Gig Photography - Kit Recommendations!

titchard · 11 Apr 2006 at 22:25

Hey guys, end of the month I am doing a charity events photography involving about six bands and a few want shots.

I currently have:

Canon 350D

18-55MM lens

I am going to get a 50MM F1.8 as the lighting is going to very low and I need a high aperture.

But what else do you guys recommend for gigs, also, any tips??

Thanks in Advance!

Rich

rG-tom · 11 Apr 2006 at 23:18

fast primes and maybe a flash

50mm f1.8 is definitely a step in the right direction

consider the 85mm F1.8 too, faster AF, and a bit longer :>

Tom.

cyKey · 12 Apr 2006 at 00:36

Sigma 10-20 and the Canon 50mm f/1.8 are my two faves. You can use the 10-20 at 1/10th which helps at f/4 and ISO800/1600.

morgan · 12 Apr 2006 at 09:39

cyKey said:
You can use the 10-20 at 1/10th which helps at f/4 and ISO800/1600.

confused why you cant do that with most lenses?!!!

DizMatt · 12 Apr 2006 at 09:52

I shoot away at any settings like a monkey
I think though that the best photos are captured when you balance out the ISO and the aperture
not just for shutter speed but for quality
i'm a noob though )

Alex53 · 12 Apr 2006 at 10:46

I use:

Sigma 20mm f1.8
Canon 35mm f2
Canon 50mm f1.8

DizMatt · 12 Apr 2006 at 11:12

Alex53 said:
I use:

Sigma 20mm f1.8
Canon 35mm f2
Canon 50mm f1.8

Mmmm that prime 20mm looks nice at a decent price
very tempted!

Alex53 · 12 Apr 2006 at 11:26

I was skeptical about Sigma lenses until I got this one. I suppose a prime is a prime.

Quality-wise its great. It's not the fastest focusing lens I have though. Also the filter size is 82mm, so it took me a while to buy the filters I needed for it. The price for a multi-coated 82mm circular polariser is scary. Of course thats not a huge issue for gigs, I just wanted it for lanscapes too, with threw polariser and ND into the equation.

JimmyEatWorms · 12 Apr 2006 at 11:57

morgan said:
confused why you cant do that with most lenses?!!!

It's all about the focal length. Wide lenses don't register camera shake as much as long ones since the FoV is wider. You could do it with ANY legth of lens if you have a hand as steady as a rock

or a tripod (not exactly recommended for a gig).

morgan · 12 Apr 2006 at 12:08

JimmyEatWorms said:
Wide lenses don't register camera shake as much as long ones since the FoV is wider.

the shake is still there its just harder to see...just thought cykey's quote was a bit misleading...no biggy

cyKey · 12 Apr 2006 at 13:30

morgan said:
the shake is still there its just harder to see...just thought cykey's quote was a bit misleading...no biggy

I wouldn't say its misleading, as you can use it at those settings and get good results.

Alex53 · 12 Apr 2006 at 13:51

Its not misleading at all. Its a well accepted rule of thumb that you can get good results handheld when the shutter speed used is the reciprocal of the focal length. ie. 1/100sec for 100mm lens and so on.

Just try to hold a long lens and keep the subject stable in your view and then try it with a wide lens, its obvious why you need faster shutter speeds the longer the lens.

Less noticeable motion blur = Less shake!

morgan · 12 Apr 2006 at 14:21

Alex53 said:
Its not misleading at all. Its a well accepted rule of thumb that you can get good results handheld when the shutter speed used is the reciprocal of the focal length. ie. 1/100sec for 100mm lens and so on.

Just try to hold a long lens and keep the subject stable in your view and then try it with a wide lens, its obvious why you need faster shutter speeds the longer the lens.

Less noticeable motion blur = Less shake!

grandma
suck eggs
dont

thanks for the lesson though

theres a lot of love this forum at the mo...

cyKey · 12 Apr 2006 at 16:04

morgan said:
grandma
suck eggs
dont

thanks for the lesson though

theres a lot of love this forum at the mo...

Easy tiger. He's only trying to help

Alex53 · 12 Apr 2006 at 16:06

Sorry if my post was a bit dry and even pedantic. I didn't intend it to be.

morgan · 12 Apr 2006 at 16:11

np alex..i was joking

cykey...go argue with someone else

hoodmeister · 12 Apr 2006 at 16:54

While we're on the subject, there's a school of thought that says you should include the FoV crop in shutter calculations. So something like 1.5/focal length (150 for a 100mm lens).

Of course, it all depends on the individual photographer, their technique, and how much camera shake they find acceptable.

rG-tom · 12 Apr 2006 at 16:55

hoodmeister said:
While we're on the subject, there's a school of thought that says you should include the FoV crop in shutter calculations. So something like 1.5/focal length (150 for a 100mm lens).

Of course, it all depends on the individual photographer, their technique, and how much camera shake they find acceptable.

urmm nope, I dont think crop factor should be equated into it :S

Tom.

hoodmeister · 12 Apr 2006 at 17:12

I'm not saying you should - i'm just saying that some people say that you should.
I don't bother with it myself - I just like people to get all sides of the argument!

SDK^ · 12 Apr 2006 at 17:54

hoodmeister said:
While we're on the subject, there's a school of thought that says you should include the FoV crop in shutter calculations. So something like 1.5/focal length (150 for a 100mm lens).

Of course, it all depends on the individual photographer, their technique, and how much camera shake they find acceptable.

Whilst there are some that say you should increase shutter speed to match the focal length and crop factor due to the fact that a print requires enlarging more from a small sensor than a full frame camera I don't really think it matters much.

It's a crop factor, the actual focal length does not increase