Looking for fast low light cameras for shooting bands/burlesque/fire eaters

[kevin_kranz]

<p>Right now my main camera which does me well with well lit areas for the use of the 320EX speedlight that I guess I overheat sometimes is what seems like the somewhat limited edition Canon PowerShot SX1 IS. I'm about to acquire a Canon PowerShot SD4000IS I heard that it's good in low light and that most of the time I'm so close to the stage and that the zoom takes so much out of the f-stop I thought that this camera might help in the short term till I can work out what would be the best camera for me and how I would set up a payment method or work on saving some money for the next six months to work on building a nest egg for new equipment<br>

<br />my first thought was to get the latest Canon PowerShot SX40 but even though they haven't improved technology to clear up some of the graininess at higher ISOs they really seem to not really come that far insensitivity were my camera is at 1600 and the newer cameras maxed out at 3200 and looking at the G1X at 12,800 ISO and some of the newer cameras that are even into 25600 and 51200 ISO plus all the models but my Canon PowerShot SX1 IS have no hot shoe for a flash that kind of leaves out just plain upgrading unless somebody knows something like they're going to come out with a newer model with the same features as my Canon PowerShot SX1 IS<br>

<br />also looking at the more affordable DSLR's I'm seeing that they don't even come up to the G1X at 12,800 ISO till they hit over $2000 so that makes me unsure that it's worth it</p>

<p>main things that I need not in any certain order for shooting bands/burlesque/fire eaters are<br />1- at least one frame per second or faster counting autofocus and image stabilization.<br>

<br />2- I'm guessing a high ISO being fast in low light situations able to pick up with no or little blur if someone is swinging or jumping onstage with their guitar I am willing to live with a certain amount of graininess<br>

<br />3- it has to be also be compatible with quality and fast flashes for when I don't want to pick up the ambient light sources and just use a flash<br>

<br />4- as a trade-off of not coming with a compact super zoom if that's not available high amount of megapixels so I can just crop the photo to what I need<br>

<br />so whether it's a DSLR the new EOS M or G1X heck I might even go Nikon if I have to<br />I just can't waste my time taking 400 photographs or more and only getting a 3% to 10% return<br /><br /></p>

[eric merrill]

<p>The best bang for your buck is going to be a Rebel. The latest Rebel will do much better with higher ISOs than the PowerShot models. Don't worry about what the maximum listed ISO is. That's not indicative of quality.</p>

<p> </p>

[tom_harvey3]

<p>Rebel XSi</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Agree get a Rebel, great cameras.</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>Drebel + Tamron 17-50/2.8 and maybe add a fast prime in the future, once you know the focal length you need.</p>

[wayne_campbell]

<p>Pentax K-5</p>

[gpsbrar]

<p>I have a T2i and it is pretty good in low light conditions (for regular consumer). If you are a pro and want something better, try 7D or 5D2. More sugar you add, sweeter it gets. </p>

[Spearhead]

<p>It's good to have low light capability, however, shooting the subjects you are talking about, I find that I am almost always using flash. Only in the larger venues, which typically have restrictions on non-credentialed photographers, do I need the low light capability. When I do, I usually shoot at 3200 and use the noise reduction in LR to get the noise down. <a href="http://spirer.com/bcbmarch2012/content/images/large/_57P9860.jpg"> Here is a typical burlesque shot</a> with no flash, this is a large venue that doesn't allow flash. And <a href="http://spirer.com/hooksjan2012/">here is a band shoot </a>done with flash. And <a href="http://spirer.com/images/firedancer1.jpg">here is a fire dancer shot</a>, taken with a very old and noisy DSLR (EOS 10D), which should show that it is possible to shoot in low light without the latest technology.</p>

<p>I don't know why you think you need a high frame rate, what people do in these types of performances is very predictable. It's more about being ready than shooting a burst, I never do a burst despite usually shooting with a camera that can do 10fps.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Given what I perceive of your budget and your prior experience compact cameras, I'd suggest the G1X. You seem to have answered your own question about high-ISO performance. To substantially beat it, you'd have to go to the 5D MkIII, which is big and cost $3500.</p>

<p>Be sure to shoot in Raw and convert with a competent Raw converter, like Digital Photo Professional, LightRoom, DxO Optics Pro, Aperture, etc. Also shoot in RGB, not RGbs, so that you don't throw away 1/3 of the colors. With Raw and RGB you'll gain both dynamic range and color accuracy.</p>

[kevin_kranz]

<p>In the past day I've really been looking at the Nikon D 5100 D SLR and for about the same prize if not a little bit cheaper than the Canon rebel T3 i also a decently fast lens at F1 .8 for about $200 in both a fixed 35mm range which I'm told with this camera will come up to a 50 mm range or 50 mm which I guess would be somewhere around 75 the Canon lenses even at F 2.8 seem much more expensive although I would probably have to get a new flash and the Nikon flashes seemed to be a little bit more expensive but with the D 5100 even though I haven't seen very many stills on YouTube I've been checking out the videos this Nikon seems to be set slightly cheaper than the rebels by having the sensitivity just below the current Canon 5D Mark two and three the expanded ISO being 25, 600 with an added night vision application to ISO 102,400 from what I'm saying will do black-and-white were the the rebel T3i will cost me in the thousands for a lens that F1 .8 and is expanded up to 12,800 ISO also on this DX0 Mark.com site there is a sensitivity sports tests and what sensitivity of the sensor starts to degrade the picture which has the Nikon D 5100 nicely placed . Still considering only very slightly the Canon G1X as a second option even though and sensitivity it was about half of the Nikons on that test but up the same price about as the Nikons body and lens but I know I really should get back in the DSLR game on just control alone instead of relying on manual for everything<br>

<br />I'd really like to stay with Canon I've gotten used to their controls set up and equipment but unless I can see that the lens which I believe is an F3 .5 or .8 that I can get that comes with the Canon rebel T3i or the Canon G1 X to be able to catch action people jumping through the air twirling fire the same as I would with this Nikon on and after 1.8 50 mm lens I'm going to have to go with the Nikon<br>

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/%28type%29/usecase_sports<br>

I know the pictures are a little bit more artistically filtered and not very serious but this is what I've been taken so far with my XS1 IS <a id="groupsJumpTitle" href="http://www.facebook.com/groups/395927493797075/">Kevin's Bain Photography</a> at Facebook<br>

and for a second till I saw that there flashes weren't as fast as cannons or I believe Nikons I was looking at the Pentax K-30 <br>

and Jeff I will look at your pictures after I get back think I might have a couple bands while I'm sure I had a couple bands but maybe a few burlesque acts at a benefit in less than an hour<br>

so please prove me wrong tell me I can get a rebel that will give me the shots I want with also a lens that won't go over $400 and I will stick with Canon<br>

thank you everyone Kevin</p>

 

[Spearhead]

<p>I think you are looking at this the wrong way, and I think most of the posters haven't shot in this environment and are responding based on equipment specifications.</p>

<p>I was shooting a band (Shonen Knife) for a magazine in a popular San Francisco venue last night. It's not the biggest, but it's not the smallest. I was getting meter readings around 1/15 sec at f2.8 with 3200 ISO. Now I know that for a dynamic band (or burlesque performer), I need around 1/250 to not get blur. It's easy to see how high the ISO has to be to truly stop things simply by settings.</p>

<p>That's why I do one of two things - either shoot with flash, which I do whenever it's allowed, or wait for the static moments. The problem is that the static moments may not be the most interesting ones, especially for bands. </p>

<p>I don't think Nikon is going to offer you anything better than Canon, or vice versa. Since you appear to have a dedicated Canon flash, it probably makes more sense to stick with Canon. What you need to do is focus on things like flash technique and understanding when action won't blur unpleasantly, both of which come through experience shooting.</p>

<p>Both my bodies don't go beyond ISO 6400 but I get plenty of assignments and sell a lot of photos taken under the lighting conditions you describe. While I will probably go to a camera with higher ISO capability (either the 1DX or the 5D3), that isn't going to change what I do that much. I still find that creating my own light in clubs is often better than what happens without it.</p>

<p>Also, just a note on fire eaters, this is really much easier than it sounds. The subject is lit by the fire. The fire eater usually moves very slowly. The real challenge with fire eaters (and fire dancers) is exposure and has nothing to do with the camera.</p>

<p>The shot below is from last night's band shoot (this isn't the assignment, it's the opener, I have an embargo on the assigment and I think they were better), when I turned off my flash and shot at 3200. It did work out, but it's because I was careful about the exposure and picking the moment. I didn't need anything higher than 3200 because I timed it to exactly what I wanted and used the monitor as a stabilizer.</p>

<p><img src="http://spirer.com/mallardaug2012/content/images/large/_57P1361.jpg" alt="" width="700" height="467" /></p>

[keith reeder]

<blockquote>

<p>To substantially beat it, you'd have to go to the 5D MkIII, which is big and cost $3500.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>Sigh...</em></p>

<p>Stop it David. you can't seriously be suggesting that nothing in the Canon line-up between the G1X and the 5D Mk III is capable of better high ISO performance than the G1X. It's good for a compact, but <em>please</em>...</p>

<p>In fact, any of the DSLRs mentioned so far will beat the G1X by a wide margin if the Raw files are converted and processed properly.<br /><br />Furthermore, in Raw you get just over 1 fps from the G1X, and - assuming that its 60mm/f.5.8 at the long end will do - it has very slow AF: hardly ideal features for what the OP wants to shoot, especially as it has a buffer capacity of just six frames.</p>

<p><strong>He needs a DSLR, and there are plenty of viable options between this camera and the 5D Mk III</strong>.</p>

<p>Just (again) to put my money where my mouth is: http://www.capture-the-moment.co.uk/tp/tfu29/upload/5000_ISO.jpg</p>

<p>This is (of course) with my <strong>7D: f/4, 1/25s and 5000 ISO</strong> (closer to 6650 ISO really, as I had -0.3 EC dialed in - proper low light, anyway - and at 420mm handheld, as I was mucking about with my Siggy 120-400mm f/2.8 OSD and 1.4x), and my normal high ISO worklflow.</p>

<p>The T2i has a similar sensor, and will do this too - and will be an order of magnitude more responsive and flexible for performance photography than a compact...</p>

[kevin_kranz]

<p>okay, I'm back, that was a very long night, and I'm pretty sure I'm wearing now my flash or I should say probably burning it out although the other photographer that showed up as one of the drunk band that I guess everyone thought they were too drunk to go on showed up I felt very jealous and protective I've been doing the shows with probably the best camera there up until this other photographer showed up I know it's a very petty but I almost got really defensive in till I decided to suck his brain forever all the information and experience I could at least I found out I'm not the only one who was flash overheats maybe I should drill holes in the battery door and put a small CPU fan on it XD</p>

<p>One thing I'm absolutely sure of too much of anything in the show is bad and when it's rock or alternative band's changing out their drum sets in a very small bar with only one burlesque performance to break it up it's torture got there at 11 PM and the left at 4 AM me and the I guess you would call him promoter or producer agreed having to ban its in one night should be the maximum </p>

<p>So I'm not sure if I'm burning out my equipment or its natural wear and tear I've never shot at this intensity my EOS -3 film camera I never use the flash that much and it was pretty ruggedly built I think it was the least three frames per second which like a few of you are saying I need to get back into a SLR type of control and try to remember all the information that I have lost playing with the compact and super zooms in the digital world I kind of just wish they made a simple camera fast good construction all the controls you need but without 50 different buttons on it.</p>

<p>Jeff I saw your pictures and they're really good really sharp even the ones with the little hand blur with the burlesque dancer throwing the confetti in the air which is kind of funny the manager of the bar is getting tired of the glitter that the main or I should say lead burlesque performer has been going nuts over can't say I'm too crazy about glitter myself it's hard to clean gets everywhere and I doubt that it's very biodegradable your fire year answer picture was great I wish my photo's would've come out that good your musician selection although it must be very good to get that type of picture for publication and making money I'm not too sure if most of the girl bands would be into that type of photography they seem on their own and with their friends into very blurry maybe even distorted with adding I guess what you would call flare lighting to accent the pictures and I guess my own style when it comes to repairing the color and lighting and maybe a little bit of the graininess lies somewhere in between I'm finding that I'm addicted to a high contrast with the little or a lot of glow added to it</p>

<p>I probably have about 500 to 800 photographs to go through and after all that standing kneeling sitting in uncomfortable chairs getting rained on sweating my butt off being dehydrated then rehydrated then dehydrated again I think I should sleep before jumping in and saying what I have</p>

<p>I guess I could say something good about musicians is unlike her last dancers the kind of nailed down to their instruments and they get repetitive so yes picking a moment to shoot is a lot easier than a burlesque dancer who plays with the crowd and spins around everywhere But in consideration you get a wild crazy dancing girl being knotty makes for a lot more interesting pictures.<br>

good night everyone or good morning it's 6:30 AM or I am nice think I'll watch an episode of firefly then get some sleep oh also the manager is going to give me free reign on the nights they have entertainment in exchange for me taking pictures which I can also use in my portfolio </p>

<p>1-I guess the two other questions I could use help with would be what a more expensive and Canon flash I guess there's only one more expensive since the photographer had the next one up no way there's the 580 and the 600 right now right would spending an arm and a leg on one of those two or something similar in the Nikon range which I'm not even sure that they have either I haven't looked very well or they don't have as much flash products as Canon meal do that before I fall asleep</p>

<p>2-and I guess the second question well I can't remember the second question I will yeah viewing your photos while editing them now I've noticed in some of my most of my editing programs that kind of keep the pictures at a small size and then when Facebook gets a hold of it they might enlarge it a little bit where it looks a lot grainier and distorted specially the color well I guess the question is should I work on regular computer monitors LCDs or should I go into my bedroom for an easier view on a 47 inch HDTV when editing<br>

Kevin</p>

[jerry_sousa]

<p>Get up on stage with your gear, a can of Zippo lighter fluid, and emulate Jimi Hendrix. Then, out of the corner of your eye, see what the other photographers do about it.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Keith, look at DPReview's noise comparison to the 7D at:<br /> <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong1x/10">http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong1x/10</a><br /> In some ways the G1X is superior to the 7D at high-ISOs.</p>

<p>If he wants a compact, there are options. He only "needs" a DSLR if he thinks he needs it. In his budget range, he'll gain little, if anything, by going to a DSLR. (BTW, I own the 7D and the 5D MkIII).</p>

[kevin_kranz]

<p>got a T3i today AF TOO JUMPY, Too slow to lock on even my flash's AF-assist beam trick gives no sense of timming. thinking of T4i now </p>

[kevin_kranz]

<p>nope. tryed a G1X in the dark back room best so far</p>