[enyaw]

Hi what would you guys recommend for a wedding ie focal lengths. I'm planning to bring a 28-80 and a 50mm prime. Would that cover all the bases? First time, but asked to take photos. Would a monopod be recommended at all? Only the 50mm is a prime, and shot mostly indoors

thx,

[ramseybuckeye]

Full Frame or APS-C?

[enyaw]

sorry k50 thus aps-c, I do have an external flash with a mini reflector called a flash bender. But for some reason I don't have a deffuser yet. And I guess shoot raw

[Pentax Syntax]

If film or full frame DSLR the 50 1.4 or 1.7 will be useful. The standard Wedding kit is a 28-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8. These 'fast' zooms evolved for a reason; very handy at weddings where things move fast. If you use the 28-80 (3.5-5.6 presumably) you are going to need a decent flash. Have fun and enjoy.

Ps since you are shooting crop you might need something a bit wider than 28.

[enyaw]

I have a 35-135mm and a decent flash f3.5-45.

[ramseybuckeye]

I would think something like a 16-85 or 17-50 would be much better. Not sure about a monopod, it may slow you down. maybe a tripod for "setup" shots. The flash is essential unless you are outside and still maybe then. Make sure you have extra batteries.

[enyaw]

thank you sir, I have the external flash with (2x4) sets of batteries charged up. And the mini reflector, I have to go with the lens I have 28-80mm and the 50mm prime 1.8. I won't take the monopod. You forgot to say bring the chargers lol, jk

[btnapa]

+1 on this one.

If I had to buy one lens it would be the Tamron 17-50 f2.8. I had one and my copy was sharp even wide open. I shot weddings for 4 years back in the mid-2000. All my lenses were f2.8 or faster. You will need fast lenses for their brighter viewing and allowing to cover low light situations. I learned that lesson the hard way.

You can pick up a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 in the used market for a song and it is a fantastic lens. Just make sure it is a sharp copy.

[macman24054]

You need the wide lens during the ceremony. I would highly advise using the monopod since it is not fast of a lens. I would try to use the 50 prime during the reception since it is most often darker during the reception. With the K50 I have never used my monopod with the 50 prime on it. During the entrance of the wedding party use flash. All you will get is some blurred photos because of the movement. Plan on shooting at 3200 or 1600 ISO most of the time.

[Adam]

50mm F1.4, plus the 16-50mm or at 17-50mm F2.8. Having a killer prime can take your work to the next level, IMO.

[eva]

24-70 f/4 and flash+ bounce card +difusor. 50-135 F2.8,.77 ltd da 21 ltd lots of options ....

[skierd]

The 50-135 is my workhorse; it's indispensable for the ceremony and most portraits imo.

A fast wide zoom like the 16-50 or fast-ish like the 20-40 limited is a must too. Finally a couple fast primes like the 55 1.4 and the 31 limited to really round things out but the zooms will get you most of the way there.

A monopod? Really? That's what SR is for...

[Wasp]

The 28-80 and 50 would work well, but without something longer you will miss out on shots. It is not always possible to get up close and personal with everything that is happening, especially the melee that happens right after the ceremony. A 70-200 would work well. If you have a 'normal' one in the f/4 to f/5.6 range it will do. Soething with a macro capability would come in handy for shooting the couple holding hands with their new rings, that sort of thing.

You don't say if you will be the main photographer or will be filling in for a paid professional. That makes a big difference. If you are a second shooter, work with the lenses that you have. Otherwise, it would be worth the investment to rent a lens or two for the day. Definitely consider a 24-40 f2.8 as well as a 50-135 f/2.8 or 70-200 f/2.8. For added bokeh goodness you just can't beat a 77 f/1.8 Limited or even an 85 f/1.4 (if you can find one for hire).

Finally, without a decent flash or two you can't really do weddings. To this you can add light stands, umbrellas, slave triggers etc. but that is a whole topic on its own.

[pathdoc]

I always thought the golden rule for weddings was a second body in case the first one bricks itself.

[Wasp]

I always thought the golden rule for weddings was a second body in case the first one bricks itself.

A very valid point, sir!

Anybody who takes wedding pictures in exchange for payment should have at least two camera bodies. Some would say three.

Besides the backup scenario, having two bodies on hand means no changing of lenses at inopprtune times.

As an aside, the two bodies should ideally be exactly the same. That way the intrepid snapper can go from one camera to the other without missing a beat. Another way of looking at it is: why should the second camera be second best? This is not strictly neccesary, though. But the part of having two or more cameras is not really negotiable for a professional.