k10d and shooting in indoor concert hall

[dnaxe]

http://picasaweb.google.com/alexander.yap/2007HanoiVietnam/photo#5018080519107333042

this is a shot with indoors, using ISO 800, with a shutter speed of 1/50. You'll note that there is already some blurness from motion. I suspect that the arm motion of the violinist will always be blurred...

On the bright side, I suspect that an indoor concert hall will generally be brighter...

(Edit: Although having said that, i was spot metering on the foremost figure and you'll notice that the background is rather dark.)

 

[dnaxe]

wild shot but how about canon?
the canons are known for being particularly good in low light with high iso - very clean images, and coupled with a fast lens (focal length dependant on the environment, how far away you are and how much you can move around) - should help give good shots a bit easier ...
i do comparison shots with a colleagues 30D and its always very impressive.
i normally have to up the iso a bit and run some noise cleaning software on my images afterwards. he doesnt.
(i shoot a d2x/d2h/pentax ds btw so i'm not exactly a canon-ite)

I think the best solution (for this shooting scenario), if you have the cash, is an 1ds mk3 usable ISO 6400 - costs about 5k (although i dont' know when it'll be out in SG), paired with a 70-200 L f4 or 70-200 L f2.8 and you've got a great concert solution, except that you'll have less "zoom" because the crop factor is only 1.3. (and, 10fps shooting, which should be fun.)

At least, that's what I would get if I had funds.

However, if we're talking about DSLRS which are reasonably affordable, and your needs aren't very exacting except for indoor concerts, I would recommend a D40/D80(x) together with a 18-200VR.

The pentax solution is best if your needs are more exacting (and saying that you want a 43 suggests that they are) and having a reasonable price is important, then I would get the K10D together with a 70-300 tamron Li Di or Sigma 70-300 APO DG. The picture above was taken using the sigma. I chose it over the 50-200 because it's got more reach, and is marginally faster for identical focal lengths.

Both the nikon and pentax solutions would benefit from a 70-200 2.8 - and the nikon VR version is probably better than the sigma 70-200 2.8 + k10D, at a price.

Finally, before you go buy anything, please play with it first. All the specifications in the world mean nothing I you don't like the feel of whatever camera it is you're getting.

 

[Galdor]

Why not consider this http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=264817 and get a 70-210mm f4 (beercan) which cost about $400 only. Total cost is about $1100 and you get IS in the body. ISO 800 and 1600 is acceptable too.

 

[creampuff]

Why not consider this http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=264817 and get a 70-210mm f4 (beercan) which cost about $400 only. Total cost is about $1100 and you get IS in the body. ISO 800 and 1600 is acceptable too.

You got to be joking... the problem ridden and discontinued KM5D? Perhaps the Sony A100? I'd give it a miss too because images at high ISO are unacceptably noisy. Yes Minolta made some great lenses, the "beer can" being one of them, but so has Pentax. The Pentax A 70-210 f4 is just as good as the "beer can, and cheaper too on eBay.

 

[creampuff]

I think the best solution (for this shooting scenario), if you have the cash, is an 1ds mk3 usable ISO 6400 - costs about 5k (although i dont' know when it'll be out in SG), paired with a 70-200 L f4 or 70-200 L f2.8 and you've got a great concert solution, except that you'll have less "zoom" because the crop factor is only 1.3. (and, 10fps shooting, which should be fun.)

At least, that's what I would get if I had funds.

However, if we're talking about DSLRS which are reasonably affordable, and your needs aren't very exacting except for indoor concerts, I would recommend a D40/D80(x) together with a 18-200VR.

The pentax solution is best if your needs are more exacting (and saying that you want a 43 suggests that they are) and having a reasonable price is important, then I would get the K10D together with a 70-300 tamron Li Di or Sigma 70-300 APO DG. The picture above was taken using the sigma. I chose it over the 50-200 because it's got more reach, and is marginally faster for identical focal lengths.

Both the nikon and pentax solutions would benefit from a 70-200 2.8 - and the nikon VR version is probably better than the sigma 70-200 2.8 + k10D, at a price.

Finally, before you go buy anything, please play with it first. All the specifications in the world mean nothing I you don't like the feel of whatever camera it is you're getting.

I have used my bro-in-law's Canon 1DS Mk2 and some of his L lenses quite a bit. Yes it can do indoor handheld shots very well but that kind of setup is far higher than $5K that you estimate. To add, it is also not a light and compact setup, which is a consideration in a concert setting.

Actually I'm surprised you've even suggested the Nikon D40/D80(x) together with a 18-200VR (on a Pentax forum???) when the K100D/K10D can match both cameras just as well image quality wise and gets the job done at a lower price point. The Pentax SR system is already available and built-in the body, so there is no need for a VR lens (which don't come cheap). IMHO, the Nikon 18-200VR is a convenient all-in-one travel lens but not the best tool for a concert hall because of it's slow max f-stop at maximum zoom. Might as well recommend the excellent Pentax 50-200 which is much smaller, lots cheaper and has good image quality.

If the TS roughly knows the shooting distance, even an older Pentax or third party 135mm f2.8 tele can do the job. Fast enough for handheld shooting indoors with SR assist, compact and cheap. If not, a reasonably fast tele zoom is the best bet. An f2.8 tele zoom would be great but it will be heavy and it won't be compact.

 

[zcf]

You got to be joking... the problem ridden and discontinued KM5D? Perhaps the Sony A100? I'd give it a miss too because images at high ISO are unacceptably noisy. Yes Minolta made some great lenses, the "beer can" being one of them, but so has Pentax. The Pentax A 70-210 f4 is just as good as the "beer can, and cheaper too on eBay.

Discontinued, that's why so cheap :bsmilie: Sony still servicing them, even give free service for the "1st shoot blank" problem, though it was some design fault of KM.

BTW, I have been using KM 5D for so long, why I didn't know about KM 5D is problem ridden (except occasional 1st shoot blank issue), and you know about it :dunno:

 

[jpcc]

Thanks for the suggestions.

Mmmm, 135/2.8 seems like a good addition.
In the old film days, I heard from some photogs that they use Contax G1/G2 with
fast, wide angle to shoot concert. But the key is to get close...

Any good second hand place to hunt second hand Pentax lens.

Usually I go to Peninsular (Camera Workshop ?) to look-see, look-see.

 

[dnaxe]

Actually I'm surprised you've even suggested the Nikon D40/D80(x) together with a 18-200VR (on a Pentax forum???) when the K100D/K10D can match both cameras just as well image quality wise and gets the job done at a lower price point. The Pentax SR system is already available and built-in the body, so there is no need for a VR lens (which don't come cheap). IMHO, the Nikon 18-200VR is a convenient all-in-one travel lens but not the best tool for a concert hall because of it's slow max f-stop at maximum zoom. Might as well recommend the excellent Pentax 50-200 which is much smaller, lots cheaper and has good image quality.

If the TS roughly knows the shooting distance, even an older Pentax or third party 135mm f2.8 tele can do the job. Fast enough for handheld shooting indoors with SR assist, compact and cheap. If not, a reasonably fast tele zoom is the best bet. An f2.8 tele zoom would be great but it will be heavy and it won't be compact.

I'm brand agnostic.

I think it should be stressed to the OP that he should try all options available, because actually the differences aren't huge.

Pentax is definitely the most cost-effective - but if, for example, the OP thinks that the control system on another camera feels better, or just likes the grip, that's fine too.

On lenses: the 18-200 isn't slower than the 50-200 at 200? And you get to take pictures of the entire orchestra without changing lenses.

 

[snapnut]

Thanks for the suggestions.

Mmmm, 135/2.8 seems like a good addition.
In the old film days, I heard from some photogs that they use Contax G1/G2 with
fast, wide angle to shoot concert. But the key is to get close...

Any good second hand place to hunt second hand Pentax lens.

Usually I go to Peninsular (Camera Workshop ?) to look-see, look-see.

Alvin has a P-M 135mm 3.5 for sale. Small and light, sharp lens with build-in hood (nice touch).
Mannual and a bit slower. I understand pentax has 2 models for P-M 135mm f2.8 ... with SMC and without...
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=263030&highlight=pentax

 

[southernoise]

i'd 2nd the 135mm f2.8 option if you can get one at a reasonable price.

shot these at a distance with my DL a while back.

 

[Galdor]

Discontinued, that's why so cheap :bsmilie: Sony still servicing them, even give free service for the "1st shoot blank" problem, though it was some design fault of KM.

BTW, I have been using KM 5D for so long, why I didn't know about KM 5D is problem ridden (except occasional 1st shoot blank issue), and you know about it :dunno:

Well, my KM5D is serving me well with no problem too. Not even the 1st shot blank issue. (touchwood) Seems like bro creampuff is a big fan of Pentax and he's been very supportive of the Brand. :thumbsup: Well, to each it's own, My passion towards KM (Sony) is just as great as his towards Pentax and I understand where he's coming from.

 

[creampuff]

Ha, ha, I was a long time Minolta fan... XE, XM, XD-7, SRT-102,...etc....so you will know my age. :embrass: Used Minoltas and later Nikons for my work a long time ago. Then jumped to the D70 when it first launched...:thumbsd: so many problems. That's why I shy away from Nikon and sell almost all my Nikon stuff. Anybody want to buy my last piece of Nikon 50 f1.8?
Still got my Pentax 67 (on long term loan to a friend) but got rid of my Pentax 645 a while back :bheart:

 

[Vulpix0r]

Ha, ha, I was a long time Minolta fan... XE, XM, XD-7, SRT-102,...etc....so you will know my age. :embrass: Used Minoltas and later Nikons for my work a long time ago. Then jumped to the D70 when it first launched...:thumbsd: so many problems. That's why I shy away from Nikon and sell almost all my Nikon stuff. Anybody want to buy my last piece of Nikon 50 f1.8?
Still got my Pentax 67 (on long term loan to a friend) but got rid of my Pentax 645 a while back :bheart:

Ah, my friend who got rid of his Pentax 645 regretted it big time also... He sold some really good lenses away, now he have to pay 2x the price to get it back...

 

[direwuff]

I'm brand agnostic.

I think it should be stressed to the OP that he should try all options available, because actually the differences aren't huge.

Pentax is definitely the most cost-effective - but if, for example, the OP thinks that the control system on another camera feels better, or just likes the grip, that's fine too.

On lenses: the 18-200 isn't slower than the 50-200 at 200? And you get to take pictures of the entire orchestra without changing lenses.

i don't think he said that 18-200 vr was slower. but the price difference is huge.

 

[fengwei]

Why not consider this http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=264817 and get a 70-210mm f4 (beercan) which cost about $400 only. Total cost is about $1100 and you get IS in the body. ISO 800 and 1600 is acceptable too.

Or better yet, get this one

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=265450


It'll cost you less than 1.1K, but it's alot better than the KM beercan, and you don't need to keep two systems

 

[Vulpix0r]

Or better yet, get this one

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=265450


It'll cost you less than 1.1K, it's alot better than the KM beercan, and you don't need to keep two systems

Poisonous! But weight...:hung:

 

[creampuff]

Or better yet, get this one

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=265450

It'll cost you less than 1.1K, but it's alot better than the KM beercan, and you don't need to keep two systems

Good lens but must surely budget for a monopod, if not you'll develop arms like Popeye the Sailor

 

[fengwei]

Poisonous! But weight...:hung:

Good lens but must surely budget for a monopod, if not you'll develop arms like Popeye the Sailor

Compare w/ the Pentax FA*80-200, it's not that heavy and big lah:

Sigma 70-200/2.8: 86.2mm X 184mm, 1,270g
Pentax 80-200/2.8: 88mm X 195mm, 1,510g

It is optically as good as the Pentax one, but at 1/3 of the cost