Best one wedding lens

[alex_find]

Quick question for all you pros out there,

if you were to purchase one canon lens keeping

it under $1500.00 which one would it be and why?.

I have been looking at the canon 24-70 f/2.8 usm

and the 135 f/2L usm, realizing right off the bat

the zoom limitations of the later. Any help would

be greatly appreciated.

Alex<div></div>

[rich_dutchman1]

Easy - the 28 1.4D. This is a Nikon lens, but I know Canon makes one also (might be a 1.8). It's incredibly sharp and wide enough, but you have to get close for the candids. You can open wide to 1.4 and eliminate the background - totally isolating subjects. You can also turn candlelit rooms into daylight. My second choice is the standard 80-200 2.8 zoom. I know it's heavy, but it works great in the ceremonies, and I just can't bear to replace with a 180 or less.

[asimh]

alex, that is one smaaaaaaaall picture.

[philip_meadows1]

50mm and a can of deodorant (you'll be zooming a lot with your feet). A non L series 50mm al-la 1.8 or 1.4 will blow all others into the weeds with excellent technique and lots a change for film or memory cards!

[cliff_henry]

Alex,

 

You didn't say if you were shooting film or dig. If dig. what is crop, 1.6, 1.3 or 1.0?

 

I shoot weddings every week on film and about 85~90% of my shots are with a 28-80 f2.8-4L lens which was replaced with the 28-70 2.8L. If I were using 1.6 crop dig. I would consider the 24-70 2.8L.

 

Only one time have I used wider than 28mm during a wedding. At about 15% of weddings, where there are church restrictions, I use 80-200 2.8L from back of church. I use 20-35 2.8L at receptions about 20% of shots, close in on dance floor. I use 85 1.2L for low light shots and to isolate focus on head shots. About 1% of time I will use 135 2.8 SF for the soft focus.

 

If I were going to use primes with film, I would want a 50 1.4, 35 1.4L, 85 1.2L, 135 2.0L, and 200 2.8L, in that order, which would fit my shooting style.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Cliff

[timberwolf1]

I agree, just a normal 50mm lens will do it. You can always use "sneaker zoom". A 70mm setting is not much different than 70mm. Always have a fast sharp 50mm available at weddings. A 50mm lens will also allow you to white tape your distances around the barrel of the lens so that you can use "distances and manual mode" when you have no trust in auto mode. The 50mm will force you to consider distances.

[rich_dutchman1]

It all depends on how much flash you use. I you shoot mostly available light, then the 28 1.4 will be twice as fast as the 50 with twice the depth of field (not exactly, but close to it at least). That said, the 50 is a fraction of the cost.

[fotografz]

Hunt down a nice used 17-35/2.8L, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8. Film or digital, lowlight or

sunlight, wide views or portrait, you'll be covered.

[Marc453]

I now use the 28~135mm IS but I have a 50 f1/8 nearby. It is very, very hard to beat in any wedding circumstance.

[timberwolf1]

The reason I don't need a telephoto lens is because I

will usually be at a distance with a normal lens of about 5-6 feet for portraits.

Because I will be photographing 2 people in portraits mostly: the bride and groom.

This extra person puts me back in distance. And this is what a telephoto does for

portraits: it pushes you back to give a certain look.

<p>

In a single portrait of a person, like a bride, I am usually set back to see her veil, as well

as her face. So, again I am distanced from the subject using a normal lens. No need

for a 85mm lens, in other words.

<p>

I rarely use a 28mm; I

would only really use this lens as a speciality item. I would use a 28mm in a small

dressing room, for example.

<p>

The only other alternative I would suggest for a one-lens choice is a 35mm lens. This is a

basic photojournalistic choice. But it is not a good lens for a portrait of one person. It will

make their midsection look larger.

<p>

The 50mm is the best all-around choice for weddings. All other choices meet specialty

problems at weddings. The 50mm can basically "do it all" if you are alittle careful in your

choices of posing and don't mind a little extra backing-up with your feet.

[fotografz]

Timber, if Alex is using a digital camera, then a 28mm is a very good idea. Cameras like

the 10D/Rebel and D100/70 have smaller sensors that effectively multiply the lens factor.

A 28mm on a D10 equals a 45mm.

[think27]

I hope you will have at least two lenses with you - just in case something happens to one of them. Two bodies as well. <p>All anyone can tell you is their personal preferences. I love my three zooms and one fixed 1/4 for low light. I prefer zooms so that I'm not "zooming with my feet" as some say. With my zooms - no one even knows I'm there. 17-28 2.8L, 28-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L IS are my zooms. Most of my work is with the 28-70 but I do most of my work with couples and individual portraits work with the 70-200. That is not a right or wrong answer -- Just my preference based on flexibility of catching "moments" quickly, quietly and easily as well as I love the look/persepctive and blurred background the 70-200 gives me on couple shots.

[timberwolf1]

In response to the "digital" reference above. The questioner appears to me to be using a

film camera or a full-frame digital camera. But he doesn't specify which. However, I

really don't don't know which model of camera or which format it is in fact. He doesn't

specify. Therefore, my recommendation for a one lens choice is for a "normal lens" in

whatever format is used. If that is a 28mm in a 25mm digital, then that is "normal" for

that format. If the format is 35mm digital/film then it is 50mm for a "normal" focal length

lens. A fast "normal" focal length lens is my choice for whatever format is used, any

format, large or small.