Upgrade lens or Camera?

<p>I shot my first wedding in january and it went well, everyone was pleased with the photos and I didn't die of stress. A friend of mine asked If I could shoot a wedding for another friend and said yes. My first wedding I read at least 50 of these forums so I'm pleased to say I did my homework.<br>

This is the equipment I have:<br>

xti<br>

Sigma 24-70 f2.8<br>

canon 18-55 f3.5-5.6? no IS<br>

Quantaray Flash (I don't know the exact model off the top of my head but I works great)<br>

A set of Fanciers Fan160Bs for formal portraits.<br>

and before you have a heart attack, I borrowed an xt and extra batteries from my school for backup.<br>

Now for my next wedding I have a choice, should I buy a 40d and use my xti as a back-up or should I get a Sigma HSM 70-200 f2.8? Because the wedding is over the summer I can't borrow an extra camera from my school. I have an assistant using an xsi for this upcoming wedding and I'm not above taking the camera from her if mine fails. I'm only in high school so I don't have a huge budget. Should I just rent a 70-200 IS USM? If so, are there any camera rental places in the Seattle-Tacoma area? Thank you so much for your help.</p>

<p>Not sure about the rental availability in your area, but I would bet there are places if you search a bit.</p>

<p>From where you stand, I would be inclined to rent the long lens and for now get a used 30D, and a 430ex. They should cost about the same as a new 40D and will provide you better redundancy in case of faliure.</p>

<p>As a future plan: next time you are in the market for replacement/upgrade gear, I would trade your Xti for a used 5D, then add an 85/1.8 for lower light, no flash work. Eventually getting a longer lens like the 70-200/2.8 IS and then a 580 EX2.</p>

<p>On the wide end of your lenses, plan to get a 16-35/2.8 when you can afford it too. That will open up a whole new world of perspective when coupled with the 5D.</p>

<p>As backup you have the 18-55, so I would suggest keeping that as long as you have a working crop factor body.</p>

<p>I'd suggest get a Canon 70-200mm F4 IS lens if the 2.8 version is out of reach. The F4 IS lens is a killer, you cant go wrong with it at all.<br>

or<br>

The sigma 70-200mm F 2.8 which is known to be an excellent lens. Also, I think its a good idea to upgrade the 18-55 non IS lens unless you are using it only for a few ocassional wide shots.</p>

<p>Sorry i forgot to add, if possible get a second body. 40D will be excellent otherwise a 20D in good condition can be bought for very little now, I still use my 20D, never lets me down.</p>

<p>I would say this is all up to you, EXCEPT--it is imperitive you have access to a back up body. How you work it is your call. I am not one of those that feel a 70-200mm is necessary--I'd rather have fast prime teles, but you should do as you like. You probably know that you can do fine (focal length wise) with what you have already. And with a tripod, even dim church weddings, no flash, are possible.</p>

<p>As you saw in a previous thread, the temptation to spend money on lenses, rather than back up gear is very strong. However, my recommendation is to cover yourself first. I even think one should have a back up external flash and lenses (if they don't cover each other as is).</p>

<p>One factor you haven't covered is whether you are getting paid to do this wedding. This might influence what you can reasonably spend.</p>

<p>I shot my first wedding with an Xt, a 35-80 f4-5.6, & a 75-300 USM, so no judgments here! (no, no backups at all... and I only had one batt!)</p>

<p>I would buy the Sig, the glass is going to hold it's value much better than ANY body (esp. a 'pro' level 70-200 f2.8), so when you're ready to get seriously serious you can sell it for pretty much what you paid ($500-550 used, though expect a $1600+ hit to get anything significantly better), but using two bodies is far better than one because then you don't have to bother w/ lens swaps every other shot 24-70 + 70-200 = most of what you can effectively do.<br>

Crop sensor cameras are getting cheaper and cheaper for better and better units (read low light performance), Glass is more important, and a better chunk of glass is ALWAYS worth it!<br>

BTW if you can find somebody who'll swap a 5d for your XTi, send them them my way, I've got some old Enron stock at a helluva deal!!! or, I could always use another 5d body!</p>

<p>Thank you all so much for your help.<br>

I will get paid for this wedding but probably not much, it's more of a favor. Currently I'm leaning towards getting a camea over the lens.<br>

David: I do plan on getting a 5d in the future or perhaps instead of the 40d if I can get the funds.<br>

UJwal: Is the f4 going to work for weddings? I thought it would be to slow for indoor work.<br>

Nadine: I won't be geting paid much for this wedding but I still want to be professional and have the best gear I can get.<br>

Marcus: I wish someone would trade me a 5d for my Xti... But by then hell would freeze over... then I can go iceskating!!!!</p>

 

40D and Canon EF 50 f/1.8 for low-light and portait work.

Hi Joshua, the 70-200mm F4 IS will work indoors. Its one stop slower than F2.8 lenses, but it will give your 3 more stop hand holdability! The Image Stabilizations is probably the best one in Canon's arsenal ( yes...its better an 2.8 IS's stabilizer)

 

I can shoot my 70-200mm F4 IS indoors with shutter speed as low as 1/20 at 200mm handheld ( i have found that when i shoot at continuous mode, the first frame will be slightly blurry, second frame tack sharp and third frame more blurry.I pick the sharpest and discard the rest). With a 200mm F2.8 (non-IS), there is no way you can shoot at such slow shutter speeds. Even with 200mm F2.8 IS.....if you used it at F4 (and maybe even 2.8), I doubt that you can consistently get good results such slow shutter speeds.

 

Cheers!