Son of step is getting married next year and to save cash they have asked me to do the photos :eek:

On the plus side it does mean swmbo as given me free range on the budget to buy new kit to do a proper job :D:D

So today we ordered a 055xprob tripod with a 488rc4 ball head and a 682B free standing monopod, which I explained would also be nice for the holidays

Now to Glass, I was thinking a nice fast 10-24mm, 24-70mm, and a 70-200mm should cover all the bases, Not sure she as actually seen the prices of these yet :P:rofl:

Wonder if I could persuade her on the benefits of the Sigma 150 mm f2,.8 Macro and the 150-500 mm zoom whilst she is in a party mood

I have done a few close friend's weddings. I found it is best to keep the gear simple - less chance of the wrong lens at the wrong time.

My favourite 'wedding lens' is a 24-85mm f2.8-4. I use it on my Nikon F100 film camera with Fuji negative film. 400 speed is my favourite. I don't think spending on lenses is needed unless you are really lacking in that department.

More important than the finer degree of optical quality is capturing tender moments in the ceremony. These are fleeting (due to the pressures of the occasion) and having the camera bolted down on a tripod may mean that you miss some of these. Smiles from anyone, groups, the wedding car arriving and the party afterwards are all good album fodder. Don't get too 'arty' as the simple photographic style will always win through. Remember the fad of heads chopped off? Nowadays it is crazy tilted angles - this will date badly too I think.

Good luck and enjoy it.

TH

I. I don't think spending on lenses is needed

Shhhh ! :P

Son of step is getting married next year and to save cash they have asked me to do the photos :eek:

On the plus side it does mean swmbo as given me free range on the budget to buy new kit to do a proper job :D:D

So today we ordered a 055xprob tripod with a 488rc4 ball head and a 682B free standing monopod, which I explained would also be nice for the holidays

Now to Glass, I was thinking a nice fast 10-24mm, 24-70mm, and a 70-200mm should cover all the bases, Not sure she as actually seen the prices of these yet :P:rofl:

Wonder if I could persuade her on the benefits of the Sigma 150 mm f2,.8 Macro and the 150-500 mm zoom whilst she is in a party mood

Have you told SWMBO that that little lot will actually cost more than the wedding ? :rotz:

So as 'not to be a let down' you 'll need to get some practice in, Andy e.g. similar lighting conditions (and ISO limitations etc), different scenarios (groupings and even bad weather) and even a backup camera (I know ).

I'm sure there's a few more peeps on here who've done weddings will offer advice - I know I wouldn't like the responsibility

Andy, I can't remember if you have a dslr body or you can get a new body too

For weddings, IMO, you really need a fast zoom. Too much going on to swap primes over, unless you have 3-4 bodies available.

When doing weddings, I'm now using my D700 with AF-S 24-70 f/2.8. I put my 85mm f/1.4 on my D200 for those creamy portrait shots.

You may want to consider a proper flash too - not only will it give you more power should you need it, it'll also be good for fill light. But I suppose it depends on whether flash is permissible or not (in church, etc). If not, A D700 / D3 / 5Dmk2 / 3Dmk2 with suitable big glass does the job. I've shot as ISO6400 and they're usable But a D700 + 24-70/2.8 + SB900 is over 3 grand :eek:

Also, it's worth having a backup body in case the main one plays up on the day. Have spare batteries and loads of CF / SD cards too.

When / where is it happening? Drop me a PM if you want

Cheers Xav, its next March and its going to be a civil ceremony in a local Hotel/ restaurant so lighting shouldn't be the same issue as in a church. I am currently shooting a D80, and may take a film body along as well as a bit of a back up if I have managed to resist the temptation of a D300, (unless they drop to bellow the 1K mark with the advent of the 300s).

I was planning on using the 50 mm f1.8 I already have for the 'set up' standard portrait shots and maybe a few with the fisheye to provide a slightly different perspective.

Top of the shopping list for the candid shots will be the 24-70 f2.8 Just haven't made my mind wether to cream £1200 on Nikon glass or budget with the sigma at £750 (which I have read good things about).

How about renting the 24-70 before the wedding and see what it does for your photography? If it makes a real difference then go for it!

During my wedding work, I find my zoom often at the extremes - 24mm for big groups and then out to 85mm for portraits. 70mm may be a bit short to get the tighter shots (on full frame).

Despite the convinience of digital, I find that film is much more forgiving of contrasty scenes and the highlights will never blow so badly as on digital. My wedding mentor - a pro wedding guy uses film only.

One lens I really do like for my wedding work is the new 50mm 1.4 AF-S. For informal small groups, set the aperture to f2-f2.5 and the groups stand out nicely fromn the background. I usually just wander and blow a roll of 36 through as people are standing and chatting after the meal/party. These small (and relaxed) groups make great photos and the bride and groom will have some favourites for sure.

Getting back to lenses, the 24-70 whilst being very good is not the focal length that makes for the real magic. For that you need the 70-200 f2.8. Set it to around 135mm and f2.8 and see the magic happen down the viewfinder!

TH

And the list goes on, if the overtime fairy comes knocking then I would consider the 70-200 f2.8, would probably go for the Sigma macro lens tbh rather than the nikon. Currently I have a 35-80 f4-5.6 and 75-240 f4.5-5.6 Nikkor lenses in this range but both are on the slow side for this type of photography :(

The D80 is a DX sensor so 25-70 is equivalent of 36-105 or there abouts, so would the 70-200 (105-300 equivalent be too long?), I must admit I would rather buy to own either the 70-200 macro or even more so the 150 mm macro than the 24-70. I will be getting the10-24mm to take on holiday this year but I guess this will be a little too wide for the purpose of wedding shots? The only other lens I really want is the 150-500 sigma for the bairn playing sports, birds etc.but that really would be useless

I have explained to son (and daughter in law to be) that I have 0 experience and don't want to be responsable if they don't get the shots of the day they would like, but they are adamant that, A) they would rather spend the £750+ on other things, and that whatever most people say they only really need 1 good shot to put on the mantelpiece the rest just get stuck in a drawer and might be shown to the kids in 20 years so they aren't really that bothered so long as they have something.

I don't mind buying the 24-70 if that allows me to get some decent shots, and I will have a good lens after the event that won't really depreciate in value like just paying for them a wedding photographer would, as they had their wedding present 2 years ago when they first announced their engagement and got their own place then at least by doing the photos I am giving them a little extra as well.

So any further thoughts on Nikon vs Sigma

24-70 vs 70-200

150 or even the 105 macro VR or do I deffinately need a zoom?

and will the std 50 mm f1.8 cut the mustard for the portrait shots?

Edited 31 July, 200916 yr by postmanpat

I will admit that neither of those lenses would be my first choice for a wedding.

Take a look at the 24-85mm f2.8-4. Nearly as fast as the 'pro' 24-70, easier to carry and the results are excellent indeed. The 24-70 whilst being very good is also very heavy and it will not be the best balance on the D80. Also look at the 17-55mm f2.8 DX? That would be perfect on the D80 AND will work at the longer focal lengths on the F100 without corner shading (but I still would prefer the 24-85mm as it is future proof).

Whilst not a portrait, this is the 24-85mm wide open. Corner shading due to a too-thick polariser, but the colour and sharpness are first rate. This was Fuji 400 print film.

I have the 17-55 vr as a kit lens but it is f3.5-5.6 which I am guessing will be too slow as I won't want to be shooting the D80 beyond 800 iso (400 preferred) max. but I am reluctant to buy the same focal length just for the speed. Is the 24-85 fast enough at 85mm f4 for indoors with no flash?

I have the 17-55 vr as a kit lens but it is f3.5-5.6 which I am guessing will be too slow as I won't want to be shooting the D80 beyond 800 iso (400 preferred) max. but I am reluctant to buy the same focal length just for the speed. Is the 24-85 fast enough at 85mm f4 for indoors with no flash?

The 17-55mm is a constant f2.8, but the 18-55mm is a variable aperture zoom. The 17-55mm is a 'DX Pro' lens with weight and pricetag to match.

Concerning the 24-85, it is usable indoors with no flash - it is good wide open but not as good as the 24-70. Trouble is without flash some shadows tend to get a bit heavy. I went for an SB-800 and with that bounced and with the forwards lighting panel lifted (so to give bounced and front light) I get some much cleaner photos. It really does depend on the room - a bright painted room with large windows will probaly not need any flash, but as soon as you are up against dark and shadowy areas it needs more than a 1/2 - 1 stop of light (difference between lenses) - it needs something like a D700/D3 with that wonderful sensor or a subtle wink of flash.

Yes sorry I meant the 18-55, I really didn't want to get into buying speed lights and flash photography if I am honest. It is just another skill to master and something else to get wrong (bloody kids )

Well after seeing the venue I have capitulated, a flash will most definitely be required, so seen as I had a voucher code for Jessops a SB-900 now resides in Chez Pat, the bloody instruction manual is 140 pages, for a flamin flash :(

Andy, the SB-900 is an amazing bit of kit. But I've found the manual to be incredibly confusing. They try and show it so simply with various examples, but I just ended up getting confused.

I really recommend you spend several hours playing around with it. On the day, you won't have time to flick through the manual to find the setting you need.

Also, if shooting in bright daylight with the flash to fill for shadows under those pesky wedding hats , and you want to use fast glss for nice bokeh, you have to set the camera body to FP (focal plane). Otherswise, the flash will sync the shutter to the fastest speed possible (1/250s) and you'll end with blown out photos and scratching your head why it's not working as you expected. Trust me, I made that mistake at my first wedding shoot

edit: I'd also seriously consider hiring some nice lenses for the wedding. www.lensesforhire.co.uk are a decent bunch (although never used them personally, yet!)

Oh, and after finially forking out for the 24-70/2.8 Nikkor, all I can say is wow. It's frikkin expensive, frikkin heavy, but delivers very good shots for a zoom lens with minimal distortion. And whilst I agree a nice telephoto is nice for bokeh and candids, I believe that can only be on a second body. Unless it's a massive wedding which probably won't be the case if it's civil, I'd definately have your 50/1.8 for those formal, indoor, group shots.