Suggestions about a great lens for senior photos/weddings on a 7D?

<p>I plan on doing primarily senior portraits and weddings with a Canon 7D. After undergoing lots of research an consulting with others, for my current budget, this is overall the best camera for me to go. Now, I have heard some mixed opinions on which lens I should kick things off with. Any recommendations for what I plan on shooting, taking into consideration a modest budget? (preferably less than 1,000, but I still would love to hear any strong suggestions towards more expensive lenses too)</p>

<p>Thanks, <br>

Kyle Heaser</p>

<p>EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS.</p>

<p>+1</p>

<p>Scott hit the bullseye. The 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens is a fine portrait and wedding lens for APS-C sensor cameras, and you will discover that it is a perfect choice for countless other duties as well. It stands up to heavy use and abuse for years without complaint. It's body finish is durable, and doesn't dent/crack/chip, or wear through in spots unless you really work hard to make it happen. It is sharp, fast, and it's IS system is simply amazing. Best of all, it is the highest performance wide angle to mild telephoto zoom lens for an APS-C camera in the entire Canon lens lineup (and beyond), and used lenses are in such high demand and short supply that a clean 4 year old lens will quickly sell for nearly the same price as a new lens.</p>

<p>Mine is 5 years old now. It has been used for commercial work and personal pleasure with five different bodies from the 30D to the 7D (there were two 30D's), and if I killed it today, I'd save my coins, and buy another one just like it. By the way, if you buy one, spring for a factory hood, and always use it. It is near bullet proof, and takes the hits intended for the lens without complaint for years on end...<br>

<img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4659343072_8f4a88a7ae.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /></p>

<p> </p>

<p>Hi , Kyle, here is some honest first hand experience, from someone who learned the hard way, The senior portraits wont be a big problem as far as lighting, so the low fstop is not a deal breaker, So i shoot with 3 cameras the 7D the 40d the XTI, Sigma has excellent lens that is a 18-200 with awesome glass and it is on sale at amazon for now for about 330 dollars, this is the lens,</p>

<h1 >Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC AF OS (Optical Stabilizer) Zoom Lens for Canon Digital SLR Cameras and you can buy it interest free for 6 months.</h1>

<p> it has such a high rating that people honestly don't know why it is not an L or prime lens they have added some incredible mix of glass in the lens and when you are in a church the low light can sometimes be a issue , but of course if you have an external flash even if its just a 430exii or equal you can master that, i have had issues where there 18 people in just the wedding party and the church pulpit is so narrow you can t fit the whole group at the alter without a lot of imagination but it can done, With the crop sensor the 17 or 18 is so close to the same you cant see which is wider, ans the 18-200 will cover the problem of having a fairly wide lens and a zoom at the same time, you will Always end up with shots where your in the back of the church or in the balcony and looking for a long zoom that is clear and this one will put you there ,Now for the church that literally has no light in some spots and you cant get a good shot with a 3,5 then i pack the cheap, canon 50mm version 2 has a f1.8 and works very well at 2,1 and for the low light your in its about 100 bucks anywhere,and is small to pack in your case, and lastly this one is a useful beyond words but somewhat steep glass but i bought the <br>

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLRs at amazon and as luck would have it is 720 bucks but you can get it amazon.com for 12 months same as cash, it takes the most awesome crisp wide shots ,it will totally blow your mind and it can really put you into the big league without going broke, so all total your looking at about 1230 bucks with tax and shipping for 3 very good lens and if needed to i would leave out the 50mm till money came in ,as its a cheap fix for very low light, I have bought a dozen lens or more since i started and figured out packing around all the wrong lens was killing my back and you have to watch you stuff like a vulture even in church, SO you can use what they call a case logic defender suspension case which holds two lens a memory and etc with your 7d dropped in a suspension holster with big zoom end and you can wear it around all you want its a bout 60 bucks at amazon as well, i have the 200 dollar cases form canon and they are great but not for 8 hours on your feet at a wedding, Ill put the pictures on here that i shot last night to give you an idea, they were shot with no flash and i was behind home plate.I hope this helps it work for us and we are easy on price and charge about a grand per wedding and turn couples down all the time because we are in just to well liked by word of mouth, you can be that way too. Good luck><br>

<br>

<br>

</p><div></div>

<p>SLRGEAR has reviewed this lens as well (twice actually), awesome is not the adjective they chose.</p>

<p>KYLE here is the canon 10-22 cropped</p><div></div>

<p>Tamron 17-50mm f2.8.</p>

I would say the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 "L" series lens because it is often called "the work horse of Wedding photography", but this lens is more suited for FF cameras, it is also very heavy so by the end of a long wedding you are crying for some BenGay. This lens also tends to hunt in dim lighting situations although that might be aleviated with the better AF on the 7D.

 

The 17-55mm is a great lens which will cover about 80% of your shooting needs, but if I had to choose one lens it would be the 24-105mm which is a little more versatile and also a great performer. Combined with the 10-22mm, these2 lenses will cover about 90% or more of your shooting needs.

<blockquote>

<p>but this lens is more suited for FF cameras,</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why is that? Pretty much every PJ and sports shooter I know using Canon shoots a 1D3 (or 2n or 4) with the 24-70. That's not full frame and it works fine.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>it is also very heavy so by the end of a long wedding you are crying for some BenGay.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why is that? Pretty much every PJ and sports shooter I know using Canon shoots a 1D3 (or 2n or 4) with the 24-70 and they can shoot for hours. I did six hours with that setup last Sunday and I had a 580 on top. Sure I would like to have a similar setup that only weighs 5 ounces for everything, but that isn't going to happen and I wasn't crying at the end of the day. I use this for portraits (although sometimes with studio flash) and for events similar to weddings in terms of work.</p>

 

<p>Jeff,</p>

<p>Whilst I won't disagree with your numbers I found the 24-70 too long on my 1.3 crop 1D's, I used the 16-35 instead, that is probably because I was so used to it on film cameras first though. But I use the 24-70 full time for weddings on the 1Ds, I suppose I am just a little wide orientated. Personally, I could, and would, shoot a wedding completely with a 7D and a 17-55, I couldn't do that with a 7D mounted 24-70 as the effective 38 on the wide end wouldn't be wide enough, for me, but these things are very personal.</p>

<p> </p>

Why is that? Pretty much every PJ and sports shooter I know using Canon shoots a 1D3 (or 2n or 4) with the 24-70. That's not full frame and it works fine" ===========================================================

 

 

Well Jeff, on a cropped body like my 1.6X 30D the widest focal length I can get is the "equivalent" of 38.4mm on a FF, which is way beyond what one could consider true wide angle. I had my doubts about this lens from the beginning. The heaviness, the backward produding front lens when zooming in and out and the often hunting in dim light, but when I finally got my 5D is when I started really appreciating this lens. It's like the 2 were made for each other.

 

I get a decent wide angle, better focusing and extremely sharp images up to 16X20. The Canon EF 17-55 f2.8 IS is also a great lens which I would not mind owning and so is the Tamron 17-55mm acclaimed by many experts, but they can't match the build quality and ruggedness of the 24-70mm, plus I would have to be relegated to using cropped bodies only.

 

This is what I hate about my Canon 10-22mm f3.5/4.5. I have recently purchased a strap to use with the 24-70mm which alleviates things a little bit, but it is still a very heavy lens to use in my opinion, I also wish it came with IS.