Short telephoto for theatre photography

PlacidoD · Mar 18, 2016

I have gave my new XT-10 an outing at an opera dress rehearsal this week using the 18-55 f/2.8-4 lens. Previously I have used Nikon SLR with f2.8 zoom or primes on tripods and monopods to produce shots like these:

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-2/p593238053-5.jpg

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-2/p585013771-5.jpg

Given that I have a principal role in the production I was rushing from auditorium to back stage but got some good results that I very quickly and roughly processed shooting jpeg at ISO 3200 so as to get them out to people overnight:

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/p550116526

MY QUESTION:

Where do I go now with additional lenses? I was looking at the 16-55 f/2.8 but it has no image stabilisation(??!!??) So I will gain one stop at the telephoto end but lose a couple of stops without OIS. That means going back to a tripod and/or monopod. I really enjoyed the complete novelty and freedom of being hand held for this shoot and the ease of processing was welcome. With the Nikons (a D80 and a D50) I was shooting RAW and pushing in post-processing and that took me an age mainly combating the noise.

In future I will be comfortable using ISO 6400 and jpeg

So what do I gain by going for the constant f/2.8? Very little I suspect? I can probably capture some movement at the tele end on a monopod but equally I could switch to ISO 12800 to up the shutter speed one stop then go back to ISO 6400 for the rest using the f/2.8-4

Is there any suggestion that they will add OIS to the 16-55 down the line?

Chris

AlbertTheLazy · Mar 18, 2016

PlacidoD said:
I have gave my new XT-10 an outing at an opera dress rehearsal this week using the 18-55 f/2.8-4 lens. Previously I have used Nikon SLR with f2.8 zoom or primes on tripods and monopods to produce shots like these:

Please post images as pat of your post. It makes life easier for us and a number of DPR regulars refuse to click on links like these.

PlacidoD said:
...

Where do I go now with additional lenses? I was looking at the 16-55 f/2.8 but it has no image stabilisation(??!!??)

Stabilization only helps with static subjects. You can see this in one of your shots where a moving hand is blurred.

PlacidoD said:
So I will gain one stop at the telephoto end but lose a couple of stops without OIS.

That means going back to a tripod and/or monopod. I really enjoyed the complete novelty and freedom of being hand held for this shoot and the ease of processing was welcome.

I only ever shoot stage shows hand held. I never use stabilized lenses and one of my most-used lenses is an adapted Nikkor 105mm f:2.5 with manual focus.

PlacidoD said:
With the Nikons (a D80 and a D50) I was shooting RAW and pushing in post-processing and that took me an age mainly combating the noise.

In future I will be comfortable using ISO 6400 and jpeg

So what do I gain by going for the constant f/2.8? Very little I suspect?

I suspect you are right.

In your position I'd consider the 56mm or 90mm Fujinons.

PlacidoD said:
I can probably capture some movement at the tele end on a monopod but equally I could switch to ISO 12800

That starts getting nasty!

PlacidoD said:
to up the shutter speed one stop then go back to ISO 6400 for the rest using the f/2.8-4

Is there any suggestion that they will add OIS to the 16-55 down the line?

Not in the near future!

PlacidoD said:
Chris

GilBarib · Mar 18, 2016

Hi Chris

Have you though about the 50-140, f2.8 and great OIS

Gilles

GilBarib

Explore GilBarib’s 7,604 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Advent1sam · Mar 18, 2016

PlacidoD said:
I have gave my new XT-10 an outing at an opera dress rehearsal this week using the 18-55 f/2.8-4 lens. Previously I have used Nikon SLR with f2.8 zoom or primes on tripods and monopods to produce shots like these:

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-2/p593238053-5.jpg

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/img/s/v-2/p585013771-5.jpg

Given that I have a principal role in the production I was rushing from auditorium to back stage but got some good results that I very quickly and roughly processed shooting jpeg at ISO 3200 so as to get them out to people overnight:

http://placidod.zenfolio.com/p550116526

MY QUESTION:

Where do I go now with additional lenses? I was looking at the 16-55 f/2.8 but it has no image stabilisation(??!!??) So I will gain one stop at the telephoto end but lose a couple of stops without OIS. That means going back to a tripod and/or monopod. I really enjoyed the complete novelty and freedom of being hand held for this shoot and the ease of processing was welcome. With the Nikons (a D80 and a D50) I was shooting RAW and pushing in post-processing and that took me an age mainly combating the noise.

In future I will be comfortable using ISO 6400 and jpeg

So what do I gain by going for the constant f/2.8? Very little I suspect? I can probably capture some movement at the tele end on a monopod but equally I could switch to ISO 12800 to up the shutter speed one stop then go back to ISO 6400 for the rest using the f/2.8-4

Is there any suggestion that they will add OIS to the 16-55 down the line?

Chris

How wide do you need to go? the 50-140 and 55-200 are the logical choices, the 55-200 is f4@100mm and only f4.4 at 135(200mm ff)

PlacidoD · Mar 18, 2016

AlbertInFrance said:
PlacidoD said:

I have gave my new XT-10 an outing at an opera dress rehearsal this week using the 18-55 f/2.8-4 lens. Previously I have used Nikon SLR with f2.8 zoom or primes on tripods and monopods to produce shots like these:

Click to expand...

Please post images as pat of your post. It makes life easier for us and a number of DPR regulars refuse to click on links like these.

Noted

AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:

...

Where do I go now with additional lenses? I was looking at the 16-55 f/2.8 but it has no image stabilisation(??!!??)

Click to expand...

Stabilization only helps with static subjects. You can see this in one of your shots where a moving hand is blurred.

I appreciate that but I am used to capturing the static moment and binning shots where I do not succeed. Several of those shot the other day are 1/20th and perfectly serviceable. My hand is not that steady that I could hand hold that without OIS.

AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:

So I will gain one stop at the telephoto end but lose a couple of stops without OIS.

That means going back to a tripod and/or monopod. I really enjoyed the complete novelty and freedom of being hand held for this shoot and the ease of processing was welcome.

Click to expand...

I only ever shoot stage shows hand held. I never use stabilized lenses and one of my most-used lenses is an adapted Nikkor 105mm f:2.5 with manual focus.

Not sure I want to go down that road (MF)!

AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:

With the Nikons (a D80 and a D50) I was shooting RAW and pushing in post-processing and that took me an age mainly combating the noise.

In future I will be comfortable using ISO 6400 and jpeg

So what do I gain by going for the constant f/2.8? Very little I suspect?

Click to expand...

I suspect you are right.

In your position I'd consider the 56mm or 90mm Fujinons.

That is where I started my thinking - I think the 56mm and not the APD.

AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:

I can probably capture some movement at the tele end on a monopod but equally I could switch to ISO 12800

Click to expand...

That starts getting nasty!

Thanks for that! I was wondering how far I could go before it got ugly!

AlbertTheLazy said:
AlbertTheLazy said:

to up the shutter speed one stop then go back to ISO 6400 for the rest using the f/2.8-4

Is there any suggestion that they will add OIS to the 16-55 down the line?

Click to expand...

Not in the near future!

AlbertTheLazy said:

Chris

Click to expand...

--
Albert
(The one in France)
Every photograph is an abstraction from reality.

My set up with Nikon was 24-70 f/2.8 on one body and 80-200 f/2.8 on the other with both mounted on a T bar on a substantial tripod. Then I would swap out the 24-70 onto a monopod and/or change to a 50mm f/1.4 (sometimes borrowing a third body to allow me to shoot with three cams)

Thanks for your help!

Kalinus · Mar 18, 2016

I vote for the 55-200. F4,8 at the end f4 at the middle, you don't lose even a full stop compared with your zoom so probably iso doesn't push up if you handheld an static object/subject

notdarkyet · Mar 18, 2016

I currently use the 55-200 for Concert and dance photos. I would think that, or the 56 or 90 prime is a good way to go. Here is sample of Ballet using the 55-200,

http://www.notdarkyetphotography.com/Dance/Ballet-Palm-Beach-the-Meyer/

PeaceKeeper · Mar 18, 2016

In your position with some money to spend I'd go with the 90mm and 50-140.

Less money? 55-200.

This is assuming the major shortcoming of your 18-55 is reach.

MrFoopy · Mar 18, 2016

I know it's not a "short" telephoto, but the 50-140 f/2.8 is a fabulous lens for theater photography. OIS seems important to you and this lens has about the best OIS I have ever used. Rent one and try it out at the next show. Or don't rent one, unless you're prepared to want to buy it.

Keith Williamson · Mar 18, 2016

They are really good photos which I am sure the cast will love.

As for a complementary lens to the one you have, that depends on whether you want to get closer in to the action or not.

Since you have a lot of experience in this type of photography, you will already know the pitfalls of having the wrong lens on for particular shots. Whilst you can crop a wider shot, you cannot add to a close telephoto shot.

notdarkyet · Mar 18, 2016

MrFoopy said:
I know it's not a "short" telephoto, but the 50-140 f/2.8 is a fabulous lens for theater photography. OIS seems important to you and this lens has about the best OIS I have ever used. Rent one and try it out at the next show. Or don't rent one, unless you're prepared to want to buy it.

MrFoopy, I am definetly considering upgrading to this lens from my current 55-200mm. Only bad thing I have read about this lens, some complain it makes a lot of noise?

MrFoopy · Mar 19, 2016

notdarkyet said:
MrFoopy said:

I know it's not a "short" telephoto, but the 50-140 f/2.8 is a fabulous lens for theater photography. OIS seems important to you and this lens has about the best OIS I have ever used. Rent one and try it out at the next show. Or don't rent one, unless you're prepared to want to buy it.

Click to expand...

MrFoopy, I am definetly considering upgrading to this lens from my current 55-200mm. Only bad thing I have read about this lens, some complain it makes a lot of noise?

notdarkyet · Mar 19, 2016

MrFoopy said:
notdarkyet said:

MrFoopy said:

I know it's not a "short" telephoto, but the 50-140 f/2.8 is a fabulous lens for theater photography. OIS seems important to you and this lens has about the best OIS I have ever used. Rent one and try it out at the next show. Or don't rent one, unless you're prepared to want to buy it.

Click to expand...

MrFoopy, I am definetly considering upgrading to this lens from my current 55-200mm. Only bad thing I have read about this lens, some complain it makes a lot of noise?

Click to expand...

notdarkyet · Mar 21, 2016

MrFoopy said:
notdarkyet said:

MrFoopy said:

I know it's not a "short" telephoto, but the 50-140 f/2.8 is a fabulous lens for theater photography. OIS seems important to you and this lens has about the best OIS I have ever used. Rent one and try it out at the next show. Or don't rent one, unless you're prepared to want to buy it.

Click to expand...

MrFoopy, I am definetly considering upgrading to this lens from my current 55-200mm. Only bad thing I have read about this lens, some complain it makes a lot of noise?

Click to expand...

Kalinus · Mar 23, 2016

I think 55-200 and even 90mm feel bulky on a mirrorless system. The equivalent lens on canon are cheaper, smaller, and even faster ( 85mm 1.8 for example) It's a shame, we'll have to wait to the lens roadmap to be actualized. Until then I would go with the 55-200!

bowportes · Mar 23, 2016

The 16-55 F2.8 and 56mm are a nice combo if you tend to shoot wide, normal, or short telephoto. I don't miss the OIS on either lens.

Try shooting RAW + JPEG at ISO 1600 and using the EC dial to underexpose (if necessary) in order to boost your shutter speed. You can then reprocess the best one's quickly in camera, pushing exposure digitally to brighten the shot. You'll get sharp, relatively noise-free images that way.

historianx · Mar 24, 2016

'nuff said

Search

Short telephoto for theatre photography

PlacidoD

New member

AlbertTheLazy

Veteran Member

GilBarib

Forum Enthusiast

GilBarib

Advent1sam

Veteran Member

PlacidoD

New member

Kalinus

Well-known member

notdarkyet

Forum Enthusiast

PeaceKeeper

Forum Enthusiast

MrFoopy

Forum Enthusiast

Keith Williamson

Leading Member

notdarkyet

Forum Enthusiast

MrFoopy

Forum Enthusiast

notdarkyet

Forum Enthusiast

notdarkyet

Forum Enthusiast

Kalinus

Well-known member

bowportes

Veteran Member

historianx

Guest

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts