Is this lens good enough for wedding photography?

J

James Greed

Suspended / Banned
Messages
180
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got a 75-300 F4-5.6 usmIII Lens that i've had for about 6 years.

I cant remember where i got it or how much i paid for it! (i'd like to know what its worth too- if anyone has any ideas!)

Is it good enough (IQ wise) for candid's at a wedding or do i need to get something like a 70-200 f2 L Lens?

My other lenses are a sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 and i'm on the verge of purchasing a 50mm f1.8.

These are used on a 1.6x frame body.

(i should add this is not for a paid job- just a favour to some friends!)
 
If you're doing it for nothing then you'd be nuts to spend several hundred quid on a new lens.
 
I'm looking at moving into wedding photography though so it wouldn't be a one off.

I've a photography degree, studio experience and have assisted many weddings- i've just never needed my own kit- its always been supplied.

Now that i'm considering doing it for myself i need to buy the right kit so just wondering if my current lens will get me through this wedding- i can then get a 70-200 L lens once i've got some confirmed (paying) bookings!

'm evaluating all my kit at the moment and so i'm costing up a 5d, a 10-20, a 50mm prime, and a 70-200 zoom to add to my 17-70.
 
IQ wise it wouldnt be anything special and would only be okay for outside, anything inside you will need alot faster lens. maybe hire a 70-200 f2.8 out for the day?
 
Don't cost up the 10-20 and the 5D as the 10-20 is for crop sensors only. But the EF 16-35 would do an identical job.
 
Your 75-300 will most likely be too slow for low light conditions.

If your doing weddings, a 10-20ish zoom ( i think its the 12-24 thats full frame?) on a full frame would be too wide.

Id go with the 70-200F2.8, and a 24-70 f2.8. Though bare in mind most wedding photographers carry two cameras so they don't need to change lenses.

Your 17-70 wont work on a 5D as its a crop sensor lens only.
 
Ahh crap- i thought i could use the 17-70 on a 5d to give me my wide angles.

I was going to use my 20d as my back up but if i cant migrate the lens (my 17-70 is currently my favourite lens) between both bodies then its not a very efficient way of doing it.

I think i will try and borrow/hire a 70-200 2.8 to see how i get on with it.

I just cant justify spending 2-3k on new kit if the business doesn't take off.
 
If you need to ask the question, then you will probrably find the biggest factor effecting the quality of your wedding photography is YOU. When you costantly hit a wall with a lens/camera, and it is stopping you from working efficently, or producing the best work, then you will know what lens /camera you will need next, and more importantly, you will know why
 
I think that you'll find trying to prduce professional quality images with an EF75-300 is akin to running a Limo business with an Austin Allegro.
The lens can no doubt provide a good image when the planets are aligned but you'd be pushing your luck to capture "once in a lifetime" moments with it.

Bob
 
The23rdman said:
If you're doing it for nothing then you'd be nuts to spend several hundred quid on a new lens.
Click to expand...

Someone should probably start drilling that into my head. I'm planning on spending £100+ just to hire out a lens for events that I'm not being paid for, and I've got about £1,500 worth of lenses ready to buy before the year is out which will all mostly be used for non-profit events.

:'(
 
guybrush said:
Someone should probably start drilling that into my head. I'm planning on spending £100+ just to hire out a lens for events that I'm not being paid for, and I've got about £1,500 worth of lenses ready to buy before the year is out which will all mostly be used for non-profit events.

:'(
Click to expand...

This photography lark is bad for your bank! :D
 
I'm going to start with the 50mm f 1.8 .

I'll keep the 75-300 in my kit bag as a 'just incase' but with a view to replacing it with a 70-200 L once i've lined up some more jobs.

To be fair i've taken some nice-ish shots with the 75-300 (even from the back of a fairly dark church) I'm just worried that i need the extra focal length to just operate with a 50mm and a 100mm.

I love my 17-70 so i'll keep that.

Also need a back up body.

Its all take take take...! ;0)
 
daugirdas said:
I really doubt 75-300 would be of any use. Treat yourself to a nice prime like 85mm f/1.8, 100mm macro or 100mm f/2. They will get plenty of use in weddings.
Click to expand...

I must admit I get nearly all of my shots from my 85mm 1.8 as keepers, even in low light as it focuses so quick. The lens you have will be fine outside but it will be a different story inside, even at high ISO's.

Edit: the nifty fifty is still great and will be more than capable.
 
unfortunately its the same with all businesses. you need an investment/capital upfront which is your equipment in this case and like other businesses, you probably wont see a return till a few years in. Just some words of advice before you take the plunge.

Lens wise, I would definitely say you need constant apertures of 2.8 or wider and f
i would suggest getting the 24-200 range covered first. Anything wider than 30mm is mainly used for the one off creative shots, and i'd focus on getting the range for your bread and butter shots covered first. Also I think the backup 20D wont cut it in anything less than broad daylight, and ISO handling is very important too. For example, I was shooting at 40 2.8 6400 regularly on saturday inside a church. hope that helps and good luck
 
As you have probably gathered the answer is no. As suggested by hsufftan get the 24-200 range covered. You will NEED two bodies both with good high ISO performance, two flashes lots of battaries for cameras and flashes and lots of memory cards.
 
I would personally hire some nice glass and ask them to help towards the cost. For around £100 you could hire a 70-200 2.8 and 50mm 1.4 which will go well with the 17-70 you have.

www.lensesforhire.co.uk
 
James Greed said:
I'm looking at moving into wedding photography though so it wouldn't be a one off.

I've a photography degree, studio experience and have assisted many weddings- i've just never needed my own kit- its always been supplied.

Now that i'm considering doing it for myself i need to buy the right kit so just wondering if my current lens will get me through this wedding- i can then get a 70-200 L lens once i've got some confirmed (paying) bookings!

'm evaluating all my kit at the moment and so i'm costing up a 5d, a 10-20, a 50mm prime, and a 70-200 zoom to add to my 17-70.
Click to expand...

No offense but if you've got a photography degree and assisted many weddings then you shouldn't be asking if your 75-300 is good enough.

Outdoors yes. Indoors you will really struggle unless you have some decent lighting equipment or you're lucky enough to find a really well lit venue.
 
TBH I think a lot of talk about what equipment is essential for a wedding is rubbish!

Years ago I used to regularly cover all my weddings with a Ricoh Singlex (with a 55mm lens - I think) and a Mecablitz 502 flash gun.

And I used to easily cover 2-3 weddings in a weekend with these.

So the kit lens, a "Nifty Fifty" and a good flashgun - and you're set.
 
petersmart said:
TBH I think a lot of talk about what equipment is essential for a wedding is rubbish!

Years ago I used to regularly cover all my weddings with a Ricoh Singlex (with a 55mm lens - I think) and a Mecablitz 502 flash gun.

And I used to easily cover 2-3 weddings in a weekend with these.

So the kit lens, a "Nifty Fifty" and a good flashgun - and you're set.
Click to expand...

the key phrase in all that is 'years ago'. What clients demanded even 15 years ago, and what they want now are very different things.

advising that a kit lens, a nifty 50 and a flash are enough is not even slightly useful advice anymore
 
boyfalldown said:
the key phrase in all that is 'years ago'. What clients demanded even 15 years ago, and what they want now are very different things.

advising that a kit lens, a nifty 50 and a flash are enough is not even slightly useful advice anymore
Click to expand...

Well I've seen quite a few albums etc supplied by photographers who regularly do weddings ( and charge for them) and there is very little (if any) difference in the types of pics supplied by them and the kind I was taking 30 years ago.
 
petersmart said:
Well I've seen quite a few albums etc supplied by photographers who regularly do weddings ( and charge for them) and there is very little (if any) difference in the types of pics supplied by them and the kind I was taking 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

I mean this with the greatest of respect, I'm not sure how you can think that. That comment is not intended to take away from anything you did, but styles, techniques and expectaions have changed so much over that 30 year period.

In today's highly competitive market, if a photographer was doing the same things now as photographers did in the early 80's then I'd be very amazed if they even got one paid booking.
 
petersmart said:
Well I've seen quite a few albums etc supplied by photographers who regularly do weddings ( and charge for them) and there is very little (if any) difference in the types of pics supplied by them and the kind I was taking 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

Quality of the image is debatable... but one reason for profesional equipment is perception to the client... 30 years ago it was much harder to get into photography than it is today.... today considering how cheap and acsessable entry level dslrs are, they are fairly commen place and not considered the mark of a proffesional, showing up with basic equipment would just promt the question from bride/groom/guests/family, why are we paying this person £xxxx to shoot our wedding... (ofcourse as photographers, we know that its the photographer that matters, not the gear)... but a random guest may not... having professional gear, not only helps to aid the photos, but sets you apart from the best friend of the groom, who happens to show up with his new dslr he bought just last week...
 
petersmart said:
Well I've seen quite a few albums etc supplied by photographers who regularly do weddings ( and charge for them) and there is very little (if any) difference in the types of pics supplied by them and the kind I was taking 30 years ago.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, I would also disagree with your comment, and agree with Boyfalldown. Clients may not necessarily ask you to shoot in a particular manner as most clients are not that knowledgeable about photography. However they will tell you what they like to see which will require you to have equipment of a high standard in the background.

For example, the couple from my wedding on saturday asked me to capture their first dance in a kind of silouette with shadows of them on the floor. They had seen in done elsewhere and wanted something similar. The equipment behind it was a 5DMKII, 24-70 2.8 L, 2 radio triggers, 2 flash guns mounted on light stands. I took the shot but had a nightmare of a time even getting focus lock. This is something I doubt happened 30 years ago.
 
Clearly i've open up a can of worms here!


I don't think its fair to say things like 'if you have a degree (I do- not exactly something one would say if not?) then you should know' because as i've already stated, i always used the universities gear, and when I worked in the studio, all the gear was provided by the company i worked for.

You know nothing about my level of skill, knowledge or ability so comments like this are unnecessary and unhelpful.

I've never had the need to buy expensive kit- i don't see that this is a crime or that it affects my ability as a photographer. Good kit doesn't make a good tog.

That's said i'm aware that it is unprofessional to operate without suitable kit and for this reason i'm going to bite the bullet and invest in a a new body, a nifty 50, and a 70-200 IS L lens to go with my 17-70. As more work comes in i will upgrade and invest further.

I don't think it unreasonable for anyone to cautious about setting up a new venture and the costs that come with it, especially in an economic climate such as ours.
 
fallen_mathi said:
Quality of the image is debatable... but one reason for profesional equipment is perception to the client... 30 years ago it was much harder to get into photography than it is today.... today considering how cheap and acsessable entry level dslrs are, they are fairly commen place and not considered the mark of a proffesional, showing up with basic equipment would just promt the question from bride/groom/guests/family, why are we paying this person £xxxx to shoot our wedding... (ofcourse as photographers, we know that its the photographer that matters, not the gear)... but a random guest may not... having professional gear, not only helps to aid the photos, but sets you apart from the best friend of the groom, who happens to show up with his new dslr he bought just last week...
Click to expand...

You're wrong about that - I have the kit I have because I need to able to tell my clients that I can deliver their photography and then be able to do so knowing I will not come uo against kit limitiations that stop me doing so. You're right its the photographer not the kit, but kit limitations do play a part.

The one thing I and nobody else I know does is uses kit to set them apart - that'd be foolish and expensive.
 
gonna be honest nothing in that list would come out of the bag at a wedding tbh they're all pretty soft (or crap made - nifty) and none are blistering to focus
 
James Greed said:
You know nothing about my level of skill, knowledge or ability so comments like this are unnecessary and unhelpful.

I've never had the need to buy expensive kit- i don't see that this is a crime or that it affects my ability as a photographer. Good kit doesn't make a good tog.
Click to expand...

You're right we do not know your level of skill, knowledge or ability. But, I must admit I was suprised at the questions you asked considering you have studied photography to a high level.

You're also right that good kit doesn't make a good photographer. However, bad/unsuitable kit can make a good photographer bad.
 
Well, it has been a while since one of these...................:lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top