Wedding photography is such an incredibly diverse and versatile area of photography that asking “which lens is best?” is akin to asking “what is the proper aperture for a photo?” You need just a bit more information to answer the question properly. Any given photographer is going to have dozens of different sorts of scenarios in front of their camera on a given day, and there too many stylistic and cultural differences between wedding photographers to even approximate here. The idea of the “right lens” depends on context, and for me one of the big questions is “well, what other lens am I carrying?”
Like many other wedding photographers, I am generally a two-camera shooter. As a photojournalist, I’d always shot with just one at a time, but from my very first wedding, I had one slung over each shoulder (the now-dinosaur Nikon D70s and Fuji S2 Pro). This decision was cemented in my very first wedding when my camera locked up about 10 seconds before the first kiss … and I had another one ready to go.
But a second camera shouldn’t be mere backup…it gives you an opportunity to have two lenses ready at all times. Two points of view, two different modes that you can think in, and a great deal less reaching into your bag, hoping you can get your lens switched before the moment is over. While I still use one camera for most portrait shoots, I’ve now had two (or sometimes three!) cameras on my body for well over 500 weddings, and here are the top 5 kinds of combinations I’ve found useful, and their relative advantages and disadvantages.
1. Medium-wide prime and medium-long prime
This is probably the most common combination for modern two-camera shooters. With two cameras, it’s a lot easier to use primes because you won’t be stuck with a telephoto when you get asked for a group photo or stuck with a wide when a perfect moment is happening 20 feet away from you. Also, the main downside of two cameras is that it can get heavy and cumbersome, so putting lighter primes on your cameras keeps you nimble. In return you get the fantastic low-light capability, incredible depth-of-field control, and a more subtle benefit — you know exactly what frame-of-view your camera will have before you even put it to your eye, so you can have a shot already framed in your mind even with the camera not in your hands at the moment.
Far and away the most common split here is a 35mm and an 85mm. These lenses are far apart to give you very different looks, but not so far apart that you’ll be constantly looking for something in-between. 35mm is the standard photojournalistic focal length for good reason — it lets you get in close to the action without a great deal of shape distortion like with wider lenses. Also, these lenses exist for virtually every system, such as Nikon’s 35mm f/1.4Gand 85mm f/1.4G, Canon’s 35mm f/1.4L,85mm f/1.2L, or Sony’s Zeiss 35mm f/1.4and the brand-new 85mm f/1.4 GM. But since weight is a major benefit of primes, it’s also a fine choice to go with smaller f/1.8ish lenses.
In fact, the 35/85 split is so popular that I tend to avoid it, partially for my images to stand out a bit but more because I love the 35mm focal length until the action starts getting intense, like crazy dance floor action, and I start looking for wider lenses. I find the Nikon 28mm f/1.8or Sony 28mm f/2to be a good balance for my eye … and they both score well in the bang-for-your-buck category.
2. Wide prime and normal
Here we are looking at carrying something like a 24mmand a 50mm. This may seem too close to the last category to merit its own section, but the experience of shooting with them is substantially different. This combination is often favored by those who adhere to Robert Capa’s adage: “If your photographs aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.” This is great for being mixed right up in the action, and I love it for the start of the day—getting ready and make-up—and the end of the day—crazy, somewhat-inebriated dancing. It is generally not the best combination for a cathedral ceremony unless you have a really, really tolerant officiant and a good invisibility cloak.
As a photojournalism combination, you generally want to look at lenses that have great autofocus performance, which for me sometimes means using a 50mm f/1.8 instead of the fastest lenses from each system. But if you’re looking for extreme depth-of-field for portraits or quieter situations, you may even use something like a Canon 50mm f/1.2 or even Mikaton 50mm f/0.95.
3. Two fast zooms
This combination is nearly the exact opposite combination from the last. Throw on a 24-70and a 70-200and on paper you seem ready to go, since you’ve covered every commonly useful focal length. Crazy dance moves right in front of you? There’s no problem getting people’s extremities in the frame. Covering a ceremony where you are commanded to go nowhere near the altar? You can still make it work.
The problem is that these lenses, fine when you’re using one camera, can get heavy and unwieldy when you’re working 12-hour days with two. Speaking from experience, carry this combination around long enough and a) you will develop back problems and b) you will eventually smack an expensive vase or a small child with the dangling 70-200. This is generally a ceremony combination for me since zooming with your feet is much easier at 28mm that at 200mm, and because, although counterintuitive, a 70-200 is a perfect lens for family photos (it keeps the people on the edges looking like normal humans instead of stretched-out blob monsters).
4. Mix it up: zoom and fast lens
This is the jack-of-all-trades, with some of the versatility of the zoom combination and less weight. I started my wedding career with this, using the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8and 85mm f/1.4 (equivalent to 127mm). On full-frame you get the same sort of combination with a 24-70 and a 135, with a bit less child-smacking. In this case, I use the 24-70 as a “moment maker” and the long lens as a “pretty maker.” A fast zoom near wide-open turn will tend to focus on exactly one thing and turn the rest of the frame into eye candy, which tends to give you a higher rate of good photos and a lower rate of great ones, because fewer elements can get in the frame.
You can also use this just to have a low-light ambient option at a reception, which might mean throwing on a fast 50 even if you’re also using a 24-70 with a flash, or conversely a fast wide like a 35mm f/1.4 with a 70-200.
5. Getting weird
When you’ve worked with a lens enough, as soon as you put it on your camera your mind starts seeing the world from the perspective of that lens. 85? What would the world look like as an out-of-focus background? 24? How can I make all the elements of this wider frame work for me?
So sometimes you need to just mix it up with something completely non-standard. A super-wide like a 12-24mm (or even a fisheye if you’re so inclined). A tilt shift like the 45mm f/2.8 Nikonor Canon. Super fast manual focus glass like the Mikaton or Nikon 105mm f/1.8, or a lens with a unique look like the Petzval 85mm f/2.2. You can mix one of these with your favorite workhorse lens for a quick, occasional “different” sort of shot, or, as I sometimes do for a portion of a portrait shoot, put “weird” lenses on both cameras, forcing you to see a scene differently.
Warning: Every “trick shot” (and I do mean *every* sort) should be used in extreme moderation. A little goes a long way, and too much can be cloying and faddish.
To see more of Robert Brenizer’s work click here.
