The main issue is that the Canon 60D is an APS-C sensor camera, so has a 'crop factor' on all its lenses. Your 18mm is actually about 28mm.

$500 is quite a low budget - very wide lenses tend to be very expensive too! - but a good option would be the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM, which you can get for under $500 from BH Photo. (You can probably find it cheaper elsewhere, I was just looking to see what a big US retailer would charge.)

I used to have the Sigma 10-22 when I used Canon and found it a perfectly good lens for anything up to an A3 print. It's not up to professional standard, but produced some nice pictures. The 10-22 would equal a 'real' focal length of 15-30mm.

Be aware that a very wide angle lens is probably the one in your bag you will use the least. I ended up selling mine as I just didn't use it enough.

Hope that helps. You can get in touch via @dcharlwood on Twitter.

You will need a lens with at least a f/2.8 aperture inside the church.
(I photograph with a combination of an 85mm f/1.8, 50mm f/2 and 28mm f/2.8, although a lot of photographers use a 70-200mm f/2.8.)

Make sure that your shutter speed is high enough to freeze the action of the first kiss and people smiling - you'll need 1/100th of a second, or faster if you're using a telephoto lens, to avoid camera shake. If you're using a mid - high end DSLR then don't worry about pushing the ISO up to 3200 (or 6400 if it's full frame) Most clients will not mind or even notice a 'noisy' photo, but they WILL notice a blurry one!

My other big piece of advice would be to stand still and be discreet - especially if the vicar has concerns about photography. If you can get in front of the bride and groom do, it is a better angle, as you can see their faces. If not, then just shoot down the aisle. If you do move, only move during hymns - that way you will make a friend out of the vicar and help the next photographer who shoots there.

Yes, prime (or fixed) lenses are generally much better quality than zoom lenses. Only the top professional zoom lenses come close to the quality you can get from a good prime lens.

To capture a fast moving event there will be times when you have to change lenses quickly, but most of the time you learn to 'see' in one fixed focal length.

There are potentially shots that you will miss by shooting with a prime lens - you can move closer to your subject, but you can't quickly create the fore-shortening effect of a telephoto lens, or the broad vista of a very wide lens. However, there are also shots you will see by shooting with a prime lens. Being focused on one focal length, I have found, has made my composition stronger and I try to spend more time thinking about the light in my images than just what the subjects are doing.

The trick with fill flash is firstly to make sure your flash is powered down as much as possible on both the camera body and the flash itself. If you're still over-exposing buy a flash diffuser or cover the front of the flash to diffuse it.

You should then be able to use different apertures, as long as your shutter speed doesn't exceed the flash gun's 'high-speed sync'. (That is usually around 1/180th of a second.)

It does vary depending on the subjects, but the main principle is to make sure that head heights are at a consistent distance - if you're using different levels or have subjects of different heights.

The posing does very much depend on the length of shot though, whether it's full length or head and shoulders etc.

I've done a bit work with nurseries and I've found that there are a few things that help:

Make your camera as small as possible by taking off lens hoods etc - some kids are just scared of big cameras.
Smile a lot and talk to the shy ones.
Give the 'borderline-insane' ones a task to do, or let them play whilst you photograph.
Finally make sure you choose the right lens. For kids I almost always use an 85mm focal length and an aperture of f/2.8 or less. That way you can isolate them, even in a crowded environment, and create a good portrait.

(Have a look at the two shots of under 6's at this link...)
http://www.charlwoodphotography.com/#!other-work

I almost always shoot in RAW, it gives you much more flexibility. Think of a jpeg as a print of a photo and the RAW file as the negative.

You can change the white balance (how the camera 'sees' the colour of a scene) afterwards on a RAW file and you also have more latitude in the exposure which enables you to make more changes to the file in editing.

The only occasions I would shoot in jpeg were if I didn't have enough space on a computer for RAW files, or I wanted to give images to the client straight away. Most cameras will let you set the contrast, sharpness and saturation of jpeg files within the camera, so you can customise the results to look better without editing them.

When in doubt though, RAW is the much better option.

For under £500 your best option is either the Sony NEX-5n or the Panasonic GX-1. The Sony has a full DSLR size APS-C sensor inside it, but it has bigger lenses. The Panasonic is aimed at enthusiast photographers, so has very good controls, and you have the whole range of micro 4/3rds lenses to choose from. Both are really nicely built.

The best thing is to go into a shop and pick up both of them, try them out and see which you prefer :)

I think this year's biggest challenge, in terms of photography, will be really developing my brand as well as trying to find a truly unique creative voice. There - a nice easy question to start :P