Night club lenses - canon 350d - Stigmas...(NeWbIe ALERT!!!)

S

steveOooo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
65
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi:wave:, i am going to be doing some shooting in night clubs:thumbs:, im currently bidding on a second hand body only canon 350d (i understand the lens that comes with it wont be any good for night club shots):bang:

im led to believe i need a wide angle for ** group shots and low aperture to take in as much light as possible. The two lenses im considering are as follows: (- my understanding of each lens)

1. Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 - wide with low aperture (is the F2.8 the aperture or focal zoom?)

2. SIGMA 30mm F 1.4 EX DC HSM For Canon - Not so wide but lower aperture

3. Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC HSM - uber uber wide but higher aperture so less light.

Note: i plan to get the speedlite 430ex flash gun so for ** group shots not a problem but for WS of crowds i would need a low aperture lens?
:bonk:

Note: i have over used animated smilies... :gag:
 
so from my list which would be best? do i go for really wide with high aperture or not so wide with low aperture? Im leaning towards number 3 cos it will fit in a group of people at close range BUT it might be too wide? and the aperture maybe to low... AHHHHH a head ****

1. Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 -

2. SIGMA 30mm F 1.4 EX DC HSM

3. Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC HSM -
 
steveOooo said:
so from my list which would be best? do i go for really wide with high aperture or not so wide with low aperture? Im leaning towards number 3 cos it will fit in a group of people at close range BUT it might be too wide? and the aperture maybe to low... AHHHHH a head ****

1. Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 -

2. SIGMA 30mm F 1.4 EX DC HSM

3. Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 EX DC HSM -
Click to expand...

Personally, I would like the versatility of a zoom in these situations, but whether the speed of the prime is a good trade off may be a factor.
Also, have a read of the following for settings etc:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=115435

Another mention of the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 here, It's a superb lens and around the same price as your selections. :)
 
Of those three I'd go with the (1), as the zoom will give you some versatility over a prime and it's unlikely you'll need to go as wide as (3).
 
The big question for me would be flash. If you can use it, life will be very much easier. If the camera comes with the kit lens, this will be fine. Even if it's the non-IS version, it's pretty sharp at f/5.6 or so, and the 18-55mm focal length range is probably as good as you'll get. I would then invest in a good flash, preferably a Canon 580EX, and put a good reflector on it. Lumiquest Quik is excellent and very versatile, but maybe a bit cumbersome, in which case try a Sto-Fen or Lumiquest Ultrabounce.

If you need to shoot by available light, then aperture is everything. You'll probably not do better than the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on that score, though the fifty-fifty 50mm f/1.8 is very cheap, if a bit long for a lot of things. But depth of field is extremely thin at f/1.4. You can use this creatively of course, but if you shoot groups then it will be almost impossible to get more than one person sharp.

Perhaps the best option is one of the 17-50-ish zooms like photstar uses. Decent aperture, good quality, and works well with flash of course. Pick of the bunch is Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8, at a price ;)
 
A lot of the guys over at tilllate.com (who I work for also) use the kit lens, it is fine for in clubs as typically you dont want to be using a really low aperture as this can create DoF issues where one person is in focus but the other isnt etc.

Generally the trick is to use something around f/4-5.6 and then use a flash (like the 430 you mentioned or even the popup) and drag the shutter speed to something like 1/3s so that you freeze the subject when the flash pops but then absorbs more ambient light in the rest of the time that the shutter is open.

:D
 
I use the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 often for gigs but using ambient lighting is always a problem. Its about the best you will do without going to a prime lens or over £1000. May not be wide enough for groups unless youve got room to back up. Personally I use flash when possible and go up on the F stops to give me a deeper depth of field.
 
steveOooo said:
Sorry, newbie:bonk:... iso - higher the number, the slower the lens?

any reccomendations?
Click to expand...

ISO is a measure of the sensitivity of the sensor. ISO400 needs twice as much light as ISO800. Lowest ISO is highest quality, higher ISO increases noise. Higher ISO usually makes photography easier, particularly in relation to short shutter speeds to freeze any movement of the camera or subject.

Fast and Slow are terms used to describe lenses and shutter speeds. It's photographers' slang and can get confusing. A fast lens has a physically big, wide aperture and a low f/number, it passes more light and can produce brighter images, and shallow depth of field. Slow lenses are the opposite.
 
Just goes to show there are many ways to skin a cat, I go for the complete opposite. D700 with a 24-70mm f/2.8 at 2.8 or 3.3 (make sure groups of people are generaly level and not all over the place), very high ISO and fairly high shutter with a small iTTL blip of fill flash.

Freezes the action well and doesnt give ghosting or blur.

6510643810a10219707132l.jpg

6510643810a10219706572l.jpg

6510643810a10154559969l.jpg

6510643810a10219732707l.jpg

6510643810a10219730453l.jpg

6510643810a10219730955l.jpg

6510643810a10231467642l.jpg

6510643810a10219705235l.jpg

7747575790a10462798366l.jpg

7747575790a10462798561l.jpg


R.
 
steveOooo said:
so the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 is wider angle than 18-50mm? and i take it they both do 2.8 which means alot of light is let in. ?
Click to expand...

Sigma don't currently list a 17-35mm f/2.8-4 lens, but if they did, 17mm is wider than 18mm so, yes, fractionally.

F/2.8 is quite a fast lens and lets a lot of light in, but some lenses are only f/2.8 at the wide end, and they reduce to, say, f/4 at the longer focal length setting. F/2.8 lets in twice as much light as f/4, but continuing with that theme, f/2 is twice as bright as f/2.8, and f/1.4 is twice as bright again (the relationship between f/numbers is 1.4 - the square root of 2 - so 2.8 x 1.4 = 4). Put another way, f/1.4 lets in 8 times more light than f/4.
 
steveOooo said:
so the 17-35mm f/2.8-4 is wider angle than 18-50mm? and i take it they both do 2.8 which means alot of light is let in. ?
Click to expand...

Correct although the 18-50 is constant f/2.8 throughout the entire zoom range. So you can shoot the low aperature whatever the zoom whereas the 17-35 is f/2.8 at the 17mm end but rises to f4 at the 35mm end.
The difference in zoom is 1 mm which is negligible so personally I'd go for the 18-50mm OR have a look at the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8!
 
Thanks everyone, once ive played with the supplied lens (55mm canon) i shall venture towards 17mm-35mm f2.8
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top