Camera for events

NikonsandVstroms

One of my friends asked me about what type of SLR and lenses to get for doing event photography specifically barmitzvahs to start at least. Her budget is 1200, so my thoughts were for a consumer body, nice lens may be a little greater range than a kit lens but faster, flash.

I don't know much about flash is offhand but my initial thoughts for a body and lens combination were

A Nikon D80 and a 16 to 85 VR

Olympus E520 and the 14 to 54

Any other ideas?

swintonphoto

I think those are both great ideas.

Art Scott

Maybe a used nikon body like D70 ( I really like bodies that accept CF cards as I do not like SD, Micro SD and such........ tooo dang small...to easy to drop and lose).....and a Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 (this will be on one of my new bodies when I make my leap from KM to nikon, unless I go Full Frame from the get go)....right now I have the 24-70f2.8 on one body and it is just not quite wide enuff and the body has a 70-210 f2.8 Sigma.....really great sharp lenses and could move up with me to a full frame body (the 24-70 / 70-210 is what could move up with me)......but for weddings and other events these could be ideal lenses in most cases especially with off camera flash.....
As for flash.....take a look at Sigmas 500 series of flashes....good build reliable abd not nearly as expensive as Nikon flash units.

TonyL

If you were to go the olympus route and she has only 1200 to spend then you should get the 510, the 14-54 and the fl50 flash. That will put you close to the mark. The 14-54mm is a great piece of glass.

davidweaver

I'll let y'all figure out the body.
A big plug for the Tameron 17-50mm lens. On A nikon <D700 body you get a 25-75 effective zoom range on a super sharp lens. You'll love this lens after a while too. Get a bright piece of glass as you will be indoors!

I'm a Nikon body shooter. The top end Oly body is very nice but falls out of your budget. Oly has some sweet glass too.
Cheers,
David

Miguel Delinquento

Go lightweight
Quality-wise it seems like all DSLR bodies are more than good for event work. I would suggest that your friend choose a lightweight body and lenses. Once she attaches a flash and bracket the handling characteristics change and it takes awhile for newer photogs to get in shape to shlep the setup around for hours.
I purchased the above mentioned Tamron f2.8 17-50mm for event work. The optical quality is good enough for events, though for art I'd use something else. A common issue to a few platforms (don't know about Olympus) is that the AF is dodgy and is only accurate 60% and this seems true. What helps significantly is using an AF-assist beam if your camera and flash provide that function.

M

swintonphoto

cadguru wrote:

The 14-54mm is a great piece of glass.

So true! The 14-54mm lens is - in my opinion - the best bang for the buck high quality zoom anywhere. Simply superb.
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/33/cat/15

Manfr3d

Those are good ideas!

I use a (old) Canon 10D + Tamron 17-50mm/2.8 lens +
Flash (with warming gel) for this type of shooting.

davidweaver

Miguel Delinquento wrote:

...I purchased the above mentioned Tamron f2.8 17-50mm for event work. The optical quality is good enough for events, though for art I'd use something else. ...

Wow...you should take it back if that is your opinion. The 17-50 is sharper than my 12-24 Nikkor DX and it is is the same glass (and factory) as the 17-55 Nikkor. As for 'art' I've a bunch of happy customers that bought work I shot with a wide angle diopter lens attached to a Coolpix 5000. :-)

Cheers!
David

ziggy53

davidweaver wrote:

Wow...you should take it back if that is your opinion. The 17-50 is sharper than my 12-24 Nikkor DX and it is is the same glass (and factory) as the 17-55 Nikkor. As for 'art' I've a bunch of happy customers that bought work I shot with a wide angle diopter lens attached to a Coolpix 5000. :-)

Cheers!
David

While the Tamron and the Nikon 17-50mm lenses both have very good glass, the construction is very different.

The Nikon is 14 elements in 10 groups including 3 ED and 3 aspherical glass elements.

The Tamron is 16 elements in 13 groups including 2 aspherical elements, 1 LD (Low Dispersion) glass element, 1 XR (Extra Refractive) element.

The Nikon has a 9 bladed diaphagm and the Tamron is 7 bladed.

Trying to compare these lenses with the statement "same glass (and factory)" is probably not very fair.

Miguel Delinquento

David,
I'm probably about as curious about the reasoning behind your words as you are about mine.
First, there is zero reason for me to return a lens that meets my requirements for shooting a corporate event. Unlike, say fine art, the primary objective for my work here is to capture happy and productive looking people within the frame. Sharpness matters, but lighting does too and the f 2.8 enables that quite well.
It's great when a lens is sharp, and the Tamron 17-50mm is one of my purely sharpest lenses, but sharpness is one of several criteria I use to evaluate a lens. For corporate events basic sharpness is important, but so is skin tone rendering.
For my fine artwork other factors including color rendition, contrast, texture discernment, and bokeh matter as much as--and sometimes moreso than sharpness.
I must admit to not understanding your logic behind the claim about the lens being " the same glass (and factory)" as Nikon. Even if this is accurate, so what? There is a process in manufacturing engineering called "design" that tends to strongly influence the quality of the final product. I doubt that Nikon and Tamron use the same design on two lenses of differing focal lengths. By your logic, since the majority of DSLR lenses come from glass blanks sold by Hoya, they all must possess the same qualities in final form.
I'm glad your tools work for your production of fine art. One thing I love about art is that what works for you can be totally different than what works for others and it really doesn't matter.

M

davidweaver wrote:

Wow...you should take it back if that is your opinion. The 17-50 is sharper than my 12-24 Nikkor DX and it is is the same glass (and factory) as the 17-55 Nikkor. As for 'art' I've a bunch of happy customers that bought work I shot with a wide angle diopter lens attached to a Coolpix 5000. :-)

Cheers!
David

davidweaver

Ziggy,

toss me a link to the construction specs for both lenses. Neither Nikon nor Tamron provided that much info on what I could find. I've been told by a reliable source that they are identical except for the blades and weatherproofing. I do believe you.

Thanks for the correction. I want to pass it down my line of information now. :-)

That said I've taken shots with both lenses and for me, the Tameron is a fantastic lens and just as sharp as the 17-55 nikkor. As I own the 12-24DX nikkor I can say that the Tameron 17-50 is sharper enough for my editors to actually comment on the pics I've taken with it compared with the 12-24dx. All they see is image quality and they don't know (or care) what lens it is.

ziggy53 wrote:

While the Tamron and the Nikon 17-50mm lenses both have very good glass, the construction is very different.

The Nikon is 14 elements in 10 groups including 3 ED and 3 aspherical glass elements.

The Tamron is 16 elements in 13 groups including 2 aspherical elements, 1 LD (Low Dispersion) glass element, 1 XR (Extra Refractive) element.

The Nikon has a 9 bladed diaphagm and the Tamron is 7 bladed.

Trying to compare these lenses with the statement "same glass (and factory)" is probably not very fair.

davidweaver

Miguel Delinquento wrote:

...There is a process in manufacturing engineering called "design" that tends to strongly influence the quality of the final product....

LMAO. Lots of glass and a fair amount of 'pro' glass that bears the Nikon logo is made by contract manufacturers. Much of that glass 'design' is made by contract designers. Really. Your post is still making me laugh. Thanks for that!

No one gives a rat's ass about your or my gear when they buy a picture and I agree with your statement about that.
BTW: Manufacturing and Design are completely separate phases of the process so I don't agree with you at all there.

Thanks for the reply.

ziggy53

davidweaver wrote:

Ziggy,

toss me a link to the construction specs for both lenses. Neither Nikon nor Tamron provided that much info on what I could find. I've been told by a reliable source that they are identical except for the blades and weatherproofing. I do believe you.

...

I get my information from the source:

Tamron 17-50mm, f2.8:

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/1750_diII_a016.asp

Nikon 17-55mm, f2.8:

http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Camera-Lenses/2147/AF-S-DX-Zoom-NIKKOR-17-55mm-f/2.8G-IF-ED.html

Please bookmark these sites because I will never help you find something again that you could have so easily found on your own.

davidweaver

ziggy53 wrote:

Please bookmark these sites because I will never help you find something again that you could have so easily found on your own.

As Jar-Jar would say....how whoood. :-)

I am properly corrected about the same glass, same factory. The nikkor and Tamron are not the same lens. Okay

I already visited those sites. And I went looking a a few others.

Your reference for Nikon says:
"Rounded diaphragm to make out-of-focus elements appear more natural."
I had to go to the Lens Manual:
http://www.nikonusa.com/pdf/manuals/lenses/DX/AFSDX17-55_2.8G.pdf to find a place where it said 9-blades.
Now I just spent 20 more minutes looking and I did find this site and page"
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/lens/af/dx/af-s_dx_zoom17-55mmf_28g_if/index.htm

Just like Nikon service, finding stuff on their web sites takes a long time. I used to just go to Nikon's european site to get product manuals but they now require registration.

For Tamron, I had seen that also. What I unsuccessfully went hunting for was for more technical info of the lens.

Sorry to seem so retarded to you.

Cheers!
David

ziggy53

davidweaver wrote:

... Sorry ...

At the links I supplied, do you see a "Specifications" and "Tech Specs" tab?