70-200mm Telephoto Zoom Lenses, will this be good for wedding or portrait photos??

[KindachiShota]

Hello,

I am still in learning stage about cameras and photos.
My cousin told me to purchase 70-200mm Telephoto Zoom Lenses for Nikon D7000.
She said that this lens might be good for any wedding photographs or any type of portrait photograph.
Can you please advice about this and help me understand more better?

[DanK]

Kindaichi,

It depends in part on what camera you are shooting--full-frame or crop--because the angle of view is quite different. I have a 70-200, and it is very useful with both formats, but given what I shoot, I find it more useful on the full frame. Leaving aside macro, my 70-200 is my second-most-used lens on my full frame camera, and it is superb for both portraits and candids. On a FF camera, a focal length range of, say, 70-110 mm puts you at a distance that provides a very nice perspective. On a crop sensor, you have to be farther away to get the same framing at any given focal length, so I found that I used that lens less for shots of people. However, it was still useful when taking candids because you can do them from a distance.

However--and this is a very big however--it is almost always a bad idea to buy a lens just because someone else says it is a good one. In my opinion, the starting point should always be: what can't I do with my current equipment, or what can't I do well enough? That will suggest what lens or other equipment might solve the problem. If you don't do this, you will face issues even if you decide to buy a 70-200. For example, in the Canon line-up, if you want image stabilization (VC in Nikon-speak), there are two 70-200 lenses to choose from in their top line: one f/2.8 and one f/4.0 The f/2.8 costs about twice as much and weighs about twice as much. Which would be best for you? It depends on what you do. For me, the f/4 was the obvious choice, and I have never once regretted it. For people who have to do candids in low light without flash, or who need razor-thin depth of field, the f/2.8 is worth it.

Dan

[NorthernFocus]

For shooting weddings indoors on D7000 this may be too long for you. 24-70 f2.8 may be better choice. If you have the budget 24-70 f2.8 plus 70-200 f2.8 cover most needs.

[tbob]

I agree with the two Dans. For candids outside it is great because you can stand a distance away and have your subject much more relaxed. Inside the lens is just too long and cumbersome for most shots

[Manfred M]

Kindaichi - Good advice from the two Dans and Trevor.

The advice of a 70-200mm lens being a good portrait and wedding lens is true for full frame (FX) cameras, but not necessarily for crop frame (DX) cameras like your D7000. That is the focal length range that most commercial portrait photographers will use for portraits, especially of individuals and will generally include specific types of ranges like head shots (200mm setting) to 3/4 shots (70mm setting). For group shots or full body shots, they will usually go to a 24-70mm lens. As an aside, I own the f/2.8 Nikkor version of both these lenses, as I do a lot of portraiture in a studio setting.

Both of these lenses are extremely expensive and quite large and heavy. Yes they can be used on a crop frame camera like yours, but they are not ideal. If you use the 1.5x multiplier for crop frames to calculate the equivalent focal lengths, you should be looking at something in the 17mm - 140mm range to cover all those focal lengths. Nikon makes an 18 - 140mm lens; I suspect that this would be far more suitable for your camera body if you want to cover off typical portraiture focal lengths on your camera body.

[rpcrowe]

I totally agree with the above comments. I consider the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 70-200mm (f/2.8 version if you intend to shoot under low light conditions without flash) as a great combination for a full frame camera in virtually all professional shooting scenarios including weddings with the exception of sports and wildlife.

In fact, I would be happy with this combination for wedding and event photography when using a crop sensor camera. The equivalent focal range of 36mm to 105mm is great for shooting people. I don't like to go much wider with people because the distortion often results in a less than flattering image. This is especially true at for women the edges of the image. (and women usually control the purse strings regarding weddings) However for other than event/wedding photography, I consider 24mm as pretty restrictive on a crop sensor camera.

For general shooting, I use Canon gear with a 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and a 70-200mm f/4L IS on a pair of cameras (sometimes a pair of crop cameras and lately a crop camera and a full frame camera). This brings up another factor. I believe it is absolutely essential to have a backup camera when shooting once in a lifetime events or any other event for which you are being paid.

Since a second camera is essential, a good idea is to shoot with both cameras, one with a mid-range zoom and the other with a longer focal length. That way you never lose a shot because you are switching lenses.

There are many convenient ways to carry a pair of cameras but, that is a subject of another thread...

BTW: I did a pretty good job on a wedding many years ago shooting with a pair of 35mm Leica M-2 film cameras with a 35mm prime on one body and a 90mm short telephoto on another. Also in the days of film, I shot many-many weddings quite successfully using a 6x6cm Rolleiflex twin lens reflex camera with a fixed 80mm f/2.8 lens. I had a 6x6cm Yashica twin lens reflex as a backup camera but, did not usually shoot with it...

[AlwaysOnAuto]

I'd recommend you see if you can find and try a Nikon 18-200 VR I or II lens. I own the VR I lens and it's the only lens I had for my D7000 until I started collecting manual focus Nikkors for my Sony A7ii.

[William W]

What lenses do you already have?

Do you mean to take Weddings and Portraits professionally (i.e. for money) or are you asking for general advice about a lens which might be useful to take to a wedding as a Guest and to use to make general portraiture?

If the question is about a lens for professional work, how a many Weddings has your cousin shot?

***

Apropos professional photography of Weddings and Portraiture, if one were using a 70 to 200 on a D7000, (APS-C Format Camera) the Subject Distance required for the framing of most of the shots necessary, would be too long and thus:

> would restrict ease of movement of the Photographer to get the best angle on the Subject(s)

> would impair rapport

> would impair direction and instruction

> would restrict the range of Perspectives available for any one shot

> would affect the range of intimacies achievable in the images.

***

As a general comment, a 70 to 200 would be a good lens for a Wedding and Portrait Kit, however, (especially if this is a question about Professional Photography), that lens should be an F/2.8 and you should seriously consider getting one with VR and {if such is available) one which allows the use of a Nikon x1.4 Tele-converter.

Additionally, such a lens will be comparatively expensive and for a (professional) Wedding and Portrait Kit, there are many items that rate higher on the priority list and will return better and more shots per dollar investment than a 70 o 200 lens, if you are using it on APS-C Format (i.e. a 'crop camera').

These comments also apply if your question concerns more general use.

WW

[dem]

My cousin told me to purchase 70-200mm Telephoto Zoom Lenses for Nikon D7000.

She said that this lens might be good for any wedding photographs or any type of portrait photograph.

This lens on this camera is good for a close up portrait of one (two at a push) people shot in a good light from about 4-10 meters away. That's it.

[Tronhard]

As I understand it the D7000 is a crop-sensor camera, the FoV will be impacted by that. My thoughts would be with the 18-200VR II, or the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR which would have FoVs of 24-300 and 36-180mm respectively. Why I like the 24-120 is that it has a constant aperture of f4 as opposed to the 18-200's variable aperture value of 3.5-5.6.

I got a new one of these recently at a bargain price and it has performed well on my FF Nikon

[William W]

This lens on this camera is good for a close up portrait of one (two at a push) people shot in a good light from about 4-10 meters away. That's it.

Yes. Agree. Summed up eloquently.

. . . and the long shot, usually from the rear of the Church or Venue: but that's one or two shots only in the whole coverage, and those shots are more cheaply achieved by a 135 Prime (and maybe a 1.4 Tele-converter) or renting a lens when one knows that it is a large Church or Venue and/or the Photographers' movements are restricted by the Official.

WW

[Tronhard]

Having read the whole thread the two things we are all struggling with are:

1. What level of involvement are we looking at here: casual wedding shots of friends or working as a wedding pro (and everything between)
2. What is the budget?

In the interim the advice to rent gear is perfectly logical, but if this is to be a purchase that information would be helpful...

[William W]

... and ...

3. what lens(es) does the OP already have?

[pnodrog]

As I understand it the D7000 is a crop-sensor camera, the FoV will be impacted by that. My thoughts would be with the 18-200VR II, or the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR which would have FoVs of 24-300 and 36-180mm respectively. Why I like the 24-120 is that it has a constant aperture of f4 as opposed to the 18-200's variable aperture value of 3.5-5.6.

I got a new one of these recently at a bargain price and it has performed well on my FF Nikon

I was quickly scrolling down to add my words of wisdom? when I noticed Trev has more or less said it all. On a FF camera, the 24-120mm just about covers everything you need at a wedding. With a DX crop frame camera, it may be handy to have something that will go a little wider but only for large group shots.

[rpcrowe]

I have noticed that a lot of today's photographers use wide or ultra-wide lenses for group shots when experience in posing groups would allow a "better" (less distortion) image with a longer focal length lens.

Handling a group of people in a firm but, polite manner is, IMO, one of the most important skills in wedding or event photography. Of course, handling people for a group shot is predicated on knowing what you want them to do and being able to communicate that to them.

You certainly don't get any repeat business by being abrasive during a wedding shoot but, you also don't get repeat business without the ability to get the best shots...

[William W]

I agree on both points Richard made.

On the matter of using wide lenses for Group shots for Weddings - I had a "rule" for myself never to use wider than a 35mm Lens (on 135 Format aka "Full Frame").

On some Portrait Shoots, one or two Person(s) I have used as wide as 16mm Lens (on FF) - but that is a different type of shooting to a Wedding where there is a pressure of time. On a Portrait Shoot I'd typically use a range of Focal Lengths, and a few shoots might be using a very wide lens, but I would have the time to do that and more time to concentrate on not making a mistake.

WW

[JHzlwd]

You have received a lot of good advice already but here's my 2 cents worth.

I detest wedding photography so, as an amateur, I can readily avoid it. Once in awhile I do get coerced into "doing" a wedding and seem to have a good knack for it. A 70 - 200 mm is an excellent choice because it enables candid shots from a distance. The new Nikon F/4 is compact and has excellent optics. If you can afford a shorter lens as a supplement - the 24- 70 is great if you are required to arrange for posed shots but it's expensive. Remember, the loving couple and their guests aren't interested in image quality but memories. If you're going to do weddings, round out your kit with a "cheapy" alternative to the Nikon 24- 70.

Best wishes,
JH

[William W]

. . . Remember, the loving couple and their guests aren't interested in image quality but memories. . .

I disagree.

WW

[Tronhard]

I disagree.

WW

I absolutely agree with Bill. When I got married a LONG time ago we did so on a shoestring. The result was that a professional photographer with no wedding experience offered to do our photos. Desperate, we agreed. He totally screwed up the photos and from that whole day we had maybe one image that was worth keeping.

People get married (normally) with the intent that this is a once-in-a-lifetime experience and the significance of that needs to be given respect. I always council amateurs in any kind of photography, but especially wedding photographers, to be very aware of that fact and their responsibilities to the their clients - in this case the couple, family and guests. Wedding photography is a specific skill-set and has a very high exposure to people for whom the results are of significant emotional value - take good ones and they will love you, take bad ones and you will wish you never went near the project. As a service provider one needs to treat any client with respect for their needs and agenda, and if we are not prepared to do so then it's best not to engage. If one is not being paid and doing it on a best effort basis that still doesn't release one from taking a professionalist approach - it reflects on us and our pride in our craft.

When I suggested using the Nikon 24-120mm (36-180mm on an APS-C body) lens I did so primarily because I believed that the in one lens it provides all the necessary focal lengths, the aperture is reasonable and constant, and the quality of the images that I have had from it are satisfactory. Yes, this is regarded as a 'kit' lens for a FX camera -it is not because it is cheap (not really) but it is popular for the reasons I just listed and because it offers excellent results.

[William W]

The other factor you (Trev) mentioned about the 24 to 120/4 being a possible good choice for the OP, who is using APS-C Format, is that this lens has a Non-Varying Maximum Aperture.

This happens to be quite important purchase factor for lenses for Wedding Photography.

A Varying Max Aperture Zoom can be diabolical if one is using Canon gear.

There are subtle differences for Nikon, but similar traps are prevalent.

Specifically these traps arise when moving quickly under the pressure of time between different lighting situations, using Flash and zooming to make different Framing, when using the Camera in Av Mode or Manual Mode.

For one example: The Recession (inside dark); nearing the Church doors (some more sunlight, brighter), at the doors (outside Sunlight)

WW