What lens, wedding photography?

[gtsiawd96]

A friend would like me to come to there wedding and take some photo's, candid's before the wedding, and family portraits. At first I was really excited, well its turning into nervousness as the day approaches. I need another lens to shoot with. I'm on a budget of around $500 for another lens.

I currently have a D60 with my kit lens 18-55 af-s, I have a 50mm/1.8 MF, and I have my Tokina 12-24mm that I have to manual focus on the D60 because of stupid AF-S.

I was thinking about going with a Nikkor 55-200mm VR AF-S, or something used like the 18-200mm if I could ever find one around $500, Or possibly a Sigma. What ever lense I get I want it to be VR and also have AF-S. Maybe a Prime 85l or 135l, I don't know much about them though?

Can you guys point me to some links or some suggestions, maybe you have had experience with. Please nothing crazy expensive like a 70-200mm f2.8 its not gonna happen. I Wish, I'm just broke.

Thanks!

[Supersprynt]

I think you're going to want something longer, esp if these are going to be candid shots. As soon as people know their photo is being taken they change their behavior; so you're going to want to stay out of the way and still get the shot.

You're also going to want something fast, so if you can get a zoom (for practicality purposes) with the lowest f/stop possible, go for it. You can also cut costs by going with a long prime. It eliminates some versatility but if you're on a strict budget it may be an only option.

And personally I'd stay away from the 12-24 at a wedding. IMO that's way to much distortion for a wedding event.

[gtsiawd96]

Originally Posted by Supersprynt

I think you're going to want something longer, esp if these are going to be candid shots. As soon as people know their photo is being taken they change their behavior; so you're going to want to stay out of the way and still get the shot.

You're also going to want something fast, so if you can get a zoom (for practicality purposes) with the lowest f/stop possible, go for it. You can also cut costs by going with a long prime. It eliminates some versatility but if you're on a strict budget it may be an only option.

And personally I'd stay away from the 12-24 at a wedding. IMO that's way to much distortion for a wedding event.

Thanks! I was definitly planning on staying away from the 12-24mm, except to take a shot or two of the church before everyone arrives, and possibly one or two after everyone is drunk wide angle of the dance floor/hall everyone actin a fool. lol

I understand what your saying with the long lens, its something else I didn't really think of is behavior change when people know there is a camera around.

I searched around and it seems like Canon is the prime lens king, they have them all layed out nicely. But Nikkon is a little different. Recomendations?

[grimm]

if your on a budget i suggest renting a lens or two. I agree you will want something longer and fast. I would think a zoom might be better than a prime? but thats your call. i might also be thinking about some strobes.

[97TurboDSM]

rent or buy two. one long/fast, one wide/fast.

[gtsiawd96]

When you say long, how long. Like 100mm or 200mm? I haven't had alot of experience with longer lenses so I'm not sure how far a 200mm len's how far out of the way would I be. Dumb question but know what I mean?

[cszakolczai]

long like 200mm long and you want something wide open. You'll need a flash for sure. Especially if your dealing with an 18-200VR with that lens closing up to 5.6 when zoomed to 200. I would rent a few lenses and get yourself an SB800 or something like that.

[Supersprynt]

A zoom would be more beneficial in that you have the ability to adapt to situations; whereas a prime you have to move around more and may have to swap out a lens quickly - and in that time you may miss the moment. So yes, a zoom would def. be the better choice.

That being said, the 55-200 would be good. Not sure how fast you can get that, but the faster the better. Renting a lens would be excellent, you can check out http://www.lensrentals.com/for-nikon to check out pricing and availability. That way you don't actually have to commit to buying and still do the job.

Look for a long zoom lens with a static f/stop through the range.

[97TurboDSM]

rent a 70-200/2.8 and something in the 16-50 range at 2.8. I would shoot no slower than 2.8 for a wedding but thats just me.

[YO CAMRY]

Tamron makes a 17-50mm f/2.8, you could use that for your mid range.

[gtsiawd96]

Thanks guys good input.

I'm going to go over to "Le Camera" tonight after work, see what he has also.

The 70-200 f2.8 seems like such a great lens, it sucks its a little pricey. And honestly, I don't know if I'm going to stay with Nikon or not I think I'm rapidly out growing the D60, and so far don't have enough invested in lenses to not consider switching. So spending that much on a lens is killing me.

The wedding starts 2 p.m. so I'm hoping that most of my shots will not need a flash, Of course I don't have a flash either(other than on-board), will using the on camera flash be that terrible?? I was looking at the SB-600. What kind of advantages will this flash give me for the wedding. I understand the reason for the fast 2.8 lens is very good in low light while maintaning a good shutter speed. So you don't need to be flashing peoples faces off all night.

[YO CAMRY]

I wouldn't use the on camera flash at all, it just makes dull straight on light. The SB600 will allow you to bounce the flash off different places for a better looking fill light.

[djb5118]

everything that has been said as been great so far. id rent a 70-200 2.8 honestly. its a great lens and you wont be dissapointed with the quality of the photos.

for weddings, you really want a good tele to get the range and the good DOF. if you dont have a long enough lens, youll be getting in the way, and people will change how they act (like what was mentioned earlier)

i would also suggest renting the 70-200 and the nikon 17-55 2.8. Both are very good lenses and will give you great results. If you have money to spare, rent or buy a sb600. Like it was mentioned, it gives you the ability to bounce the flash by changing its direction, which will give much better indoor and outdoor lighting.

sorry for the ****ty punctuation/grammer....im typing fast while at work

[djb5118]

Nikon 17-55 f2.8 - $69 for 7 days insured
Nikon 70-200 f2.8 - $91 for 7 days insured
Nikon SB800 - $49 for 7 days
Nikon SB600 - $26 for 7 days

(prices from lensrentals.com...ive used them and they are great!)

You could look into getting the sb800 and then one or two sb600 and set them up as remote flashes if you really wanted to get fancy. That would be well under your $500 budet. Or just rent the glass and buy the flash (they are really really useful)

Your 50mm prime is a good portrait lens, but will be difficult to frame shots quickly. The 12-24 can be used for wide shots (obviously) where you want to get everything in, like you mentioned in the church, during the ceremony/reception, etc. I wouldn't use the wide lens for any portraits or candids really. Additionaly you cant use L glass (the 85mm and 135mm) that you mentioned becuase those are Canon mount only.

[Supersprynt]

x3 on a hot shoe flash. You do not want that harsh light.

Here's a glaring question: are they hiring another photographer? You don't want to get in his way either, esp if you're going to be strobing.

[YellowMSP]

the lenses most people recommended are probably ur best bet for the day. last wedding i used the 70-200 and 85 for most of it so i was out of the way to get good candids. i used the 16-35 for group shots and indoor shots where the other lenses were too long. if you rent lenses go for f2.8 or faster because that speed will help, esp later in the day when the sun starts going down. flash is a good idea too and it can help you in the day too just to add some fill light to the faces of people youre shooting so they dont get caught in pretty harsh shadows from the sun at that time of day

[sisforsurfing]

Originally Posted by gtsiawd96

Thanks guys good input.

I'm going to go over to "Le Camera" tonight after work, see what he has also.

The 70-200 f2.8 seems like such a great lens, it sucks its a little pricey. And honestly, I don't know if I'm going to stay with Nikon or not I think I'm rapidly out growing the D60, and so far don't have enough invested in lenses to not consider switching. So spending that much on a lens is killing me.

The wedding starts 2 p.m. so I'm hoping that most of my shots will not need a flash, Of course I don't have a flash either(other than on-board), will using the on camera flash be that terrible?? I was looking at the SB-600. What kind of advantages will this flash give me for the wedding. I understand the reason for the fast 2.8 lens is very good in low light while maintaning a good shutter speed. So you don't need to be flashing peoples faces off all night.

Le Camera is a great shop. The guys are really knowledgable, I think one of them shoots weddings. I prefer driving 45 minutes to shop there even than using B&H when it's ten minutes away in the city.

But yeah, at 2 pm you don't "need" the speed except for DoF. Rent a 70-200 or even 180/2.8, though it's nice to be flexible at a wedding with a zoom. But in daylight if you're having to ask what lenses to use, you're best off focussing on gear you know how to use well and capturing good moments. Most brides I've met don't give a hell about depth of field but really, really care about how good their smile is on their wedding day!

[gtsiawd96]

Okay, so I just got back from Le camera. The guys in there are definitely cool, the owner was a little pushy, saying $1,000 for a lens is nothing. LOL. I guess when you have a half million dollars worth of inventory sitting behind you you can say that.

So, we looked at the Nikkor 55-200 VR AF-S 3.5/5.6. Ehhh. He had a non VR used also, didn't really like it. He didn't have many used lenses that were AF-S compatible. So I tried a 70-300mm f3.5-5.6 AF-s same as the 55-200 it was okay, not terrible. Than we tried a 70-200 f2.8 Tamron wouldn't work on my camera. Than we tried a Manual Focus 85 f1.8, very cool lens, I liked it DOF it felt good, but didn't like the MF.

Than he stumbles across this lens Brand New Sigma 50-150mm F2.8 HSM, I tried it out and I love it. I switched back over to the 55-200 quickly to see how the 50mm less on the Sigma, and honestly I couldn't really tell a difference. The Sigma autofocus was super fast, the shoots seemed super crisp with the ISO at 400-800. It was much lighter than the Tamron 70-200, but didn't feel cheap like the Nikkor 55-200mm. The lens is just out of my price range at $800.00 retail. But I told him I would go home think it over and see if I can swing it. Maybe ask him to go a little lower, I found them online at $750.00 new. Anybody have any experience with this lens?

[97TurboDSM]

it's good you went out and tried some stuff out. the sigma should be just fine, plenty long and fast enough. you WILL need something wider than 50mm though. seriously look into renting for a week. its very affordable and you'll be able to get some great glass for awesome prices like posted above. even that lens shop might rent to you.

[cszakolczai]

Sigma is pretty good, but you need a flash. Sorry but you cannot shoot a wedding without another flash other then the pop up one. The pop up flash is harsh, cheap and very very amature like. If you want to do a good job you need to have the right equipment. How many people is this wedding? And where in Princeton are you located? I live in Princeton too.