Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 01 Apr 2013 (Monday) 16:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which lens for weddings

 
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
Apr 01, 2013 21:44 |  #16

All depends on your style. I don't carry a 24-70 or 70-200 in my bag for weddings.

I hate 2.8 for weddings. So limiting. ;)


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
memoriesoftomorrow
Goldmember
3,846 posts
Likes: 289
Joined Nov 2010
     
Apr 01, 2013 21:58 |  #17

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #15781015 (external link)
I hate 2.8 for weddings. So limiting. ;)

Why I carry a number of different primes too ;)


Peter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidmtml
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 389
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
     
Apr 01, 2013 23:15 |  #18

umphotography wrote in post #15780955 (external link)
First off,, main body is a 40d,,, F/4 is not gonna be fast enough for most churches I shoot in but the 85 on a crop might be long enough plus you can shoot at F/2.0.,,, that said, you need a better body and more glass,,, you should consider several things and scout well so you don't get in trouble,, churches present unique problems,,, good equipment is essential

I do need a better body and more glass...don't we all haha?

Both of these weddings are for friends/acquaintences, and they know the limitations I have. I do not rely on photography for my livelihood (yet). Of course I would love to buy a 5DMK III with the 70-200 2.8, the 85 1.2, and 135 2.0 etc., but it is just not going to happen. I would love to have the f4 and the f2.8 of the 70-200, the 2.8 for weddings, f4 for more of a walk-around lens, but again...just not going to happen at this point in my life.

Realistically I will only be able to buy one lens before the weddings...maybe 2 if I did the 70-200 F4 IS is the 85 1.8. This is tough!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris
Goldmember
Avatar
4,126 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 45
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Algonquin, IL
     
Apr 02, 2013 08:07 |  #19

All I'm saying is that if you can only open up to F4, you are going to struggle with good exposure and low noise if you can't use a flash.


Chris

70D | 24-70 2.8 | 400 5.6 | 580 EXII | 2X Yongnuo 622C |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Thomas ­ Campbell
Goldmember
Avatar
2,105 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Kingwood, TX
     
Apr 02, 2013 08:33 |  #20

Chris wrote in post #15782099 (external link)
All I'm saying is that if you can only open up to F4, you are going to struggle with good exposure and low noise if you can't use a flash.

Same goes for 2.8. :lol:


Houston Wedding Photographer (external link)
Houston Sports Photographer (external link)
Current Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,285 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1320
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 02, 2013 09:28 |  #21

Chris wrote in post #15782099 (external link)
All I'm saying is that if you can only open up to F4, you are going to struggle with good exposure and low noise if you can't use a flash.

That's true on a lower end body. But on your 5d3 (and mine also), especially if you have IS, it's become less of an issue.


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnThomas
Senior Member
Avatar
401 posts
Joined May 2012
Location: Long Island, New York
     
Apr 02, 2013 10:28 |  #22

I've never tried using the combo during a wedding, but I love the 85 1.8 on my 50d. It's about 135 on a FF sensor and portraits at f2 are beautiful. This is typically a walk around / family gathering setup.

In my opinion, you can't go wrong with a 70-200 - I use mine all the time.

As far as f4 goes.. I would do everything I could to avoid it. When I was getting into event photography I waited until I could afford the 2.8 models and I'm very glad I did. As other have noted, even 2.8 isn't fast enough sometimes.


You can call me JT
jsantiniphotography.co​m

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidmtml
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 389
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
     
Apr 05, 2013 11:57 |  #23

Right now I'm leaning towards buying the 85 1.4, and renting the 70-200 2.8. After using it, I will then decide if I want to save and buy the 2.8, or buy the f4.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sapearl
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
16,285 posts
Gallery: 148 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1320
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Apr 07, 2013 14:00 |  #24

davidmtml wrote in post #15793863 (external link)
Right now I'm leaning towards buying the 85 1.4, and renting the 70-200 2.8. After using it, I will then decide if I want to save and buy the 2.8, or buy the f4.

When in doubt renting is always an inexpensive way to either avoid mistakes or reinforce opinions ;).


GEAR LIST
MY WEBSITE (external link)- MY GALLERIES (external link)- MY BLOG (external link)
Artists Archives of the Western Reserve (external link) - Board

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jason401
Member
83 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Apr 08, 2013 09:18 |  #25

Personally, for the circumstances you mentioned (friends wedding etc), I'd get the 85 1.8 over the Sigma. Don't get me wrong, the Sigma is a great lens, but it's over twice the price of the Canon. And the Canon is a sweet lens (along with the 135L, it's one of the best bang for your buck lenses). That will leave you with some extra cash to put towards your rentals, or even to purchase another lens. If you need something longer as well, you could get the 200 2.8. This combo would come in just a bit more than what the Sigma would cost.

Or, if you can compromise on the focal length, just get the 135L and never look back.

Thats if you really like primes. Otherwise the 70-200 2.8 would be my choice. Especially if you really only use one camera. I use two, and have the 135L on one, and either a 35 or 85 on the other.

Anyway, just some thoughts. Good luck!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidmtml
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 389
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
     
Apr 08, 2013 11:31 |  #26

Jason401 wrote in post #15803190 (external link)
Personally, for the circumstances you mentioned (friends wedding etc), I'd get the 85 1.8 over the Sigma. Don't get me wrong, the Sigma is a great lens, but it's over twice the price of the Canon. And the Canon is a sweet lens (along with the 135L, it's one of the best bang for your buck lenses). That will leave you with some extra cash to put towards your rentals, or even to purchase another lens. If you need something longer as well, you could get the 200 2.8. This combo would come in just a bit more than what the Sigma would cost.

Or, if you can compromise on the focal length, just get the 135L and never look back.

Thats if you really like primes. Otherwise the 70-200 2.8 would be my choice. Especially if you really only use one camera. I use two, and have the 135L on one, and either a 35 or 85 on the other.

Anyway, just some thoughts. Good luck!

Thanks for your thoughts. I feel like both the 135 and 200 would be too long for me being on a crop camera. One option that I have been toying around with is getting the 85 1.8, and then buying a used 7D. Looking at tests though, I just really like the images from the 1.4, and the extra 2/3 stop never hurts either. I do have the 50 1.8, which, while I'm sure the 85 1.8 is much better quality, I still feel like it is not quite enough for good low-light performance.

Last wedding I shot, I did shoot with two cameras. I had my 17-50 2.8 on my 40d, and the 70-200 F4 IS on my 350D.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davidmtml
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
848 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 389
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Montana
     
Apr 14, 2013 16:28 |  #27

Here with an update...I just ordered the Canon 85 1.8. For now I am probably just going to go ahead and rent the 70-200 2.8 IS, and save some money. I've been really thinking about a 7D for another body, but I would buy used, and I really want to wait until the 7DMii comes out, hoping to get a steal off of someone upgrading..but then I wonder...how long until I upgrade to full frame. I mostly shoot portraits and nature.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mike_6480
Member
38 posts
Joined Jan 2013
     
Apr 22, 2013 15:09 as a reply to  @ davidmtml's post |  #28

How about the sigma 70-200 f/2.8 OS?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
L.J.G.
"Not brigth enough"
Avatar
10,463 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 43
Joined Jul 2010
Location: ɹǝpun uʍop
     
Apr 22, 2013 15:34 |  #29

I use a 40D as my second and backup body, a 5DII as my primary. One thing I don't do is use my 70-200 f/4 IS on the 40D indoors. I tend to use my Sigma 85 f/1.4 inside, as well as my other primes (35 & 50), I also defer mainly to the 5DII because of higher ISO usage.


Lloyd
Never make the same mistake twice, there are so many new ones, try a different one each day
Gear Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,423 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which lens for weddings
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is meehow
874 guests, 358 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.