wedding lens

[fatalimage]

my sister's wedding is coming up and she wants me to take pictures, it'll be my first, here's my setup:

canon 20d
50mm 1.8
10-22mm

i just sold my 28-135is and planning on getting the 17-40 f4 and speedlite 430ex, i also thought about getting the 70-200 f4 as well, any of those choices any good? along with my current gear?

[Woogie]

I'd kick the 50 1.8 for the 50 1.4 for the USM. You'll need the lens to be quick and accurate at focusing or you'll miss the shot. I'd also try to get my hand on either the 85 1.8 or the 100 2.0 to get some sweet candid shots.

The 70-200 f4 would be a great lens if the wedding were to take place outdoors, but indoors, you'll want a slightly faster lens. Sigma/Canon 70-200 2.8 will certainly do. Maybe you can rent the 70-200 2.8L IS.

On the wide end, the 17-40 will work well, but ideally you'd like something faster. --> 17-55 2.8 IS would be an awesome lens to have with you. The IS especially helps when you're doing static shots; the IS will allow you to take shots at lower ISO.

[Galaxy99]

maybe you need two bodies w/ different lens mounted...

[Grace]

i love my new 17-55 :) perfect for weddings

[JimAskew]

i love my new 17-55 :) perfect for weddings

Kathy,

Glad to hear you like your new 17-55...I bought mine last June specifically to photograph my Niece's wedding...it was a great decision :-)

[tim]

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=255604

[fatalimage]

my budget right now is about $700ish for a lens and flash unit. i've been looking around and can't seem to find a 430, but might end up settling for a 420 instead for about $180. that leaves me with about 500 to spend on a lens. the 24-70 2.8 or 17-55 would be great but probably can't afford it for now. will the 420ex do the damage? anyway thanks for all the help guys

[jsimon724]

Got my 430ex at B&H, don't know if they're in stock right now - give it a try if you haven't yet. With the money left over, go for the 85/1.8.
That, along with your existing kit should cover what you need.
Jim

[joruiz]

Then there's also the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 for about $400 from adorama.com... very sharp lens I've heard, and good in low light. No IS though. That's the one I will buy soon.

[Tish]

The 420EX is fine, it just doesn't have manual settings, so you will grow out of it eventually if you eventually want to go off camera with your flash. I have one & have used it for weddings & corporate events. But you should be able to find one for $150 or less used, $180 is pretty high for an obsolete flash. The 430EX is only around $230 new at B&H and is more versatile.

If the wedding is indoors, you're definitely going to want something faster than f4 though, you can't always count on being able to use flash. Some venues/officiants won't allow it.

Definitely read through Tim's FAQ sticky at the top of this forum, it's full of vital information you need!

[tim]

I don't need manual settings on my flashes... I could get by with a 420EX. Saying that I find the pull out panel and the one button head rotate on the 580EX invaluable, so much so i'll probably spring for a 580EX-II at some point before next season.

[liza]

With your budget, the Tamron 17-50 and the Sigma 500 Super would be good choices. The Sigma flash is a bit more powerful than the 430EX and is cheaper as well.

[fatalimage]

well i just picked up the 17-40, crossing my fingers it'll be okay. i picked up a 430 for $416 new. i have a 10-22 which i'm guess i won't use as much since i got the 17-40 now, i might trade that in for the 70-200L F4, yeah it's an F4 again, but it's within my budget. that shoudl cover all the ranges for me. though i want to keep all my equipment canon, i guess i'll look into a sigma, something in the 2.8 range that will be a walk around indoors lens. any suggestions? i don't want the 24-70, i'd prefer something longer yet still at 2.8.

[Woogie]

well i just picked up the 17-40, crossing my fingers it'll be okay. i picked up a 430 for $416 new. i have a 10-22 which i'm guess i won't use as much since i got the 17-40 now, i might trade that in for the 70-200L F4, yeah it's an F4 again, but it's within my budget. that shoudl cover all the ranges for me. though i want to keep all my equipment canon, i guess i'll look into a sigma, something in the 2.8 range that will be a walk around indoors lens. any suggestions? i don't want the 24-70, i'd prefer something longer yet still at 2.8.

416 USD? I certainly hope not. That is way too high for a 430ex.

[fatalimage]

416 USD? I certainly hope not. That is way too high for a 430ex.

my bad, it was $216 i mean. haha, i had to edit my first quote being...."really, where can i get it cheaper"

[capturedexpressions]

I'd kick the 50 1.8 for the 50 1.4 for the USM. You'll need the lens to be quick and accurate at focusing or you'll miss the shot. I'd also try to get my hand on either the 85 1.8 or the 100 2.0 to get some sweet candid shots.

The 70-200 f4 would be a great lens if the wedding were to take place outdoors, but indoors, you'll want a slightly faster lens. Sigma/Canon 70-200 2.8 will certainly do. Maybe you can rent the 70-200 2.8L IS.

On the wide end, the 17-40 will work well, but ideally you'd like something faster. --> 17-55 2.8 IS would be an awesome lens to have with you. The IS especially helps when you're doing static shots; the IS will allow you to take shots at lower ISO.


What ap do you typically have your camera set to for the "sweet candid shots"? If a bride is putting on earrings and you just want her sharp, what would be the ideal ap to be sure that her face,hand, and earring were sharp?

[TheGreatDivorce]

Tell her to hire a pro, so you can enjoy the wedding. Seriously.

[Joe Cyr]

well i just picked up the 17-40, crossing my fingers it'll be okay. i picked up a 430 for $416 new. i have a 10-22 which i'm guess i won't use as much since i got the 17-40 now, i might trade that in for the 70-200L F4, yeah it's an F4 again, but it's within my budget. that shoudl cover all the ranges for me. though i want to keep all my equipment canon, i guess i'll look into a sigma, something in the 2.8 range that will be a walk around indoors lens. any suggestions? i don't want the 24-70, i'd prefer something longer yet still at 2.8.

The 70-200 f4 would be a great choice. You need something longer for sure and it delivers exceptionally sharp pics. I use it a lot at weddings, when trying to be more discrete. With the 17-40 you really don't need the 10-22.

[fatalimage]

Tell her to hire a pro, so you can enjoy the wedding. Seriously.


well she wouldn't have had the wedding photographed anyways, it's not much of a custom for us to do so. just that since i happen to be into photography, she decided to ask me to do it. it's not going to be much of a biggie thinking about it now. i'll stick with the 17-40 and take some shots of her, him, the two together, family. it's going to be at the marina, so nice ocean scenery. what i should have got for my gear is the 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 along with my 10-22, that'll cover the ranges without overlapping. i'll eventually sell the 17-40 and go that route. the 24-70 is just so expensive, $900, can't afford that right now. i can surely trade off the 17-40 for a 70-200 f4. thanks for all the input from everyone.

[Stan43]

I recently shot an entire wedding with the "Trinity". 35L,85L and 135L. Worked well.

[TheGreatDivorce]

Fair enough, I just know from experience it's hardto really enjoy a wedding, and be "present", while you're working :)