Go to a  "printer friendly" view of this message which allow an easy print Printer-friendly copy Go to the page which allows you to send this topic link and a message to a friend Email this topic to a friend
Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #18123
View in linear mode

Subject: "Wedding Lenses" Previous topic | Next topic
mudman2 Silver Member Nikonian since 14th May 2009Sun 22-Apr-12 06:57 PM
167 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
"Wedding Lenses"


Jamison, US
          

Got 2 x 7000 bodies

17-55 f2.8 on one. What else would you put on the other to save time swapping ?

I don't mind what you suggest just trying to decide if I have everything I need or if I need to buy/rent another

Thanks in advance

I don't suffer focus issues is my new mantra (touch wood)

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Replies to this topic
Subject Author Message Date ID
Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
David D Busch Silver Member
22nd Apr 2012
1
Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
purple5ive
22nd Apr 2012
2
Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
billD80 Silver Member
23rd Apr 2012
3
Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
km6xz Moderator
23rd Apr 2012
4
Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
mudman2 Silver Member
23rd Apr 2012
5
     Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
ericbowles Moderator
23rd Apr 2012
6
          Reply message RE: Wedding Lenses
mudman2 Silver Member
23rd Apr 2012
7

David D Busch Silver Member Nikonian since 07th Nov 2011Sun 22-Apr-12 10:18 PM
174 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#1. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

>Got 2 x 7000 bodies
>
>17-55 f2.8 on one. What else would you put on the other to
>save time swapping ?
>
>I don't mind what you suggest just trying to decide if I have
>everything I need or if I need to buy/rent another
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>I don't suffer focus issues is my new mantra (touch wood)

It really depends on your style and the kind of photos you shoot. If it were me, I'd have the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR I on the second body for selective focus shots from a slight distance. Only a small gap in focal length between 55-70mm, VR I is much cheaper and about as good on a DX body than the VR II, and the copy I have is excellent wide open or at f/4. The VR makes it hand-holdable.

An 85mm f/1.4 might be a good substitute if you move around a lot and don't need to zoom. Incredible bokeh and also also good at large apertures.

Of course, I'm a selective focus kinda guy. I'd use one of those two lenses on the second body, and rely on the 17-55mm when shooting groups and/or more depth-of-field required.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
purple5ive Registered since 07th Jan 2012Sun 22-Apr-12 10:36 PM
31 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#2. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 1


AU
          

70-200 f2.8 is an excellent lense. bit pricey though

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

billD80 Silver Member Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Mon 23-Apr-12 02:46 AM
2141 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#3. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 0


US
          

A real sleeper is the 80-200/2.8 AF-S. Said to be VERY sharp, and a good deal less expensive than the 70-200/2.8's. No VR though, if that's important to you.

www.billkeane.zenfolio.com

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

km6xz Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge in various areas, including Portraits and Urban Photography Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Mon 23-Apr-12 05:29 AM
3295 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#4. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 0


St Petersburg, RU
          

Yes, another vote for the 70-200VrI or II and possibly swapping the 17-5 5 and some money for a 24-70 2.8 which is optically better and has a more useful range.
The 85 1.8G is optically very good and much cheaper than the 1.4 version. I have a 85 1.4D but for detail shots and candids like are so popular wedding photography, the 70-200 has just as good of bokeh and isolation at 2.8 plus is more versatile.
I have the 17-55 also and never really warmed up to it, in that range I prefer my 24 1.4 and little 35 1.8. The image quality for people shots is just better with the 24-70 on DX. Nothing wrong with a 17-55, it is competent but it only is lessened by comparison to quality glass.
Stan
St Petersburg Russia

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

    
mudman2 Silver Member Nikonian since 14th May 2009Mon 23-Apr-12 05:29 PM
167 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#5. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 4


Jamison, US
          

Thanks guys I appreciate the inputs. I wish I had a 24-70 but I don't so I will muddle my way thru it.

The 85 I do have access that and a 70-200 just thought it was a little heavy to hump around all day was thinking of the lighter 70-300, not as good but a lot lighter.

Wish me luck

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

        
ericbowles Moderator Awarded for his in-depth knowledge and high level skills in various areas, especially Landscape and Wildlife Photoghraphy Writer Ribbon awarded for for his article contributions to the community Nikonian since 25th Nov 2005Mon 23-Apr-12 06:04 PM
8510 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#6. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 5


Atlanta, US
          

For me, f/2.8 is enough to justify the extra weight of the 70-200 over the 70-300. I don't think the 70-300 is fast enough and does not provide enough subject isolation.

Eric Bowles
Nikonians Team
My Gallery
Workshops

Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

            
mudman2 Silver Member Nikonian since 14th May 2009Mon 23-Apr-12 06:19 PM
167 posts Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin    Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profile
#7. "RE: Wedding Lenses"
In response to Reply # 6


Jamison, US
          

ok you convinced me I will take it along but i will take the 70-300 just in case 12 hour is to long to carry it haha

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote | Top

Forums Lobby GET TO KNOW YOUR CAMERA & MASTER IT Nikon D7100, D7000 (Public) topic #18123 Previous topic | Next topic


Take the Nikonians Tour and learn more about being a Nikonian Wiki /FAQ /Help Listen to our MP3 photography radio channels Find anything on Nikon and imaging technology - fast!

Copyright © Nikonians 2000, 2014
All Rights Reserved

Nikonians®, NikoScope® and NikoniansAcademy™ are trademarks owned by Nikonians.org.
Nikon®, Nikonos® and Nikkor® are registered trademarks of Nikon Corporation.