Kit lens for weddings

[syphlix]

a paid wedding photog who uses a kit lens should be embarrassed... though if you're just a guest who likes to take photos then who cares...

 

[gsgary]

[quote


This was shot at ISO3200 300mm F2.8 1/125 you would have to more than double it

ISO 3200 f2.8 1/125
= ISO 6400 f4 1/125 (doubled ISO to get the same exposure)

But since we now know (claimed anyway) that it was a 300mm lens then f4 is not the number to work with. Rather f5.6 is the typical kit lens aperture at 300mm.

therefore:
ISO 3200 f2.8 1/125
= ISO 12800 f5.6 1/125 (Doubled and doubled again)

If you reduced shutter speed to 1/60th (likely adequate) then you are roughly back to doubling ISO needing 6144 ISO to give equal exposure.

Since my Nikon D90 only goes to 6400 ISO I would obviously choose the 1/60 shutter speed.

Thus we see that this shot is far from "impossible" to get with a kit lens. Furtermore thanks to software an underexposed shot with a kit lens can often be rescued rather easily.

So the moral of the story is that the beginner has a lovely souvenir photo of a concert that was paid for with the $4000.00 dollars saved from not being talked into buying the fast glass. (300mm f4 vs 300mm f2.8 Digital Camera Lenses | Nikon Camera lenses | NIKKOR Optics)

If you are not an amateur beginner looking for souvenir photos but rather a pro expected to deliver the goods then this entire discussion is irrelevant as you will likely own the best made regardless of cost. Or an amateur who don't care about the costs of souvenir photos.[/QUOTE]


Sorry but you are talking through your arse it sounds like you have never taken a picture in your life 1/60 would give you a blurry mess , every lens i have bought has paid for itself except the one i bought before Christmas
Jealousy is a bad trate

 

[fredgettings]

A lot of these kit lenses are decent. They are not exceptional.

 

[ghache]

It all comes down to knowledge and technique and experience. I am pretty sure you swap any good wedding photographer's D3s off thier hands and replace it with a d90 and a 18-200 VRII and im pretty sure he will manage to go though the day and get pretty much the same quality shots he usually gets.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

Seriously, this entire thread is complete nonsense. Sobolik, I suppose you only shoot with a kit lens then right? Its the only lens you need after all and is of equal quality of all other lenses.What a joke. I think you just like dipping your swizzle stick in and stirring the pot. Do you absolutely NEED a kit lens for a wedding? Under most circumstances, no. However, for certain effects ( Formal shots with DOF effects, low light shots with movement ) you absolutely do, but its not a MUST have. So in a sense, I agree that fast glass is sometimes pushed excessively. I would rather shoot a wedding with my 17-40L f/4 and 580EX, than with a 50mm 1.8 MarkII budget prime and no flash. But to say the kit lens is as good as most faster pieces of glass, is complete BS. And every higher end lens is going to have better IQ than that kit lens. Sure there are crap budget lenses that are worse, but people argue primes because they are the cheapest next step up in IQ as well as speed in most cases. Also, as everyone has failed to mention, a fast lens also allows your camera to focus better given that tha aperture is wider so the camera sees better. The aperture only closes to the chosen f/stop when the picture is taken. Sure using a flash (assuming it is capable ) can help AF if it has an assist but we don't know that.

 

[Hardrock]

I have only shot one wedding and would hate to have shot it with a kit lens!!! I am far from a professional but if you plan to shoot a wedding you better have some good gear which includes FAST GLASS. You may not always be at 1.8 or 2.8 but that will allow the lens to focus faster during those fast times. But then again that is my opinion!