What's in your wedding-day camera bag?

<p>Evan and I are in the process of lens shopping (Yay!!!) <br>

We sold off quite a bit of our older, non-L equipment and hoarded our money for months so that we could eventually fill our bags with all of our dream lenses.<br>

Of course, we're not quite to the point of buying every lens we want, but we're ready to upgrade to a few nice lenses. Considering that we shoot weddings/portraits, what would you suggest as our first few lenses/equipment?<br>

What we've got in mind so far is the 70-200 2.8L Non-IS version, the 24-105 4L IS and a few speedlights. <br>

The reason we're looking at the non-IS version of that awesome 70-200 only because while we aspire to do weddings full-time soon, our bread and butter is the horse shows that we shoot from February-November every year, and we just don't need the IS for those events. We've both agreed that the secondary shooter will most likely be the one to be shooting with the 70-200 and hopefully we won't kick ourselves in the butt for buying the non-IS version.<br>

Opinions? Suggestions?</p>

<p>I would definitely get the IS version of the 70-200 for wedding work. Beyond that, what is your budget? My favorite lenses in order of what I might purchase....</p>

<p>-the 50mm. Although I am on a DX sensor. On a full frame I imagine the 85mm would take it's spot!<br>

-The 85mm! :) DX or FX!<br>

- the fisheye. This one is an easy way to provide a few shots that uncle Bob can't do.<br>

- 105mm macro. Again, detail shots with this are great.<br>

- an ultra wide- we use the Tokina 11-16. Again, shots that uncle Bob can't get.<br>

- now I want a tilt shift lens. I mean I really want to play with a tilt shift lens.<br>

- and a Zeiss lens. This one might be more realistic, replacing the 105mm macro with the Zeiss version. Admittedly, this is to compare and see what differences I might see. I manually focus macro shots anyway.<br>

- finally, the last lens I would buy would be the Nikon 600mm f/4 VR lens. At $10,300 it would be the last lens I buy because my wife would kill me. I would just have to hope UPS brought it before she got home so I would have a few hours to play with it.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This is what I use for all of my weddings (I'm Nikon/Full frame)<br>

35mm f2 (stays on a non-full-frame backup body)<br>

50mm 1.4 (getting ready stuff, and other indoor getting ready shots)<br>

85mm 1.8 // 135mm f2 (I usually bring one or the other. Both great lenses, and can use them outside where my 50mm is hit and miss -- typically use one of them for first dances)<br>

70-200 f2.8 VR (ceremony, family shots, bridal party, b&g, and usually speeches)<br>

I also have a 20mm Sigma that I'll toss on for one wide shot of the venues, and a ceremony shot from the back.</p>

<p>70-200 makes my life easier. I'm glad I got it when I did.</p>

 

<p>It doesn't matter much what's in my bag, I seriously doubt that you'll want it. It's a bunch of mixed up stuff that works for ME. I think you have to decide what really fits your shooting style and what works for you. First off, I prefer faster lenses. Some I use the most are 50 1.4 AF, 50 1.8 MF, 85 1.8 AF, 180 2.8 AF. My only zoom is an old 1980s MF 28-80 Tamron SP 3.5/4.5 that can still be had for a cost of $19-39. I carry 3 bodies, 2 crop digi and a 35mm for film which I rarely use anymore. I also usually carry along a 300mm 4.5 MF which I always use mounted on a Bogen tripod. For lights I use two shoe mount flashes with assorted Lumiquest bouncers and a 400ws Lumedyne with light stand and usually a Norman white glass soft head. Also I carry along a Hasselblad 503cw with D flash and 50mm CF-fle and 100mm CF lenses plus a few rolls of Kodak Portrait film usually 160ASA which gets souped and scanned later. Lastly I have a fair collection of vignetters and diffusers that are always along in my bag. Add to this a laptop and as many memory cards as might be needed plus maybe more 400ws lights and you get the idea how I operate. So, again, figure out YOUR methods of operation and buy what you need. I also don't use a website, I hand deliver everything and deal with clients in person.</p>

<p>70-200L, f2.8 non-IS... you won't miss the IS; I sure haven't over a few hundred weddings<br>

24-70L, f2.8...great all-around lens, and pretty darn close to a macro to boot<br>

85, f1.8, bang for the buck, one of the great Canon lenses...wonderful portrait lens.. the f1.2 is too heavy and slow to focus for my taste<br>

16-35L, f2.8...terrific for low-angle, dramatic shots, and comes in real handy on a crowded dance floor..<br>

hope that helps...</p>

<p>Chris, <br>

I might come steal your camera bag, I would love to have all of those all at once :) What body do you shoot with?</p>

<p>On my Nikons (2 D3s):</p>

<p>14-24mm f/2.8<br>

16mm Fisheye<br>

24-70mm f/2.8<br>

70-200mm f/2.8 VRII<br>

4 SB900s<br>

2 SB800s</p>

<p>I also have the 85mm f/1.8, the 105mm f/2.8 Macro and a couple of Sigma and Tamron backup lenses which usually simply stay in the car (when they come with me at all).</p>

<p>Have never come across a shot I could not take...;-)</p>

<p>As for your IS-non-IS dilemma, get the IS version. Unequivocally. There's no point in "saving" a few bucks now only to spend them later (because you WILL have to spend them)...<br>

2 SB600s</p>

<p>So many things to mention. I think I cannot post them all on this small section. I need to write an article about it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Chris, <br />I might come steal your camera bag, I would love to have all of those all at once</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I was thinking about stealing Dave Wilson's bag... once I had tipped out those two digi bodies and the laptop to make it a bit lighter to carry.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong><em>What's in your wedding-day [& events] camera bag?</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Short Kit:<br />20D; 30D; 5D; 24/1.4; 50/1.4; 135/2; x1.4 MkII X2.0MkII; 16-35MkII; 70-200/2.8; 580; metz; metz; bounce card; diffuser; shoot-through PuF thingy; 3xrings; various filters; truckloads of cards and spare batteries; pens; GAF tape; notebook; penknife; short tool kit; sewing kit; short first aid kit; large glad garbage bags ; ID & press membership; truckloads of business cards; battery chargers; 303b+45/2+film; bean bag; memory stick; card reader; laptop (sometimes); emergency cash; emergency car key; tape measure; steel ruler; paddle-pop sticks; cable ties; carabineers; stone-masons’ string; spirit level; quick release bases; monopod; compass; spare watch; tissues; spare handkerchiefs (white - starched & pressed ); safety pins; nail polish (clear); water bottle; Protein Bars; electrolyte powder; painkiller tablets & earplugs </p>

<blockquote>

<p><strong><em>What we've got in mind so far is the 70-200 2.8L Non-IS version, the 24-105 4L IS and a few speedlights [. . .] </em></strong><strong><em>Opinions? Suggestions?</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Slightly irrelevant, without knowing what cameras you have? (and what other lenses, you have kept?)<br />But:<br />1. 24 to 105 would not be my choice as it is too slow (aperture) and too long at the wide for APS-C: but there are many excellent Photographers who use this lens as their main zoom (usually on a 135 format camera).<br />2. Can't see why the 70 to 200/2.8 would be part of an automatic formulae to designate that to the second shooter - having that only lens would be limiting IMO; I might have misunderstood your statement, though.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>Nikon D300<br>

Nikon D70 back up<br>

Sigma 17-55 2.8 HSM<br>

Sigma 24-135 2.8-4.35<br>

Nikon 70-200 Non IS<br>

SB800<br>

SB600<br>

QUantum Battery for SB800<br>

NiMh AA for SB600<br>

3 batteries for each body<br>

TON of memory cards<br>

Spare AA batteries just in case<br>

Bunch of other junk too</p>

 

<p>Chelsey:<br>

Currently, I use a 5D MKII and 7D, with the vertical grips. I like having both a full frame and cropped body... gives me options; plus, the 5D MKII is too slow for sports, which I do occasionally. Both bodies are terrific in high-ISO, low-light situations. </p>

<p>Chelsey,</p>

<p>I use the 5D MKII and a T1i as my backup. I too am building up my lens selection from my lower end to higher. I would suggest getting the 24-70 2.8L over the 24-105 4L. Here's my reason why, yes, it is lacking a wider zoom range, but it is much faster. Those couple stops may not seem like much, but when I'm at a wedding, and don't have the time to throw on the trust (and CHEAP) 50mm 1.8, the 2.8 still lets in quite a bit of light and does great things usually with the DOF, blurring out the background, etc. With the 4, you really just don't have the ability to get that effect. I find that effect is another difference of something you can easily offer that "uncle bob" can't. Frankly, if I'm getting up in the range of 105mm, I'm probably going to already have my big telephoto covering those shots. Unfortunately right now that's my old 70-300, which is not IS and not an L, and is painfully slow, but until I get my 70-200, it does the trick. As for the IS or not, I'd say that's a really tough call that I'm debating too. I'm a small person, so I'm thinking it may be VERY hard for me to hand hold it at all with that big honker on there, and will likely have to rely at least on a monopod to make sure I don't end up with terrible arthritis from using that lens. Do you mostly shoot outdoor or indoor weddings, and what do you intend to use the 70-200 for. If it's indoors shots, in dark churches, than the IS is probably worth it. Eventually I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to have a fish eye lens, but the way I look at it, that's only a few shots per wedding I would use it for, while getting a nice Macro lens in my arsenal would be way more useful for the time being. What body are you working with?</p>

<p>So I'd say here would by my suggested order of getting lenses:<br>

1. 24-70 2.8L<br>

2. 50mm 1.8 (and eventually replace it with a better 50mm or an 85mm)<br>

3. 70-200 2.8L IS<br>

4. Macro lens<br>

5. Fish eye</p>

<p>But before I invest in the Fish Eye, I'd first get some good big strobes, like alien bees, light stands, and pocket wizards, the works, and a nice pop up background, because I'm frankly finding more and more use for that. Right now I have the 580EX II and the 430EXII and while great, having the big guys in the wings is nice to have. Probably nicer to have than the fish eye IMHO. Also, make sure you have a GREAT gear bag. If you are investing in all these lenses than you should have a proper way to store and transport them, and don't underestimate the importance of INSURANCE. Travelers offers a fairly decent rate for liability and equipment replacement. </p>

Leica M9 and MP, plus 85/2, 50/1 and 24/1.4. SB-28 if needed. Compact, light, effective and can be carried in a small

satchel. I've sometimes got less gear than the guests.

 

I have other stuff but it stays in reserve and I prefer not to use it, emergencies excepted.

<blockquote>

<p>1. 24 to 105 would not be my choice as it is too slow (aperture) and too long at the wide for APS-C: but there are many excellent Photographers who use this lens as their main zoom (usually on a 135 format camera).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I hadn't thought of the speed difference in the 24-105 and 24-70. Good point. I think we may decide to go with the 24-70 2.8 instead.<br>

I forgot to clarify-We shoot with a 50D and 7D. We currently have our two 50mm 1.8's which we've worked our magic with, but renting lenses just gets expensive!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>2. Can't see why the 70 to 200/2.8 would be part of an automatic formulae to designate that to the second shooter - having that only lens would be limiting IMO; I might have misunderstood your statement, though.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I should rephrase that statement. When I was second-shooting, I found that I used the 70-200 more often than the first shooter did but of course, we switched out lenses quite a bit. Of course, that's not saying that we shoot exactly like him, but the system that Evan and I have worked out, it made some sort of sense. That may have been us trying to justify not getting the IS version, though. <br>

Like I mentioned, we shoot mostly horse shows with the 70-200 and the IS is kind of unnecessary in that sense. However, I've been reading a lot of posts and forums about the IS-vs-Non-IS and it's undeniable that we should get the IS. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'd first get some good big strobes, like alien bees, light stands, and pocket wizards</p>

</blockquote>

<p>We've got our big guys (3 Alien Bee 1600's) that we use at all of our horse shows. I love them to pieces :) </p>

<blockquote>

<p> Also, make sure you have a GREAT gear bag. If you are investing in all these lenses than you should have a proper way to store and transport them</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Any suggestions on gear bags/travel cases? We've been looking to get some hard cases for everything, something like a Pelican case. I worry so much with us being at horse shows and traveling so often with all our gear.</p>

<p><strong>"I've sometimes got less gear than the guests." </strong><br>

<strong>:)</strong></p>

<p>My bag o' tricks currently contains:<br>

- Canon 7D, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 17-50<br>

- Pentax K20D, Sigma 30, Pentax 16-50, pentax 50-135, Pentax 50 f1.4<br>

- Pentax Z1<br>

- Bessa R2a, 35mm Ultron f1.7, 50 f1.5<br>

- Holga 120N<br>

- Shen Hao 4x5, Nikon 150, Fuji 75</p>

<p>Most of my shooting is with the K20D and the Bessa R2a </p>

<blockquote>

<p>"We shoot with a 50D and 7D. We currently have our two 50mm 1.8's"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Thanks for this and the other additional information.<br>

For me (if I were Evan or you) neither the 24 to 70 nor the 24 to 104 would make sense as both are too long at the wide end. <br>

EF-S 17 to 55 F/2.8 IS USM would make more sense.</p>

<p>Assuming, as a two person team you are working different Camera Angle and also Different Perspective AND you like zooms - the 70 to 200 makes some sense to me, but I would ask how often do you use 135 to 200 ZOOMING RANGE at a Wedding – is it mostly at 200 and mainly for the static long shots from the rear of the Church, for example?<br>

The answer to that question then might make us think that the “second shooter’s main zoom lens” should be the 24 to 105, giving you the advantage of IS with BOTH main working zooms and the extra wide & portrait lengths, for the second camera's Angle and Perspective, whilst still having reasonable reach at 105mm.<br>

And then you also buy the 70 to 200/2.8 (without IS) for the Horses and you still have 200mm reach if you need it at the Weddings - OK no IS at 200mm, but if used mainly for the back of the Church long shots etc - use a pod. <br>

I dunno the prices where you work but here, the 24 – 105 plus the 70 – 200/2.8 (without IS) is about the same price as the new EF70 to 200 F/2.8L IS USM MkII, which I understand you are now considering. And I think the 17 to 55 is about the same price as the 24 to 105 - so in essence, you get three for the same cost as two.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Further on building a kit with a 50D and a 7D and two 50/1.8mkII and two Photographers my comments are:<br>

<br>

1. Low Light Ceremonies with a No Flash Rule in small environs - you might be compromised with only a 50/1.8 – it might be too long. But 24/2.8 or 17/2.8 on a 7D with its high ISO capacity, might be sufficient – not in an old sandstone Church, with a strict Vicar, on a Winter's Afternoon, though.</p>

<p>2. Whatever the main working Zoom Lens is (for example 17-55 or 24 to 70 or 24 to 105): IF you <em>only have that lens and 50mm and 70 to 200</em>, you are critical if that main zoom lens goes down. Therefore, the 17 – 55 and 24 – 105 makes more sense, apropos System Redundancy.</p>

<p>WW </p>

<blockquote>

<p>the 2.8 still lets in quite a bit of light and does great things usually with the DOF, blurring out the background, etc. <strong><em>With the 4, you really just don't have the ability to get that effect.</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't wish to start a riot, nor an argument but I disagree with Vail: <br />Shooting with an APS-C Camera, for an Half Shot (vertical framing) the difference in DoF between F/2.8 and F/4 is only a few inches - about 4 inches actually. <br />For a Full Length Shot the difference in DoF is about 8 inches - a tad more.</p>

<p>For any tighter than an Half Shot - the diffence in DoF is less than 4 inches.</p>

<p>The reason I mentioned F/2.8 vs. F/4 is for Tv (Shutter Speed) to freeze Subject Motion and to leverage the lowest possible ISO in doing so.<br>

Also, a minor point: the difference is one stop, only.<br>

<br /><br />WW</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Neil wrote: Leica M9 and MP, plus 85/2, 50/1 and 24/1.4. SB-28 if needed. Compact, light, effective and can be carried in a small satchel. I've sometimes got less gear than the guests.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's what I would have wanted but with the 21 and 35mm focal lengths instead of 24 and 50mm.<br /> I wonder if Nikon or Canon can ever make a full frame dslr and a 35/1.4 that together will weigh less than 1 kg / 2.2 lbs?</p>

Could this be a flag for thieves? Maybe we should be careful what we post. I'm guilty of this myself.

<p>Wow Steve, laughing my socks off.... 8-)) Bob, that's a valid observation, we always need to be conscious of security measures for our equipment, and us. I had some thugs whack my car with a club one night between Irvington and Newark NJ at a traffic light entering the Parkway. I was returning from a wedding in South Orange and it was about 1am. It was obvious they were trying to get me to open the car so they could rob me. I got off with two dents in my hood.</p>

<blockquote>

 

<p>Could this be a flag for thieves? Maybe we should be careful what we post. I'm guilty of this myself.</p>

 

 

</blockquote>

 

I'm not sure I understand this statement?

<p>Finally changed from Canon 1D Mk IV's to Leica MP and M9, plus 75/1.4 or 50/1.4, 35/1.4, and 24/2.8 ; all in a Jessica Claire ShootSac.<br>

<br /> Extremely light & mobile, all the gear on me and never gets left by the church door as my Pelican 1600 did. For extremely dark church interiors, I'll carry a Leica Table Top tripod and leave it in the car as soon as possible. <br /> 35/1.4 does all the work as it's wide enough for everything but tight corners and the files can be cropped to 25% and still provide necessary quality for anything up to 8x6".<br>

Realising this made a big difference as it will basically match IQ from my Canon 24-70 at any focal length on album sized prints. With the 24, or the 75 on the MP I've got the rest covered.</p>

<p>Neil,</p>

<p>How do you like working with the M9 all day? I love my Bessa R2a, but I lust after an M7 and M9. Such a light, small, and efficient kit!</p>