Best wedding lense setup

[antaine]

Which would you bring (with a 10D and 550EX flash) to a wedding as a paid person but to only take 10 pre-agreed photos. These shots are a few of the actual ceremony (portrait)and group shots afterwards in the church which allows flash. The couple are aware that I am not a professional.

[Andy_T]

Hi Antaine,

taking into account your current setup, I'd suggest

- 18-50/3.5 for wide angle shots outside of the church or with flash (used at f/5.6 or f/8 )
- 28-75/2.8 as standard lens (used at f/4.0)
- 50/1.4 for low light/shallow DOF shots (used at f/2.0)
... optional
- 70-200/4.0 for distance shots (ok, 2.8 would be better, but $$$)

That would be 2 shots per lens :wink:

In short ... I think that you would profit most from adding the 50/1.4 to your current setup. If you have $$$ left, the 70-200/4.0 would be nice ... but you should do nicely with the other 3.

Mind you, I've never really shot a wedding.
But getting 10 shots can't be difficult :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

[AjP]

this is what I prefer for weddings

Canon 16-35 2.8L
Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L IS

Canon 50 1.4
---------------------------------------------------
for low budget Sigma 24-70 2.8 (really nice and sharp)

still nothing better then Canon 50 1.4 (1.8 cheaper version now as good as 1.4)

it is expencive lense lineup but nothing can be better IMHO

[Tom W]

I've used:

17-40, 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, 70-200 f/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, & 135/2.

Lots of good wedding lenses, depending on the circumstances under which you shoot. Sometimes, flash is accepted, sometimes not. I'd say that for a budget, what you have is good if you add a 50/1.4 and perhaps a 100/2 or 135/2. There are times when you won't be able to get close enough for your normal-range lenses. The 135/2 has the advantage of being very useable with a teleconverter.

A lens with a focus scale is nice if you like to shoot in very dark settings where autofocus might flounder a bit or be too slow.

[HKFEVER]

this is what I prefer for weddings

Canon 16-35 2.8L
Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L IS



I second these. I saw so many wedding using these 3 lenses.

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

I second these. I saw so many wedding using these 3 lenses.

I third that. Kind of expensive though.

To save money;
Canon 17-40 f/4L
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/4L

Although, I'm not sure if the f/4's would be fast enough. I know mine aren't all that great for indoor use, and I'm guessing for weddings there'd be a good amount of indoor shooting... I donno though. Never shot a wedding.

[Andy_T]

Or, get a second hand 20-35/2.8 L.

they usually sell for about 450-500$ on eBay.

Not as wide, but nearly as good as the 16-35/2.8 L

Best regards,
Andy

[glangston]

I was checking out the equipment of a wedding photographer Sunday and he used the 20D with a bracket and 580EX flash with the 16-35 Zoom for most everything. I had the 85 f/1.8 and had some good candids.

[Citizensmith]

Here's my lineup

17-40 - General use outdoor and large group shots
24 2.8 - General use indoor, group shots, formal portraits (full length and scenery)
85 1.8 - Long shots indoor, formal portaits (head and shoulders, couples only), accent items (cake, flowers, etc), indoor candids
70-200 4 - Long shots outdoors and outdoor candids.

So basically fast primes indoors, f/4 Ls outdoors (or in bright areas) and mix it up whenever necessary.

[wilflee]

The traditional wedding lenses are 50mm, 80mm & 150mm on a 6x6. But if you used those focal lengths, you'll be fighting the pro-photog they hired for space because both of you will be standing on the same spot taking the same pictures. That said, there's no rule dictating what lens you must use. You could use 16mm to shoot the whole wedding and have some fascinating shots that no guests or the photog could have imagined shooting. And that's probably the shots the wedding couple wanted in the first place because they already hired a pro to take standard shots. They'll be looking for unique shots from their guests.

[Citizensmith]

And that's probably the shots the wedding couple wanted in the first place because they already hired a pro to take standard shots.

Aside from the fact that a fair few of us do this on a pro basis. :)

It's a long time since I saw anyone with medium or large format. Everyone seems to have switched to digital. The only way you could tell the serious pros is the large 1 series bodies and red stripey lenses. And that's probably not that reliable.

[SAZABI]

24-70 f2.8L

[ed rader]

>>Canon 16-35 2.8L
Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L I

Canon 50 1.4<<

the classic photojournalism set-up. fast zooms to capture real life and a faster prime for portraits "just in case"....:).



ed rader

[Todd Jacobsen]

this is what I prefer for weddings

Canon 16-35 2.8L
Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L IS

Canon 50 1.4
---------------------------------------------------
for low budget Sigma 24-70 2.8 (really nice and sharp)

still nothing better then Canon 50 1.4 (1.8 cheaper version now as good as 1.4)

it is expencive lense lineup but nothing can be better IMHO

16-35 / 24-70 perfect for reception areas that are space limited. I needed both of these for the wedding I did in July.

Utilized the 50 1.4 a lot as well. Liked the results but had to get used to the physical manuevering for appropriate composition.

Never utilized my 70-200 since I just got it.

Stay away from ANYTHING less than 2.8 for indoor use - if you can.

[antaine]

Thanks for all your replies

I was checking out the equipment of a wedding photographer Sunday and he used the 20D with a bracket and 580EX flash with the 16-35 Zoom for most everything. I had the 85 f/1.8 and had some good candids.
I love my Tamron but I thought of the 17-40L as a better all rounder for a wedding than my Tamron (I am on a budget and would need to sell the Tamron 28-75 for the Canon first). I might then get the 50/1.4 to do the candid shots or even look for a fast 85mm or 100mm on ebay.

The church is reasonably bright for an Irish church (most of our churches are quite old and very dark for the camera - but beautiful all the same!). This wedding is my first ever paid job (I am not being paid a lot - I deliberately gave a small price) - I want to 'use' it as an experience builder.

Any more thoughts/votes would be appreciated - wedding in 5 weeks time (so running out of time to buy from here!)

[Andy_T]

So what is your initial opinion after the poll?

Selling one lens to fund the purchase of another doesn't sound like the smartest alternative to me, because you're bound to lose money in the way.

Especially if you want to sell an f/2.8 lens to get an f/4.0 lens.

IMO, the difference of the 17-40 over the 18-50 on the wide end is not that dramatic to warrant for the considerable extra money.

Best regards,
Andy

[grego]

>>Canon 16-35 2.8L
Canon 24-70 2.8L
Canon 70-200 2.8L I

Canon 50 1.4<<

the classic photojournalism set-up. fast zooms to capture real life and a faster prime for portraits "just in case"....:).



ed rader

Yup, the perfect setup and the 50 would make a good 4th lens. But the 3 L's are all you really need.

But hey, if weddings are making you a lot of money, its good to put it into a lot of equipment. Oh and add a quantum pack to that flash and that flash is so much faster.

[Maureen Souza]

I primarily use my Tamron 28-75mm/ Canon 16-35mm for wide shots and 50/1.4 for portraits. And the 135mm is long enough for me.... I don't usually get that far away to need more reach.

[antaine]

I was just concerned at the quality of the Sigma for my group shots - if they didn't come very good (I will be using a tripod) and another guest saw that I was as I was using a €100 lense!

Pity Tamron don't make a 18-50/2.8 !!


I will probably use:


1. Tamron 28-75: Bride outside;groom outside, exchanging rings; most internal shots with and without flash

2. Sigma 18-50: 3 or 4 family shots on tripid with flash at end of mass.

3. Perhaps pick up a Canon 85 f1.8 USM (not the L) for the candids?

[Andy_T]

Pity Tamron don't make a 18-50/2.8 !!


Well, Sigma does :p

The 18-50/2.8 EX ... supposedly a very nice lens.

Another option would be the Tokina AT-X 17/3.5 pro ...

However, for interior group shots you would use a flash, and you would want to use more than f/2.8 to have sufficient DOF, especially if the people are arranged in more than 1 line.

My suggestion would be to make some test shots with your Sigma at f/8 with a bounced or diffused flash and see how they turn out.

Best regards,
Andy

[antaine]

thanks Andy for all your help - this will mean I don't need to sell my Tamron. The ceiling is very high in the church so bouncing will not be an option? (a question more than a statement!) -

What did you think of my Canon 85 f1.8 USM option?

[Andy_T]

The ceiling is very high in the church so bouncing will not be an option? (a question more than a statement!) -


You might diffuse the flash with something like Gary Fong's lightsphere ... do a forum search.

NB: I've never used this, let along shot an event like this, so search out the advice of people who really know from experience how this works best.

But I try to contribute what I remember from other threads here on the forum, which I frequent ... uhmm ... often.

What did you think of my Canon 85 f1.8 USM option?

I don't have it, but it's definitely one of the very next lenses on my wish list.

I have the 50/1.4 which I absolutely love ... believe the 85/1.8 is very similar, but I find the 50 focal length more helpful for indoor portraits ... so the 50 was my first priority.
But then, I don't do weddings:wink:

Maybe it's a big church, and you can use your 300/4 :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[grego]

I don't have it, but it's definitely one of the very next lenses on my wish list.

I have the 50/1.4 which I absolutely love ... believe the 85/1.8 is very similar, but I find the 50 focal length more helpful for indoor portraits ... so the 50 was my first priority.
But then, I don't do weddings:wink:

Maybe it's a big church, and you can use your 300/4 :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

Yeah, 50 1.4 is more versatile if you know you are going to be in tighter areas, considering the 1.6 crop. If you already have the 50 1.4, you really don't need the 85 1.8 right away. Better off putting it into another lens.

Maybe the 300 will come in handy if he shoots a wedding in a football stadium. :lol:

[antaine]

now .. the 300/4 would get me noticed photographing the different types of birds :lol:

Saw the Stofen Omni-Bounce for £16 at warehouseexpress.com

will do a test tonight at home on the tamron set at 50mm and 75mm and try and gauge which is most required lenght for the wedding candid shots (50mm v 85mm prime) - if I get the 50/1.4 it's focal length is already covered by the Tamrons' length (loosing the 1.4 of course.)

[Rokkorfan]

For all of my weddings I carry the 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and the 85mm f/1.2. I seldom take the 16-35mm because I find for wedding shots that the 24mm on a 1.3x crop is sufficiently wide for all of my photos. If I had a slightly bigger bag for weddings it would, however, be in the bag for sure.

[antaine]

Rokkorfan;
which is the second must used lenses? - the 85 or the 70-200?? thanks.

[jimbobp]

Here's what I use and find works very well. Canon 28-70 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, Sigma 20 F1.8, Canon 135 F2.0 L, and from the back of the church, a Sigma 120-300 F2.8 on a big tripod.

[genewch]

I have only 2 times of experience to take pics for my friends' wedding ceremonies, so my comments may not be so up to profesional standards. :) I have the 17-40mm f4 as my general purpose lens. It really works well in wedding ceremonies. For longer reach, a 100mm or 135mm is fine too (I have the 100mm macro). For mid-ranges, a 50mm or 85mm works, especially on 1.6x digital cameras.

For such time-critical type of photography, zooms are of great advantage. Of course it stills depends on your taste and style of shooting.