Reading mode: Light Dark

newbie to weddings - lens questions

Go to last post
T

Tckay

Leading Member
Messages
626
Solutions
1
Reaction score
100
I have a D7000, 85mm F1.8 and Sigma 50-150mm F2.8. Im trying to build up the three most necessary lenses for wedding photography as I have three booked for the coming year so far.

I will add an FF body next year for lowlight performance (probably D610 for price) but im unsure whether id be better off with the standard zoom 24-70 for the FF or telephoto 70-200?

My concern is there here in the UK things can be pretty gloomy and a lot of venues wont allow ceremony for the flash.

I could sell the 50-150 for the 70-200 and buy a 17-50 for the D7000 or just keep what I have and buy a 24-70 for the FF when the time comes.

Which lens do you consider most important for the ceremony?

Thanks in advance :)
 
Tckay said:
I have a D7000, 85mm F1.8 and Sigma 50-150mm F2.8. Im trying to build up the three most necessary lenses for wedding photography as I have three booked for the coming year so far.

I will add an FF body next year for lowlight performance (probably D610 for price) but im unsure whether id be better off with the standard zoom 24-70 for the FF or telephoto 70-200?

My concern is there here in the UK things can be pretty gloomy and a lot of venues wont allow ceremony for the flash.

I could sell the 50-150 for the 70-200 and buy a 17-50 for the D7000 or just keep what I have and buy a 24-70 for the FF when the time comes.

Which lens do you consider most important for the ceremony?

Thanks in advance :)
Click to expand...
If you are serious about weddings then it is important that you have at least two cameras available in case one develops a fault.

Secondly, it is quite handy to have reasonable reach on one camera during the speeches and for other informal settings, plus your second camera with a wide to normal range.

Thirdly, as you say, often flash is not allowed.

So I would hang on to your D7000 and the 50-150. Maybe see if you can pick up a Sigma 18-50 2.8 HSM or 17-50 2.8 OS on eBay. (I used two of the 18-50 2.8 HSMs on D300s plus D80 for some time until I got a D600)

And for your future D610, the two options are probably the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 or Nikon 24-120 f/4. I have used the 24-120 f/4 for a significant number of weddings on the D600 and have been delighted with the results.

The extra reach of the 24-120 is also very useful for capturing small groups of people during the signing of the register (In the UK we are not allowed to photograph the actual signing, although often that is not a restriction in church weddings) and during the speeches.

The D600 (and therefore D610) can easily be used at ISO 5000 or more, so in most cases, the f/4 maximum aperture is fine. The only thing to watch out for is when you come to doing group shots that will likely be enlarged a lot, use f/5 or f/5.6 - the 24-120 edges are slightly soft when used at f/4 with the longer focal lengths.

BTW if you get the opportunity, try out the D610 with your chosen standard zoom about half an hour after the sun has gone down, and the sky still has a bit of colour in it, and take some photos of the wedding venue. The sky takes on an amazing blue hue, and the lights from the building are often a magical yellow-orange. The D610 will be fine at ISO 12,800 with a bit of luminance noise reduction in Lightroom, so you should be able to hand-hold the shot... You will probably need to adjust the exposure to get the right effect - normal metering will create an image that is too bright. (Don't forget to set the camera back to normal exposure afterwards!!).

That image of the building can then be used as a background to other shots of people dancing etc. in the wedding album. In the UK summer the only downside is that it means waiting until about 10pm or later!!! Final thought here - the 24-120 has a slight advantage over the 24-70 for this type of shot - it has VR built-in...

Good luck!
 
Tckay said:
I have a D7000, 85mm F1.8 and Sigma 50-150mm F2.8. Im trying to build up the three most necessary lenses for wedding photography as I have three booked for the coming year so far.

I will add an FF body next year for lowlight performance (probably D610 for price) but im unsure whether id be better off with the standard zoom 24-70 for the FF or telephoto 70-200?

My concern is there here in the UK things can be pretty gloomy and a lot of venues wont allow ceremony for the flash.

I could sell the 50-150 for the 70-200 and buy a 17-50 for the D7000 or just keep what I have and buy a 24-70 for the FF when the time comes.

Which lens do you consider most important for the ceremony?

Thanks in advance :)
Click to expand...
Right now you are missing anything wide. I recommend the Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 zoom. This can be purchased used in good condition for under $1000 and is one of Nikon's best DX lenses ever made. With this and the other lenses you already own, you have everything you need in terms of focal length and low light options. (I used to shoot the 17-55 on a D7000 and just loved the combo.)

Also, you really need a second body. Doing weddings with just one body is a disaster waiting to happen. How about a used D700? Or if money is really tight, even a second used D7000. Just get something!

Or plan B if you can afford it: Get the D700 and the 24-70. Then keep the 50-150 on the D7000. This gets you started with full frame and gives you nice focal length coverage with these two body/lens combinations.
 
To the OP: IMO you need something wider than 24 on a DX body (only 35mm full-frame equipment). You will encounter cavernous churches and up-close perspectives. I think you need UWA more than you need the tele-zooms. Especially on DX, the 85 is more than enough at the long end. Not to mention the weight and size of 50-150 and 70-200. You need mobility.
 
Sayanda said:
The 24-70 if you go to FX.
Click to expand...
For DX crop bodies get the f2.8 17-55 DX, it will do for most of the wedding day. The f1.8 85mm would be good for portraits on the DX with it's 127mm focal length and tack sharp images. Then use the 50-150 or a 70-200 when needed. I took close up shots of rings, brides shoes, flowers with her rings in them, at a wedding with my 85mm wide open on my d5200.
 
Tckay said:
I have a D7000, 85mm F1.8 and Sigma 50-150mm F2.8. Im trying to build up the three most necessary lenses for wedding photography as I have three booked for the coming year so far.

I will add an FF body next year for lowlight performance (probably D610 for price) but im unsure whether id be better off with the standard zoom 24-70 for the FF or telephoto 70-200?

My concern is there here in the UK things can be pretty gloomy and a lot of venues wont allow ceremony for the flash.

I could sell the 50-150 for the 70-200 and buy a 17-50 for the D7000 or just keep what I have and buy a 24-70 for the FF when the time comes.

Which lens do you consider most important for the ceremony?

Thanks in advance :)
Click to expand...
You need two bodies. Period. As a back up and as a means of making things more fluid. You put a wide lens on one and a tele on the other.
As for lenses, well, you need to find your own preferences. Someone might say "get the 14-24, 24-70 and the 70-200 and you're all set!", while another will say "anything else than the 24-70 is irrelevant", with a third chiming in "35+85=perfection!".
My preference is shooting with primes. But, I make an exception with the 70-200, as that's a lens I could not shoot a wedding without. If I did not do weddings, I would sell it.

Three essential lenses for a wedding? For me that is a 35mm, a 85mm and a 70-200. And that is how I roll. The 35 stays put on one body most of the time, while the other lenses gets switched around on the other body. I also own a 58/1.4 that will take on a bigger role in the future. I do not need anything wider, tried to shoot with a 17-35/2.8 this summer, but apart from a couple of shots here and there, it was mostly glued at 35mm anyway.


Yeah but no but yeah but you need to get another body first. And then something at least wide-ish for it. The 50-150 with the D7000 is a pretty good, light version of a FX+70-200. And you've got the 85mm. So if it was me doing the decisions for you, I'd get a D610 with the Sigma 35 and be all set for a little while. (And I would not even try to shoot a wedding without another body, nor 50mm being my widest on DX.)
 
Last edited:
Hi, I don't do weddings, so take this with a pinch of salt . . . . Others have suggested a 2nd body to be important and I would agree. Even for my own casual photography the ability to pick a camera with different focal lengths is a big benefit. You also do not mention flash, which would seem to be necessary even outdoors for fill.

On the lens front, and I understand the desire to go FF at some point, but what about a Sigma 18-35 1.8mm, it gets really good reviews and gives you a fast lens, with that on one body and the Sigma 50-150 on the other you would be able to cover all eventualities.

As I say, no direct experience myself, so the above is offered based on what I have read.

Good luck with the three events, and with luck enough orders for prints etc will enable you to finance a FF body or whatever,
 
BTW if you are charging for these weddings, another consideration is that you need to take out Insurance:

Professional Indemnity and Public Liability. I use Aaduki, their charges are very reasonable. http://www.aaduki.com/

Professional Indemnity protects you against the possibility of e.g. a couple suing you for the cost of having to re-do the whole wedding because your photos weren't acceptable - that could mean a cost of £20,000 or more!

Public Liability protects you against someone suing you because they e.g. tripped over your equipment and injured themselves.

At a very early wedding, I had a step ladder to enable me to get to a suitable height for the group photo. While I was arranging the group, a little girl climbed up the ladder. Fortunately she didn't fall off, but that would have been a classic example where Public Liability insurance would have been essential to have - and I didn't have it... It was the last wedding I did without insurance!
 
Thanks so much for all your replies, and very generous advice!

I will look into all the options stated and try to work out what's the best setup.

The first wedding isn't until March, and I absolutely intend to have two bodies before then.

I would happily stick with DX if the ISO performance allowed, but again, given the crappy weather and dim venues I'm not sure it's possible. Shooting in my own house with a 2.8 zoom is giving me ISO's of 10,000 on the d7k.

although, I do wonder how primes might negate some of that problem, being that bit faster. If anyone has experience of weddings using a crop sensor I'd be glad of your impressions.

So far, only one of the three weddings is paid, two are free and various other shoots I've offered to do for experience, but insurance is a very necessary evil and I appreciate the link Dave.

Thanks again :)
 
I'm not a professional but I have shot 4 friends weddings this year as a guest (completely different, I know). As a guest I get a different perspective and I wouldn't want the pressure of a pro, so I careful to stay out of their way.

I shoot with the:

D7000

35mm F1.8G

50mm F1.8G

85mm F1.8G

11-16 F2.8 Tokina

I love the 85 but find it a bit long The other lenses get most use but the Tokina is king for me. I can get in really close to the crowd outside the church, the 2.8 works inside for party shots and the distortion at kind or draws you in a bit.

The Tokina can be had for about £350 and if you are keeping a crop body, I think it would be a great addition.
 
Tckay said:
Thanks so much for all your replies, and very generous advice!

I will look into all the options stated and try to work out what's the best setup.

The first wedding isn't until March, and I absolutely intend to have two bodies before then.

I would happily stick with DX if the ISO performance allowed, but again, given the crappy weather and dim venues I'm not sure it's possible. Shooting in my own house with a 2.8 zoom is giving me ISO's of 10,000 on the d7k.

although, I do wonder how primes might negate some of that problem, being that bit faster. If anyone has experience of weddings using a crop sensor I'd be glad of your impressions.

So far, only one of the three weddings is paid, two are free and various other shoots I've offered to do for experience, but insurance is a very necessary evil and I appreciate the link Dave.

Thanks again :)
Click to expand...
If I had to walk in with just one setup, I would take your D7000 with the Nikkor 17-55 and an SB700 or better flash for fill light. The high iso in the D7000 is not so nice. For beautiful skin, you will need more light.
 
j_photo said:
Tckay said:
Thanks so much for all your replies, and very generous advice!

I will look into all the options stated and try to work out what's the best setup.

The first wedding isn't until March, and I absolutely intend to have two bodies before then.

I would happily stick with DX if the ISO performance allowed, but again, given the crappy weather and dim venues I'm not sure it's possible. Shooting in my own house with a 2.8 zoom is giving me ISO's of 10,000 on the d7k.

although, I do wonder how primes might negate some of that problem, being that bit faster. If anyone has experience of weddings using a crop sensor I'd be glad of your impressions.

So far, only one of the three weddings is paid, two are free and various other shoots I've offered to do for experience, but insurance is a very necessary evil and I appreciate the link Dave.

Thanks again :)
Click to expand...
If I had to walk in with just one setup, I would take your D7000 with the Nikkor 17-55 and an SB700 or better flash for fill light. The high iso in the D7000 is not so nice. For beautiful skin, you will need more light.
Click to expand...
Most wedding venues realise that it is important to ensure the lighting in the ceremony room is adequate for photography. I used Dx format DSLRs for several years with f/2.8 lenses without flash, with great results, and then more recently the D600 with the 24-120 f/4 - which from a light-gathering perspective is equivalent to f/2.8 on Dx.

If I remember correctly, I would set Auto ISO 3200 on the Dx DSLRs - certainly I did on the D300s.

On the D600 I now set Auto ISO 5,000, with 1/80th as the lowest shutter speed.

I've done 30"x20" canvas prints from the D600 that were taken without flash, at ISO 5,000 - the couple were delighted with the result. (Fair to say I did use the noise reduction in Lightroom to help...)

However, a j_photo notes, it is pretty much essential to have flash available, especially for the speeches.

If you know where the venues are then a trip to each will help you gauge the likely light levels.

I always visit a venue in advance to check the lighting and also suitable locations for the formal photos, and to look for suitable places for photos of the couple together after the key activities have completed and they are feeling more relaxed.
 
DaveR43 said:
Tckay said:
I have a D7000, 85mm F1.8 and Sigma 50-150mm F2.8. Im trying to build up the three most necessary lenses for wedding photography as I have three booked for the coming year so far.

I will add an FF body next year for lowlight performance (probably D610 for price) but im unsure whether id be better off with the standard zoom 24-70 for the FF or telephoto 70-200?

My concern is there here in the UK things can be pretty gloomy and a lot of venues wont allow ceremony for the flash.

I could sell the 50-150 for the 70-200 and buy a 17-50 for the D7000 or just keep what I have and buy a 24-70 for the FF when the time comes.

Which lens do you consider most important for the ceremony?

Thanks in advance :)
Click to expand...
If you are serious about weddings then it is important that you have at least two cameras available in case one develops a fault.

Secondly, it is quite handy to have reasonable reach on one camera during the speeches and for other informal settings, plus your second camera with a wide to normal range.

Thirdly, as you say, often flash is not allowed.

So I would hang on to your D7000 and the 50-150. Maybe see if you can pick up a Sigma 18-50 2.8 HSM or 17-50 2.8 OS on eBay. (I used two of the 18-50 2.8 HSMs on D300s plus D80 for some time until I got a D600)

And for your future D610, the two options are probably the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 or Nikon 24-120 f/4. I have used the 24-120 f/4 for a significant number of weddings on the D600 and have been delighted with the results.

The extra reach of the 24-120 is also very useful for capturing small groups of people during the signing of the register (In the UK we are not allowed to photograph the actual signing, although often that is not a restriction in church weddings) and during the speeches.

The D600 (and therefore D610) can easily be used at ISO 5000 or more, so in most cases, the f/4 maximum aperture is fine. The only thing to watch out for is when you come to doing group shots that will likely be enlarged a lot, use f/5 or f/5.6 - the 24-120 edges are slightly soft when used at f/4 with the longer focal lengths.

BTW if you get the opportunity, try out the D610 with your chosen standard zoom about half an hour after the sun has gone down, and the sky still has a bit of colour in it, and take some photos of the wedding venue. The sky takes on an amazing blue hue, and the lights from the building are often a magical yellow-orange. The D610 will be fine at ISO 12,800 with a bit of luminance noise reduction in Lightroom, so you should be able to hand-hold the shot... You will probably need to adjust the exposure to get the right effect - normal metering will create an image that is too bright. (Don't forget to set the camera back to normal exposure afterwards!!).

That image of the building can then be used as a background to other shots of people dancing etc. in the wedding album. In the UK summer the only downside is that it means waiting until about 10pm or later!!! Final thought here - the 24-120 has a slight advantage over the 24-70 for this type of shot - it has VR built-in...

Good luck!
Click to expand...
 
DaveR43 said:
j_photo said:
Tckay said:
Thanks so much for all your replies, and very generous advice!

I will look into all the options stated and try to work out what's the best setup.

The first wedding isn't until March, and I absolutely intend to have two bodies before then.

I would happily stick with DX if the ISO performance allowed, but again, given the crappy weather and dim venues I'm not sure it's possible. Shooting in my own house with a 2.8 zoom is giving me ISO's of 10,000 on the d7k.

although, I do wonder how primes might negate some of that problem, being that bit faster. If anyone has experience of weddings using a crop sensor I'd be glad of your impressions.

So far, only one of the three weddings is paid, two are free and various other shoots I've offered to do for experience, but insurance is a very necessary evil and I appreciate the link Dave.

Thanks again :)
Click to expand...
If I had to walk in with just one setup, I would take your D7000 with the Nikkor 17-55 and an SB700 or better flash for fill light. The high iso in the D7000 is not so nice. For beautiful skin, you will need more light.
Click to expand...
Most wedding venues realise that it is important to ensure the lighting in the ceremony room is adequate for photography. I used Dx format DSLRs for several years with f/2.8 lenses without flash, with great results, and then more recently the D600 with the 24-120 f/4 - which from a light-gathering perspective is equivalent to f/2.8 on Dx.

If I remember correctly, I would set Auto ISO 3200 on the Dx DSLRs - certainly I did on the D300s.

On the D600 I now set Auto ISO 5,000, with 1/80th as the lowest shutter speed.

I've done 30"x20" canvas prints from the D600 that were taken without flash, at ISO 5,000 - the couple were delighted with the result. (Fair to say I did use the noise reduction in Lightroom to help...)

However, a j_photo notes, it is pretty much essential to have flash available, especially for the speeches.

If you know where the venues are then a trip to each will help you gauge the likely light levels.

I always visit a venue in advance to check the lighting and also suitable locations for the formal photos, and to look for suitable places for photos of the couple together after the key activities have completed and they are feeling more relaxed.
Click to expand...
 
j_photo said:
DaveR43 said:
j_photo said:
Tckay said:
Thanks so much for all your replies, and very generous advice!

I will look into all the options stated and try to work out what's the best setup.

The first wedding isn't until March, and I absolutely intend to have two bodies before then.

I would happily stick with DX if the ISO performance allowed, but again, given the crappy weather and dim venues I'm not sure it's possible. Shooting in my own house with a 2.8 zoom is giving me ISO's of 10,000 on the d7k.

although, I do wonder how primes might negate some of that problem, being that bit faster. If anyone has experience of weddings using a crop sensor I'd be glad of your impressions.

So far, only one of the three weddings is paid, two are free and various other shoots I've offered to do for experience, but insurance is a very necessary evil and I appreciate the link Dave.

Thanks again :)
Click to expand...
If I had to walk in with just one setup, I would take your D7000 with the Nikkor 17-55 and an SB700 or better flash for fill light. The high iso in the D7000 is not so nice. For beautiful skin, you will need more light.
Click to expand...
Most wedding venues realise that it is important to ensure the lighting in the ceremony room is adequate for photography. I used Dx format DSLRs for several years with f/2.8 lenses without flash, with great results, and then more recently the D600 with the 24-120 f/4 - which from a light-gathering perspective is equivalent to f/2.8 on Dx.

If I remember correctly, I would set Auto ISO 3200 on the Dx DSLRs - certainly I did on the D300s.

On the D600 I now set Auto ISO 5,000, with 1/80th as the lowest shutter speed.

I've done 30"x20" canvas prints from the D600 that were taken without flash, at ISO 5,000 - the couple were delighted with the result. (Fair to say I did use the noise reduction in Lightroom to help...)

However, a j_photo notes, it is pretty much essential to have flash available, especially for the speeches.

If you know where the venues are then a trip to each will help you gauge the likely light levels.

I always visit a venue in advance to check the lighting and also suitable locations for the formal photos, and to look for suitable places for photos of the couple together after the key activities have completed and they are feeling more relaxed.

--
DaveR
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to imply always use flash. I have found in even relatively OK-lit spaces, a bit of fill flash can make for nicer images. So I like having it as an option.

When I used to shoot with the D7000, I would try to keep ISO no higher than 3000 if I wanted nice skin tones and such. Sounds like we are more or less on the same page.
Click to expand...
Tckay,

If you were to consider the 24-120 f/4, the newly announced D750 is apparently going to include a bundle with that lens. Once the D750 UK prices settle down a bit, that may be a cost-effective option compared to the D610 body plus 24-120 f/4, each separately priced...

An advantage of the D750 is the low light focusing ability - better than the D810 or D4s! Occasionally I've had to persist to obtain focus with the D600, so that could be useful in lower light situations.

--
DaveR
 
Last edited:
I did see that this morning myself Dave, thanks for the heads up. I'm assuming the D750 will have the better focussing module than the D 610?, which would be a winner for me. And with that lens my query would be co pletely resolved.

I did shoot a (free) wedding recently with a borrowed D610, which in most respects was amazing, but the AF let me down in almost every shot of the very low light first dance.

:)
 
If you are getting a FF body and one lens, it looks like the 24-70 F2.8 would meet your needs better. You already have the higher range covered and you will never regret getting the 24-70. The faster lens (as opposed to an F4) will significantly improve autofocus on any camera body. Good luck!
 
RickD said:
The faster lens (as opposed to an F4) will significantly improve autofocus on any camera body. Good luck!
Click to expand...
Rick: I'm not sure that's true. I recall reading posts and explanations here that indicate this is not the case. I'm sure there are others in the forum who could address this question and provide a more definite answer. But you might want to do a little checking on this statement.
 
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