Another wedding lens question

With four weddings and two engagement parties already under my belt, I've been nobbled by my son to do the pix for his nuptials at Edinburgh's Royal Over-Seas Club. He's on a G7 now with plans to go the 40D route, so I'll be on my mettle. I've already done a recce and some test shots - fairly low white ceilings, so no probs with bounce. Exterior shots on roof terrace with Edinburgh castle as background.

My planned kit is 5D with 24-105 + 430EX and 20D with 70-200 2.8 IS + 580EX.

I'm also under instruction to enjoy the wedding, so plan to keep kit as minimal as poss.

So, one prime - 50 1.4 or 85 1.2 ? I know, apparently a no-brainer, but I'm thinking lug, weight and drunkenness at the end of the night.

Tripod? Monopod? Or both? Or neither?

Any thoughts?

85mm f1.2...

My thoughts on the 50 1.4 were predicated by its near-85 FOV on the 20D at the expense of some IQ and a marginally slower speed. It's also far less unwieldy!

Also, the DOF of the 85mm at f/1.2 is so tiny, it's not very useful. Looks like a great kit to me - I second shoot quite a lot of weddings, I've never used a monopod or tripod after from taking shots of the hall just before dinner. Depending on when / where dinner will be, you may not need / want one. In fact, the 24-105 on the 5D would probably do - sure it's f/4, but you can handhold around 1/30s anyway, so take that down to 1/5s and the IS should just hold up to that, and raise the ISO if needed to ISO 1600, and you'll be right as rain .

Enjoy! I have three sons, but the one thing I do know, is that I won't shoot any of their weddings .

After 20 years of a weekly commute to London, I've long-since learned the virtues of minimalism. My instinctive thought is - what can I do without? I've tried to come up with a kit that has flexibility by working the combinations.

The 24-105 and 70-200 fell to hand with delightful and instinctive ease; I'm still on a two-week learning curve with the 85 1.2. I'm getting better but still haven't mastered it. Better the devil you know . . . ?

Wow - I had a regular commute up to Edinburgh before I moved up there (where I met my wife) from London, though after we got married, we moved back South. Oh, amusing Edinburgh news story.

goatee wrote in post #5736566
Oh, amusing Edinburgh news story.

He sounds like a cross between Antoine de Caunes and a speech synthesizer!

Mike

rofl - haven't heard that name in years!

85L f1.2

Don't get me wrong... I think the 85/1.2 is a lovely chunk of glass, and I do enjoy high end lenses. But for most purposes I think I'd stick with an 85/1.8. It's a fine lens and would work well on either of your cameras: As a short portrait lens on the 5D or a long portrait lens on the 20D. Plus, I'd be much less bummed if an 85/1.8 hit the floor after an evening of revelry, rather than an 85/1.2! I'm sure my insurance adjuster would agree with me on that one.

Want to spend some more money? I'd recommend the 24-70/2.8 instead of the 24-105.