# Any Wedding Lens Advice?



## Tabor Warren Photography (Sep 10, 2012)

So, my wife and I have three weddings right at the start of 2013, but here's the kicker; I think we're lacking a little glass. 

We have the following
5DII, 60D, 17-40L, 35L, 50 1.4, and a 430ex ii. We also have a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 which I am not the biggest fan of and will be selling soon. We would like to keep our purchase at a max of ~2K and don't mind buying new, refurbed, or used (from a quality seller). 

What do you all think? I strongly believe that this forum is an invaluable resource for photographers who are beginning their business and thank you all in advance for your support.

-Tabor


----------



## CharlieB (Sep 10, 2012)

I dunno... maybe I'm strange, maybe I'm too old school.

Have shot my share of back breaking weddings with 500c/m and 60, plus an 80 as a spare. Got it all. Used 283's in Chimera boxes - camera mounted - for light. Got it all. Every once in a while, a balcony shot, ok dig out the 250, or add the Mutar to the 80.

Fast forward to today.

Holy crap.... give me a 24-105/4.0, not much worse than the 60/3.5 on the Hasselblad, Give me TTL speedlights in the same Chimera box on the camera... If I can't do it with that alone, maybe an extra light as fill or highlight... something is seriously wrong.

Just my 2c on it all....


----------



## agierke (Sep 10, 2012)

the 24-70mm F2.8L and the 70-200mm F2.8L are staples in wedding realm. primes are good but just a different style of shooting.

the only focal range that you dont have covered is the 70-200. the 70-300 isnt fast enough so i dont count it. i would get a 70-200 F2.8L non IS version and also get another speedlight if i were you.


----------



## Jakontil (Sep 10, 2012)

24-105 withflash or 24-70 will b your choice i suppose


----------



## bow26 (Sep 10, 2012)

+1 on the 70-200mm. That lens is staple for any wedding photographer's kit simply because of the versatility and the focal range. I recommend you get the 70-200 f2.8 IS II as it is optically king and the extra f-stop and IS will help in darker locations, despite the weight. And looking at your current set-up, you've got the shorter focal lengths covered.


----------



## wockawocka (Sep 10, 2012)

Yes, you are lacking a lot of glass.

The 5DII:
24-70
70-200
85 1.8

The 60D:
24-105
50 1.4

You guys can share the 100mm Macro and the 60D needs a proper flash.

This is minimum kit.


----------



## brianleighty (Sep 10, 2012)

The 70-200 2.8IS ii is a great option. Expensive and heavy but a really awesome lens. One other option that I haven't seen listed in the postings so far is the Sigma 85 1.4. I just rented this for a wedding this weekend and was really happy with it.


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Sep 10, 2012)

Man I would love to get a hold of all of the lenses and test run them. Like so many of you have polled and commented the 70-200 2.8 ii or a close varient should probably be the winner. I like the 24-70 range as well and a close buddy of mine actually owns it. I think I'll check with him about renting it from him and I'll probably rent or buy the 70-200 2.8 ii for this event (I just checked and it's $110 for 5 days, not bad really. I'll put some more thought into it but greatly appreciate and value your advice.

-Tabor


----------



## Alex (Sep 10, 2012)

Personally I would go for the 24-70 on the 5d mkii and the 70-200 on the 60d.. You will probably find that during a wedding your not going to have the luxury of changing lens all the time.. If you wanted to do a few specialist shots then a fisheye at the reception goes well and possibly a 50mm for rings and other item shots.. Other than that 24-70 and 70-200 is pretty much all you will need to get some great shots..

Alex


----------



## adhocphotographer (Sep 11, 2012)

Alex said:


> Personally I would go for the 24-70 on the 5d mkii and the 70-200 on the 60d.. You will probably find that during a wedding your not going to have the luxury of changing lens all the time.. If you wanted to do a few specialist shots then a fisheye at the reception goes well and possibly a 50mm for rings and other item shots.. Other than that 24-70 and 70-200 is pretty much all you will need to get some great shots..
> 
> Alex



+1


----------



## cpsico (Sep 11, 2012)

The 24-70 is a hammer, it nails the shot every single time, the 70-200 f4 is is exceptional on a budget, it will not focus fast enough in extremely dark reception but at the time you will be using fast primes and 24-70 which will focus very well still


----------



## steliosk (Sep 11, 2012)

well get the 24-70 for sure

and then go for 70-200 2.8 IS II if you can afford the cash.
if not, buy the 135mm for portraits on 5D

glad to see you've got the 17-40, an ultra wide angle lens is a must for ceremonies.


----------



## jaayres20 (Sep 11, 2012)

The 24-70 is a boring lens and you already have some wide angle lenses. Go for the 70-200 f/2.8L IS II it is a must have and will be on your camera most of the day.


----------



## MarkIII (Sep 11, 2012)

You really need to get that 40-70mm range at least. I know I was recently contemplating the 24 - 105 f/4 to get me by while I was waiting for my 24-70 2.8 II to finally be released. I have not shot that lens but figured it could get me by since my Tamron 28-75 went down on me right before a busy wedding month for us. I loved that lens, it worked great for me on a tight budget, but. My replacement now. Sits in my bag capped while I rock the 16-35 2.8 II. In my experience I can't ever remember shooting. Long lens in a reception, it's always been my 28-75 or now my 16-35.


----------



## ro-b (Sep 11, 2012)

I would ad the 24 1.4L  
It was just fun to use that lens! And the results are much better than that what i got out of my 24-70 2.8L 

My Lineup was:

7D
5D III

8-15L ( used on 5D III)
16-35 2.8 II (not used much)
24 1.4L II (almost fixed to at least one body)
50 1.4 (most of the time on 7D)
24-70 2.8L (used often on 5D III)
70-200 2.8 L IS II (used on 5D III)

580 EXII
430 EX

Some other stuff to get the light where I want it


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 11, 2012)

Tabor Warren Photography said:


> So, my wife and I have three weddings right at the start of 2013, but here's the kicker; I think we're lacking a little glass.
> 
> We have the following
> 5DII, 60D, 17-40L, 35L, 50 1.4, and a 430ex ii. We also have a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 which I am not the biggest fan of and will be selling soon. We would like to keep our purchase at a max of ~2K and don't mind buying new, refurbed, or used (from a quality seller).
> ...



If I were you, I wouldn't even bring the 70-300. The 35L + 5D2 and the 50mm + 60D during most of the day. I would rotate either a 135L prime or the 70-200MM in when needed.

Keep it simple, 2-3 lenses and flashes on both cameras, even for just the AF assist beam. Use the 17-40 for the show stopper photos of the church but that's about it.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Sep 11, 2012)

If I were you, I'd look at the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8

While these lenses aren't as amazing as the primes out there, they a still really really really nice lenses. The problem with wedding stuff is that you are constantly moving around and taking pictures of people all over the place. Unless you're really experienced, you are going to run into problems switching primes all the time. Don't forget, what use is a great lens if you aren't able to get the shot?

I will say that when I am doing the "set/formal" shots I love using my primes, however, when I'm running around getting candids the 24-70 is on the camera about 95% of the time and I might have a 50mm on my second body.


----------



## bp (Sep 11, 2012)

70-200 IS II. No question. You've got the wide end covered very well. The 70-200 would become your workhorse, and if you do spring for the mk2, you'll be blown away by its IQ


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 11, 2012)

I never shoot events, such as weddings, without a 24-70L lens. I've done without the 70-200, but not the 24-70.


----------



## willis (Sep 11, 2012)

85mm F1.2L II - 24-70mm F2.8L - 70-200mm F2.8L, Pretty much perfect setup, covers a nice big area ( 24 to 200 ) All lenses got Superb IQ on FF, great on low light situations.


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 11, 2012)

Tabor Warren Photography said:


> We have the following
> 5DII, 60D, 17-40L, 35L, 50 1.4, and a 430ex ii. We also have a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 which I am not the biggest fan of and will be selling soon. We would like to keep our purchase at a max of ~2K and don't mind buying new, refurbed, or used (from a quality seller).


You have the mid-range nicely covered with the 17-40, 35 and 50, but you don't have a good telephoto for weddings. I recommend replacing your 70-300 with either the 70-200 f/4 IS (my preference) or the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (bigger and costlier, but better for low light).

I would also recommend the inexpensive but extremely good 85 f/1.8, in addition to a 70-200. That would cover the telephoto range very well.


----------



## sameerthawani (Sep 11, 2012)

I would suggest the 70-200 f/2.8 - but here's why: 

A lot of weddings/indoors are subject to low-light and limitations on the use of flash. I was shooting in a conference room once, and my lens would only allow f/5.6 at near 200mm. I couldn't use flash, and had to resort to high ISO. Although the high ISO's in camera's nowadays are pretty good, even then you'll still see the noise and grain and every camera is better at a lower ISO than it's higher ISO.

Believe it or not, sometimes even at ISO 3200 you're not getting enough light with an f/5'ish aperture at high zoom. 

In these situations, a zoom lens with a wide aperture such as f/2.8 is a blessing. 

If you can't afford the Canon, I would take a look at third party lenses which offer high zooms at f/2.8. Yes I know that some folks will disagree with third party, but if I had to choose between the ability to have 200mm at f/2.8 with a third party lens vs not having that, I would choose the third party. Better something than nothing. 

Just my two cents. 

Sameer Thawani


----------



## mitchell3417 (Sep 11, 2012)

70-200 2.8L is hands down the way to go IMO. In the style I shoot it is a must have for weddings. Spends most of the day on my camera. And you have a very similar setup to me on the shorter end. 17-40 and 50 can do everything you need.


----------



## sameerthawani (Sep 11, 2012)

Let me just add - I agree with another poster here : I would keep the 70-200mm on on the 60D and another lens/lenses which covers the wider ends on the 5d MKII.


----------



## K-amps (Sep 11, 2012)

You don't have a 70-200 f2.8 mk.ii yet? 

Once you get that... I'd suggest the 135L or 85mm but first, I'd get the King Zoomer. 60+% people agree it is a good choice.


----------



## preppyak (Sep 11, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> You have the mid-range nicely covered with the 17-40, 35 and 50, but you don't have a good telephoto for weddings. I recommend replacing your 70-300 with either the 70-200 f/4 IS (my preference) or the 70-200 f/2.8 IS (bigger and costlier, but better for low light).
> 
> I would also recommend the inexpensive but extremely good 85 f/1.8, in addition to a 70-200. That would cover the telephoto range very well.


I agree with this. The 70-200 will cover your tele needs and be good for 90% of its uses...and a tele prime would be good for closer up portraits.

The prime route would be to get the 100mm macro (L or non-L), the 135L, and maybe the 85mm f/1.8. That set-up could work nicely if you've scouted your locations well in advance, and you know that you'll need certain focal lengths. You'd have them all covered up through 135, which is more than enough.

But, since you are starting out, the 70-200 is gonna cause a lot less panic than switching lenses a lot


----------



## LightboxPhotos (Sep 11, 2012)

I would go for the 70-200 L IS II.

I shoot a lot of weddings, in fact I did one last saturday and I have 3 to do over the next 3 weeks.

My setup is usually as follows:

5D3/Grip -> 35L 1.4
5D3/Grip -> 70-200L IS II

I also have a 17-40 & 24-105 in the bag which I usually use for group shots, wide ceremony shots and a few others although the 35 & 70-200 sit on the bodies most.

The IQ from the 70-200 is on par with primes, and its range is so good I tend to use it for 75% of my work.

Feel free to browse my site (www.lightboxphotos.com) where all of the pics are done with this setup apart from most images where taken on my old 5D2 bodies which have now been replaced by the 5D3's although range is exactly the same. Although one picture taken of the wedding last Saturday is on my blog, this was the 5D3 + 70-200.

Cheers

Simon


----------



## Tabor Warren Photography (Sep 12, 2012)

Wow, you all are amazing!



K-amps said:


> You don't have a 70-200 f2.8 mk.ii yet?



lol No, not yet. I have been on the fence regarding the 70-200 f/2.8 mk. ii for a while now. It seems that there is a general consenses that this lens should set me up rather nicely for my work. 

Thank you all again for your support. I definitely still have the others in mind, but I will likely be jumping on board with this little monster.

Also, LightboxPhotos -- I checked out your site and you are quite exceptional at what you do. Keep up the great work!

-Tabor


----------

