Gig photo's

If you used to use a 50mm in the film days, consider the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM. It's roughly the same field of view as 50mm on film. And damn, it makes some nice colours!
 
I will give that one a look as well. The 85mm f/1.8 also look pretty good too.

I rented it a couple of times and didn't like it for shooting gigs. It gave heavy CA wide open and the kind of light you get on stage makes it much worse.
 
Lol, isn't the only difference in the 2 HSM? I know they are differnet size wise as well.
Different optics. IQ wise the HSM model is on par with Canon's L lens.
 
The one big difference between the Canon 50mm f/1.4 and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 is that the Sigma has rounded Aperture blades. This means you get nice round bokeh balls at smaller apertures too :)
 
Crank up the ISO - to about 1600 or 3200, on the 500D its going to be grainy

I don't understand why people think 3200 ISO will be grainy. I've done pleny of shooting with the 500D on 3200 ISO and the results are really great. Sure, if you're gonna pixel-peep, you'll see some noise, but scaled down for posting to web/flickr and for printing to jumbo, the images are outstanding.

@DylanHaskin: if you invest in some flash gear later on, you can experiment with bounce flashes which really keeps the ambiance of the shot, especially if you use highspeed sync.

--deckert
 
I don't understand why people think 3200 ISO will be grainy.
Because it is. You might not notice the noise when you've reduced it down to a facebook sized image but I never take a photo with the sole intention of disseminating only that way.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why people think 3200 ISO will be grainy. I've done pleny of shooting with the 500D on 3200 ISO and the results are really great. Sure, if you're gonna pixel-peep, you'll see some noise, but scaled down for posting to web/flickr and for printing to jumbo, the images are outstanding.

You can see the grain even in this:


That's only 2000 ISO. But that doesn't bother me, in fact, I would probably have liked this shot more if it was more grainy. What bothers me is the stains on the guitar is the red stains all over each image. It's slightly harder to see scaled down but it's often quite clear.
 
Last edited:
So - here's my first attempt ... and a few things I learnt :

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolby2000/5656763090/in/photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolby2000/5656190283/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolby2000/5656763242/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolby2000/5656762926/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dolby2000/5656762820/in/photostream/

A) A white lens means very few people stop you ;)
B) It's alot more difficult than I first thought
C) The Canon 7Ds noise handling isn't that great
D) I found manual focus worked the best
 
Some nice images there Dolby

Here are a few from my long weekend - mostly still jpgs since I'm still wading through the 9000 pics I took. :o

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php
 
Thanks bwana :)

After using the lens the first time, I was slightly disappointed - but some of last nights turned out very well and I'm smiling once again ;)

What music festival did you get those at?
Also your 70-200 2.8?
 
Hey Bwana, great pics!

BTW. what are you using to get the exif info on the footer of your pics, you can't be typing it manually?
 
What music festival did you get those at?
Also your 70-200 2.8?
It was our Splash - between that and Neil Diamond I think I've had enough of musicians to last me for a while. :)

The Dr Victor & the Rasta Rebels photo was either the 16-35 or 24-70 - the rest were taken with the 70-200.

I managed to break a camera and a lens this weekend but it was worth it. :D
Hey Bwana, great pics!

BTW. what are you using to get the exif info on the footer of your pics, you can't be typing it manually?
It's a free Aperture plugin called BorderFX.
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X