Need advice: Gear for Wedding Photography

[spuds]

I was hoping to get some advice specific to my situation/gear.

I'm starting to do some wedding work and I want to upgrade my gear.

I currently have:

D700
D200 (backup)

17-35mm f2.8
35mm f1.8 (DX)
50mm f1.4
70-200mm f2.8

Its been working well but I'm prepared to make an upgrade. My options are:

1) Buy a 24-70mm f2.8 since that is the zoom lens I am missing.

2) Buy a D7000 (DX). This way I can use the 70-200mm on the D700 and the 17-35mm on the D7000 (making it a 25-52mm).

I seem to be drawn towards option 2 because that would give me a decent 2 camera setup with all the zoom range I'd really need. Also, apart from the time and trouble needed to change lenses, I already have all the lenses I need right now.

Buying the 24-70mm would be spending a lot of money for convenience (which I know is critical at weddings). But the D200 is no good in low light so I'd be left with a 1 camera setup for some of the time.

I'd obviously like to buy another D700 AND the 24-70mm but I've got to be realistic. :p

Any comments/suggestions would be appreciated!

[JM Tran]

ahhh the good old what gear for wedding work threads:)

judging from your gear you seem to have all the essentials and a 24-70 would complement it. Thats if you follow the norm/generic/cliche type of photographers, as it all depends on your shooting style.

I do a lot of weddings per year and prefer unconventional focal lengths and lenses - ie. the Sigma 12-24 ultra wide on full frame, or Canon 100 F2 and 135L F2. I dont use anything around 24-85 ish, thats for my 2nd shooters to cover ie. usual group shots and stuff. Sometimes a 70-200 would come out.

how is your lighting set up though? To me that goes hand in hand with the right lens, sometimes even more important.

but in regards to your question, I'd go with option 2. The D200 was always a good camera to me, but the lack of mid to high ISO performance severely limits it these days and just wont cut it anymore.

[kiwi]

Plus you get some video

Haven't sen any pictures from you posted yet by the way

[spuds]

Thanks for the quick replies!

For lighting, I've got a SB800 and 600 I use on camera to bounce. Of course I try to just use the flash to bring up the light levels a bit and use the ambient light as much as possible... which is where the D200 falls over. :)

Hey Kiwi. Yeah, kinda still new to the forum. Where should I be posting?

[ricktas]

You post your photos in the members photos forums. Click FORUM across the top of the site and scroll down and you will see all the forums the site has to offer.

[Will Zhao]

IMHO，you'd want a mid range and an ultra wide on two seperate bodies.

17-35 on a DX is really not that wide and not enough for a wedding, again IMHO.

For me, I would either buy another D700, and couple both D700's with 17-35 and the 70-200, with a third body (your existing D200) mounted with a 35 F1.8, that way you have ultra wide room, telephoto zoom, and standard 1.8 covered.

Or, buy a Nikkor 17-55 to use on the D200, and the 17-35 on the D700, that covers everything from ultra wide to mid-telephoto.

[RRRoger]

I would buy a D7000, mount the 35 f/1. DX on it, put it on a TriPod and let it run in HD movie mode while I took stills with your D700 and 70-200.

[fotografik]

Add in a fisheye lens. Definitely you will get a different perspective of things.

[kiwi]

Hmm, a fish would maybe be the last lens I'd look at, seriously, how often would you use it at a wedding ? For one gimmicky group shot or two ?

[fotografik]

Hmm, a fish would maybe be the last lens I'd look at, seriously, how often would you use it at a wedding ? For one gimmicky group shot or two ?

IMHO for only a handful of shots, as long as the faces are not distorted.

[super duper]

I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.

[N*A*M]

af-s 24 f/1.4 :cool:

[kiwi]

600 F/4 af-s :cool:

[kiwi]

I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.

If you have say a 24-70 or 50 1.4 you can get close enough for most purposes

Marcus Bell actually just whacks some extension tunes onto a 50 1.4 if he needs to do "real" macros

[Macca2188]

I'm still a learner...but I thought you'd want a macro for a wedding shoot? To get those close ups of the flowers, rings etc....I've read the 105 f/2.8 macro is a fantastic portrait lens aswell.

i use the 85mm macro as a portrait lens occasionally works very well

[johndom]

I reckon you need an 85mm prime, the 70-200 is too big.
But like others have said it depends very much on your shooting style.
If you can do amazing things in different situations with a fisheye then you will have a look that i quite different to most others.