Need Help with Lens choice! new Camera Body!

So I'm pretty disappointed by the photos from my last show. I play in a touring band so i get a lot of time to mess around with live band photography. my last camera body was horrible in low light so now that i have a decent body i want to get more in depth with it. I recently picked up a Canon 7d. which lens would you recommend for live stuff? I'm almost always either on stage or right in front. Right now i have a canon 50mm 1.8 and a sigma 10-20 in my bag. here are some examples from the other night. Again, it was my first night messing around with it haha.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​197322851/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198496262/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​197364845/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198454192/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198452810/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198419968/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198418276/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/90219788@N03/8​198422828/

What exactly are you feeling disappointed about? What should a new lens do better? Focal lengths? Aperture? Image quality? Focus accuracy? Focus speed?

Image quality mainly. Id like a small zoom if possible. sometimes i don't have time to swap lenses.

Cflaisch wrote in post #15261509
Image quality mainly. Id like a small zoom if possible. sometimes i don't have time to swap lenses.

I can't see where you are going wrong with the lenses you already got

maybe I'm just my worst critic

Well, between the 10-20 and the 50, you should look into one of the 17-50/2.8 lenses that are around. The best one is probably the Canon one. Also the most expensive. I've been happy with the Tamron I've been using for years. (Its the older version of the 17-50/2.8 without the image stabilization). If you consider upgrading to a full frame an option, you could also look into the 24/28-70 ones. In any case you should select a fast one with 2.8 and not bother with anything slower. If you just want to fill the gap between the 20 and 50, a prime around 30mm could also be an option. The Sigma 30/1.4 is a popular choice.

I find the 24-70m f2.8 the one I use the most if you can get close and the 70-200m f2.8 if you are back a way. Add the 1.4x extender and your good for a pretty large range of focal distance but you lose a lot of light when you add the extender.

Cflaisch wrote in post #15261608
maybe I'm just my worst critic

Personally I find that if you did have the lenses in my sig, you're more or less covered, but that is pushing up the amount of money spent on a hobby too high, but that isn't covering all focal lengths. Because its depends on how the stage is set up at venues. Some can be too close to the pit. Since you have a crop body, it complicates things because you have add in the crop factor

boogada wrote in post #15261868
Well, between the 10-20 and the 50, you should look into one of the 17-50/2.8 lenses that are around. The best one is probably the Canon one. Also the most expensive. I've been happy with the Tamron I've been using for years. (Its the older version of the 17-50/2.8 without the image stabilization). If you consider upgrading to a full frame an option, you could also look into the 24/28-70 ones. In any case you should select a fast one with 2.8 and not bother with anything slower. If you just want to fill the gap between the 20 and 50, a prime around 30mm could also be an option. The Sigma 30/1.4 is a popular choice.

^^^ This.

But I also don't see much wrong with the shots that would change by using a different lens…

I agree... for the 7D, I highly recommend the Canon 17-55 2.8 (or 3rd party equivalent if budget is an issue), since it is usually wide enough even on a crop body when up close and gives you some range versatility ...couple that with your ultra-wide 10-20 and you are all set for your up-close/in-your-face style.

There are also some good deals to be had on a used 17-55...

lastly, if concert photography is in your future, it's a good idea to avoid buying any glass slower than f2.8 from this point forward - you'll likely only be disappointed.

You might look at the Canon 16-35/2.8 <link> .

Or a 24 or 28mm prime. I use the Canon 28/1.8 for low-light close shots - it has excellent image quality, fast AF, and is affordable. I can usually crop to 4x with little loss of quality.

Thanks for all of the advice folks! ill def check into them!

bubbygator wrote in post #15263964
You might look at the Canon 16-35/2.8 <link> .

Or a 24 or 28mm prime. I use the Canon 28/1.8 for low-light close shots - it has excellent image quality, fast AF, and is affordable. I can usually crop to 4x with little loss of quality.

The 16-35mm is not a cheap alternative, I would go for a third party alternative, cheap, but good enough to get a portfolio going

the 16-35 is an expensive lens, but i am not aware of any 3rd party ultrawide lenses that are f/2.8.

Relatively cheap third party Sigma f/2.8 lens wide angle 17-50