50mm had it's very own cheerleaders thread but....

AnimalRights

At a gig tonight the headlining band decided to use feck all light and I assumed out of the 2 lenses I had with me the 50mm 1.4 and the 17.40 f4 that the 50mm 1.4 would surely handle the lack of light far better, boy was I wrong.
17-40L wiped the floor with it.
What I want to know is why? I tried both flash and non flash but the 50mm could only supply me with OOF images, 17-40 had far more in focus.

challengemaster

Problem here would be you, not the lenses.

Funny - Blame the gear first, the photographer never.

IIRC, you did say you shoot wide open on all your lenses. f/1.4 isn't going to leave much in focus... f/4 will leave a lot more though. The problem is the way that you shoot in this case.

Also you've not said what settings you were using.

Fajitas!

You need to focus at 1.4

AnimalRights

I wasn't shooting all wide open with the 1.4, when I was using the flash in tandem I was shooting at diff apps.
The 17-40 had no problems at any app.
Light was almost pitch dark I just assumed the 50mm would outperform the 17-40.

Fajitas!

I really don't think that's a case of one lens being better or worse, practicalities, lighting, stage and so on are hugely important. Tell me I'm shooting a gig though, and I'll bring the 50 1.4 over a 17-40 f/4 zoom anyday!

ThOnda

50/1.4 MkI is not compatible with E-TTL-II. That could be also a thing to consider.

AnimalRights

mmm I see what you're saying, obviously I was just starting off on the 50mm at its hardest app to get results from in dark conditions, I was starting of with the f4 at er f4 lol....
Mmmm interesting.

AnimalRights

ThOnda wrote: »

50/1.4 MkI is not compatible with E-TTL-II. That could be also a thing to consider.

aahhh right....any distance shots were even worse, I needed to be up close.

Mycroft H

Stupid question but was the af locking on the 50? Also the depth of field on the fifty wide open is horribly thin so even if it was locked it would only be a small area in focus......

Just thought of another one, were you using another af point bar the center af point without realising??

AnimalRights

Fajitas! wrote: »

I really don't think that's a case of one lens being better or worse, practicalities, lighting, stage and so on are hugely important. Tell me I'm shooting a gig though, and I'll bring the 50 1.4 over a 17-40 f/4 zoom anyday!

Thats what I thought and assumed, hence my slight shock at the results I got tonight.
Kinda wish the gig wasn't over as would love to feed this thread information into a "Gig special take II!"

AnimalRights

landyman wrote: »

Stupid question but was the af locking on the 50? Also the depth of field on the fifty wide open is horribly thin so even if it was locked it would only be a small area in focus......

Just thought of another one, were you using another af point bar the center af point without realising??

Yes
and No.

sineadw

Were you using auto or manual focus? I almost always manual focus in dark conditions. Especially if I'm right down at 1.4. If you're close to the stage its a very shallow DoF indeed!

AnimalRights

I used AF mostly as I'll be the 1st to admit I'm inexperienced with MF, I did try a few times with MF but that was even worse.
Only thing I can think of is that I should have went up higher to about 5.6 or more in app, think highest I tried was around 3 to 4.

Ricky91t

Why to f/5.6?I've seen plenty of gig shots at f/1.8 which came out perfect,and they've been from 400D's etc,the fact the 5D is full frame(more light in),alot newer,with improved AF it should of been fine at f/2.8 or more,maybe even f/1.8

AnimalRights

I tried 5.6 because 1.4+1.8 was failing, the previous advice in this thread was to step down.
The reason I started this thread Ricky was because like your reply I was confused why I never got the results I assumed I would get.

Also don't forget the gig shots you see at 1.8 are more concerts rather than proper pub gigs and they come with their fancy lighting effects, add into the mixer that as I've already stated they basically turned the lights to almost down, the 2 previous bands I didn't have this problem.

Ricky91t

But imo,lowering the aperture is a dark room is pointless,cause you're letting less light into the lens,if i were you i would of stuck around f/2.8 and do what Sinead said,Manual focus!

Cause for me anyway,when my camera can't autofocus i can still make out the subject and MF ,maybe time to get some MF pratice in?We all gotta' start somewhere it doesn't just come to us naturally

Borderfox

Ricky91t wrote: »

Why to f/5.6?I've seen plenty of gig shots at f/1.8 which came out perfect,and they've been from 400D's etc,the fact the 5D is full frame(more light in),alot newer,with improved AF it should of been fine at f/2.8 or more,maybe even f/1.8

What improved AF? same as the original 5d..

John

Definitely need to MF in low light gig conditions. I find any available light tends to be mainly picked up by mic stands and the AF will pick them out rather than the person behind them (and with the narrow DOF at lower appertures the person in question will be out of focus). I really only shoot pub/club shows and find my 50mm f1.8 more than up to the job, even in exceptionally low light with a relatively low ISO.

Borderfox

Ricky91t wrote: »

But imo,lowering the aperture is a dark room is pointless,cause you're letting less light into the lens,if i were you i would of stuck around f/2.8 and do what Sinead said,Manual focus!

Cause for me anyway,when my camera can't autofocus i can still make out the subject and MF ,maybe time to get some MF pratice in?We all gotta' start somewhere it doesn't just come to us naturally

That is the difference between the 1d bodies and the 5d/50d bodies

AnimalRights

John with all respect you actually have light in the background.

Only light in this basement was that tiny tungsten type light above the bass player but as per usual the vocalists came out onto the floor so I was left with the 4 minsculine pen type lights.



Here are a couple of shots when the lights were on to normal for the support bands and I had no trouble with the focusing then.

challengemaster

Looking at the first pic, the first thing that comes to mind is the song "Jizzed in my pants" (guy on the left :pac:)

Interesting shot either way

uprising

that drummer shot is really a good shot.

AnimalRights

uprising wrote: »

that drummer shot is really a good shot.

Ta, mightn't be what you're looking for but a diff perspective of said drummer, him and his full kit!

DanGerMus

Hope you don't mind a minor hijack here lads but i'm just getting into this and i'm finding the kit lens on my d90 isn't giving me great results on the indoor dark shots no flash i don't like the look with the flash generaly.

Think i should try one anyway as you guys seem to rave about them. Is there much of an advantage to the f1.4 over the f1.8 at twice the price. i honestly don't mind the cash outlay as i'm in this for the long run and don't want to find myself wishing i had just got the 1.4 in the first place. think i've answered my question there. anyway.

sineadw

Don't know about the nikon, but the canon 1.4 was well worth the extra money DanGerMus

Yep AR its a lot easier to MF in dark gigs IMO. I've shot gigs with one light that looked like a bloody lucozade bottle. Like John says it confuses the AF and you get great shots of Mic stands :rolleyes:

Was that gig in the boom boom room?

John

AnimalRights wrote: »

John with all respect you actually have light in the background.

True! But it was still seriously dark during their set and my points still stand. Although, if the light levels get so low as at that gig, you might be better investing in a night vision camera

AnimalRights

Yes sinead It was and john I have many night vision vids if u click on my you tube sig... Nightvision I hate!
Still curiou on why the 17-40 was able to focus better!

Simplicius

AnimalRights wrote: »

John with all respect you actually have light in the background.

Only light in this basement was that tiny tungsten type light above the bass player but as per usual the vocalists came out onto the floor so I was left with the 4 minsculine pen type lights.



Here are a couple of shots when the lights were on to normal for the support bands and I had no trouble with the focusing then.

This is a superb shot ... top class ... a keeper for sure, B&W works fantastic here.

Excellent thread too --

Simplicius

Defying logic since 1878

Borderfox

One thing to look for, if you have a flash you can put it on the camera and set it to disable flash but it will still use the contrast pattern to help focus.

Ricky91t

Borderfox wrote: »

What improved AF? same as the original 5d..

I assumed the AF would be better on a 5D than say a 350D or 400D....

Fajitas!

Yep, it is indeed better on a 5D than 350 or 400, I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it's gotten since.

AnimalRights

I have read a few times that the AF on the 5DII is meant to be fractionally better than the old 5D.
Will try and find out where I read this....

DeVore

Did anyone else look at this shot and think "Boy, that bass guitarist has a really big right hand.....".

DeV.

melekalikimaka

AnimalRights wrote: »

the 2 lenses I had with me the 50mm 1.4 and the 17.40 f4 that the 50mm 1.4 would surely handle the lack of light far better, boy was I wrong.

If you use flash the 50mm kinda loses its edge over the 17-40 unless your looking for shallow dof.

sineadw

Boom Boom's a nightmare alright. That light (just the one) they have is from a three bar electric fire I think.