shootin my own wedding help for lens choice

[jade_riwhi]

<p>hi guys, i am looking at shooting my own wedding nxt year (with a bit of help) anyways i am looking at getting a wide angle lens? i am using a 450d cannon, basiclly i want to just be able to shoot and get sharp pics without to much fuss, i am finding sometimes with my standard zoom lens 18/55mm if i want sharp pics e.g f22 there is not enough light and if i use f8 the pics arnt sharp enough, which is why im looking at getting a wide angle any help advice would be great,</p>

<p>jade</p>

[picturesque]

<p>If you aren't getting sharp pictures at f8, there is another reason besides f stop, unless by 'sharp', you mean the entire depth of the image is in focus. And having a wide angle lens isn't going help either, although wide angles help with DOF. Perhaps post an image that you feel isn't sharp, with a 100 percent inset.</p>

[richard_beisigl]

<p>PLEASE! Do not try to photograph your own wedding. Find someone you trust to do this, or hire another professional photographer to take your wedding pictures.<br>

I spent 30 years doing weddings, and I have heard and seen weddings where the groom or bride tried to photgraph part or all of their weddings, and it was a disaster.<br>

It is your wedding, but I really hope you will reconsider your plan</p>

[amol]

<p>I agree with Nadine and Richard.</p>

<p>You should get good "sharpness" at f/8 on that lens; unless you are referring to keeping more things within the focus range. But this will depend on focal length, and distance of subjects etc.<br>

*( f/22 is probably not a good idea, you will probably start to get diffraction.)</p>

<p>Secondly, sometimes around Christmas time, my wife and I take "family pictures" to send out as cards. Even with the best composition, tripod, remote, the images still don't have the same "feel" that my pictures normally have when I take portraits of other people.</p>

<p>That is to say, I have rarely (actually never) come across a picture that looked classy, that was taken by a person in the image. Sure, large group shots, and self-portraits (where there is one subject in the image) are exceptions, but to capture 2-4 people, in a nice composed image, that takes an eye behind the camera... and/or really good cropping after the fact (which should be avoided). You will miss the emotion and non-verbal communication. Some of my best friends, are photographers too, and I can usually tell when they took a picture of themselves (and family) using a remote/tripod. It just doesn't have the same look or feel. Not sure how else to describe it, but you can kinda tell it was taken with tripod/remote and one quick compositional view (no one behind the camera).</p>

<p>I'm sure there are some skilled photogs that are able to pull off remote/tripod shots of posed self/family portraits, without making it look like it was.... (I'm still working on it) ...but a wedding... forget it. Have someone else do photo, you need to focus on other things... like your wedding. It's gonna suck, if the only mental memories you have of your wedding are stressful/photography memories. That is exactly what you will have.</p>

<p> </p>

[farceur_coince]

<p>Just out of curiosity, are you a professional photog?</p>

<p>It seems not - even if you are, please don't shoot your own wedding. It will end in tears.</p>

[neilambrose]

<p>A moderate lens will offer plenty of sharpness at f8. What it won't offer is infinite depth of field. Are you getting sharpness and DOF mixed up?</p>

<p>Shooting at f22 will cost you loss of definition unless you're shooting medium format or larger. This is due to diffraction effects due to aperture size relative to image circle, and is unavoidable with any lens. Best to avoid shooting beyond f16 if you're using a DSLR.</p>

<p>But the most common cause of lack of sharpness is hand shake. The smaller the aperture, the slower the shutter speed and the greater the effects of shake. If you're routinely shooting fully stopped down without a tripod then that alone is the reason for unsharp images.</p>

<p>If you want to maximise visibly sharp images you need to focus carefully on a subject that's dominant to the composition and use a moderate aperture - say around f5.6 - and allow DOF to recede naturally through the rest of the image. Don't confuse DOF with sharpness, as they're not interchangeable. Better to have sharpness than DOF.</p>

<p>You can increase relative DOF by using wider angle lenses (which I think was your starting point with this thread) but that comes at cost of image distortion. There's a fine line to be trod in all dimensions - sharpness, DOF, distortion of elements at the edge of focal plane - and they all require some thought and consideration to the thing being photographed. Not sure there's any such thing as "get sharp pics without too much fuss".</p>

<p>On an unrelated note, let me warn you how difficult it will be to shoot your own wedding. I was best man and photographer at my brother's wedding, and it was pretty much impossible to do a decent job of both, even with a lot of experience. It will be so much harder if you're the bride. If it were my wedding I wouldn't even consider it.</p>

[davebell]

<p>Are you going to be saiying your vows with a remote shutter release in one hand..? I agree it is a recipe for disaster and I am sure you bride would appreciate that you concentrate your focus on the usual groom activities/duties without such a big distraction. No offense, but it is clear you don't know much about photography, let alone wedding photography given your question. So please follow the advice and hire a photographer or as a minimum get an enthusiastic guest to do it for you. Good luck.</p>

[rt_jones]

<p>I don't understand the, "remote shutter" comments. The OP says she's getting help and I'm sure she has her reasons and understands the consequences of doing this.</p>

<p>The 18-55 is wide enough but it's only f/3.5 at best. With controlled lighting it should work for group shots. (But my kit lens was a piece of junk). A $100 cheap-o 50mm/1.8 might be best for the ceremony if your helper can get close enough.<br>

Keep in mind that if you start buying what you really need then you're encroaching on the notion of just hiring somebody to do this.</p>

[philipward]

<p>With your total lack of experience,shooting any wedding will be a disaster.But to shoot your own!.The logistics boogle the mind.I bet all the good advise here is way over your head,hopefully it disuades you from taking it on.I think you should look into some basic photography classes anyway.</p>

[stephanie_w]

<p>Gah, I can barely stand it on holidays when my family expects me to be the official photographer for the day when I just want to relax and enjoy myself. I always end the day exhausted and hungry and needing a drink when I've got 500 photos of everyone I love (that I didn't really have time to talk to) and all the wonderful food and drink that came and went (that I was too busy photographing to eat). I couldn't imagine trying to photograph my own wedding day.<br>

No one is trying to bash you here but please take the advice given and do not shoot your own wedding. I understand that photographers are really expensive, but there are always photography students and amateurs out there that have decent equipment that will do it very cheap, see Craigslist.<br>

If by any chance you are having a very small, informal wedding (like court house and a get-together after), and you absolutely do not have an extra dime to spend on a photographer, teach a competent friend the basics of how to use your camera and equipment in the very least, keep everything on auto, have them shoot in raw and try to fix stuff later.<br>

Good luck and congrats :)</p>

[sherijohnson]

<p>Who is going to be helping you and are they a good photographer? I only ask because I have big regrets about my own wedding. I handed my camera to someone and not one image was in focus and this was with me showing them how to do it. If you want good pictures, at least find someone that knows how to take pictures and get good results. I can't see why you would be shooting at f22? Maybe for landscape, but not for people.</p>

[rt_jones]

<p><em><strong>I handed my camera to someone and not one image was in focus and this was with me showing them how to do it. </strong></em></p>

<p>Yeah, but it's your fault. You never said I had to shoot sober. :)</p>

[fabiopazzini]

<p>As Nadine pointed out, and others suspected as well, it seems like you're not understanding sharpness, or there's something else going wrong. Do you really understand aperture and speed? In weddings I rarelly take pics at f8, needless to say never above this. Usually I'm in f4~f6.3 for group shots, and with larger apertures for details.<br>

I even suspect you're not understanding 'wide angle'. Your whole question tells me you don't know much about photography. You say you're not getting sharp enough pics, and that's why you want a wide angle? The lens 'angle' (focal lenght) has nothing to do with sharpness.</p>

[William Michael]

<p ><strong ><em >I am looking at getting a wide angle lens . . . </em></strong></p>

<p > </p>

<p >EF-S 10 to 22 F/3.5 - F/4.5 USM is a wide angle zoom lens for a 450D and it is tack sharp. I recently had a play with one.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The 18 to 55 “kit” lens you have is not a wide angle zoom lens; it is a standard zoom lens. </p>

<p >If you want a sharper zoom lens in that FL range then the EF-S 18 to 55 F3.5-F5.6 IS (i.e. the “IS” version of your kit lens) is one option. I have this lens and it is good value for money. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Another (more expensive) option is the EF-S 17-55mm F/2.8 IS USM. This lens is superb. I have test driven this lens.</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong ><em >***</em></strong></p>

<p ><strong ><em > </em></strong></p>

<p ><strong ><em >i am finding sometimes with my standard zoom lens 18/55mm if i want sharp pics e.g f22 there is not enough light and if i use f8 the pics arnt sharp enough.</em></strong></p>

<p > </p>

<p >I also own this lens.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >F/22 is LESS sharp than F/8. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >At F/22 there is noticeable diffraction and thus lack of sharpness.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >F/7 to F/11 is the sharpest range of apertures for this lens. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think you need to address your shooting technique; perhaps posting an example of your problems would assist in diagnosis. (Samples with EXIF and AF and DRIVE functions noted, please).</p>

<p > <br>

WW</p>