# D5000 indoor dancing photography



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 14, 2016)

Hi all, so I am sort of a newbie to photography. My discipline is mainly Graphic Design so my photography so far has been just for family/friends/projects.

My question is; I have a Nikon D5000 which is about 6 years old.
As for lenses I have;
-Nikon AF-P Nikkor 18-55mm f3.5-5.6G VR 
-Nikon 55-200mm VR AF-S f/4-5.6G ED
-Nikon 60mm AF-S G Micro-NIKKOR G

I am wanting to shoot indoor dancing photography, where light is very low.
What lense do you recommend? 

**NOTE: I am not in a position to change camera's, but as I am looking to sell my Macro lense, and my 18-55mm has recently cacked itself and got jammed (cost more to fix it than to buy a new one), I am looking at buying something new.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 14, 2016)

A fast-aperture lens would likely be helpful, meaning an f/1.4 or f/1.8 prime lens, in most cases. You do not mention any distances...nor any budget...both could be make or break deals.

Possibilities for close-range? 20mm f/1.8 AF-S G? 24mm f/1.8 AF-S G? 35mm f/1.8? 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G?


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 14, 2016)

Whoops. Budget is basic. I am only a beginner and this is only a hobby. So under $1,000 I guess.
Distance. I'm generally shooting quite close. So 2-25metres away from my subjects


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Derrel (Nov 14, 2016)

Distance is a key....beyond 25 meters, one is usually located in a balcony, where 100-200mm lenses are pretty useful.

On-line field of view calculators can be useful to determine how BIG of an area a lens will show, at the various, different distances.

Check out this site and its Dimension Field of View Calculator panel:

http://tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm

With a 1.5x sensor camera like the Nikon D5000, at 15 feet, the field of view would be 18 x 12 feet, exactly, using a 20mm lens.
With a 1.5x sensor camera like the Nikon D500, at 15 feet, the field of view of a 24mm lens would be 15' x 10'.
With a 35mm lens, the field of view at 15 feet would be 10' 3.4" x 6' 10.3".

With a 50mm lens at 40 feet, you would have 19' 2.4" x 12' 9.6".


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 14, 2016)

Thanks... I'm always on the same level as target. 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 15, 2016)

The 50mm 1.8 would be a good one to have for shorter distances, as you start getting further out I'd probably look at a 70-200mm F/2.8.  An older model sigma without image stabilization would fit well within your budget.


----------



## The_Traveler (Nov 15, 2016)

Do a search for Scott Nilsson dance photographer. He is a great dance photographer and a great guy.  He has some articles around on how to and those may be of help.
He is responsive to emails.

Lew


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 15, 2016)

Thank you very much!


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Dave442 (Nov 15, 2016)

I have often used the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens for school presentations and such where you can be fairly close to the dancers. It can still be a balance between how high you want to go on the ISO and the shutter speed. 

I also have that 60mm Micro, you can try with that lens and see if there is enough light. So if you are at f/2.8, ISO 6400, 1/125 then with the faster lens you could be at f/1.8, ISO 3200, 1/160.  On the other hand, if you are at f/2.8, ISO 6400 and the shutter speed is under 1/30 of a second then probably even the faster lens is not going to help.  (Note that the 35mm lens focuses much better for me than the 60mm micro in dark environments - using the center focus point).


----------



## Braineack (Nov 15, 2016)

Dave442 said:


> I also have that 60mm Micro, you can try with that lens and see if there is enough light.


this is what i was thinking...


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 15, 2016)

Thank you both I will give it a try! I do still need to buy a new standard lens though


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Derrel (Nov 15, 2016)

Braineack said:


> Dave442 said:
> 
> 
> > I also have that 60mm Micro, you can try with that lens and see if there is enough light.
> ...



See if the 60/2.8 Micro will even focus well enough to get decent hit rate...my 60 Micro is the earlier f/2.8 AF-D version, and it has incredibly, incredibly HAIR-TRIGGER autofocusing at distances longer than 3 feet...it is so,so,so touchy that the slightest miscue results in focus that is 3,4,5,6,10 feet "off". Secondly, the f/2.8 aperture collects less light than a wider aperture.

On a camera like a D5000 ( simple AF system, low-powered CPU to run the AF system), I really do not expect the AF-S f/2.8 60mm Micro~NIKKOR to do all that well as a lens used indoors in dimmer lighting, or on moving subjects; it is not a "standard lens", and never was designed to be a standard lens nor a sports lens; look at where Infinity is, and then look at where 10 feet is on the focusing scale.

I've owned a number of macro lenses...typically they are NOT very good at focusing in lower light, or on fast-moving action, and there's the issue of how many out of focus shots they tend toward giving you; macro lenses are not designed as "field" lenses...


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 15, 2016)

Ok then what would you suggest?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Derrel (Nov 15, 2016)

My original suggestion, and Dave442's post kind of dovetail.

I originally suggested 20mm f/1.8 AF-S G, 24mm f/1.8 AF-S G, 35mm f/1.8, or 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G lenses.

Check Thom's reviews here for lenses. Camera, Lens, and Accessory Reviews | byThom Sites | Thom Hogan

My idea is that for the D5000, you want a semi-wide to normal lens for most shots, and perhaps a long lens, like a 50mm, for your close-range, short telephoto uses. The 35/1.8 *DX-Nikkor* is low-cost;$199 is the normal price for that lens. Note:there is also a high-priced 35mm f/1.8 but it is NOT a DX-Nikkor. 

The 50/1.8 AF-S G is inexpensive. It might also be too long a lens length for many situations, unless you can back up a bit, or want close-framed shots. The original question is a bit broad and vague. Not sure if you mean ballroom dancing, or people in dance clubs? For flash shots of 2 and 3 and 4, the 20mm lens is good from 5 to 12 feet on APS-C cameras.


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 15, 2016)

It's for Rock n Roll dancing. In small country halls/gymnasiums. 


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## Designer (Nov 16, 2016)

Using your 18-55mm zoom, take some test shots (of people, preferably) at the approximate focal lengths as the three lenses that Derrel has recommended.  Since you already have some experience with the distances involved at the actual dance venue, you will be able to see which lens would be the best choice.  Get that lens.


----------



## aubes (Nov 16, 2016)

I would definately recommend the 35mm 1.8 Nikon or even the 50mm. Then the key is to shoot in Manual mode. In this case, i always try to down the iso to 800 (for limiting the noise) and shoot at least at 1/200 if the subject is moving fase, 1/20 is the subject is not moving. And dont forget to shoot in RAW so that you can manage good exposition then.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 16, 2016)

1/200, f1.8, and iso800 is going to result in a very dark image in sub-par lighting conditions.

1/20 is going to result in a very blurry image in all conditions.


----------



## aubes (Nov 16, 2016)

Dont agree. I shot plenty photo at 1/200 iso800 f1.8. And for static subject 1/20 result in perfectly sharp photo 



Braineack said:


> 1/200, f1.8, and iso800 is going to result in a very dark image in sub-par lighting conditions.
> 
> 1/20 is going to result in a very blurry image in all conditions.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 16, 2016)

TheCheekyPixel said:


> It's for Rock n Roll dancing. In small country halls/gymnasiums.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app



A thought occurs, depending on your budget you might want to seriously consider a used Nikon D600.  As far as shooting in lowlight it would be a huge step up from your current D5000.

It would be a larger investment of course, you'd end up having to replace a lot of your current lens line up.  But I think you'd find long term it would also be well worth it if most of what your shooting are in the lighting conditions you describe.


----------



## TheCheekyPixel (Nov 16, 2016)

Hmmm I'll have to look into it... my funds are quite tight but may e


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 16, 2016)

TheCheekyPixel said:


> Hmmm I'll have to look into it... my funds are quite tight but may e
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app



I shoot a D600 myself, in combination with an older Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 without the built in focus motor.  You should be able to pick up both for around $1000 and it would be a very good combo for the types of lighting conditions you describe.




20161006_1382 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

This was shot indoors at the zoo in some pretty bad lighting, I see a world of difference between these and the ones I used to shoot with APS-C.  This was actually shot at ISO 6400.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 16, 2016)

ƒ/5.0

130.0 mm

1/40

6400

assuming you had shot that at f/1.8,  you still would have been at ISO 8000...  ISO 800 would be -3.33EV


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 16, 2016)

Braineack said:


> ƒ/5.0
> 
> 130.0 mm
> 
> ...



Umm...not really sure what your point is, just pointing out the the op that a FF camera and a halfway decent 2.8 lens might be a good idea considering the type of photography he is wanting to do...


----------



## Braineack (Nov 16, 2016)

it just helped support my argument above with aubes


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 17, 2016)

Braineack said:


> it just helped support my argument above with aubes


Ummm... Sure.

Lol

Sent from my N9518 using Tapatalk


----------

