Low light indoor lens

Guzzler

Ok, this is somewhat like the other thread of the wedding photos, but I have a bit more difficult assignment.

I've been asked to take photos of stand-up comics while on stage. The issues are:
1. I am not allowed to use a flash, at all! (the comics find it very distracting).

2. I am only allowed in the back of the club so 'sneaker zoom' is not an option. I'm allowed to move side to side, but not front to back. The distance is roughly 20-30 feet from the comics to where I can shoot.

3. The lighting is horrible. Mainly candle lit on the tables, and the stage spot is really disgusting and weak and yellow.

4. They would like zoom close up's and some shots of audience and comics.

I only have 300D and the stock EF-S 18-55 f3.5 lens and a 80-200 f4.5 lens. I have to crank up the ISO to max to get any type of decent shots. But they are really grainy and still get motion blur.

If I understand right, a really fast lens might help. Correct? If so, which/who's lens would one recommend? Remember, it needs to be a zoom lens of some sort.

I have a decent camera shop where I can rent lenses, because I have a feeling that what you guys are going to recommend is going to be way out of my price range.

Andy

i'd recommend canon's 50mm f/1.4, or the 85 f/1.8. both under $300 and both really good, optically. i own both, and can attest to that.

wxwax

What they're asking for is unreasonable. Personally, I'd tell them so.

Even an f2.8 lens is not going to give you what you need. You need to get close with a faster lens, like a Canon 85 f1.2, or a Canon 200 f1.8 (marginal), or a Canon 50 f1.0 or f1.4, or a Canon 35 f1.4.

In other words, shooting him from the back of the room with no usable light is a fantasy. If they can't throw a decent spot on him, and they won't let you close enough to use fast glass, then I seriously doubt you can do this job.

And that's just the comic. Again, for shots of the audience, you're going to need to get close, if they're only lit by candlelight.

Me, I'd turn the job down.

Mongrel

hmmm....
You may want to add the Canon 100 f/2.0 USM to your list as well, it's cheap relatively fast and has a pretty good reputation for being sharp with accurate auto focus. I'd also recommend the 135 f/2.0L-BUT it's over $800 and is probably unrealistic for where you are at budget-wise. Both would give you a bit more reach than the 50's or 85's. There is also the 135 f/2.8 SF (soft focus), but at f/2.8 you are pushing it as far as shutter speed in the type of lighting you describe. The combination of two fast primes, say the 50 f/1.8 ($70), and the 100 f/2.0 USM (about $380) would be a pretty nice combo for this situation.

Now, if you want a recommendation for a zoom, here it is:

Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS (around $1600). That would give you a pretty fast lens with stabilization that would allow you to hand hold at decent shutter speeds for low light IF the subject is holding fairly still. Sigma makes a good 70-200 f/2.8 (EX HSM), that can be had for around $700 new. But it doesn't have IS so you would need some way of stabilizing it like a monopod so you could get at least 1/60th or so shutter speeds at 200mm. You need to PRACTICE with this setup to get the technique down, but it can be done if you can brace your back against a wall for instance.

I agree though, your between a poorly lit stage and a hard place!

They at least should give you roaming rights on the sides of the room, or even a front row table off to the side.

If it were me, and I *really* wanted this gig, I'd get a 50 f/1.4 and the 100 f/2.0 OR the 50 f/1.4 and the 135 f/2.0L (if I could afford it).

Good luck and keep us *posted* how it goes...

wxwax

Yeah, I'm not so worried about keeping the camera still. Even with maxed out ISO, you're gonna get subject blur in super low light. At least, that's my experience shooting bands in clubs. A real challenge.

Guzzler

The shoot is going to be the finals in a comedy competion. Six or so young comics starting out. I didn't go to the last competition, and a friend that hosts the show was chewed out by the promoter for not getting any photos, then my name came up as to why I wasn't there, and that I will be next time.

I guess I may have over exaggerated the conditions. Here is shot I took previously.



This is actually one of the better shots (sucks, don't it) that I can post at this time (hard to make out peoples faces).

This was from opening night of the new club. The owner just wanted some general shots for a web page. I did it on short notice and had him understand that they wouldn't be that good. But it should give you general idea what I am up against.

I found that if I use my tripod but as a monopod I can reduce camera shake, not eliminate it, but reduce it.

I've got a month or so to get ready, and rent some lenses and go up and try them out.

Guzzler

Oh, wxwax. As for turning down the gig... Naaaa... I love challenges. I get comp'd in and get to listen to some really funny sh*t, and I get to put name out there. Who knows, it might lead to something better than what I'm doing now.

wxwax

Hey Guzz, yer right, that light's not so bad. I reckon a 70-200 2.8 would do a nice job for you. IS and prolly fast enough. They won't let you set up a tripod, even in the back, huh? Looks like you should do a custom white balance. At a minimum, shoot in RAW, if you can.

Deacon

Lighting suc__
Shooting live events is tough because of the typical lighting conditions. I try and meet with the person setting up the lighting for a concert/stage presentation and convince him a little higher level of light helps everyone. They always want to make things mysterious and shady. I will often use a light meter and have him set ranges for me, not that he/she will use them through the whole show but it gives me a chance to get decent shots.

I was able to work out lighing on these, 70-200 vr 2.8 lense, handheld.






It also helps to get an anggle on the shot that is more reflective off the subject. In other words position yhourelf under the lights showing on the subject.

Hope this helps.