50mm 1.4 or 28mm 1.8?
 

I've just bought a t2i and I'm trying to decide which of these two lenses to get, for shooting weddings (videos).

If anyone has experience with both these two lenses and can offer me some advice as to which one to go for that'd be much appreciated :) I'm really stuck!

thanks, James

Both.

Seriously for portraits 50mm is an optimum focal length, its slightly telephoto so its flattering.

The 50mm will be too long in a crowded room. So in tight spaces you will want the 28mm

It is also a choice between a lens that will knock out an ugly background (50mm) and a lens that will show off a nice one. (28mm)

what about this lens: Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
Has anybody tried it for weddings?

Stelios

That lens won't hold up well in low light. For daylight and good lighting it's alright. But there are better lenses.

I can't recommend the Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC lens enough. You get a nice walk around lens with vibration control (stabilization), as well non-variable aperture for low light and zoom use.
Now 2.8 is the minimum in my book for low light use. But this lens works well for most low light shooting.

If you wanted to spend more, then you could look into the Canon 17-55mm 2.8 lens. But your stepping up in cost if you chose to do so.

The thing is, that you're going to need a few different lenses for any shoot.
Unlike a video camera, where you have one fixed lens with a lot of creative focal lengths, with a DSLR you need different focal length lenses to achieve the same looks.
A prime, zoom, and zoom telephoto is a good place to start.

I would prefer the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, but if you have to have Canon, then 28mm would be more useful for me.

thanks for the advice. I'm now even more confused though! I have absolutely no experience with SLR's & lenses, and really just want an all round good lens that will be good in low light situations. My budget is probably only £300... The t2i is only going to be my b-cam (at first anyway), and will mainly be shooting wide-ish shots. Although it would be the main cam for the first dance.

So do you think either the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC lens would be suitable?

James

In my complete personal opinion, it's hard to recommend primes for weddings. Maybe for bride/groom prep, you could get some great shots, but losing your zoom capability during the ceremony/reception really limits me from shooting any event. If you have another camera going, maybe...

Again this is my two cents and applies to my style of shooting (which is more of a stay discreet and out of the way style.

I was thinking of getting a Sigma 30mm 1.4, but I think I'm going to save up for a 70-200 2.8. I borrowed my friend's lens and that baby does wonders.

If you're new to DSLR's you could get the much, much cheaper 50mm 1.8 (goes for only $100) and experiment with it. With some experience with that, you'll know if you need a wider and/or faster lens.

Good call Chris. Also, it's usable if you up grade to the Mark II, while the Tamron lens won't....

That said, the Tamron is a pretty sweet lens that you can get from the big stores for around $415 (after $45 Tamron mail-in rebate).

But yeah, get that $100 50mm - it may very well be the best deal in camera optics anywhere.

I've just been looking into the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and came across this video:
YouTube - AF Sound - Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8

It seems very noisy! Not sure it would be any good for using during a wedding ceremony...

Are all lenses this noisy?

The 70 - 200 is pretty long on a crop sensor body (though very popular with wedding photographers using a full-frame body). The Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS is fast (for a zoom) and optically excellent. The build quality is so-so.

If it's the AF noise you're worried about, it won't be a problem, since you'll be focusing manually, right? ;-)

If your budget is $480 and want it to be good in low light and wide-ish, then a good one may be Sigma 20mm F1.8. I have two primes one at 50mm and the other at 20mm. The 50mm f1.8 cost me $95 and 20mm f1.8 cost me $409. So, for about $500, I have most indoor situations covered. With zoom the fastest F is 2.8, which is a bit dim for some indoor scenes.
If you are considering Tamron, keep in mind there are two version out there, one with VC and one without, and the focus ring is opposite of Canon, which can be frustrating when using both at the same time.

I would second the Sigma 20mm 1.8. With the crop factor the focal length seems just right for natural filming (close to what the eye picks up).

I would recommend getting both the 50 1.4 and the 28 1.8 for shooting weddings. That is not all you will need, but those two lenses will be great for shooting the reception. I have gone to shooting with fast primes for the reception, mainly because zoom lenses are limited to 2.8. I tried using 2.8 lenses, but for dark receptions, it just wasn't fast enough.

I like to have one camera getting closeups and a second camera getting wide shots during the first dance and parent dances. The 28 will work well for wider shots, as long as you do not want a super wide shot, but the 50 may be limiting for close shots, unless it's a really small dance floor. For the last several months I have been using an 85 1.4 for close shots of the special dances and it is great.

For weddings I have decided to go for this lens: Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS. From what I have read in various columns its ideal foe weddings. I am saving now to get it. Anyone here using this lens?

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 USM IS - Review / Test Report

Stelios