SimonPJ
Well-known
For the past three years I have been working with a theatre and performing arts school to document their productions - to provide photos for publicity and for the students' portfolios.
I have found that the M9 can work superbly to cover almost all of this work. With full freedom to move around the stage during dress rehearsals I find the Noctilux covers most of my needs (the long focus throw works well for me to respond to constant small shifts in focus), with the 35 Lux Asph working for smaller stages. Working at ISO 640 and adjusting exposure in post (as suggested in other threads here) I find I can work between f2 and f4 and 1/90 to 1/125 with enough flexibility in the RAW files to achieve good results in almost all lighting that I encounter.
However, in a couple of recent productions there were a few scenes which had extremely low lighting - such as outdoor night-time scenes, or nightmare scenes. These scenes were quite visible to the naked eye, but I found that I needed to add three to four stops extra exposure (effectively going from ISO 640 to ISO 6400) to achieve similarly visible results from my M9 shots - by which point the files were very ugly and noisy. The resulting photos are just barely acceptable as a documentary record, but really stand out as significantly poor quality compared to the rest of the photos from each show.
Next month I will be photographing a production of Cabaret which I know will have similarly large contrasts between fully lit and very under-lit scenes, and where I will also need to get pictures of the live band, who will be quite dimly lit.
Do you have suggestions or experience to share about camera / lens combinations which might work as a good back up to the M9 for these very low light theatre scenes? Does the M 240 bring enough high ISO advantage to solve the problem and offer a one camera solution? Would a Canon 5Dii or iii focus reliably in such situations? I'm wary of combining rangefinder focusing and autofocus within a shoot as I'm very confident focusing a Leica M, but quite unpracticed at autofocus.
Many thanks for your suggestions,
Simon
M9, Noctilux
I have found that the M9 can work superbly to cover almost all of this work. With full freedom to move around the stage during dress rehearsals I find the Noctilux covers most of my needs (the long focus throw works well for me to respond to constant small shifts in focus), with the 35 Lux Asph working for smaller stages. Working at ISO 640 and adjusting exposure in post (as suggested in other threads here) I find I can work between f2 and f4 and 1/90 to 1/125 with enough flexibility in the RAW files to achieve good results in almost all lighting that I encounter.
However, in a couple of recent productions there were a few scenes which had extremely low lighting - such as outdoor night-time scenes, or nightmare scenes. These scenes were quite visible to the naked eye, but I found that I needed to add three to four stops extra exposure (effectively going from ISO 640 to ISO 6400) to achieve similarly visible results from my M9 shots - by which point the files were very ugly and noisy. The resulting photos are just barely acceptable as a documentary record, but really stand out as significantly poor quality compared to the rest of the photos from each show.
Next month I will be photographing a production of Cabaret which I know will have similarly large contrasts between fully lit and very under-lit scenes, and where I will also need to get pictures of the live band, who will be quite dimly lit.
Do you have suggestions or experience to share about camera / lens combinations which might work as a good back up to the M9 for these very low light theatre scenes? Does the M 240 bring enough high ISO advantage to solve the problem and offer a one camera solution? Would a Canon 5Dii or iii focus reliably in such situations? I'm wary of combining rangefinder focusing and autofocus within a shoot as I'm very confident focusing a Leica M, but quite unpracticed at autofocus.
Many thanks for your suggestions,
Simon
M9, Noctilux
YYV_146
Well-known
If you want the absolute ability of low light shooting with the ability to reliably use manual focus, get an A7S. The camera comfortably goes up to iso 20,000, and 6400 will be far cleaner than the bulk of 20-24mp digital cameras out there. With a Noct in the picture the potential of low-light work is unlimited.
This one is with the regular A7 and a 50lux ASPH. iso 1,600 I think
Edit: sorry for the watermark. I need to organize my gallery better...
AF is probably not a good option - short of a one-digit Canon or Nikon, most full frame bodies hunt in light that low. The center point on a 6D or D610 will probably still be functional, though, so it depends on how you want to use AF.
This one is with the regular A7 and a 50lux ASPH. iso 1,600 I think
Edit: sorry for the watermark. I need to organize my gallery better...
AF is probably not a good option - short of a one-digit Canon or Nikon, most full frame bodies hunt in light that low. The center point on a 6D or D610 will probably still be functional, though, so it depends on how you want to use AF.
SimonPJ
Well-known
Thanks Viktor. What's the A7 EVF like for manual focusing in really low light?
I find that in most theatre productions there's a moment that needs to be captured about every 5 to 10 seconds, which usually requires pin-point refocusing as actors move around the stage. After years of working with Leica M's I can make that work without even thinking about it, but from what I've read about EVF's in low light I had the impression that it might be a bit of a challenge.
I find that in most theatre productions there's a moment that needs to be captured about every 5 to 10 seconds, which usually requires pin-point refocusing as actors move around the stage. After years of working with Leica M's I can make that work without even thinking about it, but from what I've read about EVF's in low light I had the impression that it might be a bit of a challenge.
lynnb
Veteran
I've had limited experience shooting stage work with Canon AF (original 5D), with either the Canon ST-E2 IR transmitter or a Canon speed light with the flash turned off in the hot shoe. In both cases AF is fast and accurate using the pattern of IR beams thrown by either unit. You can't use it during actual shows as the criss-cross beam pattern is faintly visible in dim light. For rehearsals it wouldn't be a problem.
The advantages of the A7 are probably a better option (better high iso, M-mount lens compatibility, focus peaking, EVF).
The advantages of the A7 are probably a better option (better high iso, M-mount lens compatibility, focus peaking, EVF).
YYV_146
Well-known
I work with concerts, dance performances and other extreme lowlight events (candlelight memorials) all the time with EVF cameras. Actually started doing it long before the A7 series came out, the NEX-7 was good enough for me to work with such setups, albeit with very fast glass.
The question really depends on the iso level. If you're constantly using iso 6400 and above on an A7, for example, then the EVF will be "noisy", but it won't lose it's refresh rate like the Fuji cameras. Peaking most definitely still works, and you can set the jpg rendering to B&W to see the lines better. If you have EFC on there is essentially no lag to speak of, and the image is captured before the shutter curtain falls, which is a big plus for handholding.
This was with the NEX-7 and a 90mm APO-summicron (a much, much worse EVF). Not a big issue at all
SimonPJ
Well-known
Thanks Viktor - that's good to know. Sounds as if the A7 or A7s might be worth a try.
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
One thing that theatre people do not understand is that cameras and the human eye do not see the same way. If photographs are to be taken and that appears to be what they want they need to light for the camera not the audience. During the dress rehearsal you could ask for extra lighting but I seriously doubt that they will comply. Give it a go. Good luck.
SimonPJ
Well-known
Hi Steve - Yes, that's a reasonable suggestion regarding asking for extra lighting to make sure they get the pictures they need of important scenes. That may sometimes be possible, but it's an inexorable fact of many final rehearsals for stage productions that they take place on a finely balanced knife-edge of stress and potential catastrophe, and it may not always be possible to prioritise photography...
porktaco
Well-known
You could also go Fuji. I shot an xe-1 at 6400 all the time, and it did very well in stage lit situations. An xt-1 would be a nice upstage from the xe-1
gavinlg
Veteran
Fuji XT-1 for sure. You've got fast and brilliant fuji lenses, excellent high ISO noise control, super quick and accurate AF.
x-pro1, 35mm f1.4 @ iso5000/1.4/125th, grain added in post
x-pro1, 35mm f1.4 @ iso5000/1.4/125th, grain added in post
semordnilap
Well-known
X100s is another option. Deadly silent, great high ISO, and it sounds like the 35-e will work for you. But it's not super easy to focus in really low light.
M240 has good high ISO though... Depends on what you want to spend I think.
Maybe rent and try some different options?
M240 has good high ISO though... Depends on what you want to spend I think.
Maybe rent and try some different options?
SimonPJ
Well-known
Thanks for posting that X-Pro 1 example Gavin.
I'd be very interested to see any other examples of Fuji X or Sony A7 low light theatre / stage photography. I'm wary about my ability to focus anything other than a Leica M under those conditions, but guess the only way to find out is to try...
I'd be very interested to see any other examples of Fuji X or Sony A7 low light theatre / stage photography. I'm wary about my ability to focus anything other than a Leica M under those conditions, but guess the only way to find out is to try...
YYV_146
Well-known
All with the A7 and higher than iso 4,000. Not exactly theater, though - don't have any samples on my laptop.
SimonPJ
Well-known
Nice shadow detail on the face on the last one, Viktor.
swoop
Well-known
I had an M9 for about four years and used a 5Dmk2 as backup. Was dying for a camera with the ISO performance of the 5D, but worked like my M9. Then the M240 arrived and it's perfect. The ISO performance is essentially identical to the 5Dmk2, which isn't bad at all considering the 5dmk2 is essentially identical to the 5dmk3.
The 5Dmk2 can be had pretty cheap these days. I use mine with a set of 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4 and 100mm f2.0 lenses. About $1000 for all three Figure another $1600 for the camera on the used market and you have a nice backup camera when you absolutely need to have ISO 6400.
The 5Dmk2 can be had pretty cheap these days. I use mine with a set of 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4 and 100mm f2.0 lenses. About $1000 for all three Figure another $1600 for the camera on the used market and you have a nice backup camera when you absolutely need to have ISO 6400.
f16sunshine
Moderator
That's actually a great choice. My 5Dii is staying with me until it gives up.
It's a super tool and a great way to use some excellent inexpensive lenses especially at the longer focal lengths which may be handy for the OP considering his subject matter.
I handled the sony A7s the other day while meeting another rff member (a great pleasure!).
It's a very intriguing camera as well. The electronic shutter may be something that also could benefit the OP.
Absolutely completely silent!
