User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Need advice: Gear for Wedding Photography

  1. #1
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    06 Dec 2010
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Need advice: Gear for Wedding Photography

    I was hoping to get some advice specific to my situation/gear.

    I'm starting to do some wedding work and I want to upgrade my gear.

    I currently have:

    D700
    D200 (backup)

    17-35mm f2.8
    35mm f1.8 (DX)
    50mm f1.4
    70-200mm f2.8

    Its been working well but I'm prepared to make an upgrade. My options are:

    1) Buy a 24-70mm f2.8 since that is the zoom lens I am missing.

    2) Buy a D7000 (DX). This way I can use the 70-200mm on the D700 and the 17-35mm on the D7000 (making it a 25-52mm).

    I seem to be drawn towards option 2 because that would give me a decent 2 camera setup with all the zoom range I'd really need. Also, apart from the time and trouble needed to change lenses, I already have all the lenses I need right now.

    Buying the 24-70mm would be spending a lot of money for convenience (which I know is critical at weddings). But the D200 is no good in low light so I'd be left with a 1 camera setup for some of the time.

    I'd obviously like to buy another D700 AND the 24-70mm but I've got to be realistic.

    Any comments/suggestions would be appreciated!

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ahhh the good old what gear for wedding work threads

    judging from your gear you seem to have all the essentials and a 24-70 would complement it. Thats if you follow the norm/generic/cliche type of photographers, as it all depends on your shooting style.

    I do a lot of weddings per year and prefer unconventional focal lengths and lenses - ie. the Sigma 12-24 ultra wide on full frame, or Canon 100 F2 and 135L F2. I dont use anything around 24-85 ish, thats for my 2nd shooters to cover ie. usual group shots and stuff. Sometimes a 70-200 would come out.

    how is your lighting set up though? To me that goes hand in hand with the right lens, sometimes even more important.

    but in regards to your question, I'd go with option 2. The D200 was always a good camera to me, but the lack of mid to high ISO performance severely limits it these days and just wont cut it anymore.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Plus you get some video

    Haven't sen any pictures from you posted yet by the way
    Darren
    Gear : Nikon Goodness
    Website : http://www.peakactionimages.com
    Please support Precious Hearts
    Constructive Critique of my images always appreciated

  4. #4
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    06 Dec 2010
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for the quick replies!

    For lighting, I've got a SB800 and 600 I use on camera to bounce. Of course I try to just use the flash to bring up the light levels a bit and use the ambient light as much as possible... which is where the D200 falls over.

    Hey Kiwi. Yeah, kinda still new to the forum. Where should I be posting?

  5. #5
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,406
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    You post your photos in the members photos forums. Click FORUM across the top of the site and scroll down and you will see all the forums the site has to offer.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  6. #6
    Site Rules Breach - Permanent Ban
    Join Date
    09 Jan 2011
    Location
    Brighton East
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    IMHO,you'd want a mid range and an ultra wide on two seperate bodies.

    17-35 on a DX is really not that wide and not enough for a wedding, again IMHO.

    For me, I would either buy another D700, and couple both D700's with 17-35 and the 70-200, with a third body (your existing D200) mounted with a 35 F1.8, that way you have ultra wide room, telephoto zoom, and standard 1.8 covered.

    Or, buy a Nikkor 17-55 to use on the D200, and the 17-35 on the D700, that covers everything from ultra wide to mid-telephoto.
    Last edited by Will Zhao; 01-02-2011 at 11:18am.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Nov 2009
    Location
    Monterey Bay, California
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would buy a D7000, mount the 35 f/1. DX on it, put it on a TriPod and let it run in HD movie mode while I took stills with your D700 and 70-200.

  8. #8
    Member fotografik's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Feb 2011
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Add in a fisheye lens. Definitely you will get a different perspective of things.
    Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n | Nikon AF 35-70mm f/2.8D | Nikon AF 80-200 f/2.8D | Nikon AF 20-35mm f/2.8D | Contax Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.7 | Leica Summicron-R 90mm f/2.0 | Metz 54 MZ-3

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hmm, a fish would maybe be the last lens I'd look at, seriously, how often would you use it at a wedding ? For one gimmicky group shot or two ?

  10. #10
    Member fotografik's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Feb 2011
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kiwi View Post
    Hmm, a fish would maybe be the last lens I'd look at, seriously, how often would you use it at a wedding ? For one gimmicky group shot or two ?
    IMHO for only a handful of shots, as long as the faces are not distorted.

  11. #11
    Member super duper's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Nov 2010
    Location
    Qld
    Posts
    93
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    18 Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    271
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    af-s 24 f/1.4
    Thanks,
    Nam

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    600 F/4 af-s

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    12 Feb 2008
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    7,837
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by super duper View Post
    I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.
    If you have say a 24-70 or 50 1.4 you can get close enough for most purposes

    Marcus Bell actually just whacks some extension tunes onto a 50 1.4 if he needs to do "real" macros

  15. #15
    Member Macca2188's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Jan 2010
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by super duper View Post
    I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.
    i use the 85mm macro as a portrait lens occasionally works very well

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    14 Feb 2010
    Location
    Leura
    Posts
    136
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I reckon you need an 85mm prime, the 70-200 is too big.
    But like others have said it depends very much on your shooting style.
    If you can do amazing things in different situations with a fisheye then you will have a look that i quite different to most others.
    Togs are what my son wears to go swimming.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •