Newdevonian

Pretty much my choice of kit set up. I have the camera with the short lens slung around my neck and under my right arm and the longer camera/lens slung around my neck and under my left arm (I am right handed). Both camera are immediately ready for action and minimising camera clash. Works for me!
BTW I ALWAYS ask to attend the rehearsal so I know to be in the right place at the right time.

Exposures and Art Loc: Murrells Inlet SC

Skidoo an has the solution, or add an 85mm fast lens to the 70-200 & 24-70. I have used all three @ weddings & am very happy with results. UR pics ARE fine btw! :-D

diannarucker Loc: Iowa

thanks everyone for the advice. Someone mentioned some different lens than the 24-70 because I have a DX body, the NIkon d7000 and d90. I don't know how the FX vs DX body looks differently except that I"ve heard if you go full frame you'll love it.
PS here are a few more of the wedding from last weekend

TomballLegend Loc: Tomball, Texas

Check out my bride shot in "Pictures that should never have been shot"

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

The biggest differences I find are:
1)Better control of shallow depth of field shots
2)The viewfinder seems a lot bigger.

Image quality & high ISO quality between the FF D700 & D7000 are pretty close, the D700 being slightly sharper.
The 24-70 would be a great lens, expecially if you plan to go to full frame sensor soon. If you're sticking with DX, get a 17-55 2.8 Nikon...the only pro DX Nikon made. It came out before Nikon made a full frame sensor camera. I have heard the Sigma and Tamron 17-50~55 2.8 are good too.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

With your array of lenses, there is definitely a range that is missing that the 24-70mm would cover. It truly is a beautiful wedding coverage lens and will take care of 85% of your shots.
If outside I use the 70-200 for my formals . . . in a restricted space the 24-70 does a great job also. I would never recommend using a focal length any shorter than 24mm on groups, especially formals, as the distortion could be really undesirable .

Although the 85mm is a beautiful lens, it is redundant if carrying the 70-200mm

Leave the "kit" lens at home . . . it is too weak for professional wedding work. (lack of quality and too slow)

Here's a suggestion or two:

I think the best quality 24-70mm would be the best investment in your gear as a wedding photographer, but keep in mind that it is not a macro and will give you no better results than your 50mm for your close-in detail shots. Because there probably will never be a request for a large copy of the detail shots, they can be successfully taken with a good quality P&S. Very effective for macro . . . no changing lenses on site (very dangerous anyway) . . . easy to carry (don't we pack enough weight already?)

Again . . . not suggesting that you shouldn't invest in the 24-70mm . . . but in the meantime an inexpensive alternative, that is in fact, better than carrying a specialty lens for detail shots anyway.

Food for thought . . .

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

Here's a detail shot taken with a Nikon 990 P&S

Peekayoh Loc: UK

Wedding Guy, you need to read Dianna's post.

A 24-70mm is totally inappropriate for her current needs.

Weddingguy Loc: British Columbia - Canada

If you would take the time to read my post you would see that I said that the 24-70mm was not a macro and as a result would not be any better than her present 50mm. My discussion of the 24-70mm was backing up previous posts by other members that it is in fact the ideal wedding photography lens for 85% of a wedding coverage, and by the way, used by most professional wedding photographers.

Suggest read carefully first . . then criticize :-D

Mashubi1 Loc: Salem, Oregon

Dianna ....Great shots!!!!..I also use a Tamron 70-200 2.8 & a Sigma 24-70 DG HSM 2.8 and two different camera bodies.

Mashubi1 Loc: Salem, Oregon

I like using the 24-70 when you are moving fast to "keep up with the crowd" and cannot get in the position you would like to take the shot you would like to take and be able to not miss the moment. The Sigma 24-70 is a bit heavy but not that bad. I also prefer the Black Rapid strap system.

allen finley photography Loc: Sunshine State.

Try using extension tubes with the 85mm 2.8 to get your macro/close up shots. you can use them with your 50mm as well.

ranscot Loc: Texas

This post is awesome for me because I JUST bought a Nikon D7000 AND I want to begin doing weddings. I have taken photos for years and it is in fact becoming an addiction, but I the D7000 is more camera than I have ever had. I am taking online courses to sharpen my skills, but seeing your use of the camera and the pictures here is great.

I am probably the least experienced person on this site, but I think your pictures are just great. Thank you for sharing!

Grizzly Loc: USA

I use a 17-85 (Canon)as a general use lens. I also use a Sony NEX5 for candid work. Renders good images from APC sized sensor and looks like the ubiquitous point and shoot and does not threaten people. Great low light camera.

Photographs are really good. I would recommend (as shown) some cropping to help. For the group, tighten up the group a bit then crop to get the close-up you want.

For the record, any bride should be very happy with what I've seen.

westernlifestyles Loc: NV

You have talent, and if I had to guess....I'd say you loved photography. I do too. As I am learning I've had my feelings hurt a few times through "helpful criticism", but have always realized that much of what what I've been told has value, even if I don't always agree. That being said, may I carefully make a comment about the rings? The red in the flowers detract from the elegance of the rings. The flowers are lovely and the rings are beautiful, but the rings are the focal and should not have to compete. Just a matter of opinion, given with admiration for your images. Happy shooting. WSL