best canon lens for weddings image
Joyelle W
I have the Rebel 300d and the 20d (and of course the lenses that came with the camera). I have the 50mm 1.4 ap but I need something with a zoom because I shoot portraits and weddings and just sometimes need to chase that child with my zoom instead of my legs because I do alot of outdoor shoots where I let the kids run around. I use my 50mm for studio pics and that works great. I LOVE the 1.4 ap although sometimes have problems with depth of field blur. I just would love a lens that isnt TOO expensive (<$500) but still has the low aperture. THANKS!
and I would only need the zoom to reach about 100 feet or so
Answer
Another person stated that 50 mm is not a good portrait lens. I think she may have not realized that Digital Rebel & 20 D is not a full frame DSLR, and with a 1.6 x crop factor, a 50 mm lens is equal to 80 mm.
To answer your question, if you are limited on what you would like to pay for a new lens, the 28-105 mm f 3.5-4.5 II USM should be very usable.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=7442
Another person stated that 50 mm is not a good portrait lens. I think she may have not realized that Digital Rebel & 20 D is not a full frame DSLR, and with a 1.6 x crop factor, a 50 mm lens is equal to 80 mm.
To answer your question, if you are limited on what you would like to pay for a new lens, the 28-105 mm f 3.5-4.5 II USM should be very usable.
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=7442
What is the best canon dslr i should purchase next?
Mertle
I'm a 17 year old deciding if a future of photography is best for me and have used the past year to get the experience with a canon eos rebel XT i purchased second hand for a start. Although the camera has no problems besides not as fast of shutter speed as id like, I'm stuck on whether or not i should purchase a better canon or stick with the model i have? I have also purchased a 55-250 lens and i already had the original 55 kit lens. My main subjects typically are portraits and weddings and with scheduled senior pictures and 2 weddings coming up for pay I'm confused on whether or not i should purchase a higher functioning camera or maybe just more lenses and accessories? I will be purchasing this camera second hand as well if i do buy a new(to me) one so since I'm buying entirely myself i would like to stay in a price range of $500 or below on cameras running around that range on ebay and craigslist. Thanks for the help in advance :)
Might i add this is totally unprofessional gigs done by me. Yes there will be small pay but everyone understands that I'm a beginner with no other education other than what i have taught myself and that is a perfect factor for everyone involved since they are just looking for cheaper options and decent quality pictures still being done. I recently shot at a wedding and the pictures turned out fantastic but was just asking for advice on whether or not i should waste money purchasing a newer camera at such a young age or continue with the model i own. Nothing fancy just small local mutual friends and such asking for my assistance in capturing memories for them. I completely understand along with everyone involved that I am not professional therefore that's not even a factor of complaint. My pictures are at the moment amateur with potential and with people seeing that quality they have asked me personally to do these pictures for them. hope this helps clear things up.
Answer
If you're not sure about these things, I'd be very careful shooting a wedding and asking for money for it unless the couple specifically asked you and offered to pay. If they ask you to sign a contract, then think very hard because if you screw up the wedding they could sue. Even if they don't, you run the risk of their memories of such a day being blurred, wrongly coloured or badly composed. Weddings don't give you second chances, by and large.
Reading your question comes across rather like someone who doesn't know how to change the oil on a car charging people for driving lessons. You've been learning for one year? Would you entrust your wedding photos to someone who has been shooting for one year and doesn't really know how good their own equipment is?
Real wedding photographers who shoot Canon generally use significantly higher grade models than a rebel. These days I would guess that most of them are shooting 5D Mark 3s, probably two of them. One with a 24-70 and one with a moderate or long tele...and with high quality flashes on both. That's already a lot of money. Certainly a lot more than 500 dollars. Nearer to 5000, and probably more than that.
To be blunt, you don't sound like you're ready to be trying a wedding. A skilled photographer could shoot a wedding with a rebel and a 55-250, but they would know the camera inside out and back to front.
This sounds like I'm being mean, and maybe I am. But I wouldn't want you to see what happens when such a big occasion goes to pot because the photographer wasn't up to scratch. You could get yourself a 1DX with the best glass Canon can make and it won't make a difference if you haven't got the vision yet.
Google "bad wedding photos" and look what people do in the name of photography. If you think you can do better, then absolutely go for it. But know where you are as a photographer and where you want to be. Then google "good wedding photos" and ask yourself if you could do that. If you really, really believe that you can, then go for it, but from your question it sounds like you still have a lot to learn.
Edit: now I've read your additional details, then by all means go for it. Most modern cameras are good enough to do most things. If anything, you might want to look closely at lenses, rather than cameras. If the wedding's going to be in a church then you might have trouble with the light; a 55-250 lens has a 4.0-5.6 range, which means that you're going to have trouble shooting when there isn't much light available unless you jack up the ISO so high that your pictures get too noisy. I would look at fast prime lenses like a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, or an 85mm 1.8. (If you happen to win the lottery tomorrow, then get the 50mm 1.2 and the 85mm 1.2)
Faster lenses like these will make it much easier for you if you're in a dark environment.
Hope I didn't come across as too aggressive in the original post: now that you've explained how things are, then I hope you can make a good go of the weddings and portraits.
If you're not sure about these things, I'd be very careful shooting a wedding and asking for money for it unless the couple specifically asked you and offered to pay. If they ask you to sign a contract, then think very hard because if you screw up the wedding they could sue. Even if they don't, you run the risk of their memories of such a day being blurred, wrongly coloured or badly composed. Weddings don't give you second chances, by and large.
Reading your question comes across rather like someone who doesn't know how to change the oil on a car charging people for driving lessons. You've been learning for one year? Would you entrust your wedding photos to someone who has been shooting for one year and doesn't really know how good their own equipment is?
Real wedding photographers who shoot Canon generally use significantly higher grade models than a rebel. These days I would guess that most of them are shooting 5D Mark 3s, probably two of them. One with a 24-70 and one with a moderate or long tele...and with high quality flashes on both. That's already a lot of money. Certainly a lot more than 500 dollars. Nearer to 5000, and probably more than that.
To be blunt, you don't sound like you're ready to be trying a wedding. A skilled photographer could shoot a wedding with a rebel and a 55-250, but they would know the camera inside out and back to front.
This sounds like I'm being mean, and maybe I am. But I wouldn't want you to see what happens when such a big occasion goes to pot because the photographer wasn't up to scratch. You could get yourself a 1DX with the best glass Canon can make and it won't make a difference if you haven't got the vision yet.
Google "bad wedding photos" and look what people do in the name of photography. If you think you can do better, then absolutely go for it. But know where you are as a photographer and where you want to be. Then google "good wedding photos" and ask yourself if you could do that. If you really, really believe that you can, then go for it, but from your question it sounds like you still have a lot to learn.
Edit: now I've read your additional details, then by all means go for it. Most modern cameras are good enough to do most things. If anything, you might want to look closely at lenses, rather than cameras. If the wedding's going to be in a church then you might have trouble with the light; a 55-250 lens has a 4.0-5.6 range, which means that you're going to have trouble shooting when there isn't much light available unless you jack up the ISO so high that your pictures get too noisy. I would look at fast prime lenses like a 50mm 1.8 or 1.4, or an 85mm 1.8. (If you happen to win the lottery tomorrow, then get the 50mm 1.2 and the 85mm 1.2)
Faster lenses like these will make it much easier for you if you're in a dark environment.
Hope I didn't come across as too aggressive in the original post: now that you've explained how things are, then I hope you can make a good go of the weddings and portraits.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment