For all you wedding photogs out there...

[ethan_mei]

Good day All. I need your sound advice. I have started out as an assistant wedding photographer not too long ago (shot 3 weddings thus far), with the goal of becoming a primary wedding Photog in the future (disclaimer: this is still a side gig & I have a full time job, but goal is to be full time wedding photog).

 

Currently my gears are:<br /><br />1) 5D Mark II<br />2) Sigma 35 mm f/1.4<br />3) Canon 50 mm f/1.8 II<br />4) Canon 24-105 mm f/4<br />5) Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 II<br /><br />I am saving up to purchase my next gear...should I aim to buy:<br /><br />1) 5D Mark III<br />or <br />2) Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II (if I choose this option, I would sell my 24-105)<br /><br />I know the price difference between these options could be a swing of $2k, but that's not a concern for me. I don't mind investing more upfront because I am aiming to 'strategically' purchase my gears. Priority here is practicality and usefulness.<br /><br />Initially I thought of purchasing lenses first, but the thought of a 2nd body is very intriguing because I have found swapping lenses is a bit of a hassle and could miss some important opportunities. However, I have done only 3 weddings and can't really use this limited experience as a proper measuring stick. Your expertise and experience in guiding me w/the next purchase is much appreciated!<br /><br />Thanks!

[daverhaas]

<p>My advice would be a 2nd body and at least one, if not 2 external flash units. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

[william-porter]

<p>+1 to what David says: second body and some flash units. It's been said here many times but I'll say it again: Equipment fails and you must have a backup. And although I know a lot of photographers who leave their backup camera in their car, I always have two bodies with me during the ceremony in particular. </p>

<p>For the second body, the 5D MkIII would be a great choice. But the more affordable 6D would also be a good choice. I wouldn't worry about what anybody calls a "pro" camera. The 6D is full-frame and takes great pictures. </p>

<p>Your lenses are okay now. A 24-70 f/2.8 is a bit more versatile but I shot weddings for several years with primes only and to be honest feel a bit like I'm cheating now that I'm relying mostly on zooms. If I were you I'd stick that Sigma 35 f/1.4 on one camera and the 70-200 f/2.8 on the other, carry them both, and be ready for anything.</p>

<p>Will</p>

[ethan_mei]

<p>Thank you David and William! David, yes I failed to mention I have one flash unit now--Canon EX430 II. William, that's my thinking: Siggy 35 1.4 on one body and 70-200 2.8 on the other!</p>

[dave_wilson1]

Second body, and you need at least one extra flash for off camera light or spare in case one dives. Plus slave trigger. Do

you have a good tripod? Also, study real hard and learn how to work with wedding gowns, and do some lighting and

poses with the wedding gown. Just like in the bridal magazines. I see SO many terrible/awkward poses with the dresses,

it's aweful. The new excuse today is all the PJ style, no posing. Well, the dresses look like garbage, lenses wont help.

[William Michael]

<p>I also would suggest a second body as a priority to buying an EF 24 to 70/2.8 – the lenses you have at the moment can suffice.<br>

I also would recommend a second Flash.<br>

I am passionate about System Redundancy – and – at the moment you have zero System Redundancy in respect of Camera Bodies and Flash Units.</p>

<p>However, as a strategic business choice I would not necessarily choose an EOS 5D MkIII, without first seriously evaluating the option of another 5DMkII (or even a 5D).<br>

Your question states that the purpose is mainly you want to use BOTH cameras (i.e. you are not buying as specifically as a ‘back up’ body) – in this case it is implied that a 5DMkII would suffice as the other working camera.</p>

<p>It is important to consider your <em>short term</em> and also <em>long term</em> <strong>return on outlay</strong>: and in the main DSLR Camera Bodies depreciate rapidly from the moment of Purchase.<br>

So considering that you are (spasmodically) assisting and assuming that Capital is not a bottomless pit of spare cash – I would be considering the $ difference between a second hand/refurbished 5DmkII and a new 5DMkIII.<br>

A new 5DMkIII will depreciate at about the same rate over the next 24 months, whether you shoot 12 Weddings or 240 with it.<br>

The Capital that you save could be put into other gear, that you will use <strong><em>for a long time</em></strong> even if you don’t use it much in the beginning and will not depreciate as rapidly as a camera body; for example that other zoom lens.<br>

Especially if you sell the 24 to 105, I expect you could get a new 24 to 70/2.8 and a refurbished 5DMkII and maybe even another Flash, for about the same outlay, perhaps a bit more, than buying a new 5DMkIII.</p>

<p>WW </p>

 

[savagesax]

I've been using the 24-105 for many years now. I have the 24-70, but I can't remember the last time I used it. The optics are better with the 24-70, but not much. Not enough for you to buy or trade it in for the 24-70. You also have the 50mm so save your money.

 

I'd like to see you using a more powerful Canon flash and use the 430 as a spare or with added lighting. Nothing worse then a flash dying on a job.

 

Have a great time. Glad to see you assisting first.

[markonestudios]

<p>As has been said, get a second body and a backup flash. I would be looking at the 7D if I were you. That way, you can truly fully leverage your existing lens cache. Consider Sigma's 17-50 f/2.8 OS lens (for redundancy).</p>

<p>Adorama has been selling refurb 7D's for under 1000USD. I just recently picked one up for $959. Very fast AF system, very similar interface/control layout, so an ideal complement to the 5D2.</p>

<p>The 24-105L is a great lens. Like every lens, it has its shortcomings, but given a choice between that and the 24-70, I would go for the 24-105 every time...</p>

<p> </p>

[rick_m.]

<blockquote>

<p><br />I know the price difference between these options could be a swing of $2k, but that's not a concern for me.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Taking you at your word that money is not a concern then I would get the MKIII and two top-of-the-line Canon flashes. </p>

<p>I also agree with what William said. The Sigma 35 on one body and the 70-200 on the other and you can rule the world.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>To start out, keep what you already have, add a second camera like the one you have for consistency of operation when under pressure, and add a second flash.</p>

<p>You have not yet determined your shooting style, and as that reveals itself after shooting for a while, you will know what to get. </p>

<p>For example, I came to prefer the 24-70/2.8 as the main lens because it is a stop faster than the 24-105. For my shooting approach, a bit brighter viewfinder and ability to drag the shutter @ f/2.8 to open up backgrounds when using TTL flash in dark venues is more important.</p>

<p>I also, found that after many weddings, I was using longer lenses less and less ... until I just sold my 70-200/2.8 for lack of use. I have a 135/1.8 but it is still my least used lens. 85/1.4 is the go to lens for portraits, and it was the 85/1.2 in the Canon system when I shot Canon.</p>

<p>Generally, I primarily use two cameras and 2 lenses ... 24-70 and 85mm. I have other exotic lenses, but they are extras and not really needed to photograph a wedding from start to finish.</p>

<p>So, the point is ... relax on the gear front other than getting some redundancy. Concentrate on learning weddings and developing your own approach ... then get what is needed to accomplish that.</p>

<p>Best of luck.</p>

<p>- Marc</p>

<p> </p>