best combo for wedding photography

[william_bray1]

Hi I have a canon 20d with a 70mm-200mm f/4 IS,tokina 12mm-24mm f/4,50mm

f/1.8,sigma 105mm macro 2.8 and a canon 28mm-135mm. My problem is I'm getting

asked to do more wedding photos and I realy enjoy it and I'm thinking in the

future to go semi pro. At the moment I'm not considering buying a 5D I,m more

intereted in getting good lenses. So I want to replace my 28-135 I have been

considering the 24-70 f/2.8 or the 24-105 f/4 IS, at the moment I'm leaning

towards the 24-105 because I try to always shoot at f/4 because I want to keep

a constant look in my photos and to have a greater depth of field when shooting

the couple together to get them both in focus,and using my primes if I need to

blow away the background.Also When I shoot with flash I like to use a between a

40th and a 60th of a second and on a 20D with a 24-70 at 70mm I would be prone

to camera shake so I thought the IS would be nice to have.But then I started to

look at the 17mm-40mm F/4.I thought camera shake wouldn't a problem and on a

20d 17mm would be good.So what do you think is the best combo Tokina 12-

24+canon 24-105+canon 70-200. Or 17-40+50mm f/1.8+70-200. I always shoot in RAW

so the CA's on the tokina are not a problem and I don't want EFS lenses for

when I do eventually go full frame. Thanks for any advice as I don't want to

make a decision that I'll regret.

[nhut-nguyen]

Hi William, do you have any rental facilities near your home? I think you should rent the lenses first to try out before you drop big bucks on them.

[douglas lee]

http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/

 

Good place to start.

 

In general, with flash IS isn't going to do much for you. The flash will stop the action (ie,

subject movement.) Just a thought. Good luck.

[andre_reinders]

I know you said no EFS - but I think a good addition to your kit would be a Canon EFS 17-55 f2.8 IS. You could sell it when you move to full frame.

 

The lens gets great reviews, it has IS, you like to shoot at f/4, so putting this lens at f/4 means it not wide open and thus sharper. I think the 17-55mm zoom on a cropped sensor is a great all around range. I have a 20D and a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 - my Budget version. I shot a friends wedding and used it for most shots until the reception when I used a borrowed 70-200 F2.8 IS for quite a few shots.

 

You could then move to a 24-105 f4 IS when you go full frame (or a 24-70 f2.8). I used the 24-105 at another wedding and found it too narrow at the wide end on a cropped camera - but gave great images!

 

Everyone's style is different, but I like to have a 70-200 on one body and a standard zoom on another body - and pretty much stick to that.

[tdigi]

Another good option would be another body ( it could just be another 20D or even a rebel xt

)

 

Body 1 : 17-55 2.8 IS

 

Body 2: 85 1.8

[KenPapai]

Ditch the slow, f/4 zooms. For paid-for-hire work, and especially if used indoors, they are nearly worthless.

 

Invest, or rather build your kit around fast primes and f/2.8 zooms.

[davebell]

"Ditch the slow, f/4 zooms" - the 24-105 F4 IS has its place in my opinion. It will get some shots you just won't get with a F2.8 non IS lens - as I have experienced 1st hand. I have a copy, as well as a Tamron 28-75 F2.8. Each has it's own strengths, neither is worth "ditching".

[manuel barrera houston,]

I do events very few weddings, but you need some thing wider then 24 on a 1.6 crop camera, for group photos or long gown tails, if you think you will be moving to full frame go with the 17-40 L great zoom lens or the Tamron 17-50 f/2

[joshroot]

<a href="http://www.photo.net/learn/wedding/equipment">Photo.net Wedding Equipment Guide</a>

[hjoseph7]

Sorry but all the choices you put in your post got my head spinning.

[William Michael]

16 to 35F2.8L; 24F1.4L; 50F1.4, 135F2L, and consider the x1.4MkII.

 

The 16 to 35 zoom being be your main working lens.

 

You already have the 50mmF1.8 and that is no slouch: keep it, it would be fiscally a bad decision to get the 50mmF1.4 as a replacement for it: better to put the money into the fast zoom.

 

You might get some use from your 70 to 200F4IS and the 105 macro: the 70 to 200 zoom`s use will be dependent upon your style: I would not that zoom length very much at all.

 

I do not see any use for the other lenses.

 

Irrespective of the fact that you do not wish to get a 5D at the moment, IMO you need at least a second body to cover any Wedding.

 

The lens cache above ideally suits a dual format (20D + 5D) Wedding Kit, and has been suggested, with that specific long term aim in mind.

 

WW

[William Michael]

>>> I do not see any use for the other lenses. <<< WW

 

Explanation:

 

This means: `I do not see any use for the other lenses (you own at the moment)`.

 

In regards to buying the 24 to 70 F2.8L (and / or the 24 to 105F4L IS): these FL zooms are the least necessary for a dual format Wedding Kit, the explanation of which is here:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00P3ev

 

(My post Apr 07, 2008; 01:03 a.m.)

 

WW

[keith_lubow]

Always shooting at one aperture will not give your pix a constant look. You knowing what you're doing and having a style will do this.

 

As for your kit, what you "need" will be apparent to you soon enough once you start working. Those who are willing to make bold statements as to what equipment you need to be a professional, and what equipment simply won't do, are missing the point. There is no shopping list the contents of which will allow you to work professionally. Anything that gitz the pix flies. It's up to YOU to get them, and to know what you need to get them.

 

I would also consider that if you are seriously and honestly questioning what tools you need to work professionally, then you might need some more experience first before you put yourself in a position to have you @$$ sued off over technical matters. Wedding photographers are the most sued shooters out there, and usually for good reason: amateurism and/or technical incompetency.

 

A good starting wedding kit would be the same as any good general photo kit: A wide, a normal, and a medium-long lens. Two cameras. External flashes. Monopod/Tripod if you are into that sort of thing. Which lenses are up to your own personal preference. I have shot them with everything from slow 5.6 "amateur" zooms on an APS-C camera to large format 8x10 for portraits. It all flies if you know what you are doing.

 

Keith

[tdigi]

William IMO you can probably go with any high quality set of lenses mentioned above but the

key is having at least 1 other body. I can't imagine shooting an event with just 1 body.

[william_bray1]

I'am looking at getting another flash and a 2nd body but I was only going to get a second hand body as a backup, at the moment everyone is waiting for canon to replace the 5d. If I had the money to buy the lenses I want and a 5d I wouldn't want to buy the 5d now only to find it replaced or a lot cheaper in a few months time. I do agree with Keith, a lot depends on knowing your own skill with a camera and also in photoshop but I'm still learning. I'm worried that with a f/2.8 lens shooting at a 60th (or lower so as to keep the ambient light) with a flash I'm going to get camera shake and I realy want to stay away from monopods and tripods as much as possible.

Does any one know any thing about the sigma 24-70 f/2.8. As this would free up some money to buy the other kit I need.

[william_bray1]

Just to say thanks to everyone for taking the time to help me.

[todd_masters]

I don't know if anyone else here actually shoots weddings for pay, I do about 10/year. Half indoor half out. Here is what I and my other wedding shooters use:

2 bodies is a must. I have 2x40Ds

Getting ready: 17-55 f2.8IS on one and 24-105 f4 IS on the other.

for DOF issues most of us shoot at f4-f5.6 except during ceremony. I like the 17-55 here when it is just the bride or I want a very shallow dof. for a little more reach I hit the 24-105, the IS helps get a faster shutter for me to be comfortable in the 1/20 to 1/60 range.

 

Formals: 17-40 f4 nothing beats this lens for sharpness and contrast. for the groups I am shooting at f5-f8 anyway for a good dof for the group and bring my own light.

 

Ceremony: 70-200 f2.8 IS and 24-105 f4 (with flash + ABBC) for aisle shots. 24-105 is super sharp and fast. Since this series starts with more than one person in the shots, for dof you will shoot at f4+ anyway. I usually keep it on f5.6 with a flash at iso 800-1600 and bounce my flash with "A Better Bounce Card". during the ceremony I use the white monster from the back at f2.8 and no flash. When they come back down the aisle towards me I grab the body with 24-105 and flash to hit them at f4+ 1/125 in AI servo.

 

Reception: 17-55IS and 24-105IS

here I am walking around. IS helps with handheld issues. I know there is overlap with these two lenses but for me each has its pros and cons. I used to have the 17-55 and the 70-200, but it just gets too heavy to carry around at this point. I use the 17-55 for creative dof and good ambient shots and the 24-105 for shots where I need more reach and for cake/garter shots. It is fast and sharp.

 

Ring shots: sigma 105 f2.8 macro. Yes I carry this one too for the ring shots. I haven't found anything better to do creative shots of rings, flowers, invitations etc...

 

So what do I bring:

17-40: formals (could use 24-105 or 17-55 as well)

 

17-55: informals when I need more speed & less dof

 

24-105: I sold my 24-70 (first had a sigma, had backfocus issues then got a canon, then sold it when I stopped using it because I like the 24-105 better) This is the sharpest, fastest focusing most versatile lens I shoot with BUT it is f4 so it has limits.

 

70-200 f2.8 IS: If you get this lens, this is the only version you want. I bought this instead of a 5D and I don't regret it. I use it to death for portraits (e sessions and seniors). Great for PJ shooting. IS is a must at this range.

 

105/100 macro f2.8: it really helps to have a good macro if you want to stand out with your creative shots.

 

I prefer zooms, I have primes but with only two bodies swap lenses too much. I dont like to change lenses during segments, just between when I get breaks in the story line. Prime junkies will disagree with everything I said.

Personally with a 20D you could get a 17-55 and a 70-200 and have all you need. Use the 17-55 for everything but the back of church shots where you cant use flash and then go back to 17-55. One step up would be 16-35 + 70-200 but I would buy a 2nd body before I would do that.

 

hope that helps

[William Michael]

>>> Does any one know any thing about the sigma 24-70 f/2.8. <<< (wb)

 

Yes: it will not give you wide enough on a 20D (or any other APS-C body) to cover a Wedding adequately, as the primary zoom lens.

 

Adjusting your focus to third party lenses might be a logical business decision considering your ambition, but concentrating on this FL range as an initial purchase, is flawed thinking, IMO. But I kinda said that second bit previously.

 

>>> I don't know if anyone else here actually shoots weddings for pay, <<<

 

Bio pages and posting history are hints, in this regard.

 

WW

[jimstrutz]

I have an older Canon 24-85 for a walk around lens on a 20D/40D, but I don't like it. It's really not wide enough for general shooting. For weddings I want one very good main lens that covers the core focal lengths that I will use. For me that means an EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS. I use that on one body and mostly switch the 12-24 and 100mm f/2 lens on the other body. A 24-xx zoom puts the wide end right in the middle of everything, and I end up switching back & forth constantly.

 

It's a personal choice though. Some people never use wide zoom settings, or go directly from normal to superwide, with no use for the the intermediate wide settings. If that's you, a 24-70 f/2.8L would be the lens to have.

[william_bray1]

Todd for my wide angle shots could I not use the tokina 12-24f/4. The 17-55 is a nice lens but it's a lot of money for a lens that I will not be able to use with a full frame body as that is kind of camera I want end up with.You say that the 24-105f/4 has it's limits because of the f/4, what are the limits, because from what you say you're getting most of your shots with that lens.

I know a lot fo people might not agree with me and I might be wrong. But when I need to go faster and I'm on my max aperture and I don't want to up the ISO, I shoot on RAW under expose 1 stop and bring it back in photoshop. There is also a plugin called Noise Ninja you can try it for free, you can shoot at 3200 and still save the image. I only do this when I have to but I thought it might help in sticky situations.

Thanks

[keith_lubow]

Everyone is different, as you can see from the responses here.

 

My most used lens as of late (for weddings) is an 85mm on a 1.6 body. (This closely replicates a 135mm lens on 35mm film.) If I had to do a wedding with one lens, it would be a toss up between moderate tele or a normal lens. (I have used just s 50 before, for the "non-portrait" pix. Portrait pix were medium format.) Having a faster-than-2.8 lens would be more of a priority for me than being able to vary the focal length.

 

I am far from a "prime junkie". I love zooms for what I love them for: when you are stuck in one spot, and are expected to get a variety of shots. However, I personally find that, for myself, two or three bodies with fast primes get me much more "possible" pictures. 2.8 is decent, but limiting. The exception would be 70-200 2.8 IS, with which IS makes a big difference. Great for low light music shows, journalism, and I thought it would be great for weddings too. However, after trying it, I now think it is overkill at a wedding. I rarely used it at or past 135mm. Big, heavy lens to have around your neck if you aren't actually going to be changing focal lengths that often. Instead, I use the 85 1.8 now. I personally like it much better. 1.2 would be sweet...someday. 17-55 might be perfect, 'cause of the IS plus 2.8. Would like to try it one time. Not until my 10D dies, however.

 

It is very interesting to speak of weddings entirely in terms of small format equipment. Is was not that long ago that most wedding shooters used small format for candids only...the "fun" shots. High-rez. digital changed that for sure. Still not "better quality" than medium format, but definitely "more than good enough", plus several other advantages over MF film.

 

So, each one of us will have different ways that we like to work. You have to just try a bunch of things to figure out what works for you and what doesn't. Just don't use paying gigs for your initial practice arena. Try assisting someone about a dozen times first. Try working with various shooters to see what different things work for different people. Do a few assisting jobs for free if you have to. Just don't make your first wedding a paying gig in which all the responsibility rests on your shoulders.

 

Keith

[linh dinh]

A 24-70 f/2.8 and a 70mm-200mm f/208 IS is a good combo for wedding photography.

In some case such as at church you can not use flash, a 135mm f/2L USM lens is a good one.