What to do?

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>I am just new to this forum and have been researching the net for endless hours trying to decide what to do!!<br /> I would like to build up my 'hobby' photography to something a little more than a hobby but not to the extreme where I would make it a full time business. Maybe just shoot the occasional wedding/paid event.</p>

<p>My current equipment is:<br /> Nikon D90<br /> Nikon 18-105mm<br /> Nikon 50mm 1.8<br /> Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 VC<br /> Nikon SB700<br /> Gary Fong Lightsphere</p>

<p>I am currently looking at buying either the Nikon D700 with the Nikon 70-200 VR or maybe staying DX and getting the Nikon D7000 which would allow me to get the 70-200 VRII. Or another option would be to get another D90 and the 70-200 VRII which would allow me to get something like 85mm 1.4 or 105mm.</p>

<p>I would appreciate any suggestions in relation to adding equipment to my kit :)</p>

<p>Thanks<br /> Sharyn</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It strikes me that the thing you need most is more knowledge about the photographic fields which interest you, rather than more equipment. There really is no such thing as an..."<strong>Occasional Wedding"</strong>....so my sincere suggestion is that you learn more about these fields......books, chats with pros in the field.....best of all may be a membership in either PPA or PPOC, so that you can have access to the mountain of useful knowledge you will need....regards, Robert</p><div></div>

<p>Before you spend a dime on hardware, spend a month or so reading every thread in the archives for this forum. You need knowledge before you embark on possibly ruining someone's wedding.</p>

<p>Then you can start doing portraits, baby photos, etc. that can be retaken relatively easily.</p>

<p>Nice photo Mr Cossar.</p>

 

<p>Thanks, but I asked for advice on what equipment to get, and the replies were: to get more knowledge! I would assume that by getting equipment and then learning how to use that equipment would give me knowledge.</p>

<p>I don't see how I can get 'knowledge' from reading a whole lot of forums. Practice to me would seem to be the best way to learn, at least then you can see where you can improve.</p>

<p>Further I did not say that I was going to get the gear and then run out and 'ruin' someone's wedding!</p>

<p>It's kinda like saying I should become a carpenter without a hammer!!</p>

<p>First--gear isn't something you ask someone else about. You should know what gear will suit you. If you don't, you need to shoot more weddings until you do. Yes, it can be interesting to hear what others would or wouldn't do in the same situation, but ultimately it doesn't help that much because what works for someone else may drive you crazy.</p>

<p>For instance, I don't think a 70-200mm lens is a given. I shot without one for a long time, and still shoot no-flash, low light weddings with fast aperture primes. I now own a cropped sensor lens equivalent to that range and appreciate it for outdoor weddings in bright light.</p>

<p>However, if it were me, I'd get the 85mm f1.8 (or 1.4--don't know the Nikon line) and wait on the long zoom. For the time being, I don't see a need to replace the D90, unless you are talking about a back up body, or making the D90 a back up. If that's the case, nobody can figure out for you whether you'd like a full frame or cropped sensor body better. Or whether you can handle or like a dual format kit. My suggestion, if you are just dying to spend money, is to rent whatever it is you are thinking about to help you decide. Or shoot a lot more weddings and then figure it out.</p>

<p>While my opinion about doing 'occasional weddings' is not as dire as Robert's, I also think it would be difficult to develop and keep one's skills sharp doing the occasional wedding. I love having weddings to shoot every weekend. And when I start up again after a lull in booked weddings, I do feel sluggish. There is a quite a bit of 'muscle memory' involved in shooting weddings, surprisingly enough. Maybe because quick reflexes are important.</p>

<p>Ok to clarify...</p>

<p>By 'occasional' I did not mean once or twice a year situation. I simply meant not an every weekend thing (I did say I did not want it to be a full time thing) I work full time and simply put would not want to be working every weekend also.</p>

<p>Thank you Nadine, as for the D90 yes I did mean as a back up or the D90 being a back up. I am not dying to spend money, I just wanted to be equipped with the tools I would need.</p>

<p>I see now that asking questions on forums (this is my first time and probably last) may not be the way to go about it. People just make too many assumptions!</p>

<p>Thanks anyway</p>

<p>Get the D700 if you want one, you'll likely prefer it's low light performance over the D90 not to mention the superior AF. You need a lens for it as you only have a 50mm f1.8 that will work with it that said if you are really skillful you could get a lot of mileage from a D700 and a 50mm at a wedding. Maybe adding the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or a pair of primes like the 35mm f2 and the 85mm f1.8. Personaly I would not run out to get a 70-200 f2.8 lens at the beginning. At the end of the day though it is more about what you do with the equipment rather than how much equipment you own.</p>

<p>I would suggest that you start with portrait sessions, engagement photos really anything that is not a one time event. Do some street photography to help hone your skills.</p>

<p>Sharyn, you already have a hammer, and a decent set of hand tools to go along with it, except I would dump the Gary Fong and get something better. A number of pros I know think it's a great item for the reseller, but not so good for photography. Nadine likes the Demb units if I remember. A 4x6 file card and a rubber band also works quite well. What you don't appear to have is any backup gear, body or flash.<br>

Going back thru the archives, you will find lots of threads regarding gear, backup gear, multiple flash usage, posing, pretty much everything under the sun(and moon).</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you Stuart,</p>

<p>The reason I was asking was so that I would have an extra body. I know that the 50mm is the only lens I have that is compatible with FX which is why I was asking about the 70-200 (which has also been mentioned lots on forums as being the 'best' lens to get) OR the 85 OR the 105 not all of them.</p>

<p>I don't want to have a whole lot of equipment I just want an extra body and a lens to go with it and was asking which combo would be best. And I WILL be practicing with these before I go shooting a wedding on my own! </p>

<p>I don't have access to hiring lenses where I live so I have to rely on advice from people before I go out and purchase (sometimes the advice from the salesman is not always the best!) That is why I asked the questions here :)</p>

 

<p>Thanks Bob,</p>

<p>I have used the Gary Fong once and I agree it is going to be dumped! Annoyed now because I was the 'forums' that led me to purchase it!</p>

<p>I was at a wedding last night (keep your pants on everyone I was not the photographer) and I had more comments about that silly thing than anything. I ended up telling the women it was a 'wrinkle' remover which led to me taking endless photo's (which I will prob have to edit now with wrinkle removing!!)</p>

<p>As a Nikon shooter with D90s, I can vouch for the durability and generally good quality of the body and it's feature set. I do wish it had more focus points and a bit better ISO. It's also easy to handle when the going get tough. I do not own a 70-200, but am lucky enough to have a huge rental place 20 minutes away. It costs me $35 to rent that $2200 lens for a weekend, so the economics are pretty much a no-brainer. If it gets to the point where I need it daily, then I'll buy. You might consider one of the online rental sites like http://www.borrowlenses.com/. I've not used them or any other online rental service, but if you search their name in this forum I'm sure you'll find lots of comments.</p>

<p>Depending on where the wedding is and the rules imposed upon you as an official photographer, the 70-200 f2.8 may be invaluable. As a "guest" with a camera you have leeway that a pro will never get. Meaning that you, as a guest, may be allowed to shoot a flash during the ceremony, be closer to the couple, etc... As a pro the officiant imposes a set of more restrictive rules, most of which caused by dumb photographers that the officiant has encountered over the years. </p>

<p>So my advice on lenses would be the 70-200 vr i or II and a backup body. If it were me - I'd do the D7000 and switch my D90 to a the role of backup with the D7000 being my primary. I'd avoid the D700 - since you don't have a compelling need for a full frame. </p>

<p>As for the 85 f1.8 or 1.4 - Nikon makes both - and both are great portrait lenses. The 1.8 goes for around 400 - 500 used while the 1.4 is about $1,000. They are good short telephotos - but again you may find them useless in weddings in larger venues - where you are told to stay behind the last row of guests.</p>

<p>The comments you received are pretty typical for people on this forum saying they want to shot weddings, without providing their experience or background level. Many here have apprenticed for years (at least 1 - 2) before going solo on weddings. The point they were trying to make is that shooting a wedding is a commitment, not something you do to fill time. A wedding is one of the most stressful events imaginable for a photographer, since the spotlight is on you to get it right. Failure is not an option. </p>

<p>By suggesting you read the archives - they were saying - without saying it aloud, that many people before you have been in the same situation, asking the same question, and perhaps you could learn from their experience and stumbles. Thing is, we all were beginners at weddings at some point. Some decide they like it and excel, others loath them and avoid them at all costs. </p>

<p>I hope you reconsider and continue to read and contribute - and ask questions on these forums. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>I do mostly portraits and weddings. I purchased my D700 a long time because I wanted the maximum flexibility of shooting in low light situations with the best possible results. The D700 is long in the tooth, but I still purchased a second recently because I was tired of changing lens and it remains an excellent body. One body has a 24-70mm f2.8 Nikon and the other body has the 70-200mm f2.8 Nikon. Depending on the situation, I occasionally use by 14-24mm f2.8. I have an 50 (f1.4), 85 (f1.4) and 105 (f2.8) prime lens, but I rarely use them. Stop by my website if you want to see examples of pictures taken with the first two lens (http://www.e2photo.net).<br>

The D700 may be phased out soon so a bit of patience could be beneficial.<br>

I use the VRII 70-200 and take advantage of the VRII capabilities, but optically, the VRI and VRII versions are pretty close to each other. VRII has a bit less vignetting in my opinion.<br>

I would pick up the 70-200 lens and wait until we hear Nikon's announcements in October/November before deciding body.<br>

In terms of DX vs FX, tis a matter of taste and type of shooting, but for me the DX leaves me feeling like I am shooting through a tunnel, and the FX set me free!</p>

<p>I would add that a great way to figure out what you like is to rent the hardware and try it out for a few days!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have used the Gary Fong once and I agree it is going to be dumped! Annoyed now because I was the 'forums' that led me to purchase it!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The above is exactly why I said what I said in my first post. By the way, if you'd asked me, I would not have recommended the Lightsphere.</p>

<p>As David said--you can learn a lot just by reading the archives. Many people have asked essentially the same question you just did. And no one can give you the answer, just their opinion.</p>

<p>For instance, now that you said you want the D90 to be a back up, I would personally forego the 70-200mm for now and get another body. (Getting a 70-200mm is also something that is popular to say on forums, but at least for me--isn't a necessity). Whether it would be the D7000 or D700 is something you'll have to figure out, because you are talking about a choice between a cropped sensor body and a full frame body. For good discussions about a dual format wedding kit, look up William W's posts about this. It isn't something to be taken lightly, because it will affect your lens choices. There are wedding photographers who use a dual format kit, some who use cropped sensor cameras only, some who use full frame only. This issue is not something that someone else can decide for you.</p>

<p>Try the online lens rental places, and try borrowing cameras, if you don't have a handy rental place. There is nothing like actually using the gear at a wedding to tell you exactly what you need to know to make a buying decision, regardless how much good information you got from others.</p>

<p>As for not asking questions on forums--one has to have a thick skin. To get the best out of forums, acquaint yourself with the 'regulars', lurk for a while to find out who makes sense and who doesn't. Then ask, and you'll know who knows what they are talking about.</p>

<p>Sharyn,<br>

I like you am fairly new to wedding photography. My previous job left me with 5 years experience with cameras, lenses, lighting and super stressful situations, so weddings aren't that big of a leap from where I was. I love my 70-200, and I prefer it for when I do get a wedding gig. But that's because I directly compared it to the 200mm F/2.0, the 200mm F/4 Macro, the 135mm F/2.0, the 85mm F/1.4G, F/1.4 AIs, & F/1.8D, the 105mm F/2.8 VR & the 105mm F/2.0 on both FX (D3s) & DX (D7000) for months on end everyday in shooting (and I'm only mentioning the lenses in its range). My point is, it took me months, even years of shooting all these lenses on FX & DX to figure out what worked for me, and I'm still figuring it out. I could tell you the reason's I settled with the 24mm, 85mm, 17-35mm & 70-200mm lenses for just about everything I shoot, but it wouldn't mean much to you, even if you thought it did. For me personally, the marriage of artist to gear is one that has to have chemistry, you've got to "feel" those lenses on FX or DX, regardless of what anyone says. There are no right or wrong answers here.<br>

Definitely rent lenses, if you are in a place you can't, try and find other photographers in your area, maybe you can have a photographer get together and have a chance to at least feel other gear; a lot of people are shocked by the sheer size and weight of a 70-200 the first time they see it, especially when they have to carry it around all day. Do be careful with tele primes, especially if its your only body, you can easily wind up with the wrong lens at the wrong time and miss critical shots.<br>

Also, take a vary serious heed to the warnings posted here, wedding photography is nothing to be taken lightly, if you were to in anyway not to deliver, the legal repercussions alone could be very steep.<br>

As for not posting, don't give up now. I know it can be a bit frustrating, but its all part of the learning process. All of us here are trying to help you, and one day you'll understand :). We are a bit jaded because there are countless posts nearly identical to yours. Heck I've only been here a couple of months and I've already seen a dozen or more posts that are nearly identical to yours. And its largely because of the misconception that creative problems have answers. That if you buy this lens your work will be much better, or if you get this amazing flash mod your lighting will suddenly be much better. Its simply not true. Creativity is a lot like love, it plays by its own rules. Its like a Jimmy Cricket, except instead of your conscious its your creativity, you've got to listen to it, and for every person that creative voice in their head is different, which is why we are limited in advising whats best for you.<br>

Remember, its not the destination that counts, its the journey :).</p>

<p>Skyler--you give some excellent advice. I just want to make a comment about your warning about tele primes. I know you said 'if' you only had one body, however, this is the kind of comment that, like the Lightsphere comment, can keep someone from purchasing tele primes, when tele primes may be just the ticket. They are particularly helpful for indoor, low light, no flash ceremonies. They are also helpful for 'on the prowl' candids, as well as in more controlled situations. </p>

<p>It just takes some skill and experience in anticipating what is to happen. And--knowing how to make the photo with any focal length you happen to have on the camera. Granted there will be a few times with a tele prime where you cannot step back fast enough (or at all) to achieve the closest focus, but otherwise, you just re-think the image within nano seconds and just shoot.</p>

<p>As a general comment, Sharyn, you would do well to be a lot less on the defensive. We're not out to tear you apart. You will find some useful advice here, from some very accomplished photographers, wedding & otherwise. Not everyone will give that advice with kid gloves on. That's just life :) If you are looking to get into weddings, then a second body is necessary. It does, however, sound to me like you need to get much better acquainted with your current tools (and they are fine tools for that matter) and figure out your style first. For example, not every wedding photographer has need of a 70-200mm lens (I am in that category)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have used the Gary Fong once and I agree it is going to be dumped!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I used it once and one guest commented that it looked like a male contraceptive device on my flash. The thing is too big to lug around all day long and a simple Stofen will do just fine.</p>

<p>Nadine,<br>

I agree, my favorite focal length of all time is 85mm, I've owned 3 of Nikon's offerings and Canon's 85mm F/1.2; I would pick 85mm over 50mm any day of the week.</p>

<p>To refine my warning, Sharyn, short teles are excellent lenses which I love very much, the 85mm F/1.8D is unbeatable for the price vs performance, and I think it would be excellent to have one in your bag. When using it on a DX body, you get a focal length of approx. 127mm; you need to be consciously aware of these limitations especially if you are only using one body and in a cramped environment. Nadine is absolutely right, there are many places where short teles are just the ticket for many reasons, separation from the background, low light, and low profile (In my estimation it would take roughly half a dozen 85mm F/1.8s to equal the size of a 70-200). My recommendation is to have the 85mm on one body and your 17-50 on the other. That way if you suddenly find yourself to tight with no room to back up you simply switch bodies and shoot away, hopefully without missing a beat. If you do wind up with just one body and a tele prime, you'll have to work at those anticipation skills Nadine spoke of, and position yourself according with your tele prime. Of course, this warning doesn't apply to tele primes alone, the 70-200 actually has a longer close-focus distance than most of Nikon's primes (the 180mm & 200mm primes being exceptions), I think its 5 feet (compared to the 3ft of most 85mm lenses), and if you suddenly find yourself 4 feet away from your subject, and no way to back up (small room maybe), then you'll have to spend a few minutes switch lenses. Something to be aware of with any tele lens.</p>

Well I hate gary fongs stuff too. Mainly because of the color change. If I want to change the color I'll do it in post. he's made millions, so I guess the fong dong works well for a ton of people. Save your money on adding this attachment.

 

I shoot with Quantums, mainly the Trio. There are several attachments for the Trio as well as their other lights. I like shooting bare bulb and with a dome. Reflections and hot spots on faces usually don't show up.

With the Trio you can set it up on your camera's hot shoe. The other Quantum flash units are also very good, but you need a bracket, because these aren't set up on a hot shoe. These are my spares, and they get lots of use as backup gear or 2nd units for me. Check out their site. They have about 10 lessons you can look at. Kind of cool. If you are looking for power, the X series will pop out 400 watt seconds, one of the most powerful wedding strobes on the market, along with the Normans.

 

If you plan on doing a mess of weddings a year, like me, use heavier gear. I'm down this year with weddings, but not by much. I'm at 45 weddings so far, with only 2 more on the books. We are getting ready for Santa shots, instant printing.

 

Think of the future before dumping a pile of money into stuff you will never use. If you are unsure - rent.

 

Hope this helps.

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3902476">Bob Sunley</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Oct 16, 2011; 01:26 a.m.Before you spend a dime on hardware, spend a month or so reading every thread in the archives for this forum. You need knowledge before you embark on possibly ruining someone's wedding.Then you can start doing portraits, baby photos, etc. that can be retaken relatively easily.</p>

 

 

 

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

 

<p ><a name="00ZTQy"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=6818098">Sharyn Coffee</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"></a>, Oct 16, 2011; 02:11 a.m. Thanks, but I asked for advice on what equipment to get, and the replies were: to get more knowledge! I would assume that by getting equipment and then learning how to use that equipment would give me knowledge. I don't see how I can get 'knowledge' from reading a whole lot of forums. Practice to me would seem to be the best way to learn, at least then you can see where you can improve.Further I did not say that I was going to get the gear and then run out and 'ruin' someone's wedding!</p>

 

<p>It's kinda like saying I should become a carpenter without a hammer!!</p>

 

 

 

</blockquote>

<p>Sharyn, you have a decent "hammer" and tool set to begin with, that's why you got the responses you did. Practice without knowledge is just trial and error. People on this forum do often provide advice without kid gloves on, but this is because most of us have seen people who are total newbies go out and ruin a wedding, something that happens only once, and is a very special day to those involved. Most people getting into wedding photography at first don't have a clue as to what it really takes and the pressure associated with it. I don't think Bob was implying you would necessarily ruin someone's wedding. But generally, you can learn a ton from this forum by reading through what everyone says with a grain of salt and often a thick skin. I know I've had my fair share of not so nice things said to me on Pnet, but I keep coming back because about 95% of it is amazing advice and I keep learning.</p>

<p>Having better gear does make it a bit likelier that you will get better shots. If it didn't, we wouldn't be spending thousands of dollars on pro models, but understanding all the fundamentals first is a pre-requisite to get really great shots. If you can't get a good shot on the gear you have now, getting a much better rig isn't going to change much (I am not saying YOU aren't getting good shots, I haven't seen your work, but your post sounds like a beginner's post, so we'll assume right now that your stuff isn't gracing the covers of NatGeo). That's why people leapt to saying you need more knowledge. The thing is, you can't just buy knowledge like you can buy gear, so many of us when first getting into the field think, AH, if only I just had better gear, better gear will make me better. Nothing makes me cringe more than when people say, well your shots are good because you have a good expensive camera, but without the knowledge to operate it properly, you can still get take terrible photos with it. Good gear also makes it easier to get away with bad technique that results in decent photos. For example, yes, with my 5DmkII I can get away with taking reception shots that are in dimly lit venues at 2000+ ISO. I couldn't do that with my T1i. But from reading this forum, I now know that isn't the best way to go unless I'm really trying to capture something with natural light alone. If I'm using flash, my ISO does NOT need to be that high. From Nadine, I learned to drag the shutter. Now I can even use my T1i and a flash together and get better results if I drag the shutter, than if I just throw my ISO way high up on the 5DmkII. <br>

Another thing that most people don't do very well at the beginning is management of other people there, the guests, the couple, the bridal party, the uncle bobs who are thinking they are a better photographer than you and getting in your way, and also basic posing principles for formal shots. These are all things that have been discussed time and time again on Pnet and the advice there is sooooooooooooooo valuable for someone starting out. So be sure to read through those posts.</p>

<p>So in general, when it comes to buying gear, the very important lesson I have learned on Pnet is to ask yourself, WHY AM I BUYING THIS??? What do I hope to accomplish by adding this to my arsenal. When I teach photography lessons, I say that each lens and each accessory for your camera is like a different type of brush used for painting. Each one should be used for a specific purpose, to get a specific look. If you don't know why you need something in your arsenal, but you have it, you aren't likely to use it for the right reason. Sure you might stumble on a new use for it, but doing things by trial and error, rather than by learning from seasoned pros who are offering you advice, will make your learning much slower than necessary. </p>

<p>So for someone starting out, I would suggest they have a digital SLR that does decently at 1600 ISO at a minimum, so that the grain isn't terribly noticeable in a correctly exposed image. Make sure you are shooting in RAW. Get an editing program like Light Room or Aperture so you can easily edit your RAW images. Have an external flash, preferably a name brand one that is made for your camera i.e. don't get a cheap knock off flash like a bower. So at a minimum the SB700 for Nikons, or 430EXii for canon (I don't know the equivalents for pentax and sony), it needs to be able to have ETTL and manual mode, and variable power in manual mode. Create/buy a light modifier for the flash, so that you can get some good fill flash. This can be a simple index card with a rubber band. It actually works really well. And a 50mm lens that opens at least to 1.8. Take this kit and then learn to rock it, on manual mode. Any pro worth his salt should be able to shoot a basic wedding with this kit. Once you know your camera inside and out, know how to drag the shutter, how to handle tough lighting situations that don't allow you to bounce the flash off the ceiling, how to properly use flash outside as fill flash, how to deal with backlighting, understanding the basics of how your light meter works and when it is going to lie to you (very light shots, very dark shots, backlit shots) etc. Take some formal photos of your friends to practice posing. Then look to see if you could 2nd shoot a time or two or 50 with your local wedding photographer. Get a basic feel for what it is like. Then after that, if you are still interested in taking on the responsibility of being a wedding photographer, get yourself a back up body and back up flash, and then put yourself out there. What I did for gear was as I did bigger and bigger weddings, the money I earned from them went to better and better gear. I didn't start out with a 5DmkII. I started out doing tiny weddings in things like basements and backyards for $50/hr with my t1i, and xsi, and my 430exII and a 50mm 1.8 and my 18-55 kit lens. My shots didn't start to really get good though until I really started to practice all the techniques I learned about through photo.net and through being a 2nd shooter with Daniel McGarrity, who also didn't teach with kid gloves on, but man, I learned a TON from him.<br>

After that I bought the 24-70 2.8 L lens a demb bracket, and the demb photojournalist flip it flash modifier. After that the 580EXII flash. After that a 12mm extension tube to give me more macro capabiities. Then the 5DmkII body. Then the 16-35 2.8L and the 50 1.4, then the 135 2.0L with the 1.4x tele-extender. Then a set of pocket wizards and another 430 exII and a light stand and a small collapsable soft box. I'm waiting until the 5DmkIII comes out to get another pro body. This is a kit that works really well for me. It suits MY needs. What your needs will be, I'm not sure. Just before you buy any more gear, ask yourself, WHY am I buying this? What am I expecting it to do? What is it that it can do, that I can't do now?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I would appreciate any suggestions in relation to adding equipment to my kit"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I believe there are general guidelines which can be given as advice, apropos equipment.<br />Analysing your beginning "to buy list" I see the following shortcomings:</p>

<ul>

<li>If you buy the D700 and 70 to 200: you have nothing wide and fast.</li>

<li>If you buy a D90 and a 70 to 200, then you have neither Standard and Fast nor Wide and Fast</li>

<li>You do not have a second Flash</li>

</ul>

<p>Why the exceptional bias for the telephoto?<br />In the second buying scenario, you would be shooting with a standard F/2.8 zoom (17 to 50) and a (almost) super-telephoto F/2.8 zoom 70 to 200 and BOTH Primes are telephoto (50 and 85 or 50 and 105).</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I see now that asking questions on forums (this is my first time and probably last) may not be the way to go about it."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That would be your loss.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"People just make too many assumptions!"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes it is an human trait to make assumptions – as you just did, above.<br>

<br />Also: assumptions are very easy to make when INFORMATION is limited and/or there is little ENGAGEMENT in the CONVERSATION by one party: so it would be good, as you seem to have decided, to keep the conversation going - thus maybe answer my question, please. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Thanks anyway"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You are welcome.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Well, I'm a little late to the party and don't know whether Sharyn (who's been quiet for most of this thread) is even seeing these messages any more, so I may be talking into an echo chamber. But this was a simple kit question, not a why-am-I-here question. People learn in different ways.</p>

<p>On a full-frame sensor camera, a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens can serve capably (not spectacularly, but capably) as the only lens you use at a wedding. If you're using zooms, it is nearly-unarguably the most important lens to have. The equivalent on a crop-frame sensor camera is a 17-50 (your Tamron 17-50 is brilliant) or 17-55mm (usually the camera brand-name) lens. Since you have this combo as your starting point, you'll probably really enjoy having a 70-200 to round out your coverage.</p>

<p>And since you do already have the 17-50 and one crop-frame body, you'd probably be happier with the D7000, which will mean both of your bodies will feel and function about the same (albeit with some control-layout differences). Getting a D700 would put you into the situation of having no general-purpose zoom for that body even though you'd very much want to use it as your main body. I think it would compel you to spend even more on a 24-70 or similar. So, though my knowledge of your skills and expectations is limited to what you've written here, I suspect you'd be happier with a D7000.</p>

<p>I've been shooting for the last year with one full-frame and one crop-frame body. I've learned that I really do not like that combination, and find that I almost never use the D300. So I'm planning to pick up another D3. I think it's WW who uses and prefers the FX/DX combination, and he's posted several good discussions of the benefits of that approach. But because moving in that direction would really necessitate an additional lens purchase, I think a dual-DX setup is more likely to suit you.</p>

<p>The VRII version of the 70-200 is a notable improvement over the original VR version, particularly in the amount of flare the lenses produce when shooting toward bright lights. So, if going the D7000 route allows you room in your budget to pick up that lens, then that's a bonus.</p>