need camera for gig pics in low light conditions

Hi, thanks for your reply. A gig is an english term for a concert...

si

"Chip G" <NOSPAMchipg_98 RemoveThis @ATyahoo.TODELETE.com> wrote in message
news:zvFPa.35188$GL4.8538@rwcrnsc53...
 > Not sure what you mean by "gig" but I find the Minolta S414 set on manual
 > focus and set to infinity for focus to work well for me. Obviously, my
 > subjects are far enough away that infinity works for the focus. You have a
 > little bit of flexibility as far as controlling shutter-speed and
 > aperature... EV I guess really but the effect seems to be the same. So far
I
 > have found that in general auto exposure control with manual focus seems
to
 > most consistently get me the shots I want in low light conditions.
 >
 > The camera also has a "bracket" mode that takes three shots + 0 - exposure
 > which is sometimes helpful to get the shot.
 >
 > Hope this helps,
 > Chip
 >
 >
 > "Simon" <simon_hatesspam_newby.com RemoveThis @btinternet.com> wrote in message
 > news:ben74b$mqs$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
  > > I am looking for a digital camera with the ability to take shots of
gigs.
  > > I do not want to use flash. The conditions are generally dark although
 > there
  > > are always plenty of spotlights etc around. I used to use a casio qv-10a
  > > which is very old by todays standards but the results were always
superb.
  > > Shots were rarely blurred and always sharp. There are no options to
alter
  > > ISO or shutter speed on it so presumably it was setup specifically to
  > > compensate for its lack of flash.
  > >
  > > However every so called superior camera I try never gets the shots. They
 > are
  > > always blurred. The worst offender is the fuji f601 and its predecessor
 > the
  > > 6800. When you half press the shutter it annoying gives you a preview of
  > > what you could have had (hey that looks good) and then takes a shot with
a
  > > massive lag time and a resulting blurred mess.
  > >
  > > Are there any cameras that anyone has come across that get rid of this
lag
  > > time and that may be better suited to my intended use? I really need a
  > > camera that takes the picture that I want and allows me to work in low
 > light
  > > conditions.
  > >
  > > many thanks
  > >
  > > simon
  > >
  > >
  > >
 >
 ><!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: need camera for gig pics in low light conditions 

I tried very low light shots, not of a gig; but very low watt light bulbs would
really throw the exposure settings around and cause darker things that would
show up well to not show up well at all because the camera was focusing its
efforts on the bright light instead of the background. This was an automatic
dcam that gives me no control over shutter speed or aperture. I do get a +/- 0
to +/-2.0 exposure control which is helpful in bringing foreground backlit
subjects out of shadow. But I think the bright lights of a gig would fake out
the sensors so bad.....well, I guess I have to find a gig and try out my camera
yet.
 >> Stay informed about: need camera for gig pics in low light conditions 

I was doing handhelds of stationary objects at down to 1/15th of a second
and they had to be lightened with significant gamma correction (+1. in the
software portion. Whether I got a sharper picture or a fuzzier one was on a shot
by shot basis. That is what the LCD screen is for so you can zoom into 4x right
after you take the picture to see if it is sufficiently in focus. Some pictures
look OK on the LCD screen, then you get them home on the big monitor and they
look like you've got a vision problem and need glasses. I'm saving those kinds
of photos to show at an opticians convention somewhere, 'cause they can be real
doozies on certain kinds of eyes (LOL).
If I took a picture of my car speedometer at night and wanted "just the
miles, please", I'd have to shut the engine off for the handheld shot, and even
then the camera may be too finicky about autofocusing in such low light: so I
have to zoom out to get more light from the "lit speed numbers" so that the
camera will take the shot more effectively, even if the subject "mile numbers"
are smaller. I get the pictures on my computer and find that while the numbers
may have looked "in focus on the lcd screen, with 4x zoom on the result", on the
big screen I run into artifacts of defocus/unfocus/whatfocus?/an optician must
have glasses for this kinda focus. So I have to put up with the imperfections of
blurriness on a shot by shot basis. I just checked the shutterspeed used on a
full speedometer on a night scene that came out damn well as a handheld shot
with a prop from the steering wheel and it was 200/100 seconds, or 2 seconds! I
told ya, this thing just sucks in light like amazing.
For moving objects on a stage though, I wouldn't count on anything staying
stationary enough for more than 1/80th of a second. Also, my camera does have
quite a delay. I took some pictures of traffic on my street and I'd see all
kinds of indications that it previewed the shot to set the focus and other
settings, then again I see a stutter on the lcd for when the picture gets shot.
I wouldn't know what I got until it was done and I could review it on the lcd.
The cars, going at 30 mph/50kmph on an overcast day were blurry, but the street
was not. I find out now that the shutter speed of the picture in question was
1/6th of a second! I'm using ISO 200, and the f-stop was 3.2, and it was taken
right about sunset on a shady street without any sun around. The trees are green
and bright, but the attic window I shot out of needs cleaning.
So getting a stage shot within a half hour after sunset might be
appropriate, but after that, things might just get a little too dark. You would
need a tripod and crowd control and stationary musicians (if no flash was used)
if you take pictures much later than that. But I'm no expert, this camera is
amazing me just for this post!
 >> Stay informed about: need camera for gig pics in low light conditions