I'm looking at rentig/buying a new lens for weddings

[Photog82]

So far, we have gotten by nicely with the lenses we have now but we are shooting a wedding at the end of the month that is going to be inside in a semi-dim room. To give you an idea, this is the location.

I was initially looking at the Canon 24 1.4 but thought that it would be too wide at a distance. I normally use my 24-105 with by 580EX II and it's worked OK in churches- I love that lens in a studio and outside but am not sure if it's right for churches and halls.

Any suggestions for Canon lenses for me to look into? My current lenses are in my profile. I'm leaning towards the Canon 50 1.4 L or the 100mm Macro IS L 2.8 as I can use that for close ups and portraits as well but how well would that work in dim lit rooms?

[Sean Setters]

For not a lot of money, I think the EF 85mm f/1.8 is a good candidate for low-light, indoor weddings. The 50mm f/1.4 works decently, depending on how much flexibility you have in movement. I have also used the EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM (orig. version) with great results, but I usually turn to the primes when the light level dictates an even wider aperture. But if I had to settle for an f/2.8 aperture, I don't think I would buy a prime - I'd rather have the versatility of a zoom (EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM / EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II USM or their predecessors).

I find the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 works very well for indoor events - I think it's a great focal length for wedding receptions.

[Photog82]

I'm thinking about the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II USM but it seems to overlap the 24-105 as far as focal length goes but it does have a wider aperture. I usually switch between the 24-105 f/4 and the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8. I was looking at testing a 1.4 to see how it performs in low light though.

On my 7D the 35mm is basically a 50mm and the 50 1.2 is 80. I wonder if the 50 would be best if I wanted to use 1.4 as it has extra reach?

[peety3]

Can your shots tolerate a wider aperture from a DoF perspective? If not, you need to chase better ISO performance, not aperture.

[Haydn1971]

May I suggest an alternative - try a 6D with your 24-105 rather than new glass - you may want to then look at the 24-70 2.8 MkII which on a 6D will give you better results than fast primes on your 7D in low light

[Photog82]

May I suggest an alternative - try a 6D with your 24-105 rather than new glass - you may want to then look at the 24-70 2.8 MkII which on a 6D will give you better results than fast primes on your 7D in low light

What I don't like about the 6D is that it has less focal points than the 7D. If anything, I'd go for a 5D but I'm not ready to go FF yet.

[Kayaker72]

Hi James,

You mention the Canon 50 f/1.4 L. Did you mean the 50 f/1.4 or the 50 f/1.2 L? I see you have the 50 f/1.8. That was my first prime lens. I upgraded to the 50 f/1.4 about two years ago. It is a much better lens, IMO. The nifty fifty is a great lens, but I didn't care for the AF and prefered the sharpness starting at ~f/2.8. The 50 f/1.4 has much better AF (still leaves something to be desired) and I like the center frame sharpness starting at ~f/2. It also has a little bit of pop to its photos that I like.

Regarding your actual questions. My first recommendation would be to try to go to the church and test out your current lens lineup to see how it works from different vantage points and what exposure settings you need, assuming the church is reasonably close to you.

If that can't happen, I actually think you have wide covered with the EFS 17-55 and the EFS 10-22. As a guest, I shot a wedding two years ago that looks somewhat similar to the church in your link. My 7D and EFS 15-85 did pretty well (a number of my photos have been used by the couple). My exposures were ~1/60, f/4-f/5.6 and ISO 800-1600. So I think f/2.8 may be enough, in which case, and considering your EFS 17-55, I would be tempted to buy or rent a 70-200 II. If not that, I would be tempted by the 80 f/1.8 or 80 f/1.2. Equivalent to 128 mm on the 7D, it would be great for closeups.

Regarding the 100 mm L macro. I enjoy that lens much more on FF than I did on my 7D. For macro work, it is still good on the 7D. For most other shots, it is long.

Hope that helps....Good luck,
Brant

[Photog82]

I meant the Canon EF 50 f/1.2 L. I do have the 50 f/1.8, I like that lens but it's consistently soft even after changing the micro adjustments. I did play with it a bit tonight and feel that have a better 50mm vs the 35 MAY be the way to go for this up coming wedding. I'd rent the 50 1.2 and may buy the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 L lens for shots that I can't get up close with in the low light and for those closeups of the ring, flowers, etc (plus I could use it for other macro photos that I'd like to take for non-wedding purposes).

I'm looking at the 70-200 but it's just too expensive at this point, even used as I'd want the mk II. If we get more jobs then I'd consider it.

We are planning on going to the church at the time the wedding is going to be shot and test everything out... we have two flashes I'm wondering if I should get a third, I'd have one, my wife one and the 3rd could be controlled off camera by my flash for added coverage as well.

[Jayson]

I shot weddings in very dim lit situations with a 7D and had great results. For the ceremony, you should be able to use your flash before and after. I used flash for the walk up and walk out and it worked pretty well. Those times I used the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 (non VC) and the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L v1. During the ceremony, I used the 70-200 f/4L IS and it worked great. You can use lower ISO and a slower shutter speed with the f/4 due to the IS and the lack of movement during the wedding itself. There were times I switched to the 85mm f/1.8 when I was allowed to get close to the alter for the lower DOF shots. I used the zooms mostly during the ceremony because it is hard to zoom with your feet when restricted and you don't want to detract from the wedding for the couple or the spectators. During the reception and the dance, I used a 50mm f/1.4 and the 35mm f/2 (old one) with flashes. I had two cameras the whole time. Most of the reception and dance I shot with the 35mm since it was wider.

You can make your current lens lineup work if you don't want to buy anything new. Just make sure you have a backup camera in case something should happen even it is an SL1 or a T something. At the same time, don't forget, you can rent pretty cheaply from Lens Rentals if you are interested in the 2.8 versions of the zooms or a 5D mark 3. Just rent them for a whole week so you can get use to them.

My opinion has always been the 50mm f/1.4 is a good buy. It is not very expensive and f/1.4 is sharp enough. At f1.8 and above it is very sharp. Don't forget about the new sigma 50mm f/1.4 if you don't want to spend the extra bucks on the Canon f/1.2. Looks to be a stunner.

[Photog82]

I rented the Canon 50 1.2 and really enjoyed using it for the wedding and with my daughter. It's not as sharp as my Canon 25-105 but it performs so well in low light with a little bit of flash it's really a nice lens. I'm thinking about buying a copy but am wondering if there's another lens that is a little sharper or is this the way it is with such a wide open lens? Here are some examples (All shot at 1.2):