What lens for Nikon D300 to shoot weddings ?

Hi,

 

I have just decided to buy a D300 body with MB-D10 grip and baterries. I would like to start as a wedding /

portrait shooter, probably as a "second" one at the beginning. Being a bit on a budget after my shopping, I`ve

chosen a basic lens to my new toy and decided to get Nikon 35mm f/2 to be my standard for now to begin with. I

know with DSLR it will be like a 52mm lens, usefull but not wide enough for some situations. I also have Nikon

85mm f/1.8 lens that with D300 is like an almost 130mm tele lens ... I dont think it is usefull for indoor

wedding photo. Is it a good idea to sell it and get the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 to get a 75mm portrait lens as I am

thinking ? Do you have any other suggestions what type of lens to add to have a starter set of gear for that type

of shooting ? I prefer bright primes ober zooms so maybe some fisheye lens from Nikon would be a nice addon ? If

you have any advice or suggestion, please let me know. Also, if you have any personal ideas or combinations, I

will surely find them helpfull.

 

Thanks,

Piotr

Piotr, becoming a wedding photographer even as a second shooter has very little to do with what equipment you have. You need to read up on some basic books like "Wedding Photography: Art, Business and Style" that will explain the basics. But to answer your question, you need an extreme wide angle zoom like the Nikkor 14-24 2.8 for shooting at the reception where you're right on top of people with no room to back up, an 80-200 or 70-200 2.8 for closeups and tight shots both at the ceremony and reception, and something like 24-70 2.8 for everything in between. 2.8 zooms are plenty fast for wedding work. Despite people who claim they can shoot without light, most wedding work is done with flash, often double lit by an assistant with a second flash. Main thing is having enough light to see and focus, not to be shooting wide open at 1.4 in the dark with no depth of field. Enough light is not the same as good light. Wedding work is fast paced so you don't have time to be constantly changing primes, so zooms are a huge advantage. You'll be changing zooms often enough as it is. But of course you'll have more than one body, right (backup of everything is another cardinal rule of wedding photography) so if you're got the wide zoom on one body and long zoom on the other you're set for most shots.

Hey Craig that was one of the best answers to the "what wedding lens" I have ever read. I do all of the above and I must

put a shout out out for what I believe is the best lens, if you could only have one, and that is the 18-200 VR. It does

everything well and never complains.

For wedding work you should be considering an 17-55mm f/2.8G Nikkor, the 24-70m mf/2.8G and the 70-200mm f/2.8G. As a basic tool you need the versatility of a high quality zoom more than you need a fast aperture lens, those can come later.

Art, thanks. Actually the lens kit I describe would be my answer to just about every "what lens do I buy" question short of heavy macro or sports. I've actually done more news photography than weddings, but it's the same lens kit and actually very similar in the sense of having to catch shots on the fly with few if any second chances. If you have those three lenses you can shoot 80 percent of what you're ever going to have to shoot. If you do macro add a 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor (or the current equivalent, I have a very old macro lens) or teleconverter and a 300/400/600 if you do sports/wildlife. Obviously there are always going to be special lenses for special jobs but there are "money" lenses that pay for themselves day in and day out, and then the ones that you only need now and then. That's why rental exists. BTW I have nothing against prime lenses -- I have more than a dozen from the pre-zoom days.

Consider the 18-55 and 55-200, both with VR.

Ellis is right on the money. That's what I use with a D2x (and its predecessors, including film cameras). The 12-24 (or 14-24) is a niche lens - a super-wide angle which should be low on your list of future acquisitions). A 17-55 would suffice for over 80% of a typical wedding, and should head your list, followed by the 70-200/2.8 VR. I use a mid-range zoom mainly for formal groups. The 18-200 is too slow unless you really crank up the ISO.

 

You also need an SB-800, possibly two of them (flashes tend to go south at the wrong moment and are easily broken). You need enough memory cards to handle twice the anticipated load (at least 4 x 4GB) and at least three sets of batteries for camera(s) and flash.

 

Before I forget, you need to enslave yourself to a wedding photographer to learn the trade. Any dilettante with a credit card can buy the equipment, but weddings and events are all about organization, speed and people-handling skills.

Here is my opinion Guys:

 

Craig and Ellis, both of you write that a typical set should cover in my opinion the absolute widest zoom range I could imagine to shoot people! The 17-55mm f/2.8G Nikkor, the 24-70m mf/2.8G and the 70-200mm f/2.8G. all together cost a fortune and in my opinion do not guarantee anybody that wont miss a best shot af an event. Ofcourse, it is a great gear for sure but belive me or not, I personally know a few photographers shhoting weddings and other similar events with just a 3 prime lenses that are a fisheye lens, 35mm lens and 85mm portrait lens - thats the gear they use most of the time during the wedding, plus a flash and a full frame Canon body. And belive me or not, the results I have seen are far more esthetically genious that any other pictures I have seen taken with a zoom lens. You may not agree up to that point as it is my personal onw, but after a few years of avoiding bright primes and shooting even a 2.8 Nikkor zoom lenses, I`ve come up to the point that some amazing results will never be achieved with a zoom lens, and can be done with a 1.4 prime. Ofcourse, time to change lens, organisation, people skills ... thats all true. I just wanted to find out what lens can provide me flexibility and wont be a zoom lens, rather than "what to buy" question. I guess I know what I want to achieve and focus on. And that way is not only accessible with spending almost 5000$ on a supberb Nikon zoom lenses that may come later. I am at the beginning now, thats the point.

 

Thanks to any of you for a surely pfofitable discussion!

Piotr.

Piotr, you touch on an interesting point.

 

IMO, wedding photography can easily become homogenized unless you have some sort of vision going in. With some sort of vision

fueling choices, selection of lenses becomes very personal,

and need not follow the herd.

 

I personally like faster primes, and at one time used only primes backed up by one, less frequently used zoom. After recently switching

from Canon to Nikon, I secured the full range of Nikkor

AFS zooms mentioned above because I could afford it, and use them for a wide range of different work ... however, the more important

part was adding some key primes to produce my vision

when shooting weddings ... IMO, Nikon zooms are significantly ahead of Canon, but when it comes to fast primes Nikon is significantly

behind Canon (so far.)

 

To date I've added the Nikon AF50/1.4, AF85/1.4, AF100/2.8VR Macro and AF135/2DC. If Nikon offered an AF35/1.4 in would be in my

bag in

a heart beat.

 

If you are not adverse to manual focus, the list of primes increases dramatically. Many top lens makers like Zeiss and Voigtlander, as

well as Nikon. make fast, optically excellent lenses in the Nikon F mount.

 

But when it comes to wider AF lenses, the zooms are actually a better choice IMHO. Most AF wide angle primes are f/2.8 anyway ...

so

you might as well get a zoom with the same f/2.8.

maximum aperture. A good buy in this regard is the AF17-35/2.8 ... which is the equivalent of an AF25-52/2.8 on your D300 which is

plenty wide enough for wedding work. This lens can be found

used for a good price, isn't that big, and offers excellent quality. Later, it will work on a full frame Nikon camera.

 

As to the working aspect of primes verses zooms ... that is a matter of different disciplines. Anticipation, coupled with vision, makes

primes work just fine. 95% of all my wedding photography

was accomplished with prime lenses:

 

 

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=540005

I shoot weddings every weekend, often 2 or 3 per weekend. My portfolio on the site will show you that I use lots of different focal lengths

to get different looks. I often shoot a portrait with a 20 to get and intimate feel then I walk away and take the same portrait with a 200 for a

totally different look. That method gives me speed and variety. I mention that because in practice, your lens choice is a very subjective

thing. The number one most noticeable characteristic of any lens is the effect it has on perspective relative to the subject. I shoot 99% of

the time with one of three lenses on my D200's. I use a 70-200 2.8 VR, a 1.4 50, and a 17-35 2.8. I never miss the other fast primes.

Yes, these lenses are heavy, but the inconvenience of the weight is overcome by the convenience of cropping and composing with the

zooms. There is nobody I know who could look at a portrait and tell me weather it was shot on a prime or a zoom. While zooms are

expensive, they are really 4 in 1 lenses, so I think they are a great value.

Piotr,

You should have stated your question clearer. If all you wanted to know was what prime to buy, you should have asked that. If the work you admire was shot with 35mm and 85mm primes, then get one of them. Your style will develop from the equipment you shoot with.

 

Personally, my 17-55 stays on my D300 95% of the time and my assistant shoots with a D300 with the 70-200 during the ceremony, then switches to a mid-range zoom. I'm not even sure what it is, it's his lens. If I work alone, I use those two lenses on both bodies and carry them.

 

My personal opinion, for someone starting out and not knowing the flow of a wedding, a zoom is a better option. As you said, timing, switching lenses, etc. can eat time you won't have.

 

Sam

Using D300's for me has been more about the additional DOF afforded by the use of wider glass for the same perspective that longer glass would give on a FF body.

 

So, bearing that part in mind... I use a few lenses for weddings on the D300:

 

Current most used lens is the Tokina 16-50/2.8, followed by the Tokina 11-16/2.8. I pull a Siggy 20/1.8 out for some stuff and love it.

 

I have available in the bag; Tamron 17-50/2.8, Nikon 17-55/2.8, 18-200Vr. All of these can cover the wide stuff when needed.

 

I like to use primes but mostly on a FF body for shallower DOF.

 

I imagined that once FF bodies hit the market I would not keep the crop bodies any longer. Well, I surprised myself by finding that the use of crop bodies was preferred for the wider stuff. I now think I will likely keep a couple of crop bodies long term.

 

What I would like to see for a D300 in terms of a prime would be a 24/1.2 or 1.4 with SWM. Or even a 20mm with the same specs.

 

What I want for the FF bodies would be the 24 and a 35 both with SWM and 1.4 or wider.

Good grief. Most of these answer seem to be coming from Nikon shareholders.

 

If you can't shoot a wedding with an 18-70 mm and a D300...but, Piotr, I'll bet you can.