>> |
Anonymous
>>34041
I'm sorry, I really don't think the picture's all that. It's nicely composed and everything, but it's one of those shots that looks brilliant on a contact sheet and then lets you down when you blow it up. Your eye wanders to the DJ and his setup and sees blurs, back to the type on the banner and sees more blurs, on to the girders at the back of the picture and it's just all a world of camera shake. This picture is unsatisfying for that reason.
Plus, the reason to stop down a lens in these conditions is that a small aperture opening tends to reduce the optical effects of stray light sources. In an environment like this, you're going to get all kinds of odd light from unexpected sources. That gives you ghosting, flare, glare, in unexpected places that reduce quality of the image.
Anti-shake systems may give you perhaps an additional stop (or two!) to play with, but bear in mind that these systems (iirc) do not correct motion perpendicular to the plane of the shutter. Other benefits to using a tripod/other camera mount include the ability to use very slow shutter speeds (1/8 and much much slower) to get other interesting effects. And finally, while 1/60 at 28mm may be acceptable, 1/60 at 200mm is not, due to the magnification amplifying the effects of any camera shake. So if you're looking to take some kind of closeup of the performer's face or something, and not just stick to the wide angle, I would strongly recommend _not_ hand holding.
As for the ISO thing I do happen to be particularly anal about grain and noise, but considering that digicam noise shows up especially well in the shadow parts of the image, which are prevalent at concerts, I would stay away from high ISOs while shooting concerts. Now then if you're going for the gritty/low budget look that of course doesn't matter at all. Or, you know, you could try shoot ing tmax 3200 instead, which I find quite aesthetically pleasing.
|