A new, very scared photographer in need of advice and guidance

birdiphotography · July 13, 2013

Just ordered this lens BTW: Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S DX ED VR Nikkor Wide-Angle Telephoto. Super happy to get started with it. I think it will be better than my 18-55 and tamron 70-300. I hate always having to change lenses during a wedding. So, I hope this will be the main go to lens for events etc. Anyone have it and use it for event photography?

Wouter Willemse · July 13, 2013

Jessica, I have the 16-85VR and in many ways, it's an excellent lens. Better than the 18-55 at wider apertures, better build, plus the extra bit of wide angle is useful. But, and this is a big "but" it's absolutely not a great choice as event lens. As I wrote in an earlier post, you want f/2.8 lenses for that - not a lens that's f/5.6 at the long end. As I said in an earlier post, you'd want something like a 17-50 f/2.8 as main lens for this work.

I hope you're posting here under a false name, photo.net ranks high with Google and calling your clients crazy (even if they are) on a public forum under your own name migth not be the best of ideas. You can request a name change if needed using your workspace.

rick_m. · July 13, 2013

Maybe you got the idea from the previous post, perhaps even subliminally. Now I'm starting to wonder if you're a bit crazy, if someone else has mentioned this forgive me (is there a "sarcasm" icon I can use?)

</blockquote>

I did not read the whole thread. I just jumped forward as I was on my way out the door. Perhaps you are just rude and call everyone crazy. Insert eyeroll here.

birdiphotography · July 13, 2013

Thanks guys,

She really isnt crazy, just driving me crazy! She really wont leave me alone about a refund. I've never had to deal with anyone like this before. She says my pictures are blown out, that her son is sticking his tongue out (Which at the time she thought was adorable). And, that I didnt get good shots of her hand made jacket... I told her I would do a reshoot back when she complained first I wasnt out at the photoshoot long enough. She said I should have been out there for at least two hours! I took over 300 photos in an hour. I think this lady is trying to scam me. She already posted the pics on her facebook page.

I'm just going a little insane over here. between her and trying to learn everything about my flash and camera.

I just purchased the 16-85. I really want the 24-70 but I cant afford it right now so the 16-85 will do for the meanwhile. I just need something that a wont have to keep changing at events, it gets to be too much to have to change a lens at a wedding. Changing to one or two lens through out the day is fine but I dont want to have to change my lens constantly. thats why I got the 16-85. Comes at the end of the month. I hope it works well for me. <div></div>

dcstep · July 13, 2013

Jessica, this is the fourth day that we're talking about this. Have you worked enough to master one element of managing your camera? Work is required to master things.

birdiphotography · July 13, 2013

David,

Yes. I have. You dont have to keep up with the forum. It is not required of you to help me, I merely asked not demanded. I have Narcolepsy and many other health issues so things take me a little longer to complete. This in no means makes me disabled or unable to work. I just need more time to complete things. I apologize if I take longer to "Master" the basics, David.

Bill C · July 13, 2013

She says ..., that her son is sticking his tongue out (Which at the time she thought was adorable).

</blockquote>

Hi, I spent a few years as a traveling department store photographer, high-volume work shooting mostly kids (I was practically a kid myself). Because it was on film, there was no way to review shots, nor was overshooting encouraged (the 70mm film was a bit costly). We learned never to shoot at the peak of an expression, because the face seems unnaturally distorted and these shots never sold. But if you wait just a half-second, it fades into a natural-appearing pleasant smile.

So we learned that what the parents thought they wanted was not always what they wanted to buy.

Digital lets you fire away with virtually no incremental cost, so you probably should click the shutter when the parents seem excited. Otherwise they'll think you missed the best shots. But other than that, I think you should use your best judgement on how you shoot (if they're not ok with your style, maybe you don't want to shoot them).

BTW, I think that missing the hand-made jacket was your fault; you should have found out it was important to her, perhaps by discussing expectations or just small talk during the shoot.

ps: I applaud your response to David's unhelpful post. The Photo.net community as a whole doesn't help to keep this sort of thing in check as it once did. I don't like making purposely discourteous (rude) posts, but sometimes I think one has to step up and make them. Likewise, I hope that if my ego or arrogance gets out of hand, someone will (gently) let me know about it. (I'll probably argue about it if they do, though.)

dcstep · July 13, 2013

Well Jessica, you're spending plenty of time talking about your problems. I think that time would be better spent working at mastering your camera, but one step at a time.

I think you're letting the vastness of your challenge overwhelm you and you're frozen into inaction. The two or three things that I suggested that you master are not rocket science and become repeatable and part of your basic MO quickly, if you'll just concentrate on them and repeat them physcially.

I'm sorry if you have disabilities, but you need to learn how you learn and start doing it. Reading a bunch of suggestions here isn't going to help you until you start applying the advice physically by doing the actions required to competently operate your camera. Apparently you'll have to work twice as hard as the rest of us, but if you want this, then get started. I said master one thing a day. You may need three days to master one thing, but you'll master nothing until you get started.

I don't mean to offend. I'm just saying that no progress will be made until you start working on mastery. Buying a new lens is not the answer... at least not yet.

William Michael · July 13, 2013

It appears to me that there are technical / technique matters to address and buying the 16 to 85 lens will not necessarily be the answer to those issues.

Technical comments on the image of the Bride: If that is a full frame crop, then the Photographer was about 8ft away from the Subject. The DoF is about 10inches. The shot appears to be made under available light and pulled at: F/2.8 @ 1/250s @ ISO200 using a 50mm lens on an APS-C Camera. Under close scrutiny:

<ul>

<li>the point of sharpest focus appears on the Subject’s mouth</li>

<li>the Subject’s head appears to be moving downwards and to camera right: (evidenced by the movement seen at the ear-rings and a shadow trail on the eyes</li>

<li>there appears to be a slight camera movement, to camera right: (evidenced by other trailing blurs seen at arm creases and bangle)</li>

</ul>

In consideration of these elements it is plausible that the shot is in fact in focus, but is soft because of either Camera or Subject Movement or both. My best guess is that the Photographer moved the camera and lens, following the movement of the Subject’s Head: I have seen this error before. Typically, shooting in available light, a shutter speed 1/250s would be close to safe for a Stationary Adult Subject, seated: although I am more comfortable with 1/320s as my slower limit, for “safe”.

***

Technical comments on the image of the woman, man and child: On my monitor the image appears to be over saturated and incorrectly colour balanced biased toward yellow/orange - rendering the skin tones incorrect. It also appears to be considerably over sharpened. The crop of the hands at the bottom is not the best.

***

In respect of lenses and lens choice, etc:

For Weddings, Events and Portraiture it would be best to buy a standard range, fast zoom. For APS-C that’s about 17mm to 55mm. “Fast” also means non-varying maximum aperture – and that is F/2.8. With Nikon, also, one should choose lenses which best fit the Auto Focus System of the cameras being used.

It is a poor business choice to shoot a Wedding, with only one camera.

WW

birdiphotography · July 13, 2013

Bill- I didnt miss the Jacket, I just didtnt make it the main focus of the portrait shoot. I think she wants to sell her clothing but I did not know this at the time. I just thought it was a cute prop she made for that specific shoot. I guess I was wrong. She wanted more shots of the whole jacket, centered and crystal clear. I focused on her son.

David- I've been practicing using aperture priority and been reading my user manual. The focus seems 10 times better in aperture priority. I still need to learn all the setting's on my flash. but, right now I'm more concerned with understanding my camera and what it does. I took some pictures of my hand and they came out pretty sharp.

William- What you said is exactly what a photography teacher told me. My shutter speed is usually off and I need to learn to adjust it when needed. Thats what I need to learn. I am taking quite a few classes over the next few weeks to get me more familiar with shutter speed in different environments. I will have a second camera too. A D90. I might even hire an assistant to help me out for one of the weddings.

Thank you guys for your input I truly appreciate all the help and guidance. Understanding what I am doing wrong and repeating it to me lets me know I need to take charge and get this taken care. I am excited to learn new things about my camera and lenses.

Bill C · July 13, 2013

William, although I partially agree with you, I think you've missed on the reason regarding lack of sharpness (the Bride photo).

Have a look near bottom of the shot, just left of center, and see if you don't change your mind. Fine detail is visible in the fabric at that point. (My evaluation is on the first page, two thirds of the way down.)

William Michael · July 14, 2013

Bill C,

I read all the responses, including yours, after I scrutinized the images but before I posted my response.

I do not disagree with any passion with any of the advice given: nor do I have any 'beyond doubt' evidence to disagree with any of the analysis given.

***

I think there is a misunderstanding of the precise meaning of my post.

I expect that the misunderstanding has been caused because of my inaccurate words:

"Under close scrutiny: the point of sharpest focus appears on the Subject’s mouth"

By those words I meant: "Under close scrutiny: the point at which the Photographer made sharpest focus appears on the Subject’s mouth.

***

In my first post, I did not go into detailed analysis, but as you raise this point here is a more detailed analysis:

Given that (assuming that) the area around the nose/mouth is where the Photographer (attempted) to make focus (more logical than attempting to make focus on the folds in the dress), then, as the CAMERA ELEVATION is ABOVE the SUBJECT; and the SUBJECT is appears to be SITTING: I expect that the folds in the dress (the area you mention) is IN the SAME PLANE, as the mouth and nose area.

However those folds in the dress (when I enhanced them), did not appear "as sharp" as "I would have expected" from a 50/1.8 - but yes I agree with you that these folds in the dress are indeed "the sharpest area of the image".

When considering all observations: Head movement; Shallow DoF; The Area of the Dress you mentioned; the Camera Elevation; the inclined angle of the Subject's PLANE to the Camera; the (apparent) 'softness' of that are of the dress which is 'sharp'; the (expectation) the Photographer would make focus on the face area and an assumption that it is likely that the error is Photographer and not a lens fault -

I conclude that:

<ul>

<li>the Subject's HEAD Movement plays a major contributing role to the image being soft</li>

<li>the Lens is very likely A-OK</li>

<li>it is plausible to suggest that the camera was also moving (as mentioned flowing the Subject's head movement)</li>

<li>if the camera WERE moving then it is likely that, that camera movement contributed to the softness of the image.</li>

<li>it is also likely that the camera was not moving (meaning = the shutter speed was adequate to relieve any Camera Movement Blur) in which case - the blur of the face is totally due to Subject Movement and the dress fold (you mention) are indeed at the sharpest which that particular lens will perform: however, the movement blur which I perceive in the bangle (close to the plane where the folds in the dress are located) does not accord with any logical SUBJECT MOVEMENT, so I do suspect there was actually CAMERA Movement, happening.</li>

</ul>

***

All of these observations can exist happily with the observation that the area of the dress (where you mentioned) is the area of the image, which is the sharpest.

***

It would be incorrect for Jessica to read into my comment that, simply watching the shutter speed, will address the issues of the Bride Shot: I am not suggesting she has done that, I am just emphasizing that improving her technical knowledge and technique (generally) are the best avenues for her at this point in time.

***

For a Bride Shot like that (to be "safe"):

<ul>

<li>using APS-C; </li>

<li>shooting in Available Light;</li>

<li>with the subject at an inclined plane to the camera;</li>

<li>with the Subject likely to have HEAD movement: </li>

</ul>

I would like to be at: F/5.6 and 1/320s - at the least.

WW

birdiphotography · July 14, 2013

Thanks William for your very detailed post. I think I was moving too much. The bride was moving slightly while I was taking the shots but no that much. I do tend to shake sometimes if I hold the camera up for awhile. I dont know if anyone else has issues holding the camera up? My fingers and wrists sometimes want to give up. The D5100 is pretty small, light but I think its almost uncomfortable to carry on long days. I just bought a FS-Slim Strap system to wear on the next event. I hope this will help. I didnt think slight shaking/movement would turn my pictures soft/blurry. From reading everyone's posts I think it was a large combination of things that went wrong in those shots. But, your so right William, my main issue is technical knowledge and technique. Two very important things I need to learn fast.

William Michael · July 14, 2013

"From reading everyone's posts I think it was a large combination of things that went wrong in those shots,"

</blockquote>

Yes. That's good you think that. It is my opinion that you should not focus on any one point as the ONLY issue.

I think that (for shooting Weddings) you might have to address your nervous energy: perhaps you might practice shooting fewer shots and practice more of anticipating 'THE SHOT'.

More Weddings, as a Second Shooter, would be good.

Apropos the hand and wrist being sore; many Photographers strangle the camera and far too many Wedding Photographers run around in a 'ready' position.

There is an old thread in the Wedding Forum with good advice about W&P Photographers’ wrists. If I can find it in the not too distant future - I will post a link.

Not medical advice but many a sore wrist and forearm comes from posture and tense shoulder and neck - as I mentioned, many Photographers don’t hold the camera correctly or have correct shooting posture - speak to your teacher about these points.

WW

birdiphotography · July 14, 2013

I am really nervous at weddings. I need to control that. You are so right William, I tend to grip the camera really hard for hours and I think that makes my fingers and wrists hurt. I think I just need to relax. I have been told that I have bad posture when holding my camera. I guess your supposed to hold your arms close to your body? I just hold them out. I will talk to my teacher about it for sure. Thanks for your posts I really am thankful for everyone here! I learned a lot about myself and reassurance of what I need to change to be better.

William Michael · July 14, 2013

Yes, for SLR / DSLR / Rangefinder style cameras, we could argue that best practice would require the arms being tucked into the body at the elbows when shooting Landscape Orientation; Shooting Portrait Orientation the right arm is (usually) raised.

But I tend to stress more the relaxed shoulders and arms and wrist.

I believe that it is important to ensure each arm and each hand has a distinct function: the left is (generally) the base and support and it takes most of the load; the right is the action hand – it cannot be in tension, as the fingers are required to play the buttons, quickly and efficiently.

Also I am very conscious of feet: the centre of gravity of the body nicely positioned, like with tennis for example, the coach will start out training very precise feet position for a fore-hand stroke and will play the ball to the student such that the student does not need to move . . . and then, when those feet remember where they must be at the time of execution, the coach moves forward allowing the student to move about – ensuring when each stroke is made the feet are in the correct position.

All of this is muscle memory and training – for example, no one ever continuously looks for where the accelerator pedal or the brake pedal (or clutch pedal) are positioned in a car: drivers just get in and . . . drive.

The problem is that people, if not taught how to do some physical action correctly, they will continue to make poor physical actions because that is what their muscles learned: for example generally, my society, where I am, will encourage parents to seek instruction for their child to swim correctly; there are also “stroke correction” classes for adults; but there are not many “Running Teachers” . . . and I see many people ‘going for a jog’ each morning and evening and many have very poor running technique – it is generally the same with many people, using a camera.

WW

MODERATOR NOTE:

<blockquote> At this point in the discussion, the thread has been moved from the “New User Introductions Forum” to the “Wedding and Social Events Forum”.</blockquote>

markonestudios · July 15, 2013

"My biggest issue is not remembering everything my camera does, technically."

"I am really nervous at weddings."

"I didnt think slight shaking/movement would turn my pictures soft/blurry."

</blockquote>

Jessica, I have read through the myriad posts in this thread, but I could not get the above statements. You have received some excellent advice, but my main concerns are:

1. Will you remember the advice?

2. Given that you get that nervous, will you apply that advice?

3. Remember that apart from this being a once-in-a-lifetime event, whether from Craigslist bargain hunter couples of from royalty, a wedding photographer does a whole lot more...

Your statements above don't disqualify you from shooting a wedding per se, but they do raise fundamental questions about your preparedness.

You must be able to understand the flow of the day; you must be able to do some crowd control; you must be able to take charge and pose people when required; you must be able to handle a varied range of personalities (your current refund client is just one possible personality type you will have to handle). All these while knowing exactly what settings will work in what lighting environment.

I appreciate that you have assisted before, but as an assistant were you shooting also, or schlepping gear? And if you indeed were shooting, were your images also given to the client along with the main photographer's?

Bottom line, I would not have put myself out there in the first place, given your confidence level. Being able to manipulate images in Photoshop does not equal good photography. Having had a look at your work on PN and G+, there is certainly an eye for composition, but these were all in posed or stationary situations. Weddings are constantly moving, constantly changing. The weather could change on you in an instant and throw off all the settings you had planned to use.

If you absolutely cannot get out of them, or work with a more experiences photographer, then I would spend the next several weeks really polishing up on my basics, understanding my D5100 and internalising the various settings. Figuring out what focal lengths you prefer. Maybe assist at a few more weddings if possible.

Trust me, the clients may say NOW that they understand your experience level and still want to work with you, but there have been umpteen posts on PN about horror stories involving brides, grooms, Mothers of Brides, et al giving the photographer a hard time and asking for refunds, sometimes not without reason. Don't become one of those statistics...you'd rather bide your time, gain experience and then put yourself out there when you are confident enough to do so. We all have to start somewhere, but in this case, I don;t think you are ready yet. but I think with focus and practice, you will be.

Finally, regarding the 16-85mm lens, $630 is a lot to pay for that glass. You would be better off, from a wedding standpoint, with say Sigma's 17-50mm f/2.8 OS lens ($570 on Adorama). It is not spoken of much but has great reviews (www.photozone.de).

savagesax · July 15, 2013

Fellow phtogs, does this look like a bit of camera movement at a slow speed? My monitor is good, but not good enough to decipher movement or a focus issue.

savagesax · July 15, 2013

Now that I've looked at all of her images there isn't camera movement. I don't know without seeing the actual camera settings. As of now it is simply out of focus, however the color saturation is also pretty bad.

I'm in agreement that it could be the lens or the sensor. Some cameras have a diaptor to set the camera for your eyes. For example my eyes are perfect so I set the camera for my eyes.

Do you wear glasses?

john_deerfield · July 16, 2013

As to why the images are soft, I would bet money that you have a filter (UV) and probably a relatively cheap filter on the front of the lens. And then you shot a relatively wide aperture. That's a deadly combination (and I have seen it hundreds of times). A good filter ($$) helps quite quite a bit but I personally don't like shooting wide apertures with any kind of filter.

studio460 · July 16, 2013

Jessica, I haven't read the entire thread, so excuse any duplicate advice. I'm taking the liberty to assume I have your permission to re-post your previously linked image here. Shown below is your image (cropped) with the AF points revealed in Aperture. Since no single AF point is illuminated, I would've guessed that you were using "dynamic" area mode (though your EXIF data shows "manual"):

I don't know if you've already stated the AF mode you were using (or, if in fact you were focusing manually), but it's important to know that the D5100 has two different controls/menu items for focus which significantly affect the way your camera focuses: 1.) focus mode: AF-A, AF-S, AF-C, M, and 2.) AF area mode: auto-area, single-point, dynamic area, 3D-tracking.

Firstly, if choosing AF-A (auto-focus automatic) as your focus mode, the camera automatically determines whether to use AF-S (single), or AF-C (continuous).

Secondly, if using the AF area mode, "dynamic area," the camera automatically selects the focus point, and does not show you which point is active. Using dynamic area mode can often lead to the camera choosing a higher-contrast part of the frame on which to focus, which isn't necessarily your desired focus point. If using AF area mode, "3D," the camera automatically tracks its selected focus point, and unlike when in "dynamic," will also display the selected AF point in red.

Here is what I would suggest for more control over your auto-focus:

1. Set your focus mode to either AF-S or AF-C (I prefer AF-C). 2. Set your AF area mode to single-point, and choose your focus points manually using the multi-selector button. 3. Turn off 3D tracking.

Additional notes:

Try to shoot a 1/320th or above--for many subjects, 1/250th is too slow. I shot a mother-and-baby portraiture session once, and even at 1/500th, I got subject motion-blur on his eyelids. Remember, that on a DX body, a 50mm lens is a 75mm full-frame equivalent--basically a short telephoto, which requires a relatively steady hand. When using an 85mm lens on a full-frame body, I try to shoot at 1/320th or above when shooting handheld candids.

Depth-of-field: Shooting at f/2.8 on a 50mm DX lens leaves little room for error. Even at f/4.0, I often find I'm struggling to keep both eyes in focus. If shooting two people, I try to shoot at f/5.6 or f/8, and I still need to keep their eyes in about the same plane. Arithmatically derived depth-of-field charts are notoriously liberal in their calculations, even when the circle of confusion is set to what seems like an infinitesimally small, 0.03mm--real world depth-of-field always seems skinnier than you'd like.

Personally, when shooting "money shots" of people--you know, shots that absolutely have to be in focus, I typically hover an AF point directly over the subject's eye (compromising composition a bit), and use AF-C mode (single-point). I also use the rear AF button to focus ("AF-ON" on pro bodies), instead of a half-depressed shutter (your camera may or may not have the ability to assign a rear AF button). For some, this technique increases focus accuracy (operationally, not literally).

studio460 · July 16, 2013

Also, note that the AF points displayed in the re-posted image above happened to land on very low-contrast parts of the frame. These particular areas are very challenging to AF sensors. The trick is to hover one of your single-point selected AF points over a particular area of the frame which is both, a desired location of focus, and also fairly contrasty (eyes are typically contrasty enough for this purpose).

studio460 · July 16, 2013

As for your heightened anxiety, Jessica, rest assured that this feeling recedes with time. Rock-solid technical mastery of your tools, plus added experience accelerates this process. In preparation for my first wedding gig (which I've yet to land), I've essentially attempted to simulate each shooting situation likely to be encountered on a "typical" wedding gig: low-light, processional/recessional, group daylight exteriors, etc. Of course, no matter how much testing you do, nothing can accurately simulate the pressure of a real event with a paying client.

What makes me qualified to dole out advice, when I haven't shot a single paid wedding gig myself? In my day job (I'm a broadcast field-camera operator), I shoot very fast-paced events, many with a plethora of unpredictable variables, most of which are one-time opportunities--if I miss the shot of an 'A'-list celebrity, I may never have that 1.5-second window again. With dozens of other TV outlets, and dozens more still photographers on any given major-event arrival line, there's no time for any "do overs." I have to act quickly, with precision, and I can only do this because I've been doing this same job for over 20 years.

As others have probably already suggested, try to shoot as many wedding-like events as possible (for free, if necessary), prior to your first paying gig as a primary. Since setting my own goal of someday becoming a professional wedding photographer, I've been shooting every event I possibly could for friends and family, using the exact same tools and techniques I would use on an actual wedding. With each event, I learned something new. And with each successive event, I gained more confidence.

This is the main reason why your skills need to be so well-honed--so much so, that they become almost automatic. You already may know from your experience as an assistant that there'll be a lot going on, often at a rapid and unpredictable pace--you likely won't have the presence of mind to think through any problems on the spot. It's best if you're prepared to accommodate any likely situation with a known likely solution--one which has already been well thought-out, and previously tested. So, definitely continue to try hone your skills (which will help you to relax more on future gigs), try to do more "test" events, keep shooting, and good luck!

studio460 · July 16, 2013

Jessica, I've just been reviewing your equipment list:

Nikon D5100, SB-910 Flash, Sigma 10-20mm, Nikon 50mm 1.8, Nikon 18-55mm, Tamron 70-300mm, and a Speedlite YN460 . . . I was also wondering if I should add the Nikon 16-85mm 3.5f to my list of lenses?

</blockquote>

I've also been building up my equipment inventory for my eventual entry into wedding photography. I basically have at least two of everything, plus additional, alternative back-ups. I presume you're on a tight budget, so your list will probably be a bit smaller than mine, but still, you should think about some redundancy (I know, equipment is expensive enough, without having to worry about buying two of everything, but you do need back-ups!).

My partial equipment list:

x3 Nikon FX bodies x3 Nikon SB-800s x3 TTL cables x2 Quantum Turbo batteries (looking to buy more) x2 Quantum cables (still need to buy spares)

(I also own several AC monolights, plus a pile of AC inverter/battery systems to power them when I'm away from house power.)

As for lenses, my main "everything" lens is an AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4.0 VR. It's one of the slowest lenses I own, and too slow for most available-light situations, but it's great for quick-and-dirty, flash-fired event coverage. My favored low-light prime is my new Sigma 35mm f/1.4. It's great for shooting full-length shots and small groups in ultra-low light. My favorite mid-tele prime for low-light is my pricey AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 (just FYI, I basically never shoot with my 50mm f/1.4; but remember, you're shooting DX, so your mileage may vary). For DX shooters, Sigma just announced a new 18-35mm f/1.8 short zoom--if I were starting out in DX, this would be my first choice--it's basically the fastest short-zoom on the planet.

For general available-light shooting, a full range of f/1.4 or f/1.8 primes, or f/2.8 zooms is kinda necessary. I think I read that you've already purchased the 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 VR. That's okay for flash-fired photography, but will be virtually useless for any available-light photography.

The typical set-up for DX shooters is either the Sigma, Tokina, or Tamron "baby" Holy Trinity f/2.8 zooms. They "match" the FX-sized "Holy Trinity" zoom range equivalents for DX bodies. They're all fairly fast, at f/2.8, and buying just two of these will allow you to cover wide-to-normal (e.g., Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8), and mid- to telephoto (e.g., Tokina 50-135 or Sigma 50-150mm). If you can still return the 16-85mm, you may want to re-consider your lens line-up now, before you invest in more glass which may not serve you best overall. But, again, Sigma's recently announced 18-35mm f/1.8 lens changes the game a bit--this short zoom is just too fast to resist. Pair this lens with Sigma's 50-150mm f/2.8 OS, and you'd be ready to shoot nearly anything.

If I were starting out with a DX system today, I would opt for the following:

1. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM ($799) 2. Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM APO ($949)

A bit pricey, I know, but a very high-performance set-up, in only a two-lens kit. Buy a second D5100, and you would have a very slick, two-body DX wedding set-up. Sexy, even. I now own two Sigma FX lenses (Sigma 35mm f/1.4, Sigma 150mm f/2.8), and I believe their optical quality actually surpasses some of my pricey Nikkor glass.

birdiphotography · July 16, 2013

Thanks so much Ralph!!! I have been practicing all day... I will attach some photos. I made myself a little setup at home of nick nacks to photograph. I just realized that my WB was never set to Flash when I took a lot of my weddings photos!!! It made such a difference today shooting with WB on Flash mode. Everything seemed warmer. <div>

</div>

Sign In

A new, very scared photographer in need of advice and guidance

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in