Lens Need to buy...need some input

[mbower05]

Hi all,

I was able to shoot several weddings last year as a second shooter and the photographer I work for is booked solid this year which means many more weddings for me too!

Last year I was able to get away with renting fast glass but with at least 10 weddings coming up I just can't see spending $200 per event to rent anymore. So... I am going to buy! As much as I would love to I simply can't afford to go out and buy nikons "holy trinity."

I was hoping some of you may have some input on this. I keep going back and forth
-drop $2000 for one nikon lens or go with sigma or tamron and be able to afford 2 or 3 lenses instead of 1? Ultimately I would love to get a24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 and possibly a 14-24

I have only eve r used nikon so I guess I just need to know if sigma or tamron will cut it for wedding shoots?

I'm all for trying to save money but I also don't want to make a purchase I will regret down the road!

Any help would be appreciated!

I have the 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 Sigmas (as well as the 50mm f1.4). The 70-200mm is really nice. Very fast focusing, and the image quality is pretty damn good.

I'm on the fence with the 24-70. It's okay. The image quality is pretty decent, and it's built really well. However, I occassionally have problems focussing at 70mm. Not sure if I'm going to fork out the extra $600 for the Canon, but it's tempting.

The 50mm f1.4 is awesome, and is by far the most used lens I have...especially at wedding receptions.

[OsmosisStudios]

You'd have to borrow both and test them.

[jojonac]

I have some friends that have the sigma lenses and the only complaint from them is they seem to focus slower then the nikon. But I would really suggest you try them first and then decide. I'm taking it one lens at a time, and now I just need the 24-70 and I am complete.
good luck.

[Brian Mullins]

Coming from a working photographers viewpoint, save up and buy the best. It's really tough to do but the Nikon 24-70 2.8 is a fabulous piece of glass and sharper then many primes. It's tough to swallow that pill at first but keep in mind that in 10 years, when you are still using that same lens, you will not be concerned about the extra cash you spent.

Lenses loose very little value, especially when compared to camera bodies. You can have a D3X but it you put a sub-par lens on it, it will look like any other consumer camera. Lenses are, by far, the most important thing to not skimp on.

[mbower05]

Originally Posted by Brian Mullins

Coming from a working photographers viewpoint, save up and buy the best. It's really tough to do but the Nikon 24-70 2.8 is a fabulous piece of glass and sharper then many primes. It's tough to swallow that pill at first but keep in mind that in 10 years, when you are still using that same lens, you will not be concerned about the extra cash you spent.

Lenses loose very little value, especially when compared to camera bodies. You can have a D3X but it you put a sub-par lens on it, it will look like any other consumer camera. Lenses are, by far, the most important thing to not skimp on.

Brian,

Thanks for your insight. I spent some time and thought about what you said and it definitely makes sense. I am not a pro yet and I know that equipment alone will not get me there but I also know that If I don't invest in myself as well as equipment I won't make any progress.

This afternoon I bought a nikon 24-70 2.8 as well as the nikon 70-200 2.8 vr. I almost vomitted spending that much but I am definitely looking at this long term. This summer with with the amount of weddings I have.. I would have thrown away over $2000 renting so why not just buy right?

Thanks again!