Hockey related but applies universally in low light shooting...

Simple question that I have my own thoughts on but would love to hear others... Are we better off shooting higher ISO and cropping much less due to the addition of a TC or shooting lower ISO and bigger crops? Background info is that I am shooting with a 1D3 and 70-200 MkII with or without 1.4x TC. Last game I shot was at 1/500 f2.8 and 2000ISO. Thinking about adding the TC which would obviously lose a stop of light but gain reach. 3600+ ISO is pushing the 1D3 out of its comfort zone in my opinion, even when properly exposed. Jut curious about other perspectives on this. FYI, I will not be shooting TTG so that does help the cause a fair amount.

namasste wrote in post #17412172
Simple question that I have my own thoughts on but would love to hear others... Are we better off shooting higher ISO and cropping much less due to the addition of a TC or shooting lower ISO and bigger crops? Background info is that I am shooting with a 1D3 and 70-200 MkII with or without 1.4x TC. Last game I shot was at 1/500 f2.8 and 2000ISO. Thinking about adding the TC which would obviously lose a stop of light but gain reach. 3600+ ISO is pushing the 1D3 out of its comfort zone in my opinion, even when properly exposed. Jut curious about other perspectives on this. FYI, I will not be shooting TTG so that does help the cause a fair amount.

I would say higher ISO's and use a noise reduction filter above ISO 3200 then you can get higher shutter speeds. I use "Neat Image" but others use Topaz or Noise Ninja, etc.

Depends a lot on the AF performance of the combo with the TC.

But my take is that at a low ISO like 2000, I wouldn't hesitate to use a TC if I trusted the AF. But I'm usually at ISO 12800 at f/2.8 and 1/800, so I've not had such a luxury. I consider ISO 12800 to be a limit for my bodies, and I do not crop sports images much.

Instead I got a Sigma 120-300/2.8 instead of a 1.4X TC for sports reach.

various things i've learned shooting hockey games

My hardware I use
5D3, 7D2, 70-200 II, 135 F2 L, 200 2.8 L, 100-400 II

- TC works as long as you don't have to shoot through netting - if so, forget about it - you will too often catch the net and miss critical pictures - it is extremely frustrating and if I see a net the TC does not get used ever

- spend a few days watching Youtube videos on Noise Reduction (yes days) and you can seriously improve your hockey pictures at higher ISOs

- unless you are shooting tykes (6-8 year olds) 1/500 is too slow for hockey - I hate using even 1/640 and only if we are talking about gruesomely low light would I even consider 1/640 - 1/800 is not even cool with me but I will accept it and go for images where you are not trying to stop the action

- I start at 1/1000, F2.8, ISO 3200 as a baseline in every arena - a pro arena with good lighting if you slip in the 135 F2 as a non-pro camera, then ISO 2000, SS 1/1600 F2 is fantastic on the 7D2

- i have learned with hockey with lots of practice with noise reduction, masking, etc - to accept up to ISO 6400 so I can use SS 1/1000

- when i experimented with the 100-400 II on the 5D3 at F5 I was shooting at 6400 and it worked fine (this is an attempt to answer in an indirect way your TC question)

- personally, I shoot in AI Servo with BB Focus, I also try and pre-focus as much as possible, and yet if the TC slows down the focus grabbing at all I would rather just crop without a TC

- not sure I have helped at all - other than to say try exploring higher ISOs (which might make your TC work) and up those SS as well

interesting so far guys, thanks for replying. I have no qualms using the tc as the AF is not hampered at all on the 1D3/70-200 II UNLESS shooting TTG or netting. Then it can play havoc and the light loss is too great TTG to make it workable. I used to use Noise Ninja but think there may be better options. A few observations though, from my experience at least, I disagree on needing 1/800ish speeds and also that shooting in pro arenas is really "all that" in terms of lighting. Some are good and usually better than most HS rinks but unless you are shooting house strobes, its not as good as one might think, even through the cutouts. Shutter wise, you have to be aware of the angles you shoot but I've found that even at the pro level, I've been able to use 1/500 with no problems at all. This is particularly true if shooting objects moving towards me which is my preferred style (and maybe why I don't struggle with such a "slow" speed). To each his.her own I suppose.

All that said, I think I'll throw the TC on for the bench shots from next game and leave it off for anything TTG. My gut tells me that noise is better than the IQ degradation from larger crops but I was curious if I was alone on that or not. I'll check back to see if anyone differs in opinion and post a few samples later with no noise reduction to give an idea of what my baseline is. Thanks again.

namasste wrote in post #17413467
My gut tells me that noise is better than the IQ degradation from larger crops but I was curious if I was alone on that or not.

This is 'one' of the reasons for my 1/1000 SS - I crop a lot - basically every picture. After lots of experimentation, getting a crisp picture at higher ISO, that I can then use noise reduction on, is far, far, far better than a less crisp but cleaner ISO.

embrace the high ISO

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #17413653
This is 'one' of the reasons for my 1/1000 SS - I crop a lot - basically every picture. After lots of experimentation, getting a crisp picture at higher ISO, that I can then use noise reduction on, is far, far, far better than a less crisp but cleaner ISO.

embrace the high ISO

I have to agree. I think I want to holy grail of course but there's always a tradeoff, right? I know I can't push the 1D3 to 1/1000 ss with acceptable noise at the ISO that would require (over 3200). At 1/500, I can live with 2000ISO and just have to be very careful about how I am shooting. I may be able to push to 1/640 and slightly higher ISO with some NR software but I think much more would be iffy. If I can ask, which NR program are you using?

I use Lightroom and after a lot of experimenting and watching good Youtube videos on NR in Lightroom, where I use to never go above ISO 3200 on the 5D3 and 2500 on the 7D2, I now feel comfortable up to ISO 6400 on both cameras. The full extra stop, plus generally pushing it another 1/2 to full stop in Post, but also pulling down the highlights to keep the ice from blowing out, is where I have ended up if required to keep the SS at 1/1000. I tried 1/800 and 1/640 in order to not go above ISO 3200 but the results were NO WHERE NEAR as good as moving the ISO up to keep 1/1000 and then using NR + the required Lightroom sliders to get the look I wanted. These are not wedding caliber pictures with slow moving people - I feel, unless you are going for a blurred look, that you need to start with crisp and sharp - and then solve for the required ISO - which is often in the 3200-6400 range - and then experiment and experiment and find whatever NR is required to give the best look - the end result is better (at least in my experience with my gear).

Scott, to return to your original question you should run a few test shots and pixel peep to make your own determination. I have a 1.4 tele vII and I have found that cropping in on my 5D3 sensor is better than the added multiplication of the tele. I lose a stop in speed and add blur from the optics. I have thought of trying a vIII tele to see if it is noticeably better in sharpness. I am willing to accept less light to the sensor if there is no reduction in sharpness. Of course I have no problem going to ISO 12,800.

Great points Dave and I agree. I've never really done a controlled side by side test with and without the TC (apart from micro adjusting). I'm guessing you are probably correct. Even with the TC, there is still likely going to be a need to crop and that, combined with the TC could really degrade IQ. I'll upload some samples shortly of a game I just did with no TC, pretty heavy crops, and no NR done. Be curious what you think. I haven't been shooting sports much in the last few years, at least not like I used to so I did notice that my timing was not as crisp as I like it to be. Got another game this Saturday so at least more practice is imminent!

here's a few samples as I mentioned. All with 1D3 and 70-200 f/2.8 II. Same settings on all, 1/400 - f/2.8 - 2000ISO. No noise reduction or levels adjustment, only USM at 150/.6/5, all are fairly heavy crops. As you can see, they are noisy and there is some motion noticeable. Obviously, I have some room to play with on shutter and ISO to eliminate the motion but going back to the issue, the noise will get nasty on this body at much higher. I feel I need to go back to using NR software and shooting higher ISO and shutter while at the same time, reducing the crops. Thoughts (apart from how rusty I have obviously gotten?)

You can fix noise, you can't fix motion blur. I would try a faster shutter speed and work some noise reduction in post.

FWIW- I've never been happy with the TC added to any of my gear. I've tried it with the 1dx, the 5d2, the 7d, with the 70-200 2.8 II, the 400 5.6, 200 2.8, and the sigma 120-300 2.8. I am SO wanting it to work... but I always come back to the same conclusion- The shots look better if I crop more in processing and leave the TC off.

I own the 1.4 TC from Kenko (the better one). I've borrowed the 1.4 lll from CPS. Neither has been any better.

Just my 2 cents....

I've had good luck with the Canon TC provided the light was great. In questionable light, I have to agree that it's not an ideal solution. Wish I still had my 300 2.8 but since I don't, I have to sort out the alternatives. I'll see what happens tomorrow at some higher SS and higher ISO.

I think the colors are great in these pictures - whether you are selling them at tournaments or providing them to families on the teams. These pictures are far, far better than any non-semi pro with a good camera could ever produce and any parent would love these images - the fact that there is some small blur doesn't matter in their eyes and in fact I would guess that some actually like it.

With all the above said, and given what I am seeing, I think you could easily half the shutter speed to 1/800, push the ISO to 3200, add a little NR and all that would be noticed without pixel peaking is most if not all the motion blur would be gone. In my experience 1/1000 is where 99% of it disappears - even at 1/800 the eye picks it up in about 20% of the pictures - at 1/1000, the eye is at least fooled that it is tack sharp - although from experience shooting the World Juniors in the Air Canada Center (home of the Maple Leafs), 1/1600 is where tack sharp really begins.

Thanks for that. I am definitely going to push the shutter speed tomorrow. Oddly, I played hockey for most of my life (at some reasonably high levels) and yet despite shooting pro and NCAA sports for years, its one sport I have very little experience with in terms of shooting. Picking up advice here is always invaluable, especially in situations like this so again, thanks much to you and everyone who has responded.