Live music lens question

I'm really contemplating picking up a 24-70 L 2.8 for my live music shots as well as some fashion/glamour that I am working on. Does anyone have any experience with this lens in low-light situations or will I still be using my 50mm 1.4 and 20mm 1.8 alot?

I do, probably, 80% of my concert shooting with an f/2.8 lens. You should be fine...

it really depends on the club's lighting...the dark, dingy, low rent places i haunt would never allow for a 2.8 aperture to be used much, if at all...

I have that lens. I rarely use it for concert shooting but that's mostly because of my venues and that I like really tight shots. It is the lens I use to shoot boxing! It is a great lens but as Narlus points out it is really not particularly fast. Are you not happy with your 50mm f/1.4?

the 50 mm works very nicely, I just want a zoom that I can use for my other photography, and it would be nice if this lens could be usable for my live music stuff.

how does the 20mm sigma work for you? i've decided that instead of getting the 50 f/1.4 i'd be better off keeping the 1.8 version and getting another fast but wider prime. was looking at the canon 28 f/1.8 USM lens. i can't get good wide pics w/ the 50mm, and most of club settings for me anyway dictate that i stick to one spot, or lose it. and since i'm fairly short, i need to be up towards the stage as far as possible.

I find the Sigma 30/1.4 extremely versatile, but it will be quite close to your 20/1.8 (though most likely a lot sharper wide open ... mine is a bit sharper than the 50/1.4)

Best regards,
Andy

I love my 20mm. I use it almost exclusivly now. It is a bulky, heavy lens that's very noisy but it is tack sharp (even wide open, the results are very acceptable). And, it's not too expensive (around $400).

24-70 is a super lens. Pick it up

Will you be on stage for these shots? 70mm might not give you the zoom you need from anywhere else. Close-ups of performers is essential for good concert photography (IMHO).

Good point. I often shoot with a 300mm f/2.8L and sometimes add a 1.4TC both handheld and from a tripod for concert shooting. I get my favorite shots with this lens. My next lens will be a 400mm f/2.8L for this reason. But I also use a 70-200mm f/2.8L IS for most of the rest. The 24-70mm f/2.8L is good for wide stage shots with but those are not the most interesting.

I normally shoot with the 70-200, and the 70 is probably as wide as I'd want to get. If I need to go wider, I'll grab the 28mm.

As an aside, I wouldn't recommend getting on stage with the band. You haven't lived until you've been smacked in the side of the head with the headstock of a Fender Jazz Bass.

Or so I've heard...

Steve Parr wrote:
I normally shoot with the 70-200, and the 70 is probably as wide as I'd want to get. If I need to go wider, I'll grab the 28mm.

As an aside, I wouldn't recommend getting on stage with the band. You haven't lived until you've been smacked in the side of the head with the headstock of a Fender Jazz Bass.

Or so I've heard...

LOL....I'd be pissed if I got wacked on the head or even worse...had my L glass bashed into. Most of the shooting I do is at small clubs so the focal lenght wouldn't be an issue.

The way I see it is, that if your shooting the really dingy places that require really fast lenses, as I do also. Then you can get away with using flash. The only places that don't like flash are the bigger venues, with fancy lighting and bands that take themselves too seriously. I shoot the darkest gigs with flash and a 17-40l which is only f4. I get half decent results by slowing the shutter speed for background and freezing motion with the flash.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=182645

I'm a little different; the venue I shoot in the 70-200 is perfect. The reason is I am right on top of the performers. It does not do well if you are at more than 30' from the stage, if you want to single out the performer.

What I like about it is I can get close and have a slower shutter speed than getting a long way back and zooming in. My best shots are with that exact lens.

I think you have to have that lens in your bag.

The other point I would make is if you are going to buy the 70-200 IT IS A MUST THAT YOU GET IT WITH "IS"!!!!!!!!!!!!

The IS will really help with the camera shake and let you shoot at a slower shutter speed, which will help because of the poor lighting. Even at 1600 ISO with my 70-200 I sometimes need a shutter speed around 1/60th to get any decent exposure?

I can't wait for the day that I can upgrade to a 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM. For now my sigma 70-200 and my 24-70 L glass will have to do.


The IS will really help with the camera shake and let you shoot at a slower shutter speed, which will help because of the poor lighting. Even at 1600 ISO with my 70-200 I am sometimes needing a shutter speed around 1/60th to get any decent exposure.

I can't wait for the day that I can upgrade to an 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM. For now my sigma 70-200 and my 24-70 L glass will have to do.