Canon 100mm f2.8 for vows & speeches.. recommended?
 

I know some people have used 85mm or 135mm lens as a prime lens for vows and speeches. But I've only got a 100mm f2.8 macro currently.. considering on using this for vows & speeches.. do you think it's recommended?

I don't see why it should not.. it does produce sharp image for macro but portrait performance isn't that bad either, dont you think?

It's a decent lens. I know alot of "pro" photogs who use it for portraits. I can give you some examples of why I wouldn't want to use it, but do you have any idea why you wouldn't want to use it? You have it, might as well put it to use :).

You're asking a question but answering it yourself at the same time, lol. I know how it is though so no worries.

LOL.. well, I'm not a pro.. so what seems fine to me may not actually be the case!

I just want to know from other's (more expert) point of view, if there's any good reason why I should/shouldn't.. I find it strange as I've heard some people (photo and video) who've had this lens and only use it handful of time during the wedding day.. and I want to know their reason

The only logical guess I can make is that because they have other better lenses to work with for portrait.. but is that it?

being a macro lens, the focus ring is very long and also has very shallow depth of field on f2.8

you can use it with no problem on still subject. but when you have to pull focus and stuf, might not be the case. so vow and speeches should be ok.

All right.. Thanks for the info! Never thought of that.. I should be able to safely trial it on my next wedding then :)

That is what I was going to say, focus for vows and such is ok, but I wouldn't use it if you had to worry about your subject moving.

I know you said you have not seen people use the lens, but at my most recent wedding, I had the 85L, and the 135L (and a bunch of other lenses, but those don't matter in this situation) and what I ended up using for vows was my 100 macro 2.8 because of where I thought the best place for that camera.

I would not use it. Just the slightest movement and they will be out of focus.

Why do you have that lens in the first place?

At that price I would of bought something else more suitable.

I think at f2.8 it is still quite safe as I've often shoot at f2.8 indoor without problem. If you're on f1.4, then you will need to be very careful.

I have this for ring shot mostly and I want to try to do macro stuff (although I'm still no expert hehe). We already have other lenses dedicated for vows and speeches, but I'm considering to use this for our 3rd camera.

The slightest turn of the focus ring results in greater distances of focus, however, whenever not focusing and leaving the focus static, the rules are the same as any 100mm 2.8 lens with regard to movement and staying with in the circle of confusion. The macro part of this lens doesn't have anything to do with the subject staying into focus, the 2.8 aperture does.. unless of course he tries to pull focus on a subject that isn't macro, then focusing becomes more difficult than a 100mm 2.8 that isn't macro.

Maybe I'm stating the obvious here, but just because a lens is 2.8 doesn't mean it has to be shot at 2.8. It doesn't make much sense shooting at 2.8 for speeches and vows as that DOF is so shallow. Stop the lens down to f/4 or even f/5.6. If it's dark, raise your ISO or lower your shutter speed. You can fix grainy footage with neat video, its next to impossible to salvage really out of focus shots.

That lens isn't bad at all if you just want a lens that will shoot a long shot. When you start looking into other characteristics besides sharpness, such as micro contrast, rendering/drawing style, bokeh, color cast, chromatic aberration / LoCA and the like, then you will start to see why some prefer to spend the money on the 135L or zeiss lenses.

So if you just want a long lens to get the job done and don't care for the other characteristics of a lens, just use it and make money with it :).

Cheers.

Do you own a 7D or a 5D?

Thanks Randy. For some reasons I always like to put my aperture as high as possible and ISO as low as possible for indoor.. But I think I must try set it at f4 to play safe and make use of my lighting. Thanks for reminding.

I think in terms of sharpness, color, etc.. I still dont think spending more for 135L is worth it at this stage. I'll use what I have right now :)

I have a 7D, so this will translates to 160mm on my camera.

I have that lens and also a 7D. I've not tried doing video with it yet but have done lots of stills with it over the years. You've had good advice as far as focus and stopping down. The only thing I have to offer is I'd look online for a chart to check the sharpness of the aperture on that specific lens at the different settings. My guess is you start to lose sharpness after f5.6 but it may be higher. Even if you have to go higher than the "sweet spot," at least you know what all your current balancing act involves. And, this probably goes without saying, but make sure the focus range is set long not close like macro when you use it for this.

The big question for me is about the focal length. I would hate to be fixed at 100mm and have no options. If you are at the back of the church then it probably won't be long enough. If you are at the front it could well be too long. You will need 'options'.

Having said that - if the focal length is the right one at the time, there should be no reason you can't use this lens.

Coming back to this thread.. we shot our recent wedding using 135mm f2L on one of our cameras.. and my goodness.. after seeing the quality, I completely understand why people would prefer this lens over any other lens, big time!

I am now considering hard whether I should ditch my 70-200mm f4L for that lens.. I know I will lose the zooming options.. but then the image quality really won my heart

My questions are.. for those shooting with 135mm f2L during ceremony, do you use monopod or tripod? Did you find it troublesome to have to step fwd/back to compensate the zooming?

Would like some suggestions. Thanks! :)