Re: Best Camera [Setting] for Concert/Gig/Festival

A good look over the
manual doesn't give good hints as to get good pictures in the light
setting that a concert or festival has and we end up with overly dark
photos that are often blurry with no explanation why.

To expand on the advice you've gotten so far, you need several things:

1) A shutter speed fast enough to eliminate blur caused by the camera
shaking. A a camera that is able to compensate with some sort of image
stabilization can help here, but even so, you still need a shutter speed
fast enough to eliminate blur caused by your *subject* moving.
2) A lens that lets as much light into the camera as possible, given
that relatively fast shutter speed you are going to use to eliminate
blur is going to limit the total amount of light the sensor receives.
3) an ISO setting on the camera high enough to that allows pictures to
be taken with relatively little light that is going to hit the sensor,
given that you need a relatively fast shutter and lens can only let in
so much light.
4) a camera of sufficient quality that the pictures taken at high ISO
settings actually look OK - the higher the ISO setting on a given
camera, the grainier the picture
5) As steady a hand as you can manage, or a tripod, to maximize your
chance of a sharp picture, given that you almost certainly cannot get
your lens to let in as much light as you'd really need to produce a good
picture at whatever your top ISO setting that produces acceptable
results is.

My guess is your camera *does* let you set ISO and aperture, but it is
highly doubtful that the maximum settings will be sufficient. For
instance, your camera may max out at ISO 400. Professional
photographers with pro-quality cameras in this sort of situation would
likely choose ISO 1600. Furthermore, the quality of the pictures they
get at 1600 is probably in terms of graininess better than what you can
get at 400. Similarly, the lens on your camera may have a maximum
aperture (a number that basically indicates how much light is being let
in, smaller numbers meaning more light) of 5.6, depending on the zoom
setting. Professional quality lenses might have a maximum aperture of
2.8 at that same zoom setting - or they'd sacrifice the ability to zoom
in favor of a lens with a maximum aperture of 1.4.

But in any case, it's worth a try. Find out if you can set ISO on your
camera, and set it as high as possible. Find out if you can set
aperture, and set it as big as possible - which means the smallest
number unless they have a different way of numbering things than is
typical for professional gear. The camera will probably then choose a
shutter speed for you to let in the right amount of light, but chances
are it will be too slow to eliminate blur, so if you can override the
shutter speed to be a notch or two faster, you'll get a sharper picture.
You can always brighten it in Photoshop or other photo editing software
later (whereas you cannot really sharpen something blurry from too slow
a shutter speed). Also, as someone else said, zoom out as far as
possible before trying to improve the aperture, as most lenses will
allow a bigger aperture (= small aperture number) when zoomed out.
Again, you can always crop and blow up the picture afterward and to make
the subject appear bigger.

For the most part, cameras with good enough ISO settings and lens
apertures for this kind of work are digital SLR's such as the Canon
Rebel XT or Nikon D70 (or the one I use, the Pentax *istDS). An SLR is
a camera with interchangeable lenses and in which when you look through
the viewfinder, you are actually looking through the lens, via a system
of mirrors or prisms. These cameras generally start at around $700,
although that comes with only one lens that may or may not be any better
in this respect than what is on your camera.

However, there are some digital cameras that are not SLR's that might
have good enough high ISO performance and/or lenses with big enough
maximum apertures to give you decent results. I've never used the
Panasonic FZ-5, but I looked long and hard at it before deciding on the
*istDS, and I agree that it seems like a good choice in many respects.
Certainly the lens is fantastic, with a maximum aperture that is more
than adequate for most purpose, and a truly hellacious zoom range. An
equivalent lens for a digital SLR would cost *thousands*, but the FZ5 is
around, what, $500? And the image stabilization system on the FZ5
allows you to get away with a somewhat slower shutter speed that you
would otherwise. But the camera is not going to go up to ISO 1600, or
even give you the same results at 400 that a digital SLR would. So it's
ability to take good pictures is going to be more dependent on just how
well-lit the place where you are taking pictures is. For me, that was
one of the deciding factors in going with digital SLR, even though I had
to spend a couple hundred more, and while I did get two lenses with mine
to give me the same (actually, a little better) zoom range as the FZ5,
mine don't have nearly as big a maximum aperture. I suspect that
shooting at 1600 with my lens gives me better results than shooting at
400 with the FZ5, but I can't prove it. Since buying the camera,
however, I've picked up a few more non-zoom lenses that do give me a
maximum aperture equal to or better than the FZ5 at the corresponding
zoom settings.

---------------
Marc Sabatella
marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Music, art, & educational materials
Featuring "A Jazz Improvisation Primer"
http://www.outsideshore.com/


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pondering Functionality
    ... I've been thinking about how I would like an ideal camera to operate. ... Now we can set the ISO on a per-shot basis, ... I want to be able to control aperture, ... would allow "auto" modes to prevent over or under exposure. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Pondering Functionality
    ... Now we can set the ISO on a per-shot basis, ... I want to be able to control aperture, ... immediately change any one of those parameters, or have the camera set one ... would allow "auto" modes to prevent over or under exposure. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Pondering Functionality
    ... Now we can set the ISO on a per-shot basis, there's another immediate degree of freedom to play with. ... I want to be able to control aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and exposure compensation. ... Rather than going into the menu system or rotating a dial to select from a range of a modes (e.g. aperture or shutter priority), I'd like to be able to directly and immediately change any one of those parameters, or have the camera set one or more of them for me. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Pondering Functionality
    ... first "real" camera was an aperture priority SLR, ... shutter speed, ISO, and exposure compensation. ... immediately change any one of those parameters, or have the camera set one ... would allow "auto" modes to prevent over or under exposure. ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: P&S at high ISO which one?
    ... been looking at the sample pictures from the different camera ... Nikon Coolpix P5100 seems to have the best performance at ISO 400 ... I used to have a Canon G6, it had a fast lens, but the high ISO shots ... delivering good pictures only in excellent conditions. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)