5D + 1D3 Combo - The lenses I want and why. What are your thoughts?

[kansascityshuffle]

I have some bookings coming in for next summer, which will be my first season in business. I'm trying to plan out the lens and body gear list at the moment. Some purchases will be made right away, and some gear will be added after some cash flow comes in. I may have to do some renting while I wait to finish purchasing, but that's fine.

I shoot a 5D now and enjoy it, so it will stay. I'm fairly sure I'm going to purchase a used 1d mark 3 to pair it with before the jobs start. I would prefer two bodies that I want to use, as opposed to one great body and a "backup." I'd also get to take advantage of the 1.3x crop, allowing me that many more possible focal lengths.

This additional FL possibilities are huge, because I really favor primes. I favor them so much that I don't think I'll purchase a zoom. I also feel there are much better lenses available than Canon Ls, but they focus manually. Obviously, MF is not optimal for weddings, but the top IQ still comes from alternate gear, IMO of course. I do feel MF would be great for the wide end, where DOF is not so thin.

So, here's what I'm thinking for gear...

Bodies:
-Canon 5D
-Canon 1d mk3

Lenses:
-Zeiss Distagon 21 f/2.8
-Canon 50 f/1.2L
-Canon 85 f/1.8
-Canon 135 f/2L


I think this kit would give me some serious possibilities. The Zeiss is awesome. I can deal with MF in return for the colors and sharpness the lens will give me. I love Zeiss stuff. 21mm on the 5D would be really sweet for wide reception stuff, which I do a lot of.

I'm thinking of using the 50L on the 1D3 a lot of the time to give me 65mm effective FL. Paired up with the wide 21mm on the 5D, I feel like this will cover a large percentage of most weddings.

The 85 and 135 will both be there if I need something longer. Both are proven, and obviously will be great on either body.

Gotta run to class, so this will end abruptly, but I would like to hear thoughts on this from other wedding shooters. Particularly, what do you think of the 5D/Zeiss 21 and 1d3/50L combos as my main rigs? What would you do differently?

[tim]

Have you ever photographed a wedding?! Manual focus isn't a good idea IMHO, not at a fast paced event like a wedding. Also while primes are great and make great images flexibility is more important for new wedding photographers.

Also you're looking at two cameras with different controls, which will slow you down when you swap between them. I'd think either add a 30D (same controls as the 5D), or another 5D. You can crop easily from a 5D file. The only downside is you'll have to have a speedlite on each camera, as the focus isn't so fast especially in low light.

None of your lenses is very wide either, and you say you like wide. I occasionally use 10mm on crop body, which is 16mm on full frame. The 21mm is kinda wide, but like I said I don't think MF lenses aren't a good idea. Neither is thinking "oh i'll use primes and swap lenses between cameras when I need to" - you won't always have time.

[bnlearle]

135L on the 1D3. 50L on the 5D. The 21mm would be plenty wide for me. I could easily shoot a wedding with that whole set up. Only thing is I'd get a second 5D as I LOVE the 135L on a FF sensor.

[kansascityshuffle]

135L on the 1D3. 50L on the 5D. The 21mm would be plenty wide for me. I could easily shoot a wedding with that whole set up. Only thing is I'd get a second 5D as I LOVE the 135L on a FF sensor.

This I what I had in mind for ceremonies or parts of receptions where I need those FLs. It would be perfect.

I personally am embarassed by how bad the 5D's AF is. That's the entire reason I want a 1D3 as opposed to a 5DII, because I have the hard drive space for it. With a 1D3 and my 5D, I get the best of both worlds.



Tim, Ill address your thoughts when I get home. Can't type that much on an iPhone. I'll say that we certainly have different approaches to the business in general, however. Yours works, and Im thinking mine will as well, but for me in particular.

[kansascityshuffle]

Have you ever photographed a wedding?! Manual focus isn't a good idea IMHO, not at a fast paced event like a wedding. Also while primes are great and make great images flexibility is more important for new wedding photographers.

Also you're looking at two cameras with different controls, which will slow you down when you swap between them. I'd think either add a 30D (same controls as the 5D), or another 5D. You can crop easily from a 5D file. The only downside is you'll have to have a speedlite on each camera, as the focus isn't so fast especially in low light.

None of your lenses is very wide either, and you say you like wide. I occasionally use 10mm on crop body, which is 16mm on full frame. The 21mm is kinda wide, but like I said I don't think MF lenses aren't a good idea. Neither is thinking "oh i'll use primes and swap lenses between cameras when I need to" - you won't always have time.


First, let me describe where I would like to fit in the wedding photography business. I'm not interested in cookie cutter wedding photography. I'm not interested in handing over 800 photos from an event all taken by a 24-70 and 70-200. That works well for a lot of people, but it's boring to me and lacks creativity IMO.

I am, however, interested in standing out with distinct, artistic, high quality shots. I would prefer to hand over a smaller number of very nice shots and a few stunners as opposed to a boatload of good images. My potential clients know this, and some of my bookings for next season are partially because of this. I'm targeting clients that prefer envelope-pushing creativity to bulk.

That may not work for many photographers trying to make a living, because there are far fewer clients in that category. I'm going to see if that approach works for me, because I can only handle a handful or two of weddings per year anyways. I am going to be a full-time grad student starting in August, so the time I can devote to photography will be somewhat limited. I'd prefer to find 10 couples who love my style and creativity, rather than adapt and book clients who like me because my shots look like everybody else's.



So, now that you've got more background on what I'm doing and why I think I can get away with doing some things "my way," let's discuss the points you made.

You're right about the camera controls. I don't know if the combo will work, but I'm going to try it. If I can't get used to switching and it causes me to stumble, I'll find another solution. As it stands, I can't deal with the 5D's AF. When I had the 35L/85L combo, I got to a point where I used them in full manual. Eventually, I realized that there are better optics out there, so why not switch to adapted MF glass if I was already manually focusing everything? I did. The Contax Planar 100/2 is the one I really fell in love with, and I have a few others as well. I don't have an AF lens in my bag, and I don't feel like I'm missing out. I use an EE-S screen and steady hands, and it isn't so bad. Rewarding, really.

I've even second shot a wedding with my MF set. That, plus another wedding as a second and one more as the hired pro make up my wedding-specific experience. Yes, it's limited, but it's something and I've learned a lot.

Back to the MF glass...people have been using MF glass to cover weddings for a long time. It can be done, despite the new technology. MF lenses can still be a valuable tool. I wouldn't walk into a wedding with a bag full of MF glass, but I'm willing to give up AF in certain focal lengths (wide-angle) for the advanced optics in comparison to the Canon offerings. I may have misconstrued how much I plan to use MF in the first post, but I do intend to use some.

I also think you're a little quick to dismiss an all prime wedding kit. With the proper preparation and the ability to stay calm, I really haven't found weddings to be quite as hectic as the established pros would like the new crowd to think they are. :D

Wow, that was long. I must be pretty bored. :oops:

[tim]

Many people did use MF glass for many years, if it works for you, great! I just know I suck at MF. Different focus screens can help. If you're only doing it because your camera lacks good AF why not just buy a better camera? perhaps use the 1D3 as a main, and get a 7D or something as a backup. Or the 5D in MF if you're happy with it.

I don't believe that a slightly sharper image from Zeiss etc glass will put you into the artistic category, I don't think you think that either, so the subjects aren't really linked. You can use an XT and single prime and be great - look at Bobby, he pretty much just uses a 5DII and 50L, even though he's owned pretty much every camera and lens.

Good luck!

[kansascityshuffle]

Many people did use MF glass for many years, if it works for you, great! I just know I suck at MF. Different focus screens can help. If you're only doing it because your camera lacks good AF why not just buy a better camera? perhaps use the 1D3 as a main, and get a 7D or something as a backup. Or the 5D in MF if you're happy with it.

I don't believe that a slightly sharper image from Zeiss etc glass will put you into the artistic category, I don't think you think that either, so the subjects aren't really linked. You can use an XT and single prime and be great - look at Bobby, he pretty much just uses a 5DII and 50L, even though he's owned pretty much every camera and lens.

Good luck!

I love the IQ that comes out of the 5D, and I'm not so sure about the 7D yet. I wish the 5DII would have gotten better AF, but oh well, maybe third time will be the charm.

Thanks for your insights!

[timnosenzo]

I personally am embarassed by how bad the 5D's AF is. That's the entire reason I want a 1D3 as opposed to a 5DII

Is it weird that you to say you want to use MF lenses for a wedding, but then say you are "embarrassed" by how bad the 5D's AF is?

Personally I would be very uncomfortable using MF lenses at a wedding, but I'm real comfortable with the AF on my 5D's. I also agree with Tim about having cameras with similar controls, but some folks are able to pull it off.

[kansascityshuffle]

Is it weird that you to say you want to use MF lenses for a wedding, but then say you are "embarrassed" by how bad the 5D's AF is?

Personally I would be very uncomfortable using MF lenses at a wedding, but I'm real comfortable with the AF on my 5D's. I also agree with Tim about having cameras with similar controls, but some folks are able to pull it off.


I guess I don't get the connection you're making. I thought the 5D's AF was so poor that I migrated towards MF lenses. Now, I'm a huge fan of Zeiss optics and want to cover the wide end with one. What's weird? :D

And yea, the controls may become an issue. We'll have to see.

[tim]

The 5D AF isn't poor, it's just not that fast in low light. Sharpest combo i've seen is a 24-105 on a 5D.

[kansascityshuffle]

The 5D AF isn't poor, it's just not that fast in low light. Sharpest combo i've seen is a 24-105 on a 5D.


That depends on the user's definition of poor. After upgrading from 40D to 5D, I never noticed a marked improvement in AF. For bodies that cost what the 5D and 5DII do, that's poor in my book. It's fine for a single shot in good light, but even minor tracking is a struggle. Not to mention the frustration of failing to lock on to anything in low light... I don't really enjoy having to aim for the highest contrast point of an object just so AF can lock on.

[form]

5D's AF center point is pretty good with one shot, less so with servo in bad light. I would not be able to use MF lenses in a wedding because it is too fast-paced.

[tim]

That depends on the user's definition of poor. After upgrading from 40D to 5D, I never noticed a marked improvement in AF. For bodies that cost what the 5D and 5DII do, that's poor in my book. It's fine for a single shot in good light, but even minor tracking is a struggle. Not to mention the frustration of failing to lock on to anything in low light... I don't really enjoy having to aim for the highest contrast point of an object just so AF can lock on.

40D AF is widely considered better than the 5D AF - it's a much newer camera. It's probably better than the 5DII as well. The 7D AF system's similar to the 1D4 AF system, i've used both cameras and they're both pretty nice.

[kansascityshuffle]

40D AF is widely considered better than the 5D AF - it's a much newer camera. It's probably better than the 5DII as well. The 7D AF system's similar to the 1D4 AF system, i've used both cameras and they're both pretty nice.


Very nice. The 1D4 seems very stout. 7D as well once they hit the used market for a decent price.

[czeglin]

While we're on the subject, how does the 5D / 5D2 AF compare to a 450D? People always say both are "terrible" and I have no basis for comparison. The only time I've had a problem with my 450D is at night in AI servo with the 17-55. And even then it did a fair job. I definitely missed a lot of shots due to AF failure but I nailed a lot, too.

[ScullenCrossBones]

Just my opinion, but we think too much about cameras and lenses and not enough about light and how to control it.

As someone who as done lots of weddings, most of which were on MF/MF (medium format/manual focus), I feel that each photographer will develop whatever equipment lineup works best for them. In other words, there is no right or wrong rigs, only rigs that work better or worse for you.

So if you want to use a 1Ds3 or a rebel, or a Hydroblatz 5000, it really doesn't matter. You can make great images as long as you understand great composition and learn how to arrange or harness the light you have available.

As always, YMMV.

[bnlearle]

My old 40D's KILLED my 5D's -- and my 5DII's for that matter. A year or so ago, I left a 5D at home for a wedding in Thailand and accidentally grabbed a 40D (So a 5D and a 40D instead of two 5D's). At the airport I started taking photos with it and my immediate thought was "you know what, the whole 5D AF sucking thing might be overrated. This is super fast!" Then I looked down and noticed it was the 40D :p

[bnlearle]

Just my opinion, but we think too much about cameras and lenses and not enough about light and how to control it.

As someone who as done lots of weddings, most of which were on MF/MF (medium format/manual focus), I feel that each photographer will develop whatever equipment lineup works best for them. In other words, there is no right or wrong rigs, only rigs that work better or worse for you.

So if you want to use a 1Ds3 or a rebel, or a Hydroblatz 5000, it really doesn't matter. You can make great images as long as you understand great composition and learn how to arrange or harness the light you have available.

As always, YMMV.
I don't think anyone disagrees. I know I don't. But the OP asked what cameras have better noise control at 1600 -- so people gave answers. Then it fizzled down to advice after that. The OP wasn't saying there was one way -- as he's going a very rare route (with MF lenses) and Tim made it clear that whatever works, works ;)

People can care about light AND these tech things just the same :)

Bobby

[kansascityshuffle]

I don't think anyone disagrees. I know I don't. But the OP asked what cameras have better noise control at 1600 -- so people gave answers. Then it fizzled down to advice after that. The OP wasn't saying there was one way -- as he's going a very rare route (with MF lenses) and Tim made it clear that whatever works, works ;)

People can care about light AND these tech things just the same :)

Bobby

AN MF lens! That got taken a bit out of context, haha.


My technique and knowledge aspect of photography is an ever-growing work in progress. The gear is something I have complete control over, which is nice. I need any help I can get.

And Bobby, I spent some time earlier looking back through your posts. You have really grown an impressive amount in less than a couple of years. Your current work is nothing short of outstanding.

[ScullenCrossBones]

I don't think anyone disagrees. I know I don't. But the OP asked what cameras have better noise control at 1600 -- so people gave answers. Then it fizzled down to advice after that. The OP wasn't saying there was one way -- as he's going a very rare route (with MF lenses) and Tim made it clear that whatever works, works ;)

People can care about light AND these tech things just the same :)

Bobby
It was just a general statement, not directed at anyone. Sure, we all need cameras to make photographs, so it's natural to have discussions about equipment. I just never seem to see many questions or informative posts about the other, more important subjects, those of composition, light etc.

Maybe everyone has complete knowledge of those :D

[kansascityshuffle]

It was just a general statement, not directed at anyone. Sure, we all need cameras to make photographs, so it's natural to have discussions about equipment. I just never seem to see many questions or informative posts about the other, more important subjects, those of composition, light etc.

Maybe everyone has complete knowledge of those :D

Ha, doubtful. That information is really all laid out in different places. I tend to search, sift through what I find, and read a lot when I research lighting techniques. I don't post much when I do that though.