Wedding photographer delves into the world of primes...help!
I
did it. I sold my nikon 70-200 VR2. Why? I seriously just never
liked the thing. Works great, great photos, but it was always just blah
to me. I think i'm just a wide angle photographer. However, i'm a
wedding photographer and we all need a good portrait lens. Funny thing
is, i feel like i quit my job before i found another one. I have
weddings soon and this was a spur of the moment decision, meaning i
needs me a portrait lens and soon. I mean i obsess over equipment all
the time, of course, but i'm just stuck on this. It's obviously going
to be a prime, i already had the best zoom. Here's how i see my
options:
85 mm 1.8g and a 105 mm 2.8 VR - on APS-c sensors
First of all, has any wedding photographer ever used the 105 2.8? I see no evidence of such thing on the internet! On the surface it sounds pretty sweet to me: 1:1 with a foot minimum focal distance for details, 160ish portrait lens on dx, 2.8 constant, and vr2 technology. So why, tell me why, has virtually no one (even the prime peeps) used this lens for weddings??? I don't think i'm an inovative genius, so what's up???
Secondly, i don't want the 85 1.4 because i'm a minimalist and i don't need anything it offers over the 85 1.8 for that price tag. I'm still shooting expensive weddings with a D90 and D80 :) Me, definitely a minimalist. I'm just thinking of myself during most ceremonies/toasts/candids at the long end of my 70-200 and i don't know if the 85 is long enough (sounds like a lot of cropping work, bleh). But i've shot an 85 and it such a great bokeh! Engagements and bridals will be a dream, but a fast paced wedding? Hmm.... anyone got experience with it in that arena???
Well... sounds like the perfect lens for me would be the 70-200, but alas, it's gone and i just don't seem to want it back even if it does sniff it's way back home. So all you wedding prime shooters out there, sos! Please help and thank you in advance!!!
85 mm 1.8g and a 105 mm 2.8 VR - on APS-c sensors
First of all, has any wedding photographer ever used the 105 2.8? I see no evidence of such thing on the internet! On the surface it sounds pretty sweet to me: 1:1 with a foot minimum focal distance for details, 160ish portrait lens on dx, 2.8 constant, and vr2 technology. So why, tell me why, has virtually no one (even the prime peeps) used this lens for weddings??? I don't think i'm an inovative genius, so what's up???
Secondly, i don't want the 85 1.4 because i'm a minimalist and i don't need anything it offers over the 85 1.8 for that price tag. I'm still shooting expensive weddings with a D90 and D80 :) Me, definitely a minimalist. I'm just thinking of myself during most ceremonies/toasts/candids at the long end of my 70-200 and i don't know if the 85 is long enough (sounds like a lot of cropping work, bleh). But i've shot an 85 and it such a great bokeh! Engagements and bridals will be a dream, but a fast paced wedding? Hmm.... anyone got experience with it in that arena???
Well... sounds like the perfect lens for me would be the 70-200, but alas, it's gone and i just don't seem to want it back even if it does sniff it's way back home. So all you wedding prime shooters out there, sos! Please help and thank you in advance!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment