barkin Posted November 13, 2019 Share Posted November 13, 2019 4 hours ago, lownote12 said: So you google for posts with a title like "What's a one size fits all lens for gigs", and there are several posts - all pointing towards the 24-70 2.8 zoom which costs squillions. So you do more research and discover the ancient 35-70 2.8 does almost the same for a 1/10 of the price. One is now coming. I'll let you know what occurs. Are those recommendations for full frame? Cos 24/28/35 isn't really "wide" on APS-C. For me, something like a 16-50 would be a better fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted November 13, 2019 Author Share Posted November 13, 2019 (edited) On 13/11/2019 at 14:16, barkin said: Are those recommendations for full frame? Cos 24/28/35 isn't really "wide" on APS-C. For me, something like a 16-50 would be a better fit. For sure. As you say a 16- something would be better but the cost starts to go up again even with secondhand fast wide zooms of that ilk. That's why I got a cheapish 11-16 (EDIT: Tokina, like Fleabag's) for £160. If I need the FoV it gives me the equivalent of 16-24. Because I have a small sensor, I'm just living with the fact that my 35-70 will actually be equivalent to a 50-105. Edited November 14, 2019 by lownote12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fleabag Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 (edited) Which 11-16 ? I have the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 in Nikon mount and its a beauty. Not ultra cheap at £450 give or take, but can be had used for £200, give or take. Works out at 16.5 - 24mm on a 1.5x crop Nikon Edited November 14, 2019 by fleabag 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunoBass Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 17 hours ago, lownote12 said: As you say a 16- something would be better but the cost starts to go up again even with secondhand fast wide zooms of that ilk. You may want to investigate the Nikkor 16-85mm which is a terrific, versatile lens. It’s not especially fast but I’ve shot gigs with mine where the lighting has been good, and there are secondhand bargains to be had. https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/product/nikkor-lenses/auto-focus-lenses/dx/zoom/af-s-dx-nikkor-16-85mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunoBass Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 I often shoot at gigs with a very small Fuji X100S. It’s got impressive ISO capability and a wide lens (23mm I think?) but it’s tiny and light and easy to use in that kind of environment. A camera like that is better for small pub gigs where you can get close obviously, but the results are decent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted November 14, 2019 Author Share Posted November 14, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, BrunoBass said: You may want to investigate the Nikkor 16-85mm which is a terrific, versatile lens. It’s not especially fast but I’ve shot gigs with mine where the lighting has been good, and there are secondhand bargains to be had. https://www.nikon.co.uk/en_GB/product/nikkor-lenses/auto-focus-lenses/dx/zoom/af-s-dx-nikkor-16-85mm-f-3-5-5-6g-ed-vr I see that's quite slow (3.5-5.6) by old fashioned standards ( then I am very old). But maybe things have changed with the advent of digital and usable high ISO and its not so vital to have super fast lenses any more. For eg, I have a 55-200 Nikon VR that's f4-5.6. I haven't used it for concerts yet, but it occurs to me that even at f5.6 that's only two stops slower than 2.8, which should allow the same shutter speeds at ISO 3200 as a big expensive fast 2.8 lens at 800. Edited November 14, 2019 by lownote12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrixn1 Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 You mentioned previously that slow shutter speed might be a concern. What were the ISO, aperture, and shutter speed of your photos from 4th & 5th Nov? Knowing this, would it help estimate if shooting at, say, f/5.6 would be acceptable (when you go back to that same venue/lighting)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunoBass Posted November 14, 2019 Share Posted November 14, 2019 3 hours ago, lownote12 said: I see that's quite slow (3.5-5.6) by old fashioned standards ( then I am very old). But maybe things have changed with the advent of digital and usable high ISO and its not so vital to have super fast lenses any more. For eg, I have a 55-200 Nikon VR that's f4-5.6. I haven't used it for concerts yet, but it occurs to me that even at f5.6 that's only two stops slower than 2.8, which should allow the same shutter speeds at ISO 3200 as a big expensive fast 2.8 lens at 800. Yes, as I said it’s not fast but at the wider end with high ISO it’s pretty good. Incidentally, the best lens I ever had was a Nikon 85mm f/1.8D which was great for gig photos - equivalent 127mm on a DX body and very fast. It met a sticky end but that’s another story. I really should get another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 Does anyone have a reliable accurate workflow invoilving Lightoom/ Photoshop for processing they'd be willing to share? I'm not sure I've got the idea and am wasting hours repeating, bodging and generally tearing my hair out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wateroftyne Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 1 minute ago, lownote12 said: Does anyone have a reliable accurate workflow invoilving Lightoom/ Photoshop for processing they'd be willing to share? I'm not sure I've got the idea and am wasting hours repeating, bodging and generally tearing my hair out. What kind of workflow issues are you having? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 I'm trying to batch process a couple of hundred RAWs into TIFFs, cull the no-hopers, edit the remainder, then render as JPEGS. I've been trying to do this going from Lightroom to PS then back to Lightroom but I really have no grasp of the logic of it all. I know there are tutorials on line but just wondered if anyone had an easy workflow on here. This isn't so much dealing with individual shots and but quickly handling a fair number of them in one go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wateroftyne Posted January 30, 2020 Share Posted January 30, 2020 5 minutes ago, lownote12 said: I'm trying to batch process a couple of hundred RAWs into TIFFs, cull the no-hopers, edit the remainder, then render as JPEGS. I've been trying to do this going from Lightroom to PS then back to Lightroom but I really have no grasp of the logic of it all. I know there are tutorials on line but just wondered if anyone had an easy workflow on here. This isn't so much dealing with individual shots and but quickly handling a fair number of them in one go. OK, so here's what I do - it works for my needs, but YMMV etc. Import into LR as raw, setting descriptive tags if necessary Go to full-screen-per-image-view, and do an initial - and pretty brutal - pass to flag the no-hopers for removal (hit x on the keyboard) Delete the flagged images completely, i.e. from LR and the hard drive (I can't remember the keyboard shortcut for this - muscle memory has kicked in at this point) Switch to the develop module Process each image as I see fit Right-click, edit in Photoshop (if needed - I rarely do any post using Photoshop) Repeat step #2 to delete images deemed redundant in step #5 Export as JPG or what-have-you directly from LR, either as a single image or as a batch Hi-five whomever happens to be nearby So, things to point out: I keep my master images as raw files at all times I rarely jump into Photoshop for edits - usually just for mean layer merging when I want to get a pseudo ND filter effect. Everything else I need is in LR. Hope this helps... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted January 30, 2020 Author Share Posted January 30, 2020 (edited) Seems to work like a hot buttered dream. Please have a high five (or six here in Norfolk). Edited January 30, 2020 by lownote12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lownote Posted January 31, 2020 Author Share Posted January 31, 2020 @wateroftyne you are as a God to me. Yesterday's edit took 5 hours and earthy imprecations. Today, 20 minutes and I am in a state of grace. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wateroftyne Posted January 31, 2020 Share Posted January 31, 2020 3 minutes ago, lownote12 said: @wateroftyne you are as a God to me. Yesterday's edit took 5 hours and earthy imprecations. Today, 20 minutes and I am in a state of grace. Happy to help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.gif.9ad672bb8b84505709f76b39c8c256ec.gif)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.