28-135mm IS USM Suitable for Concerts?

[Arsonist lolol]

Hey all, I'm going to start getting into concert / show photography...I have a guy who says I might be able to shoot for his website if I show him a portfolio of live shots (duh)....problem is, I have none! So I'm looking to upgrade from the Rebel kit lens, to something with a little more reach, and better quality. (Although one of my friends has produced amazing shots with the kit lens)

So now I'm lookin at the 28-135mm IS USM (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=149629&is=USA) for my Digi Rebel; I know that the reach will be perfect on it....but I was kinda hoping for something a little more wide angle, and also, would f/3.5 suffice in low light / stage lit situations??? (won't want to use flash) I'm happy that it's IS....that always helps, considering I probably won't be using a tripod. If it matters, the type of music will be hardrock / metal, meaning the band members would be moving around A LOT.


I don't really know what else to look at, I don't want to spend over $600. The 10-22 is too short, along with the 17-40. And the 16-35 / 24-70 are too expensive. Maybe I could look at the 24-85mm (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=72655&highlight=28-135) The 135mm reach isn't THAT necessary, 85 would be good.

Any input would be much appreciated.
-Chris

[FlyingPete]

I shoot a lot of concerts, and mainly live off my 75-300IS for those up tight close shots, however the 28-135IS would do well for shots like this one at 105mm:
http://www.lowden.net.nz/Stuff/KevinRAW.jpg

The IS is a must in the low light, typically shooting well below the 1/focal length shutter rule.

I would love to have a 28-135IS no fill in some of the wider shots, and still have the IS. Generally speaking though you don't need IS for wider shots.

As for the wide angle, most wide angle band shots are pretty average, mostly I use wide angles (the best I have it the 18-55 kit) for crowd shots:
http://www.lowden.orcon.net.nz/Portfolio/Event/Crowd2.jpg

BTW try using a Tripod in a mosh pit :D

[Arsonist lolol]

Thanks a lot for the reponse Pete, yeah IS would definitely be a must for the lighting I'm gonna have. I'm thinking about a fisheye for some stuff, I have a feeling that could give out some good results in certain situations.

Here's an example of the kinda shots I'm looking to take (friend took this with the kit lens + dig rebel) Only difference is....she has connections with most of the bands she shoots, so she can get right on the stage....I would usually be on the ground in front / to the side of the stage (hence my need for more reach)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/WhileInSilence/1.jpg

[FlyingPete]

Thanks a lot for the reponse Pete, yeah IS would definitely be a must for the lighting I'm gonna have. I'm thinking about a fisheye for some stuff, I have a feeling that could give out some good results in certain situations.

Here's an example of the kinda shots I'm looking to take (friend took this with the kit lens + dig rebel) Only difference is....she has connections with most of the bands she shoots, so she can get right on the stage....I would usually be on the ground in front / to the side of the stage (hence my need for more reach)



That is one intense image! Looks like it was taken with a flash at a slow shutter though, as you may know flash is usually a no-no. A ultra wide angle gets some really cool perspectives, one of the girls on my team this year (at a music festival I work at annually) had a 16-35 on a 35mm film EOS, really interesting shots!

Become visable with the stage people, as they get used to you they will begin to think they know you, then you are more likely to get shots like your friends. Was that one taken in a club situation, probably more likely to get up close there than in front of 25000 people!

[Arsonist lolol]

Yeah flash is usually a no-no for sure....not sure how she got away with that (who knows, she may have been scolded hehe)

Getting to know stage people would definitely help....I'm doing promo shots for a band soon, so when they do shows I could definitely stand on stage with them. And yeah, it was a club situation, like 350people.

[Longwatcher]

Usually Flash is a no no if you are in front of the band. The reason is so you don't temporarily blind them and they fall off stage. You may have noticed that all bright flashy lights tend to be behind the band or have blocks so the band doesn't get blinded. The audience on the other hand...

On two occassions I have been allowed to use flash (my 550EX), but in both occasions I was well away from the stage (like about 20-40 feet) using my 70-200/2.8L IS. It was deemed far enough to not bother the band. I did take a few non-flash pictures as well, but they took more correction. Still using 10D at the time.

my results for one of the occasions.
http://www.longwatcher.com/event_p_02.html
(May be blocked by some filters)

For trivia, I show up blatantly in two of the pictures on the contact sheets (taken by now ex-girlfriend)
Also note: I asked permission from both the venue and the band before using my flash.
The 28-135 will work, but a f2.8 lens would work better if you can't use flash. and a f1.2 or 1.4 prime is even better as the lights go down.

And for additional trivia, I attend my city's 4th of July almost every year to catch band shots and the fireworks. They always have 2 bands (fairly good ones) and no flash is allowed for safety reasons and as the light goes down, I always find myself switching to the f2.8 lens for about 30 minutes and then frequently to my 50/1.4 for the last 20 minutes before it is time to head over to the best view for fireworks. I rarely like the results I have taken in the past though.

[Jetmech1]

I have the 28-135 IS lens and I don't think it is fast enough for concert photography. It did not work very well for childrens indoor sports photography. I had to purchase a prime for that. I choose the 85mm 1.8 prime which works a lot better in low light that the 28-135 mm IS. The 28-135 IS is a very nice lens. Mine gets used a lot. A prime would be your best choice for low light indoor shooting.

[FlyingPete]

I have the 28-135 IS lens and I don't think it is fast enough for concert photography. It did not work very well for childrens indoor sports photography. I had to purchase a prime for that. I choose the 85mm 1.8 prime which works a lot better in low light that the 28-135 mm IS. The 28-135 IS is a very nice lens. Mine gets used a lot. A prime would be your best choice for low light indoor shooting.

Actually the 50/1.8 gets a lot of use if the enviroment is right, it is either a great focal length to have, or almost useless. The last concert I shot at didn't have a meda area, so it became virtually useless.

[tim]

Read this (http://www.photo.net/learn/concerts/mirarchi/concer_1.htm). I do some theatre photography, i'd not even consider an F3.5-5.6 lens - I want F2.8 at a minimum, and I just got the 50mm F1.4 and will probably use that a lot.

[FlyingPete]

Read this (http://www.photo.net/learn/concerts/mirarchi/concer_1.htm). I do some theatre photography, i'd not even consider an F3.5-5.6 lens - I want F2.8 at a minimum, and I just got the 50mm F1.4 and will probably use that a lot.

Hmmm my primary driver for that little toy you have, the 70-200L f/2.8 IS - Concert Photography.

[tim]

Hmmm my primary driver for that little toy you have, the 70-200L f/2.8 IS - Concert Photography.

It ain't little! It's really heavy, if you want to use it for more than 10 minutes you'll need a monopod, so it probably wouldn't be much good if you were up the front of the concert. It's probably too long for up close anyway. Sure the IS will help, but performers rarely stay still, so you might be better off with a faster prime.

[FlyingPete]

It ain't little! It's really heavy, if you want to use it for more than 10 minutes you'll need a monopod, so it probably wouldn't be much good if you were up the front of the concert. It's probably too long for up close anyway. Sure the IS will help, but performers rarely stay still, so you might be better off with a faster prime.

That is why I wanted to hire one first, to find out all that useful info! Thanks :D

[Steve Parr]

For shooting bands, I use the 50mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.8.

I haven't been too disappointed. I'd love to go for the 85mm f/1.2L, but that's a bigger bite of glass than I can take right now...

Steve

[Arsonist lolol]

Thank you all for the responses....I have the nifty fifty, but I don't want to limit myself to a prime...I mean, I don't know how close I'm going to be, depending on the band and the venue I could be at very different locations. And at one point in time a guitarist could be on the left side of the stage, and running to the right side the next minute.

So yeah....kinda wanted to stay away from primes, unless it was a fisheye. I'm sure using a prime wouldn't be all that bad...but I'd just like to have the zoom just in case i'm off stage, which I probably will be most of the time.

[Longwatcher]

It ain't little! It's really heavy, if you want to use it for more than 10 minutes you'll need a monopod, so it probably wouldn't be much good if you were up the front of the concert. It's probably too long for up close anyway. Sure the IS will help, but performers rarely stay still, so you might be better off with a faster prime.

I have hand held a 70-200/2.8L IS on a 10D with BG-ED and two BP-511 and 550EX flash for over two hours (except when changing cards).

No problem, yes my arm was a bit tired by the end, but still doing good at that point. Could have gone for another hour at least.

It is not that heavy since I know I am not in anything apoaching good shape.

[tim]

Interesting Longwatcher. I guess if I needed to I could keep it up for a while, but probably not holding it at my eye the entire time. I find it quite hard on my right bicep.

[FlyingPete]

Interesting Longwatcher. I guess if I needed to I could keep it up for a while, but probably not holding it at my eye the entire time. I find it quite hard on my right bicep.

I meet a guy who was using one at a concert, it is all he had, raved about it, no complaints about size/weight, that is why I was considering one. He did have it on a 1Ds Mk2 though, not that really makes a differnece.

[tim]

There's can't be many 1Ds Mk IIs in the country! I'd love to have a play with one, I suspect i'll end up with one one day, and probably a (gasp) film camera too! ;)

[FlyingPete]

There's can't be many 1Ds Mk IIs in the country! I'd love to have a play with one, I suspect i'll end up with one one day, and probably a (gasp) film camera too! ;)

Nice camera, nice lens, can't say that much about the photographer though, one of those 'oh you are an amateur!' types. Apparently he has a bit of a rep for being like that. I know he is free-lance. Doesn’t like sharing his secrets, in case you step on his turf.