which wedding kit would you choose?

<p>all right wedding guru's.... i am revamping my equipment list and am wondering which kit you would choose and why?<br>

kit #1:<br>

canon bodies = 1D mark ii 40D 30D<br>

Lenses = 24-70mm 2.8L 70-200mm f/4 L sigma 10-20mm sigma 30mm f/1.4 canon 50mm 1.8<br>

canon 85mm 1.8 (keep in mind i do like to carry a back up lens in case the zoom breaks, hence the 30mm and 50mm primes which also work in low light no flash situations)</p>

<p> OR<br>

canon bodies = 1D mark ii 40D<br>

Lenses = 24-70mm 2.8L 50mm 1.2L (i would sell most of the above to purchase this lens)<br>

tamron 17-50mm 2.8 (use for wide angle and as backup to 24-70mm)</p>

<p> I currently use the canon 580 ex ii and 430 ex flashes. <br>

thanks for looking and i can't wait to get your replies.....</p>

<p>You really need to answer this yourself Mat. None of shoot exactly like you do. We can only tell you how the two kits would the way that we work.<br>

BTW: Niether would work for me . . . I shoot Nikon . . . ;)<br>

Ed</p>

<p>Here's a good reference: <a href="http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment">http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment</a></p>

<p><em><strong>"which kit you would choose and why?"<br /></strong></em></p>

<p>Kit #1 Because:</p>

<p>1. FALL BACK: Three Cameras, not Two.</p>

<p>2. CAPITAL OUTLAY: EF50F1.2L is not a prudent capital outlay for the return it provides in a Wedding Kit.</p>

<p>3. LOSS OF WIDE: Tamron 17 to 50 does not give the wide as Sigma 10 to 22 and is relatively only 4mm gain on the 24 to 70.</p>

<p>4. WEAKER KIT, OVERALL: Purchasing another “APS-C only” lens (Tamron) and / or selling Prime Lenses, which work effectively on both camera formats, weakens the Internal Redundancy of the Lens Cache in a Dual Format System – thinking the Tamron is a “backup zoom” is false economy – Primes would be “backup” and provide, in and of themselves more functionality, creativity and operational expanse of the kit – the extra zoom of similar focal length however would lay idle most of the time.</p>

<p>5. VULNERABLE KIT: Having only the EF50F/1.2L in Prime Cache, makes the kit vulnerable in a Low Light, No Flash scenario, within: a Tight Space; large Wedding Party; short Aisle. Effectively you only have a (FF) FoV = 65mm lens at any speed on a camera you would only push to ISO1600? maybe? - at ISO3200 and the APS-C you have FoV 80mm - neither is good in a small, dark Chapel, for example.</p>

<p>Obviously the strength of points 4 & 5 depend upon what is sold, as theses details are not disclosed, one assumes the Kit #1 and Kit #2 are "as is" and the question was answered on that basis.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>thanks for your detailed answer william.... you made some excellent points which i agree with.... i am really looking for the way people think and how they would choose... this helps me to see things from different angles before i decide what to do.... regards...<br>

mat</p>

<p><strong ><em >"i am really looking for the way people think and how they would choose... "</em></strong><br>

<br>

FYI: I would choose, to use, neither kit you have described. That choice would be not as a matter of individual style or individual preference, but on the basic strategy of a dual format Wedding Kit. Once one introduces dual formats to a Wedding Kit, it is my opinion that the leverage gained, should not be compromised.<br>

<br>

IMO, both wedding kits are limited at the outset, by choosing APS-H and APS-C sensor cameras. I understand that there might be other reasons (uses outside Weddings) for having an APS-H body. <br>

<br>

From the initial choice of those two sized sensors, those limitations are compounded by the choices of the lenses, the most ferocious of which is introducing “APS-C Only” Image Circle Lenses. <br>

<br>

WW </p>

<p > </p>

 

<p>William,<br>

if i had it my way i would dump all of it and move to full frame... unfortuantely, the collection of bodies and lenses that i have acquired will not allow for the $$ if i sell it all and i am not at this time inclined to spend the $$ to invest in two FF bodies.... i guess we reep what we sow and learn as we go... i don't shoot the same today as when i got this gear years ago.... on the other hand, having the dual format kit does keep you on your toes and really good at multiplication! changing lenses from one format to another i think makes you see things differently and keeps your mind constantly working. of course some may agrue that it takes time away from capturing the moment ..... for me, the dual format system has pushed me a little further to get the best images possible with the formats chosen....maybe not the ideal kit.... but one that works for the time being.... thanks again for your insights, i appreciate all of your input.... and by the way, i think i will go with kit#1...<br>

mat</p>

<p>Mat, would you consider selling the 1Dii in favour of a 5DII? Or an original 5D, given that is still the bedrock of most wedding kits, and there are many advantages to a dual format kit, which is what I personally favour. </p>

<p>You are welcome, mat. Regards also.<br>

***<br>

Crikey Lindsay, why didn't I think of that! :) <br>

Hope all is well with you. All the Best.<br>

WW</p>

<p>Given only those two choices, I'd say kit 1. Kit 2 leaves you with very limited focal range, basically only normal zoom range. </p>

<p>Remember that Tamron will not work on the 1D. As an H size sensor it cannot accept EF-s mount lenses. So you will miss tons of long and wide shots.</p>

<p>All you gain in kit 2 is 1/2 F stop on the 50. And you're giving up all your wide and tele to get it. I can't justify that. </p>

<p>I have to dissagree with William "I understand that there might be other reasons (uses outside Weddings) for having an APS-H body."</p>

<p>I use a 1d II at wedding sometimes now to compliment my 5D and 30Ds. All those bodies have thier place given the right lense choices. The 1D body is excellent for fast action reception shooting and low light AF performance.</p>

<p >No Bob, I think you misunderstand the point I was making: let me be clearer.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >If one is going to choose <strong ><em >only</em></strong> <strong><em>two different formats,</em></strong> from the Canon range and use them solely for Wedding Work, there are only three combinations:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >1. 135 + APS-H</p>

<p >2. 135 + APS-C</p>

<p >3. APS-H + APS-C</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The point I wish to make is that option 2. is the strongest and gives to most leverage to the lens cache and also give the most power to eliminate lenses and work a very light-weight but powerful and, broad range, fast aperture kit: whereas options 1 & 3 are very weak in all these regards.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Having all three formats available, was not in the equation of my comment. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >The 1DMkII is a most suitable camera for Wedding Work, though it would not be my choice as a part of a <strong ><em >two camera only</em></strong> kit.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW </p>

<p > </p>

 

Forgive me, but I'm not sure that the OP has clarified what is his *current* kit, apart from the flashes :) Mat, could you please clarify? Am I missing something? :]

<p>Hi William, I hope things are well with you too. Whilst reading this thread I was thinking about the steps I took to rationalize my own wedding kit and I had some excellent advice from you in this thread: <a href="http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00SSZc">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00SSZc</a> which Mat may find helpful.</p>

<p>Going slightly off track, I'm wondering if Mat also does portrait work alongside the weddings. I feel that is another case for considering a full frame body within his arsenal. My answer to Mat is therefore that I would modify whatever kit he chooses in this way. </p>

<p>Lindsay,<br>

thanks for the link and your input.... i am strongly considering the 5D and selling the markii however, i am wondering if it is worth keeping the mark ii and saving for the 5Dii instead... is the jump to FF at 12 MP worth it over the 1Dmark ii, 40D, 30D combo or should i save the $$ for the 21 MP FF with video? in other words, do you think the 5D with 40D is better than a three camera (1D mii, 40D, 30D) kit? consider that my 10-20 wide angle and 30mm 1.4 prime will only work on a aps-c sensor. I could sell the 30 for a 50mm 1.4 but what about the wide angle? decisions... decisions.... makes me dizzy!</p>

<p>Mat, yes, I personally prefer a 5D (i or ii) and a 40D, since FF and APS-C will give you the greatest flexibility/leverage as regards your lens choices. However, bear in mnd your shooting style and how you like to work, rather than leaning entirely towards what others do. And try not to think too much about megapixels, 12.8MP of the 5D is more than enough for wedding/portrait photography, and the files from this camera enlarge beautifully. I haven't bothered getting a 5DII because in order to manage the files at current speeds I'd have to use the mRAW or sRAW settings anyway, only using the 21MP if I were considering a massive end result or cropping very tightly (which I don't do). The video feature holds no attraction for me.</p>

<p>Your 10-20 is quite wide on a 40D and if it were to fail, the 24-70 on a 5D is generally wide enough for most wedding situations. I overcame this particular issue by purchasing the 16-35L giving me ultra wide capability on the 5D and normal on the 40D - getting this lens was one of the best decisions I ever made. I go to a job with the 70-200 on the 5D and the 16-35 on the 40D and that sets me up for the day - and a couple of fast primes of course for the dim light stuff. There are other advantages to the two formats - if you refer to the link in my last post, see Nadine's comments.</p>

<p>Lindsay,<br>

please forgive me for being confused.... however, how does the 5D 40D combo give me the greatest advantage for lens choices.... i do understand the multiplication factors however, i can still only mount ef-s type lenses on the 40D and EF lens type mounts on both cameras.... i understand that the focal range may change but can't i simply choose different length lenses to fit the need? after all, your 16-35 only gives you roughly 25-56mm range which is not a great span to me.... therefore, is the only advantage to the 5D the large sensor.... it is my understanding that this will bring out more detail in the pictures however, how will the 5D with a 50mm 1.4 compare (roughly) to a 40D with 30mm 1.4 (lens for aps-c) sensor? considering the asp-c lens is focusing on the center of the sensor targeting the "sweet spot"? (again, these are things i have read in research, opinions of other photogs, not sure if they hold up or not...) Especially considering that most of the images will be "tight" and filling the frame with the subject matter..... still dizzy! :^)</p>

<p>Mat, as you will know EF lenses mount on both full frame and crop sensor bodies, giving you great variety of (apparent) focal lengths when used between the two formats, I mentioned my 16-35L being a case in point (I would rarely use this lens if I only ran a FF system). Obviously EF-S lenses will only fit crop bodies which is why I referred to your likely options should your 10-20 lens fail when on your 40D. Careful lens choice is critical when using any dual format system, should a failure occur. In that regard, I have no EF-S lenses, but that is not to say your 10-20 will not be very useful "at times" (consider how often you will use this lens) on the 40D - so long as you bear in mind if it failed your next widest option, if you had a full frame camera in the bag, would be your current 24-70 on the FF body. In other words redundancy and failure must be considered. My point is that with a FF and APS-C kit, you have greater variety and flexibility in your focal lengths than in, say, an APS-C and APS-H system, and obviously I am referring to the lenses which will fit both bodies. Given that you only have one EF-S lens (the 10-20) then the system I am suggesting would not be disruptive to you.</p>