Two23 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
honorerdieu wrote:
Not to be rude, but I can't imagine shooting a wedding with one prime lens at the wide focal length, and another at the telephoto length.
.
I've only done 6 weddings in the past year, but have some thoughts. I just can't imagine not having a "work horse" zoom such as the 24-70mm. I'd be missing shots left and right. With a zoom I can get multiple shots of a bride coming down the aisle, reframing as I go. The other lens that has saved me was the 70-200mm VR. Half the weddings banned photographers up front during the ceremony, but with the 70-200mm I was still easily getting shots from the back. I would have failed without both zooms, NO doubt about it.
I own lenses from every era of photography, starting with the 1840s. I still actively shoot many different formats--4x5, half plate, 6x9, 6x6, 35mm, and digital. For the life of me, I still don't understand why someone would buy a single focal lens for general purpose. Sure, back in the 1960s you didn't have all that much choice, but now some of Nikon's best lenses are their f2.8 pro zooms. The pro zooms are the very peak of technology! As for a 24mm f1.4 being sharper than a 24-70mm--maybe, if you always use a tripod. My own personal experience is that a $100 kit lens will beat a $1,800 single focal lens in sharpness if the kit lens is used on a tripod and the other lens is not. There are a few times when things are almost too dark for moving shots at f2.8--maybe the wedding is being done at night by candlelight or something. Really though, I find single focal lenses to be crippling for something like a wedding. I tried the single focal lens thing a few years ago and was extremely frustrated.
Kent in SD
|