Glass question to all you wedding pros

Foques

I have a wedding that will be shooting next year; I do have quite a bit of time to do more research, and look at things, and learn from you all.. but here is one of the things I would like to find out.

At the moment, I have the following lineup:

Nikon 50mm 1.8
Nikon 85mm 1.8
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VRI
Nikon 35mm 2.8
nikon 28mm 2.8
Tamron 10-20mm 4
Tamron 17-50mm 2.8
D700
D300s
SB-600x3

First of all, I want to convert to FX completely, thus I will be selling my d300s, Tamrons and the 35mm.
I am still hoping that Nikon will release the d800 sometime soon..
Which lenses do you think I should invest into next?
Any primes?
I am considering getting 24-70 (or should I stick with an alternative? if so, which one?)
I am also considering getting the 14-24 (alternatives?)

I am noticing that a lot of you guys are shooting weddings with a 70-200, and primes for the rest.. would that be a save bet for a wedding shooting newbie?

I would prefer to keep glass as fast as possible, I know that FX cameras are good with noise, and I can bump the ISO.. but I want to get the highest speed possible, not sacrificing the quality in the slightest.

Additionally, I do not know if the 70-200 sigma that I had was a good lens for me to judge other lenses by.. Reason I mention it is that lens sucked. I mean, yes, If I had a lot of time to compose something, results were great, but I needed a fast, snappy focus.(I shoot concerts as well).
That said, are there any trusted, fast focusing, and clear lenses from other manufacturers or Nikon is my safest bet?
to add, should i invest into any macro glass?

also, MUST I upgrade my flashes or SB-600s are going to fare well during any wedding situation?

Sorry about the long post, but I have questions, and the more I learn, the more questions I get.


I realize I am talking a lot of $$.. But, for now, I can sort of afford this, so I want to take the leap.. Next year, I won't have that opportunity.

zoomer

24-70 2.8 on a D700 with flash bracket and sb800.
70-200 2.8 on a D3
35 1.8 put this on the D3 when the light gets low.
Sigma 150 macro for the ring shots.

All I use for weddings really. I use other lenses here an there just for fun but don't really need them.

I could shoot weddings with only the 24-70 2.8 bracket and sb800 and be fine. The rest is gravy. Have fun putting your kit together.

Foques

thank you sir.

I tried using a bracket, but found it uncomfortable. Just using an adjustable bouncer to deliver light to subjects.

Qarik

24-70 and 70-200 are all you need

ShepsMom

17-55 and 70-200 that's all i use, once in a while i have my 50 for some detail shots.

Foques

Thank you for the input, rather interesting.

Matthew Saville

Here's my article on lens buying theory 101:
http://photos.matthewsaville.com/For-photographers/Cameras-Lenses/What-Lenses-Weddings


And here's my thoughts on Nikon and weddings, in particular:
http://cameratalk.xanga.com/724047312/the-ultimate-nikon-dslr-setup---weddings/


Bottom line: It just depends on what your style is. I can't tell you what your sytle is, you just have to find it.

Half the wedding shooters out there use nothing but a "trinity" of f/2.8 zooms, and the other half prefer to use primes 90% of the time and only bust out a 2.8 zoom when absolutely necessary...

The trinity of 2.8 zooms is 14-24, 24-70, and 70-200. Or the 17-35 instead of the 14-24, if you're like me and REALLY need the option of front filters in certain environments. (I shoot in some crazy places, and I like to protect my lenses...)

The primes of choice are usually 24mm or 35mm, and then 50mm and either 85mm, 105mm, and/or 135mm.

Good luck figuring out which lenses really "click" with your artistic vision! That's the fun part...

=Matt=

Foques

Matt, I was hoping you'd post! Thank you for the linkage and suggestions.

I am finding that long lenses is what I prefer, but wanted to see if there is a "traditional" way of doing things.

/Off to read your posts.

Matthew Saville

Foques wrote: »

Matt, I was hoping you'd post! Thank you for the linkage and suggestions.

I am finding that long lenses is what I prefer, but wanted to see if there is a "traditional" way of doing things.

/Off to read your posts.

Good luck!

After mulling over your current gear list, and your aspirations, I'd say:

Get a 2nd D700, but don't sell your D300s. If you're a 2-camera shooter, then a "backup" becomes a 3rd camera. I hardly ever use my D300, but I still bring it. You never know what could happen. You might want to sell the D300s to fund the new D700, but honestly I can only say that's not the professional thing to do. If this is a side job, your business should be able to generate an extra $2K easily for a used D700.

And, certainly don't go buying a 2nd D700 before you buy a 24-70. That's really the only lens that I see lacking in your kit, given your telephoto style. I mean you could upgrade your 85, or you could go buy a 105 or a 135, but all of those lenses are due to be updated soon with AFS-G, so I'd hold off on that for now.

So, step 1 would be to get a 24-70. Step two would be to get another D700. Then, for step three, you could upgrade your 85 to the 1.4 AFS-G, or maybe an 85 1.8 AFS-G if it's out by then, ...OR try out a 17-35 or 14-24, or maybe get a 105 f/2 or 135 f/2, if they've been upgraded.

Oh, and yeah I don't use flash brackets either. I bounce, bounce, bounce. Or whenever I do need to use direct flash, I'm still doing it in a way that doesn't require the flash to be overhead. So, no worries on the bracket issue!

=Matt=

Foques

Matt, thank you so very much!
i'm glad that my plan of action is same as you are proposing. no doubt, the lens will be here first, by then maybe a d700 replacement will come out.. or i'll convince my second half to allow me to swing for a d3s

sphynge

Didn't like the 24-70 so much
I have a similar lineup but with a D700 and now a D3s. You've got more than plenty to go on - the main thing during weddings is: you have NO TIME. That means, no time to change lenses. Okay, you have a little time. But not that much. So changing lenses around is a real burden. I would actually consider saving the D300s as both a 2nd camera (so you can put one short lens on a body, and a long lens on another body) and a backup camera. You never know what can go wrong - you'll need a backup everything.

On the 24-70 specifically: it has always been soft for me. Always. And it's only gotten worse. I've taken it to Nikon a few times and every time they tell me nothing's wrong with it. It's soft. And now, it locks when I focus sub foot. I've talked to a few other owners and we all seem to have the same problem. So I'd save up that money and make sure you've got 2 bodies

Raphy

I've tried various setups and re-configured than tonnes of times. I guess intimately YOU will find what works well for your situations... I'm 90% there in my setup:

D700+grip + 24-70mm 2.8 + PW (or Sb-800)
D700+grip + 85mm 1.4

I also carry the 24mm 1.4 and 105 2.8 macro in a pouch on me at all times. It's getting more rare for me to even use them though...

I have my assistant hold on to the 70-200 but I only really use it during ceremony for longer reach.
I also have the assistant hold onto an Alinbees B1600+vegabond II battery pack (i use this for after-ceremony photos only). It's also getting really heavy (so I will likely change this over to a lighter Quantum system or even better - the Vegabond MINI - hance why i'm 90% there with my setup).

During receptionj I set up two sb-26s or sb-800s and cross light the dance floor, and move the lights as needed.

Hope that helps.

Art Scott

We all shoot a bit differently.....I shot weddings for years and years and years and years with only a close focusing Sigma 70-210 f2.8 (in the begin it was a f2.8-4), there are shots I wanted to get that I needed the close focusing ability (ring shots, cake toppers...small decorations) and since I started out in film I hated having to use cropping masks to get the shot cropped the way I wanted.....so I cropped in camera and that is where the close focusing lenses came in....they are marked Macro but that meant 1:2 magnification or 1/2 life size so not true macro (1:1 or lifesize magnification) ....... I have complained on here and other places of Nikon's unwillingness to turn out a 24-70 and 70-200 that will focus under 3 feet...my 70-200 vr1 focus distance is like 6 feet.....I may have found a suitable compromise with a 24-120 f3.5-5.6....this may become my new wedding combo....the 24-120 and the 70-200......but my perfect combo has been the Sigma 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8...both close focusing and fast.....as to flash units...the SB600's should work fine as long as you keep your distance in check......for battery power..I would go to the quantum site and see which battery and cable they say workd=s with the SB600 and then buy some used / working Quantum batts off ebay, just make sure they have chargers with them.....I got lucky...I have been using quantum batts for an extremely long time (QB1+) for my SunPak 622's and the same batts works great with the SB900's......before I realized these could be rebuilt by a local battery company here (All Pak Batteries) I was tossing them and rebuying....the last 2 I bought off ebay were like $75ea with charger...it is just a matter of watching and not buying the 1st one that shows up.......the last rebuild was a whole whopping $25 to have the batts replaced.......but I recommend having 2 just in case......my SB900's recharge in about 1.5 to 5 seconds now and of course that gets longer as you shoot throughout the day.....
I still shoot of a flash bracket (stroboframe RB series- camera rotating ) but I am looking at Newtons folding flash brackets...again this stroboframe I use is over 15yrs old...it was an upgrade from the stroboframe RL2000.........but for me since I want the flash horizontal above my cam, a bracket is a must for my style and for diffusers, either a softbox or a "sto-fen" type of diffuser so that ALL the light goes mostly forward, unlike any of the gary fong stuff that allows for tons of light loss with light being omni-directional.....but this is my preferences and you will need to try out and decide what works for your style of shooting.....

Foques

Raphy, I looked through your site.. Holy cow, man!! I have so much to learn to get even close to your level! yikes!

thank you for the insight. would it be ok if I bugged you via PMs if (when, really) I have more questions?

Foques

Art, you brought up a really good point.
One of the things I need to figure out is the "macro" shots.. is there any 1.4-2.8 macro lens that is relatively affordable and is sharp?

joshtilton

I would highly suggest that you take a look at some Zeiss primes. The 35, 85, 100 are just fantastic!

Qarik

Foques wrote: »

Art, you brought up a really good point.
One of the things I need to figure out is the "macro" shots.. is there any 1.4-2.8 macro lens that is relatively affordable and is sharp?

you can go with some macro lens like the 60mm nikkor or you can buy and kenko tubes and stick that in your 50mm for example.

Art Scott

Foques wrote: »

Art, you brought up a really good point.
One of the things I need to figure out is the "macro" shots.. is there any 1.4-2.8 macro lens that is relatively affordable and is sharp?

Qarik wrote: »

you can go with some macro lens like the 60mm nikkor or you can buy and kenko tubes and stick that in your 50mm for example.

I would highly recommend NOT using any sort of added tubes for macro / close ups for weddings...time is a premium and people, at least here in my area, hate to see you changing lenses.....My solution has always been to shoot with the Sigma Line up of 24-70 and 70-200 (mine was a 210) f2.8....I have never had anything but excellent quality sharp lenses from Sigma.........I am very disappointed in my Nikon Glass...as I have found it NO better quality than my much less expensive Sigma glass...I am doing one last buy of Nikon Glass and if the 24-120 is good and sharp and allows for closer focusing, with in 1 foot of subject from front of lens then I will probably keep it and not sell to buy a 24-70f2.8 Sigma lens...but it won't arrive until the end of the week........My Sigma's spoiled me both would close focus and were tack super sharp so it did not matter which I had in hand when I needed a close focus shot I could get it.....
My recommendation would be a Sigma 24-70f2.8.........

I had to try this 24-120 VR G from Nikon tho as I had used a ED model but wanted a VR model..just in case....the Sigma is not that heavy and my last one could change from AF to MF just by pulling/pushing the ring on the lens....no switches to hunt for....and I do believe the current EX model is the same way....mine that I recently sold with my Konica Minolta gear was only 3 yrs old........
My wedding gear list includes this:
2-D300's
70-200VR1
Arriving soon 24-120VR 3.5-5.6
total of 6 Enel3 batts
2- SB900's with "sto-fen" copy Nikon diffuser
1- LumiQuest Original Softbox
2- Quantum QB1+ batteries
2- Quantum MKZ9 cables
stroboframe RB4 series (much like the current PRO RL series)
Still carry 8-12 AA's just incase.......
Tripod
Monopod (used as a lightstand a lot at receptions)
Nikon F70 and 5 rolls of 35mm - 24 exp fil...just in case.......
Sekonic L558 light meter..............
plus lens cleaners, sewing kit, 16 Cf cards, 2 of which are 16gb and the rest are 8gb...............I have found a grip to be a hindrance or better put.......just extra weight I did not want to deal with and since weddings do not move remotely as fast as races at a track meet, horse race, dog race or motorsport racing I have never needed to boost the capture speed of my D300's....but then again I never missed a shot at a wedding using a hand crank winding hasselblad film camera either (or Mamiya C330 or Yashica-mat 124G).......no sense in blasting away trying to capture 1500+ images when your not delivering them all........with film I deliver between 120 / 170 images...so I only carried 6 rolls of 36 and normally only used 4 rolls at most...with 2 1/4 film I carried 6 rolls of 220 film and delivered 120-150 images........

Raphy

Foques wrote: »

Raphy, I looked through your site.. Holy cow, man!! I have so much to learn to get even close to your level! yikes!

thank you for the insight. would it be ok if I bugged you via PMs if (when, really) I have more questions?

Wow - thanks man! I really appreciate that ! I'm really flattered.
You can bug me via PM any time. I'm more than happy to help

Raphy

Foques wrote: »

...
One of the things I need to figure out is the "macro" shots.. is there any 1.4-2.8 macro lens that is relatively affordable and is sharp?

Have you considered extension tubes ? I sometimes use them with a good piece of glass and they work REALLY well. $150 for the Kenko's...and they even AF with my Nikkor glass.

Foques

would you mind posting a link to the ones you are referring to? I am bidding on a 60mm right now.. and it is going for 170.. : )

Raphy

Foques wrote: »

would you mind posting a link to the ones you are referring to? I am bidding on a 60mm right now.. and it is going for 170.. : )

KENKO EXTENSION TUBES

Foques

thank you very much. I'll look into those!
I think i'd still rather have a macro lens anyway, so I'll keep hunting for a 60 or 100mm ones.

tenoverthenose

Extension tubes FTW.

Matthew Saville

It is a good point that lens-changing time is at a premium on a wedding day. This is why, personally, I think the best lens to use for macro is something that doesn't render your camera completely useless while being used for macro. Too much extension tube, and you won't be able to focus on anything at a distance. Personally, I'd rather just get a Sigma 50mm f/2.8, or a Tamron 90mm, because they're moderate f/2.8 lenses that I can use in a pinch if something important happens while I'm shooting macro.

That, and the time it takes to put on an extension tube is a little bit more than simply adding a close-up filter to the front of a 70-200 or 24-70. So by default, I recommend close-up filters first. They're a good compromise between convenience, and size / weight / cost.

This isn't an issue during most of the wedding day, if you have a 2nd camera laying around with a 24-70 on it.

Personally, I love nature photography. It's a big hobby of mine, so I went out and bought a Sigma 150 2.8 a while ago. Now that the new Sigma 150 2.8 Macro OS is out, I'm hoping to get that. I don't have a 70-200 2.8, and I hate the size / weight of 70-200 2.8's in general.

So, my macro is a dual-purpose telephoto candid lens... :-)

=Matt=

Foques

just got the 24-70 in mail.
Thank you. Thank you for suggesting it to me! I love it!