Concert photography, S2 and AF accuracy

[steve_muntz]

I've been shooting concerts lately with my Fuji S2 and having a

problem with AF accuracy. This shot was taken at ISO800 with a 50

f1.4, 1/45 sec at f1.4, AF in "C" mode. My daytime shots with this

lens (and the others I use for this - 85 f1.4, 80-200 f2.8, 20-35

f2.8) are very sharp but in low light I have a problem getting sharp

images. This image is pretty typical (usable, but not "tack sharp").

 

I realize that at a fairly close distance, a 50mm at f1.4 has a very

short depth of field. To increase the ISO to 1600 (adding a stop)

is too high a price in image quality. Am I better off with a

smaller aperture - say 2.8 - and waiting for enough light on the

subject to get a good shutter speed, or any other recommendations?

Is the AF in this camera just not able to keep up - how much better

would a D2H be in a situation like this? Thanks for the help.<div></div>

[steve_muntz]

PS - this is "right out of the camera" with sharpening in standard mode.

[Spearhead]

Shooting handheld at 1/45 in a crowded and noisy environment is not the best environment for avoiding camera shake, which is what appears to be the problem. There is nothing in focus, so it's definitely not an issue of mis-focus. <p>

 

I shoot a lot in this kind of setting, and usually find props for either my arm or the camera. You could also try a monopod, although I find it better to reduce what I carry.

[tony_p4]

Although I sometimes use Fuji Superia 800, I find Fuji Superia 1600 just as good and the touch of extra speed helps to nail those shots easier. The smaller the aperture the better your AF will work as well, I often use F2.8 or F4 with lenses 105mm or less for reportage and they are published.

[Spearhead]

He'll probably find it hard to put fast film in a digital camera.

[steve_muntz]

Thanks for the replies. Actually, the upper horn of the guitar (where the strap is attached) and the guitar player's necklace are pretty sharp when looking at 100% in Photoshop. Both faces are not, and most of the guitar - which is of course at an angle - is not. I'll try to stop down a little and see how it works.

 

I may also try my F100 with 800 speed film to see how that works.

[tony_p4]

Jeff OOOOOOOOOPS good point sorry, but the second part of my reply still applies. Every considered a film instead of a digi instead? lol :-@

[tony_p4]

Steve, I'll probably open a bag of worms here but picture quality at higher speeds is the only reason I still shoot film when using colour. I do recommend the Fuji Superia 1600 if you use your F100 though.

[james_oneill]

ISO 800 1/45 at f/1.4 ? I'd say that was right at the limit of what an autofocus system can focus at, and with concert lights changing, subjects moving etc you're asking a lot. And at f/1.4 you've got no D.O.F to give you a margin for error - with a 45th in the crush of conceert if you're not moving the subjects will be!

You could look at noise reduction software like neat image and see if that gives tolerable images. F/2.8 won't give you vast depth of field either.

[Spearhead]

I took a look at your image here in Photoshop. One problem I see is that the "standard sharpening" isn't enough. Some USM and a little bit of contrast enhancement does wonders for this image. The faces still aren't sharp, but they also look like they could be moving.<p>

 

Also, there are ways to deal with noise at high ISO. Here is a shot I did at 3200 with a Canon 10D.<p>

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/sorrowtc/images/sc18.jpg"><br>

<i>Sorrowtown Choir at The PoundSF, Copyright 2004 Jeff Spirer</i></center><p>

 

I have found that digital at high ISO gives far better results than film at high ISO.

[tony_p4]

Jeff, As you say very good quality especially at the speed it was shot. I will agree to differ on which is best (although I think it's getting very close) but that's because like everything it depends on post production and it's use. I am very fortunate in that I process all my own B&W so have complete control and have a very good pro lab locally who offer an exceptional service (at a price). Of course digital gets into the chain at some point for my colour work and when I can justify a Nikon D2H investment I will go digital for colour.

[igord]

You have no DOF that is why your photos are unsharp. I did this one with olympus c-740 at f2.8 something about 1/10 sec at iso 400.<div></div>

[Spearhead]

Tony, here's a comparison with film. This was shot on Fuji 1600, and there's a huge difference. I would agree that with black and white, the difference is not nearly as dramatic, but if you're shooting color, it's just no contest between digital and film at high ISO.<p>

 

<center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/images/redrap.jpg"><br>

<i>Red Rapper (WordSound), Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer</i></center>

[tony_p4]

Hi Jeff, Many thanks for posting the comparison and I stand corrected there's a hell of a difference. Thinking back I guess the difference for me is that under very dark lighting conditions such as those I use B&W Ilford Delta 3200. With colour I shoot the Fuji Superia 1600 in lighting conditions only as low a dawn just before the light fails.<div></div>

[andy_schwegler]

Jeff, that comparison isn't accurate. It looks like your film shot was a few stops underexposed. I use superia 1600 all the time for concerts and as long as your exposures are accurate then you should get nice results.

<br>

Here's a shot with superia 1600

<br>

<img src=http://s89005778.onlinehome.us/new_photos/hoobastank.jpg>

[steve_muntz]

Jeff, thanks for all the info. How do you handle the high noise of digital? I know there is some good noise reduction software out there, any recommendations?

 

When I get a good, sharp image (~60-70% or so), it makes a great print almost right out of the camera at these settings. Murphy's law that the ones I wish were sharp look like the one above... With the "keepers", I usually do a little USM, levels and contrast adjustments to it but that's it. The Fuji at 800 is great, but 1600 isn't so good. Getting another stop out of it would be very helpful.

[twmeyer]

Actually, there's a lot of controversy concerning the S2 and what's called "back focusing" (I'm not sure why it's called that). I use the S2 in all sorts of light and with a variety of lenses and can confirm that it's the big weak point of the camera. Be sure you use the center focusing spot as much as possible, as it's much more sensitive than the other four. The N80 is this way, while the F100 has 3 good focusing points (left, right and center) and I think the F5 has the more sensitive points on all five. Check out all the hits you'll get on this topic at <a href="http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/index.asp">Rob Galbraith's website</a> where you'll find forums particular to the Fuji S2 as well as Nikon and Canon digital cameras and equipment... t