PDA

View Full Version : Possible to cover the whole wedding with only 85L mk2?

Jac
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 17:49
Hi guys and gals, do you all think possible to cover the whole wedding shoot or any of you successed to did it with only 85L with 30d/1d/5d body for wedding which included a groups shoot?
Grace
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:02
no...85 isn't near wide enough.
kamarola
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:05
i cant really imagine how far away you would have to stand for group shots.
Megapixle
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:12
No, but if you sold the 85L you could buy all the lenses you need.

~mp
mkuriger
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:25
no but a 24-70 should be all you need!
galahad
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:34
Michael,

do you use more the 24-70 than the 17-55 when covering a wedding?
Toogy
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 18:35
Anything is possible, but it would be severely limiting!! And you better make sure you have lots, repeat LOTS of room to work with!!
tim
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:05
No way, not a chance.
deadpass
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:23
sounds like a good challenge for a photography reality show.
mckc
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:34
sounds like a good challenge for a photography reality show.

haha...thats great.
picturecrazy
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:37
Yup, you certainly can do it! But it'll be a whole wedding full of headshots if you do. That would plain suck. If I were doing an all prime wedding, at MINIMUM I would carry three bodies and 35mm equiv lengths of around 24mm 50mm and 85mm. And that would still be tough!!!

Zooms are a great thing. I shot primes-only for 10 years (due to financial reasons) before I ever owned a zoom. I don't miss that at all. ZOOMS FTW!!!
liza
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:45
Hi guys and gals, do you all think possible to cover the whole wedding shoot or any of you successed to did it with only 85L with 30d/1d/5d body for wedding which included a groups shoot?

Only if you want to be sued (assuming this is a paid gig). ;)
Ronald S. Jr.
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:52
If I were forced to do a wedding with just one of your lenses (which, imo, is silly), I'd take the 35L. You can crop, but you can't dream up what's outside the frame.
danpass
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:53
No, but if you sold the 85L you could buy all the lenses you need.

~mp



LOL



.
00silvergt
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:55
Oh, you can...you will have to walk very far away and walk real close and your client will want to fire you...:P
mkuriger
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 19:56
yes, except in the lowest of light since my 17-55 has IS built in.

Michael,

do you use more the 24-70 than the 17-55 when covering a wedding?
Jac
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 20:45
Saw pbase user did it with 1dmk3 and around 90% of the shoot is used 85Lmk2.;)
2 photo use 100mm macro and 3 use 24L.
Just wondering who else did it....
Grace
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 20:47
so whats the point here? is it possible...yeah... limiting...yeah...smart..no.


?
picturecrazy
13th of August 2007 (Mon), 22:25
Saw pbase user did it with 1dmk3 and around 90% of the shoot is used 85Lmk2.;)
2 photo use 100mm macro and 3 use 24L.
Just wondering who else did it....

was he the primary shooter? Or a secondary? It would be easy to shoot as a secondary with only that lens... you can miss important shots and nobody will kill you!