Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens x 2?

[jeff_harper3]

<p>I am trying to select an appropriate zoom lens for wedding cermonies. I have a micro four thirds body, which means the numbers double on any full-frame model lenses. the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens would become a 140-400. <br>

Is this too extreme to be practical in a church? I shoot in large catholic churches, but I also have my share of smaller protestant churches. <br>

Anyone have any thoughts?</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Thought that Cannon bodies had APS-C cropped sensors, not micro 4/3rds ;-) </p>

<p>I've found that the 70-200/2.8 on the crop is pretty effective even in the largest cathedrals (locally I think that's St. John the Baptist here in Savannah). Even though it won't allow me to do tight head/shoulders shots from the back of the St. Johns, it does allow me to get full-body shots pretty easily. That's 1.6x 200 -> eff. 320mm. @f2.8 (APS-C).</p>

<p>If I could somehow fit a 70-200/2.8L to a micro 4/3rds body, I expect that the eff 400mm would be more than adequate. Certainly the 100-400L on the 5D is capable of that (though I hate the slow speed, esp. in the sometimes very dim cathedral). </p>

<p> </p>

[jeff_harper3]

<p>Encouraging news, Marcus, thanks for your reply.<br>

I am at a disadvantage today, since my camera and kit lens (14-140mm) is not here at this time, and I cannot test the 140mm in a church to get an idea of a reference point in my search for lenses. My camera kit will be returned to me in about two weeks.<br>

I realize, rather sheepishly, that I posted forgetting a critical element of this issue: the lens is built for full frame, not Four Thirds bodies. I am somewhat lost in the search for lenses for this camera, because there are numerous considerations with my particular camera.<br>

There is an adapter available, I believe, that will pull this off, and I will have to investigate that before proceeding further. <br>

I have found the Canon used for $1K, but to make a decision without being able to test the lens is unwise. So at this point I must seek the adapter first, then go from there.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>select an appropriate zoom lens for <strong><em>wedding cermonies</em></strong>. . . I have a <strong>micro four thirds body</strong> . . . the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens would become a 140-400. . . Is this too extreme to be practical in a church? I shoot in large catholic churches . . . <strong>my camera and kit lens (14-140mm) <em>[Lumix G Vario HD 14-140mm F4.0-5.8 ASPH Mega OIS]</em></strong> is not here at this time . . . <strong><em>I am somewhat lost in the search for lenses for this camera</em></strong>, because there are <strong><em>numerous considerations with my particular camera.<br /></em></strong>There is an adapter available . . .</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p><strong><em>Anyone have any thoughts?</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sell the 4/3rds camera and kit lens and buy Nikon or Canon (or Pentax).</p>

<p>Yes 140 to 400/f2.8 would be OK for large Catholic Churches IF you be to be the rear or close to the rear: I would however opt to be closer and work with shorter lenses for the Ceremony.</p>

<p><br />WW</p>

<p>PS - What happened to your 40D and the 85/1.8 . . . I am confused</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>WW-</p>

<p>You know, I've found that the larger the church, the more restrictive they are w/ location specific rules. For example, at St. Johns, you are not allowed on the center aisle at all during the wedding (or the walks). Makes it kind of difficult to get a straight on shot (considering from altar to end of pews, it's >200'(?), and the pews are (?) ~30' (each side, inner, from center aisle to side aisle)), unless you are shooting w/ a nice long lens. Anything shorter would give you only the ability to shoot from the side.</p>

<p>I guess they figure that regardless of things like: "flower girls & ring bearers must be between 6 and 9 yrs old" "Photographer must have soft heeled shoes if they are to change location during wedding mass" etc. They will still be booked solid (and they are!).</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Hello Marcus,</p>

<p>Interesting comment.<br />There is an old thread where we discussed these matters at length - I can't find it, sorry.</p>

<p>We discussed Catholic and Baptist and Seventh Day Adventists . . . and England and USA and Europe . . . and City and Country areas . . . some general trends emerged. In synopsis, there were many factors making this or that Church(**) more or less strict and with greater or fewer “rules”.</p>

<p>One trend which did emerge (at least stuck in my memory as the most interesting) was that the Churches which had “difficulties” in the past had stronger rules now.</p>

<p>Now thinking about this point alone: large Iconic Churches, be they a City Icon / Cathedral (**) or the largest Township based Church in a Rural Area - these Churches would have more likelihood of being popular.<br />Hence having more Weddings and from a broader community - being OUTSIDE their local Parishioners – or even NOT regular Church goers.</p>

<p>So it stands to reason that these larger Cathedral type Churches would have more rules based on the hypothesis of "Past Problems" alone.</p>

<p>Certainly I made mention of a Cathedral where I have worked which NOW only allows Photography by a “registered” Photographer – and personal attendance prior to the event is required for “registration”.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>(**) "Church" = any institution for a Wedding - including Synagogue, Hall and etc - one word used for simplicity.<br />(**) "Cathedral" = any "big and popular one" of any "Church"</p>

[jeff_harper3]

<p>Marcus, William, thanks for your posts. William, the lens is actually for a 4/3 Panasonic GH2 that is primarily for video usage. <br>

It appears that I will need to abandon this 100-200 idea which would mean sinking $1k plus into a lens (used) that has limited potential for usage. As has been pointed out it will be long even in the longest churches, and there will many cases where the lens will be of no use at all. <br>

So, it's plan B! I have three cameras. One will be outfitted with my 20mm 1.7 with an effective focal length of 30mm. I could place it rear of main floor for a nice steady shot. <br>

I would then need, I suppose a 85mm or 100mm fixed, but not sure about the third camera. Suggestions?<br>

William, I sold my 85mm last year with my 40d to buy other gear. I have missed both it and my Sigma 30mm 1.4 terribly, and still occasionally go through those photos and sigh.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>Thanks for clearing up my confusion - obviously with that detail, please ignore my previous suggestion. <br />I remembered your name and the fact you loved the 85/1.8 on your 40D and so I was confused by this question.<br />***<br /><br />As to your Plan B: <br />I assume the third camera will require a longer lens? So if 200mm is too long: in the Canon range I suggest the 135/2L or 135/2.8SF <br />Don't dismiss 135/2.8SF - if F/2.8 is fast enough for you, is a nice lens for very little money.<br />On the other hand - maybe 20mm; 50mm and 100mm would be a better set for the three cameras.<br />Best to think how the set of three will work for you best, in most situations than look at each individual lens: in this regard I reckon you can always crib, beg cheat and get a little closer in a big area, but you cannot back up if you are already at the back or side wall.<br /><br /><br />WW</p>

[jeff_harper3]

<p>William, there's a bit to ponder with your excellent suggestions. I cannot tell you how helpful...I feel less alone and more like I'm headed somewhere. I do know photographers locally, and while most of them are excellent guys and gals, I don't feel comfortable talking with them about photo lenses, and they may feel a bit of competitive annoyance or some such thing. Some refer customers my way, and I don't want them to feel that I'm now a competitor. Even though I'm not.<br>

I have added the 135s (both) to my wish list on amazon just in case. But I do love fast primes, and I suspect I would prefer the flexibility, as you suggest, of the 100mm. <br>

The 135 f/2 is clearly an amazing lens. I haven't even used one, but the reviews are very persuasive.<br>

I actually dislike my 20mm, though it's not bad, but it's not Canon, that is clear. For the money it's OK, and works with the features of the camera just fine. But I digress.<br>

Anyway I will look at some 100mm Canons, as well as 50mm, though I want a 30mm f/1.4, which while so close to the 20mm specs, it's faster and not TOO long, as I am fearful that the 50mm would be. 50mm are popular with others with my camera, so it must be a good fit, but I don't know. I'm going to start with choosing the long lens, and let the middle one sort itself out. Or vice versa! I don't have a wedding for nearly a month, so I suppose it doesn't matter!<br>

Jeff H.</p>

 

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>"I actually dislike my 20mm, though it's not bad, but it's not Canon, that is clear."</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

A second-hand 24/1.4L (original version) might be suitable on 4/3rds? - the CA is more pronounced at the edges when used at F/1.4.<br>

But it is a mighty lens, nonetheless: <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=958772">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=958772</a><br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

 

[jeff_harper3]

<p>Nice lens, I will look into it, thank you. Love the photos, lovely.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>good ho!</p>