Telephoto for the Wedding Photographer

Blurmore

This is a question mainly for Event/Wedding photographers who pack something longer than 200mm.
Background:

I have a 70-200 f4 L, I shoot 40-50 weddings/year mostly subcontract.

I like the 70-200 but I also carry a tripod, and I am accustomed to hitting the still moments of the ceremony. I am considering something image stabilized in the 100-400mm range, and I'd like to get away with a monopod only. I consider myseld VERY steady, I've been known to hand hold the 70-200 @200mm 1/60th with useable results.

My questions are for those who use a 100-400 or there abouts do you carry a 70-200 as well?

For those who use a Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6 L is the 1st gen IS noticably aged in comparison to new 3 and 4 stop IS units?

I am considering the new 120-400 f4.5-5.6 Sigma OS HSM but pro dealers in my area are no longer stocking Sigma products. For those who have the 80-400 OS, do you like it, would HSM take it from like it to it is awesome? I've read the photozone.de reports on both lenses and the Canon is what I expected, the Sigma 80-400 better than I expected.

I'm not particularly interested in a 70-200 2.8 IS with a2x TELE, but for those who use this combination does the tele really get a lot of use?

I've only worked in 2 churches where I can really say I NEEDED something longer, The National Cathedral in DC and the Naval Academy Chapel in Annapolis, but I can see the advantage of a 400 in most any church especially if the quality is up to snuff, and as a bonus I could leave my tripod at home.

What I'd really like is Canon to update the 100-400 to a 3 or 4 stop IS, I'd be the first in line. I've considered a 300mm f4 IS (again same hang up with old IS unit) but I know I'd still find use for the 70-200.

Any discussion or opinions from Canon shooting social photogs appreciated.

jonh68

I can't speak for wedding photgraphers, but some portrait guys like having a 300 2.8 as it really isolates the background and allows close ups from a good distance a way.

Blurmore

jonh68 wrote:

I can't speak for wedding photgraphers, but some portrait guys like having a 300 2.8 as it really isolates the background and allows close ups from a good distance a way.

Thanks...

Lens is out of my price range, and my sherpa has a bad back...but the IS version of this with the 1.4x would probably fulfill my needs, too bad it is more than I am willing to pay.

SavedByZero

I'm not really sure where I'd see the need to use anything longer then a 200mm lens let alone a 400mm lens on a 1.5/1.6 crop body camera during a wedding. I'm not even sure if the expense of that lens for just shooting down the isle during the cermony for a few shots makes it a worth while investment or even the added weight.

I've never been in a big enough church to need anything that long and if I was I'm sure getting half way up the isle would be simpler IMHO.



Also I don't shoot Canon, Minolta/Tokina if that matters.