Need a new, full frame zoom lens for wedding photography

Suggestions? Shooting with a 750 and need something that will allow me to stay on the outskirts of a wedding ceremony and still get the "money shots" when the time called for it.

If you have a favorite prime, I'd like to hear what/why for that too!

70-200 maybe. I think one guy on these forums (umphotography maybe) uses a Sigma 120-300 for the same sort of scenario you are asking about.

Primes, well I guess it depends how far back you are and how you want to frame the shot. I reckon anything from the new Nikkor 105 and up could be used to great effect

In my opinion (however limited when it comes to weddings), nothing beats a 70-200 2.8 for doing exactly what you described. You can do a bunch with an 85mm 1.4 or 1.8, and I would guess even with a 105mm or 135mm prime, but if the goal is to stay on the outskirts and snipe, the pro zoom is where it is. I know someone who does quite well sneaking around with his 200mm F2, on one body and 85mm 1.4 on another, but that's a different category of shooter all together. What's in your wallet?

I love the 70-200! It really is amazing. I have a close friend who let's me borrow his whenever we shoot weddings (and he's not using it of course). My fear is that I'll invest in the 70-200 and then find out that there's a better option out there.

AZ Pix wrote in post #18126154
In my opinion (however limited when it comes to weddings), nothing beats a 70-200 2.8 for doing exactly what you described. You can do a bunch with an 85mm 1.4 or 1.8, and I would guess even with a 105mm or 135mm prime, but if the goal is to stay on the outskirts and snipe, the pro zoom is where it is. I know someone who does quite well sneaking around with his 200mm F2, on one body and 85mm 1.4 on another, but that's a different category of shooter all together. What's in your wallet?

I'm glad to hear that. I have my eye on the 70-200, but want to make sure that there's not a secret amazing alternative that I'm unaware of... because I'd find out about it 2 days after my purchase.

If you want flexibility in the telephoto region, there's not really much better, particularly if you match it with a D810. The big Sigma I mentioned gives a bit more range but at a big weight disadvantage and so it's much harder to handhold for a long period.

I strongly doubt you'll be disappointed with the 70-200 VR2

The 70–200mm f/2.8E FL ED VR (VR3) was recently announced as well.

The 70-200 2.8 VR is going to be the best bet here Shawn. That is because you will be on the outskirts like you want and you will be able to nail the shots even in low light. I've never had a better lens for doing what you are talking about and it will be $2k well spent if wedding photography is what you do all the time. Then when you decide you want to do some sports on the side in a dimly light gym, you'll also find this lens will be your best friend.

I am a retired wedding photographer. For the task you described: you would be hard pressed to beat the 70-200 range of fast VR zooms, f2.8, that Nikon has produced. I used one for years, and it never failed to get me amazing shots in even very dim light. The VR feature was indispensable, and the f2.8 constant aperture made focus precise. I tried third party zooms, but was never as satisfied as I was with the Nikon product. It was a lot of money for me to spend when my children were in college, but I consider that lens a good investment to this day.

i would recommend nikon 24-70