Need advice on a lense for a wedding

[Tusk333]

I have a Nikon D3000 I just bought and I was looking a couple of lenses throughout the last several days and I am hearing about a thousand different things about the lens I am looking for. I have been told that a Nikon AF Nikkor f/1.8 lens would work and then I was told it would not work. Then I was told that a AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G and a AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G would work for my Nikon D3000. Anyway there is a huge difference in price and I am shooting a low light wedding on July 10th. So I know one of these lenses if not all of them will work. but can someone please explain the difference to me about these three lenses. I would greatly appreciate it so much

Mike

 

[tirediron]

I'm assuming by 'work' you mean autofocus. On your body you'll need an AF-S lens (one with a built-in focus motor). An AF lens will NOT auto-focus, but will work fine otherwise. As far as wedding photography goes, I've rarely used a prime lens except for the formals. I would look into renting the AF-s 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8. These are my staple lenses for wedding photography, but they're pricey ($1800 - 2200 each).

 

[mwcfarms]

I'm assuming by 'work' you mean autofocus. On your body you'll need an AF-S lens (one with a built-in focus motor). An AF lens will NOT auto-focus, but will work fine otherwise. As far as wedding photography goes, I've rarely used a prime lens except for the formals. I would look into renting the AF-s 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8. These are my staple lenses for wedding photography, but they're pricey ($1800 - 2200 each).

Dont forget the offbrand versions of those lenses, I hear good things about Sigma's.

 

[tirediron]

Dont forget the offbrand versions of those lenses, I hear good things about Sigma's.

Good point, however most rental places that I'm aware of only rent first-party lenses.

 

[mwcfarms]

Really, I know TheCameraStore does both here not sure about other canadian vendors but Im happy they do so I can try before I buy. They even have where they apply up to three rental amounts towards your purchase if you buy it within 90 days of renting it.

 

[KmH]

I have a Nikon D3000 I just bought and I was looking a couple of lenses throughout the last several days and I am hearing about a thousand different things about the lens I am looking for. I have been told that a Nikon AF Nikkor f/1.8 lens would work and then I was told it would not work. Then I was told that a AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G and a AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G would work for my Nikon D3000. Anyway there is a huge difference in price and I am shooting a low light wedding on July 10th. So I know one of these lenses if not all of them will work. but can someone please explain the difference to me about these three lenses. I would greatly appreciate it so much

Mike

To specifically answer your question.

Your D3000 does not have a focus motor in it. Neither does Nikon's D40/D40x/D60 and D5000, but the rest of Nikons recent and past dSLR's do have a focus motor in the camera body.

So, to have auto focus you need lenses that have a focus motor in them.

Nikon lenses designated AF-S have a focus motor in them so the AF-S 35 mm f/1.8G and the AF-S 50 mm f/1.4G with auto focus on your D3000.

However the much less expensive AF 50 mm f/1.8D (notice no S) won't because it doesn't have a focus motor in it.

So, from the D90 up both AF and AF-S lenses will auto focus. The AF lenses utilize the AF motor in the camera body and use the in-the-lens AF mnotor in the AF-S lenses.

You may wonder why Nikon didn't put a focus motor in the D40/D40x/D60/D300/D5000 cameras.

They left the motor out to keep the cameras as small and light weight as possible so they would appeal to the growing number of women becoming interested in dSLR cameras.

 

[SrBiscuit]

eeek...low light wedding and a d3000?

i would consider renting both a better body and a lens...i think the 24-70 2.8 is rather popular amongst the wedding crowd, but i may be mistaken.

*edit* looks like i missed TI's mention of said lens. whoopsy.

 

[Tusk333]

Okay so I can or cannot use the first lense I described, due to auto focus/ AFS I guess is the only thing that my Nikon D3000 can use. Its more of a favor wedding. I have only just bought this Nikon a couple of weeks ago and I have been familarizing myself with it, because I have very little photography background, but I really want to learn. I have dreamt of doing this since I was 6 when I would see National Geographic Explorers in Doctor's offices. Maybe I can get a little help then. I have been studying a lot on shooting techniques and how to use various programs like lightroom 3, CS5, and gimp trying to absorb a lot. Does anybody know where I can get a lens for a super cheap price? I'm on a budget right now or I would have atleast bought the D5000 instead, but I'm just learning how to crawl, before I can all out run with it.

Thanks for all the help

 

[Derrel]

For a wedding shot in low light, I think the 35mm f/1.8 AF-S G is the lens for a beginner to buy...a 50mm lens indoors will have a pretty narrow angle of view. The 35mm 1.8 at $199 is, these days, sort of a "super-cheap price". It's surprising how fast and far lens prices have gone up over the last few years.

 

[sovietdoc]

Yeah I am not even sure wtf is up with that. You'd think that with all the zooms coming out, primes would get cheap too. But no, when I was trying to decide on what to get as my fast prime, people said they picked up this sigma 24mm for 230 bucks a few years ago. I ended up paying well over 400 for mine. WTF

 

[Flash Harry]

We are a captive audience, they charge whatever they like, we gotta pay. H

 

[SrBiscuit]

are you being paid for this wedding on july 10th?

 

[flyingember]

weddings? get the 50-200 2.8 (I think it's that range) and a 35 1.8 and maybe even a wide to short tele like an 18-50 or so.

I shot a wedding with an 18-50 2.8 and the speed was fine but I needed more zoom to actually get the shots I wanted. unless you like stepping in front of people during the ceremony that is

 

[subscuck]

are you being paid for this wedding on july 10th?

No, he's doing it as a favor.

I'm not trying to be harsh, but a reality check is in order here. I admire your passion and enthusiasm. It will take you a long way down the road, but you need to realize that it's not as easy as Ashton Kutcher makes it look in the commercials. Especially shooting in low light with limited gear and technique you haven't mastered yet. And you won't master it in the next week and a half. You say you're trying to crawl before you run, but for you to shoot a wedding at this point is like springing from the womb at a full sprint.

Here are my suggestions:

1) If it's a choice between you or nobody, and the bride and groom's expectations are in line with your current gear and skill level, go ahead and do it and it will be what it will be.

2) If they have even the slightest expectations of pictures approaching the quality of a pro charging several thousand $, bow out. Explain to them your gear and skill level are not enough to deliver the results they're expecting, and you don't want to disappoint them. Photoshop can salvage some iffy pics, but it can't bring them back from the abyss.

This is simply my two cents, which adjusted for inflation aint worth much, but I would seriously consider the bride and groom, and your relationship with them, above all else.

 

[SrBiscuit]

thats what prompted me to ask the question...
i saw "im doing a wedding"...but then i also saw some "i have no photog background", with a side of "im just learning to crawl"...

if its a casual favor type thing...man...idk...get the fastest lens you can for your budget and/or a nice flash...

im with subscuck on this.

*edit*
not sure what your budget is, but derrel mentioned to 2 best cost:benefit lenses out there.