Ice Hockey.....QMJHL

Hey all,

First run at ice hockey since I went digital.....whenever the 300D came out Which surprises me since I breathe the game......

http://jalbum.net/brow​se/user/album/103471/

Some notes:

1) Sat two rows from top of lower bowl - closer to one net than the other.
2) 30D
3) 200mm 2.8L
4) Quick PP was cropping, curves, and some USM. Some could stand for more cropping, but that's personal taste sometimes.
5) Through the glass was garbage...including with the lens right on it.

Next time I go:

1) Try and grab a lower seat. The usher let me switch seats as I had a free ticket.
2) Try and sneak the purchase of the 300 2.8 past my wifey......but I don't think that'll happen

Constructive critism appreciated!

Thunderbird33 wrote in post #7176706
2) Try and sneak the purchase of the 300 2.8 past my wifey......but I don't think that'll happen

YES! I'm trying to figure out the same thing! I think these are much stronger than your 1st ones - as for the gear, you have a great lens for sports - make due with what you have 1st.

I like the clarity and exposure of your shots; great action captures on #'s 4 and 7.

I, personally, would crop a bit tighter on most of the shots.

#8 doesn't do anything for me- no puck, no face.

Were these shots taken above the glass and through netting?

Terry

kwkodiak wrote in post #7185651
#8 doesn't do anything for me- no puck, no face.

adds to the mystery

kwkodiak wrote in post #7185651
I like the clarity and exposure of your shots; great action captures on #'s 4 and 7.

I, personally, would crop a bit tighter on most of the shots.

#8 doesn't do anything for me- no puck, no face.

Were these shots taken above the glass and through netting?

Terry

I was second row from the top of lower bowl.....as far as cropping goes...I'm just going to go for a lower seat on the aisle...hopefully I can get one about 10 rows lower so the 200mm gets a "natural crop"

If Canon only made a 250mm or 300mm like the 200 (but a bit more expensive of course).

The 200mm is huge bang for the buck.....and then it costs $3500 more to go up to 300mm!

Thought about the 1.4x converter, but figured I'd lose too much for what it's worth.

I know what you mean about shooting through glass; the only time I ever liked the results was at our pro (AHL) rink. Looking forward to seeing some shots from lower down.