What lens to pair with the 17-55 2.8 on a crop sensor for weddings?

<p>If you could only have one other lens to cover a wedding on a Canon 40D (crop sensor) besides the 17-55 2.8, what would it be? </p>

<p>I would have to say it would be the 70-200 2.8.</p>

<p>One more lens? For me, it would have to be a fast prime at your preferred focal length.</p>

<p>The range of 17-55 on a crop sensor is good, and could be all you need. But what is not so good is the low light performance, especially on 40D. Hence a faster lens for when you need it is likely to be more useful. For me, f2.8 is too slow in some cases.</p>

<p>The 70-200 is too long on a crop sensor, unless you like to shoot at a great distance from your subjects.</p>

<p>Perhaps an 85/1.8 or /1.4 ... but it depends on the venue, your style, etc. A shorter fast prime (like a 30/1.4) would have a certain appeal, as well.</p>

<p>I was looking at both the 85 1.8 and 70-200 2.8. From the weddings that I have 2nd shot/assisted at, I know that I need something longer then 55 for many instances (getting expressions of the B&G while they're at the altar, etc). I have a 50 1.8, but haven't used it much since I bought my 17-55 2.8. I have trouble getting enough of the subject in focus below 2.8, so I don't necessarily see the 1.8 or 1.4 as an advantage over 2.8 if the DOF is too thin. </p>

<p>I'm a Nikon shooter with a similar set up (D90 w/17-55 2.8) and I have more than a few lenses, but if I had to pick one extra it would be close between the 50 1.8 and the 70-200 2.8, with the 70-200 getting the SLIGHT advantage. The 50 1.8 is invaluable for the VERY low light situations. I can get a lot of low light shots by cranking up my ISO to 2000 with the 17-55, but I would much rather have lower noise images with the 50 1.8, and the DOF isn't a problem when you get used to it. However, the 70-200 gives me the reach to get the more important shots that are very unique, such as the kiss from the back of the church, or close ups of the expressions on peoples faces without them knowing that you're shooting them. I probably use the 50 1.8 more, but the 70-200 is more valuable to me.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The 70-200 is too long on a crop sensor, unless you like to shoot at a great distance from your subjects.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I started using the 70-200 on a 40d instead of lugging a 300 on FF for shots from the back of the church.</p>

I rented the 70-200 for a month, and I own an 85 1.8. I recommend the 85. It's a fantastic lense, especially for the money,

and works great with crop sensors. I would say, unless you want to stand at te back of the church the whole time and

zoom in on b&g, you won't need it. Also, it's heavy and you need a monopod to use at anything 1/80 or slower. The 85 can

keep you far enough away to not disturb the ceremony and still get tight shots.

<p>85mm f1.8.</p>

<p>It's too bad neither Nikon nor Canon have something like a fast 50-150/135. It's one of the redeeming aspects of Pentax. I haven't found that I've needed anything longer, and this type of lens is a lot lighter than a 70-200. You might want to try Sigma's 50-150 or Tokina's 50-135 (similar to Pentax), both 2.8 lenses. They're both about 1/2 the price of a C/N 70-200.</p>

<p><strong><em>so I don't necessarily see the 1.8 or 1.4 as an advantage over 2.8 if the DOF is too thin.</em></strong></p>

<p>Wow. 2 full stops has no advantage? It most certainly does and that DOF widens the further back you are. Plus, a faster prime will focus quicker.</p>

<p>Also, some of you are tossing around the 70-200 without mentioning whether it's the IS flavor or not. Two different beasts.</p>

<p>The 85 f/1.8 for the budget minded,<br>

The 70-200 f/2.8 IS (Mk1 or 2) otherwise.</p>

<p>It is true that with f1.8, shooting from a distance of 20-30 feet back, has enough DOF to comfortably surround a couple standing at the altar, and possibly more than comfortably. My choice would be the 85mm even if I weren't budget minded.</p>

<p>All I can say as to the 85 f/1.8 that it struggled with focus this past weekend, the venue was dark and the people were moving. This was the 85mm f/1.8 on a 7D.</p>

<p>As much as I like shooting with an 85mm prime, I think your second lens has to be a 70-200. I very frequently need the reach, particularly during the ceremony. And, even if you can get closer, if the longer lens lets you blend into the background a little more, it's all the better. A fast 50 or 85 is very valuable and they should eventually make their way into your kit. But I would be very, very hesitant to show up to a wedding without a 70-200. Another thing to consider is that if you're a second shooter, you're not likely going to get the optimal shooting positions. You'll be shooting from further away and less than ideal angles. You may need the reach to overcome those challenges. That's been my experience anyway. </p>

<p>Wow, everyone is bringing up great points! Thanks for explaining how the DOF is enough to surround the couple at 1.8 when you're farther back, Nadine. That's great to know! @Tony, great points about not getting the optimal positions as a 2nd shooter, and needing the reach. </p>

<p>Personally, I say the 135 2.0 L.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But I would be very, very hesitant to show up to a wedding without a 70-200...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I appreciate it's a question of style, but I show up to 90% of mine with nothing longer than a 90mm (on full frame). I have never found it to be a problem.</p>

<p>And if you're a second shooter, I'd seriously question why you'd be trying to photograph the action at the altar when the main photographer will be doing that, and there's so much more to be photographed everywhere else.</p>

<p>6+<br>

85mm f/1.8 perfect for alter shots = 136mm in FF<br>

-Dave</p>

<p>I would say the 135mm f2 L or macro 100mm for the wedding rings, details in hands-fingers, details in many accessories and portraits. Just my opinion. I like primes.</p>

<p>Just wanted to add my 2 cents. 85mm 1.8<br>

Great reasonable lens, I have used mine countless times for all kinds of shooting. I sometimes use this for close ups with a 5T diopter, but I have other close focus lenses so for me not a big deal. My next must have after this is the 180mm 2.8, although some prefer the 80-200 2.8, I don't own one.</p>

<p>I shoot weddings with 2 cameras - a 5D with a 24-70L and a 40D with a 70-200L 2.8. No lens changes. Done. Although I do have primes in my bag I'm finding this combo to be very effective for me.</p>

<p>What did you finally decide?</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>@William, I'll be going with the 17-55 2.8 and renting the 85 1.8. I'll let you know how I like the combo after August 7th!</p>

<p> . . . good one !</p>

<p>Good Luck</p>