Wedding lens?

[MCI]

You have a choice to take 2 lens for a wedding shoot.
What would your choice be?

[cdifoto]

Who's restricting me?

[Skrim17]

I would ask in the wedding forum.

[prinspaul]

24-70(17-55) -70-200

simple!

[timnosenzo]

24L II + 50L

[jr_senator]

Would be helpful to know what format you are using.

[mikekelley]

24-70 and 135L

or 17-55 and 100 f2 or 85 1.8 or something

[friz]

24-70L + 35L

[gasrocks]

I might question the wisdom of doing this wedding.

[bric-a-brac]

I shot a ceremony today using only the 35L and 135L. the boss man shot his half of the day with a Tamron 18-200 and a Canon 70-200/2.8 L. It takes all kinds. :p

[tim]

Playing it safe: 17-55 F2.8 IS and 70-200 F2.8 IS
More fun: 30 F1.4 and 100 F2.8 macro

In reality: 17-55x2, 70-200, 100 2.8, 30 1.4, 10-22.

I find the less decisions I have to make on a wedding day the more I concentrate on the emotions, and I get better photos that way. Having said that equipment does help.

[jr_senator]

Perhaps it's just silly me, but I can't understand the replies without knowing what format the OP is going to use. Also, some of the replies don't identify which camera the respondent is basing the suggested lens choice on. The AOV with the same lens on each of the three possible formats different greatly.

[RichLPhotography]

I'd pick 24L and 50L and bring my 1DmkIII and 5DmkII... that would get me the following focal lengths, 24, 31, 50 and 65.

another good choice would be 35L and 85L, which would give me 35, 45, 85, and 110.

[sebmour]

24L and 85LII

[cdifoto]

Perhaps it's just silly me, but I can't understand the replies without knowing what format the OP is going to use. Also, some of the replies don't identify which camera the respondent is basing the suggested lens choice on. The AOV with the same lens on each of the three possible formats different greatly.
I didn't get the impression that OP was asking for advice/recommendations. It came across to me as another pointless theoretical/what if/survey thread.

[TweakMDS]

Coming from an amateur with limited gear: I'd probably go for 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 IS (on 2 FF bodies), but as said above, if you have to ask this question here, you should really doubt whether or not you should shoot weddings (on a pro-level - as a primary shooter).
Situations can change and you might have to change strategies very quickly, like switch to a low light prime or pick something wider than 24mm, etc.
Not everything comes out best with natural light only, so having the proper flash technique down can help out.

[jr_senator]

I didn't get the impression that OP was asking for advice/recommendations. It came across to me as another pointless theoretical/what if/survey thread.
And looking back, you may be correct. If so, I will take 20 lashes with a wet noodle.

[cdifoto]

Then again it could be solicitation of advice disguised as a survey. :D

[vibin247]

On a FF: 24-70L & 70-200 f/4 L IS
On a 1.3X: 16-35L II & 70-200 f/4L IS
On a 1.6X: 17-55 & 70-200 f/4L IS

[RT McAllister]

On a 1.6X: 17-55 & 70-200 f/4L ISCrap. Here's more silly talk of a 70-200 on a 1.6x crop.

Listen up... It's too freaking long for a wedding!

And don't make me lie to my wife and buy one just to prove it because I will!!!

IS f/2.8

<drool>

[tim]

Crap. Here's more silly talk of a 70-200 on a 1.6x crop.

Listen up... It's too freaking long for a wedding!

And don't make me lie to my wife and buy one just to prove it because I will!!!

Damn, does that mean I have to stop using mine? 'cause I use it at every wedding, about a hundred of them so far.

[tsw910]

Damn, does that mean I have to stop using mine? 'cause I use it at every wedding, about a hundred of them so far.

not if you're in a 20x20 room :p but then again, those tears will be HUGE ! :lol:

[jr_senator]

What format, Tim?

[jr_senator]

not if you're in a 20x20 room :p but then again, those tears will be HUGE ! :lol:I'm sure Tim has other lenses as well.

[tim]

not if you're in a 20x20 room :p but then again, those tears will be HUGE ! :lol:

Depends, the rest of the world uses meters, 20x20m would definitely call for a 70-200 :p

What format, Tim?

I'm sure Tim has other lenses as well.

1.6X crop, 7D and 40D. I have lenses from 10mm to 200mm.

[RT McAllister]

Damn, does that mean I have to stop using mine?Yes. Throw that useless piece o' crap door stop away before you gets a hernia. :cry:

cause I use it at every wedding, about a hundred of them so far.Well, If I did weddings in 40 acre parks while sitting in a barcalounger drinking Iced-T...

Seriously... STOP!!! Delete this stupid-assed thread now! The 70-200 sucks and I don't need one. I'd rather be standing on the altar... in plain view... right between the couple... with my 10mm doing justice to the groom's ear hair.

[Joelene]

LOL.. sorry to interrupt, but am I the only photographer that doesn't do the "math" of it all?

[tim]

LOL.. sorry to interrupt, but am I the only photographer that doesn't do the "math" of it all?

What math?

[Joelene]

Yes. Throw that useless piece o' crap door stop away before you gets a hernia. :cry:

Well, If I did weddings in 40 acre parks while sitting in a barcalounger drinking Iced-T...

Seriously... STOP!!! Delete this stupid-assed thread now! The 70-200 sucks and I don't need one. I'd rather be standing on the altar... in plain view... right between the couple... with my 10mm doing justice to the groom's ear hair.


I agree, in a softer kinda girly way. That lens is big, bulky and heavy, I don't see a use for it at all what so ever, I use my tiny little 70-300 5.6 and I get more zoom. I use it because it is small, light and I have a anything that doens't fit in my camera bag, doens't go with me to a wedding rule, and it fits nicely :)

[Joelene]

What math?

the .... 1.6x 70-200 crop factor in a 20x20 room with a 10 foot ceiling will give you an image that is .... (said in my best big old man goofy face and voice) Math...

if the lens works ;) use it. If not change it. learn what works from experience and practice. Understand what lens will give you what advantage. Best two lenses in a wedding? A good portrait lens and a "fun" toy-ish lens... everyone has a different opinion on what is a good portrait lens and what is a good toy lens. Each photographer needs to figure that out for them self to be able to create images that they want to create.

[tim]

the .... 1.6x 70-200 crop factor in a 20x20 room with a 10 foot ceiling will give you an image that is .... (said in my best big old man goofy face and voice) Math...

Oh we were just bullshi**ing ;) I put a lens on and look through it, if I don't get the picture I want I change lenses!

[RT McAllister]

I agree, in a softer kinda girly way. That lens is big, bulky and heavy, I don't see a use for it at all what so ever,My wife got to you didn't she?

I use my tiny little 70-300 5.6 and I get more zoom.With that 300mm on a cropped body I'd have to shoot the wedding from the bar across the street! (In "bulb" mode no less because of the 5.6 :D)

I'm just giving Tim here a hard time. I've always wanted a 70-200 2.8/IS but just can't justify it for 90% of my venues. Plus, I'm just a lowly 2nd shooter so my "bosses" can buy their own pricey crap and carry it. :lol:

As a compromise though, I have been eyeing the Sigma 50-150 f/2.8. I'm just not convinced it will work right out of the box given its history.

anything that doens't fit in my camera bag, doens't go with me to a wedding rule, and it fits nicely.No problem carrying the 70-200 for me. I have a nice case with wheels and a trailer hitch.

[Joelene]

hehe RT, My camera bag is a Crumpler 5 Million Dollar home ( My purse is actually bigger!) and my "serious photographer" bag is the Crumpler 6 Million Dollar Home.

I have the Lo Pro wheely one, too much work lifting it into the trunk! It is collecting dust. I will not deny I am just a big ol' lazy girly girl that has never worked a day of manual labor and I don't ever intend to start! I find that the 70-200 falls under some sort of manual labor law of lifting X amount of weight.. I AM SURE OF IT! and I like the pub across the street! :P hehe

Regarding the sigma 50-150, I have yet to find a sigma lens I liked... If you do break down get one let me know how it works out for you. Personally I wouldn't trust it...


Tim all i have to say is THANK EFFIN GAWD!

[PMCphotography]

I use my 70-200 f/2.8 at every wedding i do...I'd rather stand a bit farther away and use it when I can :)

[tsw910]

Oh we were just bullshi**ing ;) I put a lens on and look through it, if I don't get the picture I want I change lenses!

exactly .. and after a while, you'll know what you'll need or have an estimate idea

[jr_senator]

...I have yet to find a sigma lens I liked...Personally I wouldn't trust it...
Same here. I would need a very good reason to buy a third party lens. And then, it would have to be a very good lens.

[RT McAllister]

Same here. I would need a very good reason to buy a third party lens. And then, it would have to be a very good lens.Sound thinking - can't argue with this.

Right now I'm trying to juggle the 135L on paper. It's doable but even that may be too long hence the notion of the Sigma 50-150.

Primes are really starting to look pretty sweet to me. I borrowed an 85/1.2 and had to wear sunglasses while shooting with it. :D I'd give my right testicle to own one. (Mrs "M" already took the other when I bought the 52" flatscreen).

[tim]

Sigma 30mm F1.4 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) is a fantastic lens, especially after calibration.

[RT McAllister]

Sigma 30mm F1.4 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/381615-REG/Sigma_300101_30mm_f_1_4_EX_DC.html/BI/2312/KBID/3114) is a fantastic lens, especially after calibration.This seems to be Sigma's slogan. They should print it on all their boxes.

[simplefoto]

70-200 here as well.
I also use the 24-70 2.8 on a second body or 16-35 2.8