Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 3, 2004, 7:44 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 31
Default

Can anyone who has covered weddings tell me what lenses they find/found themselves using most often during the wedding (i.e.; before, during and at the reception). I have a 20D and for now am using lower end lenses I already had (EF 80-200, 28-80). I am going to be shooting 2 of my buddies weddings this fall and want to upgrade my inventory. I have been looking at a 17-85 and 75-300 IS. I'm assuming that if I purchased both they would give me the coverage I need- but would like to hear from those of you who have been there -so to speak- about the pro's, con's and limitations of both (and recommend other possible lenses).



Thanks

Drew

:|
digic is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 3, 2004, 9:02 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
VictorEM83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 156
Default

I can give you an idea a all F2.8 lenses in any range from 17-200 mm at least so basicly 3 canon lenses 17-40 F2.8L, a 24-70 F2.8L, and a 70-200 F2.8L to really have a good setup
VictorEM83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2004, 11:26 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Definitely the fastest lenses you can get.
You need to focus very, very quickly and you never know if the light will be good enough for the proper shutter speed.

I have said lots about wedding photography in the past, probably enough to drive the regulars crazy. Be very careful about what you are getting yourself into. You might want to read this:
http://www.koskiphotography.com/amateur.html
and this:
http://my.bridestuff.com/checklist/photo_checklist.asp

You can search around this forum for wedding and you'll probably hit my posts. I won't say more unless you ask, as I have strong opinions on this subject that go way beyond lens choice.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2004, 1:32 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 31
Default

Thanks VictorEM83 and Eric for your suggestions-- good point with the 2.8lenses since not all churches allow flash! This should allow max focusing/exposure/speed in low light.

Eric- I have read some of your replies from past posts- I have read extensively about the rigors (and importance) or covering weddings from forums, webs, and books. The 2 friends I am covering know that I am only doing it for the experience. I insisted that they hire a pro and I am only charging them for the cost of the photos they choose to have printed.



Thanks for your help (and links).



Drew
digic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2004, 12:00 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Ahhh.... I am happy that some of my rants on the subject have been helpful to someone.

Sounds like you are ahead of most people who ask about doing weddings here. I am very happy to hear that.

The flash issues is a very serious one. You might even consider getting the 50mm f1.8. Its dirt cheap for a lens, good quality and even faster than the others. It's limiting because it's 50mm, but it might be better than no picture at all. Especially if you can plan when you'll use it.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 10, 2004, 10:26 PM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 60
Default

I've done a wedding on the exact same terms and purely as an amateur doing candid shots. I definitely second the suggestions of VictorEM83if you have the cash, however some of the bestshots I got from the eventcame frommy $80 50mm 1.8 mentioned by eric. IMHO this lens should be with you at all times, wedding or none.


NLAVD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2004, 1:00 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

80mm, 135mm, 180mm, maybe a 40mm for extremely wide, large group shots on a 2-1/4 film system. Lighting at various times by Lumedyne/Quantum/Norman (About 200ws-400ws)or Metz CT-60(about 120ws). You will need to convert focal length from 2-1/4 to whatever crop your sensor has. (An 80mm lens in 2-1/4 MF is about equivalent to a normal 45mm/50mm lens in a 35mm system.)

Key is you don't need a large pile of lenses or lens range. You need to locate the positions for your shots before hand(attend the rehearsal), and get in position in time for each event asitoccurs. If you are not the hired gun, this may not be possible, or if it is it may interfere with the pros work. You also need to have a chat with the minister and discover what is allowed and when during the services. The last few weddings I shot, now long-long ago, some of the churches were banning flash altogether, and were only allowing photography during set periods when the minister would break off and invite people to take pictures. To get some of thestandard mandatory shots in these places it required a staged shoot before or after the fact.

Seek out Eric's (and others) posts. Weddings can get you into a boat load of doodoo:-?.

IMHO: Even though I have seen some pros using Ninon/Canon dslr for weddings recently, I still don't think 35mm and the majority of current prosumer digitals/dslr's can cut it in professional weddings. But then that is only me, and I still don't think home computers will ever take off either. :whack:
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2004, 7:35 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

PeterP, I agree that certain wedding shots are much better in medium format (i.e. something with a bigger frame and higher quality than 35-mm) but I'd argue (from a location of mostly ignorance) that 35-mm with its small size body and light weight and fairly high quality is good enough for many of the shots.

But the bride/groom shots and the poses after the wedding (and the set shots some time before) are best in medium format.

I've never done a wedding (and I actively try to not do them) so I could be wrong.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 11, 2004, 9:23 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

Eric S: Yes you are right, the set formula type shots before/during/after the wedding everyone expects, and the portraits IMHO: are best done in MF. You can neverknow which may need to be cropped andselected for very large output.35mm does work well for the candids if they are part of the contract, and quite often can bedone by the assistant.

I'll put a wait and see on it,the new Canon 1ds-m2 may be able to hold its own in this market. But it is a rather expensive move to jump from aMF system to buying acouple of 10k$(cdn) bodies, and lens to go with them.Alsotheprices you can get trying to sellthe old MF systems is brutal now for some reason.

:-)So do I, I can say I now pro-actively avoid anything wedding related :-)

eric s wrote:
Quote:
and I actively try to not do them
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 15, 2004, 12:19 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

The prices on not just old, but ANY second-hand medium format equipment today is much less than it was just 2-3 years ago, because many of those shooters now use digital SLR's. Check out Monte Zucker, a regular contributor in Shutterbug magazine and a devoted Hasselblad shooter until he bought a Canon 10D. Guess which of those two cameras you don't see him using these days....

Shooting weddings isn't for either the faint of heart or someone trying out some new piece of equipment, but if you are proficient with it a digital SLR will cover a wedding very capably today.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:41 AM.