Close, Mid, Long-Range Lenses

[jamiepeter]

I've been browsing this forum and I always see talk of having 2 or 3 lenses. Why is this? It may seem like a stupid question but I'm just trying to learn. I have a 18-125mm lense, and it seems like some talk of having a 18-50, 50-125 (if those numbers exist) do you get what I'm saying?

What's the advantage of having 2 or 3 lenses that cover the same distance as one?

Hope I don't sound too clueless!

[sblais]

It's not a matter of having two or more lenses. It's a matter of what high quality zoom lenses are available to cover the basic focal lengths most needed for wedding coverage.

In the wide angle range, if you choose to go with L lenses (you don't have to, many of us like the extra quality and are willing to pay extra for it), then you currently have two options available: 16-35mm f/2.8 and 17-40mm f/4.0 (and perhaps some older lenses as well).

In the standard zoom range, you have similar options and the same also applies to telephoto range.

There is also a compromise to do in terms of focal length coverage by one given lens with respect to the aperture. In your case, your 18-125mm lens has a varying aperture of 3.5 - 5.6. Your exposure changes significantly as you zoom in or out. Many find it preferable to have a constant aperture throughout the entire zoom range.

IMHO, it all comes down to compromises. We can't have a single lens that would cover 10-200mm with a constant f/2.8 aperture throughout the entire range, so we need to buy many lenses that give us that kind of coverage.

[sblais]

Adding to my previous comment, it is very useful for wedding photography to have an aperture of 2.8, esp. for low light conditions. Having a lens with this aperture for a very large zoom range would be hard to fabricate and, very importantly, the resulting lens would be BIG and HEAVY!

Ideally, we'd have a 10-200mm f/2.8L with IS that would be the size and weight of a kit lens! But we can keep on dreaming!

[Big Mike]

That's right. It's a question of quality and maximum aperture.

Mega zooms have to make compromises in image quality....and don't usually have wide apertures (F2.8 ). Paid professional photographers should have high quality lenses and wide apertures are a very good tool to have when shooting things like weddings.

A lot of photographers choose to use prime (non-zoom) lenses rather than zoom lenses. It certainly isn't all that convenient...but the image quality is often suburb and prime lenses usually have very wide apertures.

[tim]

Jamiepeter, I hope you're not planning on shooting a wedding when you don't know this stuff... but we're always happy to help people learn :)

[jamiepeter]

no!! not at all!! Haha. I'm actually in my teens and just really interested in a career in photography down the road. I'm just trying to learn as much as I can. Thank you all for your answers: very imformative.

[cinci-photo]

no!! not at all!! Haha. I'm actually in my teens and just really interested in a career in photography down the road. I'm just trying to learn as much as I can. Thank you all for your answers: very imformative.

Sounds like you've got a plan. That's impressive. You are on the right road, by learning as much as you can about photography as early as possible. With all the digital capabilities it's changing extemely fast, but if you know the basics, really know the basics (lighting, apertures, etc..) then you'll have heads up on a lot of other people. This forum as well as others on POTN is a great place to get a lot of good, sound advice and information.

Good luck!!

[Big Mike]

I agree, good for you for doing your research now. I see so many threads like this..."Help, I'm shooting my first wedding next week"...it's just scary. Being prepared is half the battle. Keep practicing, reading and asking questions...you are on the right track.

[jamiepeter]

Thanks so much guys. I'm really hoping to major in photography in college.

[Big Mike]

Thanks so much guys. I'm really hoping to major in photography in college.

Just my humble opinion...but if you want to make money in photography (especially weddings/portraits etc.)...then consider a business major/minor. Probably a lot more helpful than a photo major.

[tim]

Just my humble opinion...but if you want to make money in photography (especially weddings/portraits etc.)...then consider a business major/minor. Probably a lot more helpful than a photo major.

I'd agree - get a business degree with a photography minor, or double major. Even learn another profession, like engineering or teaching or something, so when photography's not making you any money you can fall back on it.

[Big Mike]

Even learn another profession, like engineering or teaching or something, so when photography's not making you any money you can fall back on it.
Good point. Besides really successful pro photographers...the people with the best photo gear are doctors and lawyers :lol:

[tim]

Good point. Besides really successful pro photographers...the people with the best photo gear are doctors and lawyers :lol:

I got a 20D, 70-200 F2.8 IS, 100mm macro, 50mm F1.4, strobes, and a bunch of other stuff while I was working in IT and dabbling in photography, that makes it much easier to get the gear you need! Making good money as a photographer can be tough, especially when you're just starting out.

[jamiepeter]

Yeah my parents have actually advised me to go for a business minor/photography major or vice versa. I got another year yet.