Using 12-24mm for event


Status
Not open for further replies.

jimtong

Senior Member
May 8, 2002
1,528
0
36
Singapore
jimmyto.ng
#1
Anyone ever tried shooting an indoor/outdoor event, like wedding, D&D etc.... using 12-24 lens? (be it Sigma or Nikkor lens). Assuming I am using DSLR with cropping factor.

Is it recommended?

Like to hear your opinions, Thanks
 

nickmak

Senior Member
Apr 16, 2004
2,358
0
0
31
London, UK
www.pbase.com
#2
jimtong said:
Anyone ever tried shooting an indoor/outdoor event, like wedding, D&D etc.... using 12-24 lens? (be it Sigma or Nikkor lens). Assuming I am using DSLR with cropping factor.

Is it recommended?

Like to hear your opinions, Thanks
If its the Sigma 12-24, I have heard that the pictures are soft at all ends of the range. I dunno much about the Nikkor though...
 

KNIGHT ONG

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2003
5,792
1
38
PAKISTAN
www.pbase.com
#3
If you needs the extra space, probably this is the only lens that can gives you the solutions. There will be distrotion but can't help it, try not to place the pple near to the edge.
 

jimtong

Senior Member
May 8, 2002
1,528
0
36
Singapore
jimmyto.ng
#4
Thanks for the input, looks like there are some limitation. Guess 17-40 still the best for this type of shoot.
 

Larry

Senior Member
Apr 25, 2002
5,499
0
0
45
singapore
www.larryloh.com
#5
actually, from my experience, 12-24mm is not the best lens to use for events. the perspective distortion is really bad, unless you have no choice (i.e. you need to capture full-length people and you're one friggin meter away from them). i was stuck in these situations a few times and the amount of photoshop-ping to correct the perspective was not farnie at all. the 18-70DX lens' focal range is much better for these sort thing - you get 28-105 approx coverage which is wide enough to get most angles needed.
 

nickmak

Senior Member
Apr 16, 2004
2,358
0
0
31
London, UK
www.pbase.com
#6
jimtong said:
Thanks for the input, looks like there are some limitation. Guess 17-40 still the best for this type of shoot.
Yup! Stick with the 17-40... Its a brilliant piece of glass for the price!
 

jimtong

Senior Member
May 8, 2002
1,528
0
36
Singapore
jimmyto.ng
#7
nickmak said:
Yup! Stick with the 17-40... Its a brilliant piece of glass for the price!
:D was looking for wide lens to do event and also landscape. I think 17-40 is the one
 

jimtong

Senior Member
May 8, 2002
1,528
0
36
Singapore
jimmyto.ng
#8
Larry said:
actually, from my experience, 12-24mm is not the best lens to use for events. the perspective distortion is really bad, unless you have no choice (i.e. you need to capture full-length people and you're one friggin meter away from them). i was stuck in these situations a few times and the amount of photoshop-ping to correct the perspective was not farnie at all. the 18-70DX lens' focal range is much better for these sort thing - you get 28-105 approx coverage which is wide enough to get most angles needed.
Thanks for your opinion. Point noted.
 

ical

New Member
Jan 25, 2004
103
0
0
Pasir Ris
#9
I own the AFS DX 12-24mmf4. Honestly, it too wide for most situation. My AFS 17-35f2.8 is alway the ideal choice when come to most subject and quality is excellent.
 

clive

Senior Member
Oct 9, 2002
2,537
0
0
Visit site
#10
seriously..anything wider than 28/24mm is 90% of the time "too wide" for events. :think:
 

canturn

Senior Member
Sep 29, 2002
2,641
0
0
East, SG
www.lyricalmoments.com
#11
Interestingly, the 14mm prime is a standard issue for the press photographers. I actually managed to get one for a friend who does events...

One of the reasons why he got the 14mm is to provide maximum coverage when he needs to get close...some events, esp the big ones (cheque presentation, president shaking hand with people, etc, etc. etc.), has 8235823852385835 other photographers in front of you with their 15mm wides. Well, some shots you can't afford to miss and don't expect people to give way to you, really.

Distortion can be corrected to a certain degree in PS. It'll be another story if you miss the shot altogether.
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#13
Agree with Larry on the 12-24 reply. I used the AF-S 12-24DX (courtesy from a fellow CS member) to cover a church wedding before. It's too wide, can't get a good up close & personal feel. I presume you're looking at the 12-24 to cover group shots mainly & is worried cos the FLM automatically narrows the view.

I find that using a AF-S 17-35 instead would offer a much better choice to shoot it as a general purpose lens to group shot lens.
 

Watcher

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2003
2,307
0
0
The heart of the Abyss
Visit site
#14
It depends on the style and the story you want to tell.

Less than 3 months ago, an actual day wedding was shot using the lens. Lots of people were praising it. What happened since then? :dunno:

Yes, it is a super wide. Yes, it may not usually give a personal shots. But when you do digital, a 12mm -> 18mm, 18mm -> 27mm, 24 -> 36 mm. I don't remember anyone here complaining that the 17-35 (one of the "(un) holy trinity") is too wide on film :rolleyes: .

This is true when you do it in enclosed or cramp areas in SG... :sweat:
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#16
mpenza, the only practicality I see in using the 12-24 is for group shots, that's about it for me, personally, I t-loaned the AF-S 12-24 for my that wedding shoot was to get the group shots in & nice, being wide at 18mm, I found that I can go close and not worry about backup towards the walls/pillars of the dining areas.

But I definitely lost my range & the urgency for upclose & personal shots if the need arises.

Like what Watcher mentions, it depends on your style & the way you want to shoot, but I think more importantly, is how the couple wants their shots taken. A slight tilt of the camera will cause distortions if you're not careful although the couple & viewers might not take note, but as a photographer it hurts me slightly if I do see perspective distortions.

All I can say is that the 12-24 (FLM - 18-36) is not for the faint of heart. The 17-35 would be wide on film, very wide, I've already tested an 18-35 on a film body, but scary, the distortions are very scary. Try it only if your heart can take it. And as mentioned, there isn't really any need for any wides to go below 28mm, even for weddings.

Also, I'll have to say this even as I know Watcher is going to slap me at the next Nikon Council :sweat: . The 12-24 was *originally* intended as a landscape len, even if I do zoom to 24 (FLM 36) I won't find it comfortable for personal & portrait shots. I want to blend in with the happiness of the couple, they shouldn't not remember I'm there but at the same time I should get my shot. 12-24 is only feasible if you have the couple's attention and you can afford the wideness. Any len can be used, but the results will depend on still the photographer & the characteristics of the len (thanks to the pro who taught me this).

The best & ideal lens for Nikon users would be the AF-S 28-70 f/2.8D, it covers the best range you'll need, but alas... the 28 becomes a 42 FOV upon on a digital body :( And yes, if i'm shooting film for weddings, I promise you, the 17/18-35 will not be affixed on the film body, rather the 28-70 (ok ok I'm dreaming that I have these lenses ;p ). But if on digital body, give me the 17/18-35 any time (FLM 25.5/27-52.5). 12-24 is usable, but it boils down to your preference, and as I go back to my practicality mention to mpenza in my starting statement, that's all the 12-24 does for me. That's all folks ;p
 

ical

New Member
Jan 25, 2004
103
0
0
Pasir Ris
#17
Watcher, the distortion from AFS 12-24 with a digital camera is much greater than AFS 17-35 with a film camera. If you've the following, judge it for yourself. That's the reason why most photographer find that AFS 12-24 look wider and odd while AFS 17-35 is alright. I feel the same way too, the distortion is too great for my liking. I only use it for very tight environment.
 

Feb 3, 2002
1,741
0
0
Singapore
#18
I use the Sigma 15-30 (24-48 on 1.6x) for events - and I'm personally quite comfortable with the range.
 

jimtong

Senior Member
May 8, 2002
1,528
0
36
Singapore
jimmyto.ng
#19
I have recently tried using 17-40 on event group shot. Found that it is good enough. As for the 12-24, my main concern will be the distortion when shooting group shot.

Although 12-24 is still ok but I think the focal range is still not versatile enough if you require a tighter shot. Just my opinion.
 

2100

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2004
3,591
0
0
48
#20
Have used it for grp shoots which have > 200 people lor. I mean if you are forced to use 12mm, then you are pretty pressed for space. Having a photo to show for it is better than no photo or cropping out the sides. Have experienced before comments of why they were left out at the extreme sides of the grp photo when a 16-35 was used. So far, nobody complained of perspective distortion. Distortion is to be expected, at least it's a rectilinear lens and not fisheye.

Also used it in weddings, basically extremely useful when the groom wants to gain entry and the saboing begins. 17mm is not enough when you are shooting in the corner a corner unit of the HDB flat just 50-100cm from the brothers attempting the tricks meted out by the sisters. Gotta use some creative off-camera bounced flash though.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom