Photoclubalpha

So some of you might know that I am a sound engineer by day and hobby photographer by show time Slowly but surely there are more and more magazines that are requesting copies and there might actually be a opportunity for me there, in addition to the product shots I already have been doing. Unfortunately though I am really starting to push the limits of what I can do with my lenses (see sig for lens list and pic link). I know that at some point I am going to have to bite the bullet and invest into an actual nice low f-stop, fast, zoom lens. Now I have never been one to really follow the crowd so I have been researching a bit more and more about these puppies and just wanted some additional input. Any concert shooters on here that have such a beast and/or experience with other units? Stay away from certain ones versus others? I have never really dug to deep into these specific lenses because I never thought I would have a need for them. Yet still here I am, so lets hear it! Any input is much appreciated.

Without any practical experience with the lenses or the subject, I venture to say that there are two categories of lenses you could be looking at: Fast, and Really Fast.

Fast lenses would be f/2.8 and telephoto. You've got the wide primes taken care of, so it could be time to invest in a 70-200/2.8. For that, out of my ambient knowledge of photography and photography gear, I'd recommend a Sigma of the APO HSM II variety for cost and performance. It costs less than half as much as Sony's and is quieter than Tamron's.

Really fast lenses would be f/1.4 or f/1.8, of which there are no zooms, and not much choice at different focal lengths. Sigma makes 20, 24, and 28mm primes at f/1.8, Sony makes an overpriced 35mm f/1.4, Sony and Sigma both make a 50mm f/1.4, which you may not value highly because you already have a 50mm f/1.7. Beyond that the choices are fewer still; just Sony's 85mm f/1.4 and 135mm f/1.8.

Well, my experiences are a bit limited. I have a cousin who's a rock star, and whenever his band came to the area we all got backstage passes.

I found that my most used lens for concerts was my 135/2.8. If I was shooting today on APS-C, and especially if I had a chance to sell them, I'd invest in the 85 1.4 first, then the 135 1.8 to get the close-ups.

As I'm sure you're aware, stage lighting can be a bit tricky. You normally have bright spots and, if taking in the whole scene, you have a bright stage in a dark world. That gives you plenty of light for taking the band member, so you don't really need fast lenses for that, but getting the audience involved necessitates the faster lenses.

Digital's ability to adjust ISO on the fly negates that a bit, but high ISO shots tend to be noisy.

Dusty

Well, I did take some pictures at 2 concerts recently as a visitor, for the first time I admitt...

First on September 16, 2009 with a Tamron 55-200 4-5.6. See here:
http://s336.photobucket.com/albums/n325 ... 009-09-16/

Too much trouble to stop the action... So I went out and bought a faster lens.

Second on September 20, 2009 with a Sigma 70-200 2.8 II HSM. See here:
http://s336.photobucket.com/albums/n325 ... 009-09-20/

Much better, but the lighting was much more dim there...

I would have the need for a zoom lens, just because of my job I am never assured a position in the front or anywhere for that matter. I have to make the most of my shots with the fact that I am technically an engineer on the site and not a photographer. Fixed lenses are faster and for some applications I can see their need (currently I primary use my 50mm 1.7) but at the same time its that fixed length that is my greatest weakness. Anyone have any experience with the Tokina units or Tamron? I am also looking at the Minolta units as a possibility.

Alamein 300 wrote: I would have the need for a zoom lens, just because of my job I am never assured a position in the front or anywhere for that matter. I have to make the most of my shots with the fact that I am technically an engineer on the site and not a photographer. Fixed lenses are faster and for some applications I can see their need (currently I primary use my 50mm 1.7) but at the same time its that fixed length that is my greatest weakness. Anyone have any experience with the Tokina units or Tamron? I am also looking at the Minolta units as a possibility.

Approximately 11 months ago I purchased a KM 28-75mm f:2.8 lens and it rapidly became one of my favorites. You say that your 50mm is your most commonly used lens, and this zoom would straddle that length. You will be giving up about 1.5 stops compared to your 50mm f:1.7, but I cannot think of any affordable zoom that is any faster than f:2.8, so the speed loss is a price you will have to pay to use a zoom.

If you are not already aware of it, the KM 28-75 zoom is a rebadged Tamron - although there are rumors that the Minolta version has better coatings. From what I have read on the web, others share my high opinion of this lens, both with the KM label and with the Tamron label - and it is relatively inexpensive.

With best wishes,
- Tom -

Approximately 11 months ago I purchased a KM 28-75mm f:2.8 lens and it rapidly became one of my favorites. You say that your 50mm is your most commonly used lens, and this zoom would straddle that length. You will be giving up about 1.5 stops compared to your 50mm f:1.7, but I cannot think of any affordable zoom that is any faster than f:2.8, so the speed loss is a price you will have to pay to use a zoom.

If you are not already aware of it, the KM 28-75 zoom is a rebadged Tamron - although there are rumors that the Minolta version has better coatings. From what I have read on the web, others share my high opinion of this lens, both with the KM label and with the Tamron label - and it is relatively inexpensive.

With best wishes,
- Tom -

[/quote]

That is not a bad suggestion at all, any larger (and more expensive) range zoom lens out there are still in that f2.8 area. Whichever way I go though I think I am going to struggle at first with the fact that I have been spoiled on the blazing speed of that 50mm f1.7 and so need to end up redoing how I shoot.

UrsaMajor wrote:Approximately 11 months ago I purchased a KM 28-75mm f:2.8 lens and it rapidly became one of my favorites.

I also use the KM28-75 as indoor lens. Not wide enough(sometimes) and not a loved lens (like the beercan) but it does the job! And since in a few years we'll all be on full frame, it should be a future proof investment. Btw I do own the 50/1.7 but it's not that good wide open and doesn't get a lot of use.

I also have the 28-75 and can thoroughly recommend it. I have used it shooting in "Cabaret" type environments, very dark with spot-lit performers.

In this case I rather like the 42-112 or so effective focal length. It allows me to zoom in on faces for head and shoulder shots. My example is sharp at f2.8 and very sharp stopped down to f4 to f8. I generally use it at f2.8 and iso 1250. Works well!

Alan