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 Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 24 Jun 2013 (Monday) 03:26
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

F4 for weddings?

 
supfresh
Member
Avatar
222 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Jun 2013
     
Jun 26, 2013 17:14 as a reply to  @ post 16067685 |  #46

Hope I can contribute some of my experiences on this matter..

I can only give input on the 70-200mm f/4 IS as i've JUST recently purchased this lens. I agree with the comments posting that for light-performance, it's really negligible if you have a high-iso performing body. The only thing I would consider it for would be subject isolation.


Wedding (external link) - Facebook (external link)- Personal (external link)
5DMKIII / A7RII/ RICOHGR / 50L / 24-70L II/ 70-200 2.8 VC / 35A / 16-35L II / S85
Always some lens, never your lens.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,400 posts
Gallery: 64 photos
Likes: 287
Joined May 2005
     
Jun 26, 2013 18:02 |  #47

jimewall wrote in post #16067566 (external link)
The ceremony is where vows are exchanged and the reception is the meet and greet party (usually some other location) after the ceremony.

Since f/4's use at weddings is what you originally asked about it is how just about everybody answered.

(Based on inside wedding ceremonies and inside receptions) If I summarized correctly, most seemed to say that f/2.8 zooms and/or faster primes would be what you would want to save for if you might want to do weddings. This is to be to prevent distractions by a flash, because some churches do not allow flash, and f/2.8 (or faster) can give better subject isolation. The f/4 lenses might work for most of the receptions if you use a flash.

Someone correct me or add to this if I am incorrect.

We will do our best to deal with the potential language difficulty.:)

Buckey1, thanks for the information on using the diffuser and white balance.

Your summarization is correct. Most lens are at their sharpest when using it at around one stop than its widest F-stop. As such, the 24-105 is best used at F5.6 ( for me anyway). You want this aperture anyway when you shoot groups of people in multiple layers.

You are very welcome about the flash information, Jim. I just realized who you are. Remember us meeting at Costco? 😛




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jun 26, 2013 20:43 |  #48

Buckeye1 wrote in post #16067851 (external link)
Your summarization is correct. Most lens are at their sharpest when using it at around one stop than its widest F-stop. As such, the 24-105 is best used at F5.6 ( for me anyway). You want this aperture anyway when you shoot groups of people in multiple layers.

You are very welcome about the flash information, Jim. I just realized who you are. Remember us meeting at Costco? 😛

Yep, and I'm loving the 35.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
drzenitram
Senior Member
824 posts
Joined Aug 2012
     
Jun 27, 2013 00:55 |  #49

I used to have the canon 70-200 f4 IS, and I found that it was NOT fast enough, and that the jump to a f2.8 zoom DID make a big difference for me. On my cameras, that extra stop of the light was the difference between "too much noise" and "acceptable noise".

Sometimes I would have to give up the reach of my t2i and use my 5d2 so I could take photos at ISO 3200 and ISO 6400, which are acceptable ISO levels in my opinion. On my t2i I find ISO 1600 to be acceptable and anything beyond that I don't care for.

A bigger problem arose when I needed to shoot at f4 ISO 12800 on my 5d2, which was ALSO not acceptable.

* Switch to the f2.8 zoom, and now in the situations where I needed iso 3200 on my 5d2 and had to give up reach, I could now use the t2i body and get that extra reach because the extra stop of light let me drop down to ISO 1600.

On the 5d2 with the f2.8 zoom those ISO 12800 shots are now ISO6400 shots and are back to an acceptable level of noise.

Any darker and I go to my f1.4 primes, but since there isn't an f1.4-f2.0 telephoto prime with image stabilization, I lose the reach.


Personally I thought the switch from my $950 canon 70-200 f4 IS to my $1000 sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS was totally worth the extra $50 ;-P


| Bodies - 5D Mark II, T2i | Lenses - Helios 44-2, Sigma 35mm 1.4, Sigma 85 1.4, Sigma 70-200 2.8 OS, Tamron SP AF 1.4x TC | Lights - 430ex ii x2, Random 3rd party strobes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
Combating camera shame since 1977...
Avatar
9,897 posts
Gallery: 15 photos
Likes: 2362
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jun 27, 2013 14:30 |  #50

Richie1978 wrote in post #16066672 (external link)
My thoughts: The bridge and groom don't move around while in front of the reverend, so shutterspeeds around 1/50 should be fine. Therefore I needed ISO 1600 - ISO 4000. With the 5d MarkII and PP in Lightroom these ISOs should be fine for great pictures. I was worried more about the DOF.

And just to make it clear. I will surely add some faster lenses to my arsenal. The question is ONLY: Sell f4 lenses and buy 2.8 lenses OR add primes to the f4 lenses...

but you will also want to capture the bride and groom walking back down the aisle etc., so you'll need faster shutter speeds than that, and then of course higher ISO.

I think you have to go with selling the f/4 zooms and go with faster zooms first.

I've also been thinking about what set up i will need for weddings. Lately I've been shooting some other events (things that aren't so important as a wedding) but have been in low light similar to what I will have to deal with in weddings. Here are the conclusions i've come to.

At a constant aperture, DOF changes with distance to subject and focal length. With wider focal lengths (24-40), group shots, the whole dance floor or entire front of church etc, greater DOF is often desirable. Take this in combination with the fact you get greater DOF with wider focal lengths, the difference between f/2.8 and f/4 isn't going to do much to help you separate the subject from the background.

IMO larger aperture and wider focal lengths often don't give enough blur to truly separate subject from background, so why not get everyone in better focus?

http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html (external link)

30mm f/4
Subject distance 15 ft

Depth of field
Near limit 9.34 ft
Far limit 38 ft
Total 28.7 ft

In front of subject 5.7 ft (20%)
Behind subject 23 ft (80%)

-----

30mm f/2.8
Subject distance 15 ft

Depth of field
Near limit 10.5 ft
Far limit 26.2 ft
Total 15.7 ft

In front of subject 4.5 ft (29%)
Behind subject 11.2 ft (71%)



With longer focal lengths (135-200) and greater distance, DOF can become too thin @ 2.8 to adequately capture two or three people standing and talking. f/4 is often desired here too.

Having covered the extreme focal distances, we are left talking about the middle focal distances (40-135). I think this is where you really want faster lenses. Faster is always better, but this is really where you must have them.

Given the fact that you aren't going to find a 2.8 or faster (or even a f/4-5.6) lens in that focal length range, AND you really need two cameras to shoot a wedding AND switching lenses can mean lost shots, I think I have come to the conclusion that to be a good wedding photographer, you need f/2.8 from 24-200, and you need one body with a 24-70 and one with a 70-200.

As said above, you can start off with something less, but the above set-up is the ultimate goal.


I plan to buy a 6D with 24-105, (keep my XSi as a back up with either my 85mm 1.8 or 70-200 2.8) use that set up for a few weddings and then purchase a 24-70 2.8

Until that happens, I will work hard to isolate subjects from the background by making sure i'm in the right spot to leave the background further from the subject, which will give the effect of a larger aperture.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fg7uuui
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
361 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Germany
     
Jun 28, 2013 07:04 |  #51
bannedPermanent ban

One last question:

If upgrading to 2.8 Zooms and you can't afford it to buy them all at the same time, where would you start? In the 24-70 range or the 70-200 range?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pearlallica
Goldmember
Avatar
1,302 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Great White North
     
Jun 28, 2013 08:13 |  #52

wow, four pages of answers. Sure, I'll throw in my two cents.

I think it depends on the focal length that we're talkking about. 200mm F/4? Maybe outdoors. Indoors your ISO is going to have to go up, which is never a good thing as far as skin tones go, wedding dress detail, facial expressions....

If you're looking at a focal length range of 24 to 100mm or so, then sure, you can sometimes get away with F4 - just so long as you have a white wall or ceiling nearby to bounce your flash with. Without flash, indoors, your shutter is going to more often than not be dangerously slow which will compromise image sharpness. Never a good thing.

I've shot wedding ceremonies that are so dark that, manually set, was yielding under-exposures even at F/2.8, 1/60th, ISO 1600 - if you have busy ceilings or black ceilings - forget about using 200mm altogether. As an absolute last resort, I will use direct flash. But I have fast glass, and that typically saves me in cases where, again, the surroundings are completely black and there is little lighings (yes, some people chose very uncommon locations to get married - be prepared for it)

But yes, when indoors, flash will let you get away with all kinds of things such as shooting at F/8, ISO 100. Of course, outdoors an F/4 lens has its place too.


jonathan @ tlcphoto.com (external link) - pro wedding and portrait photog
5d2 5d3 50L 16-35 70-200 ElinchromRX600 580EX 600EX VIV285

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pearlallica
Goldmember
Avatar
1,302 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Great White North
     
Jun 28, 2013 08:24 |  #53

Just saw your final posted question, Richie.

Personally, I use the 24-70 range far more than then 70-200. In fact, my 70-200 only comes out of the bag for the ceremony and reception. And even then I don't use them all too much.

Even then, with 2.8 not being your fastest choice, pair that 24-70 with a flash and you should be able to get by much better. When I had it, the 24-70 was a favorite of mine.


jonathan @ tlcphoto.com (external link) - pro wedding and portrait photog
5d2 5d3 50L 16-35 70-200 ElinchromRX600 580EX 600EX VIV285

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fg7uuui
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
361 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Germany
     
Jun 28, 2013 08:40 |  #54
bannedPermanent ban

Pearlallica wrote in post #16072418 (external link)
I've shot wedding ceremonies that are so dark that, manually set, was yielding under-exposures even at F/2.8, 1/60th, ISO 1600)
.

Thanks for your answer.
Just this example is something I don't understand.
With a f4 this would have been 1/60 Iso 3200.
200mm with 1/60 and a IS Lens is no problem at all.
And most "normal" people wouldn't see the absolutely minor increase of noise between 1600 and 3200




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pearlallica
Goldmember
Avatar
1,302 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Great White North
     
Jun 28, 2013 09:49 |  #55

Richie1978 wrote in post #16072508 (external link)
Thanks for your answer.
Just this example is something I don't understand.
With a f4 this would have been 1/60 Iso 3200.
200mm with 1/60 and a IS Lens is no problem at all.
And most "normal" people wouldn't see the absolutely minor increase of noise between 1600 and 3200

ISO3200 on the long end (200mm) isn't that great on a 5D2, but printed at 4x6 it's not noticeable. ISO3200 on the wide end (24mm) printed large is unacceptable. You're right, it's relative. But it's teetering on a very fine line of acceptability. I'm forced into ISO3200 even with an aperture of F/1.4 sometimes - I'll do this typically for the reception when environmental light is essential (again, on the wide end, getting the subject and the hall in the frame) and it's a given that your customer will not be enlarging the images. (who blows up prints of the reception!?)


jonathan @ tlcphoto.com (external link) - pro wedding and portrait photog
5d2 5d3 50L 16-35 70-200 ElinchromRX600 580EX 600EX VIV285

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Buckeye1
Goldmember
Avatar
3,400 posts
Gallery: 64 photos
Likes: 287
Joined May 2005
     
Jun 28, 2013 12:51 |  #56

Richie1978 wrote in post #16072508 (external link)
Thanks for your answer.
Just this example is something I don't understand.
With a f4 this would have been 1/60 Iso 3200.
200mm with 1/60 and a IS Lens is no problem at all.
And most "normal" people wouldn't see the absolutely minor increase of noise between 1600 and 3200

Most normal people don't care if you use a point and shoot..or even the iPad as long as they look good in it :p Have you ever shown a picture to a group of people that are in the image? The first thing they look is themselves; if they don't look good, then they don't like the image. They can care less if it was shot with the 1Dx or the 100s.

As far as image quality, it depends on your camera body - ISO 1600 and 3200 can be a huge difference...to the eyes of those who knows what to look for :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Fg7uuui
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
361 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Germany
     
Jun 28, 2013 14:26 |  #57
bannedPermanent ban

Buckeye1 wrote in post #16073269 (external link)
[COLOR=redISO 1600 and 3200 can be a huge difference...to the eyes of those who knows what to look for :)

Of course I was referring to the 5d MarkII because I would only talk about cameras where I have taken pictures with :oops::oops::oops: Ok, noise is something "special": Some hate it and some accept a lot more. For me: With the "help" of Lightroom I would't hesitate to use 3200 and 6400 can be acceptable in some shots.

or even the iPad as long as they look good in it

This was something that made me laugh :) I do mostly landsacpe and while it's ok if people stand at the rim of Bryce Canyon and use their Iphone to snap a picture (hey as long they are happy with it), but holding the I PAD in front of the face just looks terribly stupid

Have you ever shown a picture to a group of people that are in the image?

I know. Did portraits for my family: Oh my god this is terrible - short pause - I mean, the picture you made is great, I'm just referring to my facial expression :-)




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

7,338 views & 0 likes for this thread
F4 for weddings?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
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 sdc123
715 guests, 369 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.