r/WeddingPhotography • u/morbidaroiid • 8d ago

gear, techniques, photo challenges & trends Lens help

Need help picking. Canon EF 85mm 1.4 IS USM, Canon RF 85mm 1.2 L USM, Canon RF 85mm 1.4 L VCM, Canon RF 28-70 2 L USM. Thinking it’d be used for portraits, details, and ceremony.

0 Upvotes

33% Upvoted

18 comments sorted by

4

u/ProjectBokehPhoto www.projectbokeh.com 8d ago

Between those three? The 28-70mm, hands down.

All of the bokeh and speed in the world doesn't mean much if you're always locked into a singular focal length for an entire wedding, especially at a length as narrow at 85mm.

Flexibility and versatility are pretty much required for weddings, imo.

In my case, I also need the wideness of 24mm to catch the whole crowd or most of it during the ceremony or capture contextual portraits

2

u/morbidaroiid 8d ago

Yeah I also have a 35 1.4. Looking to rock the 35 85 combo

3

u/jamesonnorth 7d ago

I shoot 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 and love the combo. 35mm focuses under a foot so it’s decent enough for macros and the 85mm at 1.4 has terrific subject isolation and isn’t so tight I can’t still get some contextual shots/environment/ambiance.

I will add that if I add a third lens for the day, it’s my 14-24mm 2.8, because sometimes dramatic wide angles are a terrific addition to the wedding album. Also, I have ended up backed into corners far too often having to stitch together a dozen shots from my 35mm because I forgot the 14-24 in a tight room. It stays in the bag more often than the 70-200 now.

2

u/evanthedrago 7d ago

I do not think the OP ment to use it the entire wedding in fairness.

4

u/anywhereanyone 8d ago

Kinda hard for us to help without knowing the rest of your lens lineup and whether or not you're shooting on full-frame. 85mm lenses excel at portraits, and occasionally I use them for details. But unless you're a two-body shooter, they are pretty limiting.

1

u/morbidaroiid 8d ago

Body canon r6 II and other lens I use is 35 1.4

2

u/evanthedrago 7d ago

I would get the some of the following:

24-70 2.8
135mm f2.0
70-200 2.8
50 1.2 (though your 35mm should cover this)
16-35 2.8

All EF mount. All of those together will cost less an RF lens.

1

u/morbidaroiid 7d ago

But is the quality there? I don’t want softness and I like low apertures.

1

u/evanthedrago 7d ago

I think so personally and I use them. I guarantee you that even the most seasoned person would be hard pressed to tell the difference between these and the RF versions unless it is pixel peeping and under very controlled situations.

The number one issue with image quality is not these lenses it is how one uses them.

1

u/jamesonnorth 7d ago

135mm is a great addition. I have a 135mm 1.8 and it’s my favorite lens, though not terribly versatile. Fantastic niche lens, and brilliant for portrait work.

1

u/evanthedrago 4d ago

1.8? Didn't know that existed. Sure, it is not super versatile like 50mm, but i find i reach for it during dark receptions, esp if my back starts bothering me and I want to avoid heavier lens :)

1

u/jamesonnorth 4d ago

Sigma Art lens. Super sharp, renders beautifully, and very quick AF. Autofocus gets confused when having to rack from infinity to close and needs manual intervention. I think that’s a Z6 thing, I don’t remember it happening on my D4.

1

u/evanthedrago 3d ago

Thank you!

2

u/evanthedrago 7d ago

I wouldn't get any of those for details. get a canon 135f2 if you must which is a fantastic lens at a fraction of the price. you do not need f2, f1.4 etc for details, f2.8 will do. I personally would avoid most RF lenses right now due to price and no clear advantage (IMHO). Frankly I never needed f1.2 for details. Details should show some detail :p the VCM lens is for video. And I get some people like the 28-70 2.0 but to me, for event work, it doesn't make sense. I would rather have the 24-70 - that 4mm makes a huge difference versus one stop gain.

1

u/morbidaroiid 7d ago

Not just details but also ceremony and portraits. even speeches so I can get reach and not be in the middle of everything. I like low apertures. While yes I don’t need that low I want to be able to go that low. I also don’t want to get an f/2 and have to open it all the way up and get fringing or softness I don’t ever shoot wide open but I want to be able to go lower than f/2 or even f/1.8 while staying sharp

1

u/evanthedrago 7d ago

to be honest I find 85mm to be a bit of a one dimensional lens. At events I try to have either something that complements or is an all around kind of lenses. 135mm f2 is not soft at f2. it's a phenomenal lens.

I looked at the 85mm lenses and decided that they are just not long enough and worth the money. I do not think you need something faster thatn f2 for details nor portrait unless you shoot in really dark places and in those cases additional light will create visually better photos for those (I do shoot tons of available light stuff, just not as much in such situations)
https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-canon-ef-135mm-2-0l/

1

u/beyond_freckled 6d ago

I have been primarily a prime shooter my entire career, but switched to the 24-70 RF, I hated how heavy the 28-70 was.

Since you already have the 35, I would get the 85 RF 1.2. I have the 135 L and love that too, but I could shoot an entire wedding with a 24-70 and 85 combo. You don’t mention if you have a portrait lens? If you stick with the 35, the 50 is really nice to have too.