Comments on: Concert photography with Telephoto Lenses http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/ Fri, 25 Jul 2008 04:02:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: nicolas http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-9898 nicolas Sun, 13 Jul 2008 18:00:55 +0000 http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-9898 chris lowe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! chris lowe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

]]> By: Todd http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-7730 Todd Mon, 12 May 2008 02:37:20 +0000 http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-7730 Thanks, Chris, glad to hear you enjoyed the article. I've been meaning to post more of these "tutorials." The 85mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are great lenses, and, as far as I've seen, both perform very well wide open. Don't worry too much about the differences in rendering of the two lenses, it's pretty blown out of proportion. Of course, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is highly useful, too. I might be selling mine if the rumors of a new version hold true, FYI. Thanks, Chris, glad to hear you enjoyed the article. I’ve been meaning to post more of these “tutorials.”

The 85mm f/1.8 and f/1.4 are great lenses, and, as far as I’ve seen, both perform very well wide open.

Don’t worry too much about the differences in rendering of the two lenses, it’s pretty blown out of proportion.

Of course, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is highly useful, too. I might be selling mine if the rumors of a new version hold true, FYI.

]]> By: Chris http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-7727 Chris Fri, 09 May 2008 23:06:44 +0000 http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-7727 A little late on the commenting, but great article. I'm down for a wide to semi-telephoto at first -- but be sure I'll head for the 1.4 or 2.8 in the near future! A little late on the commenting, but great article. I’m down for a wide to semi-telephoto at first — but be sure I’ll head for the 1.4 or 2.8 in the near future!

]]> By: Todd http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-215 Todd Mon, 17 Sep 2007 20:02:34 +0000 http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-215 Tor, glad you enjoyed this post. If you're shooting in smaller venues (2000 capacity or less) and you're positioned at the front of the stage, I would definitely go for the 17-55. I find the 70-200VR very nice for festivals and for arena-style venues, where the stage is often higher and the performers are farther away. For smaller venues, though, where musicians are often playing at the front of the stage, the reach is not needed as much. For smaller indoor venues, I use the 70-200VR most when I have to shoot from behind the pit or from the balcony. Regarding the D300, it does look to handle noise better at high ISO than the D200 and the D70. So, you could look at the camera as an effective boost in "performance" to your existing lenses, especially if you shoot at ISO 3200 or Hi-1 (6400). You might also consider third-party f/2.8 lenses like the Tamron 18-50/2.8 and the Tokina 16-50/2.8, which will save you some money. Also, for a fast prime, the Sigma 30/1.4 is very nice and would gain you several stops over the zooms, while providing a wider and arguably more useful field of view for concert photography at the front of the pit. Tor, glad you enjoyed this post. If you’re shooting in smaller venues (2000 capacity or less) and you’re positioned at the front of the stage, I would definitely go for the 17-55.

I find the 70-200VR very nice for festivals and for arena-style venues, where the stage is often higher and the performers are farther away. For smaller venues, though, where musicians are often playing at the front of the stage, the reach is not needed as much.

For smaller indoor venues, I use the 70-200VR most when I have to shoot from behind the pit or from the balcony.

Regarding the D300, it does look to handle noise better at high ISO than the D200 and the D70. So, you could look at the camera as an effective boost in “performance” to your existing lenses, especially if you shoot at ISO 3200 or Hi-1 (6400). You might also consider third-party f/2.8 lenses like the Tamron 18-50/2.8 and the Tokina 16-50/2.8, which will save you some money.

Also, for a fast prime, the Sigma 30/1.4 is very nice and would gain you several stops over the zooms, while providing a wider and arguably more useful field of view for concert photography at the front of the pit.

]]> By: Tor Arne http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-209 Tor Arne Fri, 14 Sep 2007 20:02:04 +0000 http://ishootshows.com/2007/07/31/concert-photography-with-telephoto-lenses/#comment-209 Great post! I'm actually just in the middle of deciding what part of my range to upgrade. I have a D70 with the 18-70 3.5-4.5 kit lens, a 70-210 4.5-5.6 and a 50mm 1.8, but feel that the fixed focal length of the 50mm is very limiting and not a good angle on the 1.5 crop D70. So I want to move to 2.8-glass, but I can't decide between the 17-55 and the 70-200 VR. What would you go for? Note that this is for smaller venues with either no pit or a pit of maybe 1-2 meters, not huge festivals or 5000+ venues. Also, if I understand this stuff correctly going from f/4 glass to 2.8 will give me one stop extra light. But if the D300 gives the same amount of noise at 1600 IO as the D70 on 400 ISO I would be effectively getting two stops of "extra light"? Do you consider getting a D300 instead a better option, knowing what glass I already have? Thanks! :) Tor Arne Great post!

I’m actually just in the middle of deciding what part of my range to upgrade. I have a D70 with the 18-70 3.5-4.5 kit lens, a 70-210 4.5-5.6 and a 50mm 1.8, but feel that the fixed focal length of the 50mm is very limiting and not a good angle on the 1.5 crop D70. So I want to move to 2.8-glass, but I can’t decide between the 17-55 and the 70-200 VR. What would you go for? Note that this is for smaller venues with either no pit or a pit of maybe 1-2 meters, not huge festivals or 5000+ venues.

Also, if I understand this stuff correctly going from f/4 glass to 2.8 will give me one stop extra light. But if the D300 gives the same amount of noise at 1600 IO as the D70 on 400 ISO I would be effectively getting two stops of “extra light”? Do you consider getting a D300 instead a better option, knowing what glass I already have?

Thanks! :)

Tor Arne

]]>