lens for group portrait? 28mm?

[bambino]

Hello

Ok, in about two months I will be attending my friend's wedding. He already hired professional photographers so that's very good for me as I lack expertise and gear to do so and besides I can learn from the guys doing the job.

Ok, so far these are my humble tools: Canon T3i (known also as 600D), 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 kit lens; Canon fixed 50mm 1.8; Canon 70-300mm 4-5.6mm IS USM; Canon 430 EX speedlite.

Ok, as any pro, I visited the place in which my good friend is soon to become a dead/ruined man. The church does not allow flash inside. Ceremony is to be held at 18:00 so low light. The hall for reception is somewhat dark, it is lighted by dim tungsten candles, giving these "romantic" amber tone.

Ok, Im planning to use my 50mm 1.8 for inside the church. Outside the church I might switch to 70-300mm and flash

But for inside the hall, where I will be shooting group portraits, at first I thought my 18-55mm will be ok, But then, doing some tests, I realize it performs poorly on low light so will need to increse ISO to 400 or even 800. Or use flash, which I don't really want to, but might be necessary.

So, I thought about getting Canon fixed 28mm f1.8 for group portraits, I will be shooting not so big groups like classic reception tables which are 10 people in a round table of about 2m diameter.

I want a good lowlight lens so to avoid flash as possible and capture the lovely amber light from faked candles (tungsten lights actually). Or probably set flash to low power and add an amber gel?

Ok, I have money for one of the following set of stuff

1)Canon fixed 28mm f1.8 USM

or

2)Go a bit crazy and get Canon 24-105mm f4 L IS USM

The later is appealing because it is 24mm but have read it causes so much distortion at wide 24mm as a result of being a zoom lens (in spite it being a luxury L lens). Also, its f4 is a bit dissapointing as it is not so much for low light.

The former is appealing as being a prime lens seems to be simpler and has been rated very good in distorsion. Also, it is appealing for being f1.8. Also, it is smaller and cheaper. The only con I find is that it has very limited use. The 24-105 is more of an all-terrain so it might be a better investment.

Also, I consider than in a about 2 years from now I will be getting either Canon 5D Mark II or Mark III. Kits come with the 24-105mm f4 L lens. I might not need that "L" lens now as I have a crop camera. But I might get it and just buy Mark III body later.

Ok, Im undecided.

Do you think it is a better investment to get prime lens 28mm f1.8 as it will certainly perfom better on low light?

Another issue I love about 24-105mm L lens is that I wont need to be switching one lens, then another, could be doing many things with it. But Im afraid being an f4 lens it wont be very good in a crop camera entry level whose noise at high ISO is not as good as in a full frame Mark III.

So don't know what to do?

Any comments?

Thanks all!!

 

[hirejn]

If you don't understand light, a new lens will enable only snapshots with a different perspective. If all you can think about is how gear will improve your photography, the images are already hurting. You should be thinking about better photography, not better gear. What gear do you need for portraits? The answer is the gear you have. You can take group portraits at 200 mm. Wide is not necessarily the answer. Backing up is easy. Getting a new lens costs money. What you should be focusing on is knowledge of light and how to use it, and how to work on location. I can't recommend gear as a solution if you don't have that down. Yes, flash will probably be necessary, but it's not necessarily a bad thing. You want quality of light. Even if you can make an exposure without flash that doesn't mean it's good. Flash can add mood and dimension. Most people don't know how to wield a 1.8. You can't be moving the composition around once you set focus, and 1.8 is not a great aperture for formals. ISOs of 800 to 6400 are commonly necessary at weddings, and most pros don't hesitate to use them, but they understand how they work in relation to ambient light and flash.

 

[480sparky]

"Getting another lens" isn't going to improve your work. Learning WHY a certain lens will be beneficial, knowing it's limitations and advantages, as well as having the understanding to know when and where to use a given lens, is where you need to head to.

Any wood butcher can cut a lumber with about any type of saw available. It's takes a seasoned pro to know when (and how) to use a hand saw, a flush-cut saw, a coping saw, a rip saw, a bow saw, a miter saw, a circular saw, a hack saw, a table saw, a chain saw, a band saw, a jig saw, a reciprocating saw, a rotozip, a multitool......

 

[pixmedic]

Ill try to answer the OP's question...
you already have a 50mm prime, which is a good portrait lens. back up if you need to.
a good alternative for you might be a faster zoom. you can pick up a tamron or sigma 28-75 f/2.8 for around $300-$350 for the non VR.
I have the tamron 28-75 non VR and love it. also, its a full frame lens, so if you upgrade later on, your good.
you probably wont need f/1.8 for group shots. in fact, it will probably be the opposite. you want a SMALLER aperture to get more DOF to get your subjects all in focus.
since you already have a good flash, use it. get a softbox diffuser or bounce it. if you "dont want" to use your flash, that probably means you aren't proficient with it. practice. a flash is your best friend at weddings. we use 3-4 of them. most people that know how to properly use their flashes LOVE them.

a cheaper prime alternative might be a 35mm f/1.8 at around $200 new. less for a used one of course.
for a budget, i would recommend a tamron or sigma 17-50 f/2.8 (which is a DX lens) OR the 28-75 f/2.8 (FX lens)
both will work great on you camera, and will perform just fine for weddings. we have both lenses in Tamron non VC and they work great.

 

[cgipson1]

I curious as to why you are shooting group portraits if they hired a pro to do the shoot? And do you have permission from the PRO they hired. Many photographers won't allow anyone else to organize shoots, unless they agreed to it in the initial contract. I would check that before laying out any money for a lens you will need to learn to use anyway!

 

[bambino]

Thanks for your inputs

Well, I don't mean new/better gear will make me better photographer. But Im afraid some gear are produced for some purposes (and certainly most gear are produced to cause addiction and insecurity). Yes, a good photographer is capable of great photos with whatever he has in his hands. That said, the same photographer with a better gear can make a better photo. When I mean better gear I mean more suitable for the purpose intended, not that this lens is better than this other lens. It depends.... better for what purpose? Well, yes I can make group portraits with a telephoto but provided I have enough room to get all of them into the frame.

Today I did more tests with my 18-55mm kit lens setting a table lighted by a single candle at the center, this is the way tables will be lighted that glorious day. Increasing ISO to 800 and no flash it does some decent photos at wide 18mm, but hey, I would like a faster lens!

That 28-70mm f2.8 tamron sounds good for that price!

Cgipson1, you tell me you are curious why Im shooting group portraits if my friend already hired a pro? Well Im curious about your question. Im so sure I won't be the only guest shooting group portraits. Nowadays there are thousands of digicams all around taking millions of photos anywhere, specially at weddings and everybody wants a "souvenir", a "snapshot" from that moment. And with DSLR getting cheaper and cheaper lots of people owns one these days and group portraits are very common. Nevermind a hired pro shooting group portraits... Who cares? Whoever owns a digicam, even the cheapest digicam, will be shooting groups, regardless of that pro doing the same.
I didn't know some pros do not allow anyone else to organize groups for photo. Im curious about it, never heard about that. I wonder, what could be a good rationale for a pro preventing people to organize and take group portraits? Im curious, how doing this harms pro's best interest? In which way a pro is affected by this practice? I just can't figure!
If I were to hire a pro whose contract states that no one else but him is allowed to organize shoots, I would definitely not hire him in the first place. Seems a bit odd!!
If I were a pro (something extremely unlikely) I wouldn't care at all, nor even give a thought about it!!

Well, thanks a lot all of you, any other comments are always welcome!

 

[OLaA]

Jesus people just give the man an answer to his question. Taking the information given and the fact that you've already been to the location I'm going to Yessirr it at face value and assume you've already narrowed your best option to new glass. I don't have experience with the 28 but I've had stone great experience with the sigma 35 1.4. Great glass st a reasonable price. Even if your current gear will suffice, who doesn't like an excuse for new gear!?

Forgot to add that my vote is for the prime rather than the zoom. From optimal sharpness you're going to have to stop down and the zoom just isn't fast enough. A fast zoom is a great idea as well as some one mentioned but usually has a bit more cost associated.

 

[tirediron]

Cgipson1, you tell me you are curious why Im shooting group portraits if my friend already hired a pro? Well Im curious about your question. Im so sure I won't be the only guest shooting group portraits. Nowadays there are thousands of digicams all around taking millions of photos anywhere, specially at weddings and everybody wants a "souvenir", a "snapshot" from that moment. And with DSLR getting cheaper and cheaper lots of people owns one these days and group portraits are very common. Nevermind a hired pro shooting group portraits... Who cares? Whoever owns a digicam, even the cheapest digicam, will be shooting groups, regardless of that pro doing the same.
I didn't know some pros do not allow anyone else to organize groups for photo. Im curious about it, never heard about that. I wonder, what could be a good rationale for a pro preventing people to organize and take group portraits? Im curious, how doing this harms pro's best interest? In which way a pro is affected by this practice? I just can't figure!
If I were to hire a pro whose contract states that no one else but him is allowed to organize shoots, I would definitely not hire him in the first place. Seems a bit odd!!
If I were a pro (something extremely unlikely) I wouldn't care at all, nor even give a thought about it!!

Well, thanks a lot all of you, any other comments are always welcome!

I don't shoot many weddings, but when I do, I have an exclusivity clause in my contract,and I'll explain why. The wedding photographer is hired (at no small expense in many cases) to do a particular job; that is, to record the wedding in the manner described by the clients.

I will spend several days planning my day. I will liaise with the bride & groom, maid/matron of honour, best man, wedding planner, etc, to ensure that I know where and has to be done and the best way in which to do it.

I am ALWAYS working under a tight time-line, and if I ask for two hours for formals, I'm lucky if I get 45 minutes, but I am contractually obligated to turn in 'X' product. If you decide that you want to take a group shot and don't discuss it with me ahead of time, you may be grabbing people who are crucial to my shoot plan just when I need them most. Further, you probably don't have a lot of experience "herding the cats" and getting a large group of people, most of whom you don't know, into some semblance of order. I have. What may take you fifteen minutes to organize will likely only take me five.

By all means take your camera and shoot away, I don't object to that, and neither do most of the pros I know. If you do want to actually shoot the wedding, that is get all the key shots, then ask the bride & groom for my telephone number or e-mail address and call me a week or two before-hand. Introduce yourself and tell me what & why you'd like to shoot the wedding, and 99 times out of 100, we'll be able to work something out. The only really important point is that you don't get in my way at critical times.

 

[cgipson1]

Thanks for your inputs

Well, I don't mean new/better gear will make me better photographer. But Im afraid some gear are produced for some purposes (and certainly most gear are produced to cause addiction and insecurity). Yes, a good photographer is capable of great photos with whatever he has in his hands. That said, the same photographer with a better gear can make a better photo. When I mean better gear I mean more suitable for the purpose intended, not that this lens is better than this other lens. It depends.... better for what purpose? Well, yes I can make group portraits with a telephoto but provided I have enough room to get all of them into the frame.

Today I did more tests with my 18-55mm kit lens setting a table lighted by a single candle at the center, this is the way tables will be lighted that glorious day. Increasing ISO to 800 and no flash it does some decent photos at wide 18mm, but hey, I would like a faster lens!

That 28-70mm f2.8 tamron sounds good for that price!

Cgipson1, you tell me you are curious why Im shooting group portraits if my friend already hired a pro? Well Im curious about your question. Im so sure I won't be the only guest shooting group portraits. Nowadays there are thousands of digicams all around taking millions of photos anywhere, specially at weddings and everybody wants a "souvenir", a "snapshot" from that moment. And with DSLR getting cheaper and cheaper lots of people owns one these days and group portraits are very common. Nevermind a hired pro shooting group portraits... Who cares? Whoever owns a digicam, even the cheapest digicam, will be shooting groups, regardless of that pro doing the same.
I didn't know some pros do not allow anyone else to organize groups for photo. Im curious about it, never heard about that. I wonder, what could be a good rationale for a pro preventing people to organize and take group portraits? Im curious, how doing this harms pro's best interest? In which way a pro is affected by this practice? I just can't figure!
If I were to hire a pro whose contract states that no one else but him is allowed to organize shoots, I would definitely not hire him in the first place. Seems a bit odd!!
If I were a pro (something extremely unlikely) I wouldn't care at all, nor even give a thought about it!!

Well, thanks a lot all of you, any other comments are always welcome!

hahaha... forgot about this one! Thanks John!

bambino... if you WERE a PRO... you would care! Amateurs with their DSLR's in AUTO, IPADS, and Phone cameras just get in the way... and slow the PRO's down! And as John mentioned... most PRO's do state in their contract that no other shooters are allowed to "organize" any shoots, which includes setting up "Group shots"! What if you keep the Pro from getting a shot that the Bride and Groom would really cherish? It happens!

 

[texkam]

Consider renting for this event. If you end up buying the 28mm f1.8 just for this event and don't find yourself using it after, sell it. The difference in purchase price and your selling price amounts to the cost of renting this lens.

 

[Mike_E]

If the contracted pro can't do his/her job with you in the way and you won't get out of the way then your friend is going to be very mad at you when the contracted pro walks and your friend still owes him/her all of the money agreed to in the contract.

People with point and shoot cameras or phones/tablets are annoying but they are fast because they aren't futzing with their cameras settings, they shoot and move along. The thing that drives most pros crazy is somebody with a DSLR who spends five minutes trying to get one shot because they have too many options and too little experience to chose one in a timely fashion.

You may be the groom's friend but you wouldn't think of monopolizing his time here, in fact as a friend you are there for support and little else. Take a lesson from this to your camera experience there, don't be the uncle Bob who has the back of his head in every photo in the wedding album.

Aside from that, a 28mm is fine for groups of 6 or more- meaning that you need to stand at least two or three meters away to keep them from looking like a clown with a huge nose. A 35mm might be a better option but you'll need to decide that from your needed FoV and subject to camera distance available.

 

[bambino]

Hi again

Thanks all for your experienced and sound advice..

Well, I never meant to get int the way of a pro shooter not to mention monopolize his time.

I think we are talking about different things, that's why I didn't know what you were talking about

I have attended some weddings and similar events, I always see people everywhere with either crappy point and shot or advanced DSLR organizing groups for portrait, never seen a problem about it (but can't tell for sure!!), and this Im sure is because there is always common sense on everyone involved, including the pro!

 

[bambino]

Consider renting for this event. If you end up buying the 28mm f1.8 just for this event and don't find yourself using it after, sell it. The difference in purchase price and your selling price amounts to the cost of renting this lens.

Hey, that's a great idea! You are all right. I see not much use for a 2.8mm f1.8 after the wedding. I will consider that! Thanks!

 

[bambino]

Jesus people just give the man an answer to his question. Taking the information given and the fact that you've already been to the location I'm going to Yessirr it at face value and assume you've already narrowed your best option to new glass. I don't have experience with the 28 but I've had stone great experience with the sigma 35 1.4. Great glass st a reasonable price. Even if your current gear will suffice, who doesn't like an excuse for new gear!?

Forgot to add that my vote is for the prime rather than the zoom. From optimal sharpness you're going to have to stop down and the zoom just isn't fast enough. A fast zoom is a great idea as well as some one mentioned but usually has a bit more cost associated.

Oh thanks, that sounds reasonable. Yes, if I had ther money I would probably go for a f2.8 zoom but they are way beyond my limited budget. Even the mentioned f4 24-105mm is already a bit too much for my budget!! As another one suggested, renting the 28mm lens would be a good choice. I don't feel as using it much though one never knows.... Will think about it but thanks for your input it has been of much help!