A few beginner questions

[Guitarbloke]

Hi all,

I'm pretty much a complete beginner, so please excuse my long rambling and any incorrect terminology below hehe!

I was given a camera by my dad some time ago which I have finally decided to start using.

I'm a musician and so am keen to start taking live music photos (small venues like pubs) since that's where my passion lies.

The camera is a Canon EOS 20D, and just has the stock lens with it (Efs 18-55). I've just bought an online course through Groupon which promises to teach me the basics + photoshop, and I'm trying to devour as much info as I can online, but it seems like a real minefield of contradicting info everywhere I turn

The photos I've taken so far have been ok-ish, but not great due to most of the venues i visit having poor lighting. My camera only goes up to 1600 iso, although there is an option after that if I turn the wheel a bit further which is 'H', not sure what that is but it seems to help a bit - is this higher than 1600 iso, or am I messing with something that ought not be messed with?

A few weeks ago, I borrowed a canon 35mm f2 from my dad and it seemed to be much better than my stock lens for the darker shots, so I've now got one of these on order, however I was wondering whether there was anything else you could recommend for the type of photos I'll be taking? Money is a large factor unfortunately, so I can't really look at much more than £150-200 for a lens.

A few sites I've seen mention getting a telephoto lens, but these seem expensive and also I'm wondering whether the ability to zoom in so close is necessary in a small venue when I'm frequently within a few feet of the band?

Would you recommend a lens hood for indoor work? I don't have one but again some folk have suggested getting one (but not explained why this would help indoors), as well as something called a polarizer filter (?). In your opinions, are all of these things useful to have our would I be better saving the money towards a flash or different lens? Also re lenses - are the third party lenses I've seen like Sigma worth the money, or am I better off sticking with canon since I have a canon camera?

Lastly, I recently returned from holiday and noticed that the blue sky shots have spots in them, I'm guessing dust in the camera. Is this an easy thing to clean or will it be a repair centre job?

Thanks in advance for your help, and sorry for such a long first post!

 

[Surrey Weddings]

i'd spend money on training first...

 

[Guitarbloke]

Thanks for the advice.

 

[MJWC1]

The 35mm will give you a lot more possibilities than the kit lens. Keep experimenting with the new lens when it arrives. If your finances can stretch to a 50mm f1.8 (they are quite cheap and you might find a good second hand one) that together with the 35mm will probably cover everything you need, at least for a while.

I don't know Canons, but assume H effectively pushes the ISO up to 3200 (my Nikon has something similar). You will introduce a lot of noise into the photo, but if it gets you the shot that's fine. It doesn't hurt to experiment anyway and noise in live band photos is not necessarily a bad thing (no bad puns about noisy bands and noisy photos, though).

 

[russellsnr]

Hi, Welcome to the forum.
I really do not understand why you bought a course from an on-line source when most everything you need to no can found on this site and many others, there are thousands of articles on all aspects of photography. As a beginner don't try and run before you can walk, leave Photoshop to one side and start with an application that is not so intensive, Photoshop Elements or Lightroom IMO would be a better place to start, there are forums out there for both these apps that will answer any question you want to ask if you cannot find the answer here. On lenses, remember you will not always be in a small room at some point you will wish that you had a longer focal length also as you are inside maybe a lens with image stabilization again just do a search here or on the web for the meaning of IS. Inside you don't really need a polarizer unless you are shooting through class (it will get rid of the reflections from the class). I am no expert and someone else will give advice.
Russ

 

[Furtim]

Hi all,

I'm pretty much a complete beginner, so please excuse my long rambling and any incorrect terminology below hehe!

Welcome!

I was given a camera by my dad some time ago which I have finally decided to start using.

I'm a musician and so am keen to start taking live music photos (small venues like pubs) since that's where my passion lies.

The camera is a Canon EOS 20D, and just has the stock lens with it (Efs 18-55). I've just bought an online course through Groupon which promises to teach me the basics + photoshop, and I'm trying to devour as much info as I can online, but it seems like a real minefield of contradicting info everywhere I turn

The photos I've taken so far have been ok-ish, but not great due to most of the venues i visit having poor lighting. My camera only goes up to 1600 iso, although there is an option after that if I turn the wheel a bit further which is 'H', not sure what that is but it seems to help a bit - is this higher than 1600 iso, or am I messing with something that ought not be messed with?

As MJWC1 has said, 'H' is effectively 3,200 ISO in your case - The reason why it is noted as 'H' rather than the number is in acknowledgement that it's pushing the camera to its limits, so the image may have quite a lot of noise (coloured 'speckles'). That said, a noisy image is better than no image so don't be afraid to us it!

A few weeks ago, I borrowed a canon 35mm f2 from my dad and it seemed to be much better than my stock lens for the darker shots, so I've now got one of these on order, however I was wondering whether there was anything else you could recommend for the type of photos I'll be taking? Money is a large factor unfortunately, so I can't really look at much more than £150-200 for a lens.

The 50 f/1.8 may be another option if you want that little bit more light, and small amount of extra 'reach'.

A few sites I've seen mention getting a telephoto lens, but these seem expensive and also I'm wondering whether the ability to zoom in so close is necessary in a small venue when I'm frequently within a few feet of the band?

Given your proximity to the band, I can't see this being a priority to be honest. I'd not bother looking at longer focal lengths until you've used the lenses you already have and find you are missing shots because you don't have the reach.

Would you recommend a lens hood for indoor work? I don't have one but again some folk have suggested getting one (but not explained why this would help indoors),

Again, probably not. Unless there are strong light sources hitting the front of the lens from the side (usually the sun when outside), I can't see a real problem with flare. The only other reason you might consider one is for protection - if you are going to get jostled, or run the risk of the camera bouncing around off people around you, if may give you some protection, but at the focal lengths you're talking about, I doubt the hood would be deep enough to make any real difference.

as well as something called a polarizer filter (?).

It's unlikely that any of the light sources used on stage are polarised, so all the filter will do is reduce the amount of light entering the lens, making your situation somewhat worse. You might consider it if there are a lot of reflective surfaces (as reflecting light causes it to become polarised, and hence can be reduced by the filter).

In your opinions, are all of these things useful to have our would I be better saving the money towards a flash or different
lens?

I would recommend saving your money until you've have the chance to exhaust what you can do with your current kit. Then you will have a better idea of what, if anything, is holding you back - and then spend the money on that.

Also re lenses - are the third party lenses I've seen like Sigma worth the money, or am I better off sticking with canon since I have a canon camera?

Typically you'll get what you pay for! An expensive Sigma is better than a cheap Canon and visa versa. I'd recommend looking at the reviews of individual lenses when it comes time to spend your money as there is no general rule here. I suppose theoretically, there is a chance that a 3rd party lens such as Sigma may not work with a future Canon body (Sigma have to work out how to make their lenses work with Canon camera, Canon don't tell them), but it really is a very very very small risk.

Lastly, I recently returned from holiday and noticed that the blue sky shots have spots in them, I'm guessing dust in the camera. Is this an easy thing to clean or will it be a repair centre job?

You guess correctly; it is relatively easy to clean but equally you can make a mess of it and completely screw up your camera! Read up about that specifically and make your own call based on your confidence level.

Thanks in advance for your help, and sorry for such a long first post!

That's what we're here for!

 

[Guitarbloke]

Thanks very much for the advice and suggestions guys, very much appreciated

I'll hold back on the polarizers and hoods etc for the moment, and see how I get on once the 35mm arrives.

Last question - about the 50mm f/1.8 - I've seen a canon one on amazon for about £80 - this seems suspiciously cheap - however the customer reviews are very good (though they cite build quality being a slight concern), is this really too good to be true, because I'm on the brink of snapping it up lol?

 

[steve_lyt]

one to considder in the future is a 70-200 2.8 , the sigma has servered me wull , in live events, and also a 24-70 2.8 has helped ,

 

[Deleted member 34016]

I agree 24-70 f2.8 has good light gathering qualities or as a cheaper option go for a 50mm f1.8 much cheaper and opens up to f1.8

Les

 

[Guitarbloke]

Cheers guys Another quick question - is it normal to throw away far more photos than you keep? I'm finding I bin about 80% of my shots and only have a few which end up passable - maybe this comes with practice?

Here are a few shots I've taken using the borrowed 35mm lens - any tips you can offer? Anything glaringly obvious I'm doing wrong? (These were taken at 1600-3200 iso)

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0420.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0374.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_03712.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0245.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/Ben6a.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0173.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0043.jpg

 

[Phil V]

Cheers guys Another quick question - is it normal to throw away far more photos than you keep? I'm finding I bin about 80% of my shots and only have a few which end up passable - maybe this comes with practice?

Here are a few shots I've taken using the borrowed 35mm lens - any tips you can offer? Anything glaringly obvious I'm doing wrong? (These were taken at 1600-3200 iso)

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0420.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0374.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_03712.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0245.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/Ben6a.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0173.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/guitarbloke_photos/Band Shots/IMG_0043.jpg

Yes, it's normal.

As the quality goes up, the quality of the stuff you throw away goes up, the ratios don't change that much though. Pretty much the same as being a musician.

 

[magicaxeman]

The 50mm F1.8 is one of the best bargains out there, ok so the build quality isnt the best in the world but it takes really good pictures.

Hoods for both lenses are a good idea, they not only cut out stray light but also protect the front elements of the lens as well.

 

[einaroh]

Last question - about the 50mm f/1.8 - I've seen a canon one on amazon for about £80 - this seems suspiciously cheap - however the customer reviews are very good (though they cite build quality being a slight concern), is this really too good to be true, because I'm on the brink of snapping it up lol?

Thats just how cheap it is . Given your budget I would just buy either the 35mm or 50mm. The extra reach the 50mm gives you is equal to taking 1-2 steps forward.

I would not recommend spending money on training, the internet has a lot of sites (including this one) with almost all the info you need to take your first steps.

 

[Matt_C]

I disagree with the comments that training is a waste of money. I think for the cost of the Groupon course having access to someone who can teach you the basic fundamentals and you can get practical demonstrations from is invaluable.

I've been doing a course with a digital outfit in Manchester and the photography session immediately bolstered my photos in a way that looking online hadn't. And importantly, it also boosts confidence immediately.