Recommendations - Concert Gear

[alp_hizal]

After reading forums & reviews for a month or so, following lenses are candidates for my gig pack.

 

It would be nice to hear from those of you who used these lenses for concert photography.

 

Canon EF 135mm f/2 USM L

 

Canon EF 200mm f/2.8 USM L (maybe too long?)

 

Canon EF 70 - 200mm f/4 IS USM L

 

I have a EOS 20D body. Any recommendations on combining one of these lenses with a 50mm, or 85mm

f/1.8?

 

My dilemma is that actually i cannot imagine if these lenses will be long/short on the field because i did

not have the chance to try one of these lenses above.

 

Thanks

 

Alp

[j_smith6]

Canon EF 70 - 200mm f/<b>2.8</b> USM L <i>?IS?</i>

[sravan]

Canon EF 70 - 200mm f/2.8 USM L IS

[rcox2]

These three get all the work for me (in this order):

 

70-200 2.8 L IS

 

24-70 2.8 L

 

50 1.4

[steve torelli]

For concert photography, I'd think you'd want to go with some fast primes. One of the 85mms, the 1.2 if you can afford it, the original version is readily available used. The 135 is a great lens, but even f/2 may not be enough in a typical concert venue.Depending on how close you can get or the perspective you want to achieve, the 35 1.4 might work also. The 70-200 f/4 is too slow and IS will be of little help with moving subjects like performers. The 2.8 would be better, but in places where you can't use a flash, you need the speed. Good luck.

[dont]

IMO there's no excuse not to pick up a 50mm f/1.8 considering it's like $75. I use mine quite a bit at concerts. It's great considering the noise issues encountered above ISO 800.

 

Also, consider picking up a copy of Noiseware for post work. I find it's one of the better noise reduction plugins for Photoshop.

[awindsor]

What sort of concerts? Outdoors or under powerful lights 2.8 is fine and the 70-200/2.8 IS is a workhorse for these. Indoors in dim clubs I use a combination of 35/2, 50/1.8, and 85/1.8 on my 20D.

 

Richard,

 

How is your 50/1.4 in very dim environments? I have held off buying one since a number of my fellow gig photographers have mentioned that it is far less certain at achieving focus in low light than the 50/1.8.

[andy_gulati3]

My 50/1.8 has a terrible time focusing in low light, hardly worth using. My 100/2 has been fine. I'm looking towards the Sigma 30/1.4 to handle the normal range.

 

Andy

[alibek]

DON'T BUY A 50 f/1.4 FOR LOW LIGHT

 

I've been talking about it too much maybe... sorry about that.

 

In fact, you might want to get a 85mm f/1.8 USM - giving quite a decent low light perfomance, nice DOF and fast focusing speed in general. All along in a good focal length.

 

Personally I use for any sort of concerts the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 DG HSM Macro. Rapid focusing speed plus nice zoom flexibility. Since it's cheaper than any other wide-aperture 70-200mm lens available, maybe there's sense in sticking with it -

 

at least, you save money compaing to an equivalent 'L' glass, with not-too-many differences in an image/build quality.

 

Alibek

[Spearhead]

Where are you shooting from? What's the venue like? The lenses you mention don't really make sense if you are shooting with access, and if you don't have access, they are likely to keep you out.

<p>

I shoot with access, I shoot about 70% with the 35/2 and about 30% with the 50/1.4. If there's a lot of people on stage, I will take the 20/2.8.

<p>

Concert photography is fairly specialized, you should check comments to see if people have anything to show that indicates they know what it takes. I only saw a few posters above with any concert shots to show, and even fewer (maybe one?) with any quantity. You can see some of mine <a href="http://www.spirer.com/Performance/">here</a>, some <a href="http://www.spirer.com/haight2007/">outdoor work here</a>, some <a href="http://www.spirer.com/stceagle/">here.</a> There's plenty more where those came from...