To Rent or Not to Rent...

[cnhoffma]

So I have a wedding that I will be shooting in early September. I have a decent set of lenses that help me get by, but I'm considering renting an 85mm f/1.2L. There's a few reasons for this, but the big reason to do it would be to pad my portfolio with some stellar sharp shots with this 85mm lens, in order to help me net more wedding jobs in the future. Likely I would rent the lens for a week so that I could get used to it before using it for the first time. Judging by these online lens rental places, I'll be paying between $75-$100 for a lens on a $600 wedding job. Is it worth it to get the fancy glass, or just manage with my trusty 50mm f/1.4?

[bnlearle]

I'd stick with the 50mm f/1.4. 85 on a 40D is going to be VERY tight, and I personally the f/1.4 is just fine for stellar shots. Save the money aside for an L prime in the future if you love for 50 and just want even better IQ ;)

Bobby

[Megapixle]

I'm not sure this would be fair to the client because you would be portraying something in your portfolio that you won't be able to deliver to future clients because you'd be lacking the equipment. (unless you plan on renting this lens for each future wedding?)

I'd rather just buy the lens and sell it for a modest loss if I had to.

[cnhoffma]

I'd stick with the 50mm f/1.4. 85 on a 40D is going to be VERY tight, and I personally the f/1.4 is just fine for stellar shots. Save the money aside for an L prime in the future if you love for 50 and just want even better IQ ;)

Bobby

That's a good point about the crop factor. I could make the whole evening even more expensive by equiping it to my Canon 1N...

I'm not sure this would be fair to the client because you would be portraying something in your portfolio that you won't be able to deliver to future clients because you'd be lacking the equipment. (unless you plan on renting this lens for each future wedding?)

I'd rather just buy the lens and sell it for a modest loss if I had to.

I would be honest about the renting of the lens and I do have the intention to own it one day. And if I bought it... I don't know if I would be willing to sell it.

[madhatter04]

I'm not sure this would be fair to the client because you would be portraying something in your portfolio that you won't be able to deliver to future clients because you'd be lacking the equipment. (unless you plan on renting this lens for each future wedding?)

I'd rather just buy the lens and sell it for a modest loss if I had to.

I say as long as YOU take the photo, it's fair game for your portfolio. No guilt.

[skh]

Hi,

Went through a pretty similar dilemma last year when shooting my cousin's wedding. Took the plunge and rented the 24-70mm/f2.8 mainly because I wanted to try some 'L' glass and also because I wanted to have some decent shots on my portfolio. The investment paid off and I managed to get some stunning shots (in my view:-) ).

Be warned though... life was never the same again and I am now the proud owner of 2 'L' lenses... with the hunger to acquire a few more!

[form]

Not going to get a huge benefit from the 85L; a 24L would have more usefulness. You're pretty limited right now without some f/2.8 or faster equipment.

[stathunter]

Personally I would not hesitate to rent a lens for a wedding or any other gig- but I would certainly make sure it is budgeted into the project.
The 85L is a bit limited - you might want to rent something more practical for wedding work that you do not have 70-200 2.8 or 24-70.

[cnhoffma]

Okay, so I'm getting the sense that it would be a useful investment, but the 85L might not be the most useful option. One thing I'm practicularly fond of is bokeh. How does the 24-70L stack up in the dept and are they're other lenses I should consider? Keep in mind I'll only have one camera body.

[form]

You don't get much background blur from any standard zoom on a aps-c camera. The 24-70L starts working nicely on a full frame camera, but even then it's still only f/2.8 and not the best for blurring backgrounds.

[bric-a-brac]

I use my 50/1.4 on a 50D for probably 85% of the reception; there is NOTHING wrong with utilizing what you have.

if you're going to rent anything, go longer than 85. I love my 135/2 L, and the 70-200/2.8 L is not a bad option either.

[cnhoffma]

What about renting something like a 35mm f/1.4L or the 24mm f/1.4L?

[Photon Phil]

I've seen alot of magical shots here from the 35L. I know that's a fluffy response but it's true.

[cdreemz17]

Use what you have and rent what you want. One wedding I did was shot with only an 85mm 1.8 100% of the time. That was one of my favorite weddings and the couple absolutely loved it. Let your feet do the work if necessary.

[cnhoffma]

Use what you have and rent what you want. One wedding I did was shot with only an 85mm 1.8 100% of the time. That was one of my favorite weddings and the couple absolutely loved it. Let your feet do the work if necessary.

That's kind of how I'm leaning. I'd rather have a prime lens... I'm just debating what I should get, keeping in mind I'm using a 40D. I could got with the 35L and have the extra room to frame in more stuff. The 85L has always sounded like a badass lens to use, but I'm afraid it'll be too tight. And of course, I could do the 50mm f/1.2L, but that doesn't feel like money well spent. Anyone and everyone please feel free to yell out your favorite lens and while.

Also I have a more specific question. What focal lengths are ideal for the wedding ceremonial itself?