wedding photography: Canon 20D and which lenses?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the 70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens? Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any tips!
Lisa

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

lisa.ireland wrote:
> I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
> which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the
70-200
> 2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens?
Has
> anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
> higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any
tips!
> Lisa

I shot two weddings with Canon 300D and the kit lens and learned that
you need a lens that f/2.8-4. Preferably a consistent f/2.8. If "IS"
then thats a bonus. Also, the 18mm end is good in places where you
don't have much room to move back. I hardly shot anything beyond 50mm
but then these are Indian weddings so the settings and environment
might be different for a church or cathedral wedding.

so my choice would be the Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 "L" if money was no
constraint. On a budget then the Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD. And if
you really have to spend less then the Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5.
HTH,

Siddhartha

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

lisa.ireland wrote:
> because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
> the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one
or
> 2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that
focal
> length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
> good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
> the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the
kit
> lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better
lens.
> should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
> just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?

Yes, field of view will change. Given the 20D's crop factor of 1.6x,
the 28-135mm will yield a FoV of 48-216mm. So you need a lens with
atleast 18mm at the wide-end to shoot group photographs. Even the lens
advertised as digital lenses will have changed FoV on dSLRs.

And that brings us to the likes of the Canon 17-40mm "L" and the Tamron
17-35mm f/2.8-4. They will give you the FoV of 28-xxmm on the Canon
20D. I found that the 18mm end was good enough for shooting a group of
ten people at a distance of about 10 meters or less (Sorry, I am bad
with estimations). But remember that you will avoid shooting with the
lens wide open because lenses tend to be soft at their extreme ends.
Also, you might not find the time between ceremonies to change lenses
etc so a good all-around lens might be useful.

As for practise, yes, the 18-55mm lens is good for practise. Ignore all
the negative remarks about it. Yes, manual focus is disgusting on it
and its not very bright but good for practise and casual shooting and
very much worth the $70-$100 its sold for, IMHO.

The 17-85mm has a good FL range but the aperture is such that you might
want to spend on a lens with a wider aperture, later on. So save the
400 euros for a lens with a wider aperture. I will receive my Sigma
24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 sometime next month so will post some experiences
with that soon

HTH,

Siddhartha

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 18 Jan 2005 07:12:09 -0800, lisa.ireland <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote:
> because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
> the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
> 2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
> length change because it's not a digital lens?

The focal length won't change, but the field of view will. Non-pro
Canon DSLR sensors are 1/1.6 times the size of a 35mm negative. That
28-135 lens will give you the same field of view that you'd get if
you attached a 45-216 lens to a 35mm camera.

So yeah, if you're shooting with a 20D or 300D, 28mm isn't wide --
it's more like a normal lens.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"lisa.ireland" <lisa.ireland@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1106061129.232520.82500@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
> the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
> 2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
> length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
> good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
> the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the kit
> lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better lens.
> should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
> just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?
>
> lisa
>

Here's some examples:
28-135IS:
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc20.html

17-35 Sigma (you wouldn't believe how little room I had to shoot this!)
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/jj6.html

100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM (Shot from the organ loft at 300mm f5.0)
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc21.html

That last shot could be done with a 70-200 f2.8, better. Blowout the
background and crop it. Or with the 70-200 and a 2x converter.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com