LENS recommendation for wedding for DX bodies

TigerSpider · Nov 11, 2013

Hello,

Just joined; first post.

I am a D90 shooter who just got a 7100. I generally shoot macro (spiders & invertebrates), wildlife/nature and scenery/travel.

My current lenses are the sweet Tokina 2.8 100mm for macro (with Sigma ring flash) and the Nikkor 18-200 mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VRII. I kept reading that the Nikkor 35 mm 1.8G is a lens everyone with $200 should have so I just ordered one.

My youngest sister is getting married in April and asked me to shoot the wedding. It will be an informal and intimate affair and she isn't really interested in and can't afford the usual pro shoot. She will mostly just want the event documented sort of "photojournalistically", with plenty of small group shots of friends and family, some portraits and I'm sure I'll do some macro stuff for rings, flowers, etc.

I've been researching wedding lens and I am overwhelmed. One reason my research has frustrated me is that most things I've read and viewed on YouTube are by pro wedding photographers who use full-frame cameras and their lens choices may not be good for APS-C sensors. Seems to be lots of strong opinions that conflict and confuse an amateur like me. For example, some say the 50 mm 1.8 is best, others the same in 1.4, and others say that the 50 mm is not a portrait lens at all. Most recommend the 85 mm (and use FX cameras), but I was thinking that the 50 mm on a DX is about 75 so isn't that a good equivalent choice? Also, I've heard that my Tokina 100 macro is great for portraits.

I did supplement the pro shot photos for my nephew's wedding a few years ago using my 18-200 on the D90 and did pretty well.

So, taking into account DX, specifically the 7100, AND the lenses I already have, AND the fact that this will be a casual wedding shoot, AND it will be my only wedding and any lens I buy should be useful for street, travel, wildlife ... PLEASE give me any recommendations for capturing the shots I will need. I really would like to shoot 2-6 people groups with a nice bokeh. I imagine I'll mostly be indoors and using SB600 with diffuser and demb flip-it bounce card.

Thanks in advance for any helpful replies. Extra thanks to anyone who actually is a wedding photographer and says "buy this..."

runnah · Nov 11, 2013

Can't go wrong with a 35mm and 50mm prime. Cheap and work well in any situation. Since it's super casual if it were me I'd use a 35mm and flash and call it good.

astroNikon · Nov 11, 2013

First question everyone is going to ask is .. Budget ??

I've been doing a ton of research into this too and I'm going to (sooner or later) get a 35-70 / 2.8 AF-D lens. It's older (and alot less money) but they are known as the "wedding lens" and is very sharp. The newer iterations of it is a 28-70 and a 24-70 both costing a alot more than the older ones.

But then, I don't shoot weddings but am planning on 2nd shooting some in the near/distant future.

Mach0 · Nov 11, 2013

I love 35 mm and 85mm on fx. 50 normal but I like 35 better for a lot of things. I would say rent a 17-55 2.8 or a 24-70 along with an 85 prime or 70-200. I like the size of the 85 but I love the rendering of the 70-200 at around 135mm.

JohnS. · Nov 11, 2013

astroNikon said:
Budget ??

This. There are a ton of lenses out there you can use.

For the ceremony or covering distances/large crowds, a telephoto (70-300 VR for budget, 70-200 2.8 for $$$, etc). For indoors, a fast wide angle prime wouldn't hurt (35 or 50 for budget, the cheaper 24 will AF on your 7100 and they're not TOO expensive, unless you wanna go even wider and have the money), a faster zoom (17-55/24-70 for $$$, the 24-85 2.8 version will AF on your camera and is cheaper).... Plenty of choices. Ultimately, it's what your budget will allow.

I brought my D80 for ****s and giggles to my cousins wedding recently and I completely regret not having batteries for my SB-600. I had my 50 1.8 with me but there were just too many people around to be able to move far away enough to take a picture while not being blocked by a bunch of people.

hamlet · Nov 11, 2013

Get the 35mm and the 85mm.

There are the lower (1.8) class versions and the upper 1.4 class version. So depending on how much cash you are willing to spend, get either one of those.

Braineack · Nov 11, 2013

The "lower class" 85mm is an awesome lens, but requires a lot of breathing room between you and your subjects to actually frame a shot on a DX body.

Derrel · Nov 11, 2013

The 17-55mm f/2.8 DX-Nikkor zoom would be the ideal lens. Less expensive options would be the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, or Sigma's equivalent in that same class. A fixed 85mm prime is more of an outdoor lens or a lens for longer-distance shooting.

wyogirl · Nov 11, 2013

Consider renting a lens. Borrowlenses.com is a good option especially if you are in between a couple of lenses and aren't sure which you could use afterward.

astroNikon · Nov 11, 2013

It would be good if you could scope out where she is getting married. Then imagine chairs/people there. Then try to figure out what lenses you may like.

I've been working with my 85mm alot and am finding what braineck & JohnS mentioned (I also have a 24 & 50). It is fixed. And to zoom you need to move around, and at a wedding you may not be able to move around as much as you need, and you may not be able to frame the shot as you want.

If you are using both cameras then have one with a shorter zoom and the other with a longer zoom. The zooms will just make it alot easier.

I have one of the mentioned 24-85/2.8-4 AF-D zooms and it is a very nice lens for the money and good at low light.
If I don't get a 35-70/2.8 the 24-85 will be my choice.

I've been scoping out too many weddings lately. :/
Guess it's time sooner or later to 2nd shoot one.

TigerSpider · Nov 11, 2013

Thanks for the responses. As mentioned, I already ordered the 35mm 1.8G. As for budget, I have none. I can afford what I want; I just don't want to buy something if I won't use it for my normal scenery/wildlife type of shooting. I've used borrowlenses.com before and may go that route for something like the 17-55 2.8. However, two concerns with that specific lens: 1. how often will I use at f2.8? At slightly smaller apertures I would be overlapping with my 18-200 3.5. 2. I've read many reviews that suggest that Sigma's significantly less expensive zoom of same focal range is superior. However, I may rent the 17-55 and put on my 7100 and put the 18-200 on the D90. Then if I'm actually doing set portraits I can try my 100mm macro for head and shoulder shots and also the 35 prime.

TheFantasticG · Nov 11, 2013

No budget? Fark it. D4 + 24-70 2.8 + 70-200 2.8 II and done.

JohnS. · Nov 11, 2013

Even if you don't have a budget, just because you have nice gear doesn't mean you'll get nice pictures. I don't know what your skills are nor am I trying to insult you in any way, shape, or form. I'm just saying.

But yeah, if you don't have a budget, there's nothing wrong with loading up. 24-70 2.8 on one camera and 70-200 2.8 on the other would be great choices like Fantastic said. I'd bring at least one wide fast prime as well.

hamlet · Nov 11, 2013

You would save money if you went all in now. Get the best you can afford so you don't regret not getting that better lens. 58 F1.4 or Nikon 58 F1.2 Noct.

Braineack · Nov 11, 2013

hamlet said:
You would save money if you went all in now. Get the best you can afford so you don't regret not getting that better lens. 58 F1.4 or Nikon 58 F1.2 Noct.

hey hamlet, what lenses do you own?