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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 7, 2005, 8:33 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 84
Default

The price of renting it depends on where you rent it, check with some of the stores in your area. It's probably overkill to buy for a one time deal, but it is the telephoto of choice for many wedding photographers.

The IS will gain you a little bit of light, but I think 2-3 is a little high (especially if you're a little nervous or are shaky at all. even 70mm should be shot at 1/70, maybe 1/30 with third gen IS. I wouldn't want to go too much slower that for any kind of wedding shot, A little sway in the bride and grooms stance could make them just blurry enough to be annoying.

I would think the 17-85 would still be too slow for a wedding, especially one indoors in dim light (which is most of them). It would probably be fine for outdoor or formals (which you can control lighting with stobes/flashes, etc). Considering that the Tamron 2.8 is only $330, you can get that and a 85mm f/1.8 (you already have an 50mm) for a litte over $600 after the rebates.

And wburychka, I'm not actually doing a wedding for free, the OP is. Cheap, maybe, but not free. Mine is likely to be late summer next year (exact date not set yet, waiting for the groom's work's time off schedule after the first of the year), so I should have plenty of time to practice before then. The OP has a larger problem since his on the 31st.
BrianSkibinski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 7, 2005, 11:02 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
VictorEM83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 156
Default

Wedding are heck and I got another one to cover next spring. I hate them so much they follow me and beg me but for this one im doing something new I made them sign a contract saying Im only a friend thats bringing a camera and is going to try and get some pictures at the wedding but nothing is expected of me to produce any quality pictures.

Now granted It most likely go well, but in wedding world there is a few rules that always happens here they are:
1. Nothing goes as planed
2. No picture you will try to get will have enough light if its inside
3. All pictures you will try to get will have areas with too much light if its outside
4. People not smiling when your trying to get a shot
5. High ISO = Bad
6. Digital = Low Dynamic Range
7. ETTL Metering = Blown Highlights (i.e. no details in white wedding dress)
8. ETTL Metering = Lost details in shadows

That's just a few

If you want help and advice here is the best I can give you.
1st let the people your shooting this wedding know what to expect and don't promise anything for quality and get it written and signed.

2nd Every picture they want you to get has to be typed out with names next to there title (i.e. mom(becky) dad(bob) and groom(billy))

3rd any practice things for the wedding your there before anyone for the whole event taking pictures in the same light setting that will be used at the wedding or as close to them as possible. Then write all the settings down.

4th Manual everything once you know the lighting you get a guy in a black tux-like outfit or suit and a girl in a white shirt, dress, and then a Lacey thing over it with fine details like the wedding dress. Then get your metering right so you get details in the blacks of the tux but also dont blow the highlights so you lose detail in the white dress.

5th All pictures that can be done before the wedding must be done before the wedding. Anything you forget that needed to be done before will most likely be forgotten for the rest of the wedding. everything with the bride and groom with each other with family must be done before you leave the church of place the wedding takes place. Once they break open the booze its hard to get people togeather for pics.

6th you need 4-8GB of flash memory, a flash with the best recycle times and 4 sets of fresh lithium batteries to go with it, the fastest highest quality lenses you can get you hands on, tripod, lens cleaners, filters, extra camera batteries, a helper to take care of your gear, quick snacks to keep you on your feet all day and wedding style clothing that doesnt hinder your movement that lets you carry all the gear you need at hand.
VictorEM83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2005, 1:37 AM   #13
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Default

Somewhow this turned more into a wedding discussions, so I have a few more questions. :-)


I am going to get one of the lumiquest bouncers for christmas and I am wondering what would be best for by Rebel XT/Sigma EF-500 DG Super. Would a pocketbounce be OK, or do I need one of the mini softboxes or what?
crash331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 8, 2005, 7:12 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 155
Default

The principle of the softbox is to have the source of light as large as possible in order to reduce and soften shadows. The bouncer relies on a ceiling, which is a variable, so I prefer to just soften the source. The large Lumiquest softbox works well. If you can find a larger one, that will work better.

A bracket is equally important, though, if you will take both horizontal and vertical shots. Flash on the camera is fine for horizontal, because the shadows are behind and low. When you turn sideways, though, then the shadows move to the right and become noticable. The Press T bracket allows the flash to remain above the camera when your turn it. It also keeps the rectangular shape aligned with the lens--in other words when your camera becomes a vertical rectangle, you want the flash to be a vertical rectangle too. The Strobframe Press-T (there are others, too) does that. Avoid those that keep the flash in place but turn the camera, as you lose flash coverage when the flash is horizontal and the camera vertical.
wburychka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2005, 8:12 PM   #15
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Default

I went to the camera shop today to test out the lenses. I didn't like the 17-40 that much. The zoom felt very limited and I really liked what IS did for me. Plus I couldn't see that much of a quality difference, but I am not an expert at it. Can you see anything wrong in these pics? Besides the noise, of course. I had to shoot at 800 ISO because it was so dark in the store.

http://paradigmshifts.overxposed.org/IMG_3028.JPG

http://paradigmshifts.overxposed.org/IMG_3030.JPG
crash331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 9, 2005, 10:50 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 239
Default

Crash. One tip (I do not & will not do a wedding) but . . . see if you can at least take a film camera along for backup with some lens on it - of course, the 17-85 won' t work with the full frame cameras.

I don't know where you heard that the 17-40L was not a good lens - mine is Great & tack sharp! I have yet to try it with a tripod, but I know that will help me a lot. For outdoor pix of the family, I would recommend it. Or even the Canon 20-35. I havea 20-35still (want to sell it) & it has done a pretty good job for me, all in all, but I needed something wider. Almost bought the Sigma 15-30.

Good luck in whatever you do!
Railfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2005, 5:10 AM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Default

Well I went ahead and got the 17-85mm. I must say I am very pleased with it so far, and I have only got to use it in very low light situations with no flash. The IS does wonders for me because my hand is not very steady. I can shoot all the way down to 1/5 reliably with no camera shake.

I also picked up a tripod and head by Manfrotto. I got the 3001 tripod and the joystick grip ball head. Pretty nice if you ask me.

Anyway, I have a feeling the 17-88 will stay on my camera most of the time, not only because of the range, but also because it seems like a really good lens.
crash331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 11, 2005, 3:50 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 239
Default

Crash 331:

That grip action ballhead is great if you got the 3265 (or the other one). Great choices on the tripod & head. Lens I cannot comment on since I have never used one.

DH
Railfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 9:41 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 175
Default

crash331 wrote:
Quote:
Well I went ahead and got the 17-85mm. I must say I am very pleased with it so far, and I have only got to use it in very low light situations with no flash. The IS does wonders for me because my hand is not very steady. I can shoot all the way down to 1/5 reliably with no camera shake.

I also picked up a tripod and head by Manfrotto. I got the 3001 tripod and the joystick grip ball head. Pretty nice if you ask me.

Anyway, I have a feeling the 17-88 will stay on my camera most of the time, not only because of the range, but also because it seems like a really good lens.
The 17-85 is a great lens. But this is a really slow lens for shooting weddings. If you do more of these, you'll definitely want to consider a Tamron 28-75 or Sigma 24-70. The 2.8 aperture does more for reducing camera shake than IS on a 5.6 lens (or about the same), plus it freezes movement, something IS can't do. Don't get me wrong, IS is great. I have the 17-85 and love it, I just wouldn't take it to a wedding.

Chris M
www.imagineimagery.com

ChrisDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2005, 9:50 AM   #20
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 84
Default

Well, weddings aren't going to be an everyday occurence. This will probably be the one and only. And the 17-85 seemed like the best fit for my camera for a walkaround lens.
crash331 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 2:40 PM.