When I’m photographing a wedding, I’m using the equipment I own that gives me the best quality images–e.g., my Canon 1-series DSLR + an “L” zoom lens or my prime lenses. Same with my portrait sessions. (Clients like to see that you are using expensive camera equipment when they’re paying hundreds or thousands of dollars for your services; it probably shouldn’t be that way; but, believe me, it truly makes a difference to some clients.)

But prime lenses and the best quality zoom lenses cover limited focal lengths; there’s always a trade-off between optical image quality and the range of focal lengths a zoom lens covers. Normally a prime lens–which only covers one fixed focal length–provides the epitome of image quality but the least flexibility in terms of focal length range. And professional quality zoom lenses–like the 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 IS–extend focal length flexibility with a slight, but usually acceptable, drop in image quality. However, any one of these high-quality professional zoom lenses necessarily leave out a large part of the focal length range photographers commonly like to cover–e.g., 24-300mm.

Whenever I am covering a wedding (or other event) or photographing a portrait session, fleeting moments appear in front of me that I may not be able to capture well with the focal length or lengths available to me with the lens currently on my camera, and there often isn’t time to change my lens before the moment has passed. Also, there is occasionally a need for some flash lighting that may or may not be available on my camera at that moment.

So, what do you do to insure that you are “ready for anything”?

First, I try to use a lens on my primary DSLR that can capture 80% or more of the types of images I’m trying to capture during any particular stretch of the session or event. A prime lens may suit this purpose (e.g., a large max aperture prime lens when low lighting is an issue), or a high-quality professional zoom lens might be the way to go.

What about those other 20% (or so) unexpected shots? I like to have a relatively small DSLR with a prime or zoom lens (the lens should be relatively small & light as well) on my hip, and this lens should cover a portion of the 24-300mm range not being covered by the lens on my primary camera.

Now, I’ve photographed many weddings and portrait sessions with two large DSLRs hanging on me (e.g., a 1-series and a 5D with grip) and trying to capture roughly equal numbers of photos with each camera. It’s a pain in the butt in many ways. Two large cameras weigh a lot and they can get tangled up–even when you start using some of these innovations now available to get one or both of the cameras off of your neck (I’ve experimented with some of them); also it’s amazing how easy the camera you’re not currently using can get bumped and the settings messed up such that its not available for that quick shot! The standard configuration here is having two cameras (with the same or similar crop factor), one with a 24-70mm lens and the other with a 70-200mm lens.

I have found that relying on one main camera + lens for 80% or more of your shots (during any particular stretch of an event or session) truly simplifies things and makes it easier to focus and enjoy doing the photography: less weight, less time switching back-and-forth between cameras. And if the second camera is one of the smaller, less expensive DSLRs, they come with a built-in flash just in case you need it; this is *much* more portable than having one of the professional DSLRs that require an attached flash unit.

I just photographed a fashion show this past weekend. My primary camera + lens was a Canon 1D with a 70-200 f/2.8 lens, which covered more than 90% of the shots I wanted to get. However, at my side I had my good old Canon 20D with a 28mm f/1.8  lens to grab any wide angle shots that might appear before me on short notice. This combination worked great!

The actual combination of lenses you’ll want to use will depend on the event, and may even change during the course of a particular event–e.g., for a wedding, I normally use different lenses for the “getting ready” photos than I use for the ceremony photos. For outdoor portrait sessions, I’m finding that a 24-105 lens on a 1.3 crop factor Canon 1-series DSLR works well for more than 80% of the photos; match that with a telephoto zoom on a small DSLR (e.g., 100-300 mm) and you’ll also be able to zoom in for some close-up shots from a comfortable (for both you and the subject) distance.

So, if you photograph event and/or portrait sessions and you don’t want to buy or carry around two large and expensive DSLR cameras–or spend the time and experience the hassle of regularly switching back-and-forth between them–then consider buying and using one expensive “primary” camera and lens. Supplement it with a cheaper and smaller camera + lens “safety net” at your hip that can fill in all or part of the critical focal range you’ve necessarily had to leave out to maintain the single, high-quality camera and lens configuration, and you’ll be “ready for anything”…:-).

Michael Grace-Martin is a professional wedding, portrait, event, stock, and fine art photographer based in Upstate New York. He is also the author of this blog. All images and text are (c) Michael Grace-Martin Photography. His fine art website is at http://www.michaelgracemartin.com/ and his main commercial/services website is at http://www.mgm-photography.com/.

Though I’ve certainly done a few blog posts regarding wedding photography with mentions of lens choices, I find myself having to re-visit the topic…especially now on the brink of another wedding season.

I recently got rid of one of my stalwart zoom lenses which I used since my very first wedding: the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 L USM. Recently I concluded that all zoom lenses are compromises and “crutches”, and that I happily accept and use them anyway. However–to me–the 24-70 became the ultimate in non-committal compromise. It can’t really reach into those breathtaking or highly useful (in tight quarters) wide angle shots I can get with a fisheye or 16-35 zoom lens, and neither can it zoom in very well for those intimately tight close-ups that I get with my 135 f/2 or my 70-200 zoom lens. If I want to go with a “play it safe” middle range, I’d rather put on a standard normal lens (50mm) with a larger maximum aperture (f/1.4 or f/1.2) so I can take photos in almost any lighting condition.

As I’ve mentioned before, if Canon (or anyone else) made a super zoom lens with a constant large maximum aperture, decent optical quality, and it didn’t weigh 10 pounds, that’s the lens I would use; I’m not particularly fond of constantly changing lenses *especially* when it leads to missed shots and dust and dirt getting into my camera body. But this is not the way things are, and camera equipment manufacturers aren’t highly motivated to make and sell you a single product that takes care of all your photographic needs when they can sell you a dizzying array of products, each one of which only partially takes care of your needs.

Some may say it’s physically impossible to create the one-lens-does-it-all lens I allude to. I’m not saying it would be easy, but I think technology can accomplish an amazing number of things when the needed accompanying motivation exists.

But enough talk of this “super lens”, let’s get back to current reality because that’s what I have available to me for my upcoming “real” weddings in 2010…(!)

I will have three cameras available to me this wedding season: one with a full-frame sensor (Canon 5D series), one with a 1.3 crop sensor (Canon 1D series), and one with a 1.6 crop sensor. For weddings, I nearly always have two cameras readily available (i.e., hanging on me in some way) with lenses attached.

One thing I like about having cameras with different size sensors is that it effectively turns each of my lenses into the equivalent of *three* lenses. For example, on my full-frame sensor camera, a 50mm lens has the FOV (field of view) of a 50mm lens (of course). On my 1.3 crop sensor camera, the 50mm lens has the FOV of a 65mm lens. And on the 1.6 crop sensor camera, that same 50mm lens has a FOV of a 80mm lens. Since you’re going to need a backup camera for wedding photography anyway, choosing cameras with different size sensors gives you more versatility with your existing lenses. (Note: make sure you buy lenses that can work on all three camera bodies or this advantage won’t be there.)

When it comes down to the choice of prime lenses versus zoom lenses for wedding photography, I’ve developed a few guidelines for myself:

1. The highest priced professional quality zoom lenses yield images that are absolutely good enough for wedding clients. To buy multiple primes instead of these high quality zoom lenses for better image quality will make no difference to 98% of your wedding clients. They are *much* more likely to notice how you framed your shots (e.g., how you were able to zoom in or zoom out for a shot) than to notice that a prime lens yielded marginally better detail or BOKEH than a zoom lens.
2. With the high ISO capabilities of current digital SLRs, there are many fewer instances when you need a lens with a larger maximum aperture than the f/2.8 available with most top quality professional zoom lenses for existing light shots. And for those instances when f/2.8 isn’t large enough for an existing light shot (e.g., due to your subject moving in a low light situation), you can:
   • use a bounced or diffused flash to raise the ambient light,
   • keep one large aperture, “general purpose” prime lens in your camera bag to take out and use during these moments, or
   • trigger some off-camera lighting.
3. Most wedding clients like *both* intimate close-up shots (e.g., facial expressions during key moments during the wedding day) and scene-setting, wide angle shots (e.g., the wedding couple standing at the front of a high-ceiling church, or all the bridesmaids crammed into a tight dressing at various stages of getting ready).
4. My lens strategy for an outdoor wedding ceremony and/or reception versus an indoor one is quite different and usually requires no prime lenses. In general, outdoor ceremonies and receptions are significantly easier to photograph because there’s usually much more light to work with. With more light, I can use one of my smaller maximum aperture zoom lenses that covers a much larger focal range (e.g., I have a 24-105 f/4L and a 35-350 f/3.5-5.6L). I bring a flash, but mostly just for some fill light.

So, what about my *indoor* wedding lens strategy for 2010?

• Wide-angle zoom: 16-35 f/2.8–this gives me a true 16-35mm on the full-frame camera and 20.8-45.5mm on the 1.3 crop sensor 1D. So, this lens in conjunction with these two cameras give me 16-45.5mm f/2.8 (i.e., super wide up to almost normal) coverage.
• Middle range prime: 50 f/1.4–this gives me “normal” coverage on the full-frame and 65mm (somewhat telephoto compared to normal) on the 1.3 crop sensor 1D. F/1.4 is a very useful large aperture to have available and the Canon 50 f/1.4 is the least expensive, high-quality f/1.4 lens Canon makes.
• Telephoto zoom: 70-200 f/2.8–a true 70-200mm on the full-frame and a somewhat more telephoto (91-260mm) on the 1.3 crop sensor 1D. For even closer crops, I can put it on the 1.6 crop sensor camera for an effective 112-320mm reach.
• Dark/Late night prime: 135 f/2–I often swap the 70-200 f/2.8 for a 135 f/2 later in the reception when/if it becomes too dark to use the 70-200 without auxiliary lighting.

So, at this moment in time (1:00pm on a Monday, 2/1/2010…;-), this is my lens strategy for the 2010 indoor wedding season. Whew! It’s a bit of a relief to me (I’m constantly mulling this stuff over and trying it out at weddings) and I hope you can gain something from my “suffering” as well…;-).

Michael Grace-Martin is a professional wedding, portrait, event, stock, and fine art photographer based in Upstate New York. He is also the author of this blog. All images and text are (c) Michael Grace-Martin Photography. His main website is: http://www.mgm-photography.com/.