Hey John this is my second time commenting, and i just wanted to express my appreciation and gratitude for your channel and all the work you do! 8 months ago i decided to start the journey of getting my own Business up a running. And Just last weekend had my 2nd full paying client. you have taught me so much, so thank you! Sending love from Sweden.
Having been covering weddings since the days of film - I started in 1977, there are VERY few times that I would use an aperture lower than f2.8. Lower than that, you really risk getting eyes in focus, but nose, neck and ears out of focus, which in my opinion is very unflattering. Therefore, my go-to lens is my 16-55, f2.8. It's versatile and delivers everything I could ever want for a wedding. The ideal balance of depth of field and versatility.
Surely that is only true if you are close to the subject. From a distance the depth of field extends to at least the depth of the face at f/1.4, at which point that aperture becomes useful to separate the subject nicely from the background.
@@Ttjam1 I'm pretty much always close to the subject for weddings. I see little point in having photos where the bride and groom are a tiny detail in the distance.
@@MrGohunter You're going from one extreme to the other. You don't need to be taking only portraits at Weddings nor do you need to be taking landscape photography type shots, there's a middle ground where most shots land.
Fujifilm is APAC system 😂 he will need that f1.4-1.8 aperture for lowlight performance and depth of field. I believe it is similar to f2-2.8 in full frame😂
Love working with primes on three bodies. I used to shoot corporate events with three used $300 Micro Four Thirds bodies and 12/2, 20/1.7, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8 primes. They were super small and light, affordable, and gave me just 1, 0.5 and 0.7 stops less light than an f2.8 zoom on a 35mm-format body. And, with advanced noise reduction, I could shoot at up to ISO 6400, which meant I was good without flash in most of the dim venues I worked in. Nowadays, I've moved to 35mm format because some venues are way dark, but I still rely a lot on primes. Current kit is three bodies with 24/1.8, 85/1.4 and 35-150/2.0-2.8. When the zoom starts to feel heavy and I'm in the dark part of an evening event, I'll replace it with a 35/1.4 and heave a sigh of relief. There's something satisfying about picking a focal length and making it work rather than zooming back and forth trying to find the right composition.
In terms of weight you‘re right, but I just recently got the R6II with the 28-70 f2.0. That combo, especially with the incredible low light performance on the R6II, is perfect for wedding photography. Still love shooting my Fujis and my Fuji primes though.
I also use that same exact combo, yes it's big, but you really don't feel it on a wedding day. That F2 is what got me. I love primes and 35/85 is a great combo
Totally agree and I don’t even shoot weddings. I do street and architecture. The 16mm is one of my favorite focal lengths outside and 33 or 90 inside. They balance well and are extremely fast and sharp.
When I can, I definitely shoot only with primes, but the XF50-140mm (70-200mm FF.e) is something I still really depend on for the ceremonies, specifically for ceremonies that really don't allow for much movement (ie, house rules, client preference, old fashioned Officiant or the space is just really cramped and small.) If I know ahead of time that I can get close during the ceremony and or move around a lot, then we're going XF23mm f1.4 + XF50mm F1.0 combo all the way. But otherwise, I still keep the XF50-140mm in the big bag just in case.
Very well said!! I only use primes. I only have the Fuji 18/1.4 and 33/1.4 and the Viltrox 75/1.2. Not to mention primes force you to think about what you are doing! Overall a more enjoyable process….at least for me!
Makes alot of sense John in terms of creating a shot rather than taking one. The only thing i thought is Sonys 70-200 is about 1000grams which is similar to their 135 so weight is less of an issue with Sony at least. If i didn’t want to do sports as well I would love primes only
I did a 50 and an 85. My partner, who had zero experience, shot a 35. It went great. They even managed to get an absolute killer on the zfc with a cheap ttartisan manual.
Having shot weddings with Fuji before using 2 bodies and 4 primes I can say I’m definitely happier on Sony using 1 body and 2 zooms. Tamron 20-40 and 35-150 literally have me covered for the whole day and still saving weight in the overall kit. Though tbh I don’t really use the 35-150 after portrait time. Usually will use the 20-40 and a 85mm
Hey John, I love your videos! Question, as a beginner in wedding photography with just one camera body currently- would you still recommend using primes? I think I like the idea of it for myself still, but I’m curious as to what you think.
I'll always advocate for primes. It's a little disingenuous though to roll a clip of someone using a 70-200 when you're talking about a 24-70. Primes and zoom are tools and have their proper uses for different people in different scenarios. Thanks for showing what works for you!
Love that video and I couldn’t agree more, although I used to have zoom lenses only. But this past year I sold my 70-200 and got a 50 1.2 and 135 1.8. And soon as Canon has a 24 and a 35 prime in their L-Series, I‘ll get rid of my 15-35. And of course the 85 is also on my list … but that’s probably my last step. 😅 Love your videos, you’re such an inspiration. Thanks 🙏🏻
Some good points! Being on Canon R series, I gotta say the RF 28-70 f/2 has to be the exception to the rule! It's a full stop more light than a 24-79 f/2.8, fast and accurate, tho it's certainly BULKY! I shoot with two cameras, and while I love the RF 70-200 f/2.8 for sports and events, before my next wedding I'm going to invest in the RF 135mm f/1.8 to use on my second body instead. That extra 1 1/3 stops should make a LOT of difference for dimly lit reception toasts, and I never find myself really needing to go to 200mm anyway.
Great video 👏🏻 do you shoot wide open for the 1st dance of the couple at f1.2 or f1.4? I’ve always shot with the xf16-55 lens but recently I’ve used the xf33 for the 1st dance of the couple on the dance floor and I was surprised shooting at f1.4 the images were amazing rather than shooting at f2.8 on my zoom and using continuous Af I got plenty of sharp photos too with the xh2 and xt5 cameras even in low light too as where my xt4 struggled in continuous af in low light to track the eye af
I hear ya John…my question is about reaction time: I can zoom faster than I can switch lenses. Wedding ceremonies don’t have do-overs! I used only primes at my last wedding. Zooming with my feet got me more deliberate or purposeful shots, but what about when you can’t walk it out-bushes, ponds, furniture layouts, etc.? My 24-70 and 70-200 haven’t let me down, save a little sharpness you only get with primes.
That's kind of what I was talking about closer to the end. You're never switching lenses at a crucial time because with 2 bodies you're set with 2 focal lengths for whatever is happening. During getting ready I'm generally 35 and 50. When it's ceremony it's 35 and 85. But I'm only switching when I know I have time.
@@jbivphotography I had people’s heads filling the frame with my 85! I made it creative, but I’d rather have been able to get a little closer in a split second, faster than my middle-age knees can get me. Hey, I’ll take your advice and give it several more tries.
There’s always going to be a time an place for the Holy Trinity of lenses. There’s a time and place for all of them. I shoot with an X-H2 and an H-H1. I carry a 16-55, 50-140, 56, and 33. These lenses let me cover ever aspect of a wedding.
@@jbivphotography however, on a FF high resolution body, you'll only need a 50mm f1.2 and one body to fulfil the role of your 2 body 2 lens apsc setup of 35mm and 50mm. The other body could mount a 24-70 for wide shots and 70mm for close up detailed shots. I'm sure not all jobs have the budget for a second shooter to cover for you, nor would the client expect less without a second shooter.
"I can zoom faster than I can switch lenses" Having worked with primes on three bodies for years, I can grab the FL I want at least as fast as I can raise a heavy zoom and twist the zoom ring. The difference is that when I work with primes, I've already seen the shot in my mind before I even choose and raise a camera, so once the camera is up, I'm making photos, not trying out different FLs. "what about when you can’t walk it out?" At events, I scout first, so I know in advance where I need to go, how to get there, and what focal lengths I'll want. Only once in 20 years have I gotten caught out without a needed FL, and this was solved by a utility belt with two lens pouches on it so I can have my 18/2.8 and 135/1.8 with me even if I don't think I'll need 'em. Crop Mode turns the latter into a 200/2.5, so I've got 18-200 covered with three primes on bodies and two on the belt. I do have and use a 17-28 and 35-150, but I still find primes on three bodies more satisfying. I use the zooms to get the money shots right off the bat, but later, when I switch to primes, that's when I really enjoy my work and start getting more creative.
I'm kinda there, with a foot in both camps. I'm typically shooting bounce flash with the Sigma 18-50 (tiny, sharp and moderately fast at f2.8) on an XH2 (in places bounce flash works), plus a fast 1.4 or 1.2 prime on the xt5. If it's out in the open with enough light to shoot available light, I'll switch to 2 different primes on the 2 bodies etc. I have been tempted by the Fuji 50-140mm for one of the traditional event zooms, but I don't think I'd like carting it around all day!
This video is much sassier than I expected. I fully agree with all your points and I'm in the same boat for when I shoot weddings, but I do just love the undertone of this video being "bro just get good" 😂
I like my Sigma 24-70 2.8 Art. It's always gonna get the shot, and it's sharp, reliable and versetile. But it's heavy, big, makes me lazier and it's a bit boring. Only reason I feel like I NEED a zoom is for rock climbing. It I can't move as much when I'm on a rope. Other than that I honestly feel like I either it at 24mm where 2.8 works fine, 35mm where I wish I had F/2 or bigger, or I'm at 70mm wishing I had an 85mm with F/2 or faster. Not to mention shooting primes is more fun.
There’s a reason with a film Hassy the 50-80-150 were called the money makers. That is all you needed for a lot of work that brought in the bucks. No coincidence those are approximately 35-50-85 equivalent in FF.
Thanks for the advice on prime lenses, I'm definitely switching them up but a 70 - 200mm F2.8 should be I every wedding photographers bag in my opinion. By the way, I was wondering what region of America is the "y'all" slang you use is from. I'm from the UK and I don't hear it that often.
Y'all is a southern thing. I'm born and raised from North Carolina. For me generally I just use something like a 110mm for extra reach when I need it. Those 70-200s are just so massive. I can't take it.
my least favorite part of photography is carrying a bunch of shit. I thought I really needed to invest in a zoom to do weddings but so glad I stumbled upon your content...maybe I won't....I have a weak wrist! @@jbivphotography
On a high-rez 35mm format body, an 85/1.4 in Crop Mode gives me 130/2, one full stop brighter than a 70-200/2.8. I rarely need more than 130, and if I do my 135/1.8, which crops to 200/2.5, is on my belt.
I love primes. They help me visualize the shot. I only use a zoom on my GFX 50s II because I'm still saving for the prime I want. Plus I am not sure if I'm getting the 45, 50 or 63. I mainly use 23, and 35, with the XH2.
Yes, preach it bro. I love primes and if you strategies its no problem at all. Definitely lighter than zooms. I've definitely done a few wedding with just primes. Only zoom I think about and rent sometimes is the RF 28-70mm f2, its heavy...(the...is because you don't really feel it, just remember to eat your wheaties😂)
I’ve been assisting and partially second shooting with an established wedding photographer - for my role it made sense to carry only one camera. So I put on a Tamron 28-87 2.8 and BOY did I hate it! And it’s not the lens’ fault... Even though I stuck to 28, 35, 50 and 75 and didn’t use any of the in between focal lenghts, it just felt so odd and lazy. Once you’ve learned your focal lenghts, obviously you can still pre-visualize a shot and then take it with a zoom lens, but... I just didn’t enjoy it. It’s "practical", and I hate that for some reason. Oddly enough I feel less in control of my photography when I have a zoom. And then there’s the form factor, especially on a full frame camera. I love a good understatement, and a small lens does that trick for me. This isn’t to knock people who use zooms - but it’s definitely not for me whenever I can avoid it. Granted, there are court houses and venues where it can be really difficult to move around and be in the right spot at the right time. In those instances I might be ok with a zoom because I don’t have the freedom to get the frame with a prime lens focal length. But how often is that the case?
How about a rf 16mm for smaller rooms too? Please help lol also if outside or inside for large family shots , would a 16mm be better . I’m an amateur as you can tell 😊
Hey John I have a take on zooms and primes that I’m inter to hear your thoughts on: I love using a 35/85 FF combo, but I also like using holy trinity zooms. Zooms are great for busy times of the day, being fast enough but also maybe importantly, slow enough to allow depth of field for more context and storytelling. They also typically have better stabilisation features which is great for doing hybrid photo video coverage. It’s really tempting to shoot at 1.4 all day to some, but 2.8 also allows couple’s faces to both be in focus even when wide open, especially in non controllable situations like ceremonies. Zooms have common lens focal lengths printed on the zoom ring. I like to use my zooms like a set of primes, and get used to the focal lengths like you would for primes. I generally avoid zooming while composing, and try to have a composition and the focal length locked with my hand before I take the image. I think this way, you can get the most out of zooms as long as you don’t get lazy. I think it takes a bit of mental discipline to use zooms with a prime mindset. I think that having both zooms and primes with some overlap is great for redundancy too. If my primes packed up on a wedding, I’d be fine to do portraits on zooms, and vice versa for the photojournalistic times of day using primes.
I love shooting with primes but without two bodies (I'm currently unable to afford another camera..) shooting fast pace moments becomes hard. I often get stuck on just one lens for that entire section of the day..
Yes. I FULLY agree with that. I probably should have put that in the video. If you’re shooting with a single body you have to use zooms. It’s the only way.
First off: Fuji is quite easily my favorite system and I shoot primes. I wonder, though, if you’d feel the same about f/1.4 vs f/2.8 (in low light) if you were using an ISO-invariant full-frame sensor. What do you think?
I recently bought a deeply discounted A7R3 (which is the same size as my Fuji X-Twhatever) to try out the Sony system, a Voigtlander 35 1.4, and the Tamron 28-75 2.8, but it’s my first normal (but not travel) zoom and I’m not sure I actually need it.
I'm not at the point where I have every part of the day mapped out in terms of focal lengths, so I always have the 16-55 f/2.8 and 50-140 f/2.8 in addition to the 16 f/1.4 and 56 f/1.2 . . after a 9-hour day, my shoulders want me to ditch the zooms. I may swap them out for the 23mm f/1.4 and 90mm f/2.
If you're not already using a dual harness to carry two bodies, I heartily recommend OpTech/USA's Double Sling. It's a shoulder-saver. 15 years of using two shoulder straps and carrying heavy shoulder bags messed up my right shoulder pretty bad. Now it's back to 85% and I can work without pain.
@@garypardyphotography The OpTech's upper yoke is made of stretchy neoprene, which absorbs shock and cushions the shoulders. It doesn't have any metal bits to scratch cameras in the bag. It doesn't occupy the camera's tripod mount. And, it's about half the price. I've had some of my OpTech straps for 25 years.
Hello, In the video, there was mention of an option for saving pictures from SD cards to an external drive. However, it appears that the product mentioned is no longer available on Amazon. Could you please share a link to it or suggest an alternative?" Thanks!
Counter argument on the weight: something like the recent Tamron 28-75 2.8 G2, which has received nothing but praise for its image quality, weighs 540g. I'm arguing in favor of zooms here but I'm actually a prime guy - my Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG HSM Art (the "old" one for DSLRs) is heavier than most 24-70s, but I like it a lot and it cost 250 buckos used.
I am also shooting with prime lenses o croop camera. It is super light and small. And the reasolts are perfekt sharp, becouse my crop sensor is using just the center of the prime lenses, what is the sharpest part of every lens.
@@jbivphotography Have you ever found issues in low light situations? Im considering either option - especially with Viltrox releasing some great lenses.
I use the Holdfast Gear Money Maker. I'm a huge fan of their products and they also make single and dual straps. You can check them out here. bit.ly/2VJHoql
It does, but it’s been fine for me. At the end of a day of shooting I may have a speck of dust on a sensor, but nothing to worry about. Often I don’t even see it in the photos.
Yep it’s very true. I just want to bring light to the fact that it’s possible to use primes. Hopefully opening up the idea to folks rather than them only using zooms because they think there is no other way.
Would love to shoot primes and will be moving away from zoom lenses but the cost is just too much for me right now a Sony 85mm 1.4 is £1,500 as an example
Prime time all day! Sure, there are times when you are restricted and you might need to use a Zoom. BUT, those stay in my case and only come out if something like that happens. I like to be all up in the action. If i need to zoom in, i have two legs lol. I know some can worry they are going to ruin a moment or feel like they are in the way, but trust, you wont be. For party reception photos, everyone is hype and drinking, they don't care if you are all up in there lol. 35 1.4 and 85 1.4 all day for me. 24 1.4 on the dance floor, and the occasional 50 1.2 when i need it. Grab the lenses you need for the part of the day you are shooting.
Exactly. I do own a couple of zoom lenses and I'll use them when the time calls for it. But generally I know that before the type of session I'm shooting.
My Top Favorite Lenses for Wedding Photography are: Full-Frame Prime Kit 35mm f/1.4 Nikkor 85mm f/1.4 Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 Nikkor 24mm f/2 Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 macro Nikkor Full-Frame Zoom Kit 14-24mm f/2.8 Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor APS-C Prime Kit 23mm f/1.4 Fujinon 16mm f/1.4 Fujinon 56mm f/1.2 Fujinon 12mm f/2 Rokinon 135mm f/2 Zeiss APS-C Zoom Kit 16-55mm f/2.8 Fujinon 50-140mm f/2.8 Fujinon 35mm f/2 Rokinon 12mm f/2.8 Zeiss I usually use two camera bodies and a prime kit to shoot the weddings and have one camera body and a zoom kit as a backup.
You don't make a sound argument. Plus making negative comments about other people's use of zooms is childish. You do what works for you and others will do the same.
Correct. I think getting a great photo is what matters most. My main poking fun at in this video is that most people tell starting photographers that they "can't" do certain things without zoom lenses. And I'm tired of that narrative.
People get so caught up in trends. I think everyone should just study your camera work on your craft and do what works for your! I love shooting with primes I do have some zooms but I’m a prime gal lol🎉
Exactly!! The main reason I made this video is just to be a different voice in the room and let people know that it's possible to shoot primes for weddings. But at the end of the day whatever works and gets you the results to please your clients is what matters.
If you’re shooting in a church that limits your ability, what do you use for further away shots. I know some don’t allow you to e moving around so much and not near the altar.
Generally what I’ll do for a day like that is bring an additional lens with me. Something like a 110mm for the reach. Obviously the easiest option would be a 70-200. Zooms totally have their place, but I’m usually ok with just a longer prime lens.
@@jbivphotography I am new to primes and not yet at weddings yet . For personal comfort and confidence levels. But I don’t want to go away from primes. I love the quality and speed and want to be able to do primes for any job/project etc I get. Have 50 and 85 now. Thinking of adding 35 soon and I’d think a 135 or something close in prime would have me covered when I go to weddings. Which is the goal
lol just a little fun and games. I do love a good zoom lens especially if I'm working with a single camera. Zooms totally have their place. And whatever tool works best for the photog is the best option.
PRIMES! I love shooting with primes even if it can get crazy changing lenses halfway through the dance, it certainly requires a lot of reading the room to make sure you won't miss anything key for instance right after a spin I usually know I've got about 5 seconds. I've tried using two cameras, but it's just not for me and it feels too bulky I'm 5'1 97lbs.
You talk about how f/2.8 on a full-frame zoom doesn’t let in enough light, but f/1 on a crop sensor is at best the equivalent of f/2.8 on full-frame. I’m confused.
It's more like 1-stop difference between APS-C and full frame. So f/1 on crop is more like f/1.4 on full frame in terms of depth of field and noise. f/2.8 on crop is like f/4 on full frame.
So I 100% agree with you; primes ARE better for most things… but you GROSSLY misrepresented zoom lenses as well as their pros and cons. For starters: before I switched to primes, I carried CONSTANT APERTURE zoom lenses, so the settings wouldn’t change when I switched my focal length. Also, just because one uses a zoom lens, doesn’t mean they don’t understand composition like you made it sound. For example: I would treat my zooms like a group of primes. I’d envision the shot I wanted, switch to that focal length, and go from there. Furthermore, due to the nature of zoom lenses, if I thought I wanted the shot with a 35, but now that Im seeing it, I think a 50 would be better, all I do is make a slight adjustment to the zoom ring instead of swapping lenses. One more thing, if a model said “hey I wanna do this thing,” I could walk around the model and see what my different ideas looked like on the fly and make adjustments accordingly. One of the BIGGEST pros to zoom lenses is how much it speeds up your workflow. You mentioned size and weight, and while you’re correct, the individual size and weight of these lenses are favoring to the primes, though not by a whole lot, you must remember that one zoom that covers 4+ focal lengths replaces 4+ individual primes that collectively weigh more. When I switched to primes, I carried LESS focal lengths due to size and weight limitations. Now look, as I’ve said several times: I did switch from zooms to primes - again, I don’t disagree with you, but that’s because I made that decision based on what I wanted in my photos. I wanted faster apertures and shallower depths of field. But to someone who does a lot of run and gun stuff, can’t justify the expense of all those primes, can’t travel with all those individual primes, does want to run a second body OR can’t afford one - zoom lenses make a LOT of sense. I just finished a book about “closing the feedback loop” so what I’m about to say isn’t meant to be nasty; I’ve loved your content thusfar, but I subscribed to your channel because I wanted to learn more about photography, business, and cameras/editing. If you make too many of these videos that misrepresent stuff, I won’t stick around. I do hope you have a good day today, and again, the above comment wasn’t meant to be nasty, but helpful.
At weddings I use primes and zooms - and on a crop sensor! Yes, I have the 70-200 2.8L. I have focal lengths from 10-200mm (16-320 on a crop) on two bodies. My primes are the 85 1.4 IS which is an amazing portrait lens, although at 136mm on a crop it can be a bit wide for full lenght at a dimly lit reception. That's where the humble 50mm 1.8 comes in. I use a 10-22mm quite a lot but have to crank up the ISO (fixed with DxO) or use flash (with a slow shutter) at the reception. I carry it all in a camera jacket so it's not too fatiguing. You can miss shots, or not get the best composition, with a prime because you can't always be in the best spot when something happens unexpectedly. Conversely, with a zoom you can miss a shot, or compromise on quality due to a smaller max aperture. Either way, I often keep the 10-22 on one body and swap lenses on the other to suit the situation.
Funny, I just did getting ready shots in the hotel room with an 85. I started with a 35 but found myself being a distraction to the make up artist. A 50 would be perfect for my scenario but I didn't have it with me.
The weight and size argument is getting old nowadays: a) XT5 with battery grip + 16/1.4 23/1.4 33/1.4 50/1 90/2 = 3.5kg b) a7IV + 24gm 35gm 50gm1.4 sigma85/1.4 135gm = 3.7kg Hardly any difference in weight while taking in a stop more light for 24mm 35mm 50mm, equivalent on the 75/85mm and 2 stops more light on 135mm c) Switching to an a7r5, could use apsc mode at 26MP (Same as xt4), so you'll only need a 24GM 50GM and 135GM to cover24mm-200mm at just 2.6kg or 3kg with a grip d) Sony's 70-200 weighs about the same as Fuji's 50-140 while letting in a stop more light e) Scratching my head seeing your videos juggling f2 primes, while the same could be achieved using a full frame24-70/2.8, where the same amount of light is gathered and similar amounts of subject separation f) There's a reason why much more professionals use FF than Fuji, not that Fuji can't deliver, just that FF counterparts Canon/Sony are more consistent and reliable as a tool, any camera or phone could deliver great photos, just a matter of the effort to edit, cobsistency and reliability
Zoom Lens For Clear face and clear nose & Eyes f3.5 of 5.6 and for big group f8 Prime - f1.8 For Details F2.2 For Sharp Portrait Very Easy With F1 or f1.2 or f1.4 U will get only eyes in foucs rest of frame will be Blury... So Be Carefull ..
I would be hard pressed to want to move to crop because of the wider dof at any given equivalent focal length, i mean it might not matter as much if your shooting at f1.4 as thats going to give similar dof of a 2.8 give or take ( cant recall the proper difference ) also the better iso performance. At least for weddings that is. I guess the 28-70/2 from Canon is so good that it's hard to find something better. Im hoping canon will release a 70-150 or 180 f2 soon we can't hope for a 70-200/2 lol
Not ideal, but it definitely can be done. If I had to use just one lens and choose between a standard zoom f/2.8 and a 50mm 1.8, I’d probably go with the 50. :)
Hey, introverts can get close, too. We just won't talk your ear off while we shoot. Also, there are these things called tele primes. I know, the 200/2.8 has gone the way of the dodo bird, but 135/1.8s are making a comeback.
@@jbivphotography I've adopted the same philosophy for video - that camera (fx30) is super 35 so I am using a 24 1.4 (36 equivalent) all day. Unless I really have a need for a telephoto (which I'd rent) - it is primes all the way. Not to change the subject but that 36 to 40 range (or range equivalent) is a sweet spot, a slightly different look than most people deliver.
@@jbivphotography weddings are cultural. In our case, how you shoot is considered getting into the personal space of the couple. In big swanky five -star hotels or resorts or historic churches there’s no way one can shoot photos without telephotos or zooms.
I'm not buying it. I can get just as good of a bokey on an f/2.8 zoom than I can with an f/1.8 crop sensor lens. Blowing out the background isn't how you get good pictures. f/2.8 blows out the BG great on full frame. I'd rather have a 24mm prime, 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron, 85mm prime, and a fisheye lens.
Zoom lenses robs you of creativity. With zoom lenses you just zoom in to any focal length and shoot without thinking. With primes you think and compose before pushing the trigger.
As a wedding photographer and videographer, I disagree. I've worked with countless photographers who will shoot a ceremony or entire wedding with a 35 and one camera body. They are in everyone's shot because they have to get right up in there to get close ups. It can be invasive. I have no doubt their shots were great but it's completely distracting and makes it hard for others to do their jobs.
I mean shooting on one body and a 35 only is just stupid IMO. That's why I'm shooting with 2 bodies and always have a longer lens on me so I'm not all up on the shot when I don't need to be. Main point of this video is to give a different perspective and possibility. Rather than there just being one single narrative of you HAVE to shoot zoom and you HAVE to shoot full frame. Like its not possible any other way.
I’m not. Only during getting ready and things. When there’s literally no space. Also I shoot pretty wide. I don’t like the extra tight photos all the time. 👍👍
My zoom goes to 2.0. If it's to heavy for you, get stronger. I mean if you say just because you shoot primes you're more creative than zoom lens shooters. This is trash
That Canon zoom has shaken things up for sure. It seems like a fantastic piece of equipment, but I think beginners will have a much easier time learning focal lengths by shooting primes. Might be wrong tho. For me personally, I just don’t like the look and feel of big lenses, so I’d probably be a little unhappy with the 28-70 2.0. But that’s just personal preference :)
Your videos are great, and I very often agree with your points. But the mocking voices when you're talking about other people's opinions are unnecessary and childish. In my opinon they don't reflect well on your professionalism.
Dude it’s preference every photograph has a process put it let this some people like driving sedans while some people like trucks. Your only locked in on 70-200 you know there’s more focal length like 16-35 24-70 so on in a sense you are clowning zoom users most of the time your shooting over f2 anyways
Yep. Totally a preference. However tell that to people when they instruct someone who’s starting in the industry. All people ever say are “you have to have 24-70, 70-200”. It’s more rare that people would suggest starting with primes. So I’m just trying to give the other side of the argument. At the end of the day use whatever gets you great results.
Agree with primes. 85/35 on my bodies for most of a wedding. 50 sometimes replaces one of them.
Hey John this is my second time commenting, and i just wanted to express my appreciation and gratitude for your channel and all the work you do! 8 months ago i decided to start the journey of getting my own Business up a running. And Just last weekend had my 2nd full paying client. you have taught me so much, so thank you! Sending love from Sweden.
Having been covering weddings since the days of film - I started in 1977, there are VERY few times that I would use an aperture lower than f2.8. Lower than that, you really risk getting eyes in focus, but nose, neck and ears out of focus, which in my opinion is very unflattering. Therefore, my go-to lens is my 16-55, f2.8. It's versatile and delivers everything I could ever want for a wedding. The ideal balance of depth of field and versatility.
u r right
Surely that is only true if you are close to the subject. From a distance the depth of field extends to at least the depth of the face at f/1.4, at which point that aperture becomes useful to separate the subject nicely from the background.
@@Ttjam1 I'm pretty much always close to the subject for weddings. I see little point in having photos where the bride and groom are a tiny detail in the distance.
@@MrGohunter You're going from one extreme to the other. You don't need to be taking only portraits at Weddings nor do you need to be taking landscape photography type shots, there's a middle ground where most shots land.
Fujifilm is APAC system 😂 he will need that f1.4-1.8 aperture for lowlight performance and depth of field. I believe it is similar to f2-2.8 in full frame😂
Love working with primes on three bodies.
I used to shoot corporate events with three used $300 Micro Four Thirds bodies and 12/2, 20/1.7, 45/1.8 and 75/1.8 primes. They were super small and light, affordable, and gave me just 1, 0.5 and 0.7 stops less light than an f2.8 zoom on a 35mm-format body. And, with advanced noise reduction, I could shoot at up to ISO 6400, which meant I was good without flash in most of the dim venues I worked in.
Nowadays, I've moved to 35mm format because some venues are way dark, but I still rely a lot on primes. Current kit is three bodies with 24/1.8, 85/1.4 and 35-150/2.0-2.8. When the zoom starts to feel heavy and I'm in the dark part of an evening event, I'll replace it with a 35/1.4 and heave a sigh of relief.
There's something satisfying about picking a focal length and making it work rather than zooming back and forth trying to find the right composition.
same here, I really love primes. the only zoom I have is a 24-70 f2.8 but it's just too handy to not keep in my bag
True. I do have a couple of zooms and they come in handy. Especially if you're shooting with only one body.
In terms of weight you‘re right, but I just recently got the R6II with the 28-70 f2.0. That combo, especially with the incredible low light performance on the R6II, is perfect for wedding photography. Still love shooting my Fujis and my Fuji primes though.
That is a HEAVY combo...
I also use that same exact combo, yes it's big, but you really don't feel it on a wedding day. That F2 is what got me. I love primes and 35/85 is a great combo
Totally agree and I don’t even shoot weddings. I do street and architecture. The 16mm is one of my favorite focal lengths outside and 33 or 90 inside. They balance well and are extremely fast and sharp.
When I can, I definitely shoot only with primes, but the XF50-140mm (70-200mm FF.e) is something I still really depend on for the ceremonies, specifically for ceremonies that really don't allow for much movement (ie, house rules, client preference, old fashioned Officiant or the space is just really cramped and small.) If I know ahead of time that I can get close during the ceremony and or move around a lot, then we're going XF23mm f1.4 + XF50mm F1.0 combo all the way. But otherwise, I still keep the XF50-140mm in the big bag just in case.
Very well said!! I only use primes. I only have the Fuji 18/1.4 and 33/1.4 and the Viltrox 75/1.2. Not to mention primes force you to think about what you are doing! Overall a more enjoyable process….at least for me!
100000% agree.
i love your feedback , i use 35mm 1.8 and give me nice pictures ,
primes lens more sharpen more light .
Makes alot of sense John in terms of creating a shot rather than taking one. The only thing i thought is Sonys 70-200 is about 1000grams which is similar to their 135 so weight is less of an issue with Sony at least. If i didn’t want to do sports as well I would love primes only
As a photographer totally agree, but sometimes I shoot events for photo and video mode so I need that multi purpose option in my kit, cheers!!
I did a 50 and an 85. My partner, who had zero experience, shot a 35. It went great. They even managed to get an absolute killer on the zfc with a cheap ttartisan manual.
Having shot weddings with Fuji before using 2 bodies and 4 primes I can say I’m definitely happier on Sony using 1 body and 2 zooms. Tamron 20-40 and 35-150 literally have me covered for the whole day and still saving weight in the overall kit. Though tbh I don’t really use the 35-150 after portrait time. Usually will use the 20-40 and a 85mm
same setup with me. sony body 35-150 + 20-40.
So you meant 2 zooms.. no?
Also, that full frame sensor on the Sony makes a difference.
@@rick-deckard oops yea zooms
Exactly the point. With the new Sony 16-35gm2 + Tamron 35-150 and an a7r5, its just 2.4 kg for 16mm-225mm or just above 3kg with an a7iv a7r5 combo.
Hey John, I love your videos! Question, as a beginner in wedding photography with just one camera body currently- would you still recommend using primes? I think I like the idea of it for myself still, but I’m curious as to what you think.
I'll always advocate for primes. It's a little disingenuous though to roll a clip of someone using a 70-200 when you're talking about a 24-70. Primes and zoom are tools and have their proper uses for different people in different scenarios. Thanks for showing what works for you!
Love that video and I couldn’t agree more, although I used to have zoom lenses only. But this past year I sold my 70-200 and got a 50 1.2 and 135 1.8. And soon as Canon has a 24 and a 35 prime in their L-Series, I‘ll get rid of my 15-35. And of course the 85 is also on my list … but that’s probably my last step. 😅
Love your videos, you’re such an inspiration. Thanks 🙏🏻
Some good points! Being on Canon R series, I gotta say the RF 28-70 f/2 has to be the exception to the rule! It's a full stop more light than a 24-79 f/2.8, fast and accurate, tho it's certainly BULKY! I shoot with two cameras, and while I love the RF 70-200 f/2.8 for sports and events, before my next wedding I'm going to invest in the RF 135mm f/1.8 to use on my second body instead. That extra 1 1/3 stops should make a LOT of difference for dimly lit reception toasts, and I never find myself really needing to go to 200mm anyway.
Great video 👏🏻 do you shoot wide open for the 1st dance of the couple at f1.2 or f1.4? I’ve always shot with the xf16-55 lens but recently I’ve used the xf33 for the 1st dance of the couple on the dance floor and I was surprised shooting at f1.4 the images were amazing rather than shooting at f2.8 on my zoom and using continuous Af I got plenty of sharp photos too with the xh2 and xt5 cameras even in low light too as where my xt4 struggled in continuous af in low light to track the eye af
I hear ya John…my question is about reaction time: I can zoom faster than I can switch lenses. Wedding ceremonies don’t have do-overs! I used only primes at my last wedding. Zooming with my feet got me more deliberate or purposeful shots, but what about when you can’t walk it out-bushes, ponds, furniture layouts, etc.? My 24-70 and 70-200 haven’t let me down, save a little sharpness you only get with primes.
That's kind of what I was talking about closer to the end. You're never switching lenses at a crucial time because with 2 bodies you're set with 2 focal lengths for whatever is happening. During getting ready I'm generally 35 and 50. When it's ceremony it's 35 and 85. But I'm only switching when I know I have time.
@@jbivphotography I had people’s heads filling the frame with my 85! I made it creative, but I’d rather have been able to get a little closer in a split second, faster than my middle-age knees can get me. Hey, I’ll take your advice and give it several more tries.
There’s always going to be a time an place for the Holy Trinity of lenses. There’s a time and place for all of them. I shoot with an X-H2 and an H-H1. I carry a 16-55, 50-140, 56, and 33. These lenses let me cover ever aspect of a wedding.
@@jbivphotography however, on a FF high resolution body, you'll only need a 50mm f1.2 and one body to fulfil the role of your 2 body 2 lens apsc setup of 35mm and 50mm. The other body could mount a 24-70 for wide shots and 70mm for close up detailed shots. I'm sure not all jobs have the budget for a second shooter to cover for you, nor would the client expect less without a second shooter.
"I can zoom faster than I can switch lenses"
Having worked with primes on three bodies for years, I can grab the FL I want at least as fast as I can raise a heavy zoom and twist the zoom ring. The difference is that when I work with primes, I've already seen the shot in my mind before I even choose and raise a camera, so once the camera is up, I'm making photos, not trying out different FLs.
"what about when you can’t walk it out?"
At events, I scout first, so I know in advance where I need to go, how to get there, and what focal lengths I'll want. Only once in 20 years have I gotten caught out without a needed FL, and this was solved by a utility belt with two lens pouches on it so I can have my 18/2.8 and 135/1.8 with me even if I don't think I'll need 'em. Crop Mode turns the latter into a 200/2.5, so I've got 18-200 covered with three primes on bodies and two on the belt.
I do have and use a 17-28 and 35-150, but I still find primes on three bodies more satisfying. I use the zooms to get the money shots right off the bat, but later, when I switch to primes, that's when I really enjoy my work and start getting more creative.
I'm kinda there, with a foot in both camps.
I'm typically shooting bounce flash with the Sigma 18-50 (tiny, sharp and moderately fast at f2.8) on an XH2 (in places bounce flash works), plus a fast 1.4 or 1.2 prime on the xt5.
If it's out in the open with enough light to shoot available light, I'll switch to 2 different primes on the 2 bodies etc.
I have been tempted by the Fuji 50-140mm for one of the traditional event zooms, but I don't think I'd like carting it around all day!
This video is much sassier than I expected. I fully agree with all your points and I'm in the same boat for when I shoot weddings, but I do just love the undertone of this video being "bro just get good" 😂
And this isn’t even the sassiest that John’s been when talking about zoom lenses! 😂
I like my Sigma 24-70 2.8 Art. It's always gonna get the shot, and it's sharp, reliable and versetile. But it's heavy, big, makes me lazier and it's a bit boring.
Only reason I feel like I NEED a zoom is for rock climbing. It I can't move as much when I'm on a rope. Other than that I honestly feel like I either it at 24mm where 2.8 works fine, 35mm where I wish I had F/2 or bigger, or I'm at 70mm wishing I had an 85mm with F/2 or faster.
Not to mention shooting primes is more fun.
There’s a reason with a film Hassy the 50-80-150 were called the money makers. That is all you needed for a lot of work that brought in the bucks. No coincidence those are approximately 35-50-85 equivalent in FF.
Thanks for the advice on prime lenses, I'm definitely switching them up but a 70 - 200mm F2.8 should be I every wedding photographers bag in my opinion. By the way, I was wondering what region of America is the "y'all" slang you use is from. I'm from the UK and I don't hear it that often.
Y'all is a southern thing. I'm born and raised from North Carolina. For me generally I just use something like a 110mm for extra reach when I need it. Those 70-200s are just so massive. I can't take it.
I leave long zooms at home shooting weddings... just so big and heavy...
my least favorite part of photography is carrying a bunch of shit. I thought I really needed to invest in a zoom to do weddings but so glad I stumbled upon your content...maybe I won't....I have a weak wrist! @@jbivphotography
On a high-rez 35mm format body, an 85/1.4 in Crop Mode gives me 130/2, one full stop brighter than a 70-200/2.8. I rarely need more than 130, and if I do my 135/1.8, which crops to 200/2.5, is on my belt.
I love primes. They help me visualize the shot. I only use a zoom on my GFX 50s II because I'm still saving for the prime I want. Plus I am not sure if I'm getting the 45, 50 or 63. I mainly use 23, and 35, with the XH2.
Love it man, exactly how I have felt for years!
Yes, preach it bro. I love primes and if you strategies its no problem at all. Definitely lighter than zooms. I've definitely done a few wedding with just primes. Only zoom I think about and rent sometimes is the RF 28-70mm f2, its heavy...(the...is because you don't really feel it, just remember to eat your wheaties😂)
I’ve been assisting and partially second shooting with an established wedding photographer - for my role it made sense to carry only one camera. So I put on a Tamron 28-87 2.8 and BOY did I hate it! And it’s not the lens’ fault... Even though I stuck to 28, 35, 50 and 75 and didn’t use any of the in between focal lenghts, it just felt so odd and lazy. Once you’ve learned your focal lenghts, obviously you can still pre-visualize a shot and then take it with a zoom lens, but... I just didn’t enjoy it. It’s "practical", and I hate that for some reason. Oddly enough I feel less in control of my photography when I have a zoom. And then there’s the form factor, especially on a full frame camera. I love a good understatement, and a small lens does that trick for me.
This isn’t to knock people who use zooms - but it’s definitely not for me whenever I can avoid it. Granted, there are court houses and venues where it can be really difficult to move around and be in the right spot at the right time. In those instances I might be ok with a zoom because I don’t have the freedom to get the frame with a prime lens focal length. But how often is that the case?
How about a rf 16mm for smaller rooms too? Please help lol also if outside or inside for large family shots , would a 16mm be better . I’m an amateur as you can tell 😊
Hey John I have a take on zooms and primes that I’m inter to hear your thoughts on:
I love using a 35/85 FF combo, but I also like using holy trinity zooms.
Zooms are great for busy times of the day, being fast enough but also maybe importantly, slow enough to allow depth of field for more context and storytelling. They also typically have better stabilisation features which is great for doing hybrid photo video coverage.
It’s really tempting to shoot at 1.4 all day to some, but 2.8 also allows couple’s faces to both be in focus even when wide open, especially in non controllable situations like ceremonies.
Zooms have common lens focal lengths printed on the zoom ring. I like to use my zooms like a set of primes, and get used to the focal lengths like you would for primes. I generally avoid zooming while composing, and try to have a composition and the focal length locked with my hand before I take the image.
I think this way, you can get the most out of zooms as long as you don’t get lazy. I think it takes a bit of mental discipline to use zooms with a prime mindset.
I think that having both zooms and primes with some overlap is great for redundancy too. If my primes packed up on a wedding, I’d be fine to do portraits on zooms, and vice versa for the photojournalistic times of day using primes.
I love shooting with primes but without two bodies (I'm currently unable to afford another camera..) shooting fast pace moments becomes hard. I often get stuck on just one lens for that entire section of the day..
Yes. I FULLY agree with that. I probably should have put that in the video. If you’re shooting with a single body you have to use zooms. It’s the only way.
First off: Fuji is quite easily my favorite system and I shoot primes.
I wonder, though, if you’d feel the same about f/1.4 vs f/2.8 (in low light) if you were using an ISO-invariant full-frame sensor. What do you think?
I recently bought a deeply discounted A7R3 (which is the same size as my Fuji X-Twhatever) to try out the Sony system, a Voigtlander 35 1.4, and the Tamron 28-75 2.8, but it’s my first normal (but not travel) zoom and I’m not sure I actually need it.
I'm not at the point where I have every part of the day mapped out in terms of focal lengths, so I always have the 16-55 f/2.8 and 50-140 f/2.8 in addition to the 16 f/1.4 and 56 f/1.2
.
.
after a 9-hour day, my shoulders want me to ditch the zooms. I may swap them out for the 23mm f/1.4 and 90mm f/2.
Yeah you really have to have a process and have the day mapped out. Without that process primes are hard to handle.
If you're not already using a dual harness to carry two bodies, I heartily recommend OpTech/USA's Double Sling. It's a shoulder-saver. 15 years of using two shoulder straps and carrying heavy shoulder bags messed up my right shoulder pretty bad. Now it's back to 85% and I can work without pain.
@@HappeningPhotos I've got the Coiro dual camera harness and it is indeed a shoulder-saver! And looks cool to boot :)
@@garypardyphotography The OpTech's upper yoke is made of stretchy neoprene, which absorbs shock and cushions the shoulders. It doesn't have any metal bits to scratch cameras in the bag. It doesn't occupy the camera's tripod mount. And, it's about half the price. I've had some of my OpTech straps for 25 years.
Hello, In the video, there was mention of an option for saving pictures from SD cards to an external drive. However, it appears that the product mentioned is no longer available on Amazon. Could you please share a link to it or suggest an alternative?" Thanks!
Counter argument on the weight: something like the recent Tamron 28-75 2.8 G2, which has received nothing but praise for its image quality, weighs 540g.
I'm arguing in favor of zooms here but I'm actually a prime guy - my Sigma 50mm 1.4 DG HSM Art (the "old" one for DSLRs) is heavier than most 24-70s, but I like it a lot and it cost 250 buckos used.
I am also shooting with prime lenses o croop camera. It is super light and small. And the reasolts are perfekt sharp, becouse my crop sensor is using just the center of the prime lenses, what is the sharpest part of every lens.
What prime lenses do you recommend
Are you still using an XT5 or the XH2s? Excited for JPs Fuji review
X-T5 is my main for weddings currently. I’m curious to see what JP is going to do as well.
@@jbivphotography Have you ever found issues in low light situations? Im considering either option - especially with Viltrox releasing some great lenses.
Which camera strap do you use? I’ve been looking for a comfy and reliable brand but it’s not listed in the video description 😅
I use the Holdfast Gear Money Maker. I'm a huge fan of their products and they also make single and dual straps. You can check them out here. bit.ly/2VJHoql
@@jbivphotography wow! ITS a bit pricier than I thought. But definitely worth it. Just placed my order!
EPIC EXPLANATION ！🎉Defferent scenes with different lens combo, let prime lens views in your blood.
Past few events I have done was with a 24mm
Wow. I love shooting 24mm when I'm in crowds and things. But having a nice 50mm for some reach is always nice.
How do you keep your sensor clean when swapping lenses?
I'd Imagine it would introduce dust when swapping on the fly
It does, but it’s been fine for me. At the end of a day of shooting I may have a speck of dust on a sensor, but nothing to worry about. Often I don’t even see it in the photos.
No right or wrong, whatever works for you. It is nothing more than personal preference, I use both, prime and zoom
Yep it’s very true. I just want to bring light to the fact that it’s possible to use primes. Hopefully opening up the idea to folks rather than them only using zooms because they think there is no other way.
Would love to shoot primes and will be moving away from zoom lenses but the cost is just too much for me right now a Sony 85mm 1.4 is £1,500 as an example
Samyang 85/1.4 MkI is US$500 and it's very good. Same for their 35/1.4 MkI.
Prime time all day! Sure, there are times when you are restricted and you might need to use a Zoom. BUT, those stay in my case and only come out if something like that happens. I like to be all up in the action. If i need to zoom in, i have two legs lol. I know some can worry they are going to ruin a moment or feel like they are in the way, but trust, you wont be. For party reception photos, everyone is hype and drinking, they don't care if you are all up in there lol.
35 1.4 and 85 1.4 all day for me. 24 1.4 on the dance floor, and the occasional 50 1.2 when i need it. Grab the lenses you need for the part of the day you are shooting.
Exactly. I do own a couple of zoom lenses and I'll use them when the time calls for it. But generally I know that before the type of session I'm shooting.
My Top Favorite Lenses for Wedding Photography are:
Full-Frame Prime Kit
35mm f/1.4 Nikkor
85mm f/1.4 Nikkor
180mm f/2.8 Nikkor
24mm f/2 Nikkor
105mm f/2.8 macro Nikkor
Full-Frame Zoom Kit
14-24mm f/2.8 Nikkor
28-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor
80-200mm f/2.8 Nikkor
APS-C Prime Kit
23mm f/1.4 Fujinon
16mm f/1.4 Fujinon
56mm f/1.2 Fujinon
12mm f/2 Rokinon
135mm f/2 Zeiss
APS-C Zoom Kit
16-55mm f/2.8 Fujinon
50-140mm f/2.8 Fujinon
35mm f/2 Rokinon
12mm f/2.8 Zeiss
I usually use two camera bodies and a prime kit to shoot the weddings and have one camera body and a zoom kit as a backup.
The only Zoom that i would use for a Wedding would be the RF 28-70 f/2.0.
You don't make a sound argument. Plus making negative comments about other people's use of zooms is childish. You do what works for you and others will do the same.
Correct. I think getting a great photo is what matters most. My main poking fun at in this video is that most people tell starting photographers that they "can't" do certain things without zoom lenses. And I'm tired of that narrative.
what would you say if you're a beginner and only have 1 camera body?
Depending on what type of events you're doing I would say to go with a Zoom lens. Like at 24-70 since you only have a single body.
@@jbivphotography thank you!
People get so caught up in trends. I think everyone should just study your camera work on your craft and do what works for your! I love shooting with primes I do have some zooms but I’m a prime gal lol🎉
Exactly!! The main reason I made this video is just to be a different voice in the room and let people know that it's possible to shoot primes for weddings. But at the end of the day whatever works and gets you the results to please your clients is what matters.
My most used lenses are also 23+33 ;-) for weddings
Perfect focal lengths.
Absolutely@@jbivphotography
If you’re shooting in a church that limits your ability, what do you use for further away shots.
I know some don’t allow you to e moving around so much and not near the altar.
Generally what I’ll do for a day like that is bring an additional lens with me. Something like a 110mm for the reach. Obviously the easiest option would be a 70-200. Zooms totally have their place, but I’m usually ok with just a longer prime lens.
@@jbivphotography I am new to primes and not yet at weddings yet . For personal comfort and confidence levels. But I don’t want to go away from primes. I love the quality and speed and want to be able to do primes for any job/project etc I get.
Have 50 and 85 now. Thinking of adding 35 soon and I’d think a 135 or something close in prime would have me covered when I go to weddings. Which is the goal
thank you, agree, I shoot 35mm that's it.
You make those zoom guys sound so whiny. Hope I don't end up like one of them. I'll just go shoot with my 24-70 and 70-200 now. haha
lol just a little fun and games. I do love a good zoom lens especially if I'm working with a single camera. Zooms totally have their place. And whatever tool works best for the photog is the best option.
35/50/135 on a full frame. 85 is too close for what I need it to do with groups. While protecting edges of frame.
What’re your thoughts on Viltrox lenses? Favourites from the brand?
I haven't used any Viltrox yet so I'm not familiar with them.
@@jbivphotographyThank you 😁
PRIMES!
I love shooting with primes even if it can get crazy changing lenses halfway through the dance, it certainly requires a lot of reading the room to make sure you won't miss anything key for instance right after a spin I usually know I've got about 5 seconds. I've tried using two cameras, but it's just not for me and it feels too bulky I'm 5'1 97lbs.
Great Video!
Glad you enjoyed it
You talk about how f/2.8 on a full-frame zoom doesn’t let in enough light, but f/1 on a crop sensor is at best the equivalent of f/2.8 on full-frame. I’m confused.
It's more like 1-stop difference between APS-C and full frame. So f/1 on crop is more like f/1.4 on full frame in terms of depth of field and noise. f/2.8 on crop is like f/4 on full frame.
Don't you mean 23mm or is there a 24 for Fuji that I've missed?
Must have meant 24mm on full frame (16mm on Fuji)
@@garypardyphotography haven't really seen him use wide angle, but sounds logical
great info
Glad it was helpful!
So I 100% agree with you; primes ARE better for most things… but you GROSSLY misrepresented zoom lenses as well as their pros and cons.
For starters: before I switched to primes, I carried CONSTANT APERTURE zoom lenses, so the settings wouldn’t change when I switched my focal length.
Also, just because one uses a zoom lens, doesn’t mean they don’t understand composition like you made it sound. For example: I would treat my zooms like a group of primes. I’d envision the shot I wanted, switch to that focal length, and go from there. Furthermore, due to the nature of zoom lenses, if I thought I wanted the shot with a 35, but now that Im seeing it, I think a 50 would be better, all I do is make a slight adjustment to the zoom ring instead of swapping lenses. One more thing, if a model said “hey I wanna do this thing,” I could walk around the model and see what my different ideas looked like on the fly and make adjustments accordingly. One of the BIGGEST pros to zoom lenses is how much it speeds up your workflow.
You mentioned size and weight, and while you’re correct, the individual size and weight of these lenses are favoring to the primes, though not by a whole lot, you must remember that one zoom that covers 4+ focal lengths replaces 4+ individual primes that collectively weigh more. When I switched to primes, I carried LESS focal lengths due to size and weight limitations.
Now look, as I’ve said several times: I did switch from zooms to primes - again, I don’t disagree with you, but that’s because I made that decision based on what I wanted in my photos. I wanted faster apertures and shallower depths of field. But to someone who does a lot of run and gun stuff, can’t justify the expense of all those primes, can’t travel with all those individual primes, does want to run a second body OR can’t afford one - zoom lenses make a LOT of sense.
I just finished a book about “closing the feedback loop” so what I’m about to say isn’t meant to be nasty; I’ve loved your content thusfar, but I subscribed to your channel because I wanted to learn more about photography, business, and cameras/editing. If you make too many of these videos that misrepresent stuff, I won’t stick around.
I do hope you have a good day today, and again, the above comment wasn’t meant to be nasty, but helpful.
I agree, I prefer primes. But about the size and weight… if you carry 2 bodies and several focal lengths, you will definitely carry more weight. I do…
At weddings I use primes and zooms - and on a crop sensor!
Yes, I have the 70-200 2.8L. I have focal lengths from 10-200mm (16-320 on a crop) on two bodies. My primes are the 85 1.4 IS which is an amazing portrait lens, although at 136mm on a crop it can be a bit wide for full lenght at a dimly lit reception. That's where the humble 50mm 1.8 comes in. I use a 10-22mm quite a lot but have to crank up the ISO (fixed with DxO) or use flash (with a slow shutter) at the reception. I carry it all in a camera jacket so it's not too fatiguing.
You can miss shots, or not get the best composition, with a prime because you can't always be in the best spot when something happens unexpectedly. Conversely, with a zoom you can miss a shot, or compromise on quality due to a smaller max aperture. Either way, I often keep the 10-22 on one body and swap lenses on the other to suit the situation.
Funny, I just did getting ready shots in the hotel room with an 85. I started with a 35 but found myself being a distraction to the make up artist. A 50 would be perfect for my scenario but I didn't have it with me.
:04 into the video….same bro…same lol
The weight and size argument is getting old nowadays:
a) XT5 with battery grip + 16/1.4 23/1.4 33/1.4 50/1 90/2 = 3.5kg
b) a7IV + 24gm 35gm 50gm1.4 sigma85/1.4 135gm = 3.7kg
Hardly any difference in weight while taking in a stop more light for 24mm 35mm 50mm, equivalent on the 75/85mm and 2 stops more light on 135mm
c) Switching to an a7r5, could use apsc mode at 26MP (Same as xt4), so you'll only need a 24GM 50GM and 135GM to cover24mm-200mm at just 2.6kg or 3kg with a grip
d) Sony's 70-200 weighs about the same as Fuji's 50-140 while letting in a stop more light
e) Scratching my head seeing your videos juggling f2 primes, while the same could be achieved using a full frame24-70/2.8, where the same amount of light is gathered and similar amounts of subject separation
f) There's a reason why much more professionals use FF than Fuji, not that Fuji can't deliver, just that FF counterparts Canon/Sony are more consistent and reliable as a tool, any camera or phone could deliver great photos, just a matter of the effort to edit, cobsistency and reliability
Zoom Lens For Clear face and clear nose & Eyes f3.5 of 5.6 and for big group f8
Prime - f1.8 For Details
F2.2 For Sharp Portrait
Very Easy
With F1 or f1.2 or f1.4 U will get only eyes in foucs rest of frame will be Blury...
So Be Carefull ..
Why not just stop down on a prime lens.....?
At weddings I have had idiots tell me I'm not professional for swapping lenses as more people join my subject.
That’s some painful stupidity
In 2023, they are just better at low light and bokeh let’s be real. The 24-70 gm ii is smaller and lighter than most fast primes (auto focus ofc)
I would be hard pressed to want to move to crop because of the wider dof at any given equivalent focal length, i mean it might not matter as much if your shooting at f1.4 as thats going to give similar dof of a 2.8 give or take ( cant recall the proper difference ) also the better iso performance.
At least for weddings that is. I guess the 28-70/2 from Canon is so good that it's hard to find something better. Im hoping canon will release a 70-150 or 180 f2 soon we can't hope for a 70-200/2 lol
🤣 if yout want to use a 1.5 Kilogramm lens as 28-70/f2 🤣
Are those ps1 games in the back ground?
I've shot a wedding with nothing but a 50 mm 1.8
Not ideal, but it definitely can be done. If I had to use just one lens and choose between a standard zoom f/2.8 and a 50mm 1.8, I’d probably go with the 50. :)
zooms are for introverts , primes are from extroverts lol
Hey, introverts can get close, too. We just won't talk your ear off while we shoot. Also, there are these things called tele primes. I know, the 200/2.8 has gone the way of the dodo bird, but 135/1.8s are making a comeback.
Look at a normal 24-70, uses a 70-200 in the video clip
Zoom with your feet baby!
ALL DAY!!!
I have galleries and galleries of happy customers using only a Nikon 40 f2. A cheap lens that simply kills for me.
@@jbivphotography I've adopted the same philosophy for video - that camera (fx30) is super 35 so I am using a 24 1.4 (36 equivalent) all day. Unless I really have a need for a telephoto (which I'd rent) - it is primes all the way. Not to change the subject but that 36 to 40 range (or range equivalent) is a sweet spot, a slightly different look than most people deliver.
@@ReganRossI admire you sir!!
Thanks! @@zalle1
I actually prefer using primes for landscapes but not for weddings.
Interesting.
@@jbivphotography weddings are cultural. In our case, how you shoot is considered getting into the personal space of the couple. In big swanky five -star hotels or resorts or historic churches there’s no way one can shoot photos without telephotos or zooms.
1 comment with
Great content ❤
Thank you so much 😀
I hear ya, I'm a 2 camera 2 prime guy myself.. but that title is weird.. it makes it seem for other types of photography you use zooms🤣..
Maybe I do 😈😈😈
3:02 Have you started shooting film at weddings? :O
Not yet. But getting closer to it every day.
@@jbivphotography That’s awesome. Is it mainly because you enjoy shooting film or because you see a sub-market for it or a mix of both?
I'm not buying it. I can get just as good of a bokey on an f/2.8 zoom than I can with an f/1.8 crop sensor lens. Blowing out the background isn't how you get good pictures. f/2.8 blows out the BG great on full frame. I'd rather have a 24mm prime, 28-75mm f/2.8 Tamron, 85mm prime, and a fisheye lens.
Zoom lenses robs you of creativity.
With zoom lenses you just zoom in to any focal length and shoot without thinking.
With primes you think and compose before pushing the trigger.
2:11 24-70 ?:)) really????
As a wedding photographer and videographer, I disagree. I've worked with countless photographers who will shoot a ceremony or entire wedding with a 35 and one camera body. They are in everyone's shot because they have to get right up in there to get close ups. It can be invasive. I have no doubt their shots were great but it's completely distracting and makes it hard for others to do their jobs.
I mean shooting on one body and a 35 only is just stupid IMO. That's why I'm shooting with 2 bodies and always have a longer lens on me so I'm not all up on the shot when I don't need to be. Main point of this video is to give a different perspective and possibility. Rather than there just being one single narrative of you HAVE to shoot zoom and you HAVE to shoot full frame. Like its not possible any other way.
True! I like to do a variety of zoom and prime when needed. I appreciate the perspective. :) You have great content. @@jbivphotography
Yeah, until you can't be close enough to the action
that’s what longer prime lenses are for
No one wants to rebalance gimbals every switch tho
We're talking about photography here (which you don't need gimbals for). If we were talking about videography it would be a bit of a different story.
you're right. I thought this was video.@@jbivphotography
Don’t get me started on that hairline!!!! 😭
I’m old. What’s there to get started on 😭
So you are up close and in their face all day with 35s and 50mm. Don't agree with this viewpoint at all.
I’m not. Only during getting ready and things. When there’s literally no space. Also I shoot pretty wide. I don’t like the extra tight photos all the time. 👍👍
Up the ISO. Problem solved.
"Understand your lenses" instead sell them and buy all primes.
My zoom goes to 2.0. If it's to heavy for you, get stronger. I mean if you say just because you shoot primes you're more creative than zoom lens shooters. This is trash
👍👍👍
That Canon zoom has shaken things up for sure. It seems like a fantastic piece of equipment, but I think beginners will have a much easier time learning focal lengths by shooting primes. Might be wrong tho.
For me personally, I just don’t like the look and feel of big lenses, so I’d probably be a little unhappy with the 28-70 2.0. But that’s just personal preference :)
What you're calling trash is something he never said.
Same here. #teamprime 😂
Your videos are great, and I very often agree with your points. But the mocking voices when you're talking about other people's opinions are unnecessary and childish. In my opinon they don't reflect well on your professionalism.
Thanks for the feedback.
I find the humor lighthearted and amusing.
Dude it’s preference every photograph has a process put it let this some people like driving sedans while some people like trucks. Your only locked in on 70-200 you know there’s more focal length like 16-35 24-70 so on in a sense you are clowning zoom users most of the time your shooting over f2 anyways
Yep. Totally a preference. However tell that to people when they instruct someone who’s starting in the industry. All people ever say are “you have to have 24-70, 70-200”. It’s more rare that people would suggest starting with primes. So I’m just trying to give the other side of the argument. At the end of the day use whatever gets you great results.