Doing a wedding as a favour... is my equipment adequate?

Hi guys,

A close friend asked me to photograph his wedding to help him save money. They don't have many "must-have" shots and really just want a few of them together in the church. The reception won't be a typical reception, but at a restaurant (where I don't think there will be dancing and the likes). The bride told me the lighting at the restaurant isn't the greatest either.

My question is whether or not my gear will cover what they are looking for. I mainly do nature/wildlife/landsc​apes/travel stuff, so I'm not sure if I am well-equipped for the job. After reading some posts, I'd probably rent the 70-200 f/2.8 (IS or non) and maybe the 24-70 L... but if I could get away with not having to rent that would be superb

From my gear bag, would I be able to get away with these:

1) Sigma 30mm f/1.4
2) Canon 50mm f/1.8
3) Canon 70-200 f/4 L (non-IS)
4) Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 (can I get creative with this?)

I've been in the market for a tripod upgrade and one of the Canon Speedlites to expand my horizons, but never found a "good" reason to get them until now...

Your input is truly appreciated!

A flash is a must. Id recommend borrowing another body (and if it uses different memory cards, borrow those too). You HAVE to have a flash, especially if you are looking at an restaurant reception. (My rule of thumb, if a non-photographer says the lighting isnt the greatest, you are going to need to light it yourself. If they say there is adequate lighting, you are going to need to light it yourself)

Also for a church, I dont think the f4 non IS is going to work for you. You probably cant use flash (I dont anyways) and you will need something faster. I use my 135 f2 in situations like this, but a 70-200mm f2.8 IS would be great too.

I think you should probably look at the 17-55 f2.8 IS as well. Better focal length on a crop body, and this is what you will use for formals and probably most of the reception, unless you use your 30. But id recommend looking into it.

Is your gear adequate? No. Your lenses could probably work, but without a flash, no.
I wouldnt spend too much on a tripod, I barely use mine but Im glad I have it.

Yeah what Bryan said. 17-55 will help, flash (and knowing how to use it) is essential, as is backup gear.

As a favor, your gear is good enough. Rent a flash if you need.

A 17-55IS would be nice (better than a 24-70 for crop) however doing it as a favor you should be able to get away with using the Sigma 30 for many shots. The Tokina will be useful for church shots. Unless you are shooting anything outside, I'd probably leave the 70-200 at home. I have managed the last several weddings using my 85mm 1.8 in place of 70-200, but that is just one way of doing it.

I would suggest buying a flash if you don't have one already. If you photograph people they are such an incredibly important thing to have anyways. I never bother with a tripod for weddings they just slow me down. They are mostly useful for formal pictures, but you don't really need one IMO.

I'm not familiar with the Sigma 30 and it's focus/sharpness performance, but if it's good, I think you're okay on lenses. The 50 is a great lens for the $'s, but it focuses slowly and isn't really suitable for weddings or dark receptions. Renting something like the 17-55 would be nice, but not necessary if you can count on the 30.

Everyone is right, though, you do need a flash.

I'd say your equipement is a lot better than a lot of 'wedding photgraphers' out there.

With the Tokina, if you can (I say this as my wife would have loved it) get some photos of the church with no-one in there but all flowers etc. ready. Whilst the groom gets to see this, the bride doesn't. My wife was so nervous, she pretty much forgot about the flowers altogether!

You could get some really nice wides for them, inside and out...

Get/borrow/rent a flash....

A lot of good advice. Thanks a lot!

I've asked the bride about flash photography in the church and she said she'd get back to me on that. She also just told me that she is more concerned with shots at the ceremony vs. the restaurant. In fact, she just said that I could just take a few shots at the beginning then enjoy myself afterwards So I might not even get a flash at all if the church doesn't even allow it. Does that sound sensible?

But if I ever needed an excuse to buy another lens, I think I'd buy (rather than rent) the 85mm for most of the church shots. I am more concerned with getting a decent amount of reach with a fast lens so that I don't interfere with the ceremony. That's where I would debate with myself between the 85 and the 70-200 2.8.

As (relatively) slow the 70-200 f4 is, I love it's compact size and wouldn't want to sell it in order to "upgrade" to one of the 2.8s... and I can't own two 70-200 lenses, can I??

So many options!

viet wrote in post #11299252
As a favor, your gear is good enough. Rent a flash if you need.

+1

AlexMoPhotography wrote in post #11300636
+1

The more I think about how much I want to save money, the more this option becomes more apparent.

I've just asked the bride and groom if we can scope out the church and I can test out my lenses there for their lowlight capabilties. I hope the 70-200 f/4 works ok... I am thinking I might just have to bump up the ISO a bit...

On a sort of side note, the 430EX II speedlites are on sale!

Peacefield wrote in post #11299761
I'm not familiar with the Sigma 30 and it's focus/sharpness performance, but if it's good, I think you're okay on lenses. The 50 is a great lens for the $'s, but it focuses slowly and isn't really suitable for weddings or dark receptions. Renting something like the 17-55 would be nice, but not necessary if you can count on the 30.

Everyone is right, though, you do need a flash.

The three Sigma 30's I used were all crap at focusing - inaccurate, and couldn't focus to infinity. Lloyd has a good copy though.

tim wrote in post #11302265
The three Sigma 30's I used were all crap at focusing - inaccurate, and couldn't focus to infinity. Lloyd has a good copy though.

Yeah, I have a good one too. I love it, in fact.

bbqkid8 wrote in post #11300964
The more I think about how much I want to save money, the more this option becomes more apparent.

I've just asked the bride and groom if we can scope out the church and I can test out my lenses there for their lowlight capabilties. I hope the 70-200 f/4 works ok... I am thinking I might just have to bump up the ISO a bit...

On a sort of side note, the 430EX II speedlites are on sale!

I bought a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 in hopes that I could use it in churches with no flash. At ISO1600 on my XTi it was still WAY to low a shutter speed to use hand-held, I later sold the len (it had other issues as well). The 70-200 f/4 may work if you crank the ISO up to 6400+ and the church is relatively well lit. I would not count on it being useful though. For a 70-200 lens you really need IS or a camera cabable of really high ISOs (ie 5DmkII) and still need a 2.8 anyways.

If you have been thinking of buying a 85mm, do it, they are great! Work fantastic in churches as well.

Unless the church is really huge, I would think that 70-200 (or anything in that range) will to too long as a main lens. They are good for closeups and ring shots but for the majority you would be better off with a standard zoom 17-55/24-70 (or just use your Sigma 30). for this reason I have 2 bodies, one with my 24-60 and the other with a longer lens.

DStanic wrote in post #11303579
I bought a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 in hopes that I could use it in churches with no flash. At ISO1600 on my XTi it was still WAY to low a shutter speed to use hand-held, I later sold the len (it had other issues as well). The 70-200 f/4 may work if you crank the ISO up to 6400+ and the church is relatively well lit. I would not count on it being useful though. For a 70-200 lens you really need IS or a camera cabable of really high ISOs (ie 5DmkII) and still need a 2.8 anyways.

If you have been thinking of buying a 85mm, do it, they are great! Work fantastic in churches as well.

Unless the church is really huge, I would think that 70-200 (or anything in that range) will to too long as a main lens. They are good for closeups and ring shots but for the majority you would be better off with a standard zoom 17-55/24-70 (or just use your Sigma 30). for this reason I have 2 bodies, one with my 24-60 and the other with a longer lens.

Another great point. Hopefully things will become clearer when I scope out the church. I would love to have the 85mm in my bag.

Also, the priest just told my friend that he'll allow me to use a flash during the ceremony

If I could go back and re-do my first flash buy, I would go with the 580 instead of the 430 ... I think it would work better for a wedding venue... However if there isn't a lot of guests and it's kind of like a rehearsal dinner, I think you should be fine with everything that you have.

I'm in a similar situation, shooting my first wedding in January, except the guest list is 500+ and wedding party is 30ppl. I'm nervous and know I don't have all the gear. However, I'm doing it to help the B&G save money and have already let them know it's my first time and set their expectations straight.

Go for it and have fun!