lens decision for low light

[MrsMoo]

doesnt a higher ISO reduce image quality slightly?
or were my tutors not being truthful?

 

[Mike_E]

doesnt a higher ISO reduce image quality slightly?
or were my tutors not being truthful?

To a point. The thing is you either will get the shot or get one you can't use. And the new DSLRs these days make very good images at high ISO

BTW yes you can use a tripod in a theater (and yes I have-several times)- you have to want to and be allowed to but you most definitely can. And a monopod is easy to use in one.

Putting the camera in continuous and shooting in 3 or 4 shot bursts does help but proper hand holding technique helps even more. Support is still the best answer because camera shake and subject movement added together are just evil. If you didn't notice those girls were tap dancing and the difference between what is acceptable to a parent of a little girl on stage doing tap is a world away from what a rock guitarist wants to see.

So, mono or tri-pod and a camera that is good at high ISO plus the fast lens you already have is you best bet.

 

[JodieO]

Neither option sounds to good to me. You need a really fast lens and a full frame sensor to deal with the noise at higher ISO's

I have to agree.

I shot all this with ISO 5,000 and ISO 6,000 hand held, Nikon D3 (with incredible full frame sensor), 70-200/2.8 lens in lowest of low light situation (but still needed a high shutter to stop motion) -- little grainy, but still useable... (scroll by the guy with the green hair... lolol) http://jodieotte.com/?p=340

 

[Ls3D]

Those are beautiful, but 'lowest of low light situations'? Looks pretty bright to me, especially compared to the theater already test shot.

-S

 

[Village Idiot]

IS and a tripod won't help unless he can boost the shutter speed of the lens. f/1.8 sucks as DOF gets so shallow it's a real pain in the ass to get a good photo because focus has to be perfect and even then it's only one part or another that's in focus.

It's basically a comprosmise. High ISO isn't bad if the photo is properly exposed. Your above photo is under exposed. Under exposure causes grain. A low shutter speed causes motion blur and camera shake. Best thing to try is high ISO, faster aperture, and steady the camera as best as possible. None of these are going to work on their own, but you're going to have to do your best unless you're allowed to a flash.

 

[DReali]

You may also want to consider noise reduction software such as noiseware (photoshop plig-in). It's very effective at removing noise and preserving detail (even at 3200 ISO) and nowhere near as expensive as a lens or camera: http://www.imagenomic.com/nwsa.aspx.

 

[iflynething]

If you're going to use this for the dance, dont waste your money on the IS. It won't be worth it since it will do nothing for you to freeze the movement. I'm a dance photographer for my sister's dance studio and I'm using a 70-200 2.8.

DO NOT use that f/4 if you want any decent shots. You'll have to boost your ISO up way too high (i had to shoot at 800 on my D80) to get a decent shutter speed. I was shooting at about 1/160 to 1/200 sec and got great results.

As for the lighting, I shot at degrees kelvin. Most stage lighting is at about 2600 or so degree. I believe I was at 2550 or so and was pretty spot on.

~Michael~

 

[SilverGlow]

Here is my take on this:

1. Don't make the mistake of relying on anti-noise software to mitigate the noise later. This is a foolish policy to have because anti-noise means bye, bye precious image quality. Even with today's very clean high ISO cameras it is still best to keep in the 100-800 range when possible.

2. Don't bring a tripod. It will inhibit you from moving around.

3. Don't think a prime will limit your compositions. Unless you're in a wheelchair it often won't. Bring/rent/buy a 28mm F1.8, and/or 50mm F1.8 and/or F1.4, 85mm F1.8, and/or maybe 135 F2. I don't know how far you'll be so pick 2 or 3 of these and rest assured you will have all your shots covered.

3. IS lenses will not help...they don't stabilize moving subjects.

4. Anything slower then F2.8 is a joke and not even to be considered if the best IQ is what you strive for. I suspect even F2.8 is often too slow.

5. Yes you will change lenses often. Yes you will have to move around often. A small price to pay when you strive for the best IQ.

6. Shoot raw. Use evaluative metering. Your most used focus point is perhas the one on the very top.

7. Buy/rent/borrow a 2nd body to place another prime on.

8. DON'T use the flash, at least for shots of the action on the stage. It won't help and will destroy the mood, look, and feel.

9. Later in post processing, and using a layer and mask, apply anti-noise selectively and surgiccally only on the parts of your comp that need it. Anti-noise can be very distructive must never be applied to the entire image. It smears and details gone forever.

10. Post process on a 16 or 32 bit file even if your raw is just 12 or 14. This means the math your program does has room for rounding, and less likely to add digital artifacts such as blocking, combing and the like.

11. Another benefit of a fast prime is that it will help the camera acquire focus faster, and your view finder will be brighter even if you don't need to shoot wide open.

 

[SilverGlow]

f/1.8 sucks as DOF gets so shallow it's a real pain in the ass to get a good photo because focus has to be perfect and even then it's only one part or another that's in focus.

I have to disagree. F1.8 through F2 could provide enought DOF if one is far enough from the action. Sure a wide aperture effects DOF, but so does (1) focal length, and (2) distance from subject. Remember the shooter is point toward the action on a stage, and I suspect he can be as far away or close as he wants (usually).

I often find that my 135L at F2 and shooting far behind a bride and groom in a dark church provides wide enough DOF for critical focus. Of course if I took the shot just a few feet behind them, then yes, I would have a too narrow DOF to work with.

And I just want to add that often and even in a dark auditoriam, the action is often light brightly so even though the venue is very dark, the action may not also be.

 

[SilverGlow]

so what exactly would you recomend?

here is a shot thats i took to help understand what light i am dealing with. any insight is appreciated. flash photagraphy isn't allowed

Your shot is a bad example. It is way, way too soft in focus...not very good image quality. Cute girls though....

 

[Village Idiot]

Your shot is a bad example. It is way, way too soft in focus...not very good image quality. Cute girls though....

That shot is from the OP showing people what the lighting is like and the conditions he's shooting with...that's what he was asking for advice on.

 

[laam999]

I'd have to say the f2.8 70-200L sounds like the best option, you could go for the older non IS vertion but that wouldnt help for other uses. The only other think I would suggest is try a cam with a lower noise level

 

[SilverGlow]

That shot is from the OP showing people what the lighting is like and the conditions he's shooting with...that's what he was asking for advice on.

Ah, got cha....thanks for the clarification...

 

[rufus5150]

Judging by your exif on that image, I don't think speed is your problem. That was a 1/320th of a second exposure, fast enough to freeze most motion as well as counteract camera shake on a 100mm lens.

You were shooting wide open on an 100mm f/2.8. Someone more experienced with that lens might have to comment on how it performs wide open (I played around with one for a day) but images with any lens wide open tend to be a shade on the soft side.

You could probably shoot this at ISO400 and 1/160th and be about 95% safe from motion blur and still avoiding camera shake.

What it looks like to me is focus was a problem. Auto-focusing in low light can be very, very difficult and the 100mm, IIRC, is pretty slow at focusing anyway.

If you look closely at the image, their legs are really sharp, especially the girl in the center towards her feet.

How are you focusing? center-point and recompose? or multi-point? (or some other singe point?)

ETA: my understanding of autofocus uses as part of its algorithm contrast to determine a focal point (if I'm wrong someone will correct me). That particular lighting situation is going to be difficult because the skin tones of your subjects and the background are close. The fact it's in low light amplifies that lack of contrast. I seriously don't think your lens is the problem with that image.

 

[JerryPH]

doesnt a higher ISO reduce image quality slightly?
or were my tutors not being truthful?

It doesn't reduce image quality at all perse... it introduces digital noise, which if not overly excessive, can be very easily removed with little to no loss in image quality.