Concert photography

Hey guys I have a question in regards to concert photography. I want a cheap lens that'll take great

concert pics on a 30D. Any suggestions? As always.... thanks for the tips!

 

~Andrew

Cheap? Get the 50mm f1.8 -for $85 you can't beat the low-light capability of that lens.

I second that!

Or spend 3.5 times as much on an 85mm f1.8, another great lens.

Or spend 3 times that on the 135mm f/2L.

 

If you are going to be relatively close then the 50mm 1.8 for it's price is excellent.

 

The 85mm with more reach is also a great lens to have in your kit. I have both and they suit low light venues and portraiture very well. My next fast prime lens will be the 135mm f/2L and that will be it for now for my primes at least.

 

I'd go with the 50mm 1.8 if you really want to save money and if you can swing it then get the 85mm. If you could get both then you will be happy!

Of course all of the above depends on the following:

 

Is this an indoor or outdoor concert?

 

If outdoor, is it during the afternoon hours?

 

Regardless, what is the size of the arena and how far will you be from the stage?

 

Do you want close-ups and how close do they need to be?

 

I have used anything from a Canon 50/1.8 to a Canon 70-200 2.8 IS. Any number of lenses will work fine. I shot some very good photos at New York's Farm Aid with a Canon 100-300 4.5/5.6 cheap lens. Of course, I was only about ten rows back and it was a bright summer afternoon early in the concert. As the sun went down, I used the 85 1.8 with excellent results.

 

You certainly can do alot with the Canon 135/2 and it's real popular among the pros but they are also carrying a second body with an L zoom.

You may need an expensive tripod. ;-)

 

As Jeff said depending on when is the concert, how much light is available and how far away

will you be.

Consider Canon 200 2.8L. Its a great lens for concert photography and also cheap.

The EF50mmF1.8MkII is inexpensive for sure, but it is not cheap, nor does it present good value for money, if you are in the back row of a large venue.

 

From the wings or the front rows, it might be ideal.

 

A few more shooting parameters are necessary . . . because without those, the question is kinda like asking: `I need a camera to take photos with, which one should I buy?`

 

WW

andrew said:<p>

"... I want a cheap lens that'll take great concert pics on a 30D."

<p>

The EF 85 f/1.8 is a cheap lens that will take great concert photos on a 30D ... if you are close enough.

"if you are close enough."

 

...or far enough. ;)<div></div>

To be honest I have no idea about the location. I can assume it will be dark and I will be

near the front. (no more than 15-20 rows back).

This makes up 75% of my shooting. I don't mean large auditoriums and pro venues, but usually small local places with general admission. I shoot just as much of the crowd as I do of the performers, usually in practically NO light, for dark, grainy, and moody pix. Therefore I favor a fast lens above all else. Since I have so much freedom of movement, I can get a way with this most of the time. The 50mm f/1.2, or 55mm 1.2 on film, is my most used lens in a club where there is general admission. Sometimes I will use direct diffused flash if I want that "shots in the dark" look; usually very rarely, and the crowd only, though, as I think more than a few flashes onto the band can bother them, as they are usually looking down as you are shooting up at them, and I don't want to blind them.

<BR><BR>

The absolute best bang for the buck was mentioned immediately. You can't go wrong to at least pick up a used copy of the 50mm 1.8. However, often you need longer, even with freedom of movement. If you can afford it, the 85mm 1.8 is another amazing bang for the buck.

<BR><BR>

However, if you are just shooting the performers, a long IS lens is an amazing tool. Although I hate to shoot with the annoyingly big, white, heavy, obtrusive 70-200 IS, there is no denying that it is an absolutely killer tool if you can afford it. If the action is somewhat slow, and you know how to milk the most from the IS, you can get shots at 200mm down to '25 sometimes. '50 is actually very safe with this lens at 200mm. If budget were not the issue, I would recommend this as the "go-to" lens for most people, simply due to the IS coupled with the manageable size. The payoff you get with tight dramatic shots is worth the money, IF you have it to spend.

<BR><BR>

Here is a recent shot from a 50 1.2:

<BR>

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6948688-lg.jpg">

<BR><BR>

and 70-200mm IS at 200:

<BR>

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/6948686-md.jpg">

<BR><BR>Both are at 1600 on a 1D MK. II N, and quickly processed in DPP for this post. I tried to keep them small so as not to annoy anyone too much.

<BR><BR>

As you can see, you get different shots from a fast normal lens than from the IS tele, but both are useful tools. There are a few more low light pix in my portfolio. You can tell which ones were the 50 and which were the 200. There are also a few taken with a 16-35. They are pretty distinguishable too, and it is not the worst lens for a couple pix, but I would hate to have it as my only lens for gigs.

<BR><BR>

By the way, I would forget about autofocus MOST of the time. There is generally either too much or too little contrast in these situations to rely on AF, and getting it locked on the right thing will usually be slower than using MF.

<BR><BR>

Keith

50/1.4 (or 1.8) handles most situations if you're close enough. This is from the same gig as the last one. There was one(!) spot lighting the stage (underground spirit and literally). Manual focus worked nicely.<div></div>

Andrew,

 

I just read the 15-20 rows back thing...

 

There are no cheap options for shooting a stage from that far away. At that distance, 100mm f/2 would be your most bang for the buck, and it would still be too short for what most people would envision. You'd generally have to shoot it at '200 or above on that camera. With this sort of distance, and with assigned seating, 70-200 IS is definitely the ticket. The trouble is that it is significantly more expensive than your camera was.

 

Keith

What I said was no more than 15-20 rows back. It isn't assigned seating and I could likely

end up in front.

 

~Andrew

I am partial to Canon lenses and, for less expensive concert photos in a dark arena up fairly close: I suggest you buy the 50/1.8, plus buy or rent the 85/1.8 and rent the 200/2.8. Should cover all of your bases and you'll continue to use the 85 and the 50 for alot of other things other than just concert photos.

Well, I would start with a 50mm 1.8, or even better, 1.4 if you can afford it. Shoot for a while with that, and then based on your experience, you will have a better idea of what focal length to save up for next. The 50 will always be useful, so nothing is lost by purchasing it first.

 

Keith