Best entry-level DSLR for concert photography?

[lets_get_digital]

Hey there y'all, first time poster here. Seems like an extremely informative community, glad I stumbled across this place as it seems like the best photography forum. Cheers!

Been making some decent cash booking/promoting music events around the country, but nobody ever has a decent camera - and if they do I never get the type of shots I'm looking for. Going to be purchasing an entry-level DSLR and was looking for advice as to what would be my best choice when it comes to a basic body/lens combo that would provide a good starting point for concert/club photography.

• Would prefer to keep my initial investment to around $600, but might be willing to go as high as $800 if convinced that it's worth spending the extra month saving the money - used/refurbished equipment is cool with me, keep that in mind.
• Excellent low-light performance is a necessity as this camera's main purpose will be for concert/club photography
• High-powered intel (moving) lighting, LED panels, video projectors, occasionally lasers, and almost always fog to bring the lighting out will be present at most events
• Will almost always have access to being on stage for shooting, so a zoom lens won't often be a necessity. Most venues will be no larger than 2000 capacity, usually 500-1000 - so even if I want a shot from behind the crowd I'm never too far from the stage.
• Really like the grip of Nikon cameras, with Canon coming in close second. Couldn't handle holding a Sony all night.

Also, what do y'all think about the utility of live view in an environment like this? Seems like it'd be helpful for getting overhead shots, reaching around equipment, and getting frontal shots on stage w/o blocking the crowds view of the artist if I had a flip-out LCD too. Think it'd be worth the extra money in this situation? Since that'd mean the D5000, I'd also be getting video which would be a plus.

Here's a couple photos that give a good idea of the type of environment I'll be photographing. Not trying to pick amazing photos, just the ones that portray what I'll be shooting. These 4 are from the same event, to give a feel for variation in lighting...

...and a couple more that I thought did a good job showcasing my environment

...and here's a video that has most of the typical lighting features, gives ya an idea of how chaotic this environment can be



Thanks in advance y'all, and if you happen to dig experimental hip-hop beats please check my blog located below in my sig.

 

[lets_get_digital]

So I'm thinking I'm going to go with a Nikon, but could be coerced into a Canon if there's good reason. Trying to choose between the D50 (so I have a wider range of lenses to choose from)and the D3000 or D5000.

Any thoughts on getting a D50 and 50mm 1.8 vs a D3k/5k and 35mm 1.8 for the scenes I'll be shooting? Like I said, I won't have any issues getting on stage/close up for shots.

Also, would the D3k/5k combo shoot significantly better in low-light - enough to justify spending 2-300 more?

 

[fstop]

I'd spend the extra on the D5000 because its got the same CMOS sensor as the D90. For the money, it's got very nice high ISO performance, which would be helpful in the lower light setting.

 

[LarissaPhotography]

You might need to increase your shutter speed on these pics so there isn't crazy light in the middle of a guys head because of movement. The movement looks like it may be giving weird head shapes too. To increase the shutter, you've already mentioned increasing the ISO, and you will also need to lower your aperture if possible.

I like the silhouette shot you did. Good job.

 

[lets_get_digital]

You might need to increase your shutter speed on these pics so there isn't crazy light in the middle of a guys head because of movement. The movement looks like it may be giving weird head shapes too. To increase the shutter, you've already mentioned increasing the ISO, and you will also need to lower your aperture if possible.

I like the silhouette shot you did. Good job.

None of the shots are mine, I'll let my buddy know you liked it though : )

Are their any other cameras at the same price as the D5000 or lower that yall would recommend checking out for good low-light performance? Especially ones that have a built in AF motor!

 

[KmH]

None of the shots are mine, I'll let my buddy know you liked it though : )

Heads up!

From TPF's Rules and Regs: "* You agree to only post images and/or other material to which you have exclusive copyright, or permission from the copyright holder that you are able to present to TPF Staff. Under no circumstances will any instance of copyright infringement be tolerated."http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/faq.php

Are their any other cameras at the same price as the D5000 or lower that yall would recommend checking out for good low-light performance? Especially ones that have a built in AF motor!

No, there aren't any. You have to step up to the D90 to get an in-body auto focus motor. The lens choices are only slightly wider with an in-body focus motor and Nikon is always introducing new AF-S lenses. The D90 has some other really nice features the D5000 lacks .

 

[lets_get_digital]

None of the shots are mine, I'll let my buddy know you liked it though : )

Heads up!

From TPF's Rules and Regs: "* You agree to only post images and/or other material to which you have exclusive copyright, or permission from the copyright holder that you are able to present to TPF Staff. Under no circumstances will any instance of copyright infringement be tolerated."http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/faq.php

Are their any other cameras at the same price as the D5000 or lower that yall would recommend checking out for good low-light performance? Especially ones that have a built in AF motor!

No, there aren't any. You have to step up to the D90 to get an in-body auto focus motor. The lens choices are only slightly wider with an in-body focus motor and Nikon is always introducing new AF-S lenses. The D90 has some other really nice features the D5000 lacks .

The top four pics are from a close homie that wouldn't mind at all, and the rest were just found through google images so I'm assuming I'm not breaking any rules here. Please don't ban me! haha

The D90 is just too far out of my price range to justify me spending that kind of money, although it would be really nice to have.

Any thoughts on a 50mm 1.8 vs 35mm 1.8 for the work I'll be doing? Don't consider whether or not they'll autofocus, would just like to know which one would be a better choice based on the shots I plan on taking.

 

[TJ K]

Maybe a used d80 not sure how much they cost.

 

[PhotoXopher]

D80 will be a little noisy and a lot noisy over 800 ISO.

 

[TJ K]

Well i'm just trying to think of bodies that aren't super expensive that will af with something like the 50 1.8. And if he can shoot at 1.8 he might not have to get into crazy ISO range.

 

[PhotoXopher]

Why not a D5000 and the 35 1.8?

D5000 body only at Adorama is just under $600, add the 35 1.8 and you're at $800 with a really nice setup suited for high ISO AND fast shutter. Otherwise Best Buy has the D5000 for $699 with 18-55 VR kit lens (sell that for $150)... it can be done. If you ever want wireless flash and still use Nikon's technology get the SB-900, it'll double as a commander if needed.

 

[lets_get_digital]

Just found a D100 body I can get for $150 locally with an extra battery, the plot thickens! Anyone think it'd be a good idea to grab this as a starter body and a 50 1.8, with the intentions of saving up for a D90 if I get into it? I'm thinking this might be a good choice, as it'd get the camera in my hands a month or two early for very little money and would give me a chance to try my hand at the photography thing again before I spend any big bucks. I'm sure I could sell it for $100 down the road or keep it as a spare, they're selling for around $300 on ebay it seems. Getting a working setup for $250 sounds pretty appealing!

Would I still be able to shoot decent pics with this thing, or is it so outdated that it's not even worth considering?

 

[bhphotography]

I would honestly suggest waiting and looking into a d90. It has the same sensor as a d300 but with a entry level body. It also does video. I would buy a 35mm f1.8 lens for it and a sb-600 flash and you're good to go!

 

[Village Idiot]

Just found a D100 body I can get for $150 locally with an extra battery, the plot thickens! Anyone think it'd be a good idea to grab this as a starter body and a 50 1.8, with the intentions of saving up for a D90 if I get into it? I'm thinking this might be a good choice, as it'd get the camera in my hands a month or two early for very little money and would give me a chance to try my hand at the photography thing again before I spend any big bucks. I'm sure I could sell it for $100 down the road or keep it as a spare, they're selling for around $300 on ebay it seems. Getting a working setup for $250 sounds pretty appealing!

Would I still be able to shoot decent pics with this thing, or is it so outdated that it's not even worth considering?

If it's the Older Nikon D100 and uses a CCD sensor, it's going to suck balls as far as low light performance goes. A working setup that clearly won't work for your needs for $250 sounds very unappealing.

 

[lets_get_digital]

I would honestly suggest waiting and looking into a d90. It has the same sensor as a d300 but with a entry level body. It also does video. I would buy a 35mm f1.8 lens for it and a sb-600 flash and you're good to go!

Doesn't the D5000 have the same sensor too? If so, what would be the main advantages of the D5k over D90? All I really see is build quality, top mounted info screen, and more quick-access buttons. Would it really be worth the extra $200 for whatever differences for my needs?

Also, what lens would y'all recommend not based on what cameras it works on, but rather performance in concert/club photography settings - 50 1.8 or 35 1.8? I'll always have access to being on stage or up front. I realize the 35 is like $100 more, but if I had a D90 would that extra money be justified?