Go WIDE or go LONG??

[point-n-shoot]

I've decided to start a portrait and event photography business, and I'd like some advice on my next lens choice.  I currently have the following equipment...

Bodies: (Canon)
20D
                         10D

Lenses: (Canon)  
EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6
                          EF 50mm f/1.4
                          EF 85mm f/1.8
                          EF 70-200 f/4L
                          EF 28-105/3.5-4.5
 
I was thinking about either getting the EF 300mm f/4L or the EF 16-35 2.8L...which would be a better choice for, lets say, wedding photography?

[Andy M]

16-35 2.8L IMO

Or, to give a totally different option, have you considered 'upgrading' to a 5D? Your EF 28-105/3.5-4.5 would near enough cover what the 17-85 did and you will have what many see to be the ideal wedding camera.

[David Anderson]

16-35 2.8 for me as well..

I also agree getting a 5D would be good for business, your 50 and 85 are both good lenses for wedding portraits on a full frame and the 16-35 would do the big view,,

[point-n-shoot]

5D is definitely on the horizon, I just want to make sure that I can pull off the whole business aspect of photography before investing in another body...whereas the lenses are always good to have even if I simply continue shooting as a hobby.  I won't be doing weddings for quite a while...I'm honing my skills with portraits right now, mostly for my daughter's high school (Senior photos, Prom / Homecoming, sports events and yearbook group shots, along with the occasional family/baby portrait).

If the (USA) 5D bodies would drop under the $2K price point, I'd be less hesitant to invest in one...but even with the current rebate they're still around $2500.  That's a lot of dough for a single dad on a Paramedic's salary (about 6 overtime shifts)...but if the difference in photographic quality is really THAT substantial, I guess I need to consider one soon.

For now it looks like the 16-35 is the better choice, huh?

[boku]

In my opinion, you don't need anything. You can do a credible job of what you are attempting with what you have. Why not get out there, get some action going in the marketplace? Your needs will emerge as you develop your enterprise.

In other words, delated gratification.

I know that's hard.

[alainbriot]

Go Biz

I agree with Boku that what is needed at this time is to go ahead and do business.  You don't need more gear in my estimate.  You need to go out there and market your work, get customers, etc.  

Also, there's most likely many things you need for your business besides camera gear.

[jmraso]

I would say the 16-35 2.8 then sell the junk (28-105) and start safing for
a 300 2.8 IS a must-have if you have considered the 300 focal.

Jaime
www.jmraso.com

[stever]

i don't see what the where the 300 fits in to your business plan - mine is virtually unused compared to the 100-400 and i'm not sure what you'd do with the 100-400

your more fundamental decision is whether to invest in full frame which with the advent of the 5D has become somewhat of a customer expectation in this market even if not really necessary most of the time

if you stick with the crop frame, then you probably need a 10-22 (which at 17mm gives noticebly better results on my 20d than the 17-85)

if you go full frame, then you've got to decide whether the speed of the 16-35 is worth the money over the 17-40.  and then you'll be in for a 24-105 as well $$$

the 5D with 24-105 is better than the 20D and 17-85 in a side-by-side comaprison for 13x19 prints and above  - but i'm don't think this would be noticeable in portraits or wedding photographs

in short, if there isn't real customer pressure for full frame, think about a 10-22 (and consider getting rid of the 10D and getting a used 20D for the speed of handling and lower noise)

[jorgedelfino]

16-35 2.8 for me as well..

I also agree getting a 5D would be good for business, your 50 and 85 are both good lenses for wedding portraits on a full frame and the 16-35 would do the big view,,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=98763\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Save yourself some money and buy the 17-40 L f4 lens!

[DavidJ]

I would agree with those who suggest not spending more money on bodies or lenses at the moment. If you are considering a lens to use for wedding work on the 20D and desperate to spend money the 17-40 f4 L is a good bet, a neighbour who is a wedding photographer still working mostly in film borrows my 17-40 to use on her 20D when she wants some high quality digital shots. I am an amateur photographer and occasionally take wedding photos I find that my 28-105 on the 5D gives excellent results and covers most shots. If your copy is a good one don't hurry to throw it out they vary in quality and good uns are good (for me not far off the quality of L glass)

David

[GentleGiant]

What you need is neither lens nor body;  It's lighting equipment.

I'd suggest a Canon 580ex with a large diffuser hood for soft flash shots at events, and a small 2-3 light strobe system with stands, umbrellas or softboxes, and a backdrop for more formal portraits.

Proper lighting and contrast control will make your shots stand out from Uncle Buck's, much more than a few more megapixels or a sharper lens.

[daveman]

 

"What you need is neither lens nor body;  It's lighting equipment."

Absolutely!

If you don't know what you need, you are better off waiting until the weakness is more obvious. However, lighting equipment is the main gap in my view. I have been amazed at what a professional can do with marginal equipment.

[elkhornsun]

You are fine with what you have for portrait photography - lens sharpness is not necessarily an asset when photographing people.

For event photography the 17-55mm f2.8 IS is a much better choice than the 16-35mm f2.8 lens. You need more reach than 35mm at times and do not want to be changing lenses any more than is necessary.

Bruce

[zlatko-b]

I was thinking about either getting the EF 300mm f/4L or the EF 16-35 2.8L...which would be a better choice for, lets say, wedding photography?

I shoot weddings and events and my most used lenses are the 16-35 and the 85, one on one camera, the other on another camera.  (Lightroom's metadata browser shows me how many images were made with each lens.)  I find the 16-35 is a very useful range on the 20D/30D and the Mark II, and it's not a big lens.  For portraits, I prefer the 24-105 with a 5D.  The 70-200 zoom offers plenty on the long end.  If I had a 300, I would almost never use it, and I wouldn't even want to carry it.  I'm never that far away from my subject.