17-55 IS vs. 70-200 f/2.8 IS lens choice for wedding

My brother is getting married next fall, and I am considering renting a lens so that I can get some good shots. I am a college student and family man, so I do not have a lot of money to throw around. It is a long time from now, but I am thinking that I will not have enough money to rent both of these lenses. I figure that if I got both, I would have to rent another camera body and that would be pretty steep, especially since I am not the actual photographer, I just want to get some pictures for my family. I am leaning towards the 70-200 f/2.8 IS and taking mostly candids, but I thought I would see what everyone thinks.

You may find the 70-200 a little too long for this. It's heavy (but I love it), but will grab you some great images .. maybe only head shots tho

Looking at what you already have I would run the 28-135 on the 40D, maybe grab a flash, and try and borrow another body (even an XTi) and throw the 50 on that.

The 70-2 will be way too long for most images. I'd say get the 17-55 as a) it's 2.8 and b) it has the 17-28mm range that you do not have on the wide end. You'll most likely need that range for group shots. With the 55 end, if it's not long enough, you can zoom in with your feet.

have you thought of using an 85 mm f1.8 or a 50 mm f1.8 as primes? if you already have the 28-135, it has IS you can crank up the ISO and get decent indoor shots.

I have the 70-200 mm 2.8 IS, it is heavy and will get you lots of attention, but you will get great shots.

the 24-105 f4 IS is a wedding photographers choice of lens on a FF but ignore that and stick it on a x1.6 sensor, it's a good elns, too..and if you want better image quality, then a *good* copy of the 24-70 f2.8 L could also serve you well.

bluefox9er wrote in post #6635089
have you thought of using an 85 mm f1.8 or a 50 mm f1.8 as primes? if you already have the 28-135, it has IS you can crank up the ISO and get decent indoor shots.

I have the 70-200 mm 2.8 IS, it is heavy and will get you lots of attention, but you will get great shots.

the 24-105 f4 IS is a wedding photographers choice of lens on a FF but ignore that and stick it on a x1.6 sensor, it's a good elns, too..and if you want better image quality, then a *good* copy of the 24-70 f2.8 L could also serve you well.

No way 24-105 f4 can be a wedding photographers choice as it is unusable in a church and also IS at that focus distance is hardly useful when photographing people.
In medium zoom department the wedding photographer choice is 24-70 on FF and 17-55 on APS-C.

I have both lenses and use both of them extensively. I really like the 70-200 because it can give you nice isolation for candids. Since you're not the main photographer, its not likely that you'll have to take group photos. So the 17-55 is not going to help. I used to just stay far away, especially during the ceremony (you can't get close anyways) and use the 70-200 to get their face expression. It is a zoom lense, so you have a lot more flexibility than the 85mm. Who care about the attention. If you can get good shots, then just go for it. I really love the 70-200.

17-55 and 70-200 is the perfect wedding combo for a crop body, in good light. I will be shooting my first winter wedding later this month and have just added 28/1.8, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 primes to my lens collection to cope with the lower light levels generally, and to give me more creative DOF control in the future.

I have the 50/1.8 and have never used it. The AF is seriously iffy, especially in poor light, and I would not rely on it for a wedding except in an emergency.

Here's an album of one of the weddings I shot in summer as second shooter, all taken with 30D with 17-55 and 40D with 70-200/2.8-IS.

http://picasaweb.googl​e.com …jarte?authkey=V​8UEfHdziX4

It is quite easy to find a need for the full focal length range from 17mm to 200 and f/2.8 much of the time.

That said, the first wedding I ever shot, for a friend, as a favour, was with a 30D, 17-85 lens and 580EX and not much experience.

If you have only a single lens, the 17-55mm focal length range will allow you to get 90% of the shots you would want. Wider (15mm) is good for scene-establishing but horrid (due to perspective distortion it can capture) for group photos. Longer is good for shooting from back in the pews or out of sight to the sides of the church.

I have experience in shooting wedding in three format sizes, and the AOV provided by the 17-55mm matches what I get in wedding coverage with medium format SLR for the majority of shots needed.

Wilt wrote in post #6635567
If you have only a single lens, the 17-55mm focal length range will allow you to get 90% of the shots you would want. Wider (15mm) is good for scene-establishing but horrid (due to perspective distortion it can capture) for group photos. Longer is good for shooting from back in the pews or out of sight to the sides of the church.

I have experience in shooting wedding in three format sizes, and the AOV provided by the 17-55mm matches what I get in wedding coverage with medium format SLR for the majority of shots needed.

+1

Ideal, you want both. But if you can only get one, get tht 17-55IS. It will be more useful for most of the time. Also consider after the wedding, the 17-55IS will be a great general purpose lens that you will be using more frequently. The 70-200 range lens is not something you will use often, at least not as often as the 17-55 range.

17-55 will be alot more useful out of the two.

Subimatt wrote in post #6635778
17-55 will be alot more useful out of the two.

I agree. 17-55 would be the all around lens.

I appreciate all of the help. I think that I will go with the 17-55 and then rent (if I don't already own one by then) a flash. I figure I'll start out with the Canon 430 and then when I move up to a newer flash it will make a good off camera flash.

I agree with those who suggested the 17-55. I'm not so sure that I would be waving a 70-200 lens around from a pew if I wasn't the paid photographer. The attention should be on the bride and groom.

I think you can get some very nice shots from the back of the church when the main tog is stuck behind the priest. These were shot at 200mm and 185mm with my 70-200...

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/png' | Byte size: ZERO

I think the 70-200 is the way to go if you are mainly thinking of doing the ceremony. Not being the main photog, you are going to want to stay out of his way and catch more of your shots of the ceremony from a distance. But if you are primarily thinking of working the reception, you will do better going wider. Pick one !!