more expensive to rent, and you'll break even after 4 to 8 rentals.

You're stuck spending money on the body either way, just a question of rental or purchase.

how much do you charge when shooting a wedding???

I was thinking about just using his XTi. I guess the second body is important for weddings

I'm not a pro photog (and probably just naive about this) but I'm still perplexed by this logic; that newbies charge less than experienced ones. Is this normal practice in the industry? I would think the quality/quantity of the product and service you offer should be more the determining factor. Or is this price variance due to brand/name recognition of the more experienced photog? Or is this some sort of customer aquisition strategy for newbies to get their feet wet and get the gig?

This might not be the most appropriate analogy but I don't see new restaurants charge less than their competitors with similar theme/quality.

Yes, it's all based on that, to the customer, it's all based on the overall service the photographer provides, in the general sense, applies to other things outside photography also.

If you're not experienced, then the level of service you provide to your customers will not be the same as somebody else that has a lot of experience obviously, so you should price it accordingly to what you think is fair to both you and yourself. Of course, overtime, you will gain the experience that will improve your service and thus you should be able to adjust your prices accordingly while considering your fixed costs too.

You're assuming that photographers only offer "services" and restaurants only offer "goods".

Isn't there also a service component to restaurants? Doesn't the quality of service and ambiance also play a factor in the price?

Likewise, don't photographers also have to buy "goods" too (like your camera equipment, which is what this thread is about) and also offer "goods" (i.e. CD of images, prints, albums, etc...)?

Though the problem I have with restaurants is that there are ones that thinks that they can command a high price, so thus I think it's a great restaurant based on that and other reviews, and in the end I find that it's extremely overpriced and the service is crap. Applicable to photogs too.

As for the lawyer scenario, it comes down to a few other factors. If you're on a tight budget, maybe the cheaper lawyer. But if you want a lawyer that has a good track record and you have a difficult case, the other higher price might be a wiser choice.

Like Ken said, I'd go for the body(ies) and rent the lenses. Looking at rental pricing, bodies cost disproportionately more to rent than lenses.

I come from the lo-fi school of "get what you need to do the job now". Get a basic kit that'll cut the mustard so you can start making money right away without too much of a financial hit.

With every paying gig, I set aside a percentage of the haul and save up for a new piece of gear - I started out with just the XT and upgraded to my 30D with this budget allocation. It only took three jobs, spanning three months to do this, so I wasn't out any money.

I've been shooting commercially for the past year with prosumer-grade gear (no L glass, a 30D and ant XT) and my clients have been more than happy with the results. They just want a good, clean, crisp shot and don't really care what you shoot with.

When renting, make sure the price of the rental comes out of your client's budget. It's pretty standard practice in advertising and can be applied equally to photography.

As for lenses, don't discount the savings and quality offered by third-party manufacturers. I will get to the L-glass grail eventually, but am happy with the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 for weddings (thanks for the suggestion, Ken!). For me, it's a keeper, having paid for itself many times over and will save the L budget for another focal length.

So there is an assumption then that the new photog cannot deliver the same level of service and quality of photos as an experienced one? Can this be mitigated by making some sort of a guarantee to the customer (i.e. reduced rate if services and quality are not met)?

Here's an example.

Can you, know for sure, 100% of the time, make key decisions on the spot, and I'm talking about within seconds? In most cases, with one that is lacking the experience, those key decisions could probably be made if the person had all the time in the world, but if things needs to be done on the spot, in most cases, that person is going to stumble. And this in turn impacts the end results.

So honestly, the way I handle these things is that I tell the customer up front. Such that everything is clear between both parties. If not, the customer will have a certain expectation that may have been made as an assumption and at the end of the day, if you cannot deliver those expectations then you'll end up with one unhappy customer.

Yep, it's like any other business. Bit of marketing savvy, ability to talk to customers, communication, and being able to deliver the final product.

Of course you could have the first three and not the last, then take the money and run! lol.

As a buyer, you can never tell, which is why you have to do due diligence. It's up to the client to ask the right questions, make decisions based on the vendor's reputation and confirm with references that are within their rights to request.

I think photographers should charge pro rates that are within the individual market's window of expectation. It's very hard, especially with repeat clients, to start charging more even with the explanation that you have more experience/skills and there is a danger of setting a pricing precedent and staying stuck at the bottom of the price scale.

And this way, the median price for the services we provide isn't devalued.

While I do understand your point mondo, I put myself in the customer's shoes... I guess I do this all the time since what I do during the day is customer service oriented and customer satisfaction is a key deliverable.

If you're going to charge somebody at industry rates but you can't deliver the results that would be comparable to somebody that can deliver the results *consistently*, I don't think it's fair to either yourself or to the customer. Customer feedback, either solicited or unsolicited, for example, they post their feedback on the web and is easily searched by Google, is something to keep in mind also, which can work against you.

Mondo, thanks for that point. Establishing a pricing precedent is exactly what my concern is. Sure wedding photogs don't really get repeat customers (unless the client is in a cycle of divorces and marriages, haha) but they get referrals.

I guess it's really up to the individual photog to determine what price point they want to go into by taking into consideration a lot of factors (i.e. which market segment in the industry they're targeting, how much they value their work, their confidence in being able to guarantee their work, customer aquisition/retention, what's the long term objective, etc....).

Don't invite the client to start criticizing your work so that they can pay less. It will happen, and they will find ways of being "dissatisfied".

That assumption about experienced vs inexperienced is also generally correct. The service portion of providing wedding photography is more than just taking the pictures. There's the element of the unknown, unexpected, unplanned. You don't need a "I didn't know about that", "what do we do now" from your wedding photog during the big day.

So rhommel, after all of this, what lens/body you getting?

Rhommel is getting the 24-70 2.8L because he LOVES that lens. He's been saving up for that since last year.

I completely understand your strategy, Mike, but as someone who has bought photography/hired photographers in the past, I wouldn't go with anyone if there's any chance that they couldn't deliver. Whether you charge $50 or $5000 a day, I'd still have the expectation that the job would be done right. It doesn't matter what I pay - the time alone lost in a reshoot could jeopardize an entire campaign in my industry.

If a job is botched at any price, customer feedback can haunt and hurt a photog equally, so why not charge what the job's worth?

As a client, this is where due diligence would come in. In an interview as a buyer, I would probably ask about your experience in conversation. Why not leave it to the client to negotiate a lower price based on a lower expectation, if they choose to take the risk?

As a photographer/designer/vendor, I always quote high, since I have an expectation that the price will be negotiated down anyway. But it is always a given that the job will be done right - if I show any sign that I'm not confident about pulling a job off 100%, chances are that I won't get the job, since the percieved lack of confidence would definitely work against me.

Nice lens.

I'd go used 30D, so it's more affordable and go full-frame once the biz starts paying for itself

Now that's a deal!!!!

Mind if i can ask how much one can charge if they don't have any experience shooting weddings?

The only thing really hard about wedding photog is indoor shots. For that you need a powerful flash and fast lenses. At minimum, f/2.8.

Without those two it's pretty tough.

My first question relates back to the anticipation that the couple might try to undersell your work and pay you less.

mm would you need the 2.8? I heard that the f/4L IS might be sharper or will do the same job.

Ya, apparently the 4L IS is the sharpest telephoto zoom for Canon. I own the 4L and I'd definitely vouch for the insanity sharpness.

If you're shooting indoors, maybe you'll want the 2.8. Heavier and pricier(for the price of the 2.8 non-IS, you could get the 4L IS) though. Comes with a tripod ring however haha.