Jump to content

goulden

Members
  • Posts

    797
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by goulden

  1. hi greg, I do this kind of stuff all the time and the answers to your questions are:

     

    1) charge what you feel is fair for doing maybe two hours shooting, two hours post production, and what is fair for the band (if they're unsigned etc)

     

    I'd say a starting point would be ?100 to ?300 depending on your skill

     

    2) your equipment is fine if you know how to use it, I've shot bands at 200mm and also at 10mm on my various lenses. Knowing how to light always helps and halogen lamps are a cheap way to try things out.

     

    3) shoot pictures that you like and what the band portray to you, whilst also keeping the bands wants and needs in mind.

     

    they may want to look similar in style to bands they love so ask them who they like the style of and research that bands look etc etc

     

    4) post your pics up afterwards so we can help critique

  2. as a music photographer who also shoots in venues with virtually no light ad having used both lenses you ask about:

     

    - the canon is a little faster in low light when trying to autofocus

    - the canon feels a little better built but that makes no difference to your pictures

    - the sigma is way cheaper, so you could buy something like a 50mm f1.4 or 30mm f1.4 kind of lens

     

    if i was to choose again, i'd buy the canon as it's a long term investment for me and i plan on using the lens for many years to come. and at this point in it's life it's already paid for itself

  3. Javad> either camera will get you brilliant photographs if you are a brilliant photographer. Both will take terrible photos in the hands of a terrible photographer

     

    short answer, either camera. there's nothing that one of them can do really well that the other can't. go to a shop, have a play with one, and buy whichever feels most comfortable in your hands and which has the best price for your budget

  4. We've been doing music photography for years, but we're venturing out of the

    often wet cold muddy deafening photo pits to churches.<br>

    <br>

    Have a read and look at:<br>

    <a href = "http://AAAphotos.org/weddings/">AAAphotos.org/weddings</a><br>

    <br>

    and let me know what you think of the information/prices and lastly the

    pictures.<br> Mainly want to hear if you think we're saying anything wrong or

    confusing.<br>

    <br>

    I'll probably make the text into several clickable sections so it doesn't just

    look like a huge block of text<br>

    <br>

  5. Concert Photography is what I do. The lenses I use are, in order of preference<br>

    <br>

    24-70 f2.8 - works in small to large venues, fast<br>

    50mm f1.4 - super fast, works in the darkest of venues<br>

    70-200 f2.8 - good for big venues, rarely use it in small venues<br>

    10-22 f3.5 - gets great results if used wisely<br>

    <br>

    <br>

    taken with 70-200:<br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3593301-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <br>

    taken with 24-70<br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3668874-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <br>

    taken with 10-22<br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3421129-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <br>

    taken with 50mm<br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2892142-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br><br>

    <a href = "http://aaaphotos.org">AAAphotos.org</a>

  6. It all depends what you're shooting and what you do with your pictures. for me in low light concerts a it's the only lens i can use in certain conditions and get a sharp bright image at 1600 or 3200

     

    i also use the dof abilities of it to totally blur a background out and you can't do that any other way, obviously you loose sharpness of the subject but it's simply a trade off between the two.

     

    to finish: a slightly soft picture is better than no picture at all

  7. did they pay you for doing the shoot initially, did they commission you to shoot them or did you just ask them if you could shoot them?<br>

    <br>

    Do you sell your photographic services in other areas?

    In my music photography experience you could get anything from ?100 to ?600 for the useage you descibe. But get a contract together and exclude merchandise sales or use on a cd or add in prices if they decide to use the shot for something else<br>

    <br>

    <a href ="www.AAAphotos.org">www.AAAphotos.org</a>

  8. to answer the original posters question. the 24-70 f2.8L is the best concert lens for venues from small to huge stadiums. the 70-200f2.8 is second best and the 10-22 is third<br>

    <br>

    this is based on me being a concert photographer whos uses canon gear<br>

    <br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3421129-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3935939-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <img src = "http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/3579356-lg.jpg"><br>

    <br>

    <a href = "http://aaaphotos.org/faq.htm">http://aaaphotos.org/faq.htm</a> - have a read of this faq i wrote for concert photographers

  9. you may have heard nothingbut problems because people like me and loads more like me have one and find it works perfectly with no problems at all. i'm hardly likely to put up a post saying:

     

    "my camera works exactly how it says in the manual, battery grip is perfect, all my lenses focus where they are meant to, the exposure with my canon flash is brilliant, i don't get error 99's, everything, clicks, whirrs and buzzes just as it should"

     

    if you buy a grip that doesn't do as described, you are surely entitled to get it replaced or fixed

×
×
  • Create New...