Reading mode: Light Dark

Good wedding lens (price counts too)

Go to last post
C

Cleoent

Well-known member
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
Location
US
Hi Guys, I'm sure this topic has been beaten to death, but I was hoping you could tolerate it one more time.

My sister, sister in law and cousin are all getting married this year. One is indoors, one is outdoors, one is both! I would like to buy a good lens but very important that it be

Any suggestions? A good place to start?

Thank you so much!
 
thanks Phil! I was actually considering the sigma 50-150, i hope that will be enough reach. I get front row seating though, so how far do i really have to go!
 
35-70/2.8 + 180/2.8 prime
--
cheers,

nbourbaki

d70s . 18-200 vr . 35/2 . tamron 90/2.8 macro . sb-600
tibook . G5 powermac . mac mini core duo . aperture
 
Phil_L said:
Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 used or new.
Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 VR used.
Sigma 70-200 f2.8 new.
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 new

Primes?

Nikkor 135 f2
Nikkor 180 f2.8
--
Phil_L
Click to expand...
I can't agree with any of these choices as a main wedding lens or just added to the 50 because there is then no wide end coverage. A well rounded wedding kit will have a main lens of something around 17 or 18mm. and out to 50-80 mm. You just about have to work in this range for about any venue. After this comes the more specialty ranges, some primes etc..

Any ametuer shooter can live for quite some time shooting weddings without a long zoom of the 70-200 range or there abouts, I use mine professionally and it gets maybe 10% of the coverage at a wedding where the 17-55 gets about 75% by comparison. All my lens choices combined get the 100% naturally and I wouldn't want to be without any of them but I would have a very hard time covering a wedding with what you are suggesting + just the 50mm. the OP mentioned.

David
 
The above poster is very wise. There's nothing I can add to that except ...

SInce you're asking about the equipment, i'm taking the leap of faith that you don't shoot weddings for a living and don't plan on doing it beyond these family obligations. In that spirit, I'd suggest urging your relatives to hire someone but bring a point-and-shoot.

If you really do have to shoot these as the photographer of record, you really need to cover all spectrums, wide and telephoto. (I'm sure someone will chime in with the 18-200 as a logical choice for that).

Either way, good luck.

--
'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'
 
oh no, i'm not going to be the one shooting the actual weddings as the "photog of record." I'm just wanting a nice lens to capture the days events for my family.
 
Cleoent said:
oh no, i'm not going to be the one shooting the actual weddings as
the "photog of record." I'm just wanting a nice lens to capture
the days events for my family.
Click to expand...
You want some wide angle to mid tele and probably in a zoom. Since you are not the main photographer at these events some primes would also work since you would have time to change out lenses.

The reason I mentioned not using a longer zoom was because in general for overall coverage you need to get it all in, where the long zooms will get you nice candids, head and shoulder shots. At 50mm. you can do couples or with say 180 or 200mm. maybe a long shot at the beach or outdoor venue. If you want to catch dance shots and some overall coverage you need something wider than these suggestions listed above, even 50mm. is not wide enough, in fact neither is 35 nor really 28 though more usable for full length dance photos . When it comes to the dance floor coverage you will wish you had 17mm. available and still be able to zoom in for a tighter couples shot. The Nikon 17-55 will do this very well, while the Sigma 15-30 was good too it was now too wide for this coverage for instance and 85mm. would be useless.

Think about the Tamron 17-50 as one choice, this leaves money for something else, perhaps the 85 1.8 for instance ( both very good lenses). If you want to go broke on one lens get the Nikon 17-55, it's about the perfect wedding lens but it will leave you short for a tele based on your budget. If you do get say the 80-200 , maybe look for a used one so you could still afford to buy something wider. The Sigma 50-150 is interesting , that's nice coverage range but you will still need a wider lens .

In going over my exif info for a couple of years worth of weddings I found myself shooting mostly around 33 mm. for small groups and even larger groups with a lot of 24 coverage as well, some 50- 70 ( I use a 50 for the center isle shot at the church for instance), a few overall shots at 17 and grab shots of speakers at 200. I seem to go the extreme of the 70-200 lens when I use it, not using much in between, it seems I'm at 70 or out to about 180 or 200 with VR on hand held. I still use that Sigma 15-30 for an overview of the church or if I want to get all the church in including ceiling detail and the couple way down the center isle. My wife uses a 16-45 in the Pentax mount a lot.

Weddings are like doing great big party coverage but with way more classic looks ! If nothing else remember to have fun and stay out of the way of the professional there, capture images interesting and that he doesn't do to help spread the coverage..

David
 
I primarily use 2 lenses: Sigma 18-50 2.8 and the Tamron 28-75 2.8. Both are high quality, managably light, and reasonably priced. These two lenses cover a dx (cropped) range of 27-112mm with F2.8 available at all focal lengths. If I achieve a good focus, I can usually crop out a quality 8 by 10 print that's equivalant to a much longer zoom shot.

I take along a Sigma 12-24 and a Nikon 80-200 2.8 for some specialty photos but could easly dispense with them. However, I have gotten some nice shots of the service with the Nikon zoom set up on a tripod at the back of the church.
Cleoent said:
Hi Guys, I'm sure this topic has been beaten to death, but I was
hoping you could tolerate it one more time.

My sister, sister in law and cousin are all getting married this
year. One is indoors, one is outdoors, one is both! I would like
to buy a good lens but very important that it be
have a 50 1.8 but i'm hoping to get a telephoto lens that can take
great sharp pictures.

Any suggestions? A good place to start?

Thank you so much!
Click to expand...
--
Joe Melillo
http://www.pbase.com/jmelillo/root
 
David Grabowski said:
I can't agree with any of these choices as a main wedding lens or
just added to the 50 because there is then no wide end coverage. A
well rounded wedding kit will have a main lens of something around
17 or 18mm. and out to 50-80 mm. You just about have to work in
Click to expand...
You might like to read the OP's original post before youshoot your mouths off!!

He specifically asked about telephoto lenses!
--
Phil_L
 
Cleoent said:
My sister, sister in law and cousin are all getting married this
year. One is indoors, one is outdoors, one is both! I would like
to buy a good lens but very important that it be
have a 50 1.8 but i'm hoping to get a telephoto lens that can take
great sharp pictures.

Any suggestions? A good place to start?
Click to expand...
Since you'll be a guest rather that the working photographer, you'll have the luxury of taking your time to capture lovely boutique shots, which means your new addition won't have to be a zoom. You won't need a very long telephoto lens to cover an indoor event, but you will need a fast lens. I'd suggest the 85/1.8 to complement your 50/1.8. If you want more reach for candids across the room, the 180/2.8 would be a good choice. Based on B&H Photo's prices, the pair would cost you $1020 brand new, provided you bought the gray market versions, and $1150 for the USA versions. Used mint copies from KEH would run under $800 for the pair.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank
 
bingo, I'd also add a 17-35tamron as well.
nbourbaki said:
35-70/2.8 + 180/2.8 prime
--
cheers,

nbourbaki

d70s . 18-200 vr . 35/2 . tamron 90/2.8 macro . sb-600
tibook . G5 powermac . mac mini core duo . aperture
Click to expand...
--
hi, I use a camera, flash, and lens. I'm also grumpy most of the time.
http://www.andrewthomasdesigns.com

I agree with Ken Rockwell 95% of the time, people waste too much effort arguing things that in the end really don't matter. It's all about going out, taking pictures, and having fun.

Which is what I'd be doing if i wasn't at work.
 
thanks for the advice, seems like a telephoto lens would not be of great use at a wedding I had never really even thought about that.

I have a nikon 28-200 but i really don't like it, not sharp and very slow focus.

What about the 18-200 vr lens? Seems like it covers everything, maybe it's not a very sharp lens?
 
Cleoent said:
What about the 18-200 vr lens? Seems like it covers everything,
maybe it's not a very sharp lens?
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, it's plenty sharp. It just doesn't have a big aperture, so it's too slow for indoor wedding photography without a flash. That's why I suggested the 85/1.8.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank
 
Nikon 105 2.8 AF-S VR ? How expensive is it/
Uncle Frank said:
Since you'll be a guest rather that the working photographer,
you'll have the luxury of taking your time to capture lovely
boutique shots, which means your new addition won't have to be a
zoom. You won't need a very long telephoto lens to cover an indoor
event, but you will need a fast lens. I'd suggest the 85/1.8 to
complement your 50/1.8. If you want more reach for candids across
the room, the 180/2.8 would be a good choice. Based on B&H Photo's
prices, the pair would cost you $1020 brand new, provided you
bought the gray market versions, and $1150 for the USA versions.
Used mint copies from KEH would run under $800 for the pair.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank
Click to expand...
--
Joe Melillo
http://www.pbase.com/jmelillo/root
 
Found one used for 300 bucks... seems like a pretty solid deal, maybe combine it with a sigma 50-150 and call it a day?

Your guys' thoughts?

never really owned a sigma lens before, what can i expect?
 
I opted not to change it though and let you lay one on me !!!! I didn't change anythng because I feel the overall reply still applies ok but I should have directed it more to the OP.

Sorry about that !

David
Phil_L said:
David Grabowski said:
I can't agree with any of these choices as a main wedding lens or
just added to the 50 because there is then no wide end coverage. A
well rounded wedding kit will have a main lens of something around
17 or 18mm. and out to 50-80 mm. You just about have to work in
Click to expand...
You might like to read the OP's original post before youshoot your
mouths off!!

He specifically asked about telephoto lenses!
--
Phil_L
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top