Opinions on the wide primes for weddings and events

This may have been covered in one fashion or another, but I would like opinions please on the wide prime for weddings and events, and I suppose portraits as well.

I'm mostly a portrait shooter, but I'm starting to do more weddings and indoor events. I will not shoot a church wedding - not in my wheelhouse. But, more casual gigs and especially outdoor ceremonies/receptions where I can work a crowd I enjoy. My dilemma is - I see the world mostly zoomed in. I shoot two Nikon full-frame cameras - the D610 and D750. When I carry both cameras at one time, a 70-200 2.8 Tamron goes on the 750, and a Nikon 16-35 F4 I bought mainly for landscapes goes on the 610. Both have VR (or VC or IS, etc), but when people start moving in low-light, I have no choice but to crank the ISOs. Especially with the F4 zoom. Not necessarily a horrible thing with either camera.

Seems like when I do carry both cameras and lenses, the VAST MAJORITY of my shots are with the 70-200. Only a handful are taken with the 16-35. My other lenses that would get use at an event include the 85mm 1.8G and an old 50mm 1.8 that came off of a hand-me-down film camera. Works just fine, but I don't use it much.

So now I'm looking at either the Nikon 28mm 1.8, or the 35mm 1.8. First, I'm wondering if having that 1.8 as an option in a wide lens would be a game changer for me vs. the F4 in the 16-35. And second, I'm wondering, and maybe hoping that attaching a wide prime to one camera will force me to get out of my telephoto zoom state-of-mind and get me thinking a little more creatively. And, it might force me to get in close - really something I'm not used to. I'm fine holding a conversation with a portrait subject at relatively close range with my 85mm, but getting in someone's face at an event - yeah, not so much. I've seen samples of what each can do though and I like them, but I wondering if sticking to the 16-35 is the way to go. Then I could put my funds to the 85mm 1.4 I've always wanted!

Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!

I have just gone through something similar. I went round and round for a log time until I showed up to a wedding with a wide prime locked on my second body and just went for it. I knew that I could never have a full understanding of how a lens could work for my specific shooting style unless I tried it in practice. Granted, this was a low stress type of situation (wedding shoot was for my cousin) but now I have a much better idea of how the lens can apply to my own style.

I think it takes time to develop your own secret sauce of the perfect kit for your style. might as well try it out!

Heya,

A 35 F1.8 would give you two very good options. 1) you can squeeze into the same room as others and still do a multiple portrait, or a very intimate portrait (think make up time with bride, the dress in a room, etc). 2) you can get into some lower light without having to push ISO to a level you're not comfortable, you gain 2 stops with this lens over your F4 lens, and since it's wide angle, there's not a lot of depth of field loss either even if you shoot wide open, so you don't have to worry about using that aperture and getting something not in focus that you wanted, as it won't be that thin of DOF.

While I adore my 85 F1.4, if I were shooting an event like this, I'd want the 70-200 still, for versatility. I've compared F1.4, F2 and F2.8 on various 85mm's just to see the reality of the difference in rendering of depth of field, bokeh, etc, and while each is different, I wasn't put off by the F2.8. It all depends on the environment you're shooting in anyways. F1.4 is more useful if the background is immediate behind subject. F2.8 is totally fine and still crushes backgrounds, if you want it to, with more distance to background from subject.

Another thing, the 35mm isn't all about just getting up close, sometimes, you want context and so the 35mm is great for doing portrait with environment.

Really, I'd say keep shooting the 16-35 at 35 and go for context environmental photos where you can. You may not need the faster prime. You don't get a 35mm to murder backgrounds with crushingly thin depth of field. You actually get it for squeezing into a room without distorting too much, and for being able to do context photos where you include more environment and just soften the background a bit, but not obliterate it.

Very best,

I like the above opinon. 35mm is where it's at as far as wide goes, IMO.

If you are putting lots of people in your pictures 35mm is about as wide as you can go and still have things be flattering. You can go wider as long as everyone is in the center of the frame but ladies on the outside of the frame won't be thrilled with what the distortion does.

For my shooting style I would never survive just about any assignment without my 35mm f/1.4 (I have the Art, but I'm sure the Nikon 1.8G is good as well)

I am shooting my wedding 80% with 35 1.4 and 85 1.2, other 20% I use: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200

Such awesome insight, and from folks who have been there and done that! I think I do need to just jump into a wide prime and see what happens. I was late to the 70-200 2.8 game, but that lens does so much for me, I'm comfortable getting more specialized with other lenses. I have a gig in a week, so now I just need to decide, which wide prime? If it was going to be my go-to lens, maybe I would pay for 1.4, but I will go cheaper. Nikon 28mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8 are heads and tails. I need to flip soon. Or...I've been so happy with Tamron's 70-200, maybe I'll give their new 35mm 1.8 a whirl.?.? Thanks!!

The 35mm is such a versatile lens. Back up a bit and you can get just wide enough or move a little closer and you get those more intimate moments.

CristianDascalu wrote in post #17736129
I am shooting my wedding 80% with 35 1.4 and 85 1.2, other 20% I use: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200

With the 85 1.2, are you using that mostly for portrait work correct? I can never seem to get the correct focus with it in auto with the slightest amount of movement by the subject. Need to work with it more because it is my least favorite lens right now.

I don't think there are a ton of situations that will warrant shooting the 85L wide open at a wedding. I used it for a couple weddings and had a problem with the slow AF (was missing lots of shots), so I decided to try out the Sigma 1.4, surprisingly I haven't looked back on my decision and absolutely love the Sigma 85.

Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG HSM Art
Not a prime, but it is basically 3 primes in one and reportedly prime-sharp.

I use the Sigma 18-35 1.8 on crop. If the 24-35 is anything like this one, you'll love it! I've heard great Things about the 24-35.

AZ Pix wrote in post #17734759
but getting in someone's face at an event - yeah, not so much.

i'm going against the grain here and saying that this is really where your problem lies. I've lived it. In the past I shot my 70-200 way, way, more at an event than most of my other lenses, and if it wasn't the 70-200 it was the 85 1.8. This past summer I took on a weekly gig where I knew I would be forced to approach people and "get in their face". This was a public event, not a private wedding. I made a point of using my wide lenses more (Sigma 35 1.4A and Tokina 16-28 2.8).

So i'm going to say that it has nothing to do with the lens, it has to do with your comfort level.

I am an outgoing person, have no problem approaching people to talk and often seek out meeting new people when ever possible. But put a camera in my hands and my brain changes gears. Once I started thinking about it, it really surprised me. It took a while to get past wanting to shoot from the fringes but going out week after week did the trick.

People really appreciate being asked before you take their picture. That goes for both those that do and don't want it taken. Asking has also made me a more outgoing photographer by both reinforcing that lots of people like it - and - knowing that my subjects are willing participants and I am not sneaking around. This kind of "practice" helped me in public events where I wasn't necessarily expected to be shooting, but really helped at private events where people already expect to have their picture taken.

and once you have asked them for a posed picture, the candids seem to come out better too!

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17742268
i'm going against the grain here and saying that this is really where your problem lies. I've lived it. In the past I shot my 70-200 way, way, more at an event than most of my other lenses, and if it wasn't the 70-200 it was the 85 1.8. This past summer I took on a weekly gig where I knew I would be forced to approach people and "get in their face". This was a public event, not a private wedding. I made a point of using my wide lenses more (Sigma 35 1.4A and Tokina 16-28 2.8).

So i'm going to say that it has nothing to do with the lens, it has to do with your comfort level.

I am an outgoing person, have no problem approaching people to talk and often seek out meeting new people when ever possible. But put a camera in my hands and my brain changes gears. Once I started thinking about it, it really surprised me. It took a while to get past wanting to shoot from the fringes but going out week after week did the trick.

People really appreciate being asked before you take their picture. That goes for both those that do and don't want it taken. Asking has also made me a more outgoing photographer by both reinforcing that lots of people like it - and - knowing that my subjects are willing participants and I am not sneaking around. This kind of "practice" helped me in public events where I wasn't necessarily expected to be shooting, but really helped at private events where people already expect to have their picture taken.

and once you have asked them for a posed picture, the candids seem to come out better too!

This is part of where I was going with my post. I'm wondering/hoping that a wide prime might get me out of my comfort zone and expand my approach. In which case, this would be more than just an investment in glass, but an investment in advancing my photography. Thanks for sharing your experiences!

If you shoot 70-200 vast majority of the time then it is logical to go for the Nikon 85 f1.4 to use in low light venues. I'd keep 16-35 if I were you as it has decent optic and a versatile zoom which is always handy for group shot during ceremony. Ever since I purchased the Nikon 85 1.4, I've hardly used my Nikon 70-200 except for some field works. I have my D800 to 24-70 & D4 to 85 1.4 both hanging from my black rapid during ceremony. In regarding 85mm lens, I've owned all 3, Nikon 85 1.8, Sigma 85 1.4 & Nikon 85 1.4. Nikon 1.8 was my favourite until I borrowed the 1.4 from my mate a few months ago. I sold the 1.8 & Sigma and got the Nikon 1.4. You have to experience the Nikon 1.4 to make decision for yourself but it is the best I have ever used (I have read a lot of reviews regarding all 3 85mm before I purchased mine, I even rented out Canon 85 1.2 & used it with a converter and Nikon 1.4 is still best 85mm that I have ever come across- although I have not tried the Zeiss Otus but it is out of my price range anyway.) From your last post, it seems that you're wanting to try something different that would get you out of your comfort zone, then don't worry about the 85 and get the 24mm 1.4 as you would get some very interesting perspectives. You already know the drill for shooting wedding with wide angle lens then just go for it. You can always use it for landscape or off load it latter without any issues.

Cheers

I prefer to go zoom with my wife's. By using the zoom you can control the perspective of a scene in more ways. Very rarely does the need for shallow DOF strrike me when using a wide lens and that's the key reason for a prime.