[lurchlarson]

I know this is another wedding photography/lens question...:ugh:

There is a good chance that I'm going to be shooting my sisters wedding in about 9 months and I thought that would be a wonderful excuse to buy a new lens. The thing is, I'm only going to have enough money to buy one of these lenses. I've got to save up for it.

I currently have the kit 18-55, a 50mm f/1.7 and my Quantaray 70-300.

I've never shot a wedding before and I was leaning towards the 16-50 because of the wide angle/ low light capability.

I was just wondering for those of you who have shot weddings and do have both lenses which one did you use more?

[Adrian Owerko]

Is the Wedding an indoor (Church) or Outdoors? if in the Church get the 16-50mm if it is an all outdoor event 50-135mm (:

[pxpaulx]

I am not speaking from experience, but to capture most of the usual, expected wedding shots, portraits and the like, and since you already have the kit lens, i think the 50-135 should probably be at the top of the list (had it for a week myself, and it is a beaut). that, and i think a flash would also be in order (you can pair it w/the kit lens for your wider shots).

[Ash]

Both are excellent lenses, but obviously used for different purposes.
So as Andrew says, you will need to decide whether you're going to need lots of wide-angle shots, and are able to come in real close to the action on the day, or you need more portraiture-style photos. This in itself should tell you which lens to get.

[JonPB]

I've never shot a wedding, but I've been to enough (and not more than seven of them mine own) to know that they don't all call for the same lenses. Some are in cozy rooms where you really need a wide; others are outdoors where you can't get halfway close without getting in the way. Some are in dark churches, others in direct sunlight. When your sister decides where it'll be, go scope it out with your DA18-55, and also have your zoom to see where 135mm will get you.

[GLXLR]

You probably need both, but when I am using my kit lens, I don't see myself ever needing or wanting to shoot at f/2.8, so the 16-45mm might be a better option. If you want to get tight and personal, grab a FA-35mm f/2 (or DA 40mm LTD or 35mm LTD) and then add the 50-135mm. Unbeatable combo IMHO.

[EricT]

I would say an external flash with a diffuser would be my top priority. In a dark church or indoors, f/2.8 is simply not enough sometimes, even at ISO1600. Get the flash now to give you lots of time to practice before the event
One tip is to still use a relatively high ISO and low shutter speed to get some ambient light in, this will capture the mood better and avoid the "flash look".

[nulla]

I've never shot a wedding before and I was leaning towards the 16-50 because of the wide angle/ low light capability.

Best choice in my view

Works great for indoor flash... is an even better lens for indoor low light.

Have not used mine for a wedding but have used it a number of times indoors where flash was not allowed... a real stellar lens, could not have got by without it

Cheers

Neil

[axl]

I'm kind of with GLXLR on this one.
Just at the begining of this month me and my wife took part in my sister's wedding. Since we don't have other wide to normal zoom then the kit lens we ended up taking following:
24, 31ltd,, 40ltd, F50/1.7 and tammy 70-200/2.8.
My wife shot most of the wedding on the tamron zoom and grabbed 50 for couple of shots. On the other side I did most of iit with 31ltd grabbing Sigma 24 for few group shots.
I'd say go for 50-135 + FA35 or 31. If you want zoom on wide end then Signa 24-70 might be worth a look.
In any case good luck

BR
Peter

[kenyee]

There is a good chance that I'm going to be shooting my sisters wedding in about 9 months and I thought that would be a wonderful excuse to buy a new lens.

Depends on whether you're shooting as a 2nd photog or primary or guest as well.
What that means is how close you'll be able to get. If you can get close, the 16-50 will be fine. If you're far away, the 50-135 will work better. If you're a guest further away, the 70-200/2.8...

[mklai7]

Ideally, better to have 2 cameras to cover the whole event...one with wide angle, like the 18-55 kit lens you have, another would be the 55-135. This is because of it's F2.8, great help in low light situation or long distance capture of scenerio where flash shot might not be allowable. You still need a wide angle for group photo though..hope my humble opinion would help...

[lurchlarson]

Thanks for all the advice. I'll definitely have my flash by then (I was thinking the Sigma 530 super). My wife will be shooting 2nd for me and I'm going to be the main. Using a flash won't be an issue. The wedding shots will probably be outdoors and but the reception afterwards will likely be indoors and somewhat confined.

So the 18-55 kit works just fine for weddings? Anyone have experience using it at a wedding?

[GLXLR]

Thanks for all the advice. I'll definitely have my flash by then (I was thinking the Sigma 530 super). My wife will be shooting 2nd for me and I'm going to be the main. Using a flash won't be an issue. The wedding shots will probably be outdoors and but the reception afterwards will likely be indoors and somewhat confined.

So the 18-55 kit works just fine for weddings? Anyone have experience using it at a wedding?

IMHO, it isn't the most fun lens to use. Most of your shots that aren't 50-135mm will probably include a good 35mm or 31mm or 30mm lens. Great for candids and they aren't particularly expensive (the FA 35mm f/2 goes around for $300-$400 on ebay).Wish I could show pictures, but my parents won't allow it (my cousin's wedding). I just adored that 35mm f/2 range and I can't wait til I can afford to buy it myself!

******* I almost forgot to add that you can always rent a lens from www.cameralensrentals.com.

[MikePerham]

Given that you already have the 18-55 and a fast 50, I would go with the 50-135. I shot a couple of friends/relatives weddings last year and while I have both the 16-50 and 50-135 ...some of the best shots were using the longer focal length of the 50-135 - same applies to a lot of event photography I have done. However, having said that, I could not have got a lot of the traditional shots without the 16-50. BTW, I would not worry too much about low light shots, work around that as they are very tricky at the best of times and not the mainstream type of photographs of your shoot. maybe use a tripod for the few available light shots you will do.

[lurchlarson]

IMHO, it isn't the most fun lens to use. Most of your shots that aren't 50-135mm will probably include a good 35mm or 31mm or 30mm lens. Great for candids and they aren't particularly expensive (the FA 35mm f/2 goes around for $300-$400 on ebay).Wish I could show pictures, but my parents won't allow it (my cousin's wedding). I just adored that 35mm f/2 range and I can't wait til I can afford to buy it myself!

******* I almost forgot to add that you can always rent a lens from www.cameralensrentals.com.

I agree. I'm not the hugest fan of the kit lens.

Thanks for the lens rental site. It's a pity that I have to go online to rent lenses for Pentax. Anyone in the Portland, Oregon area know of a local place to rent lenses for pentax?