Lens for wedding where I'm NOT the paid photographer

I'm going to my niece's wedding in Florida in November as a guest and member of the family -- not the photographer. Well, I can't attend without bringing along my XTi and my 17-50, but I'm wondering if I should bring a second lens along as well, and if so, which one? I'm probably going to get the 70-300 IS non-DO between now and then, or perhaps the 70-200 f/4 IS or non IS.

I tend to use events like these as good excuses to get another lens. I'm wondering if either of the two lenses above would serve much purpose at the wedding and reception, or whether I'd get more mileage from perhaps a nice new 85?

Or, for that matter, just bring the 17-50 and get a good flash unit?

Or just bring a nice toaster for the bride and groom and leave the photography to the hired gun? Nah...can't do that!
--
Gary

http://www.pbase.com/digitalgee

Depends on the setup of the wedding... If you will be roaming around or remain seated... As a shooter at an indoor wedding, I never changed from my 17-55 2.8IS.. but if you are going to be further away or stuck in a pew..is that spelled right? the 70-200 Is (2.8 or 4.0) would serve great purpose most likely... use your current lens for the walking down the isle shots then switch to your 70-200 for vows...for reception, again, you will most likely be using the lower range more than anything.

I lied.. I actually used one other lens at my last wedding for available light shots-- 50mm f/1.4

I've shot a couple of weddings, including my first paid one last Saturday. I have been using a 24-70, most recently on a 5D (which saved the day, since I really needed the wide angle coverage), and a 70-200 L f/2.8 IS on a 20D. The only other lens I use is the 50 f/1.4 when things get too dark and I'm not allowed to use flash.

So, you would find one of the 70-200 lenses very helpful. Which one, that's mostly up to your budget. I've found in a lot of low light photography (theater, weddings, etc.) that I can't live without both IS and f/2.8, but I don't know whether an unpaid wedding is enough of an excuse for you to part with $1700.

--
'Great meal. What pots did you use?' -- Petteri

Wolfgang Bluhm
http://www.wbluhm.com/

Hi!

Bearing in mind that you are not paid and, this way, you are really free to try other things than what the hired photographer is not allowed to do because he/she could miss an important shot... then, I would try to do all the wedding with a fine prime lens like the 50 1.4. In my experience, people get stunned when they see the quality (I mean bokeh, contrast, sharpness, colors...) of the pictures taken with prime lenses. Of course, we are assuming you are allowed to roam freely all around the ceremony. Otherwise, as some others have said, you'll need longer lenses.

Good luck, anyway! Wedding photography is people photography, and portraiture is the more important kind of it. Not having the stress of the hired guy is adding pleasure to the work!

Regards from Spain

Felipe

--
http://www.beatusille.net

Bokeh

Dadme un mundo sin contornos,
Un espacio feliz que ignore los perfiles.
Concededme, sí, la dicha redonda
De flotar sin conciencia en el fondo
Desenfocado de mis fotografías.

Give me a world with no edges,
A happy space knowing nothing about outlines.
Grant me, please, the round joy
Of thoughtlessly floating on the blurred
Background of my photographs.

So, assuming i can roam, the wider lens is the best choice. I'm happy with the IQ of my Tamron 17-50, but light may be an issue, so it seems like the best thing to add to my bag is a good flash unit (for the reception only, of course). I also have the 50 1.8 which would be easy enough to bring along, but it seems redundant given the 17-50 (although it's faster).

I am surprised no one is recommending the 85. Is that because the working distance indoors is an issue? I have no idea where the reception will be held, but I do think it will be in a large room.
--
Gary

http://www.pbase.com/digitalgee

Indoors you will find anything over 70mm pretty limiting when you try to catpure candid scenes with multiple people. My 17-55 was perfect for the ceremony and reception. My partner used the 50 1.4 on my other camera and shot available light since I dont have a second flash yet, so I got a nice mix of flash and natural light shots. If you can roam you wont have a need for anything greater than 70 most likely.. if you are restricted you might find the need to use something to get closer but you want something that has a fast f stop because you wont be able reach with a flash if you are in the pews.

Im not sure which 85 you are talking about, but I do know the 85 1.2L is a great lens but way too expensive for a prime @ 1600$..but if you got the money itll do well with its SUPERB MTF figures at even 1.2...If you can spend that much money on a prime.. I cant justify that expense for prime myself...Im perfectly happy with the performance of my 50 1.4 for low light and even portrait being an 80mm equivalent...I also sometimes use my 100 mm 2.8 for portrait..both have great MTF figures are fast lenses at a much more affordable price... even the 135L breaks sensor res on a 350D according to photozone.de and its half the price of the 85...

The 50 1.8 you have should do find, especially shooting free if you run into lighting problems. I wouldnt justify the expense on a 70-200 unless you will be stuck to the pews or have a reason to use it later.

i'd try to get photos the pro won't be getting. most likely the pro will be using flash and a zoom lens most of the time. so i would concentrate on available light shots with a large aperture prime. the 50/1.8 might be sufficient, but you could look into renting a better, faster lens like the 35/1.4 or 24/1.4--on the crop camera either one of those would be very useful.

shoot wide open and as close as you can get to your subjects. this way you'll likely get at least a few shots that will really blow people's socks off.

hehehe, a 300mm f2.8? Just to make the TOG feel under equiped?

Only kidding,

Regards,

Gareth
--
http://www.GMCPhotographics.com
http://www.pbase.com/gazzajagman

'Science is what we dream of, technology is what we are stuck with' Douglas Adams

Say Cheese said:

I'm going to my niece's wedding in Florida in November as a guest
and member of the family -- not the photographer. Well, I can't
attend without bringing along my XTi and my 17-50, but I'm
wondering if I should bring a second lens along as well, and if so,
which one? I'm probably going to get the 70-300 IS non-DO between
now and then, or perhaps the 70-200 f/4 IS or non IS.

I tend to use events like these as good excuses to get another
lens. I'm wondering if either of the two lenses above would serve
much purpose at the wedding and reception, or whether I'd get more
mileage from perhaps a nice new 85?

Click to expand...

I attended a wedding as a guest recently and used my 5D+24-105 which was perfect. I also brought along my new 70-200f4IS but ended up not using it. I wanted to be a bit discrete and didn't want the hassle of changing lenses. YMMV. Of course, if you have your eye on this lens and you need an excuse to pull the trigger ...

If you're going to go all out, go all out.

Maybe the Sigma 30mm 1.4

This one should allow you to get some cool available light shots that the 50mm may be too ong for.

This will hopefully be my next purchase.

I will not use flash so as not to interfere with the work of the paid photographer.... try to stay out of the way so that the paid photographer will not feel the pressure that you are "competiting" with him.

if you don't deliver knockout photos after, won't you look silly... i think i'd prefer to do w/o the pressure

that's one of the brilliant things about the 50/1.4--doesn't look like anything special, but you can do things with it that no one with a zoom lens can touch...

Hello again

Of course I forgot to mention the 24-105 lens. Very few ones would be as versatile. But it's a bit slow for indoor photography (and delivers really ugly distortion, but that's not very important but for architectural photography)

The 35 1.4 is one of the best Canon lenses. It would be and excellent option for your wedding, unless the church is really tight (it happened to me in some Spanish chapels that 24 was not wide enough and had to use my trusty and beloved 17-40...)

Regards!

Felipe

--
http://www.beatusille.net

Bokeh

Dadme un mundo sin contornos,
Un espacio feliz que ignore los perfiles.
Concededme, sí, la dicha redonda
De flotar sin conciencia en el fondo
Desenfocado de mis fotografías.

Give me a world with no edges,
A happy space knowing nothing about outlines.
Grant me, please, the round joy
Of thoughtlessly floating on the blurred
Background of my photographs.

I'd rent a 24 1.4, and I'd use the 70-200. Don't be afraid to bump up the iso (way up to 3200 if needed). Also feel free to use the flash in AV mode where it will be used only to fill (may need to use fec to dial it down even so). And take tons on pics. Maybe time to get an 8gb card. ($80 at newegg). -Bruce

I shoot weddings and my primary setup right now is a 30D with 17-55IS attached and a 580EX flash.

Weddings tend to be dark suckers, so you need all the help you can get. Flash is often a must for the reception, and if allowed, for the ceremony.

If the sanctuary is relatively small, you may be able to get away with an 85/1.8 for shooting vows, etc. I use a 70-200/2.8 for this, but in a small sanctuary could probably get away with just an 85mm reach. the wide aperture will definitely help with existing light shots/isolating the background. Your 50/1.8 should work well for this too.

I don't tend to carry the 70-200 at the reception... just too much to carry. I am considering getting an 85/1.8 primarily for receptions.
--
Cheerio...
Rich

I am not a wedding photographer (nor do I play one on TV) but I have shot these events and presented my candid shots to the couple as a wedding gift.

At the reception, where sometimes there is no light to speak of, you need a flash. I also love the 200mm length combined with the flash to get stuff that the pro would never get. It is very hard to get a good focus in these situations. The following is shot with the 80-200 f/2.8 L (on film, sorry guys):



Have fun!

--
Rod,
Photographic hack since 1969.
Samples of my pedestrian images can be found here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/grogley/collections/72157600201558641/

I haven't read the other comments in this thread, but I can tell you what I've used as a paid wedding photographer: My 24-70 mm f/2.8 is all I usually use with full frame and 1.3 crop cameras. You need a wide angle a lot of time so that you can get close to the bride without Aunt Agnes getting between you and the bride. The only time I ever used anything longer was when I was allowed to shoot the ceremony only from the balcony at the back of the church.
--
http://www.fantasy-photo.com

Thats funny, I took some shots at a friends wedding with the 50 1.4, and afterwards gave her the photos. Her first remark was"OMG, I can't believe we paid for someone to take pictures that weren't as good as these".
--
gjk
NOT a leafs fan-vive les'habitantes!