May 22, 2013, 01:43:47 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - ewg963

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
1
I was fortunate enough to get a photo pass to shoot a rock concert in my area. 

I am not a pro photog by any stretch, but the chance to marry up my two great interests (music + photography) was too good to pass up.  I've attached my really crude 101-level experience and lessons learned from the activity.  I welcome the concert vets to straighten me out if I've come away with the wrong learnings.

Gear selection
  • Faster wins.  Unless you are shooting a daytime outdoor show, you will 95% of the time be shooting close to wide open to avoid ISO values above 6400.  Faster glass will let you walk that back to 3200, 1600, etc. depending on the light.
  • Closer wins.  Shorter focal lengths handle longer shutter speeds better.  The golden rule of a maximum shutter of 1 divided by focal length is about right.   So a 50mm lens can get by with a 1/50s shutter, but a 200mm lens will need a 1/200s shutter, which often will require disastrous ISO levels.
    • So it's no surprise that I rarely see large sports glass off on the wings of concerts in large venues.  I don't think I've ever seen anything longer than an 70-300L at Coachella once the sun goes gown.  Most everyone I see in concert photo pits is carrying some sort of ultrawide (fishbowl, 14 prime, 16-35, etc.) and either a standard zoom (24-70 or 24-105) or prime (the 50 F/1.2 and the 135 F/2 are a regular sight).  Some folks pack the 70-200 as well.
    • I recognize this point (closer = better) completely dismisses the value of different glass for framing and composition, but if you want a sharp shot in this light, you have to make tradeoffs, right?
    • Also, your proximity to the stage, the size of the stage, etc. will drive the lengths you need.
  • What I brought and what I used it for:
    • Body = 5D3.  Not a selection issue for me as the alternative was my old T1i.
    • 28mm F/2.8 IS.  Not super quick, but IS on such a wide angle is super useful in the dark.  Used for wide shots up close at the stage (two guitarists in frame together, wide stage shot, etc.) as well as venue shots from the sidelines. Used it 5% of the night.  More about that later.
    • 50mm F/1.4.  This is my staple low light tool, but I noticed that it was front-focusing when I was setting up prior to the band coming out, and I didn't want to have to use MF.  It stayed in my bag until late in the night for some balcony shots as a result.  Used it for about 5% as well.  Need to set the AFMA on that and get it sorted.
    • 70-200 F/2.8 IS II.  A flagship sports / photojournalist / wedding lens, but F/2.8 is not ideal for concert lighting.  That said, there aren't many faster options at this length (other than the impressive 135mm F/2 and the comically large (but equally impressive) 200mm F/2).  Though I was planning on using the 50mm most of the night, I ended up using this 90% of the time.  It fared better than expected on focusing in low light, but the concerns of length vs. shutter speed needs obviously came up, so the ISO had to climb.  The 70mm end was not wide enough just a handful of times, but I made do.
   
Shooting up front
       
I got to the stage before the set and one of the organizers was on stage.  I flagged him down and he explained the classic thing I've read about:

  • I had fifteen minutes stage access, i.e. right at the stage (in front).  This is often phrased as being for three songs, but being a prog rock show, that could be 90 minutes.  So, for this show, it was stated as '15 minutes'.  Then I'd have to skedaddle.
  • No flash, of course.
  • No video, of course.
  • In that first 15 minutes, my head had to stay below the level of the stage, i.e. on my rear-end or kneeling.  Thais was not a traditional pit -- it was a four foot stage at a concert hall. 
    • This ended up greatly limiting my framing.  I was limited to waist up shots of the players for the most part, and shooting the drum kit was simply not happening without framing out the bottom 30% of the kit (the drum risers were not particularly high at this event).
    • This requirement effectively killed the up close / wide opportunity of the 28mm lens.  I had the awful choice of 1/3 of the VF being blocked by the stage or my two rocking guitarists being stuck in the bottom corners of a wide shot (not a good look, even after perspective correction).
  • For this show in particular, I could not mill about the aisles to shoot after the first fifteen minutes (house rules about blocking view or people leaving for the restrooms).
           

Camera Settings
       
  • RAW only.  Say this ten times.  I didn't even bother with the JPG + RAW as my card was rather full already.  With ISO 3200+ and with crazily shifting lighting, RAW is really the only way to go anyway.  JPG is useful for some shooting needs, but here, RAW is the best call.
  • Mode: I believe that Av, Tv and M all work (as always) provided you keep an eye on what you are not prioritizing. As a creature of habit, I shot aperture priority, but I was constantly working the triangle of Ap / shutter / ISO to get the best possible balance I could.   Call it 'manual shooting with metering for better exposure'.
  • Default setting was wide open or perhaps 1/3 - 2/3 stop narrower, ISO 6400 (3200 with the fast primes, perhaps).  ISO and aperture adjusted to get a more desirable shutter speed.  Exposure was generally a shade under normal (like -1/3 or -2/3 EV) as you don't necessarily want the background fully exposed (your subject will be too bright).
  • Standard (evaluative) metering -- I didn't need to mess with it at this event as the lighting was decent enough.  (Spot metering has been a prior call in some dark caves I've shot in the past.)
  • One shot focusing.  It's the most accurate unless you want to capture a burst of some David Lee Roth jump kicks (and the house lights are on).  This was not that kind of show at all.
  • Single point AF or the very small plus-shaped point cluster AF.  AF worked really well that night.  Lighting was decent.   Darker lighting + less modern AF glass = AF will hunt and you will miss shots.
  • Focused and then reframed on the wide glass (those are more DOF forgiving), but largely moved my AF point to the subject in the desired framing for the longer zoom I was using.

Composition lessons learned
       
  • Obvious, but must be restated -- shooting nearly fully open has a tiny working DOF.  F/1.4 - F/2 on the 50 prime is fine for a single subject, but if you want more than one musician in the frame, I had to do one of the following:
    • Stop the aperture down to F/5.6 - F/8, which usually meant increasing the ISO even further (i.e. 8000+)
    • Wait for the two musicians to be about the same distance away.  That happens less often than you'd like.
    • Wait for the house lights to come up.
    • Get further away, like on the balcony.  Larger distance = larger working DOF for a given aperture.
  • Move your feet.  Unless you know a band very well, your principal subject might not be where you want them to be.
  • Keyboards, mic stands can interrupt your framing, look unattractive, etc.  Again, move your feet.
  • Knowing the songs really helps.  With an emotive frontman or musician, if you know when the hook drops or the solo starts, you can time your shots for a rock face, fist pump, gospel arms, etc.
  • Don't forget the stage lighting.  Try to frame up the subject against a stage spotlight, or possibly just shoot the band member as a black silhouette in a field of color.  (Need to do that more next time.)
                       
Output / post-processing (note I'm somewhat odd in that I just use PS's Adobe Camera RAW instead of LR, Aperture, DXO, etc.)
       
  • Skintones are flat and tough looking at these high ISO settings, even on my great low light rig.  Extreme care has to be taken to avoid saturating skin tones in post processing, or your rock star looks like he spent a week in a tanning bed.  Also, software that avoids oversaturating skin tones can often fail as the stage lighting (if you didn't back it out with RAW WB processing) pulls the skin tone out of 'skin tone range'.  I need to do selective color editing in post, but I never do.  More work than I'd like.  I just did macroscopic RAW adjustments like vibrance and saturation, but at a fraction of what I'd normally do for the aforementioned skin tone reason.
  • White balance management is great with RAW, but I don't know if the goal is to subtract out the lighting tint on the subject or if I want to capture that as part of the composition.  I can do either, but I wasn't sure which to do.
  • Noise reduction is unfortunately necessary as the ISOs are high.  I generally hate what this does to details, so I do it sparingly.
  • Sharpness adjustments in RAW processing are a staple adjustment usually, but with low light it amplifies the noise.  So I generally did less sharpening to limit the noise reduction needed.

Please set me straight if I've misinterpreted the concert shooting experience with my statements above.  There may be a vital trick I am missing.

Thanks for your thoughts!

- A
A few hits and one clear miss (the drum shot) to show how much I still have to learn!
Great post and pics and thank you  :) I really liked the drummer pose.

2
EOS Bodies / Re: No 7D Mark II in 2013? [CR2]
« on: May 07, 2013, 06:54:37 PM »
....on edge of seat...is the 14-24mm L zoom on that 2013 list??????? huh...huh...huh.... :P
The 14-24mm L?? Now that's a piece of glass I'm salivating for!!!

3
Lenses / Re: EF 100-400 Replacement in 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 29, 2013, 07:44:34 AM »
<div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><g:plusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/ef-100-400-replacement-in-2013-cr2/\"></g:plusone></div><div style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a href=\"https://twitter.com/share\" class=\"twitter-share-button\" data-count=\"vertical\" data-url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/04/ef-100-400-replacement-in-2013-cr2/\">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>Speculation has started again<br />

</strong>We’ve received a few reports that an announcement for a replacement to the EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS is “very possible for the end of August”. A few prototypes of the lens are currently in use in Asia.</p>
<p>This has been a lens that has been set for replacement as far back as I can remember. I think it’s more probable for release now that Nikon has put their new 80-400 out, which was an area of weakness for them.</p>
<p>We’ve heard from a few people that Canon is having manufacturing issues and that there’s a backlog of new lenses slated for production.</p>
<p><em><a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162616-USA/Canon_2577A002AA_100_400mm_f_4_5_5_6L_IS_USM.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296\" target=\"_blank\">EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 IS at B&H Photo</a></em></p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

I'm loving it!!! Any thoughts on suggested retail?

4
Literally, the first thing that came to my mind when I read the title of this thread was:



Seriously, I highly doubt anyone can not tell that a body that can handle high Iso that perfect, and a 85mm 1.2 lens are probably the best base for shots in such circumstances.

my 6D + 50 1.8 can do great street photography at night too and many folds cheaper than your 1dx + 85 1.2.

talking about IQ/price ratio, my combo is greater than yours. ;)


You compare a 50 1.8 to a 85 1.2? Heck, even a 6D to a 1DX? That is almost more trolling than the original post here.
+1

5
Lens Gallery / Re: Canon EF135mm f/2L USM
« on: April 16, 2013, 08:25:06 AM »

6
Lenses / Re: A 4000$ budget for Lenses on 5D3... need suggestions
« on: April 14, 2013, 02:49:26 PM »
16-35/2.8 II
24-70/2.8 II
70-200/2.8 IS II

If possible.
Great choice the trinity

7
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: "I am boycotting Nikon" campaign
« on: April 13, 2013, 05:01:36 PM »
Those are hogs, and hogs are numerous, and rather a nussance as well, but worse still often a threat to local endangered and threatened populations. I am totally against poaching of threatened species, and totally against wanton destruction. But, some animals NEED to be hunted by man, often especially because we displaced their predators through habitat destruction. Here in Florida, hogs are a severe nuisance, and the laws are actually pretty easy-going about the taking o' hogs. The poster says "Bring home the bacon", so the thought is not some Great White Hunter racking up tons of kills for trophies, but a productive use, potentially, anyway. THere is no reason to be so sensitive about this...
+1

8
I'm familiar with Canon. I like the selection of glass.

9
Pricewatch Deals / Re: Canon USA Rebates Starting April 14, 2013 [CR3]
« on: April 13, 2013, 06:19:57 AM »
Well, of course, just as soon as I drop $2000+ on a new 70-200 2.8 IS II...  So much for the previous rumor that there wouldn't anymore rebates until next spring >:(
Next Spring??  I've never seen that Rumor! 
 
Canon has had almost continuous rebates for the last year.  Some involve only a few items and some cover a lot of items.  As long as the world economy is poor, Canon and Nikon will keep having rebates in order to keep the production lines going.  Its cheaper that way.  Shutting down a factory and restarting it later is incredibally expensive, while rebates just result in a lower profit margin, but its still profit.
+1

10
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 08, 2013, 06:30:28 AM »
Looks like BMCC and Sony are the first out of the gates with announcements.



http://www.eoshd.com/content/10004/sony-show-cinema-eos-style-future-camera-range-based-around-full-frame-dslrs

Canon had better not disappoint.
If not any "new" tech at least a price drop to match the competition?
I love competition!!!! It's the name of the game. We'll see.... :)

11
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]
« on: April 07, 2013, 10:25:42 PM »
BOOOORING ... don't care at all for a 70D. Would be much more interested in a hi-end Canon mirrorless .. EOS-M "done right" ... :-)
I have to agree with this. A 70D is just another cropster.

I hope the announcement is about the long awaited high MP / high DR body, or a bunch of new lenses. Like the 35L II, 50L II, 50 1.4 II, 135L II, 14-24L, e.t.c.
+1000

12
What a ridiculous thread.

I've had many Canon bodies starting with the 30D and presently the 1Dx. Anyone moaning about the poor sad 1Dx has never used one... it is simply spectacular. I find it hard to believe that people whining for ridiculous megapixel counts either need them (for what exactly, how many images of theirs have suffered) or prefer the tradeoffs involved.



So technology keeps moving on and there will be a next great thing but, personally, I have 0 interest in more megapixels, don't need more fps, and am quite delighted with the recent new capabilities in exposure and tracking.
+100

13
Lenses / Re: New 100-400 to Launch with EOS 7D Mark II [CR2]
« on: March 27, 2013, 12:52:14 PM »
 :)I love my push pull 100-400! It has been working well so far (finger crossed) but is interested at looking at the new 100-400. :)

14
I have both the 5D mk III and the Nikon D800.  The Canon is great at low light, and is a perfect camera for gigs with its real silent shutter.  The Nikon has great DR. End of.  I shoot mainly landscapes, so I want good low ISO performance.  The mk III forces me to use noise reduction at ISO 100 - 400.  This is a terminal disease for me, so I don't use the mmiii for very much at all now.  The mk III is dead in the water as far as I am concerned because of the noise banding in shadows.


You must have a bad 5DIII, for my landscapes it's been quite amazing and the appalling Nikon Live view effort puts me off any Nikon DSLR for landscape work. The D800 might have less banding and slightly more DR, but bracketing and digital blending is still required for high contrast imagery. If you are using NR on your 5DIII, then I would suggest your camera is out of spec, are using poor metering technique or you are rushing your landscape work. If you are pulling so much out of the shadows, then there is obviously a meeting issue or you are cutting courners with your bracketing and blending.
This image below, I combined the foreground and sky exposures into one image, I had to wait for the sun to kiss the foreground but the sun position was then wrong. So taking the two images created a better photo and one which looks balanced for exposure and has a stong visual feel. The difference between 30+ and 20+ mp is mute here and I get to utilise the camera's low 100 iso virtues because the 2 source images were taken using the camera's optimal performance.

Beautiful!!!!

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Announces the EOS T5i
« on: March 22, 2013, 03:40:54 AM »
this is pure arrogance of a market leader.

i really hope canon is loosing market share like mad in 2013.
but that won´t happen.. i know. 

nikon seems to have people who are really interested in photography and deliver products that at least show some improvements.

while canon is full of managers who see nothing but numbers.
+100

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6