Hello everyone,

I'm looking to purchase a new lense for my Nikon d70s. I mainly use the digital for weddings, events and family/children portraits.

I currently have the basic 18-70 and need something a little more. I would love the buy the fat daddy 70-200 but it's a little out of my budget at the moment.

I can spend apx. $500 at the moment. Any suggestions?
I have two weddings in November in the evening. Also....I just switched to digital this past year so I'm new to digital.

Thanks so much! Dawn

Photo equipment is to solve photographic problems. You said that you need "more" than the 18-70. Is that more reach? faster lens? Are you using flash or avaiable light? Tell us what problems you are trying to solve and we can give you a better answer.

If you are photographing 2 weddings in November, then the income from those 2 jobs should provide you with enough money to get a better lens. $500 is not much money for any type of good lens for the most part.

Faster lens, 1st wedding using available light during ceremony in the church and flash at reception (nightclub), 2nd ceremony is at the Torpedo Factory http://www.torpedofactory.org

I've been looking at this particular lens Nikon Telephoto AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR (Vibration Reduction) Autofocus Lens
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controll...SA&si=rev&rb=10

I can go up to $750-800 not over $900. Any advice or recommendation is appreciated.

Thanks, Dawn
http://www.dawnbernardphotography.com

And this one as well....

Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

I would get the AF 80-200mmF/2.8 ED lens. It is usable in more situations than the macro lens. I own this lens and have printed photos 24x36" from files taken with this lens. It is almost in your budget (just slightly more than $900 from B&H) but with the 5 year warranty, it is a long term investment that will get your career moving in the right direction. It is fast focusing even without AFS and just as sharp as the AFS version, all this for less money than the AFS version.

Agreed, I purchase an 80~200mm f2.8 ED nearly a decade ago, it still remains my flagship lens, even above my 105 f2.0. I’ve worn out several camera bodies on this lens and its never complained, not once.

Maybe you could go used or gray market.

Tom
tworner.com
thomasworner.com
BayBeachWeddings.com
pics.tworner.com

I have shot weddings for over 40 years and my favorite lens for the past six or more years shooting film and digital is my Nikon 17-35 2.8. When I was shooting Hasselblad it was the 60mm. Get close and capture the center of the action. People remember you better and you are where you need to be (great for groups too). The current trend is long lens, but I find that being close is a plus. Guest come up to me all the time and say "you were every where", "you really work harder than any photographer I've seen". It built my wedding business and I got great photographs and great orders. I was selling $10,000 weddings fifteen years ago and shooting the whole thing with the 60mm on a Hasselblad. I had other lens, but the 60 worked. I spent my time shooting and not changing lens. Some photo worthy event always happens right when you're changing lens or headed to the bag to get another camera.

One of the reasons I love digital is not changing film. Shoot a couple hundred shots and change cards. With the Hasselblad I had 8 220 film backs loaded all the time and an assistant just to load as I shot.

I do believe it's the photographer and not the lens. I have never thought I was the greatest photographer, but I work hard.

Look for your style of photography and get a lens to support that style.

Bill

I prefer the 70-200vr but also use the 50-150 sigma2.8 and find its an all around great lens 50 lets me get a small group while 150 lets me get tight, love the color
& sharpness, It is probably my most used lens & I have quite a few

Thank you all!

I use a Nikon D200 and a Nikon D70 to shoot my weddings. My lenses are a 17-55mm f/2.8, a 70-200mm VR f/ 2.8, and a 18-70mm f/3.5 - f/4.5.

The 70-200 is is essential during the ceremony for the available light shots.

After the ceremony, the 70-200 goes in the bag and the 18-70mm goes on one camera for my assistant to use and the 17-55mm goes on the other camera for me to use.

The 17-55mm f/2.8 is my main lens for the formals and the reception. I use two umbrellas and two SB800s for the formals as well.

I've shot about 40 weddings in the last year like this, and it works for me. I see other photographers with tons more equipment costing far more, but they don't seem to get any better results than I do.

Russ

It's not the camera, it's not the flash. It's the photographer. I know everybody says that, but it's true.

Bill

Absolutely correct!!

I know several other successful wedding photographers who use minimal equipment and turn out fansatic results.

You don't need a $5000 camera for weddings.

Russ

Arkayem,Your equipment list sounds right on the money.I think a lot of photographers that are working hard to get their equipment together get lost in the oceans of different Lens,lights,back-drops,ect...It's nice to get some straight advice.

Arkayem,you said you use two SB800 with umbrellas.Are you using your on camera flash as the commander if so do you put your two other speedlights in manual mode(then set their out-put from your camera) or do you stick with the TTL mode?What works best with this type set-up...I shoot with the D300 I will be using my built in flash as my commander and my two SB800 w/umb at each corner of my large groups.

123

I usually use TTL and then adjust each flash with plus or minus compensation as needed. Seems to work well for me.


Foley

123, Why are you using umbrellas with groups instead of direct flash? the distance the umbrellas are from the group makes the larger light source negligible. And the umbrella reduces your light output. Try it both ways and see if you really see a difference. Don't assume there is one. Plus a larger light source creates glass glare. I know a lot of photographers use an umbrella, and use two flashes in one umbrella to boost the light level. I use umbrellas for portraits, not the wedding photography. There a flash placed in the right place is perfect and not in the way. Travel light and use a voice activated light stand.

123, Take at look at the video here on the use of Nikon flash.

http://www.honlphoto.com/servlet/StoreFront

Hi Billy,It is always great to read your replys.Yes,I have always assumed that my umbrellas or bouncing my flash was the way to go.Guess I have bare Flash phobia.I've had this condition for many years and it's hard to over come.There seems to be so many products on the market to ease me into a different way of thinking,So I am making progress.Now all I need is about 20 people to do some test shots....As you already know, I'm new at the(CLS)I now have a couple of SB800 and hopefully will never
haul my Novatrons lights again.But with this Bare Flash Phobia
and 20 models no where in site (for test shots)and an event on my heels,Im feeling a little nervous.It will work out,it always does.I'm just glad there are people like you that are willing to give good advice and direct me to such informative links...
Thanks Billy....PS-That non slip speed strap looks like a must have.I use to be horse poor,then I was house poor,and now I'm camera equipment poor.....(smile) 123 (Kim)

123, You don't need 20 models, just one. Allow the room as if you had 10 on each side of your model and shoot. You can see what you get. Do it simple and easy. I have been shooting with umbrellas since 1966, but there are times it will not help or add anything. An umbrella focuses the light to about 3-5 feet (most people don't know that). It is a parabolic reflector and it focuses the light to a point. That's why they make big umbrellas, really big umbrellas and really big light boxes (the light box does not focus the light). When you just need light on a subject like a wedding...well don't believe anyone. Try lighting anything with the light 10 or fifteen feet away from the subject. You will be surprised.

Do you know what the dome that clips on the SB800 does for a photograph? Have you ever heard "angle of incidence equals angle of reflection"? Look at where the light is going and what it's bouncing off. Don't tilt your flash up just because you saw someone do it. If there is not anything above the flash that is reasonable close then there is nothing to bounce off of. Do lots of test shots and with digital it's free.

I shoot everyday, even if I'm not working on a job. When I hear or read something, I check it out. Most people are wrong about how to light. You can create some great portraits with direct flash using the SB800's. Just get your flash off the camera.

Helmut Newton use to say "Just put light on it". Look him up.

What flash bracket are you using on camera?

123, Take a look at Joe McNally's new post on lighting. This is how I usually do portraits. Not weddings. There is lots of information in his description.
http://www.joemcnally.com/blog/2008/02/11/location-lighting-in-the-philippines/#more-61

Billy,I have heard of Helmut Newton,after looking at some of his work on line, I'm not sure what to say.His style was certainly
different.It leaves me wondering if he really loved women or
had a secret hate for them.His older work could leave one guessing?I have an older stroboframe (low end) and I hate it.I only use it if I feel it is needed.I know I should always keep my flash off Camera and I have been looking at a custom Bracket.
I need a very light weight one,that will flip every way known to man!But that will have to wait a while. O.K I'm off to check out those links you sent....

Billy,also thanks again for the advice on the umbrellas.I didn't realize the light would be focused only 3to5 feet.I knew the Umbrellas would of course reduce and soften the light but I thought it would help to spread it to a wider coverage as well.
Yes,I always use my diffuser dome to soften and wrap the light for close-ups.I do read a lot about lighting but If weeks go by and I dont use it,,,,,I lose it.I guess it's the curse of turning forty.Your advice to shoot everyday is very wise.

123, There is no doubt that Helmut Newton seemed a little strange, but his style of photograpy set the stage for what you see today in fashion magazines. If the subject is strong enough and interesting enough all you need to do is light it.

Get your flash off camera. Use a flash bracket. I use the RRS Wedding Pro Flash Bracket. http://reallyrightstuff.com/flash/04.html. It does a super job, light weight and will put the light where you want it. I have owned every bracket made and this is my favorite. You have to use an L-bracket with it and it's expensive. Check out this bracket review http://www.aljacobs.com/BEST_WORST2005A.htm.

About the diffuser dome. Try some test with and without the dome. The dome reduces the light output. It only softens if there is something to bounce the side light off. The dome does not make the light source larger and larger is what softens the light. It can bounce off a wall or a ceiling and then soften the light by adding another light source, but only if there is a wall or ceiling to bounce off of. Shoot some flash shots with and without the dome and then try to see if or why there is a difference.

I shoot all my weddings with direct flash unless I have a low white ceiling or a close white wall to bounce off of.
My clients like me because I am quick and I get good photographs, and I think they actually like me. I shoot by myself with one assistant to run for me. Flash on camera with flash bracket, seldom do I use a second flash. No light stands, but I do use a tripod to shoot the groups after the wedding.

It's not age that's causing you to lose the dome. Keep it in a case. Same place everytime (I keep the dome in the SB800 case in my camera case). I'm 64 (sounds like a Beatles song)and if I didn't have an organized camera case, I couldn't find anything.

I learned lighting from Dick Balli (Mardick Balli) the guy that invented the umbrella for flash photograhy (yes, he's the one that did it) and he created the Balcar lighting system. He knew more about light than anyone I had ever met. Dick was a fashion photographer and couldn't find what he wanted so he made it. He had a hard time selling lighting in the US because so few photographers understood how it worked. They still don't. Everyone just does what someone else says instead of testing it. I still shoot with Balcar lights and umbrellas.

Billy

Sounds like you been there and know what's going on. How about shooting through umbrellas vs bouncing off does that help spread the light any better. I understand what you are saying about the large light source so I don't guess that would make an umbrella any larger as a light source. But????


Thanks
Foley

Foley, Your light source is the last thing the light (flash) hits before it hits the subject. If you shoot through an umbrella (one made for that purpose) then it does spread the light, everywhere. Makes it hard to control, but if you need to do that then it works. I have used it. The size is the same as the umbrella, but you have to consider the other areas that the light is bouncing off. That could be walls, ceiling and the floor. At times on a big shoot I will paint or cover the floor (with white or black) because it's such a big influence. On a portrait I may put a white reflector on the floor to use that fill light.

One thing I do to know where the light is bouncing from is to photograph the light source and area around it. With the Nikon CLS this is easy, just point and shoot. Then you can look at where the light is showing. Same thing with the light bouncing into an umbrella. If the flash just fills the umbrella then it is most effective. If it spills out to the ceiling, walls, etc then that becomes another light source. Sometimes I want to control the light and sometimes I just want to light everything. I find most photographers do not consider the stray light and how much it influences the photograph.

I just saw this new post by David Ziser. I'm an old Kentucky boy myself. He shot his flash for the video here and you can see what it's doing. And he's using a shoot throught umbrella at the end of the video. http://digitalprotalk.blogspot.com/2008/02/technique-tuesday-light-fantastic.html#links

Billy,the two links concerning that Bracket would not pull up.
reallyrightstuff and the best and worst,do you have another site concerning the(RRS wedding pro bracket.).....I did more testing with my SB800's,had to use my built-in as the commander but cut it off in camera (---).I have got to order that cover you told me about,those pre-flashes
are horrible on your subject and they do effect the lighting in the shot.Someone else in the forum had said they would not effect the shot,but in my testing they clearly light up the image.My testing was in low light conditions so I could really see the effects of them....

Maybe I'll go with the SU-800,have not even priced it yet.

http://www.aljacobs.com/index.htm if that does not work then go to http://www.aljacobs.com and choose the fash bracket link on the lower left. You might want to read a lot of the stuff on his site. He's an old photographer and has done a lot of shooting including weddings. I don't agree with all he says about weddings, but his stuff about lighting is right on. (All weddings are different and I have been fortunate to have a clientele that have good taste, good manners and are not worried about spending for what they want. So the type of weddings you do make a difference.)

http://reallyrightstuff.com/flash/04.html and if that does not work then go to http://www.reallyrightstuff.com and look at the Wedding Pro Flash Bracket. It's expensive, but it's the best I have seen and fits my needs more than any other.

The preflash could affect your exposure in low light. I have heard others say that. The flash is anoying and people tend to blink. The SU800 flashes an infrared flash. You can see it, but it doesn't cause people to blink and it will not affect exposure. Be aware that the SU800 will not fit on camera with most flash brackets. I sometimes shoot with the built-in flash triggering my flash on the bracket. It works and if the extension cable quits if's nice to know there is a backup. B&H has the infrared screen I told you about.

Billy,I may be away from the forum for a while,still reading all the wedding information on that link.Reading the first 200 pages
now.I love the humorous spin he adds to his experience.It was sad to read about his wife........Thanks again for the great links. Kim

Don't be put off by this seemingly amature demonstration. There is a lot of info in it. Nikon must have many different people working on their web and books. They don't give you all the info in one place, but if you look everywhere it all starts to come together. Some places it's just one missing piece they will give you. The Nikon SB800 does a lot and does it easy if you know the flash and menus well.
http://nikonimaging.com/global/technology/speedlight/index.htm

Billy,I have a question for you,It could start another thread
but I really wanted your advice first.I have used so many gadgets in hopes of getting the perfect white balance.My most recent ones were the expo disc and the Tri colored Target put out by photovision (Ed pierce)I returned the expo disc and am still working with the Target.It gives you the exposure reading(by checking your Histagram) and white balance.Ed Pierce includes a video with his targets, he says to follow same instruction as with a standard grey card but use the tri colored target.One thing he does say is to set camera in Manual mode while doing your custom white balance,My lantern guide to the D-200 says to set camera to A-priority when doing a custom white balance,Not sure this would make a difference...I then go to my pre-set D-0,focus on manual,place target in same light as subject,making sure I do not cast a shadow on target,fill frame with tri colored Target,release shutter...Good comes up and I think all is right with the world.That is until I put my subject
in that same lighting, go back to d-o snap a shot,then for comparison reasons change my white balance to a standard camera setting only to realize my "custom" white balance which I used the target to get has a blue cast,and the standard camera w/B setting is better!!!I tested both of my cameras
D-200 and D-300 and set up everything the same the D-200 seems to have more of the blue cast but even the D-300 had a hint of blue as well.(My test were done with out any Flash)I am only judgeing this by the view on my camera,I didn't put it up on my computer monitor.Have you ever used these Tri colored Targets and do you have any idea why I am getting this blue color cast?If anyone else uses these Targets let me know your experience with them,I'm wondering if the old (cheap)grey card is just as good as far as W/B goes,or am I missing an important step?

123, First I need a little information. Are you shooting NEF files? Is your monitor color corrected?

I often refer to the image on the back of the camera for color, but be aware that it is not color corrected.

After you set the custom white balance, what white balance setting do you choose in camera? Are you choosing your custom setting? Have you tried using auto with the D300?

Are you shooting with flash after setting the color balance? What kind of light are you shooting?

The "original" grey card was intended for exposure not color balance. I imagine all the new ones are color corrected now and are a neutral grey.

Have you seen this site (another one on color balance)? http://www.rawworkflow.com/products/whibal/index.html

I shoot NEF files,I am judgeing the color from what I see on the back of the Camera(only)I just got my target so when they had that blue color cast I didn't bother puting them on my monitor.They were just test shots.After setting the color white balance
in (pre-set)using the tri colored target for a custom white balance..D-0 I kept it in d-0 (custom)to do the test shot of my subject.Thats when I realized my (custom white balance wasn't that great.So for comparison reasons, I played around with the "standard" camera w/b setting like Auto and incandescent and yes the standard camera setting of incandescent was better than my (custom) one.After all I was under home lighting.But the point being,that custom setting (using my target should have been the best.Maybe I should just stick to my camera setting and forget all the new gadgets that are suppost to make life easy.
I keep searching because in the past the camera settings (even with alittle fine tuning did not give me the correct white balance in some situation,such as the strong orange cast from tungston which I deal with in churches and who has time to try and figure out what Kelvin I'm dealing with.I was looking for a quick and accurate way to set this (in camera)Guess this will be a problem of the past when I get CS2(PS).

Read this: http://www.rawworkflow.com/products/whibal/index.html

White balance is always a problem, but I think, my opinion only, that it's better to fix it in post. I use CaptureNX to set the color balance. If you have a D300, then you got CaptureNX free with the camera. I set my D400 on auto white balance (shooting NEF files) and it's right most of the time. I fine tune in CaptureNX or sometimes for quick changes on lots of files in ViewNX. To help fix it I may shoot the card from Whibal (see link).

It is a good thing to do the test you're doing. It's experience that gets the best shot and you are getting the experience and learing the camera menu at the same time.

Yes,I up loaded CaptureNX but have not used it much.Guess I need to spend some time with it.

I do use Elements but it is so limited.I guess I'll have to check in to some classes to bring me up to speed on the new (PS)and Lightroom.This learning curve never ends it doesn't even slow down,but I love it...............Kim

I do use Elements but it is so limited.I guess I'll have to check in to some classes to bring me up to speed on the new (PS)and Lightroom.This learning curve never ends it doesn't even slow down,but I love it...............Kim

Sigma 50-150 2.8 its a great lens, 2.8 all the way and beautiful color wish it had a tripod mount but other than that a perfect lens

Yes, for groups, I normally put the remote flashes in Commander Manual mode and set their power from the Commander on my D200. However, if I am pressed for time, I sometimes put the remotes in TTL and let them control their own power. TTL is pretty reliable and repeatable, so I don't see any major differences between images in a sequence, so Manual is not absolutely necessary.

Incidentally, don't get your umbrellas too far away from the camera when shooting large groups, or you will end up with the ends of the group bright and the center area dark. I put the umbrellas no more than about four feet right and left of the camera and about three feet above, pointed straight ahead. That maintains an even brightness across the widest possible area.

Russ

Billy - Interesting comment on white balance. You think it's better to fix it in post? Not being argumentative here, but isn't it better to get it right to start with, doesn't correcting the white balance after the fact do two things 1) increase the work necessary to output quality work (instead of out of the box) and 2) increase noise and possible hilight loss by correcting the white balance in post production?

Mike.

Mike, It's always good to get it right at capture, but that is not always possible. I use Capture NX to process my NEF files and changing it there is quick and painless. Nikon gets it right with their software and it matches the camera settings. Plus you can make minor changes easily. Much easier than going through the camera settings for changing light. It just works with the D300 because the D300 almost always get it right.
Bill

"The 17-55mm f/2.8 is my main lens for the formals and the reception. I use two umbrellas and two SB800s for the formals as well."

I will second that. The 17-55 is practically meant for indoor shooting in low light, among other things. I combine that with a 70-200 (another fast lens) and the 50mm 1.8, which is so cheap but so useful it deserves a place in your camera bag.

I used a 70-200mm with a 1.4 teleconverter for most of my wedding shots.
There are times when you don't want to be on top of your subjects at the wedding, and that distance gives you the ability to get the shot without being abtrusive.
For group portraits, my 14-24 was employed.
For walk around, and recepection shots, I also used a zoom, my 24-70mm. That about covered it.