Wedding photography lens? Last night I took photos at a wedding reception as the hired photographer. I thought I was ready with my 70-200 lens, 85 telephoto prime, wide angle and nifty...

diannarucker Loc: Iowa

Last night I took photos at a wedding reception as the hired photographer. I thought I was ready with my 70-200 lens, 85 telephoto prime, wide angle and nifty fifty. I just could NOT come up with a comfortable lens. I had my speedlight mounted on my nikon d7000. I did have a mount that I could have added on my camera to raise it off but it is very cumbersome. After the fact, I wished I'd used it. My problem was that no matter what I was using it seemed to be the wrong lens. If I had the 85 on I just couldn't get back far enough to get the photos, If I had the wide angle on I couldn't get close enough, people were too far away and dark. THe reception was very dark. I've done other receptions and didn't have so much trouble. This was the first place that I had this problem. Can someone suggest an in between lens that would have helped me??? I"ll post a photo later. They were ok but not great. THe bride and family knew I was not professional.

diannarucker Loc: Iowa

diannarucker wrote:

Last night I took photos at a wedding reception as... (show quote)

oh on a better note I took a free class from Clay Blackmore, photographer from MD. and really enjoyed the day.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Fast glass helps in low light situations, not just in getting a fast enough shutter speed, but in focusing.
I use a 17-55 2.8 for DX cameras like your D7000.
Sigma makes a less expensove version that has VR.
If you forsee going full frame, the 24-70 2.8 would be good.
I think Sigma or Tamron make a version with the same spec's. NONE of these options are cheap, but if you want to run with the big dogs, it's going to cost you.

diannarucker Loc: Iowa

GoofyNewfie wrote:

Fast glass helps in low light situations, not just in getting a fast enough shutter speed, but in focusing.
I use a 17-55 2.8 for DX cameras like your D7000.
Sigma makes a less expensove version that has VR.
If you forsee going full frame, the 24-70 2.8 would be good.
I think Sigma or Tamron make a version with the same spec's. NONE of these options are cheap, but if you want to run with the big dogs, it's going to cost you.

I hear you. Tell me more about the 17-55 2.8. like 4 or 500 dollars? for a Tamron? or Sigma? I also think something wasn't set correctly on my camera last night. My flash keeps giving a couple of pre fires before it actually fires. What do I have it set on that makes it do this? I don't like it. I miss too many shots. and it sure isn't helping with the red eye.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Over 1k for the Nikon. I shoot for a living, and in my opinion, it's worth it. I use the 17-55 (DX only) or 24-70 wide open if I need it. They are sharp.
The other thing about these lenses is they are constant aperture. Stay the same 2.8 through the whole range. They are impressive looking and heavy and do the best job.
It does sound like you have the redeye reduction on. If you had used your bracket it would minimized that. I bounce the flash whenever possible, or use a Gary Fong light dome.

14kphotog Loc: Marietta, Ohio

Shoot in manuel, set shutter speed to flash sync or slower and bang away.

bvargas Loc: Palm Harbor, Florida

I do professional weddings, have been for over 50years. Had Hasselblad in film days. I just retired and my last outfit was, Nikon D300, primary lens was a Tamron 18-200mm, Fisheye and a 70-200mm 2.8. Now since retired I upgraded to the new Tamron 18-270mm 2 Lens. This lens is fantastic. You could actually do the whole wedding with just this lens. For most situations, I shoot on Program when using SB Flash, and set your Flash shutter speed to a slow 1/30sec. Believe me it works. I also use jpeg only, since I send all my files that the customer wants to a Professional Lab and they do the work for me. I do not like Post anything when working in quantity. My average wedding includes in excess of 1000 images. Too much to play with after the fact.
David Ziser, a well know Professional wedding photographer uses the same system. I learned from him at one of his seminars. BV

sontog Loc: S. California

I shoot quite a few weddings and party type gatherings. I have used a Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 but wasn't happy with the range. I now use a Nikon 24-120mm f/4 and it's a great lens. You have to watch the distortion from other lenses when they are wide open. The 24-120 doesn't show this. It has the VR feature which helps. I am sure everyone has an opinion for what works best for them. I am not happy with aftermarket lenses. I have gone through boxes of them. I shoot a Nikon D3S in DX and FX modes, and only use Nikon lenses.

FOTOSTAN Loc: Ca..NYC..Fla.

diannarucker wrote:

Last night I took photos at a wedding reception as... (show quote)

WHY????? do so many people think they can shoot a wedding? WHY???? cheat the newley weds out of pix that cant be re-taken? CONCLUSION: Take your pix, but only as a backup shooter (NOTE I didn't say photographer, which to me is a special vocation of mine) To give the bride and groom and family... "they were ok but not great" images is a sin for a special ocassion like a wedding.

gdwyer Loc: Greenbush MN>

FOTOSTAN. not trying to be a smart (a) how did you start?

ronjay Loc: york Pa.

bvargas wrote:

I do professional weddings, have been for over 50y... (show quote)

I thinking of buying the new tamron 18-270mm is not rated that great what do you think.

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

gdwyer wrote:

FOTOSTAN. not trying to be a smart (a) how did you start?

Agreed. Most of us that do weddings, didn't start out doing so from the womb. Just like anything else, you learn as you go.

Of course......... I did.

bk

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

A 24-70mm f2.8 zoom. Great focal lengths to choose from and a fast lens. Don't make this your only lens, but when you have trouble deciding and don't want to fool around a lot changing lenses a zoom fits the bill.

diannarucker wrote:

Last night I took photos at a wedding reception as... (show quote)

Roger Hicks Loc: Aquitaine

If you are familiar with your equipment, and reasonably experienced, you can shoot a wedding with just about anything. I have done so, including a wedding shot with a borrowed camera when I forgot I said I'd take pics: we were all very young and broke, but cameras were easier to understand in those days.

Otherwise... Well, very little will work for you.

Yes, you have to learn somewhere/somehow. But unless you are familiar with your equipment, and reasonably experienced,a wedding is not something to undertake. If you have to ask what lens to use, or why your lens didn't work, then probably you don't have enough experience to understand the answer.

Sorry if this sounds vicious and cruel, but it's based on 45 years' experience and around 40 years since I (unwillingly) shot my first wedding.

Cheers,

R.

fifthwish Loc: SE Florida

I have shot several weddings as well as those of family member getting married. I use the Nikon D300 and by far my most popular lens is the Nikon 18-200mm, as well as two different Nikon flash units. I primarily shoot in RAW.
These wedding photos can be seen
@ Thefifthwish@smugmug.com