Looking to start shooting indoor local bands...can I get by with my Canon T1?

I am very much a newbie to photography and I have done some events for motorcycles and landscape and some portraits. I have a Canon T1 w/ the stock 18-55mm and an F1.8 50mm. I also recently purchased a Neewer TT520 (but already did some reading that flash shouldn't be neccesary). So far from what I have read and searched 70-200mm seems to be the glass to get for band performance shots and use the 50mm for group shots backstage. Can I skate by with what I have or is the telephoto lens the way to go to be able to crank up the iso and get the shots? I am borderline hobby/career...I think I take on the hobby enthusiast attitude to keep the pressure off. Ultimately I am chasing a career as a healthcare professional but want to do photography on the side for the creative outlet and maybe pull in extra cash.

Thanks ahead of time for any help on this subject

The Neewer TT520 seems to be an all-manual flash?
Would not be my first choice: For one thing, it might not go low enough, and they certainly aren't the easiest to work fast with when you have changing distances to the subjects… (I'm assuming "posed audience / band shots / portraits" here, since in most case I wouldn't use flash for on stage shots anyway.

You can get by with the 18-55 for "club" and "backstage" shots, assuming you use flash. The 50mm is pretty long for this (IMO).
You can get by for "on stage portraits" using the 50/1.8 and maybe the 18-55 for wider shots, assuming the venue is decently lit.

Don't be afraid to use high ISO and learn yto use what you have now. You will then get to know in what area's it does (not) perform, and you'll figure out what to get next.

The 70-200 is a nice lens, but does nothing for you if you like to shoot wide.

René Damkot wrote in post #15411839
The Neewer TT520 seems to be an all-manual flash?
Would not be my first choice: For one thing, it might not go low enough, and they certainly aren't the easiest to work fast with when you have changing distances to the subjects… (I'm assuming "posed audience / band shots / portraits" here, since in most case I wouldn't use flash for on stage shots anyway.

You can get by with the 18-55 for "club" and "backstage" shots, assuming you use flash. The 50mm is pretty long for this (IMO).
You can get by for "on stage portraits" using the 50/1.8 and maybe the 18-55 for wider shots, assuming the venue is decently lit.

Don't be afraid to use high ISO and learn yto use what you have now. You will then get to know in what area's it does (not) perform, and you'll figure out what to get next.

The 70-200 is a nice lens, but does nothing for you if you like to shoot wide.

The neewer has the S1 and S2 setting as well as the M but i don't have the remote to use it for those slave settings (or maybe I too green to understand what I have yet, lol)

I used to be a band booker/promoter and worked at a small venue so I have lots of friends in Metal bands and other styles of music and want to get action shots of them, so I won't always be at a particular venue. For the most part around here with the bands it is a lot of sports bar and grill settings and some dive bars, no House of Blues style venues. So close space with maybe neon lights or even DJ multicolor light set ups.

I have found recently when I was doing photographs for the family during xmas that the 18-55 had a hard time getting bright shots even with a high iso (T1 goes up to 3200) and flash. When I tossed on the 50mm I was able to get the ambient lighting and just the stock flash and even brought the iso down to 400 and got some great warm shots.

This has lead me to believe the stock 18-55 is going to be useless. I want to get all this figured before i set up a shoot with a band and not go in completely clueless. But the 50mm would be great if I can get close enough and I feel lighting will be easier but honestly I want to have the freedom to move around and get shots from the back for full stage shots and get close enough but not have to disturb the fans. Again I am really new to much of this and the digital photography class I took this past semester in college focused on a lot of day shot stuff. Now I want to expand to the indoors.

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15413168
So close space with maybe neon lights or even DJ multicolor light set ups.

Can be challenging using any setup

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15413168
I have found recently when I was doing photographs for the family during xmas that the 18-55 had a hard time getting bright shots even with a high iso (T1 goes up to 3200) and flash. When I tossed on the 50mm I was able to get the ambient lighting and just the stock flash and even brought the iso down to 400 and got some great warm shots.

That was probably caused by something else.
The 18-55 has a widest aperture of f/3.5 at the wide end to f/5.6 at the long end.

Let's assume you were comparing at a bit under 50mm, so the aperture was approximately f/5.0. This is 3 stops slower then the 50/1.8 wide open.
So you shot the 18-55 at f/5; ISO 3200 and the 50mm at f/1.8; ISO 400.

ISO 400 to ISO 3200 is also 3 stops, so you should get identical exposure with both setups at the same shutter speed and flash power used (more noise in the ISO 3200 shot, less DoF in the 50mm/1.8 shot obviously).
The 18-55 might have a harder time focusing because less light get's in, but the 50/1.8 isn't exactly known for trouble free focusing either…

Fast lenses certainly have their uses, but for certain types of shots (group of people, where some DoF is needed and flash is used) the 18-55 should cope.

Example: Backstage shot of a "meet and greet":
http://www.damkot.com …ingBorder_0030_​large.html

1D3 using 17-35L at 1/15 sec, f/6.3, ISO 3200 using bounced flash
I could have taken a similar shot (provided I'd be able to back up a bit to accommodate for the different field of view) using a T1 with kit lens.

The rest of the images in that gallery are of a festival in different parts of a venue, with quite varying lighting and a variety of focal lengths used (between 17 and 200mm, maybe occasionally with a 1.4x TC added).
Exif should be there, to give you an idea.

Keep in mind that my 1D3 has a bigger sensor, so your camera has a slightly narrower field of view.

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15413168
I want to get all this figured before i set up a shoot with a band and not go in completely clueless.

Good idea, but there's only one way to find out for sure

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15413168
But the 50mm would be great if I can get close enough and I feel lighting will be easier but honestly I want to have the freedom to move around and get shots from the back for full stage shots and get close enough but not have to disturb the fans.

The 50mm is a good place to start. And to find out whether you need wider or longer lenses. For wider: Try the kit lens (on the wide end, because it's least slow there). For longer: crop. Seriously. You won't be able to mimic a 200mm, but you could take a shot similar (not identical: DoF will be different) to what a 85mm would have gotten you.

Keep in mind that zooming most certainly does not take away the need for moving around! Zooming does nothing for perspective. And IMO, perspective can be one of the more important choices to make that reflect how an image will look.
Think of a zoom lens as giving "infinite perspective control", since you can zoom to keep framing of the subject constant, while simultaneously moving to alter perspective
(Illustration on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.o​rg/wiki/Dolly_zoom )

René Damkot wrote in post #15413512
Can be challenging using any setup

That was probably caused by something else.
The 18-55 has a widest aperture of f/3.5 at the wide end to f/5.6 at the long end.

Let's assume you were comparing at a bit under 50mm, so the aperture was approximately f/5.0. This is 3 stops slower then the 50/1.8 wide open.
So you shot the 18-55 at f/5; ISO 3200 and the 50mm at f/1.8; ISO 400.

ISO 400 to ISO 3200 is also 3 stops, so you should get identical exposure with both setups at the same shutter speed and flash power used (more noise in the ISO 3200 shot, less DoF in the 50mm/1.8 shot obviously).
The 18-55 might have a harder time focusing because less light get's in, but the 50/1.8 isn't exactly known for trouble free focusing either…

Fast lenses certainly have their uses, but for certain types of shots (group of people, where some DoF is needed and flash is used) the 18-55 should cope.

Example: Backstage shot of a "meet and greet":
http://www.damkot.com …ingBorder_0030_​large.html

1D3 using 17-35L at 1/15 sec, f/6.3, ISO 3200 using bounced flash
I could have taken a similar shot (provided I'd be able to back up a bit to accommodate for the different field of view) using a T1 with kit lens.

The rest of the images in that gallery are of a festival in different parts of a venue, with quite varying lighting and a variety of focal lengths used (between 17 and 200mm, maybe occasionally with a 1.4x TC added).
Exif should be there, to give you an idea.

Keep in mind that my 1D3 has a bigger sensor, so your camera has a slightly narrower field of view.


Good idea, but there's only one way to find out for sure

The 50mm is a good place to start. And to find out whether you need wider or longer lenses. For wider: Try the kit lens (on the wide end, because it's least slow there). For longer: crop. Seriously. You won't be able to mimic a 200mm, but you could take a shot similar (not identical: DoF will be different) to what a 85mm would have gotten you.

Keep in mind that zooming most certainly does not take away the need for moving around! Zooming does nothing for perspective. And IMO, perspective can be one of the more important choices to make that reflect how an image will look.
Think of a zoom lens as giving "infinite perspective control", since you can zoom to keep framing of the subject constant, while simultaneously moving to alter perspective
(Illustration on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.o​rg/wiki/Dolly_zoom )

A lot to digest but will work on trying it out in a casual setting where I can randomly shoot bands and try stuff out. Thank you for the in depth lessons. I did check out the shots for the Crossing Border event, that is a huge theater. Very nice shots. That is the kind of thing I am looking to capture from the smaller venues, unfortunately the lighting will not reflect that. A challenge for sure. I have a lot to study.

I like to shoot a lot of local bands and small club venues. You'll find the lighting at these types of venues sometimes to be down right atrocious. An example the last event I shot this small bar had one red and one yellow light on and when I asked if they could turn anything else on the guy there said "no! I'm trying to create a mood"

Anyway the faster the lens the better, I have a bag of lenses and find the f1.4 and f1.2 to be the best so I end up using them the most while the f2.8 zooms just sit in the bag. If you can use a flash the whole dynamic's change and you can do much more. Also the full-frame sensor's allow much better noise reduction.

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15417099
that is a huge theater.

Not everything.
It was over 5 locations. Capacity from 1200 (huge) to 700 (large), then 300 (small) and a café (horrid lighting). Also some shots from a writer being interviewed in a kinda "living room" setting.

I actually prefer the smaller venues: More chance to get an intimate / interesting shot, instead of the default "long lens from way back" shots.

This is a while back. Small cafe, small stage, bad (quality) lighting:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=323097

BushWacker wrote in post #15417187
I like to shoot a lot of local bands and small club venues. You'll find the lighting at these types of venues sometimes to be down right atrocious. An example the last event I shot this small bar had one red and one yellow light on and when I asked if they could turn anything else on the guy there said "no! I'm trying to create a mood"

Anyway the faster the lens the better, I have a bag of lenses and find the f1.4 and f1.2 to be the best so I end up using them the most while the f2.8 zooms just sit in the bag. If you can use a flash the whole dynamic's change and you can do much more. Also the full-frame sensor's allow much better noise reduction.

So you think the f1.8 50mm will be good?

René Damkot wrote in post #15419661
Not everything.
It was over 5 locations. Capacity from 1200 (huge) to 700 (large), then 300 (small) and a café (horrid lighting). Also some shots from a writer being interviewed in a kinda "living room" setting.

I actually prefer the smaller venues: More chance to get an intimate / interesting shot, instead of the default "long lens from way back" shots.

This is a while back. Small cafe, small stage, bad (quality) lighting:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=323097

I like that small venue shots but I always feel the noise will be a distraction with the higher ISO, but if that is not the case then I will give it a try.

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15422550
I like that small venue shots but I always feel the noise will be a distraction with the higher ISO, but if that is not the case then I will give it a try.

That was shot with a 1D2 and (more important) processed in an older raw converter. If'I were to re-process then in LR4, there would be way less noise.


Edit:
Comparison:
Old version, no idea what settings were:

René Damkot wrote in post #15422862
That was shot with a 1D2 and (more important) processed in an older raw converter. If'I were to re-process then in LR4, there would be way less noise.


Edit:
Comparison:
Old version, no idea what settings were:

New Q&D edit. ISO 3200, exposure +1 stop in LR4. So that's a 1D2 at ISO 6400:

Interesting. I have CS5 and I shoot in RAW. Is there a main tool to use to lessen the noise? Or is it done with a seperate editing program?

I use only the NR in LR4 (same as in ACR).
I used to occasionally use NeatImage, but the raw converters got good enough to do without that.

For smaller venues, take both lenses but assume you'll be using the 50mm for most of them. Set up at 1600 ISO, and go up to 3200 if you *have* to. Shoot RAW, you can pull exposure back afterwards if it's a little dark.
Go full manual, set a shutter speed that isn't going to give you blur (start at 1/125th) and widest aperture and see how you get on.
I use center point focus only as the depth of field at f1.8 at 10 feet is going to be a few inches.

When you get it back into Lightroom, discard anything out of focus, apply the lens correction. Drop the blacks a little to lose the noise, and punch the highlights and whites to make it look punchier. Use noise reduction if you need it, and clarity can sometimes give a good effect on certain subjects.

Most smaller venues will be happy to guestlist you in return for a watermarked copy or Flickr link, I've found.

I've shot many gigs using just a 50mm lens.

HornsUpPhotographer wrote in post #15422548
So you think the f1.8 50mm will be good?

The best lens is the one you have with you. If f/1.8 is your fastest than have it with you for sure. If you can get something faster all the better...