So I spent $5300.00 on new gear. Fisheye vs Superwide

[Kerbouchard]

It seems to me, the OP has more to worry about than how the distortion from his fisheye lens will work. He should be more worried about how he plans to actually shoot a wedding with the gear he purchased.

I am curious as to what part of that gear will allow him to shoot the formals. I am not even worried about the 1 shot in the album that may have a fisheye view of the church.

 

[T3HeavyShop]

I'm confused. Are you saying that the edges of the frame are too clear, and you want them to be all bendy looking and/or oof?

 

[Josh66]

Hopefully, the OP already has 'normal' lenses, and the fisheye/wide angle stuff was just 'extras'. He did buy a flash too... ("580" - EX II, I assume.)

 

[Kerbouchard]

I'm confused. Are you saying that the edges of the frame are too clear, and you want them to be all bendy looking and/or oof?

Of course not...because anybody who would spend $5300 to outfit themselves for wedding photography gear would know they can achieve the same thing in Photoshop at a click of the button.

What the OP is saying is that they spent a lot of money on gear so they are ready to shoot weddings. You might want to ask them about their availability. You might even get lucky and reserve a spot.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Just not liking the decision of not having ONE fast prime and no full frame with that much money. I am planning to buy a couple of siggy in the near future.

I rather be stuck with a 5D and 50mm all night than using the combos you have.

What's wrong with the Sigmas?
I mean yes the 24-70mm and 70-200mm are not quite as good as canons top end (I'll let the 70-200mm be against canons original 70-200mm not the M2) but still in the right hands will deliver a more than suitable product when combined with the right lighting and usage.
And the sigma 10-20mm is rated very well against the canon 10-22mm.

 

[T3HeavyShop]

OP, this link will not answer your question directly, but I think if you go through the different tools, and compare them to your results, it should help you make a well informed choice.

Canon & Nikon Digital SLR Camera & Lens Comparisons

 

[doubleoh7]

... trying to figure out why this is in the "beginner" forum???

 

[Ryan L]

It seems to me, the OP has more to worry about than how the distortion from his fisheye lens will work. He should be more worried about how he plans to actually shoot a wedding with the gear he purchased.

I am curious as to what part of that gear will allow him to shoot the formals. I am not even worried about the 1 shot in the album that may have a fisheye view of the church.

Why wouldnt the 24-70 2.8 not work for formals??

The lenses are fast enough. Wouldnt hurt to add a 50mm 1.4, or 85mm 1.2 on a FF. As far as the Sigmas. As long as they arent soft copies of the lenses, I dont see the huge deal here. Then again the op never asked for opinions on the rest of his gear...sorry, I dont have any experience with a fish eye.

 

[RumDaddy]

Yes it will. There are several different things I have my photographers do with a fisheye other then a panoramic shot of the church. Theres at least 4 other important shots. And if the day allows for it, or if the timing of the day allows for it. I usually try to get one or two new shots. Something unusual or creative, off of the routine. But I have to admit Im loving the Superwide. Its my new favorite lens. Fisheye is officially boring to me, but exciting to the customers. Super wide is super kewl.

 

[Robin Usagani]

Yup.. make sure you use the UWA on most of your ceremony pics too. Make the groom look as tall as Manute Bol.

 

[RumDaddy]

Ive been schlepping bags with pros for almost 30 years.

70-200 mm EF 2.8 for low light churches and long isle shots.
24-70mm EF 2.8 for dark dance floors and a good multi purpose lens
8mm EF fisheye for a good 6-8 shots at every wedding. Those shots usually stand out pretty good and get a lot of attention.
10-20mm EF-S super wide that Im just getting used to but absolutely love.
60D Back up
580 speedlite back up
Plus I already have
580 speedlight
50D
50mm prime f1.8 canon lens. But it was only $96 new and ya get what ya pay for.
Plus a 28-135mm variable f-stop and a 70-300 variable f-stop.

 

[McNugget801]

Ive had the glass for a few days. I must say Im truly disappointed in the amount of distortion Im getting out of the sigma 8mm fish eye. Im shooting with a 50D. I borrowed a friends 5d and got a almost identical effect. Keep in mind its not the 50d vs the 5d. Its more of the crop sensor vs the full sensor. Your suposed to get more distortion with a full censor camera but I cant see the difference in fisheye distortion between the two. Well the only difference I noticed. The 5D you get the full circle but the 50D you dont. But thats usually irrelevant cuz after the shoot you usually crop the image anyways. But like I say barely see any difference at all. And the distortion is pretty week.

Who complains about distortion from a fisheye? Isn't that why you bought it in the first place?

Its like calling water wet.....

 

[imagemaker46]

Seems like some poor choices, nothing wrong with Sigma, they do make decent lenses. I think when you're putting your gear together you have to start with the best body avaliable, or the best that can be afforded, then work up from there. Definately having faster lenses.

 

[KmH]

Ive been schlepping bags with pros for almost 30 years.

What kind of pros? Pro photographers?

 

[RumDaddy]

Im complaining that the fisheye isnt fishy enough. But after farting around with it I realized you only use a very small portion of the image. You have to keep that in mind when shooting. The fishy distortion happens at the top and bottom but not in the middle.

McNugget, I luv the avatar.

KmH. Yeah professional photographers that shoot for me. Of course. Do you think Im going to shoot a wedding all on my own. LOLOLOLOL!!!

How ever, their employees and not my mentors or teachers. Id rather they took pictures for me then taught me about gear.