Hello Rick, Unless the spot lights are good, that is a very slow lens to be using. I would lean towards the 1600 speed film. You do have the additional issue of color balance. A filter will take care of that, but at the cost of some light - seems like about a 1-2 stops. Another reason to push toward the 1600 end.
Here is a play that I shot last year on digital - mix of 800 and 1600 ISO, some lenses were as slow as 5.6, but usually around 2.8 - 4.0. http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/OJHPlay/index.htm This is really where the digital realm shines - you can set white balance without loss of light and the high ISO's are much nicer than super grainy films at that speed. I wish you luck, man. It is quite fun to shoot. -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, February 28, 2005, 7:41:07 AM, you wrote: RW> I'm going to be shooting a high school play in a few RW> days. The lighting isn't great, and since I'll be RW> using the 80-320 zoom on my PZ-1p a fair amount I'd RW> like to keep the shutter speed respectable. RW> Would I be better off (1) using 800-speed film and RW> underexposing it by a stop; (2) using 800-speed film RW> and asking the lab to push it; or (3) using 1600 speed RW> film? RW> I used (3) a few years ago, and the grain was rather RW> coarse. RW> Rick RW> __________________________________________________ RW> Do You Yahoo!? RW> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around RW> http://mail.yahoo.com
