 Kathy L. Pollick |
Lenses for Wedding Photographs For taking indoor wedding pictures of the couple, in natural light & w/some flash, is it best to use a macro lens close up, a zoom lens from farther away or a standard 50 mm lens? I'm talking shots of say lighting of the candle, the kiss, the rose ceremony, the vows, etc... where just the couple will be in the photos. Thanks for the help.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Karma Wilson |
I personally would go with the standard 50. Reasons are this--zooms are sometimes hard with flash. Most Macros are terribly slow at AF and nobody is going to stop the proceedings for you to get focused. My 1.8 cheap 50 mm produces good sharp images, is best for low light, and while not really fast at AF is much better than a macro. It also gets pretty darned close. My macro lens and my zoom are really my favorites as far as portraits go for picture quality, and my zoom is by far my best for action. But the combination of using flash, getting close, and low light make me think the 50mm is the best choice. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. If your 50mm is not at least 2.8 then I wouldn't use it. Karma
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
I totally agree.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kathy L. Pollick |
Oh what a putzhead. I didn't mean a macro, but I meant a telephoto... DUH!! My 50mm says it's a 1:17 (22) What does that mean? is that better than 2.8? I also have a Kalimar AF 28-200mm zoom. It says it's a 1:3.5-5.6. (Don't know what that means either) Will this lens also work? Thanks for the help.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
How did you know I was a putzhead? LOL A 1:17 lens is a little faster than a 2.8. I would still stick with the 50mm standard lens. For one, it is probably a very sharp lens. Most standard lenses are. I really don't know much about Kalimar lenses but I would be willing to bet that your 50mm standard lens is sharper. The 1:3.5-5.6 is a slower lens whose minimum aperature changes as you zoom out, so the further you zoom, the slower it gets.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kathy L. Pollick |
But wouldn't a telephoto lens take closer, sharper pictures of the couples faces, than the standard 50? I'm going to use my tripod, so I can at least keep from getting blurry pictures AND I am going to keep it on Autoprogramming as I haven't mastered the manual settings yet, so if I use the 50mm, do I just have to keep moving Up or Back - depending on how much of the couple I want in the scene? I want to get one really sharp, versatile telephoto lens and one really sharp close up macro - for doing bugs & flowers.... (really close up bugs & flower parts!!) So which would you recommend? I really don't know what I would use the macro for - nothing specific, unless it would be people & maybe outdoor scenery or something. I just want a few really good lenses on hand for when I do need them. I eventually want to get a really nice digital camera, so I don't want to invest a ton of money in the film camera, but I do want to have some basic options for when I want to use either.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kathy L. Pollick |
OOps... I mean I don't know what I will be using the telephoto lens for... nothing specific. Gosh... these words, I keep getting them cornfused!! They need to add an EDITING buttong on these posts!! LOL
|
|
|
|
||
|
Kerry L. Walker |
A good moderate telephoto is great for portraits, much better than the 50mm since you don't have to get so close. Don't worry so much about having to move back and forth to compose the shot. That is called using shoe leather zoom and it works.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||