Which 24-70 to buy for weddings & events?

[cliffwang]

I'd get the tamron, The original 24-70 is a good lens but a bit long in the tooth. The tamron is better in every way except built quality, Plus VC.

Unless you have the budget for the MK2, the tamron is the obvious choice.

+1
If I didn't have my Canon 24-70mm MK1, I would get Tamron 24-70mm VC now. Many reviews say Tamron 24-70mm overall is better than Canon 24-70mm MK1. For wedding Canon 24-70mm MK2 may be the best; however, it's not out yet.

 

[AJ]

And the question is how high I'd have to raise the iso to get it to 1/125s higher, because as I understand it on the 5d2 I shouldn't got higher than iso3200?

That depends on how much ambient you want to mix in. In most churches you should be able to get away with 1600 iso or thereabouts for background 0 EV (as metered) when shooting f/4. In darker places (e.g. dancefloor, outdoor patio after dark) the background will be darker with this setting (foreground is lit by flash of course) unless you light the background with flash as well (bounced flash, second off-camera flash).

 

[John Thomas]

I'd get the tamron, The original 24-70 is a good lens but a bit long in the tooth. The tamron is better in every way except built quality, Plus VC.

Unless you have the budget for the MK2, the tamron is the obvious choice.

+1
If I didn't have my Canon 24-70mm MK1, I would get Tamron 24-70mm VC now. Many reviews say Tamron 24-70mm overall is better than Canon 24-70mm MK1. For wedding Canon 24-70mm MK2 may be the best; however, it's not out yet.

+1 -0.5

-0.5 is about Canon 24-70 Mk II. It has no VC. And there are plenty of situations in which one needs VC at weddings. I rather preffer not to use flash for many reasons - one of the most important being that the people must be natural in order to get "the shot" and the flashes of the flash break the intimate atmosphere of a wedding.

+1 also for 50mm primes.

 

[Dylan777]

I'm not a big fan using 3rd party lenses - sigma, tamron etc... I'm staying with Canon. I bought 3 different copies of Canon 24-70 mrk I in the past, none of them gave me the sharpness that I'm looking for

Interesting combination, you saying you don't like 3rd party gear while being disappointed by the 24-70 mk1 :-o ... So from what I'm hearing so far the smart move is either to get the €1000 Tamron and a good prime or the stellar 24-70 mk2 on its own - but I'm very interested in further input on how the Tamon would do as the "run & gun" lens for weddings & events.

If am you - I would try Tamron NOW and mrk II later. Buy it from authorized dealer - you have 30days to return it. See which lens is best for you. My feeling is mrk II will be a MUST have lens in the bag, similar to 70-200 2.8 IS II

Having IS or VC is great for slowing down shutterspeed, however, you still can't freeeze the object-motion. Why not go for smaller, lighter and sharper.

 

[Marsu42]

Oh, add a macro just in case you want close ups of something small.

I've got a 100L, as stated in every of my posts (look under my name to the left), mentioned in my first and many successive posts in these thread...

My feeling is mrk II will be a MUST have lens in the bag

My current "must" is to get some money out of pro photography after 1 year or so, and not spending it

And there are plenty of situations in which one needs VC at weddings.

Are there? Plenty? All I'm all in favor of a "free" IS of a Tamron lens that performs like the Canon mk1 and is much cheaper, and I'll use the IS for my personal spare time shots. But except for totals of the church and such no situations would spring to my mind that wouldn't involve people, thus rendering the IS advantage nearly moot at these focal lengths?

 

[DCM1024]

i'd shoot a wedding with 35 & 85mm prime. on full frame terms.

I might do this too with more experience, but I've been advised that at least for starting wedding photography a 24-70 is the fool-proof option to go with...

We have been using the 24-105 for over a year for weddings and have been very pleased with it. The IS offsets the one stop difference of aperture. Good luck!

Thanks for the wishes - but at what shutter rates are you shooting in lower light with the f4 24-105 to freeze motion for what final print/screen size and in what iso ratings does that result?

So suppose a wedding photographer wanted a 35mm and a 50mm prime lens. Most would probably buy the L version let's say for sake of argument, even though this might not be true. That would run about 1399 for the 35L new, and 1499 for the 50L new. You only get two focal lengths for 2898. If you buy the 24-70L II zoom lens, you probably are going to get just as good of quality for weddings as the primes for 2299, saving $600, plus all the other focal lengths. It's not a bad deal.

Weeellll, I thought about the 35L + 50L > 24-70iiL myself. But I'm not sure if one 24-70/2.8 is really sufficient, but I guess I'll want at least one prime for really low light as well. My most probable choice would be the $400 Sigma 50/1.4 which I can dual-use on my 60d for ~85mm portraits, too - but then its equal 35L + 50L = 24-70ii + s50 :-o

I like 1/100, ISO ranges from 100 (outdoor) to 6400 (if I have to in low light and/or no flash allowed). I had recommended the 24-70 I and 70-200 F/2.8 IS II to my boyfriend as the preferred zoom kit, but they were out of budget. We elected to go with the 24-105 and upgrade lenses later. I've been so pleased with the 24-105 and 5d2 combo, though, that replacing it with a 24-70 is not a priority at the moment. The largest enlargements I've had requested thus far are 20x24. I am also new to wedding photography and just completed my 10th wedding last weekend. It's going well - the brides are thrilled with their photos and are actively referring me to other brides Would have loved the opportunity to work as a 2nd shooter for someone who really knows the tricks of the trade. Instead, I tagged along with my boyfriend who is an established wedding videographer. This was done with the bride's approval, of course, and I made it a point not to interfere with the official photographer. So, the first 5 weddings I shot for free, no pressure because nothing was expected of me, tested settings and started building a portfolio. Once I had a portfolio started, the paid jobs started coming in.

 

[Dylan777]

Oh, add a macro just in case you want close ups of something small.

I've got a 100L, as stated in every of my posts (look under my name to the left), mentioned in my first and many successive posts in these thread...

My feeling is mrk II will be a MUST have lens in the bag

My current "must" is to get some money out of pro photography after 1 year or so, and not spending it

And there are plenty of situations in which one needs VC at weddings.

Are there? Plenty? All I'm all in favor of a "free" IS of a Tamron lens that performs like the Canon mk1 and is much cheaper, and I'll use the IS for my personal spare time shots. But except for totals of the church and such no situations would spring to my mind that wouldn't involve people, thus rendering the IS advantage nearly moot at these focal lengths?

How often do you hear "get the right tool for the right job". Also, Canon L lenses hold their values better than 3rd party lenses.

 

[Marsu42]

How often do you hear "get the right tool for the right job". Also, Canon L lenses hold their values better than 3rd party lenses.

Asking what the right tool is what this thread is about - and "right" doesn't mean "most expensive", not even in an enthusiast's forum. For me, the re-sale value is only of concern for lenses I might actually want to sell again, but if I get the 24-70ii I'll keep it and the money is gone for good.

I had recommended the 24-70 I and 70-200 F/2.8 IS II to my boyfriend as the preferred zoom kit, but they were out of budget.

For me "budget" is relative to what a business is about: Earning money after some sane period of time rather than spending it. I *could* get a 5d3, 24-70ii and a 70-200/2.8ii, but I'd be near broke then and I serious doubt that would be smart business in relation to my first clients' expectations and my first salaries.

I had recommended It's going well - the brides are thrilled with their photos and are actively referring me to other brides

Congrats to your successful business start! Please don't move to Berlin/Germany, will you :-> ... I guess being a women does help in this business since it's not that common, allows you more freedom and maybe people tend to be more relaxed? Well, can't change this fact now for me and have to work with what I am

 

[bdunbar79]

I will say that I couldn't have shot the weddings without a 24-70 zoom lens. It was just so staple. You can't ignore flexibility in a wedding because you must take the shot NOW. I'd wait for reviews on the 24-70L II. Wait awhile and see what Bryan Carnathan has to say, what users have to say, etc. It will pay for itself after a few weddings and you'll get the shots. Consider it down the road. I had instances where I had no idea what focal length I should use, so I put the 24-70 on and adjusted until I got proper framing. Same with the 70-200 zoom lens. For framing shots I already knew, I used a prime. You have to do both. Go to the church and practice. Imagine how you want to frame the aisle shots and front of the church shots and where you want to be. Take your lenses with you and get the focal length ahead of time. It can pay huge dividends!

 

[bdunbar79]

By the way I am working on getting a few of my wedding photos to post on here, so stay tuned in case you're interested.

 

[DCM1024]

How often do you hear "get the right tool for the right job". Also, Canon L lenses hold their values better than 3rd party lenses.

Asking what the right tool is what this thread is about - and "right" doesn't mean "most expensive", not even in an enthusiast's forum. For me, the re-sale value is only of concern for lenses I might actually want to sell again, but if I get the 24-70ii I'll keep it and the money is gone for good.

I had recommended the 24-70 I and 70-200 F/2.8 IS II to my boyfriend as the preferred zoom kit, but they were out of budget.

For me "budget" is relative to what a business is about: Earning money after some sane period of time rather than spending it. I *could* get a 5d3, 24-70ii and a 70-200/2.8ii, but I'd be near broke then and I serious doubt that would be smart business in relation to my first clients' expectations and my first salaries.

I had recommended It's going well - the brides are thrilled with their photos and are actively referring me to other brides

Congrats to your successful business start! Please don't move to Berlin/Germany, will you :-> ... I guess being a women does help in this business since it's not that common, allows you more freedom and maybe people tend to be more relaxed? Well, can't change this fact now for me and have to work with what I am

There are alot of female wedding photographers here in the US. What I get that my male photographer friends have trouble getting is boudoir

 

[bkorcel]

I use the EF 24-70 F2.8L USM and it has performed well. I suppose if I had to make the choice again I might choose the 24-105L with the IS mode even though it's F/4. The IS easily makes up the difference in 2.8 vs 4 allowing somewhat lower shutter speeds for static subjects.

I try not to mix brands in my shoots so I can maintain consistent color and contrast..which is why I only use Canon L lenses.

Other brands can be just as good but I like consistency and so far canon has delivered that.

 

[thepancakeman]

I use the EF 24-70 F2.8L USM and it has performed well. I suppose if I had to make the choice again I might choose the 24-105L with the IS mode even though it's F/4. The IS easily makes up the difference in 2.8 vs 4 allowing somewhat lower shutter speeds for static subjects.

That was my thinking when I bought the 24-105, but what I quickly realized is that people are very rarely static, so IS is of no help. If I had to do it over again, I would have gotten the 24-70 (and am now considering adding the Tamron version to the kit.)

 

[Marsu42]

By the way I am working on getting a few of my wedding photos to post on here, so stay tuned in case you're interested.

Sure, esp. if it's the "... and that's why you need equipment xyz, it couldn't be done without" type of shots!

That was my thinking when I bought the 24-105, but what I quickly realized is that people are very rarely static, so IS is of no help.

With very few exceptions (like in this thread) that's what people have been telling me, too: except if you shoot with multiple primes or are ready to accept tradeoffs like higher iso or more flash (if you're allowed to), there's hardly any way around a 24-70/2.8's combination of low light capability & flexibility.

 

[fifowarehouse]

Kinda fun to see people getting excited on the NEW 2012 Tamron 24-70 and prefer this over the 10yrs old Canon 24-70.

2012 Vs 2002 Technology - Do you think this a fair comparison?

About we wait for mrk II to come out and compare 2012 Vs 2012

 

[RLPhoto]

By the way I am working on getting a few of my wedding photos to post on here, so stay tuned in case you're interested.

Sure, esp. if it's the "... and that's why you need equipment xyz, it couldn't be done without" type of shots!

That was my thinking when I bought the 24-105, but what I quickly realized is that people are very rarely static, so IS is of no help.

With very few exceptions (like in this thread) that's what people have been telling me, too: except if you shoot with multiple primes or are ready to accept tradeoffs like higher iso or more flash (if you're allowed to), there's hardly any way around a 24-70/2.8's combination of low light capability & flexibility.

Ya know, all this gear talk is great and a way to kill time while CS3 saves files. In the End, The photographer is what makes or breaks a wedding. A Cool, Level head and A good scouting day will do more than 2,000,000 ISO, Hyper Lens Speed or any equipment mumbo jumbo will do for you on that day.

I highly recommend getting a reportage list and A day to scout the venues. Then, you'll know what you really need.

 

[cliffwang]

Kinda fun to see people getting excited on the NEW 2012 Tamron 24-70 and prefer this over the 10yrs old Canon 24-70.

2012 Vs 2002 Technology - Do you think this a fair comparison?

About we wait for mrk II to come out and compare 2012 Vs 2012

That's true if MK2 price would be 1299 + IS.

 

[fifowarehouse]

Kinda fun to see people getting excited on the NEW 2012 Tamron 24-70 and prefer this over the 10yrs old Canon 24-70.

2012 Vs 2002 Technology - Do you think this a fair comparison?

About we wait for mrk II to come out and compare 2012 Vs 2012

That's true if MK2 price would be 1299 + IS.

This is Canon L lens, NOT Tamron. Wonder where Tamron lenses are made? Japan or somehere else?

 

[cliffwang]

That's true if MK2 price would be 1299 + IS.

This is Canon L lens, NOT Tamron. Wonder where Tamron lenses are made? Japan or somehere else?

Japan. You should do your homework just google it. By the way the Tamron lens is L quality.

 

[Marsu42]

2012 Vs 2002 Technology - Do you think this a fair comparison?
This is Canon L lens, NOT Tamron. Wonder where Tamron lenses are made? Japan or somehere else?

For me, my equipment can come right from the dark side of the moon and can be dated 1980 as long as it serves the purpose. Doing comparisons isn't about being fair towards manufacturers or being right, but just about making the best decision as a consumer given the current choices.

In fact, I could even do with less red rings and white paint on my lenses, I've been told that having the latest, most shiny gear isn't necessarily a good sign for a pro but makes you look like a noob. Which I am. But no need to hand a sign around my neck.

I highly recommend getting a reportage list and A day to scout the venues. Then, you'll know what you really need.

Oh, you can be sure I'll to that allright. But there's no harm in getting lots of advice before buying equipment for thousands of $$$. And if I have adequate equipment, this is at least one thing that is less likely to go wrong next to all other things I can screw up when building a business for myself.

Besides, while LR on my older Laptop is rendering hundreds of previews, I've got even more time then you participating in pointless rumors