What lenses do I buy? <i>(Weddings)</i>

Better get out your backup credit card, cuz this is going to get EXPENSIVE!

Ultimately, your goal should be this: Get the best, highest quality lens that money can buy, in the focal range that is YOUR STYLE!!! Then, fill in the gaps...


1.) TELEPHOTO:

Many people bite the bullet and get a 70-200 2.8 with IS or VR... (stabilization) You hear these people complaining about how that lens is such a workout to carry around all day, but they don't seem to think theire is ANY alternative...

Personally, that's a bit much for me, and I shoot with the Sigma 50-150 2.8, on my crop sensor of course which makes it equal 75-225 on full frame. Except it's light as a feather and tiny, compared to the 70-200 2.8's...

If you shoot full frame and therefore can't use this lens, (AND if you shoot Canon) ...you can get a 70-200 f/4 that is just as small and light as the Sigma 50-150. So small that you don't even need a tripod collar, actually. My opinion is that if you're shooting full frame, you've already got an extra couple stops' advantage for both ISO performance AND shallow DOF, compared to crop sensors, so the "handicap" of shooting with a 70-200 f/4 is probably not as terrible as some people make it out to be. I know that personally, as much as I'd like to own the new, massive Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II, I'd MUCH rather see them make an f/4 VR lens.

But that's just my personal opinion, probably EVERYBODY who reads this is going to say "you absolutely must have f/2.8 or you're just not a serious, fully-equipped professional!" To that I say, oh well, if I ever encounter light SO dark that f/4 doesn't cut it, I'm not going to fool around with just one stop's advantage, I'm going straight to f/2 or f/1.4! That, you cannot argue with. When the going gets tough, the tough don't bicker about f/2.8 versus f/4, the tough go straight to f/1.2 or f/1.4...

The bottom line is: get the best, most professional grade telephoto zoom lens you can afford, and can bear to lug around. If you rent a 70-200 2.8 and it is just too beastly, don't feel like it's your only option. Consider my alternatives outlined above... That's all I ask!


2.) WIDE / MEDIUM:

Next, you'll want some sort of wide or medium zoom lens, depending on what your style of photography is. Some people are "in-your-face" kinda shooters, and they get an ultra-wide zoom like the Nikon 14-24 / 17-35, or the Canon 16-35 or 17-40.

Other photographers are a little more "normal", and they use a 24-70 range zoom.

Of course if you're at the point where people are just banging down your door to pay $10,000 for their wedding photography, you can afford BOTH ranges, but my point is that you can probably get by with just one. Just pick that ONE lens based on your style.


3.) PRIMES:

Lastly, a professional is naked without a fast prime. Especially a photojournalist and / or portrait photographer, I think they ought to own two or three primes if they can. Again, pick these lenses based on your style. If most of your photos are taken around 50mm on your 24-70 zoom, splurge and get yourself the best 50mm prime you can find in your lens mount. For Canon that would be the 50 1.2 L or the Sigma 50 1.4 EX, and for Nikon that would be the 50 1.4 AFS G or the Sigma 50 1.4 EX. All of those lenses are extremely high grade professional tools, with the Canon 50 1.2 L costing an extra $1000 because it has the best bokeh ever from any 50mm lens... (Not counting Leica rangefinder lenses! :-P)

If you get most of your shots with your 70-200mm lens around 85mm or 105 / 135mm, consider a prime in that range. Or if you're that "in-your-face"photographer I mentioned earlier, you may consider a 24mm, 28mm, or 35mm prime.

Again, you want to get at least ONE prime, in your favorite range, that is the best lens you can possibly afford. Then, in the other ranges you may not use that frequently but need just in case the light gets SUPER nasty, you can get the less expensive but still good quality lenses. For example if 50mm is your thing, get the most expensive 50mm you can, and then maybe get the lesser expensive primes in other ranges like the Canon / Sigma 28 1.8, and Canon / Nikon 85 1.8...


PRIMES VERSUS ZOOMS?

Okay, so you've got the whole "get the best lens you can afford for the focal length that is your style" thing down. How do you decide between a zoom or a prime? Well it depends on what you're shooting. A prime offers some things that a zoom can't, and zooms offer things a prime can't. Duh!

As a photojournalist for example, I absolutely must be prepared for various situations, depending on the job. I happen to do a few different kinds of work that dictate I own BOTH primes and zooms. For portraits, as a crop-sensor shooter I really do need to hit f/1.4 if I want to get that beautifully shallow DOF. Oppositely, whenever I'm shooting something like theater where I'm not as free to move around, let alone approach my subjects, composing my shots depends ENTIRELY on my ability to zoom. (And, swapping primes during a stage performance... YEAH RIGHT!!!)

If you shoot nothing but portraits, you could probably do your entire job with just one or two prime lenses. If you're a photojournalist, you might be able to shoot an entire wedding with just one or two zooms. Or if you shoot events, but also shoot portraits, and especially if you find yourself in low light conditions, you PROBABLY need a little bit of both. A zoom or two to get your "bread and butter" shots and a prime for when the light gets really low, OR, a handful of primes for your bread and butter shots and a zoom for the peak action. Whichever style suits you better!


4.) SPECIALTY LENSES:

Of course any freelance photographer needs to consider specialty lenses. Macro lenses, fisheye lenses, tilt-shift lenses or lensbabies, etc. Specialty lenses are the kind of thing I'm not too interested in emptying my wallet for, unless it's REALLY my style to use a tilt-shift lens or something. You can buy 3rd-party fisheye lenses, you can buy specialty lenses made for crop-sensor cameras that are probably pretty affordable, etc. etc. I have a note at the bottom of this page on which macro lenses I recommend...


NOW, after talking about what gear you should ULTIMATELY buy, let's talk a tiny bit about what you can afford right now, because unless you've got $10,000 to spend, you're not going to be buying all those lenses at once-

SO... The rule of thumb is of course to spend the most money on the lens you'll use the most, and fill in the gaps with more affordable lenses until you can complete your lineup. If your style is really photojournalistic, chances are you should be getting a 70-200 range zoom lens. If you're just obsessed with primes, or maybe you shoot mostly portraits, consider a prime in that 70-200 range.

Again, just go on down the line- If your style is medium-range photojournalism, bust out the cash for a 24-70, or if you shoot mostly super low light, or medium-range portraits, then get a 35 or 50 prime. And so on and so forth.

The point is, don't mess around getting the cheapo 3rd-party lens if it's going to be the lens you use ALL the time. Of cousre Sigma does make a few GREAT lenses that I consider to be as good as Canon / Nikon, namely the Sigma 50 1.4, (which totally beats the Canon 50 1.4, equals the Nikon 50 1.4, and comes close to the Canon 50 1.2) ...and also the Sigma 50-150 2.8 that I personally use.

Either way, be ready to go all the way if you have a defined style that you know you want to run with and enhance. Buying the best lens money can buy will be the best thing you could possibly do for your photography, if it's the RIGHT lens for your style.

LASTLY, what if you aren't exactly sure what your style is just yet? DO NOT buy anything super expensive. Rent, rent, rent! Find a local lab and pick up whatever prime or zoom you want to try; they usually cost $15-$35 for a one-weekend rental. I definitely think that renting practically EVERY pro-grade lens Nikon makes was a big part of me developing my style and finding out what I really wanted to buy... It took me years and dozens of lens rentals before I realized I preferred telephoto type shots, and which lenses I preferred to take those shots with... (And currently, even though those images are mostly telephoto, candid style images, I'm actually enjoying getting into medium-wide, fast-aperture type images right now, so my style may be changing a little. I hope to stay true to my own artistic vision, but at the same time always explore new things... :-)

Take care,
=Matt=