[UnknownVT]

After over 2 years the K-x still manages to impress me -
I have gotten away with just using the two humble kit zooms (18-55 and 50-200)
shooting sometimes in what I consider ludicrously low light......


looks like fairly standard fare.....

until one sees the distribution of lighting -


hardly any direct light on the guitarist -

the blue light illuminating the underside of the guitar -
is actually from an indicator light from his pedal board.

then the djembe percussion off stage


of course there is always off stage action....


stage center is not too much problem....

except this guy moves a lot.

and even though the lights are on in the alcove - it's harsh and not very good modelling -
so have to wait for the subject to move so the lighting becomes interesting -


even stage center has the hat issue - putting the face in shadows -
however waiting for the right moment/position - puts reflected light on the face,
which actually makes for better pictures




I'm not complaining - the challenge (and obviously music)
is what brings me back week after week......
and gives me great opportunities to take photos.

---

Last edited by UnknownVT; 02-06-2012 at 10:24 AM.

[UnknownVT]

It's not always low light - the K-x even with the humblest kit zooms can take pretty spectacular photos in good light -

Elvis Royale - celebrating Elvis's birthday.


not exactly an Elvis look-a-like - but more a sound-a-like -
it's a great show, as, hopefully, one can see......



not just the dancers - but mainly the music.....

small combo, like Sun sessions......

antics -

ok...
the girls too.....


same dancer - other leg......
(see Christmas show in Post #279 )

[UnknownVT]

Good music - but usually difficult for photography -
a table seating venue - I have to spend time on my knees.

But this Saturday was a rare exception -
as I entered for the opening act - there was an empty reserved table right up front -
so I just went there and sat down to take photos -
fully expecting to have to move when the customers who reserved arrived.
3 sets later I was still there.......

An interesting note - usually the K-x works well with AWB at this venue despite the red and blue incandescent flood bulbs - but for whatever reason all of my AWB shots were very orange - switching over to Tungsten white balance - gave these shots that did not need any white balance tweaking.

Interesting opening act -



can see the silhouette of the table seating.....


from a little right of my "premium reserved" seating......

on my knees up front -



face in shade - had to bring up the brightness.

[UnknownVT]

Same venue -













Battery Usage -

Mid-October/2011 I started to use the flash more
(after my Canon G10 compact stopped working)
The shot counts were:
996
1,035
826
996.

Just after Thanksgiving I acquired a cheapo Canon A1200 compact (it is pretty unique in having a real optical viewfinder - albeit small and squinty - see lower part of Post #277) so used that more and more for my flash shots - so once again I am using the K-x with hardly any flash
The shot counts with very few flash (if any):
1,391
1,251

I cycle 3 sets of 4 - 1 eneloop and 2 Duraloops (Duracell Pre-Charged - confirmed re-badged eneloops) charged on Maha/PowerEx C-9000 at 1000mA until "Done" - leave for another 2 hours for the slow top up charge.
Before carrying the spare set in camera bag (after the previous set have depleted) I do a quick "top up" - 1000mA charge until "Done".
I literally shoot until the camera shuts down - sometimes I will try to squeeze a few more shots by turning Off then On - inevitably I am in the middle of shooting.

---

Last edited by UnknownVT; 01-20-2012 at 11:53 AM.

[UnknownVT]

Just a benefit dance -
but the setting gave great coloring/lighting -

[UnknownVT]

withdrawals for me -
but satisfied my craving last night -

[doggy1972]

After over 2 years the K-x still manages to impress me -
I have gotten away with just using the two humble kit zooms (18-55 and 50-200)
shooting sometimes in what I consider ludicrously low light......

Agreed. Still quite a remarkable low light camera even with a humble F/3.5 zoom
Heres a couple from last night



Pentax-F 35-70

Loving your low light shots BTW Vincent. Great work!

---

Last edited by doggy1972; 02-18-2012 at 02:42 PM.

[doggy1972]

And the lowly non SMC F zoom 28-80 f/3.5




This lens isnt actually as bad as people would lead you to believe. Its fairly bright and fairly sharp although, lacks a little contrast (which isnt a problem for this this style of shot)

ISO 6400 Really pushing the K-x

[UnknownVT]

ISO 6400 Really pushing the K-x

Thanks for your responses.

I agree about ISO6400 pushing the limits of the K-x -
that's why I shoot with AutoISO set with maximum ISO5000
(and the K-x downsized to 10Mp - this does reduce the noise a bit,
due to the self-cancelling, auto correlation nature of random noise) -
inevitably at the dark jazz venue just about all of my shots are at ISO5000

[doggy1972]

Thanks for your responses.

I agree about ISO6400 pushing the limits of the K-x -
that's why I shoot with AutoISO set with maximum ISO5000
(and the K-x downsized to 10Mp - this does reduce the noise a bit,
due to the self-cancelling, auto correlation nature of random noise) -
inevitably at the dark jazz venue just about all of my shots are at ISO5000

ISO 5000 is surprisingly usable. I have some from last night at 5000 shot with an A 50 1.7 which look very acceptable. Your posts have given me a lot of advice regarding low light shooting and sensitivity. Great tutorial for budding music/gig photographers

[doggy1972]

I had to double check the EXIF when I saw this one

[UnknownVT]

I had to double check the EXIF when I saw this one

ISO 5000 is surprisingly usable. I have some from last night at 5000 shot with an A 50 1.7 which look very acceptable. Your posts have given me a lot of advice regarding low light shooting and sensitivity. Great tutorial for budding music/gig photographers

That's very kind of you to say that.

The beauty of digital photography is that it costs virtually nothing to do
(after of course the initial investment) -
other than our time.

So we can afford to be adventurous, even taking risks/break the rules -
one can just delete the failures, and no one else needs to know -
but even failures can be instructive -
making us find ways to mitigate any limitations -
with today's technical quality -
most of which are our own.

The K-x is ample evidence of that -
the humble two zoom kit (all I have) was as low as about $500 at one time -
that is lower than a lot of the up-market compacts -
ironically it is often better than me -

That unfortunately removes all my excuses -
as I can no longer blame the tools!

[UnknownVT]

just another Thursday -

[doggy1972]

Great series Vincent. You really seem to have a vibrant music scene there. The last shot is very good. The grain can be seen in the light about the horn players head but, it looks very organic and non digital.

[UnknownVT]

You really seem to have a vibrant music scene there. The last shot is very good. The grain can be seen in the light about the horn players head but, it looks very organic and non digital.

Thank you for your kind comments.

Yes, around here there is music every night of the week - more to the point, music I like and "worthwhile", my "record" stands at 24 gigs in one week... which means that I could see/hear and photograph 4 acts in one night.
I've shot at the dark jazz club for nearly 2 1/2 years now, so the musicians and venues are used to me.

So I get to process a lot of photos, but my pp is not very sophisticated, and very simple minded
- all I used to do was resize, adjust brightness/contrast and sharpen and that was it.
(I shoot almost exclusively JPGs at 10Mp, 2 star ).

However at the jazz club the lighting is very contrasty -
going from bright at stage center, to almost no direct lighting on other parts of the stage,
and even darker off stage where musicians play,
and a lot of the interesting action takes place.


Even at stage center where there is enough light for almost "normal" shots the lighting is pretty contrasty and harsh when falling on the wrong place

The last shot that you mentioned started like this:

EXIF attached - ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/50; 68mm -2/3 comp
Although there was good light - the player stepped back so that his face was out of the circle of light, and his shirt (which contained a lot of white) was in the main spot light - so one can see the contrast problem. I shot at -2/3 compensation (Highlight Correction On, and Shadow Correction on Low).

Straight brightness/contrast adjustment would blow the shirt out - not that that was important - but as pointed out to me elsewhere this can be distracting, even if it kind of conveys the scene. So I resorted to curves in Tone Map (in my olde editor Ulead PhotoImpact 8)

instead of the classic S shape all I did was to pull the middle up:

which brought up the face without blowing out the bright parts of the shirt.

I then fine tuned the brightness/contrast to what pleases my eye.

I am not very precise nor "repeatable" - since I do everything by eye.