Hockey with 7d at ISO 6400

I think these look pretty good. I am not sure what the lighting is like there but where I shoot at I have to say I have the worst lighting in the world.

Here is my set up and settings I use most of the time when I shoot.

1D mkIII 70-200 ISO 2000 AV Mode F2.8 and I let the camera pick the shutter speed normally its between 1/400 and 1/640 I also set my EV to +2/3 and I have pretty good results with this set up.


I also wouldnt use a mono pod for hockey, your getting fast enough shutter speeds that you don't need one. Personally thats a tell tale sing your not a pro and the group of guys that I shoot with make fun of the mono pod / lens hood combo.

these are some of my resent shots with this set up.

Thanks guys. I was checking out your hockey thread Brandon, some nice shots in there. You much have better lighting than me as I'm at ISO 6400 f/ 2.8 and 1/640. Many of my shots are still underexposed by a 1/3rd stop or so. I've thought about getting a 1d mIII but I think it would be too close of a side step to change.

There isn't much room by the player benches to shoot without glass being in the way. Although I do get the luxury of shooting from wherever I want along the glass. Although behind the net is usually very dirty with puck marks.

So, what's wrong with using a lens hood?

dogdstr223 wrote in post #15369852
So, what's wrong with using a lens hood?

Nothing I guess. I just prefer my little rubber one so I can press right up to the glass. It gets me closer for less glare and I'm not rubbing on the actual lens.

cstewart wrote in post #15364909
As to lighting, local minor hockey rinks are often horrible for light. 4000-6400 ISO is not uncommon. Shoot as wide open as you want, keep shutter at 1/500 or higher depending on age group and speed of game, don't use IS, and ensure your AF settings are on centre point (or sometimes I'll use the double points just above the centre point), AI servo, etc.

You mention not to use IS. Is there a reason for this? The reason why I'm asking is I am looking into purchasing a 70-200 2.8 lens. Either Canon, Sigma or Tamron. Just haven't decided if I need IS or not for shooting hockey.

I use a Canon 70-200 2.8 ii IS (most of the time) and use IS about 50% of the time. I can't decide if I really needed to make investment. But it did come with a really nice hood!

ive shot with a couple of pros who use a monopod with their rigs, but they run a sigma 120-300 f2.8 on a FF nikon. thats a pretty hefty set up to shoot an entire game with. most of the time theyre shooting mid ice AT ice level or in the stands for a little bit more separation...

Paxonator wrote in post #15366218
I find when I use the center point for focusing the framing is not as great for my photos. I need to crop more to get the photo I want. Do you think the center point would help that much for focusing?

YES it does, especially for hockey. I crop virtually all my sports photos anyway... use the axiom, shoot tight, crop tighter... By using centre point you can keep the focus where you want it and on the player you want it on, not have it drift off to another player because the camera senses it is a better focal point. Once you get used to keeping your main player in the cetnre, cropping afterward is a non-issue,

Also I can shoot from pretty much wherever I want at the glass in the rink. I bought a little rubber hood so I can press up against the glass keeping the reflections minimal. Of course when the action approaches the glass I back off.

I normally shoot raw but my hard drive has taken a beating over the last couple of years!! So for sports I've started shooting jpeg.

For hockey in dark rinks when you know you are going to have to make adjustments to the lighting in post, you should bite the hard drive bullet and shoot RAW. You will have much better success at rescuing dark images, reducing noise, etc. I shoot regularly at 4000-6400 ISO in our rink here with great results mainly because of the latitude I can get to edit the RAW images.

see reply in bold

Brandon Anderson Photos wrote in post #15367517
I also wouldnt use a mono pod for hockey, your getting fast enough shutter speeds that you don't need one. Personally thats a tell tale sing your not a pro and the group of guys that I shoot with make fun of the mono pod / lens hood combo.

A tell tale sign you are not a pro? Seriously? I can't say anyone has ever pointed that out to me when I use mine. Perhaps its time to find new friends

While it may not be technically needed from a shutter speed point of view, here are three key reasons I use mine when shooting hockey down on the glass:

1. My camera is up and ready to shoot at all times. I don't need to pull it up to the glass, then down, then up, etc. It is always there, ready to go. Plus I can swivel it easily on the monopod to follow the action as needed

2. It keeps my camera level, resulting in less post processing to correct tilt and thus less time in post.

3. It reduces wear and tear on my arms and shoulders. See 1 above...not having to physically support my camera and lens combo (1D MkIV and 70-200) for 2.5 hours and bring it up and down to glass is a great advantage. Yes I suppose all you macho young types may frown upon this, but just wait a few years and you will see what I mean!

I will also shoot every so often from up top with my 1D Mk IV and 300f2.8 and if you think I am going to try and hand hold that, no thanks.

hikermk wrote in post #15371145
You mention not to use IS. Is there a reason for this? The reason why I'm asking is I am looking into purchasing a 70-200 2.8 lens. Either Canon, Sigma or Tamron. Just haven't decided if I need IS or not for shooting hockey.

Image Stabilization is designed to be effective in low light, low SHUTTER SPEED situations, when you need a bit more stabilization to prevent camera shake. Since most if not all sports are shot at high shutter speeds (1/400 or greater) the IS really does not add much if anything. Mine is always off when shooting sports.

Nice shots. Congrats on getting a paying job! You mentioned the 85 f/1.8. With the 7D's ability to crop, that might be a good way for you to be able to bring down the ISO and keep the shutter speed up. I used the 85 on a Canon 40D for two seasons with a ISO of between 800 and 1600. Currently, I'm using a 70-200 f/2.8 with an ISO setting of 6400 on a 1D III. PP for noise, of course, is necessary as the rinks around here are a bit dim.

If I put a plastic lens hood on the 70-200, I just end up banging it on the glass, the edge of the boards... you name it. The best thing I've bought in ages was a rubber hood that screws on. It was less than $8.

If you check out my flickr page, I think the shots from December 14th were with the 85 f/1.8; those from the 15th are definitely with the zoom lens. I'm still learning!

Great shots... Loved the third shot.

Canon 7D settings:
1/400, ISO 2000, f 2.8, AI Servo, white balance off the boards or the "dirty" ice from the game before. RAW only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those gas lights fluctuate wildly. You will see red/green/pink etc in motor drive shots. You can correct this in RAW.

If you cut your shutter speed in half and drop your ISO by half, this should be a great noise-reduction system. Shoot NHL at 1/1200th. The kids are fine at 1/500 MAX. You have good anticipation, keep up what you're doing. Adjust a smidge of iso, a pinch of shutter speed as necessary. No mono pod required unless you shoot a 300mm. Do a few push ups, it'll make you feel better (tongue in cheek)

Processing tips if these help to come.

Don't be afraid to shoot to the right. You can get the details back. At 1/400th, handheld means squat. I keep the panning servo on 24/7. Tripods/mono pods only restrict your movement and look pretty stupid. These settings should freeze action acceptably.

Cheers,
Jeff

get away from auto white balance, aren't the sweaters supposed to be white, they have a heavy blue tint to them, image 2 has a heavy green tint, do a custom white balance at each rink you shoot, will get rid of the tints.

cstewart...

I'm intrigued by your post (not using IS for sports). I'm looking to add one of Canon's EF lenses to my collection especially for indoor high school basketball and volleyball. Now I'm using my 2.8L 70-200 IS USM and want to add a fast prime. Choices at 85mm are the 1.2 (non-IS) and the new 1.4 with IS. Price is essentially equal; both are full-frame; both are "L".

I shoot with a 5d iii and a 7D ii.

My logic is that at sports shutter speeds (1/800 or faster... mostly at 1/1000) there is minimal if any benefit to IS. It seems you agree. This would push me to the 1.2 but...

Are there reasons I haven't thought of that I might regret not having IS?

THANK YOU for any thoughts you may have.