Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Best lens for close up sports photography

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    lovelifegivelif

    I have been given the opportunity to photograph an ice hockey team during their matches. Can someone advise me as to what would be the best focal length/range for getting good close up shots from a few feet up to 100ft away.

    Thanks for any help or advice.

    Trevor

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    28 Jul 2006 - 1:49 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    strawman
    strawman  1022010 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
    28 Jul 2006 - 2:20 PM

    Not done Ice hocky, but for football if you can get to the side of a pitch, 50-200mm covers most of the action on a crop camera, with an occasional excursion up to about 400mm for close up on faces from a distance.

    But, Ice hockey sounds like indoors to me, and that suggests low light levels and artificial light. So you will want as fast a lens as possible, and you will want to run as high ISO as possible to keep the shutter speed up and if you use digital use RAW to get the white balance fixed afterwards.

    So lenses a 70-200 f2.8 would be good, as would a couple of fast primes, 50mm f1.8 and a 28mm for some wide shots, and perhaps a good 300mm or 400mm prime.

    wotashot
    wotashot  102249 forum posts
    28 Jul 2006 - 2:26 PM

    I've never shot Ice Hockey - but I know a man that has and he swears by a 70-200 f2.8

    I have however shot indoor volleyball, fast glass is essential. Primes (while excellent for sharpness and quality) aren't all that practical without a zoom on a second body. I would go for a 70-200 f2.8 or a 300mm f2.8 (not on its own though!). Anything with a narrower apperture and you'll struggle to focus and blur lots of shots.

    HTH

    J

    lovelifegivelif

    That's great, thanks for your help. I've had a look through the gallery and on deviantart as well and most of the sports photography seems to use a 70-200mm.

    Strawman/wotashot (or anyone else) what can you explain what a prime is and what would be considered fast and also what you meant by a crop camera?

    Thanks again for your help.

    tepot
    tepot  104416 forum posts United Kingdom
    28 Jul 2006 - 3:52 PM

    i would certainly go with the 70-200 f2.8 because of the low light levels you may experience indoors.

    Superficial
    28 Jul 2006 - 4:02 PM


    Quote: Strawman/wotashot (or anyone else) what can you explain what a prime is and what would be considered fast and also what you meant by a crop camera?

    Fast = large max aperture (small f number) so it lets more light in and therefore allows a faster shutter speed.

    Crop camera is basically any budget SLR whose sensor does not use the full size of the lens, but I will let you google that - there's no point me trying to explain here.

    Prime = not a zoom.

    strawman
    strawman  1022010 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
    29 Jul 2006 - 9:32 PM


    Quote: Crop camera is basically any budget SLR whose sensor does not use the full size of the lens

    Ooh owners of pro Nikon digital cameras may take you to task on that.

    As has been pointed out a prime lens is a fixed focal length lens.

    Good luck with your event.

    Carabosse
    Carabosse e2 Member 1139544 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
    29 Jul 2006 - 10:23 PM

    Yes the 2500 Nikon D2X is a budget 'crop' DSLR - for those with a fair sized budget! Lol! Grin

    joewarner
    joewarner  8
    29 Jul 2006 - 11:11 PM

    Canon 200mm 1.8 would do the trick, + a 1.4 extender if neededSmile

    klewis
    klewis  101870 forum posts United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    30 Jul 2006 - 10:42 AM

    Am I allowed to drool over the Canon 200mm f1.8 lens? The sharpest lens in the world and they stopped making it Sad

    ZenTog
    ZenTog  127875 forum posts England1 Constructive Critique Points
    30 Jul 2006 - 10:56 AM

    200 1.8 very nice and very expensive , if you can find one to buy, probally outside the budget of an am and most pros.
    go for a 70-200 2.8 IS model. forget the 1.4 for now as you are going to need every stop of light you can gather. so the 2.8 aperture of this lens will be the best bet, its also very sharp and one of the fastest lenses focus wise

    croberts
    croberts  102160 forum posts Ireland8 Constructive Critique Points
    30 Jul 2006 - 11:23 AM

    100mm f2. really fast focussing, nice and bright, and nice and light, and nice and cheap. :o) class lens for indoor sport. or the 135mm f2 L, if your feeling flush.

    there is also the 200mm 2.8L, another great lens at a great price.

    if you went with the 100 f2, then Just sit as close as you can, to the goal that your home team are shooting into, then you'll get faces as they race towards you, trying to score.

    Unless the pics will need to be printed large, you can just crop into the shots that are further away.

    lovelifegivelif

    Thanks for everyone's help with this.

    Most of the shots should be within 20 meters and it's about 30 meters to the half way line, do you think a 100mm lens will be enough to cope with this? Hopefully I should be free to move around so I should be able to get shots of the home team keeper that way but otherwise it'll be 60 meters to the other end of the rink so I'm guessing there wont be much detail if I used a 100mm lens from that distance but would that be ok for subject up to 30 meters away?

    Also can anyone offer advice on a 2x converter, what is the quality of the pictures if I would attach one to a 100mm lens to extend it to 200mm, does the quality suffer a lot?

    Thanks again for all the help, it's a lot more than you get from most other sites.

    stevebostock
    31 Jul 2006 - 2:15 PM

    trevor,
    for daylight work i get away with using a 100-400 on a 20D and a 28-105 on a 300D (till i can get another 20 / 30)
    but it does cause issues under low light / floodlights

    I would certainly look at the 70-200

    the 28-105 with the extender on is not bad but the aperture loss for the extender is the killer, you really need the quick aperture under floodlights.


    with the 70-200 and a 2x you'd be looking at F4 constant which may just be enough, at high iso, to get the job done, cheaper than a big prime and more versatile but at the expense of speed and quality i suspect
    my 2p worth
    steveb

    lovelifegivelif

    Everyone's help has been amazing, thank you so much.

    I wanted to ask advice about exposure and photo's on the ice and have opened up a thread in the 'Taking Photos' section as it's probably more relevant there, if it's not too cheeky to ask for even more advice from everyone would they be able to visit the thread there to help.

    Thank you all again.

    Trevor

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.