Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 27, 2006, 5:53 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

My cousins wedding is this weekend and I am considering renting a lens for it. I currently have a D80 with only the kit lens, which I'm convinced will not be enough (F-stop wise) as it will be an evening event.

Since renting lenses is fairly inexpensive, I'm looking for the best that can be had...but it must also be fairly versatile, so I'm mostly ruling out the primes. I was thinking of the Nikon 17-55, 2.8 as well as the Nikon 28-80, 2.8.

What do you guys think?
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 27, 2006, 6:34 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I would choose the 17-55 as I think the wide angle is more important. However it is nice to have a moderate tele for head shots and up close portraits.

Which "kit" lens do you have?? If its the new 18-135, if you invest in 1, preferably two Sb-600 flashes, you'll be fine. Set one up off camera to use as fill, and bounce the main one off the ceiling (if it's low and white) or use a bounce card and you won't be too limited by not having f2.8.

Another option so you have the best of both worlds is to rent the 18-200vr.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2006, 6:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

I have the 18-135 and I definitely considered a speedlight. But, I have zero experience with them and think I'd probably just end up messing shots up more than not...and I won't have time to play with it first.

Keep in mind, I'm just bringing this camera along for fun. They will have a professional photographer there.

Hmmm, if he's using a Nikon, I may be able to sabatoge his speedlight to go off when I take pictures too lol :lol:
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2006, 8:20 PM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

swgod98 wrote:
Quote:
What do you guys think?
For a low light event, where you don't want to interfere with the official photographer by using strobes, I'd go with the lenses you ruled out (primes). :-)

If the light is good enough, you could probably get by with some f/2.8 zooms, too.

I'd chat with the official photographer and make sure you're not stepping on his/her turf when taking photos. You don't want to create any hard feelings and interfere with his/her job.


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2006, 10:17 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I thought you were going to be the official photographer, hence my advice for the speedlight. If you're not going to be using strobes, a bright prime or two is the best bet. You'll find f1.8 helpful in lowlight.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2006, 10:19 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

JimC wrote:
Quote:
You don't want to create any hard feelings and interfere with his/her job.
I'll probably just be taking pictures here and there from where I'm sitting or standing. I don't intend to get a lot of pictures...I just want the ones I get to turn out good.

And I don't want to be swapping out lenses...just a nice camera ready to go when I want to take a pic. That's why I'm thinking of the 2.8 zooms.

Thanks.
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 27, 2006, 10:38 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

rjseeney wrote:
Quote:
I thought you were going to be the official photographer
I probably should have mentioned that But, I feel honored to know you mistook me for one :lol:haha
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2006, 4:50 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 91
Default

I have used the Nikkor 17-55mm 2.8 for wedding shots. It did a very nice job in a church with dim lighting. I was the official photographer and it did irritate me a lot when other people's PS cameras were causing my strobes to fire. I had to retake several shots while doing the formals because someone would trip my stobes right before I fired and they hadn't had time to recycle. Thank God for the LCD!
dboarder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2006, 10:39 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

dboarder wrote:
Quote:
I have used the Nikkor 17-55mm 2.8 for wedding shots. It did a very nice job in a church with dim lighting. I was the official photographer and it did irritate me a lot when other people's PS cameras were causing my strobes to fire. I had to retake several shots while doing the formals because someone would trip my stobes right before I fired and they hadn't had time to recycle. Thank God for the LCD!
Maybe a camera with a commander mode would work better (not sure how that works, but I'm sure it sucks to be flashing because other people trigger it!).

Ok, so my initial interest was in the 28-70, but I ended up taking the 17-55 from everyone's suggestions. Turns out the 17 vs. 28 range isn't really that much. Maybe I'll notice it more when I start using it in real situations...But, that 17-55 is extremely limited in range. I guess I'm too used to the 18-135 :-)

Oh, and this bad boy is H E A V Y!



Can't wait to take pictures...my only dissapointment will be the flash shadows I'll be forced to live with (unless I can get away without using flash). Oh well...I didn't want to be lugging an SB600 around also!!
swgod98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 30, 2006, 2:37 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 245
Default

Alright, just got back from the wedding and have learned my lesson(s)...namely:

1) F2.8 is not always desireable (even for low light!).A priority at 2.8 means my shots had terrible DOF and not all of the "subjects" were in focus all the time.

2) Using a large lens with onboard flash means you will have a nice shadow of your lens at the bottom of your pictures (unless you are zoomed in far enough). Turns out, this 17-55 produces this shadow from 17mm to about 28mm range.

3) ISO 1600 is NOTnecessarily enough indoors. Flash is still necessary in many cases (certainly for me tonight!).

4) ISO 1600 sucks. Yes, even the mighty Canon camera's work better at lower ISO's (duhh)...might as well use flash if you want the cleanest image.

5) Carry around a big camera with a big lens and you WILL be mistaken for a professional! :lol: Ya, that was the highlight of the night. I ended up talking to the "professional" (lady) for a few minutes. She was using a 20D and a 30D with her partner.

I have yet to process the images. And I still want to look them over in more detail. But, I had a lot of fun tonight considering it was really my first time "getting to know" my D80 in an indoor environment.

Anyways, thanks for the info guys. I need to return this lens tomorrow morning. Sure is a bad a$$ lens though :-)
swgod98 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 5:26 PM.