Which lens?

[ethan_mei]

<p>Fellow Photogs, I really need your help! I'm fairly new to the wedding industry and have one year of experience under my belt, with 10 weddings done this year-one as a primary for a friend. My question is on lenses. Yes, the typical, but strategically important question (when funds are limited) on which lens to get next. <br /><br />This past year, I've use mainly the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS II on my 5D Mark II & the Sigma 35 f/1.4 on my Mark III. I've just sold my never used Canon 50 f/1.8II & seldom used Canon 24-105 f/4. I can now mortgage another lens! I have 4 in mind, but can only get one at this time & wanted to get your more experienced insights. The 4 lenses I have in mind to get next is:<br /><br />1) Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II <br />2) Canon 50 f/1.2 <br />3) Canon 85 f/1.2 II<br />4) Canon 16-35 f/2.8 II<br /><br />Which one should I go for?!?<br>

<br />Thanks for your input!<br /><br /></p>

[pete_s.]

<p>Well, what are you going to do when you drop your camera with the 35mm lens and the lens breaks?<br /> Shoot the rest of the day with the 70-200?<br /> Or if you drop the 70-200? Shoot everything at 35mm?</p>

<p>That's the question I would ask myself.<br /> <br />Zooms or primes is a matter of taste. But you don't have anything wider than 35mm. I would worry a little about that.</p>

<p>BTW, after 10 weddings you should know what you miss in the way of lenses. If you don't, perhaps you are not missing anything. In that case I'd just worry about backups.</p>

 

[ethan_mei]

<p>Pete, thanks for chiming in. That's why I asked the question-which lens to get next? I can't afford to have 2 primes and 2 zooms at the moment. I have the 35 1.4 & 70-200. Which lens would you get next?</p>

[lornesunley]

<p>Personally, I'd get the 24-70 f/2.8. I bought one a couple of months ago, having made do with primes and an old 24-85 variable aperture zoom for events and found that the 24-70 2.8 is very nice and gets used a lot (at least for events)</p>

[pete_s.]

<blockquote>

<p>I have the 35 1.4 & 70-200. Which lens would you get next?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd get a cheap<a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/canon/lenses/normal-range/tamron-28-75mm-f2.8-xr-di-ld-for-canon"> tamron 28-75 f2.8</a> for backup use. Likely a used one. Best value for money midrange zoom.<br /> <br /> Then I'd save my money until I felt the need for something else.<br /> <br /> Being a prime user I'd probably feel the need for 85mm or possibly the 135 f2 eventually. Then I'd get the 24mm f1.4.</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>24-70 is a great candid lens and works for family combination shots. 85mm is great for portraits and low light candids. 50 is good for low light and shallow depth of field. 16-35 is good for wide shots in tight places and good for your room shots and interior shots of the venues. I can not tell you what you need next. You have 10 jobs under your belt so you tell me what lens on your list you wished you had to make your job easier and improve your shots. Pete has a point about back up lens and your 24-70 would fit that need. When money is tight it is best to get zoom lenses first to maximize focal lengths. good luck.</p>

[William Michael]

<p>I agree with Pete S's advice and his general comments about back up.<br />Personally, for Weddings I'd always first look at System Redundancy: with the kit you <strong><em>now</em></strong> have you are exposed if you have a lens failure, especially if the 35/1.4 goes down: if I were you I would not have sold the 50/1.8MkII even though I might never have used it - it is a back-up lens that can work on either camera and with skill and experience would allow one to shoot the remainder of a Wedding albeit with some restrictions.<br />From that point, it is really up to you and <em><strong>how you want to work</strong></em> as to what you should get form that list, but the two obvious choices (for maximum System Redundancy) are either the 24 -70/2.8L MkII or the 50/1.2L.<br>

<br />*<br>

<br />However: I do very much like the idea of buying a second hand Tamron 28 to 75/2.8 or another 50/1.8MkII as the <strong><em>back up to the main working lens. </em></strong><br />Then from that point (if I were you) I would be freed-up to choose another main working lens with more respect to the way I wanted to shoot weddings.<br />In this case I would opt for the 85/1.2LMkII, as I have shot many weddings and more recently social events with two working 5D cameras and the 35/1.4 on one and the 85/1.8 on the other and I really like working with that combination of two fast primes and I think that the 85/1.2MkII would be even more elegant.</p>

<p>*<br>

Personally, I don't really like shooting wider than 35mm for weddings and social events, but in some circumstances to do so is the easier of two choices. In this case I'd have one wider prime (even a slow prime like the 24/2.8) or the Tamron 28-75 in the bag - again I wouldn't mind if it only got used every blue moon, having capacity to go wider than 35mm (on a 5D) is just good principled business sense, IMO.</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

[rick_chen]

<p>I would say first choice is 24-70 if you plan to be the primary, you wont have time to change lenses. It gets you wider and covers anything in between in a high pressure situation such as a wedding. The fast sigma 35 can cover the 50mm for now, just crop a little or move forward. If you are 2nd, and the primary is covering the main angles and leaving you to do details and stuff, then i would consider 85 and 50 for their subject separation. For now the 70-200 can cover the same range even though it's not as fast as the primes, but the 200mm can generate some nice bokeh.<br>

I think of 50 and 85 as portrait lenses for getting ready etc., which is nice to have but then if you are to have 1 lens choice then your 70-200 might suffice for now.<br>

If you like doing a lot of landscape and architectural wedding shots, i would take the 16-35 next, also covers tight interior spaces.</p>

[JohnWebster]

<p>I hope the professional photography industry can recover from the digital tidal wave of cameras and newbies to the field. I have been retired for three years and I finished my wedding and portrait business using a Canon 20D with the kit lens (18-55) and the 35-105 F4 L lens. I did a neighbor's family reunion for free using a Panasonic Lumix SZ7 and I am uploading an example of what I obtained.</p><div></div>

[rick_chen]

Human population kept increasing without world wars, there will only be more newbies and more technologically

advanced cameras for cheap flooding everywhere. It's tough out there. You can't hope for recovery, you adapt

You are lucky to be retired

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I don't shoot weddings often but when I do my two "money" lenses are the same two I use for most other assignments -- 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. I would keep those two and the 16-35 for working in close quarters, particularly large groups in small rooms. The 50 and 85 are nice special purpose lenses but icing on the cake. I would probably kept the 25-105 as a backup.<br /><br />Wasn't this question just asked the other day?</p>

[michaelmowery]

<p>I know this may be obvious. The lens is the extension of your vision for your composition. Zoom lenses offer multiple focal lengths in one housing which makes it quicker to use and cheaper than buying all primes. When you are starting out doing event work you have to have a range of lenses from wide to tele and a backup zoom. Zooms are good because you don't want to keep moving forward or backing up in a room full of people. If you are doing just photojournalism then you can get away with primes because you are not the main photographer who shoots all the bread and butter shots. You are getting more creative shots (the shots that don't quite fit in your frame cause you could not back up in time) Still not sure why you sold your 24-105, that is the perfect candid zoom with flash or a good back up lens. </p>

[jay_smith10]

<p>As per my experience Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II is the perfect for shooting in your wedding.</p>

 

<p><blockquote><strong> MODERATOR NOTE:</strong></p>

<p>Your post has been edited.</p>

<p>Please do not use Forum Threads as a tool to advertise and promote your business</p>

<p>This contravenes the Terms of Use and the User Guidelines</p>

<p>This your first and your only warning</blockquote></p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>If your 50/1.8 was never used, I can't see why you'd purchase a 50/1.2. It's a helluva lot heavier, slower, and not much better for f2.8 + work. I think the rationale for your post is somewhat erroneous. If I read this correctly, the 70-200 & the 35/1.4 are your only lenses. You are one failure away from being grossly negligent in your coverage of weddings. Part of being a professional is that you have the capability to absorb an equipment failure.</p>

<p>... And you've got ~$2300 with which to fill your stable (else you couldn't afford a 24-70/2.8 L II)<br>

Personally, I'd grab a Tamron 24-70/2.8 USD VC ($1300) as by far the best bang for your buck in a wide-mid zoom, and maybe a prime or two to round out a good carry package, for example, an 85/1.8 USM or a Sig 85/1.4 would both fit your budget, and add stunning capability. Then it would take two simultaneous failures to kill either the long or short end. </p>