24-70L or not

[meteoric]

Hey guys,

 

I seriously need some advice here as I'm suppose to take wedding

photos for my sister this May 20.

 

I currently have the following equipments: 17-40L, 28-135 IS, 580 EX,

LS2 diffusor.

 

I have been tempting to get 24-70L (about $1100) due to its f2.8, fast

focus, etc. However, is it worth for me to spend it now? Initially, I

plan to use 28-135 for this wedding reception and hope that the flash

would be enough to freeze the subject. Besides, the "IS" in this lens

should theoretically allow me to hand held up to 3 stops.

 

If I get 24-70L, then I would have awful lots of overlappings between

these 3 lenses. Should I just ebay 17-40L and 28-135 IS, and replace

it with 24-70L? Probably in the future, I may get a 70-200 for the

telephoto part.

 

Finally, does anyone have any success eBaying your used lenses?

 

So, should I or should I not?

 

Thanks much!

[picturesque]

Are you going to be shooting weddings professionally? If not, I wouldn't consider selling your lenses just to get a 24-70mm. Since people love to spend your money for you, you will probably get lots of replies telling you to get the 24-70mm--that it is the perfect wedding lens, etc. That may or may not be true, but if you're not going to shoot weddings professionally, it makes no sense financially to take a hit on the lenses you already have, which will be fine for your sister's wedding, assuming you are happy with what you have now. Bring a tripod if the wedding is indoors.

[ken c oshkosh, wi]

I have both. The 28-135 used to be my main wedding lens when I first started out. It does work well but you'll need a bit more light to freeze motion but with a 580 you shouldn't have an issue. The IS is nice during flashless ceremonies but then 2.8 is nice too. I just shot my first wedding with the 24-70 a few weeks ago. Gotta love all that light. Decision is up to you...

 

Keep the 17-40. I have one too that I hardly use but I know there will be a need sometime...

 

Ken

[meteoric]

I am not shooting weddings professionally... ie: getting paid and such. It's more of a hobby for me. This will be my second wedding photography. Of course, I wouldn't want to mess up my sister's wedding photos either.

 

In my first wedding photo shoot (in a church), I used 28-135 for the whole reception without 580ex... that's where I realized that I seriously need to invest an external flash and a good diffusor to get the job done. I have also upgraded my Walmart tripod to be sturdier Bogen 3001PRO, it's a little heavier and bulkier to carry around, but I love it.

 

Does IS with flash work similarly to f2.8? I probably have to drag my shutter for 1-2 stops. The venue would actually be indoor... a restaurant infact. I assume that 24-70L has constant f2.8 on every focal length.

 

I initially bought my 28-135 as my walk-around lens, and 17-40 for landscape. However, it seems like I ended up using 17-40 more during hikes and traveling because it allows me to easily compose shots at narrow sidewalks/trails... sure it distorts a little at wide angle, but Photoshop CS2 seems to fix it for me. I ended up using 28-135 in low lights and also for taking some portrait shots.

[picturesque]

If you are using the 28-135mm in a church during the ceremony with no flash, I would use a tripod, no IS. What camera are you using? If a crop camera like a 20D, I would (personally) be using the 17-40mm a lot more for the other shots--processional, formals, getting ready, most reception shots. If a full frame, then yes, you'd have to use the 28-135mm, but with flash--if you have the LS, you can open it up, maybe have to up the ISO, and shoot with flash, not with available light, especially for the reception. If the reception is being held in a restaurant like most Chinese restaurants I've been in--you will need wide angle, not telephoto.

[jfr]

I'd get a few nice primes. Try a 35/2, 50 1,4 and a 85 1.8 (and all that for the price of 1 24-70!!).

[meteoric]

Yes, I have 20D. I thought of using 17-40 in the restaurant (yes, it's a Chinese restaurant) and it's easier to take photos in crowded area, however, since it doesn't have IS and I plan to drag shutter, I thought the best best is to use 28-135.

 

I would probably shoot in ISO 800, f4, 1/30 to 1/60 with 580 ex and LS. Attached is the restaurant where the reception will be held... it's actually in Malaysia and I have to fly back home from Minnesota for the first time in 6 years. As you can see, not whole lot of ambience.<div></div>

[francis_cardullo___dayton_]

First off, I�m fairly new to weddings myself, but no stranger to photography, so take my suggestions with a grain of salt =)

 

I have the 17-40L and a 70-200 f/4 L coupled with a single 20d body. For the weddings I�ve done, I�ve used the 17-40 almost exclusively for the simple reason that every time I tried to switch over to the 70-200, I started missing wide angle shots that I judged to be more important. Finally gave up and left the 17-40 on unless I was trying to shoot something from a distance that I knew would STAY at a distance (like portions of the ceremony).

 

I almost went with the 24-70, because its one sweet lens, but I did a side by side comparison of the 17-40 vs 24-70 and realized that I really needed that extra 7mm on the wide end, even if it cost me a stop on the aperture.

 

Long and short of it, it all depends on your shooting style. Some like primes, some like zooms, some like wide angle, and some like tight angle. I personally like a mix, but only if I�m working with 2 bodies. If I had $1100 in disposable cash and a wedding coming up, I would get a second body (either a 350d or a used 10d) and the 85mm f/1.8. That gives you the required spare body, god forbid anything were to happen to your 20d, and it gives you a fairly fast prime at a good focal length. Put the 17-40 on the 20d and the 85 on the 350d and shoot away. Depending on the lighting, you can probably get away with shooting available light with the 85 f/1.8.

 

If you can, I�d also highly recommend a spare flash� mine died on me in the middle of a wedding less then 2 weeks out of the box, and believe me, f/4 + available indoor light is not a good recipe for fun =)

 

That�s the two cents on MY style of photography� but it all depends on what your comfortable shooting.

[picturesque]

If you are using flash and dragging the shutter, you don't have to be concerned about camera shake if your subjects receive a good flash exposure (don't underexpose). The flash's duration will freeze movement, although you may get motion blur in the backgrounds. Since it is a 20D, I wouldn't even use the 28-135mm much--just for during the ceremony with no flash (with a tripod) for the "back of the church" shots and for portraits where telephoto makes sense. In that reception hall, you may even get away with ISO 400, f4, 1/60th with the LS and be fine.

[meteoric]

Thanks guys, you have truly convinced me that my current equipments are good enough for this reception. :) Just lately, my girlfriend and I were discussing in getting a spare body for her to practice, rather than just being my "tripod assistant" all the time. Then, I saw that canon has 30D now that supposingly allows "in between" ISO settings, which is really awesome... but I guess I'll wait on that, save some money then buy a better body and make my current 20D a spare body. My current LowePro bagpack is already packed with stuff.

 

By the way, my Rocket blower and my Bogen tripod head made the TSAs at San Francisco airport freaked out. I was on my way back from conference 2 weeks back, and my stuff was scanned 3 times and ended up hand-searched. I had to disassemble my Bogen tripod, by removing the ballhead, spike legs to fit in order to them into my carry-on luggage.

 

I may meter and try out "ISO 400, f4, 1/60th with the LS" to see if it works for me that day. I probably will have the LS dome on, since this restaurant seems to have typical ceiling height.

[picturesque]

I can imagine the Rocket Blower would freak out the airport people. As for the tripod, I always pack it in luggage, to avoid the problems with security for carry on.

 

Before others jump all over you for being a non-pro shooting a wedding (a sore subject recently), promise that you'll have back-ups for the important gear--mainly camera body and flash, as well as bring tons of batteries for flash and camera, and have enough CF cards. Sounds like you are a careful sort and know more about photography than your average wedding photography beginner anyway. Hope it goes well.

[meteoric]

Thank you, Nadine. I will look around to rent a spare body and flash before the reception. I currently have two 2gb CF cards, 3 camera batteries and will bring my laptop along for storage. The restaurant actually provides locked room for the bride to dress up and stuff. I will probably keep them there until they are needed.

 

I have bad experience with check-in luggages, because they usually came out torn and broken. That's why I started to bring carry-on luggage, and lug my camera bag around... then pass my laptop bag to my girlfriend.

[merle_white]

In my opinion if you are using your 580EX flash then what you have now in the way of lenses will work. If you are shooting the ceremony from the back of a large church with a tripod and available light your 28-135 may be a little short. If you are shooting it all photojournalistic style then the lenses you have now should work fine. Good luck Post some of your images.

Good Shooting To Ya!

Merle

[meteoric]

Thank you. I'll definitely post some of my shots here. This is, by far, the best forum ever besides some of the JAVA forums I always visit.

[rdkirk]

If you're not a professional (maybe even if you are), I'd recommend the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 DI lens. The image quality is as good as the Canon 24-70 (there are lots of forum arguments about that--the fact that it's continually arguable means it's as good). It's not as well built as an L lens, but it's as well built as Canon non-L lenses and certainly good enough for non-constant use.

 

One thing I like is that it's a bit longer range than the Canon 24-70, going from the "normal" focal length for an APS-C camera to a quite useful portrait length.

 

It's also a very light lens that won't impose itself on your neck or in your bag.

[JohnWebster]

The sleeper lens Canon might not want you to know about is the 18-55mm kit lens that came with my 20D. Maybe I have a "factory defect" in that it is not suppose to be this good. 90% of my professional wedding images are made with this lens. I am always ready for wide or moderate telephoto. It is pretty decent wide open although I use a 50mm 1.8 on my 10D for exisiting light portraits. See some tight cropped samples---no sharpening has been done!

[chris_floden]

Of course you need the 24-70L. As a wedding photographer it is my primary lens (on a 1D II N). My assistant also uses one her 30D. I also have the 70-200L on a 1Ds II, but it accounts for less than 10% of overall images. If you're shooting a Canon body, don't cut corners. Go with the 24-70L and keep the 17-40L handy for groups, smaller dressing rooms, etc. I also have a 24-105L (f4 fixed), but optically it doesn't perform as well with the 580 flash as the 24-70. If it weren't for flash characteristics with the lenses, I'd suggest you get the 24-105 (about $1200 street), but flash images seem "weak" (meaning saturation, tone) with the longer lens.

[francis_cardullo___dayton_]

Wow john, I think you've got a gem in that 18-55 kit lens... i've never seen one of those even half as sharp as that one.