Wedding Photo's

[jamesnisabelle]

Hi there, im going to a friends wedding soon and while im not the photographer i will be taking my XSI and hopefully get a few good pics, the lenses i have are the 18-55 IS, 55-250 IS and the 50mm 1.4, I only want to take one lens, would the 55-250 be the best to take, id like to get good depth of field in my shots of the couple.

Really just after some advice on how i can get some good shots and obviously what lens to take

Thanks

[OdiN1701]

I would take the 50mm 1.4 myself. I LOVE that lens. No it isn't zoom, but man for not being the photographer, that's what I would take.

It's great on a crop body for a bit longer reach.

[stathunter]

In all honesty the 50 1.4 sounds like your best option. You want something that works in low light.......but also something fast. Your others are not good for either--- the 50 1.4 is good in low light but not the fastest kid on the block. But still you can get some killer photos with the 50 1.4.

[Persephone]

Low light? OP didn't say anything about a night wedding or a window-less one...

But questions, questions...is it going to take place at night? In a church? reception at hotel? or what? unless you have permission to move around during the wedding, the 50mm 1.4 is really going to limit you, I think, unless you sit up front, then it might be ok.

[jamesnisabelle]

Hi there, thanks for your replys, the photo's are going to be taken at the reception, its in a hotel and hopefully if they get a good day with the weather (were in the wet UK here)the event will spill outside, its these shots i was looking to take

Thanks

[Mike]

The 55-250 lens would be far too restrictive so your kit lens or 50 1.4 would be the better options. Why can't you take more than 1 lens? Don't forget to take plenty of memory, shoot RAW to get the best chance of correcting shots later and read through the links here:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5999915&postcount=2

[cdifoto]

Low light? OP didn't say anything about a night wedding or a window-less one...
Low light does not equal no light. I think most of us consider anything where we're fighting for shutter speeds with an f/2.8 or slower lens to be "low light." I know I do.

That means pretty much 80%, if not more, of the average wedding.

[tim]

Don't plan on taking photos at the same time as the pro, plan on taking the photos that the pro can't get because they're elsewhere or don't know the people well enough. 18-55 is probably be best plan, unless you want the speed of the 50 F1.4. You'll need a flash for the reception, a 430EX (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/397664-USA/Canon_0298B002_430EX_TTL_Flash.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) will work well. Shoot high ISO, F2.8 if you can manage it, that's a good compromise aperture between having enough DOF and grabbing some available light.

[DigitalSpecialist]

James, glad your with us. My only request is that you get permission from the PAID photographer to shoot in and around the wedding and reception. You want good shots, and the Bride and Groom have paid a Professional for Quality work. Let everyone shoot respectfully together!!!

[tonylong]

Can you have the kit lens mounted but keep the 50 in a pocket? I know you said only one lens, but that 50 is so small but could come in sooo handy:)!

[_aravena]

^What he said. THe 50 will get you the most creative IMO with DOF and forced shots at that FL. I'd think the 55-250 would be fine but depends on how small the area is. I prefer a zoom over a wide angle but it also depends on location.

If I had to take one, I'd do the 50. I love taking just my nifty sometimes to see what I have to and can take with it.

[jamesnisabelle]

Hi there and thanks for your views, @ digital specialist, total respect on what your saying, it makes good sense, sorry i should have made myself a bit clearer, the photographer is only covering the wedding ceremony, im sure there will be a few cameras at the reception but these will no doubt be friends and family with P&S cameras, but im sure we will all be after similar shots, lol im hoping some will come out well as the couple will love them but not expect them and it will be a first lesson taken for me in wedding photography.

@ Tim & Tony, Hi tim, im flashed out im afraid, ive gone a little overkill on the camera and new lens for the next month or so, so i will have to leave it down to the onboard flash, from everyones views i think i will have to have deep pockets that day and take the extra lens or two, il get my girlfriend to kit her bag out in protection and drop the lenses in there.

Thanks again and il post the pics as soon as there done

[Persephone]

Low light does not equal no light. I think most of us consider anything where we're fighting for shutter speeds with an f/2.8 or slower lens to be "low light." I know I do.

That means pretty much 80%, if not more, of the average wedding.

I'm new to DSLR photography, but I've never had a problem with "low light" on the slow lenses, because I simply use 1600 ISO. It's only in the very extreme low light conditions - like Mimi's or in a very dark place - where I complain and wished I had a prime lens or IS so I could gain 2-3 more stops of light or could shoot under 1/50th of a secon.

[tim]

I'm new to DSLR photography, but I've never had a problem with "low light" on the slow lenses, because I simply use 1600 ISO. It's only in the very extreme low light conditions - like Mimi's or in a very dark place - where I complain and wished I had a prime lens or IS so I could gain 2-3 more stops of light or could shoot under 1/50th of a secon.

Most pro wedding photographers grapple with low light at every wedding. Sometimes ISO1600 F2.8 1/50th is a luxury. My solution is to add light.

[DStanic]

I shot my first wedding this summer, and I thought f/2.8 glass would be plenty. I JUST managed to get hand-holdable shots at ISO1600. Now I know why the 17-55 IS lens is so popular!

I'd be taking the kit lens primarily, and if possible bring the 50mm and use it any chance you get. It is limiting though and you'll have to be really close to get closeups.

[egordon99]

I'm afraid your definition of "low light" and that of folks who have been shooting for quite awhile are vastly different.

I'm new to DSLR photography, but I've never had a problem with "low light" on the slow lenses, because I simply use 1600 ISO. It's only in the very extreme low light conditions - like Mimi's or in a very dark place - where I complain and wished I had a prime lens or IS so I could gain 2-3 more stops of light or could shoot under 1/50th of a secon.

[egordon99]

Ditto....I consider f/2.8 too slow for indoor no flash photography. What might seem "fairly well lit" to you can still be quite dark for the camera.

Most pro wedding photographers grapple with low light at every wedding. Sometimes ISO1600 F2.8 1/50th is a luxury. My solution is to add light.

[Mike]

Snap! My 30mm f1.4 lens was a godsend at my last wedding. The 2.8 struggled.

[k5bh]

What do you think of the D40 for wedding photography?

In all honesty the 50 1.4 sounds like your best option. You want something that works in low light.......but also something fast. Your others are not good for either--- the 50 1.4 is good in low light but not the fastest kid on the block. But still you can get some killer photos with the 50 1.4.

[tim]

What do you think of the D40 for wedding photography?

The Nikon D40 is a cheap consumer level two year old camera, with poor high ISO noise.

The Canon 40D is a great camera for wedding photographers, I use two of them as my main cameras.