The boss said go for it! Now I need your help!

selder76

I own and operate a small photography company in southeast Minnesota providing virtual tours and photography to the real estate industry. We are venturing into portrait and wedding photography and shot our first wedding with a Rebel XT (equipped with a Tamron 18-200mm) and a 30D (equipped with a Sigma 28-300mm). Pictures are ok, but I pled with the boss to allow me major upgrades to our equipment and this morning he said yes. We'd like to pickup all the upgrades for less than $5000 and we'd like to purchase image stabilizing equipment if possible (staying within EOS if we can).

What I need:
One new camera (5D?)
One all purpose lens (24-105mm that comes with 5D?)
One macro lens (24-70mm f2.8L?)
One telephoto lens (EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS?)

I'd appreciate all the help you could give a newbie!

ziggy53

My recommendation for a great wedding camera, in the Canon family, is still the Canon 1D MKII/IIN/III based on the ability to respond so quickly, especially in low light, and overall durability.

My secondary recommendation is probably the Canon 40D, again because it is so responsive. Comparison images do show increased latitude over the 20D/30D.

The Canon 5D is used buy many wedding photographers partly because of the increased resolution and full-frame capabilities, but I am more interested in the overall responsiveness. I like that the camera will "snap-to" focus quickly, take the image and recover quickly for the next opportunity, and I'm not sure the 5D is that responsive.

The 5D would probably suite me fine for the formals, but I just don't know about the candids. The other potential problem with the 5D is that some folks, including some here at DGrin, have had problems with their 5D and moisture. The problems were severe enough to cause the camera to be inoperable until completely dried, which would be a problem in a wedding situation.

If you do go full frame I would also suggest the EF 17-40mm, f4L in addition to the other lenses you mention. It's not that much money and does give extra width when you need it.

bham

selder76 wrote:

I own and operate a small photography company in southeast Minnesota providing virtual tours and photography to the real estate industry. We are venturing into portrait and wedding photography and shot our first wedding with a Rebel XT (equipped with a Tamron 18-200mm) and a 30D (equipped with a Sigma 28-300mm). Pictures are ok, but I pled with the boss to allow me major upgrades to our equipment and this morning he said yes. We'd like to pickup all the upgrades for less than $5000 and we'd like to purchase image stabilizing equipment if possible (staying within EOS if we can).

What I need:
One new camera (5D?)
One all purpose lens (24-105mm that comes with 5D?)
One macro lens (24-70mm f2.8L?)
One telephoto lens (EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS?)

I'd appreciate all the help you could give a newbie!

First off why are the pictures ok? Yes sometimes equipment can be limiting but before you spend $5k I would be sure. Obviously since you just shot your first wedding you are new at that. I would advise getting some serious critiques from other wedding photographers (probably from other areas, locals probably help direct competitition) on your results and then looking at their work and trying to learn.

Second, you only listed cameras and lenses, what about lighting equipment (ie flashes, strobes, etc) Lighting is very important with weddings.

As far as ranking your equipment needs (excluding lighting because I am not sure where you are at) I would go in this order.

24-70 2.8 L new at B&H $1139 (currently $1059)
50 1.8 new at B&H $75
70-200 2.8 L IS new at B&H $1699 (currently $1574)

That uses up about $2913 at regular prices no shipping, etc. So say $3k, and you have $2k left. I would then round out the lighting situation for sure before new bodies. Yes a new body would be nice but after lenses and lighting, unless the 30D is approaching its recommended shutter life.

Scott_Quier

OK - I shoot weddings cause I love doing it. Here's my recommendations:

• Take a pass on the 5d. I think you would be better served with a 40D
• The first lens you need is the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS. This is the workhorse used by me and many others. I probably shoot 95% of my events using this lens. I've read some to say that IS isn't significant on the shorter lens. I've tested mine with and without the IS engaged and it does make a significant difference.
• The EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS is almost a must. I don't use it often "on the day" but when I do, NOTHING else will do the job nearly as nicely. Other lenses in the 70-200 may serve the purpose, but the faster glass is very nice and the IS is almost a must have considering the lack of light you will be shooting in.
• Pass on the 50 1.8 lens. The 1.4 is much better build, faster focusing, better brokeh, and a touch faster as well.
• Lighting is important. Many churches and most receptions are DARK! Think about investing in off-camera lighting. It frees you up quite a bit and produces much better images - the light isn't flat like you usually get with on-camera flash.
• I might also suggest the EF 100 f/2.8. This does double duty - takes the close range shots of the rings and other details, good for long distance shots, and provides backup in the event the 70-200 gives up the ghost - for whatever reason.
• I might also consider either the EF 35 f/2.0 or the Sigma 30 f/1.4 and the EF 85 f/1.8 as backup lenses. It doesn't happen often but it could happen that one of your primary lens calls in sick on you.

Pricing @ B&H

40D - $1,800
70-200 f/2.8 IS - $1,700
17-55 f/2.8 IS - $930
50 f/1.4 - $300
EF 100 f/2.8 - $450

This is just a squeek over your $5,000 budget.

Since you didn't mention or ask about lighting, I'll leave that to your imagination. Besides, including that would completely bust your budget.

selder76

Thanks so much for your help so far! Like I said, we are very new to this. We used 440 and 530 speedlite flashes at the wedding we shot, which is probably why the shots turned out "OK". I would appreciate any help you could give for basic lighting...as I said we're new. Thanks in advance. This forum is great!

Scott_Quier

selder76 wrote:

Thanks so much for your help so far! Like I said, we are very new to this. We used 440 and 530 speedlite flashes at the wedding we shot, which is probably why the shots turned out "OK". I would appreciate any help you could give for basic lighting...as I said we're new. Thanks in advance. This forum is great!

Lighting

• On-Camera Flash
  • Get a flash bracket, one where the camera can rotate under the flash. I, personally, like the Newton Di100FR2 Flash Rotator (link). The name implies that the flash is what is rotated, but that's not the case.
  • Investigate the Better Bounce Card. If you search DGrin, you will find a number of threads/posts on this subject.
  • Experiment and learn when and under what circumstances you can/should bounce off ceiling or walls. Bounced flash is always more pleasing than straight on blasting.
• Off-Camera Strobes - there's not much more that I can say that I haven't already said in this thread (link).

Elaine

Scott_Quier wrote:

Pricing @ B&H

40D - $1,800
70-200 f/2.8 IS - $1,700
17-55 f/2.8 IS - $930
50 f/1.4 - $300
EF 100 f/2.8 - $450

This is just a squeek over your $5,000 budget.

Since you didn't mention or ask about lighting, I'll leave that to your imagination. Besides, including that would completely bust your budget.

Ummm...don't mean to be nit-picky here but some of these prices look a little high to me. I've got a wish list going at B&H that includes a few of these items and the price differences I see may end up giving you a bit more to play with for lighting.

40D - $1300
70-200 f/2.8L IS - $1575
17-55 f/2.8 IS - $930
50 f/1.4 - $290
100 f/2.8 - $435
TOTAL - $4530

...add in shipping and you've got over $400 left for lighting or other goodies.

Scott_Quier

Elaine wrote:

Ummm...don't mean to be nit-picky here but some of these prices look a little high to me. I've got a wish list going at B&H that includes a few of these items and the price differences I see may end up giving you a bit more to play with for lighting.

40D - $1300
70-200 f/2.8L IS - $1575
17-55 f/2.8 IS - $930
50 f/1.4 - $290
100 f/2.8 - $435
TOTAL - $4530

...add in shipping and you've got over $400 left for lighting or other goodies.

Thanks Elaine - I just did a real quick search on B&H - didn't worry about special codes or anything. You have obviously invested some time in the research.

HarveyMushman

selder76 wrote:

I own and operate . . . but I pled with the boss to allow me . . .

LiquidAir

ziggy53 wrote:

The Canon 5D is used buy many wedding photographers partly because of the increased resolution and full-frame capabilities, but I am more interested in the overall responsiveness. I like that the camera will "snap-to" focus quickly, take the image and recover quickly for the next opportunity, and I'm not sure the 5D is that responsive.

The 5D would probably suite me fine for the formals, but I just don't know about the candids. The other potential problem with the 5D is that some folks, including some here at DGrin, have had problems with their 5D and moisture. The problems were severe enough to cause the camera to be inoperable until completely dried, which would be a problem in a wedding situation.

Personally I really like the 5D for candids. It has the same AF system as the 30D, so if you know that, it'll be just as snappy. Would I like a 1 series AF system? Sure, but not at the extra cost and weight. I have not yet had a chance to play with a 40D yet, so I don't know how the AF systems compare. When the 5D II appears in store you bet I'll be in there giving the new AF system a test drive (presumably the 5D II will have the 40D AF system).

The big advantage of the 5D for candids in my eyes is the shallow depth of field compared to the 1.6 crop bodies. When shooting candids you often want to pull a face out of a cluttered scene and there is nothing like a fast lens on a 5D to do that for you.

As for moisture, I have treked my 5D around in some pretty damp environments and so far it is none the worse for wear. I do use a rain coat for it when things get really wet, but mist and heavy fog have not been a problem. I just clocked 12,000 frames on it over the last 18 months and it has been a trooper through thick and thin.

All that said, I am sure the 40D is an excellent camera and it'll leave extra room in your budget for glass and light.

Personally I would spend at least $1000 of that budget on light: 2 580EX, an ST-E2, a couple stands and umbrellas. As for glass, assuming you are going to stick with the crop format, I'd look at the 17-55/2.8 IS, EF-S 60mm macro, and the 70-200/2.8IS. The 60mm macro will cover your macro needs and give you considerably smoother bokeh for portraits than the 50/1.8

KED

HarveyMushman wrote:

Good catch -- you beat me to it, but your response was more articulate than mine would have been!

selder76

HarveyMushman wrote:

Half owner, with my father in law the benefactor. Sorry for the confusion.

selder76

how about this?
First of all, thank you all for your help. I think I'm going to stick with my 30D and XT, purchase good lenses (glass, right? ) and wait until spring for purchasing a body. Anyone have any objection to a 70-200mm IS 2.8 L? It seems the consensus is that it is a wonderful lens. So now I'm thinking the 70-200mm and the 17-55mm, then wait it out for the new body. Also, we have a speedlight 550EX and the 430EX (I think, the co-owner has it out right now). Are these adequate? Again, I apologize for the newbie-ness. I sincerely appreciate all of your help.

Scott_Quier

selder76 wrote:

First of all, thank you all for your help. I think I'm going to stick with my 30D and XT, purchase good lenses (glass, right? ) and wait until spring for purchasing a body. Anyone have any objection to a 70-200mm IS 2.8 L? It seems the consensus is that it is a wonderful lens. So now I'm thinking the 70-200mm and the 17-55mm, then wait it out for the new body. Also, we have a speedlight 550EX and the 430EX (I think, the co-owner has it out right now). Are these adequate? Again, I apologize for the newbie-ness. I sincerely appreciate all of your help.

The 70-200 f/2.8L IS is considered by many to be among the best the Canon makes. It is a sweet lens. And, since you are hanging onto the to 1.6 crop bodies, the 17-55 will serve you very well.

I don't know anything about the 430, but the 550EX will serve you quite nicely. It is similar in power to the Sigma 500 flashes and I've shot a couple of wedding with that. No issues there.

selder76

How about anyone else out there...17-55mm? It appears that it will not fit on the 5D, which concerns me if we upgrade.

noced

I would recommend the 24-70 2.8L. It lacks a little bit of width and IS compared to the 17-55, so keep that in mind if those are important to you.

The 17-55 is practically a L lens anyway, but a couple things kept me from buying it:
- Built like an L lens, but unlike an L doesn't come with a lens hood or soft case, or have weather sealing.
- EF-S is not as flexible as EF, as you mentioned
- I tried both at a local camera shop and wasn't bothered by the extra width. But on the other end of the zoom, I liked the extra mm's for portraiture.

A couple other things to think about: The 24-70 2.8L is about $130 more at B&H, or $50 if you add in a lens hood and soft case for the 17-55. They both accept 77mm filters, so those add-ons will be similarly priced. The 24-70 is about a half pound heavier, which I liked.

ziggy53

selder76 wrote:

How about anyone else out there...17-55mm? It appears that it will not fit on the 5D, which concerns me if we upgrade.

If you need the capabilities of the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM now, then purchase the 17-55mm now. Do not purchase on speculation. Buy what you need now.

If you find that your needs change in the furure, there is a ready used market for that lens and you will recover most of your costs. In the meantime, you will have earned income with the lens.

The Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is a very capable lens and you may find that, once you use it, you will find it hard to do without.

bham

selder76 wrote:

Pictures are ok

Again I asked and you didn't answer, why were the pictures ok? You may want to start a seperate thread and get some critique and fixes, solutions, what you can do better to address this issue. It maybe equipment related, then again it may not be.

bham

Scott_Quier wrote:

Pass on the 50 1.8 lens. The 1.4 is much better build, faster focusing, better brokeh, and a touch faster as well.

True the 1.8 is light inexpensive and plastic and the 1.4 is a much better lens, but I own 2 other 2.8L lens' and rarely find a need for a 1.8, the 2.8 is usually enough. So I could justify spending $75 for it, I wouldn't spend $300 based on my usage of it. I just keep the 50 as a backup or put it on the second body when I take off the 70-200.

RecordProduction

I've had my 5D for just about 2 years now and have clocked up over 60,000 exposures on it. Moisture???? Err, never heard of that issue. Is it fast to focus? I think it is. I was at an event the other week and was using my 85L and 5D which in some ways may sound like the slowest possible combination but as I could shoot at f/1.2 and get the effect that I was looking for was surprised to find that I had an 80% keeper rate.

http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/gallery/3556791/3

I have the 24-70L and would say that it's a pretty good lens but it is f/2.8 which in my view is quite slow. Focus wise it's very fast, IQ is ok but compared with a good prime (eg 85L) it's alright but no 3D machine.

If you're looking to not use flash the 50 f/1.2 or 1.4 would be a good partner to 35L on a 5D. Just my opinion, everyone else has theirs