Using a ND filter during a ballet performance, may improve the photos?

[georges_walker]

Hello,

<p>

Today I'll be shooting a dance performance. D 300 with 24mm 2.8, 35mm 2.0 and 50mm 1.4.

<p>

Last month I did something similar and after checking the photographs in my computer, I noticed that those images

taken with the 50mm were much better. Of course that lens is better than the others (I believe) but besides that, the

lens in that time had an ND filter while the others had a UV filter.

<p>

The kind of light in theathers is different as you know.

<p>

My questions is, the ND filter (2 level, I think) helped somehow or it was just the lens?

<p>

Today I will remove all the filters so I would have a different chance to evaluate.

<p>

One more question, I also noticed that those images taken with the 24mm and 35mm were a little bit blur and

lacking of detail. Should I use the D300 option to fine tune the focus for those lenses?

<p>

All the photos were taken with ISO 1600.

<p>

I will appreciate your comments.

[syed]

<p>I have no idea why you would want to use an ND filter in a theatre that is probably starved of light anyway. Did you shoot wide open with the 1.4? As for the blurry pictures it's most likely subject movement combined with a low shutter speed, even at ISO 1600. That theatre must have been quiet dimly lit!</p>

[georges_walker]

The average setting was F2.2 / 1/120s

<p>

Yes, ver dim light, that's why I was using ISO 1600 for having the chance to shoot at 1/120. I did not try any higher ISO.

<p>

The ND filter was there already, I should check my equipment before using it but I didn't.

<p>

The kind of dance (speed) and the moments when I was shooting, I believe do not make a difference among the lenses for getting blurry pictures.

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>There's nothing "special" about light in a theater that would make pictures sharper or more detailed when shot through a neutral density filter. I've shot enough dance to know that "there's no light like mo' light". Take the ND filter off, and I bet you like the shots even more. Are you using lens hoods on all your lenses? Theater conditions are likely to cause lens flare, you'll see less "blobs" in your pictures and better contrast if using a hood and no filters (not UV, not ND).</p>

<p>The AF tune option is not likely to have an effect on the 24 or 35mm lenses under the conditions you were shooting. What more were you shooting in, A or P?</p>

[georges_walker]

Yes, every lens that I have has the original hood.

<p>

My plan today is to shoot without filters.

<p>

thanks!

[ramon_v__california_]

<p>the D300 can take a higher ISO/higher shutter speed combo.<br>

the "speed" of the movement in the dance does matter in choosing the right combo of settings. different lenses, specially, take different settings in a single situation such as a dance performance.<br>

yes, hoods only, no filters.</p>

[jorish]

<p>Same advice here; take off all filters and use hoods.</p>

<p>My guess is that the filters on your lenses created the problems; incoming light reflecting oin the front element of the lens and bouncing between there and the filter. As a further guess that might have been avoided on the 50mm, because the lenshood is somewhat deeper, and because there's less extra light falling on the lens anyway as you go from wide to tele</p>

<p>Good luck!</p>

[pcnilssen]

<p>In my experience, you need all the light you can get on dance performances, in order to stop action (short shutter speed), get better aperture value, or the lowest possible ISO.</p>

<p>Take off every filter that reduces the EV !</p>

<p>best of luck!</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>For the 35 f/2, it's far from optimal at f/2.2. Mine starts being good at f/2.8 and really good at f/4. The 24 f/2.8.. well, harder to say since mine is an old Ai version, which is very good already wide open, but I do not know if the AF versions are different. In contrast, the 50 f/1.4 should already be very good around f/2.<br>

So while I agree with all above, also remember that you're using one lens in its "sweet spot" and the others not.</p>

[sjoerd_leeuwenberg]

<p>Maybe also good to include some pictures to give us an idea of what good or bad is.<br>

I sometimes have trouble getting the lighting right, because there is a lot of contrast. Especially when the background is dark, the metering sees a lot of darkness and makes highlights (normally the faces or bodies with lights on them) too bright which also can look like unsharpness. Spot metering or manual settings might help.</p>

[georges_walker]

Thanks to all.

<p>

The performance was yesterday but I was not allowed to be in front of the scenario, they argued that the performer may be disrupted because of the noise of the camera so I was asked to go upstairs if I insist on taking pictures. So I went upstairs but with the 50mm as the only minitelephoto I couldn't do my best.

<p>

Besides that, another guy from the dance company prevent me to take a lot of picutres, also arguing the noise from the camera.

<p>

The performance was about Butoh, sometimes some music, some times quiet. I decided to take very few pictures in order to respect the performance.

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>Stage lighting is deceiving. The subjects are bright against a mostly dark background. The best way to expose is to take a spot reading from faces and use manual mode. Lights are never positioned to shine into the auditorium, so flare is not a problem.</p>

[david_mccormick]

<p>I agree with Edward: spot meter on the subjects and forget about the background. Don't put any filters between the performance and the camera. I have shot ISO 800-1600 with an f/2.8 lens for stage work and you are just getting enough light. Adding an ND would be an unnecessary waste of light.</p>

[stephen_fassman]

<p>You're trying to capture action at a dance recital. Shoot at S priority(1/250), CL, Dynamic Focus tracking, auto iso if the stage has sufficient lighting. I presume you Can't use a flash. Do you have a zoom to more closely follow your subject (pan with the motion) and to put the AF sensor directly on the subject? Your lens choices seems too wide, unless you're sitting in the first 5 rows?</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>The first priority when photographing performances is to never disturb the performers or audience. Be sure you have permission in advance. Follow the instructions of the theater facility and onsite performance manager, which may be the director or stage manager, depending on when you show up. When photographing ballet, opera or musical theater you may be dealing with more than one person. And some performances may be copyrighted or under restrictions that prohibit or limit photography. Always check in advance.</p>

<p>Use a sound-dampening device such as a camera blimp or move to a location where the camera sound cannot be heard. A couple of times I've shot from the tech booth behind glass, but only after first checking with the techs to be sure it wouldn't disturb them.</p>

<p>You need all the light you can get, and to avoid anything that makes flare worse, so leave off the filters, including UV or protective filters.</p>

<p>Autofocus is seldom as essential to live performance photography as speed is. I'd rather have a good manual focus fast lens, f/2.8 or faster, than a slowpoke variable aperture autofocus zoom. Even with an f/2.8 or faster autofocus lens I've often had to touch up focus manually. Between lighting that may change moment to moment and performers crossing around at different distances from the photographer, even the best AF camera is easily fooled. Pre-focusing on the desired area or zone focusing helps. And try assigning AF to the "AF-ON" button only so that pressing the shutter release button doesn't cause the focus to unexpectedly shift instead of staying on the desired performer or area.</p>

[georges_walker]

Thanks again. I appreciate all your comments.

<p>

Stephen, I'll put in practice your suggestion, thank you.