Wedding Camera Gear Advice

[ben_frey1]

<p>Hello all!<br /> I am new to wedding photography but have a full summer schedule ahead of me. I am currently shooting a 7d with the following lenses:</p>

<p>1) Canon 28-135mm<br />2) Canon 50mm 1.8<br /> <br />I have budgeted $3000 and am trying to determine which lenses offer the best bang for their buck. I plan to upgrade to a full frame 5d next year but will be shooting on the 7d this summer. Below are the two lenses that i am currently looking at.</p>

<p>1) <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/680103-USA/Canon_2751B002_EF_70_200mm_f_2_8L_IS.html">Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM</a> - $2500 <br /> 2) <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12182-USA/Canon_2519A003_85mm_f_1_8_USM_Autofocus.html">Canon 85mm 1.8 USM</a> - $425</p>

<p>I figure that the 70-200 puts optimal glass on my camera for much of the event. It will be ready when i upgrade to the full frame next year as well. The 85mm gets good reviews and can be used during portraits. The 28-135 that i currently use can also serve as a go to walk around camera during the reception when I'm not using the 85 or the 70-200. Please share any of your thoughts! I am eager to learn:)</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>So let me see if I've got this straight, you are planning to shoot a 'full summer schedule' of weddings with a single 7D, w/ a 28-135, a 50/1.8, and you've got a $3000 budget for new eqp that you are going to blow on a 70-200/2.8 IS II?</p>

<p>...Well one things for sure... You are new to weddings!</p>

<p>Seriously though, the fact that you are even considering blowing your wad on one big lens shows how unready you are to be shooting weddings. Let's start with the simplest:<br>

1) Camera body: 7D... and? what's your backup? a 40D will cost you the same as the 85/1.8, a 5D a bit more. But you'll forgo a backup entirely simply to get the big white L? <br>

2) You might want to get a speedlite... or three. -learning how to use one would also be pretty high up on my list.<br>

3) 7D + 28-135 ? what are you thinking? If that is your widest lens (~45mm FOV) you are going to be hard pressed to get group shots larger than a table width... Seriously?<br>

4) 70-200/2.8L II IS - a great lens, but waaaaaay out of your budget. You can get great 70-200/2.8s w/o IS for 6-700, a Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC USD is half the price of the 2.8L II (and 95% as capable). In your shoes, it would be pure nonsense to buy the L. Even a 70-200/4 IS would be better.<br>

5) ...and the list goes on....</p>

<p>My best advice is to give them back their deposits, and cancel your contracts.... cause there's no way you can do the job right if your post is an accurate reflection of your thought processes.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Ben - </p>

<p>Normally the advice is glass first, bodies second. However, if you are going into a fully booked summer of shooting weddings with only a single body and two lenses - you're going to end up disappointing someone. </p>

<p>Table stakes for wedding photography is 2 bodies, fast glass, and off camera flash. </p>

<p>For the budget you have listed, I would suggest a good backup camera - maybe a used 5DI or 60D. A couple of off camera flash units (Yugano will do) and a few good lenses. The 70-200 Sigma, 24-70 Tamron, and maybe if you have any $ left a 85 1.4 or 1.8. </p>

<p>There's a reason I suggested off brand - they are cheaper. Get the off brand, do a few weddings and upgrade to L glass. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[ben_frey1]

<p>Thanks for the response. Originally, my budget included a used 70-200mm f/2.8 IS for $1500 but i have been sorting through a range of different professional's advice which led to me asking on here. I don't currently have a back up and was hoping to use my 7d as a back up when i upgraded next winter. Yet, as you all have both indicated that puts too much in the hands of hope. How does the below look?<br /><br /><strong>Current</strong><br />7d Canon Body<br />Canon 28-135 <br />Canon 50mm<br />Speedlite 430ex<br /><br /><strong>$3000 Budget purchases<br /></strong><a href="http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-Digital-Camera-Bodies/1/sku-DC029991202900?r=FE">60d - Used (LN) </a>- $600<br /><a href="http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-EOS-Zoom-Lenses/1/sku-CE07999052959R?r=FE">Canon 70 200mm 2.8 IS - Used (EX)</a> -$1500<br /><a href="/wedding-photography-forum/Canon_2519A003_85mm_f_1_8_USM_Autofocus">Canon 85mm 1.8</a> - New - $425<br />Canon 24-70 Used (from a friend) - $450</p>

<p>It still leaves me without a sub 24 wide angle but the selection does provide much more range. Thoughts?</p>

[gary_leonard3]

<p>When I did weddings I found I needed to have backups for everything -- down to $3 flash cords that were used then. Backup camera bodies and lenses and strobes. Backup digital storage devices. I had a backup suit, tie, shirt and undies in the trunk of my car. You never know when the crazy uncle will spill a barrel of pickles and juice on you and all of a sudden, you stink.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Ben - </p>

<p>That's closer - but I'd still question the Canon $1500 70-200 - Instead get a used Sigma 70-200 for $500-600 and get a couple of backup strobes. <br>

I'd also look for a good 5dmk1 for a 2nd body - it's full frame and was the Canon wedding photographers go to body for a long time. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[michaelchadwickphotography]

<p>If you have a full schedule, then may I suggest budgeting more of your incoming funds to cover yourself with backups for everything? That could include renting equipment if necessary. Your second list is better, but seriously, heed the advice we are giving you about having a backup for everything. Not only is a second body critically important, it will also be better to be using two bodies so that you are not having to change lenses in the middle of the day and potentially missing a moment because of it.</p>

<p>I'm not going to re-hash what everyone else is telling you with regards to bodies and lenses, I suggest you pay close attention to that. I also recommend a harness so that you aren't carrying the camera bodies around your neck all day.</p>

[laronge photographie coutu]

<p>Put your money in the bank and rent. Rent a 5d or 6d with a 24-105 f4 and a speedlight. This will give you two usable set ups. Then as you mature as a wedding photographer, you will learn exactly what gear you need to fit your style and can gear up for the following season. Also, keeping the money in the bank allows for an emergency that you might not have anticipated like your computer or vehicle dying, both things that are crucial to a successful wedding photography business. </p>

[Gup]

<p>My advice, since you just got here, start searching your questions in the Photo.net archives. They've been asked dozens of times already. You will begin to notice a repeating theme, back-up everything three times. Rent what you can't afford. What can fail eventually will. Make sure you are amply insured for that possible outcome. Many of us have made a career of wedding work and we all have at least one bad memory that could have been avoided. How many businesses do you know of that were started without at least a nominal business loan? You owe it to your employers to cover all the bases. That's why they've hired a professional, right? There are no 'do overs' in wedding work.<br /> <br /> "I figure that the 70-200 puts optimal glass on my camera for much of the event "<br /> <br /> I can tell you my Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 was the least used of all my lenses during weddings. I only used it when perched on a step ladder if for some reason I couldn't get any closer. Do you really think that you are going to be using that for 'much of the event'? <br /> How are you planning to light the show? <br /> This may sound a bit harsh to you, but it is what I would tell anyone.</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>"I don't currently have a back up and was hoping to use my 7d as a back up when i upgraded next winter. <strong>Yet, as you all have both indicated that puts too much in the hands of hope.</strong>"</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I wouldn't go into any Wedding / Event without at least TWO Flash Units. <br>

In the modern epoch, since 2004, I have had one more Flash unit fail than cameras becoming terminally injured. <br>

Total three Flash - Two Canon: one fried; one shoe dislodged from an impact injury; one Vivitar just died from old age. <br>

Total two DSLR’s - 5D with mirror assembly terminal and dislodged and then 30D or 20D (can’t remember which) with an impossible to quickly dislodge “Error 99”. <br>

The very, very, odd thing was the camera failures occurred on the same day at the same event within a few frames of each other: I had a third DLSR and I used it to continue and then I also had a Film Body loaded with 400ASA Colour Film but that was not required. Spooky, very spooky and it was a very nervous afternoon. <br>

<br>

*<br /><br>

<br>

On the other matters, my view is that renting makes sense for items that one uses infrequently or to test the uses of some gear. <br>

BUT firstly there is some gear which is necessary and secondly as you have <em>"a full summer schedule ahead of me"</em> then it seems a reasonable business choice to allocate some of that expected income toward the purchase of gear that is determined a necessity and gear that you would each time to a job. <br>

And even if you used a credit card then the minimal interest that you might pay for a short period of time might be less than the recurrent rental fees. <br /> <br>

WW<br>

</p>

<p > </p>

[herma]

<p>You are lacking something wide. Buy a used 10-22mm efs, for around $500. You can easily resell it next year when you buy your FF camera and with all the money you've made, you can buy a real wide angle 16-35 2.8. (One of my fav lenses). The 28-135mm is one of the worst lenses Canon has made, slower than molasses. That is why you can easily find them for sale. Reception pictures require fast lenses. Also, you don't need to buy a 70-200 version II for $2500, you can find a used one version I for $1100-1300. I would buy a FF 5DII for all the money I've saved you.</p>

<p>Share how you were able to book all those weddings.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Your list is still incomplete. You <em>must</em> add flashs (2 Younguo 565ex can be added for ~$300), as well as something wider than 24mm. 17mm (28mm FOV) is the <em>minimum</em> width I'd have for an all crop setup.</p>

<p>Alleviating that would be a FF unit. A 5D1 fills that niche, and allows you to use a 24-70/2.8 at it's full FOV (ie 24mm). It shouldn't cost you much more than a 60D.</p>

<p>I'd second the idea of a used Sigma 70-200/2.8 (not an OS unit though) I have one I've used as a backup for my 70-200/2.8L for years, and have no qualms about shooting entirely with the Sigma (though it's looking a bit rough), though a <em>new</em> Tamron 70-200 (non VC) can be bought for ~$750. Even though it lacks FTM focus, and VC, optically it is quite capable, plus it's new, not a beat up beast, which decreases the likelihood of failure. Alternatively, a <em>new</em> Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC USD can be had for under $1500. I would choose that over a used 70-200/2.8 IS (optically their performance is darn near identical (if a <em>good</em> used 70-200/2.8 IS), and you get FTM, and VC). </p>

<p>I would also prioritize flashes over an 85/1.8. If you've got 85mm covered @2.8, you'll see only marginal improvement by using the 85/1.8, and those flashes will be far far far more important.</p>

[green_photog]

<p>I find the 70-200 not that useful for weddings. In a small venue, you don't need it. In a big venue, you need to keep your distance to use it and that means shooting through people. Not to mention they are heavy and you could easily bang the lens against chairs.</p>

<p>I shoot alone so I like the 24-70 plus 135 f2.0. If you have two shooters, the 70-200 might be of better use.</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>What's the point of an 85mm f1.8 when you want a 70-200mm f2.8? Unnecessary duplication. I agree with the others and suggest you try a Sigma or Tamron 70-200mm and not fixate on the Canon L. In my opinion anyway, you won't need it: an 85 or possibly a 135 is as long as you'll need, so dump the 70-200 altogether. I'd pick up a 17-55mm over anything else you have suggested and then with an 85mm you'd be set.</p>

[savagesax]

With a $3000 budget, I'd go with a Pentax system. A very under rated camera system with very good lenses that are not expensive.

 

$3000 can't go very far with Canon of Nikon gear. Perhaps just one body for $3000. Thats it.

 

You need a lot of backup gear and $3000 won't go very far, unless you go for used gear. Best of luck.

[Marcus Ian]

<p>I'd say that $3000 is more than adequate to build a decent wedding kit, especially with a 7D to start with. The bottom line is that if you are willing to forgo L glass, and shop for a lot of used gear, there are a lot of just as capable lenses out there for 1/2-2/3 the cost (or maybe even less in some cases). Assuming you are getting paid for this summer of weddings (which, IMO, you shouldn't necessarily be), You can plan to revisit your gear choices once you actually know what you are doing. </p>

<p>For example adding the following:<br>

60D/ used 7D ~$600-1000<br>

17-50/55 /2.8 VC/IS/OS $450-1000<br>

50-150/2.8 HSM OS ~$1000<br>

3 Yongnuo 565EXs ~$350</p>

<p>Would get you a respectable crop kit, one which will serve all your wedding duties, and do so for ~$3000.</p>

<p>I would probably choose a different route (but I like FF):<br>

used 5D ~$600<br>

70-200/2.8 VC USD $1500 <br>

28-75/2.8 (Tamron) $500<br>

3 Yongnuo 565EXs ~$350<br>

18-55 IS ~$100 (purely as backup, to cover wide end should your 5D fail)</p>

<p>Also ~$3000</p>

<p> Trust me, nobody is going to care that your lenses have no red rings, or white paint. You've got a job to do, I'd advise focusing on that.</p>

<p> </p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>My two bread and butter lenses for the few weddings I shoot (and for everything else) are a Sigma 24-70 2.8 and a Tamron 70-200 2.8. Also a Tokina 12-24 f/4 for when I need to do large groups in small spaces or places where it's just too jammed to back up. From what you already have the 70-200 would be my first choice, followed by the 24-70. I would prefer Nikon glass (or in your case Canon) but the sharpenss of the Sigma/Tamron/Tokina is fine. The 85 is a nice special purpose lens but icing on the cake. As others have said you also need a backup body and at least two flashes.</p>

[ben_frey1]

<p>Thank you all! <br>

I have very much enjoyed reading all of your post and they have kept me busy with research. In the end, i've decided to spend a little more and ensure backup flashes and a body. <br>

Here's what i am looking at... <br>

Canon 5d -$600<br />Canon 70-200mm 2.8 IS - $1500<br />Canon 24-70mm 2.8 IS - $1100 <br />Tokina 12-24 f/4 - $350<br />Yongnuo 565 EXs<br>

Thank you all who commented. For being a newbie on here, i have been stunned by the amount of previous information and commentary that you all have shared with me. Thank you. </p>

 

[William Michael]

<p>Couple of notes:</p>

<p><strong>Canon 24-70mm 2.8 IS -</strong><br>

Canon doesn't make one, with Image Stabilization. Just so you know you will not have IS. </p>

<p><strong>Tokina 12-24 f/4 -</strong> <br>

Is a lens with an image circle suited for an APS-C Camera, so it really is only useful of the 7D, although it will mount on the 5D there will be an optical vignette.</p>

<p>I understood your Original Post to mean that you wanted to move your system to all "Full Frame" by next season, I assumed the (old) 5D you are buying now serves two purposes:<br>

> firstly as a second camera to your 7D <em>for the time being </em><br>

> later as a second camera to a <em><strong>newer</strong></em> 5DMkII or MkIII <em>that you will buy next year.</em><br>

In this case, my opinion is that it is money wasted and a lens wasted having any lens that is APS-C ONLY suitable.<br>

On the other hand you might well be able to sell the Tokina in a year's time will little financial loss and that has to be considered also. </p>

<p>Even if you intend to continue next season using the 7D (and also buying a 5DMkII or MkIII) then it is also my opinion that any APS-C only lens is wasted capital for a <strong><em>dual format kit</em></strong>.</p>

<p>(Since we cut over to Digital in 2004/5, I purposely planned and subsequently have always used a dual format EOS digital kit and I only have two APS-C lenses, both are 18 to 55 kit lenses which came in a bundle, one with a 20D and later with a 30D, since then I have bought APS-C and FF 'bodies only' as replacements.) <br>

<br>

WW</p>

 

[Marcus Ian]

<blockquote>

<p>Tokina 12-24 f/4 - $350</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know how effective that will be on the FF (As WW points out), but an alternative is the Tamron 10-24/3.5-4.5. It of course works fine on the 7D, but also works well on the 5D out to about 13/14mm. It doesn't vignette noticeably @ ~14mm+ on the FF 5D. However, if you get sloppy with the zoom, you'll end up with images that reflect that. For awhile, while shooting a dual format kit, I left the 16-35/2.8 in the car in lieu of the Tamron - purely to save weight. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Canon 24-70mm 2.8 IS - $1100</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hadn't heard that they released this guy! at only $1100!?! wow!... wait... *sigh* nevermind... Seriously though. The only 24-70/2.8 IS (read VC) that I'm aware of is the Tamron. The fact that it is a) new, b) ~ the same price, c) actually has VC (IS), and d) has as good or better IQ means that it trumps the 24-70/2.8L in all regions that actually matter to a wedding photog (except of course the color of the ring ;) ).</p>

[savagesax]

Maybe the Canon 24 - 70 is one heck of a good price. I don't think so. Everyone already stated that Canon doesn't make this lens. Perhaps you are thinking about the 24 - 105? That has an IS. Anyway, the camera gear you wrote about is too good. The 70-200mm lens is a very old price. They sell for around $2000 or higher.

 

Be very careful here. And I really mean careful. Are you looking at places that offer amazing prices? Such as overseas? I got scewed one time by buying something that was too good to be true. I lost a hefty amount of money.

 

Buy your gear from the really well known companies. For example B&H in NYC, Adorama also NYC, KEH, and for me I use Woodland Hills Camera, here in Los Angeles. Ask for Scott. He is so dang smart. You can use my name if you wish. He often matches or beats the NYC prices.

 

Also if you buy something and you don't like it be aware that there are some places that charge for a restocking fee. 20 percent is common. This won't happen with the above places. A place I totally hate is Samy's Camera. If you buy something and you don't like it they will not give you your money back. You have to exchange the product for the same one or you have to buy gear equal to what you paid for. They are horrible!

 

I've been doing this since 1982, my first camera, so I've been around a bit and I know how a lot of these companies work. If the price is too good to be true, also be aware of grey market gear. Hope this helps.

 

Be careful. Before buying anything post a comment of the store and pretty much all of the readers will give an opinion.

 

Best of luck.