Zoom vs Prime for Weddings, Family Gatherings, Night Shots

**Ash** · 12-20-2010, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

And a flash.

Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and *two* flashes.
If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those...

audiobomber · 12-20-2010, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and *two* flashes.
If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those...

Yes, very true. But it always amazes me how many people don't want to use flash. I find that off-camera, bounced, or even diffused flash gives superior results in low light compared with a fast prime (i.e. high ISO, motion blur, odd colour balances and thin DOF). Everyone should have a fast prime, but everyone should have a high quality flash too, IMHO.

I find subjects are more tolerant of flash now that everybody in the world has a digital camera.

GeneV · 12-20-2010, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and *two* flashes.
If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those...

And the flashes on the end of a long bracket. Actually, It seems to me that most wedding professionals I've seen using zooms are buying something like the best quality zoom that the manufacturer of their system makes. Right now, that is usually an F/2.8.

On the other hand, I may be wrong, but I understood that the OP was not looking to become a professional.

GeneV · 12-20-2010, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by audiobomber

Yes, very true. But it always amazes me how many people don't want to use flash. I find that off-camera, bounced, or even diffused flash gives superior results in low light compared with a fast prime (i.e. high ISO, motion blur, odd colour balances and thin DOF). Everyone should have a fast prime, but everyone should have a high quality flash too, IMHO.

I find subjects are more tolerant of flash now that everybody in the world has a digital camera.

True. There are some venues where flash may have to be direct and may add a look that is not ideal. However, the majority of weddings and gatherings look much better when the photographer, rather than the available light, picks the aperture and ISO.

I find subjects much more tolerant of bounced flash, and it usually looks better as well.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People Some family shots from the holidays	dadipentak	Post Your Photos!	3	12-30-2009 06:33 PM
New Lenses v Old for the growing family, prime or zoom!! Help and guidance please.	London Calling	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	03-12-2008 04:20 AM
Zoom v. Prime	stafford588	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	01-14-2008 04:10 AM
Some shots of a family	dudlew	Post Your Photos!	7	11-16-2007 06:13 PM
A page from Alvin (family shots)	codiac2600	Post Your Photos!	9	05-23-2007 08:26 PM

12-20-2010, 01:03 PM	#16
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by audiobomber And a flash. Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and two flashes. If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those...

12-20-2010, 01:37 PM	#17
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Ash Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and two flashes. If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those... Yes, very true. But it always amazes me how many people don't want to use flash. I find that off-camera, bounced, or even diffused flash gives superior results in low light compared with a fast prime (i.e. high ISO, motion blur, odd colour balances and thin DOF). Everyone should have a fast prime, but everyone should have a high quality flash too, IMHO. I find subjects are more tolerant of flash now that everybody in the world has a digital camera.

12-20-2010, 01:41 PM	#18
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Ash Make that two camera bodies, two f/2.8 zooms, and two flashes. If there were faster zooms available, they'd be getting those... And the flashes on the end of a long bracket. Actually, It seems to me that most wedding professionals I've seen using zooms are buying something like the best quality zoom that the manufacturer of their system makes. Right now, that is usually an F/2.8. On the other hand, I may be wrong, but I understood that the OP was not looking to become a professional.

12-20-2010, 01:46 PM	#19
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by audiobomber Yes, very true. But it always amazes me how many people don't want to use flash. I find that off-camera, bounced, or even diffused flash gives superior results in low light compared with a fast prime (i.e. high ISO, motion blur, odd colour balances and thin DOF). Everyone should have a fast prime, but everyone should have a high quality flash too, IMHO. I find subjects are more tolerant of flash now that everybody in the world has a digital camera. True. There are some venues where flash may have to be direct and may add a look that is not ideal. However, the majority of weddings and gatherings look much better when the photographer, rather than the available light, picks the aperture and ISO. I find subjects much more tolerant of bounced flash, and it usually looks better as well.