DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Budget lens for wedding
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 40 of 40, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/30/2010 04:03:54 AM · #26
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by coryboehne:
Originally posted by jminso:
Canon 70-200 IS 2.8 Sweet lens but pricey. I also agree that renting may be your best bet


Bit long for a wedding, but it might well prove useful for alter shots, etc...


Not at all, the 70-200 f2.8 is fantastic for portraits, candids, compressing backgrounds and isolating subjects. I would hate to shoot a wedding without it in my kitbag.


All taken on the 70-200 f2.8L


Beautiful work Simms


Gracias mi amigo.


de nada hombre! ;)
 07/30/2010 06:33:48 AM · #27
I am certainly no expert (or even well experienced in this regard) - but I was asked to shoot two weddings for friends recently. My lack of expertise and their lack of money.
But the one thing I noticed (which no one has mentioned here yet) was that how often things were up close and cramped ! - In other words the need for a wider lens. On both these occasions I had my 17-40 lens on the camera more than any other lens. The longer lens would be handy for set up portraits and for things you could control - but most of the time it was on the hop and in close. The faster lens would definitely be a bonus (mine was f4) but I was amazed at how often I used the wider lens.
 07/30/2010 08:09:14 AM · #28
Originally posted by bmatt17:

I was thinking something along the lines of This Sigma. I'd really like a lens that's 2.8 across the zoom but it doesn't look like that's something I'd be able to afford.

//www.amazon.com/Sigma-17-70mm-2-8-4-Canon-Digital/dp/B002ZNJB32/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2JD6I93YIWY96&colid=14JGCPMYD5KUQ

If anyone has experience with the above lens or has some better options in the same price range I'd appreciate it. Also any general tips for shooting at a wedding would be nice. She knows I'm not a pro, but I'd still like to get some good print worthy shots.


I picked up that sigma lens for my 7D and I love it. Quick to focus, good sharp results, effective IS, and nice price. It's not a pro lens and you are unlikely to see professional wedding photographers with it but as a good quality walk-around I like it a lot. You could do a lot worse if you are looking for a good upgrade from the kit lens.

If you are looking to get the most out of a one-off exercise shooting your sisters wedding, I'd strongly recommend renting a 70-200 as everyone else suggests. I have decent (non-L) glass covering the same ranges, but if it were me, I'd be doing the same.

NB: The standard every-photographer-recommends-their-own-lenses disclaimer applies to the above :)
07/30/2010 08:14:20 AM · #29
boy, you'd think I was yanko or something...
 07/30/2010 10:05:38 AM · #30
i think you'd be better off buying a flash and using the lenses you already own
 08/02/2010 01:45:11 AM · #31
Originally posted by hopper:
i think you'd be better off buying a flash and using the lenses you already own


I'm thinking I may do this in addition to renting some good glass. Would the 270EX be sufficient or should I spend a bit more and something like the 430EX II. What benefits does the more costly flash provide?

Edit:
The lenses I'm thinking about getting are:
Canon 35mm f/1.4L
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS

Sound like a good combo?

Message edited by author 2010-08-02 01:49:33.
 08/02/2010 01:49:53 AM · #32
Originally posted by RamblinR:
The tamron 28-75 f2.8 is a nice lens and might work for you. It's also pretty cheap to pick one up second hand.

I have one and it's sharp at 2.8 but at 3.2 it's really sharp and it's sharp right across the image.


I,ll second that I have one and its a real versitile lens .
 08/02/2010 02:17:06 AM · #33
Originally posted by bmatt17:
Originally posted by hopper:
i think you'd be better off buying a flash and using the lenses you already own


I'm thinking I may do this in addition to renting some good glass. Would the 270EX be sufficient or should I spend a bit more and something like the 430EX II. What benefits does the more costly flash provide?

Edit:
The lenses I'm thinking about getting are:
Canon 35mm f/1.4L
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS

Sound like a good combo?


Excellent.
 08/02/2010 08:05:57 AM · #34
Originally posted by bmatt17:
I'm thinking I may do this in addition to renting some good glass. Would the 270EX be sufficient or should I spend a bit more and something like the 430EX II. What benefits does the more costly flash provide?


The 270ex flash head can't rotate, it can only pivot ... which means you can bounce the flash off the ceiling, but not walls ... that's no good (additionally, it's not near powerful enough).

The 430ex may work, and it's certainly better than no flash at all ... but you may find it's still a bit under powered. The 430ex can rotate and pivot, so the flash can be bounced off of whatever's available (walls, ceiling, directly behind you, etc).

Used outside, with your camera in Av mode and the flash set to HSS ... you'll be able to lighten the dark shadows of the sun and still keep the lens open for shallow depth of field. Used inside, just set your camera in manual mode (something like f/4 and 1/160 ... ISO 400 or 800) and let the eTTL flash take care of the proper exposure. Don't blast the flash directly at people, it won't look good.
 08/05/2010 09:47:24 PM · #35
perfect pics !!
 08/05/2010 10:51:56 PM · #36
When Simms says something regarding wedding photography. Listen up and take notes. His work for weddings is outstanding
 09/11/2011 01:43:54 PM · #37
Been a while but thought I'd post a very delayed reply. I ended up renting the 17-55 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8. The 70-200 ended up being way too zoomed for most of the wedding, and changing lens with only one camera left too much time where I couldn't shoot, so the 17-55 was used 90% of the time. Along with the 430EX II. Here's a couple shots, overall I'd say I was pretty happy with the results for my first time. And the image quality compared to my kits lens was very noticeable improved.



09/11/2011 02:09:03 PM · #38
Great shots! Well done on that particularly tricky chapel shot with strong backlight coming in from those two windows.
 09/11/2011 02:16:14 PM · #39
Originally posted by Simms:
Great shots! Well done on that particularly tricky chapel shot with strong backlight coming in from those two windows.


Thanks, first time shooting RAW and I'm converted. Never could of done that in jpeg, as the initial picture the windows were completely blown out. And the grooms suit was solid black, with very little detail. Lightroom did wonders.
 09/11/2011 02:20:39 PM · #40
Originally posted by bmatt17:
Originally posted by Simms:
Great shots! Well done on that particularly tricky chapel shot with strong backlight coming in from those two windows.


Thanks, first time shooting RAW and I'm converted. Never could of done that in jpeg, as the initial picture the windows were completely blown out. And the grooms suit was solid black, with very little detail. Lightroom did wonders.


Welcome to the fold little sheep... :)
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 01:00:04 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/25/2024 01:00:04 PM EDT.