50/f1.4 or Tamron 28-75/f2.8 for wedding

raider · 02-26-2008, 04:59 AM

Hi

A friend of mine is having a wedding dinner on 9th Mar 08 and me and another friend volunteer to be the supplementary photographer. Both of us are pentax k100D users.

I would like to seek some opinions here if the 50/f1.4 or the Tamron 28-75/f2.8 is more suitable for a wedding lens? The dinner will be in a hotel boardroom so it will not be too brightly lit.

Thanks

roscot · 02-26-2008, 05:11 AM

Are you going to use flash? The Tammy will give you more versatility. You may find the 50mm to long for some shots, although if you are shooting available light, the extra stops will be useful.

raider · 02-26-2008, 05:19 AM

Yep. I will use the AF360 flash. Is shooting available light advisable?

roscot · 02-26-2008, 05:33 AM

I would not for a wedding. Even if you are the 2nd or 3rd shooter, the couple will want and expect good quality shots. Except for some artistic shots, using flash is advised, even if it is just used as fill flash. In your situation, I'd use the Tamron and your 360.

raider · 02-26-2008, 05:41 AM

Thanks for your advice. Duly noted.

egordon99 · 02-26-2008, 06:46 AM

Agree with others, (bounced) flash and the Tamron 28-75mm.

Geekybiker · 02-26-2008, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by roscot

I would not for a wedding. Even if you are the 2nd or 3rd shooter, the couple will want and expect good quality shots. Except for some artistic shots, using flash is advised, even if it is just used as fill flash. In your situation, I'd use the Tamron and your 360.

And flash = good quality shots? I beg to differ. I hate the aesthetic of flash photography. Too "snapshot" for me. The best way to do it is talk to the lead photographer and follow his style. If he's using flash, follow suit. If he's a natural light guy, that's probably one of the reasons why the couple chose him to start with. As a 2nd or 3rd shooter I think your job is to blend with the lead as much as possible and hopefully present the couple with photos they couldn't pick out who took them.

qdoan · 02-26-2008, 01:44 PM

Why not use both? Since you will have your flash handy, I'd stick with the 28-75 for most of the time as it does have versatility, but every now and then throw on the 50mm 1.4 and take some natural light shots (account with WB here) get some nice shots of the bride or groom with the shorter DOF for some nice bokeh!

jsherman999 · 02-26-2008, 02:07 PM

.

I've never really figured out why flash is so important to some people... I feel that it's capable of ruining almost any shot, and sometimes makes the best DSLR's produce images that are indistinguishable from point & shoots.

There are cases where there is absolutely no way to get a shot without a flash, but in situations where it's not absolutely necessary, I personally would rather have a beautiful slightly underexposed shot vs. a glaring, two dimensional, bad-studio-portrait-quality image.

Am I missing something here? Maybe I've just not seen good flash photography, or have seen it but not known it was flash, etc...

.

wildboar · 02-26-2008, 02:34 PM

Take both lenses if you have them, but you'll probably use the 28-75 most of the time.

Don't let those who haven't learned how to use a flash properly scare you away from using one... but you also need to learn. You should experiment with the flash as much as possible before the wedding though, so you have better control over it. You may want to consider a Sto-Fen (or other brand) diffuser, or make a bounce card for your flash.

I'd prefer a well-executed flash shot (bounced/diffused) at ISO 100 over the flash-naysayers ISO 800-1600 shot for most occasions.

benplaut · 02-26-2008, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

I've never really figured out why flash is so important to some people... I feel that it's capable of ruining almost any shot, and sometimes makes the best DSLR's produce images that are indistinguishable from point & shoots.

There are cases where there is absolutely no way to get a shot without a flash, but in situations where it's not absolutely necessary, I personally would rather have a beautiful slightly underexposed shot vs. a glaring, two dimensional, bad-studio-portrait-quality image.

Am I missing something here? Maybe I've just not seen good flash photography, or have seen it but not known it was flash, etc...

(Coulda sworn I posted here a half hour ago)
At a wedding, there's really no substitute for a good flash, except perhaps a Nikon D3 with incredible high ISO. Your lighting conditions really suck--5EV or less is commonplace. While a flash might not be the best choice during the ceremony, when you're walking around at the reception afterwards, 1) nobody cares 2) people are moving around quickly, and well outside of the DOF for f1.4, or even f2.8. In those cases, using a flash to bring yourself up to a nice f5.6 is a boon. It doesn't look unnatural as long as your techniques are used well--what's the difference between a ceiling light and a flash bounced off the ceiling? Not much. Check out the Strobist flickr group for examples of AMAZING flash shots.

Take both lenses... use the 50 for the ceremony and situations where a flash would be inappropriate, and use the 28-75 for when it really doesn't matter. Fifties are nice for candids, too--small, light, fast, and nobody really knows you're taking a picture. The focal length is just right for kids, and maybe a little bit too tight for adults standing up.

Have fun!

aegisphan · 02-26-2008, 05:27 PM

I have to agree with benplaut. You can go to Strobist blogspot to see some of the work over there. In some pictures, you don't even notice the flash being used.

clawhammer · 02-26-2008, 06:14 PM

I second that. Flash, done wrong, definately looks 'snapshotish', but when used correctly can really enhance you photos.

**Lowell Goudge** · 02-26-2008, 06:22 PM

I also, as all posters have said, woould take both lenses, and use flash where you feel it is required.

I also have a dumb question because I did not see the reference, what mount is the 50mm f1.4? K, KA, KAF?

I know the tamron is a AE lens because I have one also, but my 50mm f1.4 is a K mount, which would limit you to only low light high ISO shots, because you can't use P-TTL with non AE mounts.

The tamron will do everything else you need. the 75mm maximum focal length is especially good for portraits. and the width covers most group shots.

benplaut · 02-26-2008, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I also, as all posters have said, woould take both lenses, and use flash where you feel it is required.

I also have a dumb question because I did not see the reference, what mount is the 50mm f1.4? K, KA, KAF?

I know the tamron is a AE lens because I have one also, but my 50mm f1.4 is a K mount, which would limit you to only low light high ISO shots, because you can't use P-TTL with non AE mounts.

The tamron will do everything else you need. the 75mm maximum focal length is especially good for portraits. and the width covers most group shots.

In his sig it says FA50, so no issues there. I love that little lens.

02-26-2008, 04:59 AM	#1
raider Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,989	50/f1.4 or Tamron 28-75/f2.8 for wedding Hi A friend of mine is having a wedding dinner on 9th Mar 08 and me and another friend volunteer to be the supplementary photographer. Both of us are pentax k100D users. I would like to seek some opinions here if the 50/f1.4 or the Tamron 28-75/f2.8 is more suitable for a wedding lens? The dinner will be in a hotel boardroom so it will not be too brightly lit. Thanks

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
First wedding	TYOsborn	Post Your Photos!	10	05-16-2009 11:17 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 70-210mm f/3.5, Tamron SP 28-135mm f/4.0-4.5 28A, Tamron pk/a adapta	hinman	Sold Items	14	05-08-2009 05:35 PM
A few from a wedding	Taff	Post Your Photos!	18	12-08-2008 06:02 AM
Wedding	AVANT	Post Your Photos!	11	09-04-2007 05:10 PM

02-26-2008, 05:11 AM	#2
roscot Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach VA USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,363	Are you going to use flash? The Tammy will give you more versatility. You may find the 50mm to long for some shots, although if you are shooting available light, the extra stops will be useful.

02-26-2008, 05:19 AM	#3
raider Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,989 Original Poster	Yep. I will use the AF360 flash. Is shooting available light advisable?

02-26-2008, 05:33 AM	#4
roscot Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Virginia Beach VA USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,363	I would not for a wedding. Even if you are the 2nd or 3rd shooter, the couple will want and expect good quality shots. Except for some artistic shots, using flash is advised, even if it is just used as fill flash. In your situation, I'd use the Tamron and your 360.

02-26-2008, 05:41 AM	#5
raider Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,989 Original Poster	Thanks for your advice. Duly noted.

02-26-2008, 06:46 AM	#6
egordon99 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Outside of Philly Posts: 1,561	Agree with others, (bounced) flash and the Tamron 28-75mm.

02-26-2008, 01:17 PM	#7
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	Originally posted by roscot I would not for a wedding. Even if you are the 2nd or 3rd shooter, the couple will want and expect good quality shots. Except for some artistic shots, using flash is advised, even if it is just used as fill flash. In your situation, I'd use the Tamron and your 360. And flash = good quality shots? I beg to differ. I hate the aesthetic of flash photography. Too "snapshot" for me. The best way to do it is talk to the lead photographer and follow his style. If he's using flash, follow suit. If he's a natural light guy, that's probably one of the reasons why the couple chose him to start with. As a 2nd or 3rd shooter I think your job is to blend with the lead as much as possible and hopefully present the couple with photos they couldn't pick out who took them.

02-26-2008, 01:44 PM	#8
qdoan Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Peoria, AZ Posts: 207	Why not use both? Since you will have your flash handy, I'd stick with the 28-75 for most of the time as it does have versatility, but every now and then throw on the 50mm 1.4 and take some natural light shots (account with WB here) get some nice shots of the bride or groom with the shorter DOF for some nice bokeh!

02-26-2008, 02:07 PM	#9
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	. I've never really figured out why flash is so important to some people... I feel that it's capable of ruining almost any shot, and sometimes makes the best DSLR's produce images that are indistinguishable from point & shoots. There are cases where there is absolutely no way to get a shot without a flash, but in situations where it's not absolutely necessary, I personally would rather have a beautiful slightly underexposed shot vs. a glaring, two dimensional, bad-studio-portrait-quality image. Am I missing something here? Maybe I've just not seen good flash photography, or have seen it but not known it was flash, etc... .

02-26-2008, 02:34 PM	#10
wildboar Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Columbus Ohio Posts: 158	Take both lenses if you have them, but you'll probably use the 28-75 most of the time. Don't let those who haven't learned how to use a flash properly scare you away from using one... but you also need to learn. You should experiment with the flash as much as possible before the wedding though, so you have better control over it. You may want to consider a Sto-Fen (or other brand) diffuser, or make a bounce card for your flash. I'd prefer a well-executed flash shot (bounced/diffused) at ISO 100 over the flash-naysayers ISO 800-1600 shot for most occasions.

02-26-2008, 04:42 PM	#11
benplaut Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Central NY Posts: 268	Originally posted by jsherman999 I've never really figured out why flash is so important to some people... I feel that it's capable of ruining almost any shot, and sometimes makes the best DSLR's produce images that are indistinguishable from point & shoots. There are cases where there is absolutely no way to get a shot without a flash, but in situations where it's not absolutely necessary, I personally would rather have a beautiful slightly underexposed shot vs. a glaring, two dimensional, bad-studio-portrait-quality image. Am I missing something here? Maybe I've just not seen good flash photography, or have seen it but not known it was flash, etc... (Coulda sworn I posted here a half hour ago) At a wedding, there's really no substitute for a good flash, except perhaps a Nikon D3 with incredible high ISO. Your lighting conditions really suck--5EV or less is commonplace. While a flash might not be the best choice during the ceremony, when you're walking around at the reception afterwards, 1) nobody cares 2) people are moving around quickly, and well outside of the DOF for f1.4, or even f2.8. In those cases, using a flash to bring yourself up to a nice f5.6 is a boon. It doesn't look unnatural as long as your techniques are used well--what's the difference between a ceiling light and a flash bounced off the ceiling? Not much. Check out the Strobist flickr group for examples of AMAZING flash shots. Take both lenses... use the 50 for the ceremony and situations where a flash would be inappropriate, and use the 28-75 for when it really doesn't matter. Fifties are nice for candids, too--small, light, fast, and nobody really knows you're taking a picture. The focal length is just right for kids, and maybe a little bit too tight for adults standing up. Have fun!

02-26-2008, 05:27 PM	#12
aegisphan Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: New Mexico Posts: 815	I have to agree with benplaut. You can go to Strobist blogspot to see some of the work over there. In some pictures, you don't even notice the flash being used.

02-26-2008, 06:14 PM	#13
clawhammer Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Logan, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 971	I second that. Flash, done wrong, definately looks 'snapshotish', but when used correctly can really enhance you photos.

02-26-2008, 06:22 PM	#14
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	I also, as all posters have said, woould take both lenses, and use flash where you feel it is required. I also have a dumb question because I did not see the reference, what mount is the 50mm f1.4? K, KA, KAF? I know the tamron is a AE lens because I have one also, but my 50mm f1.4 is a K mount, which would limit you to only low light high ISO shots, because you can't use P-TTL with non AE mounts. The tamron will do everything else you need. the 75mm maximum focal length is especially good for portraits. and the width covers most group shots.

02-26-2008, 07:06 PM	#15
benplaut Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Central NY Posts: 268	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I also, as all posters have said, woould take both lenses, and use flash where you feel it is required. I also have a dumb question because I did not see the reference, what mount is the 50mm f1.4? K, KA, KAF? I know the tamron is a AE lens because I have one also, but my 50mm f1.4 is a K mount, which would limit you to only low light high ISO shots, because you can't use P-TTL with non AE mounts. The tamron will do everything else you need. the 75mm maximum focal length is especially good for portraits. and the width covers most group shots. In his sig it says FA50, so no issues there. I love that little lens.