3 Reasons I Use Prime Lenses Only for Wedding Photography

You may not have known it, but you don't only have to shoot a 24-70 and 70-200 zoom lenses for your weddings. It's possible to get great results using prime lenses for your weddings. Let's talk about the 3 reasons I use prime lenses for wedding photography and their benifits.

___________

Check out my favorite tools as a PHOTOGRAPHY BUSINESS OWNER, CREATIVE ENTREPRENEUR, and YOUTUBE CONTENT CREATOR

License Free Music for Youtube and Wedding Videos:

____________

Video Index:

Intro 0:00
Faster Lenses 0:24
Weight & Size 1:36
Consistency & Approach 3:07

My Recording Gear:

____________

Follow Me Online:

________________

DISCLAIMER: This video and description contain affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, we’ll receive a small commission.

[philcupper]

Agree with primes. 85/35 on my bodies for most of a wedding. 50 sometimes replaces one of them.

[coinstarbon]

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.

[MrGohunter]

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.

[christophkuenster]

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.

[HappeningPhotos]

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.

[tbeiber]

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

[bmeclipse]

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.

[JonathanVarasRoco]

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!!

[SeanWashPhoto]

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.

[chermitove]

i love your feedback, i use 35mm 1.8 and give me nice pictures,
primes lens more sharpen more light .

[joshuachubbphotography]

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

[cmar]

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!

[Cleverconveyence]

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.

[p.burley]

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.

[diifter]

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!

[sttill]

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

[garypardyphotography]

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.

[SimonAckerman]

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.

[Mathieu-Greber_Photography]

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 🙏🏻

[andrewelder]

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.