Concert Photography Lenses

[german]

At moment all i use is the 1.8 and 18-55mm..like to upgrade to something with little more power..

What are some options i can look into?

Thanks for your help

Damian

[jaymrobinson]

How about the 50mm 1.4? If you can get close enough to the stage.

[german]

is the 1.4 commonly used in concert work?

The concerts i've shot at i'm that close i could untie the band members shoes..

Is there another lense that many people use..just not too sure on what would be best for concert work..

[jaymrobinson]

I've never done that kind of work myself, but if you are that close, I'm pretty sure the 50 1.4 would be pretty good for you. It is almost a stop brighter and has much better AF and build.

[jaymrobinson]

You might also try posting the question in the Performing Arts forum as there are many people who I think could help you there.

[Jaetie]

is the 1.4 commonly used in concert work?

The concerts i've shot at i'm that close i could untie the band members shoes..

Is there another lense that many people use..just not too sure on what would be best for concert work..

well, if you've got that kind of working freedom, then i'd say anything from 28/1.8, 30/1.4 EX, 35/1.4 L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 or 135/2 L. but then working distance also comes into play. and you also won't want to be too 'underneath' the bands as the perspective won't be good.

[Steve Parr]

In most instances, the kit lens won't yield the results you'd probably be hoping for.

When I shoot concerts, I use two bodies and two lenses: the 70-200mm f/2.8L and the 24-70mm f/2.8L. Prior to the 24-70mm, I was using the 85mm f/1.8.

Fast lenses are the way to go with concert photography...

[Austin Fern]

When shooting from the pit or the stage go for something fast and wide. At some shows I work there's a guy that sits up in the VIP balcony with a 400L. Gets some nice shots.

-F

[_aravena]

How the heck you get an SLR into a concert in the first place!?!

Um, if you were hired or whatever, get what Steve said pretty much. A tele 2.8 and a standard 2.8 if you got the money. If not, then try the 4L. The light on stage is enough unless it's a heavy rock/metal/whatever band cause they like dark light, 2.8. But if not, and even then they have bright lights, to save money the 4L should work. I used one at a Taproot concert with a guy. Said it was good enough, but it was like small area. House of Blues type deal. (I know they have diff locations)

[turbodude]

I use all my lenses in my sig, but mainly the fisheye and 30 - used to be 35 f/2

[breakdown]

I guess he is talking more about local gigs in clubs rather than big concerts. If that is the base, it's very easy to get within 5 feet from the band to take shots. I've brought my kit lens and 50 f/1.8 along with me. The 50 f/1.8 is okay but it's hard to get a good focus and its pretty long on a crop camera. It's tough to get shots of the entire band. I love the range of the kit lens but it's just not fast enough. A 17-55 f/2.8 would probably be great for concert photography. At the shows I've been to, 55 isn't quite close enough for a head shot but it's definately good enough for half body shots.

I guess it would depend on what types of concerts you'll be going to. The ones that I goto, I can always get really close to the stage but once I'm there, I'm there. The crowd is usually too packed to move anywhere else.

[René Damkot]

With my 10D I used a Sigma 20/1.8; Canon 35/2.0 (later a 28/1.8); 50/1.4 and 100/2.0.

[german]

I'm refering to big concerts and also raves..

I've used the 1.8 couple times, but like little more freedom than set size

_aravena, i contacted promoters and asked for photo pass..most of time it doesnt work, so going to be doing alot of local band work to get portfolio bigger and hopefully gain access to passes easier for larger bands.


thankyou all for your help

[Kenya]

I think your decision is whether to go longer or wider. (The 50mm f/1.4 will not give you a different perspective or focal length. It will bring in a bit more light and provide substantially better autofocus.) If you are going to move to larger venues with wider stages, you will need more reach. I suggest either the 85mm f/1.8 or the 100mm f/2.0. There are some dramatic perspectives you can get (especially if you're very close to the stage) if you decide to go wide. If so, try either the 28mm f/1.8 or the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. Right now, I would suggest that you go longer.

Concert photography without flash usually requires lenses with apertures of f/2.8 or wider. Also, most of your work will probably take place between moderate wide to telephoto (assuming you can work relatively close to the stage), i.e. 35mm to 300mm in effective focal lengths.

[narlus]

here is my experience:

if you are in the pit/close to stage, and using a crop body, anything over 100mm will be too long (and the 85 i have is really just good for close head shots here, or maybe the drummer as well).

if you are in a balcony and have some room, the de facto standard seems to be the 70-200 f/2.8.

if you are not using flash (and most people recommend that you don't, although there are good uses when it's important, like in a dark metal or hardcore show w/ fast moving musicians), fast lenses = good. for me, a f/2.8 zoom doesn't cut it much in the clubs i frequent, and i'm usually using primes (f/1.4 - f/1.8 ). since i don't always have freedom of motion, i bring 3 w/ me (30, 50 and 85) to almost every show. i'd love to play around w/ a 15mm fisheye too, but the price is a bit too dear for something i may not use a lot.

check out the Performing Arts subforum, there's lots of good info there.

[basroil]

if you have the money and you are that close, 35L will be your best friend. if you don't have the money, go with sigma 30mm (both are 1.4, though the L is sharper than my 70-200@f4 when wide open..)