ISO/NOISE/Aperture/Shutter Speed etc. etc.

[Bend The Light]

I am shooting a stage show again this next week for my local theatre group (my daughter is in it). Last time I used the 50mm f1.8 and legged it up and down the audience seats for close or wide shots. Mostly I used f2.2 or slightly smaller aperture, with auto-ISO and Shutter Priority at 1/60th. It worked well, except I was knackered.

In fact this was 1/80th, ISO 400, f2:


Rocky Horror 14 by http://bendthelight.me.uk, on Flickr

This time, I have arranged to be at all 4 shows (the previous have only been one night so I took photos on dress rehearsal so i could watch the show uniterrupted). I have borrowed a 24-70 f2.8 L USM lens. Nice lens, weighs a ton! the idea being that I can stay in one place and take shots. Even from just in front of the stage I can nearly get all the stage at 24mm. And i can get a 3 person group from the back of the theatre (in the balcony) at 70mm, or all the stage from up there at about 45mm.

Problem is, I tried today (admittedly no proper lights) and set the camera to ISO 1000, f2.8, Shutter priority 1/50th. But the images are terrible. So, should I increase ISO and use a slightly smaller aperture to improve quality, or should I leave as is?

Here's a crop of one of the players (same guy as above actually):


***in noise by http://bendthelight.me.uk, on Flickr

Do you think once the proper lights are up that the noise will be less apparent? I may be able to reduce ISO, or decrease aperture?
And would you decrease aperture and increase ISO, or decrease ISO and maintain f2.8? Noisewise?

Lots of questions. Any thoughts would be appreciated. I have a full dress rehearsal on Tuesday night, so not too much prssure yet. if I don't nail it then, that's when I'll panic.

 

[Joshonator]

I think the lights may make a huge difference. The first image is completely black in the background so even at 1.8 you likely would've had trouble with no light. Decreasing aperture will improve sharpness but because you need to bump ISO to compensate that would only add more noise.

 

[Bend The Light]

I think the lights may make a huge difference. The first image is completely black in the background so even at 1.8 you likely would've had trouble with no light. Decreasing aperture will improve sharpness but because you need to bump ISO to compensate that would only add more noise.

Yes, I am expecting the lights to make the difference...was just worried that the 24-70 wouldn't be helping me when I have borrowed it, and I could do better with my cheapo lenses! ha ha!

I can't really go higher that 100 with ISo, and would prefer 800 or less. Reckon I might get it with the stage lights, but do tend to lose some background when metering on the faces, etc.

 

[Joshonator]

In theory you should be able to achieve the same lighting as you did in the first picture with ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/80th. Bring a monopod and you might be able to slow down the shutter a bit. This is where an expensive camera with crazy ISO performance would be handy .

 

[greybeard33 5]

I see from your profile that you will be using a Canon 400D. From what I have read on Snapsort, ISO 650 is about it for that particular camera but, you know its' capabilities. Better keep that f/1.8 handy just in case the f/2.8 isn't enough lens.

 

[Bend The Light]

In theory you should be able to achieve the same lighting as you did in the first picture with ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/80th. Bring a monopod and you might be able to slow down the shutter a bit. This is where an expensive camera with crazy ISO performance would be handy .

Yes, maybe. Unfortunately the bank manager and the wife wouldn't agree!

I see from your profile that you will be using a Canon 400D. From what I have read on Snapsort, ISO 650 is about it for that particular camera but, you know its' capabilities. Better keep that f/1.8 handy just in case the f/2.8 isn't enough lens.

Time to upgrade the profile...I have a 40D now. The 400D was pretty poor at ISO 800, and could only get 640 etc. with a hack. I still have the 400d but my 6 year old uses that one.
The 40D is better at 800...don;t think I want it much higher than that. Hoping the lights will be enough to help with that.

Cheers

 

[Sw1tchFX]

The 50mm is more appropriate for things like this, step a few feet closer and shoot at f/2. Brings in twice the light as the 24-70 and will be sharper because it's not wide open. Also, don't be afraid to shoot ISO 3200 or w/e. It's digital, you're not pushing Tri-X.

 

[jaomul]

You could try shooting manually with your desired aperture and the slowest speed your happy with to freeze slow moving actors. Set your ISO to auto ( i can sense disapproval as i type). Let your camera decide that and the shots at least should be blur free and reasonably exposed.Only very bad noise will destroy a shot but shots with small blur are binned

 

[Solarflare]

In theory you should be able to achieve the same lighting as you did in the first picture with ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/80th. Bring a monopod and you might be able to slow down the shutter a bit. This is where an expensive camera with crazy ISO performance would be handy .

Good ISO performance isnt that expensive, really, unless you need the worlds best ISO. DxOMark - Camera Sensor Ratings

 

[gsgary]

For this sort of shoot i always use manual, but aperture is much better than shutter priority because it will under expose if it cant open the aperture wide enough for this sort of thing, setting spot meter for the face av f2 iso800 and it will give you the fastest shutter with the correct exposure use ev to alter if out you might even have to use iso1600 i would probably be at iso3200

 

[slackercruster]

Try some de noise PP

 

[Bend The Light]

In theory you should be able to achieve the same lighting as you did in the first picture with ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/80th. Bring a monopod and you might be able to slow down the shutter a bit. This is where an expensive camera with crazy ISO performance would be handy .

Good ISO performance isnt that expensive, really, unless you need the worlds best ISO. DxOMark - Camera Sensor Ratings

Expense is relative. I have £4.72 in the bank and 2 weeks till pay day.

For this sort of shoot i always use manual, but aperture is much better than shutter priority because it will under expose if it cant open the aperture wide enough for this sort of thing, setting spot meter for the face av f2 iso800 and it will give you the fastest shutter with the correct exposure use ev to alter if out you might even have to use iso1600 i would probably be at iso3200

That's similar to what I did last time, I think. Cheers

Try some de noise PP

I do. I use ACR and Topaz Denoise if necessary. Thanks

 

[gsgary]

In theory you should be able to achieve the same lighting as you did in the first picture with ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/80th. Bring a monopod and you might be able to slow down the shutter a bit. This is where an expensive camera with crazy ISO performance would be handy .

Good ISO performance isnt that expensive, really, unless you need the worlds best ISO. DxOMark - Camera Sensor Ratings

Expense is relative. I have £4.72 in the bank and 2 weeks till pay day.

For this sort of shoot i always use manual, but aperture is much better than shutter priority because it will under expose if it cant open the aperture wide enough for this sort of thing, setting spot meter for the face av f2 iso800 and it will give you the fastest shutter with the correct exposure use ev to alter if out you might even have to use iso1600 i would probably be at iso3200

That's similar to what I did last time, I think. Cheers

Try some de noise PP

I do. I use ACR and Topaz Denoise if necessary. Thanks

You said you shot shutter priority which is not the best way to shoot this sort of thing

 

[Bend The Light]

Good ISO performance isnt that expensive, really, unless you need the worlds best ISO. DxOMark - Camera Sensor Ratings

Expense is relative. I have £4.72 in the bank and 2 weeks till pay day.



That's similar to what I did last time, I think. Cheers

Try some de noise PP

I do. I use ACR and Topaz Denoise if necessary. Thanks

You said you shot shutter priority which is not the best way to shoot this sort of thing

I did. Misread/misinterpreted.

So, Av, f2. Spot on faces. ISO whatever gives me a decent shutter speed. Correct?

Cheers

 

[gsgary]

I would want a faster shutter speed than your first shot 1/80, only just fast enough for your focal length any slight movement in camera or subject and you get blur like in your shot, have you asked if you can use flash for a few shots ?