List 5 lenses you think are a must in shooting a wedding

The three I use the most: 17-40L, 85L and 70-200 L IS II. I would add another prime like a 35L

Im adding a 35L to slap on my 5dc. For outside ceremonies, I will put the 70-200 on my 7d. Then sigma 17-50 on the 7d and for reception shot versatility a prime on the 5d. My game plan for this year...

I've never shot a wedding either but I would think this would be ideal:

24-70 II
70-200 II
35 1.4
85 1.2
100L

Unless it's a tight venue or your clients are into really "artistic" shots, I can't imagine needing wider than 24mm on a regular basis.

In reality, one could probably do a pretty darn good job with the two zooms and the others just used sparingly.

I can't imagine that I would ever use 5 lenses for a wedding. Generally I can do 95% of wedding work with my 24-70 and then I usually add a fast prime such as the 85L or 135L for a little extra reach and the low light capability. Rarely will I ever use more than two lenses and I could almost always get by with just 1 should I desire. As far as macro ring shots, the 24-70 will do the trick just fine......it has a fairly close MFD and a ring shot can usually withstand quite a bit of cropping if needed (considering that ring shots are rarely ever printed very large).

For me, in order of importance:

1. Standard zoom
2. Telephoto zoom
3. Standard prime
4. Wide prime
5. Telephoto prime

I don't find myself shooting very wide. And I just got a close-up lens that will be replacing my macro for ring/detail shots.

24L II - 50L -85L II - 100L - 135L

My choices? All five lenses in my sig.

I have an extension tube for those rare macro shots that are needed throughout the day. Far easier/cheaper/safer (security) than having a dedicated macro lens weighing you down throughout the day. (which is exhausting enough from the massive gear transporting you already have)

If my business were swimming in cash, I would only add a 300 f/2.8 IS for those times that the priest restricts any photography being taken past the point of the back seating.

The 24-70 recently got the boot as the focal range and slower aperture was becoming a PIA.

Fish-eye lenses have absolutely no place in my place in my business as it conflicts with my style.

cancan7 wrote in post #14990441
will the 24-105 and 17-40 suffice, used on a 5D III? After all, it has at least 1 stop better low light performance than the mark II and 7D.

No.. no and no'er.

F/4. Ouch. That's asking for trouble. Lighting throughout the wedding day can really suck rotten eggs. Those fast apertures are godsends.

I'm actually quite disappointed with the 5D3 in the ISO department. I'm currently editing a batch of wedding photos and I am seeing ISO 400 images with severe banding and noise in the shadows. Having to crank up the noise correction filter in Lightroom on a camera that boasts improved ISO performance is quite frustrating.

cancan7 wrote in post #14990472
thanks, but will the 17-40 and 24-105 be too slow? I may be shooting a wedding in the near future, and thinking of renting a 24L instead of the 24-70. I also have the 50L and intend to get the 85L soon.

Good thinking. The 24 + 50 will cover your range just fine.

I had a 24-70 and lightroom data revealed that I was using the 24mm end of the zoom the most. That was a real eye opener.

Pearlallica wrote in post #14995535
Good thinking. The 24 + 50 will cover your range just fine.

I had a 24-70 and lightroom data revealed that I was using the 24mm end of the zoom the most. That was a real eye opener.

thank you for your advice, I am thinking of going all prime for reportage shots(alternating the 24, 50 and 85 on the 7D and 5D depending on the space and focal length).

I'll use 17-40 and 24-105(both with flash) for tea ceremony and wine toasting when I need more depth of field.

The 24-70, offering only a 1 stop advantage, doesn't hold much appeal to me, considering I can have a 24(on 5D)/50(7D) and 24(on 7D)/50 or 85(on 5D) combination.

MNUplander wrote in post #14993217
I've never shot a wedding either but I would think this would be ideal:

24-70 II
70-200 II
35 1.4
85 1.2
100L

Unless it's a tight venue or your clients are into really "artistic" shots, I can't imagine needing wider than 24mm on a regular basis.

In reality, one could probably do a pretty darn good job with the two zooms and the others just used sparingly.

your theory intrigued me and so I opened up lightroom to check my metadata from the past few weeks and looked over my most used focal lengths.

16mm - 976 shots
24mm - 2447 shots
35mm - 451 shots
50mm - 3343 shots
70 - 663 shots
85 - 2653 shots

several hundred in between 85-200

200mm - 1548 shots

Macro 100mm - 74 shots

I was really surprised at how much I shot the 85 as I don't go to it very often. I'm also surprised there wasn't as many at 16mm because it comes in very handy for weddings (tight rooms or cool effects during the reception dance)

I've shot many weddings with my Pentax 67 and one lens, a 105 (long normal). Now I use my 50D and a 28-135. If I had a 15-85 I'd use that instead. If I had a 17-50 2.8, I would like that extra stop or two. But I found early on that I did not want people waiting around while changed lenses and did not like carrying an extra body, so I learned the single lens discipline and rarely found it restrictive. Now zooms have me spoiled but the IQ on the Pentax lens and the big neg is hard to give up!

rgs wrote in post #15024884
But I found early on that I did not want people waiting around while changed lenses and did not like carrying an extra body, so I learned the single lens discipline and rarely found it restrictive.

I use the ThinkTank lens change bag. I always have all lens caps off with hoods on and it doesn't take me more than 10 seconds to change a lens. That said, I think shooting with a single lens is like painting with only a few colours of paint rather than many. Knowing what I can get out of a 16-200 range through an entire wedding day, I think all photos taken with just 105mm would drastically effect, in a negative way, the overall presentation of images I were to deliver to my clients.

Well first you must remember that the 105 on a 6x7 is a slightly long normal lens, about like a 55-60 on 35mm or FF. Second that large neg leaves plenty of opportunity to crop without obvious degradation. I also carried a 55mm if a wide lens is really needed but used it rarely. Today I use a 28-135 and carry a wider lens if needed (but it rarely is).

I have never felt restricted. Rather I find the discipline of not constantly changing lenses keeps me from being sloppy about composition and helps me see very specifically as that lens does. This is similar to view camera discipline (with which I am also familiar) in that you plan more and see more before exposure.

My response to the OP was simply because I cannot imagine "needing" 5 lenses to shoot a wedding, especially with modern zooms and high pixel count cameras.

17-40 L f.4
85 L 1.2
70 - 200 L 2.8 IS