Feedback on using XP2 for available light shots

I've made arrangements for a young (13 y.o.) trumpet player to meet Wynton Marsalis (her idol...how many 13 y.o.'s even know who he is!) backstage after a performance. It's going to be a surprise for her and is very important as her grandfather had been her trumpet teacher and mentor until he died a while back. She needs a bit of inspiration to get her back on track with her music.
About 99% of my photo work has been done with a tripod, which won't be practical in this situation. So I'm planning on using Ilford XP2 Super since it's been a good friend to me over the years. I have usually rated it at ASA 320 or 250. But since I'm expecting it to be a fairly low-light situation, I'm thinking of shooting it at ASA 800.
Any feedback on this, or other recommendations, would be appreciated.
Also, any suggestions on what lens (28mm, 50mm, 28-105 zoom) to use? I'll be shooting with my trusty Pentax ZX-50. Thanks!

Mark H said:

I've made arrangements for a young (13 y.o.) trumpet player to meet Wynton Marsalis (her idol...how many 13 y.o.'s even know who he is!) backstage after a performance. It's going to be a surprise for her and is very important as her grandfather had been her trumpet teacher and mentor until he died a while back. She needs a bit of inspiration to get her back on track with her music.
About 99% of my photo work has been done with a tripod, which won't be practical in this situation. So I'm planning on using Ilford XP2 Super since it's been a good friend to me over the years. I have usually rated it at ASA 320 or 250. But since I'm expecting it to be a fairly low-light situation, I'm thinking of shooting it at ASA 800.
Any feedback on this, or other recommendations, would be appreciated.
Also, any suggestions on what lens (28mm, 50mm, 28-105 zoom) to use? I'll be shooting with my trusty Pentax ZX-50. Thanks!

Click to expand...

I had a similar situation about a year ago, only the artist was Andre Watts and it was my wife who was the life-long fan! During the concert I used my Cosina R2S RF and shot XP-2 pushed to 800. I got some good results although we were about 4 or 5 rows back so there were some annoying "heads" in the way on many!

If you're meeting Wynton backstage afterwards, why do you assume it will be a low light situation? In the similar situation with Watts (a reception afterwards), I used my (don't kill me here folks) dSLR because it had a built-in flash unit (I wanted to stay light). You should be able to shoot 400 flat with a flash during the "meeting".

BTW: is it one of the Jazz@Lincoln Center concerts that you're attending? We're subscribers, and I'll be there on the 29th.

EDIT: Just to note. The Andre Watts event was a special recital at a nearby self-help community for mentally retarded adults and there were no restrictions on taking photos during the performance. Obviously, Jazz@LC prohibits the taking of such at its concerts and I was not advocating violating that rule!

Thanks for the info.
The concert is in Utica NY on March 27. I won't be shooting during the performance. And I'm not 100% sure they'll let me shoot backstage, but I'll come prepared.
As for the lighting, I'm not crazy about using flash: the on camera flash is too harsh; the flash unit I own is unpredictable as to whether it works or not on any given shot. I haven't had great luck using flash for B&W. So I'd prefer using available light. I will have a digital P&S for color.
There is a bit of anxiety surrounding this whole adventure, never having done this before.

My folks saw Wynton's band when they were in town here last week. Apparently it was an amazing show.

Anyway, be careful about underexposing XP2 Super. In my experience it tends to look horribly grainy with insufficient exposure.

I'm sure that XP2 will be good for this -
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
was shot in available light at f:3.5. It wasn't XP2, but Kodak's equivalent. It's almost as good as XP2.

Mark H said:

Also, any suggestions on what lens (28mm, 50mm, 28-105 zoom) to use?

Click to expand...

Dear Mark,

Whatever's fastest, surely. Then you can use it wide open, and box speed shouldn't be a problem. I'll second the point about grain with underexposed XP2, but it should still be more than tolerable.

My own inclination would be to use proper fast film (Delta 3200, probably with the meter set at 2000 -- a bit of overexposure won't hurt, and this gives you a bigger cushion against accidental underexposure) but another point is how long you personally can hand hold your camera. I normally use Leicas but with SLRs I often find I can hold them steadier if I'm looking through an accessory finder in the shoe. Don't be afraid to shoot 'too long' hand-held exposures, too: you can get interesting effects, still more than recognizable, with a lot of drama to them.

Cheers,

R. (www.rogerandfrances.com)

Yeah, as Roger says, if it was me I'd think about how long I could hand-hold and then choose the film accordingly.

Personally, I'd also be inclined to go with a fast film -- 1600 or 3200 ASA -- and the fastest lens I have. As it happens I really like shooting with a standard 50mm lens and those also generally happen to be the fastest cheap lenses so that works out nicely.

Also, if the images are crucial, I'd bracket the exposures.

My experience with XP2 has been great when exposed at EI 400, or even better with a stop or 2 overexposure. I use a fair bit of it because it is so handy. However, I have found it produces grain like oatmeal when underexposed, and found that tonality goes muddy. In short, I don't like its look for available light. I would be inclined to use tri-x, pushed to suit the light level.

Ken