Need advice- Lense/Camera Combo

[dwhanson]

Hello all. I've graduated from a $150 point and shoot Olympus to a $300 point and shoot Olympus, and found that I'm interested enough in photography to take the next step. My budget at present is $2000-$2500, give or take a couple hundred. In the spring I'll have a little more.

My interest over the summer was photographing birds in the yard at the feeders. My immediate interest is in photographing local bands in small night clubs and honky tonks. The venues will be intimate. The distance from the band members will be from 30 feet to arms length, and lighting challenges will be all over the chart. In the spring I will be wanting to photograph bull riding events, most of which will be at indoor arenas at night. The distance from the riders and bulls could be up to 70 yards at times.

I've pretty well decided on the Nikon D7000 based on reviews I've read, and video reviews I've watched. It scores well in low light conditions. It is also in the budget range, since I'll still be needing a lens or two. I would accept advice on this choice if it seems there is a better way to go for the money.

So my question is this: is there a single lens I can buy that would satisfy the focal length and aperture needs in my areas of interest. I've looked at focal length comparisons online, but I don't have enough experience to know what distances the focal lengths will cover. Will a lens such as a 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 allow me to cover the bands and bull riders?

I know that f/2.8 would be better for the night clubs, but would f/3.5 do the job since I can get very close? Would 200mm get me close enough to a bull and rider at 180 feet to get a photo with good detail in decent lighting, or do I really want something that will zoom to 300mm?

I want to be able to photograph the bands in the clubs and get really great shots. When it comes to the bull riding events, I don't need the detail on a bead of sweat to stand out, but want to capture the rider gritting his teeth during the action.

My goal is to do a good job, and learn how to play great music with a medium quality guitar. There's a ways to go before my ability would out-distance this camera. If I can get one higher end lens to do the job, it would be great. If I could use two lower end lenses, that's fine. But if I have to choose, then the night club photography is the priority. I may have a money-making opportunity in this area that could pay for it all.

Hope this wasn't too much detail. Thank you in advance! Don

[RichardTaylor]

As far a lens focal lengths to cover a selected area - See the dimensional field of view calculator on this page (you will need to scroll down).

http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm


For shooting in low light you need fast lenses.

This tute on fast lenses may give you an idea.

Lenses #6 - Fast lenses

Closeness really doesn't come into it for capturing a technically correct exposed image.
F3.5 may meet your needs sometimes especially if you are willing to use a very high ISO however a f5.6 lens is virtually useless for shooting hand held or capturing action in low light.

I am a Canon shooter so I can't advise on individual Nikon lenses.

(1) For the bands I would be looking at a 24-XXmm F2.8 zoom as the minimum.
Even this may be too long when shooting real close.

(2) For band close ups from a distance and for the bull riding at night I would be looking at a 70-200 F2.8 at the bare minimum and even then it may not be long enough for the bull riding. (plug the numbers into the FOV calculator)
After that you are into long fast prime territory.

Hope this helps.

[Shokinen]

Hi Don,

I like post like yours because it gives us a good understanding of your current situation and where you are heading rather then just "what is the best lens for wedding" type a thing.

Here is a couple thing to consider and hopefully will help you as you don't have the equipment to experiment with yet. I have shoot several shows (some amateur and some professional) so I can bring you what I experimented.

Let's start with fast lenses:
I find (and that is only me) a lot of people are overrating the f/2.8s. When you read some articles/posts, you cannot even think about taking a picture without one. Guess what, we don't all have 4000$ to get the ultimate 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 and there is ways around this. Depending on the light you have to work with, you may not even be able to get a decent picture at f/2.8. My brother's band are often playing in bars where the lighting equipment is so so and I can't even take a descend picture at f/1.8...On the other hand, I covered an entire festival show using my D90 and my 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 (Buckingham en Fete - a set on Flickr).

The thing is you need to understand the light, know your equipment limits, and learn how to fully take advantage of softwares. You can push your photography so much further once you learn to work around those 3 things.

Now the camera:
The D7000 is a very nice camera for a serious amateur. Not too expensive, it's a good body for someone who want to push it further (using manual controls). On my D90, I can go up to ISO800 without even thinking about noise and apparently the new sensor on the D7000 is good up to ISO1600. This will help you especially with the slower lenses. You can go above ISO1600 but noise will start to appear and will be more difficult to get rid in post production (software) especially if you crop a lot or if your intent is to do large prints.

Just a couples years ago pros would have died for thoses specs... You just need to know how to take full advantage of them, therefore learn how to understanding how to properly capture the light with your equipment.

Focal lenght / what lenses:
The 18-200 cover a large range but this is not what I would look into (based on your budget and your goal to take pictures for shows). There is 2 big families: zooms and primes. Zooms are very convinient because you can change your focal lenght without changing the lenses but are way more expensive especially if you want a large aperture. Primes will get you the best image quality vs. the price but are diffcult to work with sometimes especially when things are moving fast (in a sense that you cannot frame properly) or you cannot move much around your subject. I tend to use my zooms for sports/wildlife and my primes for lanscape/portraits.

So, which one I would choose ? The lens I use the most is my 16-85mm /3.5-5.6. I always start with this one and change if I have to. When I need longuer reach, I pull out the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6. When I can move around and I can take my time, I use my 35mm f/1.8 or my 85mm f/1.8. If I need more light and I cannot move around ? Pass on to next point..

External flash:
I would consider a good flash such as the SB-700 (or used SB-600). Bring your own lightsource if you cannot control it hehehehe. Combine with a GarryFong Lighsphere, it saved my butt on several occasions. Keep in mind you cannot use it in some shows / don't want to use it to capture the light comming from the spots.

In summary, there is no one size fits all solution when it comes to music shows because you do not control your environement. What I recommend is a kit that gives you the ability to adapt. Something like the D7000 / 18-105 combo, 50mm f/1.8, SB-700 and a Garyfong Lighsphere. Many questions will also be answered as you start using your equipment and start noticing what you like, what you don't and how far you can push your current kit. Don't forget to learn how to use softwares such as Lightroom, etc. This is where you transform a nice picture into a beautiful picture.

Hope this helps

[bigben6]

my .02

Thought #1 -
$2400ish

D700 with 18-105mm kit lens - 1500
This is a great start, that lens is fantastic in good light, sharp across the full zoom range, and in a pinch you can use ISO to compensate for poor aperture options in low light.

Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 - 700
This gives you the reach past the kit lens and will keep you from having to use as much ISO bump.

35mm f/1.8 OR 50mm f/1.8
wich are both as close as makes no difference to 200 dollars will be super fast, and be tack sharp when your up close and personal and do not want to carry something heavy around, pick which ever suits your needs best.

This option would give you a fast zoom, a very fast prime, and a nice walk around and the ability to shoot from 18-200mm with good IQ, though you might have to compensate with ISO when using the kit lens. And the prime while very good is also limiting in it's own way.


Thought #2
$2450

d7000 body only - 1300
tamron 28-75 f/2.8 - 450
Tamron 70-200 F/2.8 - 700

With this option your walk around lens (tamron 28-75) does not have as much focal langth but it is much faster due to the f/2.8, it also covers both the 35mm and 50mm prime ranges though @ 2.8 not 1.8. You still get the reach of the 70-200,

This option gives you fast glass everywhere, though nothing stupid fast like the prime above, but it gives up some focal range going only from 28-200, it does allow you to shoot at all focal lengths @ f/2.8, and there is 5mm overlap between the two lenses (70mm-75mm) so there is no gap in your zoom options.

So there are a few options, if I had it to do myself, i would go with the 50 bucks more, a little less focal length on my walk around and faster lenses. I love my 18-105 for nice sunny days, but in low light it struggles, it sounds like your gonna be shooting int ALOT of low light, thus i think the 18-105 while great is not a good call for this application, which means in your bar setting you would have either 70-200mm or a prime around 50 or 35 which limits your ability if you cannot get up and move yourself easily.

Good advice above as well, hope this helps.

[mbrobich]

With that kind of budget, I would get the D7000 body, a 35mm 1.8 and the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 !!!!!!!

This would cover all of your needs with the best glass you can buy for low light(bands) and action shots(bullriders)

Just filled my basket at BH with this:

$799 Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM AF Lens for Nikon

$196 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G DX Lens

$1299 Nikon D7000 DSLR Camera (Body Only)

BHphotovideo.com


Get it and LIVE/LOVE photography like never before !!!!!!!!!!

[bigben6]

Originally Posted by mbrobich

With that kind of budget, I would get the D7000 body, a 35mm 1.8 and the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 !!!!!!!

Any reason you like the sigma version of the 70-200 over the tamron, just curious...

[dwhanson]

Thank you so much everyone. This is what I needed. A lot to study and learn. Gives me direction!

[mbrobich]

I am sure the Tamron is probably as good, just have read more positive reviews on the Sigma, never read/seen one on the Tamron sorry.

Originally Posted by bigben6

Any reason you like the sigma version of the 70-200 over the tamron, just curious...

[dwhanson]

Below you'll find the results of the advice and schooling I got here. I purchased:

Nikon D7000 with Nikkor 18-105mm kit lens
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM
Nikon SB-400 Speedlight Flash
Rode VideoMic Pro Compact shotgun mic
MC-DC2 Remote Release Cord (1 meter)
SanDisk Extreme Pro 64GB SDXC UHS-I Memory Card
SunPak Pro Carbon Fiber Pistol Grip Tripod
Fancy case to carry it all in

A little over the original budget. I decided to go for it now. One last question- what are the cheapest brand of UV and Circular Polarizing filters can I get some good use out of? I pretty well broke the bank on the rest of it.

Thanks again for all the guidance!

[Scottm]

Unless you have a compelling reason to place a UV filter on the front of your expensive glass to reduce the quality, avoid it. Many people merely use such filters to protect the front element of their lenses and suffer a degredation in quality wthout realising it.