Wedding photographers: which lens do you use the most?- updated

Twizzel

Twizzel

Messages
712
Name
Rach
Edit My Images
No
A few of you may know I'm doing the photographs at my friends' wedding in August. Not by choice may I add, their photographer decided to book a last minute holiday to Chille, so they have asked me to do it

:puke: <---- how I currently feel!!

I've got a Canon 40D and 2 really nice lenses- Sigma 10-20 and Sigma 70-200 2.8, but my lens for inbetween those is the 18-55 kit lens that I got with my 350D a few years back.

I've read a few photography books and lots of photographers tend to use a lens that covers the range that the kit lens does, in an ideal world I would have a 24-70 2.8 (it is on the wish list!) but I don't. I looked at the price of hiring one and at £50 I can't afford that either.

Would the 18-55 be ok to use?

Will I be ok just standing a little further back and mainly shooting with the 70-200?
 
I can't answer as to if you'd be OK standing back with your 70-200, but I'd look again at hiring a 24-70 to fill the gap. If the tog has gone on hols leaving you in the lurch can't you get them to pay the hire costs at a minimum?

Hugh
 
If it's in august, why don't they have enough time to find another professional wedding photographer?

Or if they were going to hire a pro, then SURELY at very least they could afford the £50 for you to hire a fast wide-normal zoom...

:popcorn:
 
The Canon 17-55/2.8 IS and 70-200/2.8L IS would be the ideal combo when shooting with crop bodies like the 40D. Anything slower than f/2.8 is taking a big gamble if the light is poor. IS is a big plus. I've had to shoot at 200mm, 1/60, f/2.8, 3200 ISO, no flash for one ceremony. In fact, shooting at 1/60 and f/2.8 is pretty common, indoors at least, day, evening or night. You just try to use the lowest ISO you can to get a good exposure.

There is always the option of primes, of course, which will gain you at least 1 stop of speed, if not 2, but you need to watch focus accuracy as DOF can get very shallow.

If you shoot with manual exposure, as I usually do, you really don't want a zoom with a variable max aperture. Something like an f/2.8-4.5 lens will just be a PITA, as well as potentially too slow at the long end.
 
The tog that went AWOL is a family friend who also is a pro. Wedding is a small budget, me doing the photos was the difference between them having photographs or not.

The 24-70 to hire is £55 or so which I can't afford, I was thinking about asking the bride and groom to hire it for me but really don't want to accept any money from them.

I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place :(
 
The 24-70 isn't ideal for your body, with the crop sensor I'd suggest something in the 17-55 2.8 range, you may find the 24 not wide enough in some cases, and it'll save switching lens, and the 10-20 does have more distortion.
Actuall although the kit lens get a lot of stick, somebody tested it against a decent "proper" lens and stopped down a stop or two they couldn't tell the difference.
 
Twizzel said:
The tog that went AWOL is a family friend who also is a pro. Wedding is a small budget, me doing the photos was the difference between them having photographs or not.

The 24-70 to hire is £55 or so which I can't afford, I was thinking about asking the bride and groom to hire it for me but really don't want to accept any money from them.

I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place :(
Click to expand...

I completly understand you're position on the money & friends things etc, etc but couldn't you ask them to hire on your behalf and explain your reasons for asking them to do so. That avoids the taking money off them bit.

If your really uncomfortable doing that use your 18-55 you are doing them a favour after all

Hugh
 
I would have been happy spending £55 to hire a lens for my Tog if that was all it cost!!! When you think that a normal cost is £500-£2000 I am sure they would not mind at all :)
 
I do think you will need something shorter than the 70-200 and there is a good chance you will be shooting wide open, which will show up any weakness in the kit lens.
17-55 f2.8 as has been said would be a good choice on a 40d and is a bit cheaper to hire than the 24-70. Its lighter and has is which will help combat the vibration from your trembling hands ;)
The 70-200 will be handy but its a heavy lens without IS so i'd use it sparingly
 
p.s. I did shoot my first wedding, as a friend/guest, with a 30D, 17-85 lens and 580EX flash. I got the job done, just barely, but the lens made it all very hard work. Nothing wrong with the lens except f/4-5.6 is hopeless for weddings. The 17-55 is the tool for the job.

You do have a flash, I take it, and a backup body, lens and flash as well?
 
Nope I have no flash, I have a 350D as a backup body but no backup lens.

My dad is coming along to help me, he has a 40D and 17-85.

It's not a job, I'm doing it as a favour to 2 friends who have been hopelessly let down by a 'pro'. I don't shoot people, I 80% of the time I shoot horses, so my kit (bar the 10-20 lens) reflects this. I have explained to them that a wedding is slightly different to a horse show ;) Hence why I won't accept any money from them.

I'm going to see them sometime this week so may put forward the option of hiring the 17-55 2.8 and will see what they say :)

To put another spanner in the works, the shoes that I'll be wearing at the wedding have just been delivered, they are rather high so will have to get used to shooting in a formal dress and heels, rather than jeans and walking boots ;)
 
The 350D and kit lens plus your dads stuff covers the back up bit but I think you are going to struggle without a flash. Obviously you want to shoot as much as possible in natural light but there will come a time when you'll need to use a flash and the pop up flash wont give the most flattering light, to put it mildly! However a new flashgun is more expense and you would need to put time in to learn how to use it before the wedding and so it may well be that you're best going with what you are familiar with and if there are a few shadows in the shots so be it. A local guy to me uses a 400d with a kit lens and no flash and seems pretty busy most Saturday mornings, so its obviously not an issue for many brides and grooms.
 
I shoot nikon (flame suit on) and use 17-55 f2.8 for 99% of wedding shots now. 17mm end is fantastic for capturing group photos, 55mm perfect for portraits and the f2.8 is enough for good bokeh and shotting in low light conditions. I bring other lenses but they're hardly ever used really. I also find a flash, tripod and spare body useful to have as well.
 
paul_g said:
The 350D and kit lens plus your dads stuff covers the back up bit but I think you are going to struggle without a flash. Obviously you want to shoot as much as possible in natural light but there will come a time when you'll need to use a flash and the pop up flash wont give the most flattering light, to put it mildly! However a new flashgun is more expense and you would need to put time in to learn how to use it before the wedding and so it may well be that you're best going with what you are familiar with and if there are a few shadows in the shots so be it. A local guy to me uses a 400d with a kit lens and no flash and seems pretty busy most Saturday mornings, so its obviously not an issue for many brides and grooms.
Click to expand...

So I will have to just struggle along, up until 2 weeks ago I didn't have the 40D and have paid for it with next years student loan, so I really do not have any money to spend on a flash which I probably won't use again.

There's only so much money you can throw at a hobby- it just wouldn't be a worthwhile investment.
 
Twizzel, fully appreciate your predicament. We're only telling you what would be ideal to have and quite appreciate that there is no reaosn for you to spend megabucks, or any bucks, to do a favour. You'll be spending more than enough effort on taking the photos and going through and processing them, without being out of pocket finacially as well. All you can do is the best you can with what you have. If you can squeeze a 17-55 it will be a tremendous help. If you'll be spending any money at all - yours or theirs - then you might as well spend it on the best tool for the job rather than the wrong one.
 
I'm going to see the bride tonight and will put it to her- it will be up to her whether she wants to hire the 17-55 on my behalf, so thanks for all of your advice :)

I had another chat with dad tonight and told him what you guys have said, he seems to think there is still no need for anything but the 18-55 non-IS kit lens?

Would a flash be better?!
 
Twizzel said:
Wedding is a small budget, me doing the photos was the difference between them having photographs or not.
Click to expand...

You've answered your own question IMO. Shoot what you have and get what you get. If they want the security of somebody using pro gear to shoot the day for them, then you know what they have to do.
 
Twizzel said:
I had another chat with dad tonight and told him what you guys have said, he seems to think there is still no need for anything but the 18-55 non-IS kit lens?
Click to expand...
If your dad is an experienced wedding photographer then by all means listen to him. Be sure to check out some examples of his work during the service, while signing the register, cutting the cake and the first dance. How many weddings has he shot? I'm only up to six so far but I think I have a good enough grip on the sort of equipment that gets results. I have four f/2.8 zooms and two primes, both faster than f/2. I would not want to use anything slower than those lenses on a 40D or any other 1.6X crop body for shooting weddings.

Of course, if the service is outdoors and the weather will be fine then I guess he'd be right. But indoors, and in the evening.......?

Twizzel said:
Would a flash be better?!
Click to expand...
Would a flash be better than getting a 17-55? I don't think so. You may not be able to use flash at all during the service, and mastering use of flash skillfully takes time and practice. Personally I think the fast lens will be the most important asset to help you make it through the whole event. Some wedding photographers will do anything possible to avoid using flash at all. Mind you, they will almost certainly be shooting with primes of f/1.4 or faster, maybe f/2 for a longer lens.

With flash you end up with two exposures to control - the exposure for the ambient light and background, and the exposure for the flash as well. Then there is the matter of bouncing the flash and using Flash Exposure compensation as the reflectivity of your scene alters. If you can nail your exposures perfectly then even 1600 ISO on the 40D should be very manageable. Shoot raw, and if the noise is too bad then go arty and convert to black and white. In my opinion, flash is not a replacement for fast glass. It is a supplement to it.

Just as a reminder, your original question was "what lens do wedding photographers use most (on a 40D)?". I think the general consensus amongst those who do shoot weddings is that the 17-55 is the best tool for the job, unless you are a "prime" sort of person.

That said, given the circumstances, I wouldn't sweat it. Just do what you can with what you have. So long as everyone appreciates that weddings are not your thing and you are stepping in as a favor then really nobody can complain, whatever the results. They should be grateful for whatever you can deliver.

EDIT : I think Cyclone summed it up pretty well. :)
 
Ahh thankyou so much tdodd, that was a lot of help.

In answer to your question dad has done no weddings at all, he's doing one, like me, for a friend the week after my wedding and is taking it very seriously (possibly too seriously!!). When I told him about this thread he still said flash over lens. Hmmm.

The wedding is at a small church, with the buffet style reception somewhere else (I forgot where!!). I'm going to go check out the venues with the bride soon :)

For someone who has never used a flash before, I really don't see how it would help me, I think it would in fact make me more stressed on the day from what you've said. I'm just getting to grips with the 40D after having it delivered last week, so don't want more kit that I'm not familiar with...

I have now told him all talk of weddings is banned in the house, especially at the dinner table, he will do what he feels is right, I will do what I feel (going on the advice of you guys) and then we will be happy. He is hiring a flash, I will hire the lens (if anything).


What he's forgotten is he's asked me to do all of the processing for his wedding ;)
 
you don't have the money to burn but the tamron 17-50 f2.8 is a VERY nice lens, on my 50d it gets a lot of use. If it were available in your circumstance I would buy it as a 18-55 replacement as it is both sharper and faster.

My offer still stands btw ;)
 
a psychologist would say your lens or camera isnt your problem, its your dad! You're obviously a talent photographer, don't let him make you question your gut instincts.
 
My trusty Crystalline lens, and the attachment that is a few inches away
 
If you were planning on getting them a wedding gift, why don't you tell them that the pics and hire of the lens at £55 is their gift?
 
I'm planning on putting together a photobook and giving them that as their present :)

I spoke to the bride last night and explained the options we've got, she's going to have a think and get back to me. It seems that if I wasn't doing the photos they would have had none at all, so whatever they get is a bonus :) I didn't put any pressure on them, just said if they could afford the hire of the lens, then it may give me better photos inside the church and at the reception. If not, I said of course I'd still take photos, but they may not be quite as good as they could be.

Feeling a lot happier about it now, so thanks everyone :)
 
this flash business...
I think that is is important

if you're outside and using fast glass, but on f8 for example and the sun is shining...

they unless you really position everyone perfectly you will still need a flash ideally to fill on all the shadows on their faces.
that's just my humble opinion

I saw a friends wedding a while back, and gaped in wonder as the 'pro' put everyones face in half shadow and snapped away.
 
what date is it twizzel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top