Wedding - One lens only

agent orange

agent orange

Messages
103
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

Slightly unusual request this. If you could have just one lens for a wedding with no assistant what one would it be? On an EOS 1D MKII I'm thinking 24-70 2.8 or 35 1.4. Has to be just one lens because I'm hiring and my existing lenses (70-200 2.8L and 14-40 4L) I don't think will be suitable. I could probably make the 70-200 work but it's a fair old lump for a wedding.

Very long story short but I'm getting an opportunity that most don't get. To shoot a wedding with little or no expectation and pressure for the results. The experience can only make me better.

Constant lens changes will complicate the day so I really want to stick to a single lens and work within those boundaries.

I've trawled various sites and asked a couple of photography mates who have written me some excellent documentation including poses etc. so I'm about as prepared as I can be in that respect. But we couldn't really nail down a single lens.

My choice of camera isn't ideal for indoor shooting though other than the church we should be outside.

Canon 1D MKII with an 430 EX-II so I'm thinking I'm really going to need the 1.4 in the church but the 24-70 2.8 will be more versatile.
 
Last edited:
Just a fast standard lens. I'm assuming your camera is a smaller sensor so the 35mm f1.4 should do it.


Steve.
 
Unless you can't take them all, take them all and be prepared no need to swap and change all day arrivals 24-70, during service 70-200 if access is restricted if not which ever, if you need the f/1.4 go with that. 24-70 should be fine for everything else 1st dance the 35mm if light is low and use the 70-200 for candid stuff after you have everything else sorted.
 
If you've already got the 17-40 and 70-200 then the 24-70 is the obvious choice.

A faster lens might be better for the first dance but otherwise a quality fast zoom seems the order of the day for me

Mike
 
35f1.4 although fast isn't going to take flattering portraits 24~70 every day off the week!
 
Next on my list to buy is the 24-70
No brainer for me, and if you're interested, Jessops have it on interest free credit and a good price. I really wanted to get it before my holiday, but alas, the 50mm is the likely companion to the sunshine as I just got too busy and never got round to it
 
Was leaning towards the 24-70 2.8 but just a tad concerned about the low light ability of my 1D2.

However the more I read about about the 35 1.4 the more I'm inclined to go with the 24-70. 1.4 is going to mean a very shallow DoF. It seems the 35 is a bit soft and vignettes on a 1.3 crop until you get to f2.

So effectively comes down to a 35mm f2 v a 24-70 2.8. 24-70 it is then.

Now just have to navigate the new Lens For Hire website....
 
Have you considered the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC? Its very sharp and of course is stabilised, plus cheaper than the Canon 24-70 mKII.
Ive owned two copies and now the Canon and i'd be happy with either as far as IQ goes (of course the Canon is a bit better but not by much)
I too am doing a one off low pressure wedding this Friday, and i got the 24-70 specifically for this day, well, that was my excuse anyway lol.
 
I if were buying it would be well worth considering but as I'm hiring it can only be Canon. Not sure anyone hires Tamron lenses. If they do the hire price isn't going to be much less than the Canon I'd have thought. Maybe £20 and for £20 I'd rather go with the Canon.
 
True, the Canon is the better lens (i assume you are talking about the MKII, you haven't stated this as far as i can see), although i think the Tamron is more versatile.
I'd take the Canon over it every time for general use, but i do sometimes miss IS/VC fo rvery low light. f/2.8 isnt that fast, although i cant imagine a better lens if just using the one.
I plan to use mine most of the time, although ill probably use my 70-200 f/4 if i can for some shots. Gotta love the high ISO on the 5DMKIII :)
 
I'd get a 24-70 but I would certainly take the 70-200. I shoot as much of a wedding as possible with the 70-200 & only use the 24-70 for the routine shots.
I'll quantify that by saying I shoot weddings fairly traditionally, if your style is more natural light & reportage then a fast prime will be the way to go as thats what those guys seem to use
 
agent orange said:
Yep.. that is the bit that worries me the most about the 1D2. ISO 800 is about as high as I'm prepared to go.

PS. Yes MKII lens.
Click to expand...

Is the high iso that bad on a 1d mkII? I've used 1600 no problem on a 40D & still use a 1d mkIII at 3200
 
agent orange said:
Yep.. that is the bit that worries me the most about the 1D2. ISO 800 is about as high as I'm prepared to go.

PS. Yes MKII lens.
Click to expand...

I must admit when i was asked to do this i also used it as a reason to buy my 5DMKII. I find ISO3200 to be usable on my 60D but id rather not.
Actually i think ive spent more on getting the gear for this wedding than they (my estranged daughter) spent on the wedding itself lol.
 
agent orange said:
1D MK2 was launched in 2001
40D and 1D MK3 launched in 2007

5-6 years is a lifetime in technology. 1D MK2 goes from 100-1600 ISO. If I have to use 1600 just to get the shot then I'll use it but I'd really rather not.
Click to expand...

I didn't realise the mkIIs life span was that long.
Using a body thats going to max out at iso800 could make the ceremony tricky. Just checked & of my last 10 church weddings the ceremony was shot at iso1600 for one, iso3200 for 3 & iso6400 for 6. Thats typically with a 70-200 at f3.2 or thereabouts. Can you check out the church beforehand to check the light levels, assuming of course you are allowed to shoot through the ceremony?

A fast prime may well be good to have in the bag
 
Last edited:
Actually just checked my facts and it was launched in 2004. Not quite so old but still.

A fast prime would be good but this is a one off and whilst I'd like a fast prime I do not have the funds for one. Neither do I really want to hire two lenses otherwise the cost just keeps going up and up.

35mm 1.4 vignettes and isn't so sharp below f2 and the 50mm 1.2 is too slow AF.

The body is the wrong choice but I have to work with what I have so it's a bit of a compromise all round but we'll see what I can get out of it.

I am allowed to shoot during the ceremony and will have access in the morning to check light levels. I might have to think on my feet and forego certain shots for those where there are decent light levels in the church. ie. Big windows!! :)
 
agent orange said:
Yep.. that is the bit that worries me the most about the 1D2. ISO 800 is about as high as I'm prepared to go.

PS. Yes MKII lens.
Click to expand...

Forget this if you're shooting a wedding inside. 800 ISO will mean you're gambling with shutter speeds.

Will the bride be happier with
  • Noise free blurry images:shake:
  • Slightly noisy sharp images:D.

As photographers it's easy to get hung up on issues like noise, it's also complete b****x.

Look at the best sports photos shot on fast film, film grain the size of golf balls, but if it's either grainy or no shot - what do you choose?

If you're shooting to a brief - you get the shot, no excuses - no 'I don't like using high ISO's', no 'My lens won't focus in the dark', no 'My camera died and I had no backup'.

It doesn't matter how relaxed you think the B&G are about the photographs, you'll find out how seriously they take it when you turn up without any sharp pictures.
 
as you'll presumably have a back up camera i'd stick the 70-200 on that , and hire a 24-70 to put on your 1D

alternately if your back up is a crop , you could put the 70-200mon the 1D and get a 17-55 on the crop sensor.
 
big soft moose said:
as you'll presumably have a back up camera i'd stick the 70-200 on that , and hire a 24-70 to put on your 1D

alternately if your back up is a crop , you could put the 70-200mon the 1D and get a 17-55 on the crop sensor.
Click to expand...
This. And if you don't have a backup, hire one. I was lucky to be in the same position as you (friends wedding, no pressure, no expectation), but I put a lot of pressure on myself to get every shot and do well. I personally wouldn't do it again, as it ruined my chances of enjoying the day, which is what a lot of people say will happen. Live and learn tho, it was worth it for that knowledge alone!

FWIW I used two crop bodies, shot with 16-85 on first and 35mm f1.8 on the second body, both with OEM TTL flashes, essential for the slow lens, not really needed with the prime. The venue and ceremony were very small (all done in a hotel) so no real benefit to a long zoom. I swapped to a 10-20 UWA for the outdoor group shots, and in retrospect I'd rather have had an f2.8 17-50/55 instead of the 16-85. The results were acceptable, but definitely not up to the standard I'd hoped to achieve, mainly due to the amount of planning and thinking on my feet that I had to do.

Good luck though, hope it goes well :)
 
Last edited:
agent orange said:
1D MK2 was launched in 2001
40D and 1D MK3 launched in 2007

5-6 years is a lifetime in technology. 1D MK2 goes from 100-1600 ISO. If I have to use 1600 just to get the shot then I'll use it but I'd really rather not.
Click to expand...

EOS 1d mkII Apr 2004

EOS 1d mkIIn Oct 2005

Source - Canon Camera museum.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
If you're shooting to a brief - you get the shot, no excuses - no 'I don't like using high ISO's', no 'My lens won't focus in the dark', no 'My camera died and I had no backup'.

It doesn't matter how relaxed you think the B&G are about the photographs, you'll find out how seriously they take it when you turn up without any sharp pictures.
Click to expand...

Granted I didn't go into a huge amount of detail in my initial post but I'm not shooting to a brief - I'm one of 4 best men who just happens to have a camera in his hands. Quite simply anything I get will be a bonus. Though as I said earlier if I have to use 1600 just to get the shot then I'll use it but I'd really rather not.

In addition the B&G have zero expectation for the final images. It's about this point most threads about weddings go nuclear on here so I'll tread carefully. ;)

I can of course hear the scoffing at the back and those that'll think, when pressed, no one in their right mind has that kind of attitude to their wedding photos. Suffice to say if this were any other B&G I would agree with you but you'll just have to trust me on this. I wouldn't do this with my wedding but their photos will be "whatever anyone posts on facebook" and if I "get any shots that are any good that would be a bonus."

As an aside I see that as a worrying development for wedding photographers - at least those at the lower end for which a photo tagged of them on facebook is sufficient. But that's a whole other thread!

They completely appreciate that as they aren't prepared to spend any money on a professional that having a best man shoot, what I get is what I get. I'll do my best but personally I wouldn't want me shooting your wedding.

big soft moose said:
as you'll presumably have a back up camera i'd stick the 70-200 on that , and hire a 24-70 to put on your 1D

alternately if your back up is a crop , you could put the 70-200mon the 1D and get a 17-55 on the crop sensor.
Click to expand...

Ah yes.. you presume wrong I'm afraid. :D Nope the 1D2 is my only body and was bought purely for sports. If the camera dies... it dies. If I can't get a shot - I don't get the shot.

ronnus said:
This. And if you don't have a backup, hire one. I was lucky to be in the same position as you (friends wedding, no pressure, no expectation), but I put a lot of pressure on myself to get every shot and do well. I personally wouldn't do it again, as it ruined my chances of enjoying the day, which is what a lot of people say will happen. Live and learn tho, it was worth it for that knowledge alone!
Click to expand...

Like you I want to do the best I can for my friend. If I can nail just 5 shots I'll be ecstatic - more so than they will be I can guarantee. But myself and the B&G are realistic. If I come away with nothing - so be it. Someone will of captured something on a compact. I certainly won't do it again and I've not even shot it yet. Had any other person on the planet asked I'd have refused but long story short 25 years of favours being called in.

It's a fairly unique situation and therefore a rare opportunity because there is one thing I can guarantee it's that'll know more about myself and my camera than before the wedding even if every shot is only fit for the bin.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, because I am in a similar position to you. My girlfriend's sister is getting married in August. It will be a small local do based around a local pub in nice surroundings, and they are on a minimal budget. Therefore, because I have a 'decent' camera and I take 'good' photos, I've won the job as 'wedding photographer'.

Now, I have been using SLRs for 30-odd years, but I have spent most of that time doing railway photography with a few holiday photos thrown in. My portrait and people photography skills are virtually zero, but I 'have a good camera'!

Despite the fact I've told them that a 'good' camera doesn't mean a good wedding photographer, I will probably have the best camera there and they have said they would only just be using whatever anybody else shot on the day with phones and compacts, so I suppose I am better than nothing.

So, I think my equipment for the day will be my 450D, on its own with no back-up, my Sigma 30mm f1.4 and 430EX flash. I also have a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 OS and 50mm f1.8 plus Canon 70-300IS, but I think my needs will probably be best served by the 30mm. Like the OP, I will not be keen to faff with changing lenses or carry a big camera bag, but I will probably take it anyway. I am also looking to ask a friend to come along who will also have a 'good' camera as a back up to my potential inadequacies.

I suppose as I am in a similar predicament to the OP, he won't mind me also jumping in with a question of "Will the 30mm plus flash option be enough?" Any advice, other than "Don't do it" will be gratefully taken on board!
 
I can't believe the amount of stuff I've crammed in over the past 3-4 months, mainly flash use.
Whatever I end up getting on Friday (and I know they will be very happy with it) ill certainly come out of it with a lot more confidence and knowledge.
Never again though. The more I read about shooting weddings the more I realise how much goes in to doing a really good job.
My hat goes off to those that do this sort of thing every week, although I would expect it to get a bit easier the more you do.
 
dave_bass5 said:
The more I read about shooting weddings the more I realise how much goes in to doing a really good job.
Click to expand...

Yep it looks insane. Coupled with the initial expense of setting up, kissing goodbye to weekends, the pre-shoot work, the post-shoot work plus the need to get at least 2-3 weddings a month to even consider it paying it's way I'd have to say - no thanks!

Those that do though :clap:
 
agent orange said:
Ah yes.. you presume wrong I'm afraid. :D Nope the 1D2 is my only body and was bought purely for sports. If the camera dies... it dies. If I can't get a shot - I don't get the shot.
.
Click to expand...

just hire a back up , quite appart from the whole "what do you mean you didnt get any pictures because your camera died" angle theres also the point that two bodies means no (or very little) lens changing
 
to be honest you could just buy a nifty that difference between 1.4 and 1.8 will be negligible in practice (yes the 1.4 is built loads better but you can buy a 1.8 for the price of hiring a 1.4 )
 
I'd go with the 24-70 f2.8 if you could only take one - seems to be a popular choice amongst our wedding photographer customers!
 
Hi Agent orange, do you know what kind of photography the B&G specifically want? If they're not looking for just posed shots then that 70-200 could come in handy for some reportage less imposing shots, I wouldn't rule it out.
 
If I were in the same situation I would probably put either my 50mm F1.4 or 35mm F2 on the camera and go enjoy the day. I know at other events I have taken the 35mm and really enjoyed shooting with it - yes shots are not as tightly cropped on the subject unless I get in close but there is plenty of context from the surroundings.

But I do like using 35mm on full frame.

big soft moose said:
just hire a back up , quite appart from the whole "what do you mean you didnt get any pictures because your camera died" angle theres also the point that two bodies means no (or very little) lens changing
Click to expand...

Carrying two bodies round at a wedding where you are one of the best men... not my idea of fun!
 
RichardtheSane said:
Carrying two bodies round at a wedding where you are one of the best men... not my idea of fun!
Click to expand...

True - but i wouldnt reccomend photographing the wedding at all as one of the best men

IMO you can either be there as a guest/participant or as the photographer, not both , and if its the former you might as well just carry a compact/iphone like everyone else
 
So... despite trying to restrict myself to a single lens I've packed:

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4 L
24-70 2.8 L
50 1.4

and I'm taking my Lowepro Vertex 300 rather than the smaller, lighter Flipside 400... :bang::LOL:

Wedding is tomorrow and the weather looking good (y)

Fingers crossed eh... :help:
 
Well it was hard work and a full day what with scoping out the church in the morning and being on hand to shot from 2pm until 10pm. Whilst there are a few disasters I managed to more or less keep my head above water but I nearly crumbled in the church.

Brain started swimming, forehead sweating profusely and some bizarre shutter/aperture selection meant that much of the shots inside the church are acceptable as snaps but personally a bit disappointed.

They are very, very happy though which is the main thing. But I certainly wouldn't recommend being a best man and photographer! Despite my best efforts I'd been unable to pin down any firm requirements other than "just take some photos" and "not bothered about group shots". In many ways that made it hard as I was searching for shots but in others relieved some pressure.

Even though I limited myself to just a handful of glasses of champagne my evening photography went a bit awry. Didn't help I put the flash away and the 1D was struggling to focus and give anything like hand holdable shutter speeds even at ISO 1600 and 1.4.

A couple of samples

1.

Jason and Sheena Wedding-150 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr

2.

Jason and Sheena Wedding-152 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr

3.

Jason and Sheena Wedding-209 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr

4. Not the groom!

Jason and Sheena Wedding-503 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr

5.

Jason and Sheena Wedding-782 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr

6.

Jason and Sheena Wedding-349 by AgentOrange71, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top