Good and affordable wedding lens?

[Flowty]

I need to get a decent wedding lens, or, at least, a decent walk around lens. I'm currently using a Canon t2i, and I found using a 50mm prime very uncomfortable for social events (not wide enough, I guess it's because of the crop factor).

What lenses do you recommend? Do you think a 35mm prime would be a good acquisition? I cannot afford anything more expensive than 750 bucks

Thanks in advance!

[RichardTaylor]

What other lenses do you own?

[Flowty]

The only lenses I own at the moment are the kit lens (18-55 f/3.5-5.6 IS II) and a 50mm prime.

[RichardTaylor]

Within your budget.
(1) A 35mm F2 will give you wider and faster (I own the Canon lens and it is OK)

Above (by $300 or so) your budget and ideally I would be looking at a Canon Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (I don't own own) but it will give you very usable focal lengths and fast. (I don't own one).

[CarlyRocksPhotos]

Originally Posted by RichardTaylor

Within your budget.
(1) A 35mm F2 will give you wider and faster (I own the Canon lens and it is OK)

Above (by $300 or so) your budget and ideally I would be looking at a Canon Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (I don't own own) but it will give you very usable focal lengths and fast. (I don't own one).

I own and recommend both of the above lenses.

One of the great things about using wide angle lenses on a crop sensor, you won't get *as much* distortion at the edges. . . But still watch out if it's a group of people!

[oldwolf]

Above your budget by $150 is the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8. Great lens IMO.

Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM Autofocus Lens 571101 B&H Photo

Within your budget is the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. I don't have personal experience with this one.

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di Autofocus Lens for Can AF09C700 B&H

You can also get the 17-50mm f/2.8 by Tamron for your budget. No personal experience with either of these either. One has VC/IS and the other doesn't.

Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II LD Lens for Can AF016C700 B&H

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD AFB005C700 B&H Photo

[ceremus]

I have the Canon 17-55mm f/2.8, it's an awesome walkaround but a bit out of your budget as mentioned.

I haven't used it myself, but the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 non-VC / non-stabilized lens is often recommended as a cheaper alternative to the 17-55. It lacks the stabilizer and the full-time-manual control, but it has the same excellent sharpness as the Canon version, and is of course just as fast at f/2.8. The VC version of the Tamron is reportedly not as sharp, so be aware.

[Flowty]

Thank you all for your opinions! I've considered Tamron 17-55 non VC, but it's not available on Best Buy. I've also considered Canon 17-40 L which is around 780 dollars, *crop factor would result 27-64, and I'd be able to use it on a FF body, and resell it for a good value in the worst of cases. On the other hand, it doesn't seem to produce much better pictures (technically, of course) than the kit lens. What do you guys think?

[scootermcq]

I have the Tamron and do not use it too much....

I have a Nikon system, so it might be different for Canon, but I find it really hunts in low light. Even if it locks, about half the time the focus is soft or slightly off.

When it does focus properly, it does produce some lovely images



This was shot at:
ISO 800
1/60
f4.5
50mm

[ccting]

i wander when 24-70 f/1.4 is out.. hhhehe