Wide lens options for stage performance (indoors)

[Marbles]

Just to note, I have been shooting stage (dance mainly) performances for a number of years. Gear I use is 5D mk ii and 5D mk i. 70-200 L f.28 (non -is ) and 24-70 2.8.

My question is I love the 24-70 for shooting close up, getting end to end stage shots it doesn't shine, in my opinion.

I've thought about trying out the Canon 35 F 1.4 and see if maybe its just my technique.

Anyone have experience with performances under stage lighting with wide lenses? Any recommendations aside from the 24-70?

Thanks!.

[Mr.Magic]

With 'Stage photography' I think about difficult lighting, dark situations, etc. So a large aperture is required.
Is the f2.8 of the 24-70 satisfactory for you? Then maybe the 16-35 f2.8 II is a good option
If the max aperture is not sufficient, check out a prime, e.g. 17mm, 24mm, etc.
As these will cost some money, you could maybe rent them first to try them out ...

[Steve U]

Welcome Marbles, the 24mm/1.4 is a great lens, focuses fast and high IQ, once you've tried one of them you won't go back.
Unless of course you consider Zeiss......

[HDNitehawk]

I've never done any "stage shots", but have shot allot with low light ambient only inside. You have the right idea, either the 35mm f/1.4 or the 24mm f/1.4 will do much better than the 24-70. Not so much because they can shoot at f/1.4, because the IQ isn't that good at f/1.4. It is because their IQ is much better than the 24-70 at f/2.8. If you can keep those lenses a bit over f/2.0 they do a very good job.

[Marbles]

I've never done any "stage shots", but have shot allot with low light ambient only inside. You have the right idea, either the 35mm f/1.4 or the 24mm f/1.4 will do much better than the 24-70. Not so much because they can shoot at f/1.4, because the IQ isn't that good at f/1.4. It is because their IQ is much better than the 24-70 at f/2.8. If you can keep those lenses a bit over f/2.0 they do a very good job.

Thanks!

The 35 range is fine. On the 5D 24 is a bit wide and gives you enough barrel distortion that isn't always the best looking, imo.

You answered my question which is if the IQ of the 35 versus the 24-70 is noticeable under these kinds of conditions.

I think part of it is the range from where I am shooting? In normal close range the 24-70 looks fine, maybe not as nice as the 35.

In your experience, does the 35 focus fast like the 70-200 does?

[Marbles]

With 'Stage photography' I think about difficult lighting, dark situations, etc. So a large aperture is required.
Is the f2.8 of the 24-70 satisfactory for you? Then maybe the 16-35 f2.8 II is a good option
If the max aperture is not sufficient, check out a prime, e.g. 17mm, 24mm, etc.
As these will cost some money, you could maybe rent them first to try them out ...

Thanks

2.8 does work fine. Stage lighting is actually very bright and if there is backlighting (scrims, etc.) your camera exposes well. I also turn down color saturation and depending on how bright the hot lights are I've taken the exposure down a notch so the whites and silvers don't get blown out.

Its mostly an issue with IQ of the 24-70 and I wanted to hear what others have to say about other lenses in that range (more the 30-35 range) under these conditions. Since mostly what I shoot is dance sometimes I need to get wide shots so the choreography can be seen in whole. The 70-200 gets amazing shots (and focuses fast), esp in the 135-150 range but you can't get full stage shots without moving far back from the stage.

[Marbles]

To follow up on this. I shot with a 35 L 1.4 this weekend. I haven't opened up the photos and took a close look at them, but from the LCD screen I could see they were clearer than the 24-70. So to recap on my experience:

1. Images were better. You could tell right away. Especially just the walk around pics of people during intermission or outside the venue.

2. The auto focus is way better. The 24-70 is already really good, but this lens can auto focus in the dark. Which makes me think this is a better lens for events when you are shooting at night (which most of the ones I shoot are at night.)

3. Its lighter and not as bulky.

4. Its 1.4. Can't beat that nice creamy blurred background look

Cons:

1. I love primes, but when shooting in crowded areas you have to move people out of the way a lot. But I'd rather have better images and just push people out of my way. Zoom is more functional.

2. On the 5D you get the tail end of barrel distortion. But this probably won't be an issue when using something like Lightroom that can fix that.

Overall, if you had to make a choice between the 24-70 and 35, I'd probably pick the 35. The IQ of this lens is really something. I kept hearing about it, but now that I can see it. I plan on shooting more stage performances with this.