Q & A: Dwight McCann (Event Photography)

MetalTom, here's what I think, noting that my 70-200mm is f2.8 rather than f4: IS is very effective; if you are rock solid there is less need for IS; the 70-200mm f4 with IS will likely do a better job for you than the f2.8 without IS (I don't even know if both models come without IS); a monopod is a good idea; a tripod is a good idea. I would urge you to buy the best lens you can afford and not to buy a lesser lens because of a single shoot in the near future, unless the client wants to pay for it. If you are shooting for fun/free/a friend/the experience then I would urge you not to make your selection based on any number of shoots, but wait until you can afford what you really want. Your club friends will understand if you wait. The festival people can understand if your equipment is lacking unless they want to pay for an upgrade.

So, the bottom line: you need to do what's best for you and it sounds to me like that is to wait until you can afford to buy the lens you really want, but I hear that the 70-200mm f4 L IS USM is quite excellent! Sorry I couldn't be more helpful! And I would suggest you post in the lens forum, too.

No such thing as the 70-200 F4 IS, the only 70-200 lens with IS is the F2.8 version.

I think only the 70-200 F/2.8 comes in a an IS flavor. There are, however 70-300 models that have IS, but they're not L's. I bet you're thinking of the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS. This is the one with the green stripe that gets frequent good reviews.

I knew you guys would help me out! So, Metal, I think if you are still undecided then the lens forum might provide even more, correct, information. Oh, man, and now I've got to worry about Green stripes, too, sigh.

Hi, Dwight

This is a wonderful thread chock full of information. Thanks a whole lot. If I could get you to look at the following link (to a post I made here) that contains my first opportunity to shoot a live performance (20D with the Nifty Fifty lens), and critique them, I'd very much appreciate it. I had a tough time, but I thought these images were pretty good for a newbie, first time, outside, live performance, lights and white tent sort of set up. I'd be very interested in your opinion.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=83718 Face~Cover Band: Bruce In The USA

Best-
Noni

First off, Dwight - you are a fantastic photographer... I've found myself looking forward to your posts, and I just wanted to say that you, and the many other great photographers on this forum, have been an inspiration to me.

I am by no stretch of the imagination an expert - I've only been shooting seriously for a couple months now, and I certainly still have a lot to learn. However, I love to learn, so that means that this is an exciting time for me.

I got the opportunity to try live event photography during the San Jose America Festival on the 4th. I went for the fireworks, but I had some CF space left, so I decided to fill it up instead of rushing home. The band performing was Double Funk Crunch, a mostly local dance hits cover band.

I posted a couple of my favorite shots here: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=83715
More shots are here: http://www.gonefission​.us …s/thumbnails.ph​p?album=37

These are by no means spectacular shots - in fact I wouldn't be offended if someone didn't even consider them good. However, I learned a lot from this, and maybe someone else will too. They were all taken with my 300D with 70-200 f/4L, wide open, ISO1600, hand-held.

Here's a few of my lessons learned (nothing earth-shattering here, but probably worth repeating):

1. f/4 just isn't enough for nighttime outdoor, and I imagine, most indoor venues. Even with -2/3 exposure compensation, shutter times were ranging from 1/10s to 1/100s.
   
2. DON'T BE LAZY! Even though I had my tripod in my bag over my shoulder, I decided to hand-hold. I'm sure many of my shots would have come out better if I had pulled the tripod out and actually used it.
   
3. If you do decide to hand-hold, especially with a longer lens, IS would be a great thing to have.
   
4. Keep on your toes - you never know when the lighting is going to change, when the performer is going to get into a fantastic pose, or when something else you'd be sorry not to capture is going to happen.
   
5. I think you touched on this Dwight - structure your shooting. When doing close-ups, focus on one performer at a time (but don't forget #4!). The main reason I dialed down the exposure compensation was because the bright white suit jacket of the lead singer was getting blown out. However, I was shifting from one performer to the next pretty much willy-nilly, so I left it there. As a result some of the others were getting underexposed.
   
6. Don't be shy - get close! I was staying mainly on the fringe of the crowd (75-100 feet or so from the stage), so I was working mainly towards the 200mm end of the lens, and I still had to generously crop many of the photos to get the desired composition. I wish I had worked my way towards the front so I could have gone wider, maybe even with the 18-55mm. Camera shake would have been less of an issue, and I could have gotten some more creative angles.
   

Well, I guess I was just seeking your experience. Maybe I should pose the question differently.

Are there times when you feel you would have missed some shots if you hadn't had IS?

My thinking is the IS would be good if the lighting were to drop to the point where I would need to be shooting at 1/125 or slower using the longer end of the lens. Good for camera shake, but no help for subject motion. Do you often find yourself in situations such as this?

Maybe I'll just rent for this event while continuing to save. If the client is pleased with my work in this type of venue and more work of this caliber heads my direction, then I will look at a decision based on what I experience this time around.

Thank you for your time trying to help this scatterbrain.

I try to pay attention to my exposure time more than anything else. I usually shoot at either 1/30 or 1/60, and find that I like the results...

Steve

Exactly. As do I, although I prefer 1/60 or faster, 1/30 can have too much blur for my taste. And this is fine with a 50 or 85 mm lens, but with a 200 mm lens I can't see handholding under 1/125, tough enough at 1/250.

Kevin, I left comments at one of your other posts noted above in this post. I think you need an IS lens, monopod or tripod ... or improve your handholding technique ... as I think your problem is camera motion.

Tom, I think IS is significant but I don't pay much attention anymore. I agree with Steve that you must attend to shutterspeed, BUT what I have found is that when I am using good technique at slow shutterspeeds the critical factor is the timing of the shot to coincide with that instant that the performer isn't moving. I think I noted above somewhere that I put my 1D Mark II in 3 fps mode, pick a performer, and shoot for 3 to 5 seconds. This is not some arbitrary 3 to 5 seconds, but a segment when I think there will be good light and they may "come to rest". I may get ten blurry shots, two or three soft and one or two fairly sharp from this exercise ... or none at all ... or that surprise super-crisp, great lighting, perfect pose image. I guess what I am saying is that it takes a combination of good technique, planning, watching closely, fast lenses, monopod/tripod, anticipation, and a lot of frames ... I have dozens of examples of where this "machine gun" technique has yielded one or two good images. Another thing that I often finding myself doing is holding the camera up to my eye and following the performer, waiting for that good segment, for four or five minutes at a stretch. In a two hour concert with the 1D Mark II and 70-200mm f2.8 I have found I have a sore wrist at the end of the night.

And let me once again say: SHOOT UNTIL YOUR CF IS FULL. If you aren't shooting because you don't want to have too many images to process, the ones you do get will almost always be the worst of what you could have gotten. I spend hours and hours just culling out the soft images ... often over half my images on the first pass. Get a bigger or more CF cards. Put that puppy in the highest frame rate you've got (unless it is 8.5 fps in which case 3 fps is better). I expect to drive my 20D at 5 fps. Become One with the Tau.

Finally, I am attaching an image of Brian McComas (country singer/song writer) taken over a year ago (I have a very limited selection from here at work) at the Maverick Saloon at 129mm (don't know which lens) and 1/30th, handheld. While not ultra crisp, I think it demonstrates two of my principals: note the microphone is pretty crisp so there isn't too much camera shake, and it was an instant when Brian was "still" although a tad blurry ... I've got ten where he was real blurry!

Well, I rambled again, so bring me back to the actual question ... I've forgotten it from up here on my high horse!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Spoken like a true experienced photographer. Words of wisdom in my book (photographically speaking).

Aam, I like, "Any question worth asking is worth asking twice!" And, "The people who make mistakes make everything else!"

Happy Birthday!!!!

Geez, JF, I was just going to edit my last two posts into one but you caught me, so here's the post I deleted, again: OH, I'm 60 today and I think my wife may have sold our house last night!

For those anxiously awaiting my next event contribution in Urban Life, it will probably be of a poker tournament I will be shooting Saturday. The following week I will be shooting Smokey Robinson.

Steve Parr brought up a good point (slow shutter speed). And your answer to him made me think about something. Disclaimer: I haven't seen Steve's photos yet.

Dwight, you told Steve that his photos are similar. I'm afraid that your photos have, somewhat, a repetitive style to them. Sharp, focused, well exposed. They look perfect! they really do.
But have you tried different styles. Panning maybe, or something different.

Just wondering.