Opinons on what gear would fit my potential needs

[BananaRepublic]

Hi,

I started working for my brother recently, in a non photography position. He is a promoter and producer of touring shows, of the River Dance genre, google it, any who I would be going to locations every so often as part of the entourage we will call it. If the situation developed into me acting as photographer as an offshoot, pun, to my normal activities want sort of gear would be required.

At the moment I have a DX Nikon and various lens, not many, but I know they wouldn't be ideal for that scenario. So if I was looking what should I be looking at. My criteria would be used/ second hand nikon and two versatile lens.

FYI Im not itching to buy stuff but I would like to be informed.
Thanks.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well sounds like you'll probably be facing some challenging lighting situations, so I would probably look at something full frame.

Not sure about your budget but a good used d610 or d800 might be worth considering.

Lens wise a 50mm 1.8 would be a good choice if you don't already have on in the bag

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

 

[Derrel]

How about a couple of fast-aperture lenses that can be shot from 20,30,40 feet away, like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, or a fast 50mm lens? Or the 28mm f/1.8 Nikkor G lens? Something that will give your camera the ability to shoot at fast-ish shutter speeds at higher ISO values like 1600 to 3200 on APC-C?

A lot of people think of fast lenses as f/2.8 zooms, even though there are f/1.4 and f/1.8 prime lenses available, with higher image quality and better corrections than the zooms, so to me when I think of "fast-aperture" I think of prime 24,28,35,50,and 85mm lenses mostly.

The new Nikon G-series f/1.8 primes seem to be of very high image quality, and can/could be used on APS-C and FX Nikons. The 28 is a wide on FX,and a normal on APS-C.

 

[Designer]

Performers on stage generally don't want to see any flash, so shooting with available light is the way to go. A camera with low-light capability, and larger maximum aperture lenses and a very steady hand. If perchance they want some promo shots, then you can use all the lights you want.

 

[BananaRepublic]

Well sounds like you'll probably be facing some challenging lighting situations, so I would probably look at something full frame.

Not sure about your budget but a good used d610 or d800 might be worth considering.

Lens wise a 50mm 1.8 would be a good choice if you don't already have on in the bag

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

How about a couple of fast-aperture lenses that can be shot from 20,30,40 feet away, like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, or a fast 50mm lens? Or the 28mm f/1.8 Nikkor G lens? Something that will give your camera the ability to shoot at fast-ish shutter speeds at higher ISO values like 1600 to 3200 on APC-C?

A lot of people think of fast lenses as f/2.8 zooms, even though there are f/1.4 and f/1.8 prime lenses available, with higher image quality and better corrections than the zooms, so to me when I think of "fast-aperture" I think of prime 24,28,35,50,and 85mm lenses mostly.

The new Nikon G-series f/1.8 primes seem to be of very high image quality, and can/could be used on APS-C and FX Nikons. The 28 is a wide on FX,and a normal on APS-C.

I had figured that light would be a factor and my assumption was that I would be hurtling towards FX. As to the lens choice I do have 30mm f1'4 Sigma but its an EX which more or less covers 50mm on my current camera but what I would be caught on is the others that I have the zoom for instance, f4.5. Is there other options in a zoom I know there is Nikon/Tamron 70 200 but would one get a good second that would suit my yoke and would you be as well going FX to see any benefits.

As to a budget I would be looking more the 610 end but I know a guy who got an 800 that was 3 months old cause the seller wanted an 810, that had just come out, course I don't how much he paid.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well sounds like you'll probably be facing some challenging lighting situations, so I would probably look at something full frame.

Not sure about your budget but a good used d610 or d800 might be worth considering.

Lens wise a 50mm 1.8 would be a good choice if you don't already have on in the bag

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

How about a couple of fast-aperture lenses that can be shot from 20,30,40 feet away, like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4, or a fast 50mm lens? Or the 28mm f/1.8 Nikkor G lens? Something that will give your camera the ability to shoot at fast-ish shutter speeds at higher ISO values like 1600 to 3200 on APC-C?

A lot of people think of fast lenses as f/2.8 zooms, even though there are f/1.4 and f/1.8 prime lenses available, with higher image quality and better corrections than the zooms, so to me when I think of "fast-aperture" I think of prime 24,28,35,50,and 85mm lenses mostly.

The new Nikon G-series f/1.8 primes seem to be of very high image quality, and can/could be used on APS-C and FX Nikons. The 28 is a wide on FX,and a normal on APS-C.

I had figured that light would be a factor and my assumption was that I would be hurtling towards FX. As to the lens choice I do have 30mm f1'4 Sigma but its an EX which more or less covers 50mm on my current camera but what I would be caught on is the others that I have the zoom for instance, f4.5. Is there other options in a zoom I know there is Nikon/Tamron 70 200 but would one get a good second that would suit my yoke and would you be as well going FX to see any benefits.

I haven't shot the tamron myself, I've got a sigma 70 200 2.8 os that I picked up used for around 700 that I've been very happy with.

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

 

[BananaRepublic]

The equip I have now is a d5100, 18 55 kit, 55 200 dx vr and a 35 mm sigma 1.4 ex. I'm thinking of upgrading like I said but I don't know if:
1 I should stick to my body or go up to a d7,,,,, or go full frame, I would be buying used it I reckon.
2 If I stick or go up to d7.... does getting something like a 70-200 2.8 sigma, with appropriate lettering, with a view to eventually going fx, make sense. Again used.

I know there would be a pitfall in going fx from my current position.

 

[Mr.Photo]

I photographed a pageant last year using my D3100 with my Tamron 17-50 2.8 (DX lens) mounted, and my D7000 with my trusty old 80-200 2.8 (push pull). I couldn't use flash, so had to shoot everything at ISO 3200 to get even remotely acceptable shutter speeds.

click here to see some of the edited photo's from that day. While they are edited I will point out that they have very little in the way of noise reduction applied to them. I was actually very surprised at how well they came out.

 

[BananaRepublic]

I see what you are saying, the 80 200 is a full frame is it, that would be 110 300 on the d7000. Do you do any other photography motorsport etc

 

[Derrel]

I photographed a pageant last year using my D3100 with my Tamron 17-50 2.8 (DX lens) mounted, and my D7000 with my trusty old 80-200 2.8 (push pull). I couldn't use flash, so had to shoot everything at ISO 3200 to get even remotely acceptable shutter speeds.

click here to see some of the edited photo's from that day. While they are edited I will point out that they have very little in the way of noise reduction applied to them. I was actually very surprised at how well they came out.

Wow! Photo 11, of the leaping dancer came out superbly! Perfect timing, exposure, and focus!

 

[Mr.Photo]

I see what you are saying, the 80 200 is a full frame is it, that would be 110 300 on the d7000. Do you do any other photography motorsport etc

The 80-200 is a full frame lens as it was created back before digital had even been thought of so was built to work with 35mm film (aka. Full Frame).

Haven't had much opportunity to do any motorsport as there's nothing really in my area. I do however try to get to the airshows whenever I can.

Great New England Air Show 2015

Sugarbush Air Show 2013

Wow! Photo 11, of the leaping dancer came out superbly! Perfect timing, exposure, and focus!

Thanks Derrel, I was quite happy with that one myself.

(And that was taken using my D3100 no less)

 

[robbins.photo]

The equip I have now is a d5100, 18 55 kit, 55 200 dx vr and a 35 mm sigma 1.4 ex. I'm thinking of upgrading like I said but I don't know if:
1 I should stick to my body or go up to a d7,,,,, or go full frame, I would be buying used it I reckon.
2 If I stick or go up to d7.... does getting something like a 70-200 2.8 sigma, with appropriate lettering, with a view to eventually going fx, make sense. Again used.

I know there would be a pitfall in going fx from my current position.

If you are happy with the lowlight performance of your 5100 then something in the 7xxx would be a great upgrade for you. If you find that you really need something with significantly better low light abilities, full frame might be a better investment. A used D610 or D800 are both pretty reasonably priced for FX bodies.

I shoot a 7100 myself, very happy with it. Having shot a 5100 for a while and then later a 5200 I can tell you that for me at least the second command wheel was worth the price, being able to shoot in manual mode with auto-iso and having control over both shutter speed and aperture with the turn of a wheel is fantastic.

The autofocus system is also much better than the 5100's, it really does do a fantastic job. I originally upgraded from a 5100 to a 5200 and then eventually to the 7100. The thing I noticed was that the 5200 was a much better shooting experience than the 5100, and again with the 7100 it was easier to get the results I wanted than it was with the 5200.

There really isn't a huge, huge difference between the cameras in any one single area, but with each step there were enough improvements in various areas (mp, autofocus, lowlight, etc) that the improvements really did make getting the desired results a lot easier.