wedding photography: Canon 20D and which lenses?

I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the 70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens? Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any tips!
Lisa

"lisa.ireland" wrote in message
ups.com...
I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the 70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens? Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any tips!
Lisa

Indeed, the 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 are the best lenses for the purpose, but,
if you are on a budget, the 28-135 IS may be a good choice, too. Most of
the images on our wedding site were taken with that lens, either by my wife
or by myself.
Now, if Canon ever produced a 24-70 f2.8 IS lens, that would be the one!
If you're going to give up the "L" lens and it's moderately wider end, I'd
stick with the 28-135 IS, the extra speed is nice on the Tamron, but IS can
bail you out, as long as your B&G don't move...

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

lisa.ireland wrote:
I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the
70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens?
Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any
tips!
Lisa

I shot two weddings with Canon 300D and the kit lens and learned that
you need a lens that f/2.8-4. Preferably a consistent f/2.8. If "IS"
then thats a bonus. Also, the 18mm end is good in places where you
don't have much room to move back. I hardly shot anything beyond 50mm
but then these are Indian weddings so the settings and environment
might be different for a church or cathedral wedding.

so my choice would be the Canon 17-35mm f/2.8 "L" if money was no
constraint. On a budget then the Tamron 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Di LD. And if
you really have to spend less then the Sigma 24-135mm f/2.8-4.5.
HTH,

Siddhartha

because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the kit
lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better lens.
should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?

lisa

lisa.ireland wrote:
because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one
or
2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that
focal
length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the
kit
lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better
lens.
should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?

Yes, field of view will change. Given the 20D's crop factor of 1.6x,
the 28-135mm will yield a FoV of 48-216mm. So you need a lens with
atleast 18mm at the wide-end to shoot group photographs. Even the lens
advertised as digital lenses will have changed FoV on dSLRs.

And that brings us to the likes of the Canon 17-40mm "L" and the Tamron
17-35mm f/2.8-4. They will give you the FoV of 28-xxmm on the Canon
20D. I found that the 18mm end was good enough for shooting a group of
ten people at a distance of about 10 meters or less (Sorry, I am bad
with estimations). But remember that you will avoid shooting with the
lens wide open because lenses tend to be soft at their extreme ends.
Also, you might not find the time between ceremonies to change lenses
etc so a good all-around lens might be useful.

As for practise, yes, the 18-55mm lens is good for practise. Ignore all
the negative remarks about it. Yes, manual focus is disgusting on it
and its not very bright but good for practise and casual shooting and
very much worth the $70-$100 its sold for, IMHO.

The 17-85mm has a good FL range but the aperture is such that you might
want to spend on a lens with a wider aperture, later on. So save the
400 euros for a lens with a wider aperture. I will receive my Sigma
24-135mm f/2.8-4.5 sometime next month so will post some experiences
with that soon

HTH,

Siddhartha

"lisa.ireland" wrote in message
ups.com...
because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the kit
lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better lens.
should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?

lisa


The 17-85mm is a very good lens (I have it). It will also mean a lot less
lens changes - which is very important.

On 18 Jan 2005 07:12:09 -0800, lisa.ireland wrote:
because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
length change because it's not a digital lens?

The focal length won't change, but the field of view will. Non-pro
Canon DSLR sensors are 1/1.6 times the size of a 35mm negative. That
28-135 lens will give you the same field of view that you'd get if
you attached a 45-216 lens to a 35mm camera.

So yeah, if you're shooting with a 20D or 300D, 28mm isn't wide --
it's more like a normal lens.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall

"lisa.ireland" wrote in message
ups.com...
I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the 70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens? Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any tips!
Lisa

Indoor or outdoors?

Flash or no flash?

As an argument against the expensive EF-S models, do you ever think you
might want one of the 1 series models or might ever want to shoot film?

"lisa.ireland" wrote in message
ups.com...
because i make euros, i can afford to buy some good lenses when i go
the US because of the good exchange rate i get. i'd like to have one or
2 lenses for weddings. the 28-135 lens sounds good, but will that focal
length change because it's not a digital lens? maybe i should have a
good wide-angle for group shots like the 17-35 or 10-22, and one like
the 28-135 that will be good for candids? i was thinking about the kit
lens just to practise using the 20D before i invest in the better lens.
should i bother spending the extra 400euro for the 17-85 kit lens or
just stick with the cheaper 18-55 for practise?

lisa


Here's some examples:
28-135IS:
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc20.html

17-35 Sigma (you wouldn't believe how little room I had to shoot this!)
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/jj6.html

100-400 f4.5-5.6L IS USM (Shot from the organ loft at 300mm f5.0)
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com/mc21.html

That last shot could be done with a 70-200 f2.8, better. Blowout the
background and crop it. Or with the 70-200 and a 2x converter.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"Dave R knows who" wrote in message
...

"lisa.ireland" wrote in message
ups.com...
I've decided to get the 20D for wedding photography and I'm not sure
which lens to get. I've heard that the 24-70 F/2.8 L USM and the 70-200
2.8 L IS USM are the best. How is the EF-S 17-85 F/4-5.6 kit lens? Has
anyone used the Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 and how does it compare to the
higher priced Canons? Should I stick with IS lens? Thanks for any tips!
Lisa

Indoor or outdoors?

Flash or no flash?

As an argument against the expensive EF-S models, do you ever think you
might want one of the 1 series models or might ever want to shoot film?

I struggled with the same question (regarding the 17-85mm EF-S) - I though
of selling it and getting the 17-40 f/4L since I plan to get a full frame
SLR one of these days. The thing that kept me from doing that was:

- If I keep my 20D, the 17-85 will ALWAYS be my most useful lens (due to its
unmatched range)
- If I sold my 20D, I can sell it along with the 17-85.
- By the time I get a full frame I can always get the 28-300mm L (since 28
will be same as what I get with my 17 now). Then I would rarely make a lens
change.

I am a hobby photographer, so for someone else (like the OP), who depends on
income for photographs, L glass may be the _only_ consideration. I really
think that the 28-300mm is very good value ($2200), it covers atleast two
lenses range (if not 3) - dont know how sharp it is though.