Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

FM Forum Rules
Wedding Resource List
  

FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2012 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?
  
 
mccallmedia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


So, I'm still fairly new to wedding photography and have shot about 12 so far, the majority this year.

I shoot with two FF Canon 5dc's. I currently have the 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4 and 70-200 2.8. The combo has worked out good so far but I'm seriously considering selling the 70-200 in favor of a couple primes. I like the sharpness of primes and the extra ability to shoot in lower light along with greater control of DOF.

My budget will be in the $1200 area. I'm leaning more toward the 135L and 85 1.8 at this time. Outside of weddings I also shoot some editorial/pj stuff, concerts, and some portrait work. I recently rented the 135L and fell in love with it. I know it's a bit tight for many shots though so that's where the 85mm would come into play.

I use the 70-200 so much throughout the ceremony and reception, along with b&g portraits and what not, that I'm still a bit nervous to swap it out. I'm also hesitant to lose that 135-200 range but in reviewing my work in the past year I don't seem to need that extra reach for 90+% of what I shoot. Plus, I have the MK1 70-200 which of course becomes a little soft at the long end anyway.

So, has anyone made the change and what primes did you go with? I know many great wedding photogs shoot strictly primes so obviously it can be done. I guess I'm just too chicken to make the jump but I would definitely like to.



Aug 09, 2012 at 12:51 AM
tobicus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


With the exception of our first wedding, all of our weddings this year have been with primes...specifically, a 35, two 50s, and an 85. I typically use the 35 all day long while my wife uses the 50 and occasionally swaps it out for the 85. I've never felt a need for anything longer. It's really about how you want to capture the day. We might pick up a 24 or another 35 next year for my wife, however, since she sometimes feels constrained by the 50.

Edited on Aug 09, 2012 at 01:00 AM · View previous versions



Aug 09, 2012 at 12:57 AM
Nozzleforward
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I think you're on track with the 85 1.8 (which I'm loving at the moment) and the 135 f2, along with a 1.4tc to give you 189mm long end reach.

I have no experience with the 100f2 or the 200 2.8, but based on what I've heard / found from playing with them, they would both be good options too.




Aug 09, 2012 at 12:59 AM
mccallmedia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


tobicus wrote:
With the exception of our first wedding, all of our weddings this year have been with primes...specifically, a 35, two 50s, and an 85. I typically use the 35 all day long while my wife uses the 50 and occasionally swaps it out for the 85. I've never felt a need for anything longer. It's really about how you want to capture the day. We might pick up a 24 or another 35 next year for my wife, however, since she sometimes feels constrained by the 50.


I also would like to have a 24 or 35 down the road but am focusing on telephoto primes first and will continue using the 16-35 in the meantime. Do you ever feel the need for more reach than the 85 offers?

Edit: Didn't catch that part that answers my question. It sounds like the 85 is working well for you.

Edited on Aug 09, 2012 at 01:10 AM · View previous versions



Aug 09, 2012 at 01:05 AM
mccallmedia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Nozzleforward wrote:
I think you're on track with the 85 1.8 (which I'm loving at the moment) and the 135 f2, along with a 1.4tc to give you 189mm long end reach.

I have no experience with the 100f2 or the 200 2.8, but based on what I've heard / found from playing with them, they would both be good options too.



I hadn't thought about the 1.4tc but that might be a good plan to pair with the 135mm for the rare instances I need more reach. I also thought about the 100f2 as a cheaper option but that focal lengths seems pointless if I'm going with an 85 as well. And you can't beat the 135 wide open. I also like the idea of L quality glass. Of my three lenses, the L's have never needed repair, the 50 has been in for repair twice so far.



Aug 09, 2012 at 01:08 AM
tobicus
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


mccallmedia wrote:
I also would like to have a 24 or 35 down the road but am focusing on telephoto primes first and will continue using the 16-35 in the meantime. Do you ever feel the need for more reach than the 85 offers?

Edit: Didn't catch that part that answers my question. It sounds like the 85 is working well for you.


Ah, I get where you're coming from. You've got to do what works for you. But yes, I'm quite happy with our setup, although faster lenses would always be nice : D.

Regarding length, I debated between buying an 85 or saving for a 135, but after learning about some other photographers who did well with an 85, I decided we could too, and it worked out well. However, I also think using the 35 as my 'all day' lens was a big factor in my deciding 85 was long enough.



Aug 09, 2012 at 02:37 AM
mccallmedia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?



tobicus wrote:
Regarding length, I debated between buying an 85 or saving for a 135, but after learning about some other photographers who did well with an 85, I decided we could too, and it worked out well. However, I also think using the 35 as my 'all day' lens was a big factor in my deciding 85 was long enough.



The 35 and 85 sounds like a great combo. I know for certain things I shoot outside of weddings I would need more reach than an 85. It also seems to me like I would be wanting more reach for certain ceremony shots like ring exchange, kiss, etc. But I tend to stay back a little shy of the first rows when shooting those shots. I rented the 135 for my last wedding and it was too tight for many shots where an 85 would probably have been perfect.

I'm pretty set on the 85 1.8/135L combo though. And eventually I think I will grab a 35 prime to compliment the 16-35. I've heard too many good things about the 35 for wedding use.



Aug 09, 2012 at 02:48 AM
amonline
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I was going to say, go with the 35/135Ls first and keep the 70-200. I use mine nearly every wedding.


Aug 09, 2012 at 03:22 AM
D. Diggler
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Nozzleforward wrote:
the 85 1.8 and the 135 f2, along with a 1.4tc to give you 189mm


+1



Aug 09, 2012 at 05:13 AM
Beni
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


D. Diggler wrote:
+1


+2



Aug 09, 2012 at 05:44 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



D. Diggler
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Beni wrote:
+2


I'll pass along this little carrying case I picked up for the 1.4X extender that fits it nicely.

I believe this is the one I have:

http://www.promaster.com/products.asp?product=B1605

I picked it up at a local camera shop. I think the Promaster brand is sold a lot at the local brick-and-mortar shops so you could check there.

The above pouch has a belt loop but I just carry the pouch across my chest with a thin strap. Wear it most of the day. When I need more length out of my 135, I have the extender right handy. This pouch has a zipper closure, which I employ for storing the 1.4X between jobs. When out on the job site, I leave the zipper open and keep the covering flap closed with the velcro closure it has. Quality-built item. Soft material lines the interior so that the extender glass doesn't get scratched. (I carry the extender around without lens caps on so that it can be quickly deployed.)




Aug 09, 2012 at 07:54 AM
Dudewithoutape
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Beni wrote:
+2


+3, this was the exact set up I was going to recommend for you



Aug 09, 2012 at 08:24 AM
MAC
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Don't give up the 70-200

Add to the collection



Aug 09, 2012 at 10:50 AM
canerino
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I think I'm actuall going to go from the 85L and 135L to the 70-200.


Aug 09, 2012 at 01:32 PM
fotojennik
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I have an 85/1.8 and the 135L, but as soon as I sock away enough money I will be buying the 70-200 II

I currently shoot with two bodies, one of which has either the 35L or 50/1.4, and the other has either the 85/1.8 or 135L. This combo works pretty well but I desire the 70-200 for versatility and longer reach. Also to add a "backup" into the telephoto range of my lenses.



Aug 09, 2012 at 02:15 PM
Mike Mahoney
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


If you're going to shoot events & weddings some lenses are almost a necessity .. a good short zoom like the 16-35 2.8, a good mid range fast prime like the 35L or 50L, a good portrait length prime like the 85L or 135L, and a long fast zoom like the 70-200 2.8.

With these four lenses you will have a solid kit that can cover a lot of ground and give good variety in the looks & styles.

So consider keeping your 70-200 and adding other lenses as you see the need .. and I don't want to hear any protests about not being able to afford it If you're charging money to shoot weddings you should be investing some of it back into your business.



Aug 09, 2012 at 02:56 PM
amonline
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


^ Exactly.


Aug 09, 2012 at 04:07 PM
Prettym1k3
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I recently shot a wedding where on my full-frame bodies (D700) my 70-200 VR2 was NOT long enough. The best I could do in getting in for tight shots was photos of them with only their feet cut off, and their heads at the top of their frame.

Luckily, my associate photographer was with me, and he just so happened to have brought (so random) his 300 f/4, and that kid has super steady hands. So he got some tight shots of them.

The 70-200 is not my most used lens. I'm a total 35/50/85 guy myself, with the 85 being my go-to lens. But there are times when the 70-200 is a must have, and even then, sometimes isn't enough due to house rules.

I'd keep it, personally. If all you shoot is backyard weddings with no restrictions, you don't need anything longer than 85, maybe 135. But if you do Catholic weddings, we find there are always crazy rules about where you can and can't go, and the 200mm focal length is prime. *Huh-huh, huh-huh*



Aug 09, 2012 at 06:42 PM
mccallmedia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


Prettym1k3 wrote:
I recently shot a wedding where on my full-frame bodies (D700) my 70-200 VR2 was NOT long enough. The best I could do in getting in for tight shots was photos of them with only their feet cut off, and their heads at the top of their frame.

Luckily, my associate photographer was with me, and he just so happened to have brought (so random) his 300 f/4, and that kid has super steady hands. So he got some tight shots of them.

The 70-200 is not my most used lens. I'm a total 35/50/85 guy myself, with the 85 being my
...Show more
The more I think about this the more I'm leaning toward keeping it and just adding primes to my collection down the road. I have shot a couple weddings where they requested I stay to the back of the audience during the reception in which I did need that 200mm reach. Also I think it may be a bad idea to try to adjust to shooting primes all of the sudden at a wedding. I think I'll keep what I have through the fall when weddings die down and I'll then have more money to invest in gear.

Thanks for all the suggestions everyone; you've given me a lot of great advice.



Aug 09, 2012 at 10:11 PM
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · Thinking of swapping 70-200 2.8 for two primes, suggestions?


I personally wouldn't get rid of a 70-200. I quite dislike mine much of the time, but it's still useful, still a backup. It's long been my backup to my main tele, 85mm, but I've recently added 135mm, so will hopefully just be backup now. I'd always start with 85mm, go think a shorter lens is much more flexible, it allows you to include more of a context which is important on a wedding day. Sure you can zoom in and isolate stuff so hell and back at 200mm, but that gets boring very quickly. And, you can move in closer with your feet with 85mm... Anyway, I'd just save, not swap/trade. Sigma is another option. I've got two 85/1.4's now, definitely one of my favourite focal lengths, but the Zeiss and Minolta renderings are quite different...


Aug 09, 2012 at 10:26 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Wedding Photographer | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password