Lens - Tamron/Sigma/Canon for Weddings

[natasha_wyson]

<p>Hi everyone<br>

I have very basic understanding of all the techy stuff related to photography so I'm posting in the beginners section for now.<br>

I'm about to enroll on a wedding photography weekend course as I want to gradually build up experience to make a living out of it. I've shot 2 weddings for friends already but want to step up my gear. <br>

Someone suggested getting a 70-200mm f2.8 lens to help my wedding photography ( I only have the sigma 24-70mm f.2.8 which is limiting) but does it make a real difference with which version I buy - i.e tamron , Sigma or Canon. Would the images be sharper with a Canon? </p>

<p>If anyone could help, or suggest another lens that would be great<br>

Thanks<br>

Tasha<br>

</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>I'm about to enroll on a wedding photography weekend course as I want to gradually build up experience to make a living out of it.</blockquote>

<p>Very sensible approach. Many folks try to dive in without any such preparation.</p>

<p>See http://photozone.de/ for lens comparisons. Their testing methodology is sound and among the easiest to understand without trying to decipher too much techspeak. In general some of the better third party lenses are on par with comparable camera brand lenses, and they occasionally offer models for which there are no camera brand counterparts.</p>

[jcoffin]

<p>Sigma has some excellent lens designs, but their QA doesn't seem to be quite as careful as Canon's (among others). As a result, you may want/have to try out more than one copy of the lens before you get one that really offers optimal performance. According to the people who do testing, the Canon is probably a <em>tiny </em> bit sharper than even a good copy of the Sigma, but the difference probably isn't enough to really notice or care about. The Sigma is definitely less expensive and a bit smaller and lighter -- but they're both big, heavy lenses and the weight difference is pretty small.</p>

[William Michael]

<p><strong><em>Someone suggested getting a 70-200mm f2.8 lens to help my wedding photography</em></strong><br>

<br>

It would be a good to ask that person, specifically why this advice was given. I think understanding the reasons for advice is integral to later making an informed choice.<br>

<br>

IMO, any of the three 70 to 200mm lenses, as an addition to your 24 to 70F2.8 Sigma lens is unlikely to be a beneficial initial purchase, to allow you to develop as a Wedding Photographer. Opinions vary, but, a 70 to 200 is the last lens I would (did) buy for Wedding Kits, particularly if the kit is based upon APS-C format (like a 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D, for example).<br>

<br>

That said, and Image Quality comparisons aside, there is one significant difference between a lens which Canon offers and either the Sigma 70-200mm 1:2.8 EX DG Apo Macro HSM II; or the Tamron 70-200mm 1:2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro . . . that is: Image Stabilization.<br>

<br>

If you do decide to get a 70 to 200, IMO, the only 70 to 200 to get for Weddings is the EF 70 - 200F2.8L IS USM.<br>

<br>

***<br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>"Or suggest another lens that would be great"</em></strong><br>

<br>

What Camera do you have? (Actually I am only interested in the format size). <br>

<br>

Are you learning by doing gigs yourself - or as second Photographer?<br>

<br>

But, without that information, a (very) Fast Prime equal to or slightly wider than a normal Field of View, is my first suggestion, e.g. for a camera like a 40D something like a 30mm or 35mm F/1.4 - or for a camera like a 5D a 50mm/F1.4. But there are other aspects to consider too, especially if you have an APS-C camera.<br>

<br>

WW</p>