Good lens for wedding?

ShoeQueen

ShoeQueen

Messages
2,370
Name
Lynn
Edit My Images
No
It happened - I've been asked to do a wedding for a friend... I know I just have a D90 and no wedding experience - but I've explained all that to my friend and she just likes my photos and wants me to do it. It'll be small and relatively informal. I've experience in running events, having lists and timetables and being on my feet all day so I know it will be a long day and hard work.

I'm going to borrow a second D90 but at the moment I've only got the kit lens and a 50mm 1.8. Rather than rush out and buy a new lens I was going to hire a lens or two for the day. (The couple will cover this cost).

Suggestions on a lens/es to hire?

TIA.
 
It will depend on style but if it was me using a crop body then I would want a 17-50mm f2.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 combo. I use full frame so use a 24-105 and 70-200 combo but the options listed are the closest possible. For me I can shoot an entire wedding happily with those two, I do like popping a fast prime on sometimes but you really don't want to confuse things as you will be working hard already.
 
If you're hiring the sensible thing to do would be to hire a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 BUT if I were you I'd ask the happy couple to buy you a lens for the same price as hiring as payment, something like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC version is best) which will do the job fine and you get something to keep out of it (other than a warm fuzzy feeling inside).

Something a little longer can be good for natural candid shots but assuming your kit lens is the 18-105 then that will probably do but 200mm would be ideal.

Also, venue dependant, I'd look at getting a flash I could bounce (not so critical in a church but can still be useful).

So, one one hand you could quite easily cover the wedding with your current lenses, on the other hand a constant f/2.8 zoom will make the job much easier, up to you whether to hire the Nikon or buy the Tamron.

If you're used to bossing groups around then you're half way there to be honest as you'll not be flustered so will be able to concentrate on the photography side of things.
 
Thanks guys. I'd thought of the 24-70 2.8 but wasn't sure if that would give me enough range so I'll also look at the 17-50/70-200 combo.

I've already got an SB600 which I've used bounced with my 50mm at some events (friend's birthday bash, charity fundraising dance etc).

I had a go at a group shot last week (publicity shot for a sports club), which was good practice but I also teach evening classes p/t so I'm used to giving direction and building rapport with groups, which I'm hoping will help.
 
Nawty said:
If you're hiring the sensible thing to do would be to hire a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 BUT if I were you I'd ask the happy couple to buy you a lens for the same price as hiring as payment, something like the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non-VC version is best) which will do the job fine and you get something to keep out of it (other than a warm fuzzy feeling inside).
Click to expand...
You've got me thinking about that lens now though... I love my 50mm but for dancing shots its too close, had been considering getting a 35mm 1.8 but a 17-50mm 2.8 might be a better investment...
 
Because it is much sharper than the newer VC version which is a somewhat different design.

The only thing is, f1.8 is over a stop faster than f2.8 so especially in the evening a 35mm f1.8 might come in handy. Depends on how high ISO you're happy shooting the D90 (I was happy with 3200 on mine, as long as you expose properly and have decent noise reduction software).
 
I'm shooting my first wedding in September. As it happens it's a similar situation to your's. I have a D90 too. I'll be taking my 17-55mm f/2.8, my 35mm f/1.8 and I'll hire in a 70-200 f/2.8 VRII. All of the above are Nikkor lenses. I'm also hoping to get a spare body for the day.

If I were you I'd try and get a 17-55 f/2.8 and a 70-200 f/2.8. The lenses are both really sharp and are a pleasure to use. If you look into hiring you'll notice that hiring two lenses doesn't double the cost of hire as you only pay postage once.

Pro lenses look the part so people will know you are the head tog and won't get in your way.

Good luck.
 
If they are covering the hire cost then you may as well go for the best and get a Nikon 17-55mm on one body and a 70-200mm VR II on the other.
 
Nawty said:
Because it is much sharper than the newer VC version which is a somewhat different design.
Click to expand...
Ah, thanks. Can only find the VC listed in local retailers, would I need to look s/h for the non VC then?

Nawty said:
The only thing is, f1.8 is over a stop faster than f2.8 so especially in the evening a 35mm f1.8 might come in handy. Depends on how high ISO you're happy shooting the D90 (I was happy with 3200 on mine, as long as you expose properly and have decent noise reduction software).
Click to expand...
I use bounced flash usually as well as the venues are often very poorly lit, so I could maybe get away with the f2.8. Another option to consider anyway.
 
Mark G said:
I only use up to 1600 with mine. Any higher and imho you're limited to black and white and small prints.
Click to expand...

Yar, it depends on what you're happy with and what the situation is but for A4 prints at home 3200 (well exposed) was fine for me (and given the OP is doing a favour for a friend I would think it should suffice).

That said, I've just traded it in for a D700 as I'm a natural light junkie :D

FWIW I shot my first wedding with a D60, 18-55, 55-200 and 35mm plus SB800 and the shots came out great, B&G were more than happy. Fortunately I was blessed with great weather and an easy venue so my kit wasn't the limit, I was :)

edit: sounds like Lynn knows what she's doing so a constant f/2.8 zoom and some bounce/fill flash should be fine (I'd get some gels though) :)
 
Last edited:
Mark G said:
I'm shooting my first wedding in September. As it happens it's a similar situation to your's. I have a D90 too. I'll be taking my 17-55mm f/2.8, my 35mm f/1.8 and I'll hire in a 70-200 f/2.8 VRII. All of the above are Nikkor lenses. I'm also hoping to get a spare body for the day.

If I were you I'd try and get a 17-55 f/2.8 and a 70-200 f/2.8. The lenses are both really sharp and are a pleasure to use. If you look into hiring you'll notice that hiring two lenses doesn't double the cost of hire as you only pay postage once.

Pro lenses look the part so people will know you are the head tog and won't get in your way.

Good luck.
Click to expand...
I'm getting a loan of another D90 (easier to have two bodies the same). Fortunately I don't have to send off to hire, there is a local retailer who hires which is handy. I'll price the 17-55 and 70-200 lenses for hire as that sounds like a good combination.

Good luck with yours too Mark!
 
Last edited:
I'm now thinking of using (on two D90 bodies)

- 24-70 f2.8 (thinking of using Lensesforhire as I could hire locally for cheaper for a day but having the lens for several days would give me time to practice with it beforehand.)
- 18-200VR (borrowed from a friend)
- 50 f1.8D

Do you think that would cover enough options? I don't want to go to too much expense given that this a favour for a friend and I'm not getting paid.
 
What are you using for flash photography?
 
ShoeQueen said:
I'm now thinking of using (on two D90 bodies)

- 24-70 f2.8 (thinking of using Lensesforhire as I could hire locally for cheaper for a day but having the lens for several days would give me time to practice with it beforehand.)
- 18-200VR (borrowed from a friend)
- 50 f1.8D

Do you think that would cover enough options? I don't want to go to too much expense given that this a favour for a friend and I'm not getting paid.
Click to expand...


id personally say dont bother with the 24-70 and an 18-200. the 18-200 is not on the same quality level anyway. on crop bodies i would say a tamron 17-50 or nikon 17-55. its wide enough for group shots and long enough for portraits.

if you've got a second body you can be a bit more flexible - put the 50 on it, or hire a 70-200 or an 85mm prime for it.
 
PsiFox said:
What are you using for flash photography?
Click to expand...
A couple of SB600s.

kman said:
id personally say dont bother with the 24-70 and an 18-200. the 18-200 is not on the same quality level anyway. on crop bodies i would say a tamron 17-50 or nikon 17-55. its wide enough for group shots and long enough for portraits.

if you've got a second body you can be a bit more flexible - put the 50 on it, or hire a 70-200 or an 85mm prime for it.
Click to expand...
The 18-200 was just instead of my 18-105 kit lens for outside groups shots.

I have been thinking of a 17-50 but wasn't sure if it would be long enough?

Yes, while the second body is mostly for backup in case there is a problem, I was intending to put a lens on each and use both.
 
As I think I'd quite like one anyway, I'm thinking of getting the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non VC in time to use it at the wedding. Any recommendations on a good place to get one? Not seen any come for sale on here.

(Or is it worth paying the extra for the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8?)

Second lens then would a 70-200 f2.8 be best to hire? Or would an 85 f1.8 be better?

I'm going to look at the reception venue this week and then having a meet with the B&G and will get a contact name for the the church and arrange to go and see where I'm allowed to shoot from.
 
ShoeQueen said:
As I think I'd quite like one anyway, I'm thinking of getting the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 non VC in time to use it at the wedding. Any recommendations on a good place to get one? Not seen any come for sale on here.

(Or is it worth paying the extra for the Nikkor 17-55 f2.8?)

Second lens then would a 70-200 f2.8 be best to hire? Or would an 85 f1.8 be better?

I'm going to look at the reception venue this week and then having a meet with the B&G and will get a contact name for the the church and arrange to go and see where I'm allowed to shoot from.
Click to expand...

The tammy has they say, 90% of the Nikkor 17-55, at a fraction of the price, but the build quality of the Nikkor is way better than the Tamron. When my D300 comes out the bag 9/10 times the first lens on it is the 17-55.

Off Topic which part of NI are you in. I lived there for 5 years 69-74.
 
Last edited:
Don't forget extra batteries/cards etc oh and a brolly for you and protection for camera, depends on the size of the venue but I think you'll be better off hiring a SB900 as well.
 
ShoeQueen said:
Ah, thanks. Can only find the VC listed in local retailers, would I need to look s/h for the non VC then?

I use bounced flash usually as well as the venues are often very poorly lit, so I could maybe get away with the f2.8. Another option to consider anyway.
Click to expand...

Tamron 17-50 vc are worth a look most are now sharp, the 1st prodction run were soft from 2.8-4.0 but they seam to resolved these issues.

The non VC is cheaper
 
PsiFox said:
The tammy has they say, 90% of the Nikkor 17-55, at a fraction of the price, but the build quality of the Nikkor is way better than the Tamron. When my D300 comes out the bag 9/10 times the first lens on it is the 17-55.
Click to expand...
Thanks - I think I'll try to get the Tamron, budget wise its more accessible. But I know people say to get the non-VC version...

PsiFox said:
Off Topic which part of NI are you in. I lived there for 5 years 69-74.
Click to expand...
Just outside Belfast. :)

SussexBlue said:
Don't forget extra batteries/cards etc oh and a brolly for you and protection for camera, depends on the size of the venue but I think you'll be better off hiring a SB900 as well.
Click to expand...
Thanks - have most of that sorted or will have by wedding (October). Going to do test shots in the venue this week.
 
tris101 said:
Tamron 17-50 vc are worth a look most are now sharp, the 1st prodction run were soft from 2.8-4.0 but they seam to resolved these issues.

The non VC is cheaper
Click to expand...
The non VC only seems to be a bit cheaper (eg on Jessops website its only £5 less than VC?).
 
I lived in Crawfordsburn, near Bangor Co.Down.
 
Its lovely round there, we'd go for a walk along the coastal path sometimes.
 
This week I've been to the reception venue, taken some test shots and met with the B&G. Just have to visit the church, but they don't want many during the ceremony itself, more arriving/leaving and signing register (which will be in a different room and I will be able to use flash).

I think I may end up shooting from the back/balcony during the ceremony to be less intrusive (need to check).

So now I'm thinking of using as suggested
Tamron 17-50 f2.8
Nikon 70-200 f2.8 (hired)

I'll have two D90 bodies so thought a lens on each would make life easier.

I'll bring my other lenses (kit lens, 50 f1.8) and maybe borrow a 35 f1.8 as well.

Thanks for all the advice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top