Botchow C , Jun 27, 2008; 02:36 p.m.
Hello!
I have my first wedding in September and im busy buying new equipment.
im stuck between 2 lenses now.
I have
The kit lens- 18-55 f/3.5-5.6
and Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6
I also have a Speedlight 430EX with a diffuser
i know i need a fast lens, and im choosing between The canon 50mm f/1.8, or a fast zoom lens, like the 18-55
f/2.8 by Tamron.
i feel more like buying the 50mm since its more of an art lens. But then my problem is the reception and the
dancing, thats what i really need a fast lens for, and im worried that the 50mm its too zoomed...i planning to
take some photos at the reception with the 50mm, and would it be good results if i use the slower Kit lens i
already have, plus the flash for the dancefloor? Would that be decent results? Or do i REALLY need to buy the
faster Tamron?
I dont really want to buy it, since i already have a lens in that range, but it depends if the flash and Kit lens
would produce good results or not?
Thanks!
johanna
Nadine Ohara - SF Bay Area/CA 
, Jun 27, 2008; 02:50 p.m.
Johanna--seems like this is the third time you are asking about buying another lens.
http://photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00PZTW
If you need a fast lens for the ceremony, if it is indoors in low light, the one to get is the 50mm f1.8.
If you need a fast lens for the reception, and for other parts of the day, get the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, although I would not call that a fast lens, actually--fast ZOOM, but not necessarily fast lens. If you use flash at the reception, you can get by with the kit lens, but you will have to use higher ISO if you want to bounce, plus your recycling time may be affected. Unless the reception is outside in the day time in brighter light or the day time indoor location is bright, you might as well use flash as primarly light, meaning use of a fast lens is moot.
Russ Konrad 
, Jun 27, 2008; 03:01 p.m.
IMHO every photographer should have a 50mm f/1.8 (or f1/4) lens in their bag. Low cost for simply GREAT performance. It also does a great job on both the smaller sensors as well as the full frame bodies that are available.
Having said that - the 17-50mm f/2.8 Tamron (or Sigma or Canon version) is a much more usable and practical lens for most wedding situations. Your current kit lenses will only be of use if the wedding is outside. Inside during a ceremony - i.e. no flash - they will be almost useless.
Nadine Ohara - SF Bay Area/CA , Jun 27, 2008; 03:38 p.m.
Russ--"almost useless", but not "useless", if you use higher ISO, a tripod and shoot during the pauses during the ceremony.
Russ Konrad , Jun 27, 2008; 03:52 p.m.
I did say "almost useless" in most indoor situations.
Bottom line - an f/2.8 zoom will be much more useful than the 50mm f/1.8 lens for almost any indoor wedding work IMHO.
Russ Konrad , Jun 27, 2008; 04:11 p.m.
Nadine,
IMHO - if you are going to shoot weddings - you need the proper tools. Anything less the basics (and an f/2.8 zoom at the wide end IS ESSENTIAL) will result in poor images and an upset bride. Either make the necessary and proper investment or tell the truth to the bride and groom that you are incapable of doing an adequate job.
Nadine Ohara - SF Bay Area/CA , Jun 27, 2008; 05:55 p.m.
Well she didn't say she was going to make shooting weddings her primary career... That's what I mean about specifics in this instance. Johanna is, I guess, having a hard time deciding so clarity and objectivity are useful--strong opinions should be labeled as such, which you have now done.
Trebor Navilluso , Jun 27, 2008; 06:35 p.m.
These are really two different purpose lenes. My answer would be BOTH.
The 17-55 2.8 is indeed very useful. Not being able to zoom as with the 50 1.8 will hurt you. And the F2.8 out to 55mm will make for nice bokeh on your shots that the kit lens cannot provide. At 55 on the kit lens you are at F5.65 not very appealing bokeh (background blur). Now here's the opionon part, for Portaits/wedding I feel a nicely blurred background is very important. Some might dissagree, but I feel shot's with everything in focus look like snapshots.
Now the 50 1.8 also has it's place. F1.8 is even nicer than F2.8 in some cases. And it does give you the extra stop which could mean the difference between a noisy shot or not based on ISO. I would use it for formal portraits and cerimony (very low light in door).
Heck if you can afford the 17- 55, get the 50 as well for only $80 more. If it has to be on or the other, I"d take only the zoom. You want 2.8 through the whole zoom range and you need to go wide not just 50mm.
William W 
, Jun 27, 2008; 09:14 p.m.
Deciding between the two lenses you mention, I think you would be better getting the EF50mmF1.8MkII.
It is less money.
If you want to use it during the Reception and the Dance Floor, and it is `too zoomed` then you will get some nice half shots.
It will be useful during the ceremony, if you cannot use flash.
It will also be useful during the Reception WITH flash, if you desire.
It will be useful as an `art lens` for you after the Wedding
If you are really concerned about the 50mm being `too zoomed` then re-consider the EF35F2 instead or as an additional budget purchase.
Most likely you could get both these primes, for the price of the zoom you are considering.
FYI: My post Mar 20, 2008; 02:48 a.m.
http://photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00OqhJ
WW
Preston Harper , Jun 27, 2008; 09:48 p.m.
If I had to go with one, it would be the 17-50 for the range. The 50 is very nice but limits how close you can get.
