What's so great about Canon DSLRs?

[Dave Partington]

Originally Posted by Byron Jones

The Nikons (D600/800) have continuous autofocus during video, even a face tracking focus. I don't think Canon has this. I can't miss this shot.

They do, but I would never use it for video I was hoping to ship. It's too jumpy and nowhere near as smooth as a proper video camera.

As said above, find a nice medium focus position or better yet find the hyperfocal on the lens and use it wisely. The 14L (yes it's expensive) has a hyperfocal distance of only 3 feet, so you can have everything from 3 foot to infinity more or less in focus if you want. It's a great lens for walk outs because you get the grandeur of the church as the B+G come back down the isle with all their friends & family around them. Far too often we see this time all zoomed in and forget to show the wider picture.

[Byron Jones]

OK. So I read the posts here and did a lot of research. I even borrowed a D600 for few days and did my own tests. The Nikon produced a great image. It was sharp and had a nice range. However, it just doesn't compete with Canon's 6D or 5Diii in low light. That is a problem for wedding shooters. I know we can always add light to these dark venues, but to me, I would rather not. I have a couple of LEDs to stick up on poles as a last resort, but I would prefer to leave them in the trunk. I really don't want to have them on camera, even at a low setting as they make it much more difficult to get candid shots. I like to be descreet while filming. Having a camera that can handle low light like these two Canons would help a great deal. I don't really want to discuss the cameras themselves, but what I have found shows video capabilities are similar. I don't need a headphone jack, as I use a dual system, so that pretty much leaves cheaper vs less moire. If I find a filter for the moire, 6D it is. If not, then bye bye to an extra $1,500 for the 5Diii. What I really could use help with is lenses. "L" glass is expensive! Do I need it? What EF mount lenses do use most for weddings? Can I buy cheaper and still get great Image quality? I have no Canon glass, so starting from scratch, what should I get first for weddings if my budget cap for lense(s) is a couple thousand? Thanks!!

[Adrian Tan]

Well, just as you did with the bodies, maybe test out the glass and see what focal lengths you're happy with and decide for yourself whether you need L glass or not.

It's really just down to personal preference...

Some people claim to be able to shoot entire weddings on 50mm, and Philip Bloom, etc will often recommend this as the best starting lens to buy. But some people (like Ken Rockwell) might say instead that 50mm often feels either too wide or too tele.

[Noa Put]

I focused more on photography and leaned heavily toward Nikon as I loved the lenses.

did you try the nikon d5200? according to what I have seen it can handle high iso without excessive noise. there are some test videos on vimeo which show it's capabilities, for it's low price you could invest in some good nikon glass.

[Daniel Latimer]

The Rokinon (Samyang in Europe) brand is really good. High quality glass and less expensive than the L glass. It's all manual though. The aperture is on the lens, so you can't use autofocus (a bigger deal if you also do photography).

[Mark Von Lanken]

Originally Posted by Byron Jones

... What I really could use help with is lenses. "L" glass is expensive! Do I need it? What EF mount lenses do use most for weddings? Can I buy cheaper and still get great Image quality? I have no Canon glass, so starting from scratch, what should I get first for weddings if my budget cap for lense(s) is a couple thousand? Thanks!!

If you are shooting primarily wedding video and not photography you can get away with less expensive glass, especially if you are shooting 1920x1080 and not 4k. Another way you can save money is to get manual focus glass, either vintage or the Rokinon/Samyang. I had a Rokinon 85mm 1.4 that compared very nicely to my Zeiss 85mm 1.4, but the Rokinon was a fraction of the price.

Another consideration in making you glass budget stretch farther is prime vs zoom. As long as you are going with a 6D or Mk3, you can get by with zoom lenses, which are as fast as 2.8. If you change your mind and go with the current crop frame Canons (EF-S), you will need fast primes for those darker receptions. By fast I am referring to 1.4-1.8. When I was shooting with 60Ds, I used a lot of fast primes, especially for the reception but now that we have the 6D and Mk3s, we shoot more with zooms than primes.

So as long as you go with the 6D or Mk3, a single zoom in the range of 24-70 f/2.8 or even 24-105 f/4 can cover the range of a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm prime lenses. Even buying the cheapest primes, those four lenses will cost more than a single Canon 24-105 f/4 IS and you get image stabilization. The convenience of the zoom and IS does come at a price...f/4 versus f/1.4, but for the fast pace of weddings, zoom lenses do have nice advantages.

You will also need a longer lens, in the 70-200 range. The first couple of years of shooting DSLR, I used vintage Vivitar Series 1 70-210 3.5 lenses for the ceremony. They are usually $100 or less on ebay, but they do not have image stabilization. At 200mm it is very difficult to move the camera for a pan or tilt smoothly without IS. Another big negative to non IS lenses in that range is outdoor ceremonies on windy days. Your shots can be ruined by the wind at 200mm without IS.

If you don't want the $100 vintage Vivitar Series 1, you can look at third party zooms in the 70-200 range from Sigma or Tamron. I do not have experience with either one. We upgraded from the Vivitar Series 1 70-200s to the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS. Brand new they are expensive, $2500ish. You can watch for them on Canons refurbished site or watch the used market. I bought a used Mk1 version for $1400 used and a Mk2 version for $1800 used. Alot of money when your total budget is $2000, but well worth considering for future purchases.

Once you get the 24-70/24-105 and the 70-200 range covered you can start considering other options for specialty shots. On a full frame camera, 24mm is really nice and wide. For those ultra wide shots, a Tokina 11-16 2.8 is nice. It will work on a full frame camera, but you are limited to 16mm without vignetting. It's a specialty lens that you may not use very much, depending on your style. It's less than $600, which is a good price, but it only does one thing...ultra wide. I say it's a good price because the Canon 16-35 is almost 3 times the price of the Tokina. I do have the Canon 16-35, but I started with the Tokina.

If you do go with zooms, I would get a least one prime, in the 50mm 1.4 or 85mm 1.4. It's nice to have for some specialty shots for ultra narrow DoF or when it's ultra dark, but with the 6D or Mk3, f/2.8 is plenty fast for dark receptions and if it's not too dark, f/4.

The Rokinon 85mm 1.4 is about $300 and a vintage 50mm 1.4 can be as little as $100-150. I do not like the Canon 50mm 1.8. It is very difficult to focus.

[Terry Wall]

Hi Mark! You were a Panasonic guy for a lotta years, weren't you? What happened to all that gear? Are you exclusively shooting DSLRs now?

[Mark Von Lanken]

Hi Terry,

Yes I was a Panasonic guy. When the AF100 came out I gave it a try, but it wasn't for me. I still have my 3 HMC150s. They are used on our Documentary wedding coverage, but the DSLRs are used for our Cinematic wedding coverage. The Pannys are great for anything that requires a long form "documentary" type of coverage.

We started experimenting with DSLRs for our weddings in 2010 and went totally DSLR for our Cinematic coverage in 2011.