Jump to content
The Official Site of the Carolina Hurricanes
Sign in to follow this  
caniac_80

Type of Camera for GREAT Hockey Pics

Recommended Posts

First of all, if there has already been a thread about this, please direct me and if this is in the wrong spot, please redirect as well.

We are looking to purchase a new camera. We sit in the 300's and would also like to have one that takes some really good photos from up there. I know we will have to probably buy an additional lense and I was just wondering what other people have and what the pros and cons are. We have looked at a couple of Canon's (EOS Rebel XSi and the 40D).

Any thoughts???

I personally would go with the 40D (I am a 30D owner myself), and you'll need a long, fast lens as well.

The 70-200mm f/2.8 L might not be long enough from the 300 section, though I am not sure.

The problem with long lenses is their price tag (for fast lenses anyhow). You can get long lenses that are cheap, but 1) they won't be fast enough aperture wise, and 2) the quality of images won't be as good.

If you're going to be able to get down to the glass, the 85mm f/1.8 prime is a great and less expensive choice.

I took this from section 105 row X (near the top) with my 70-200 f/2.8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just purchased a Canon 40D with the 70-200 lense. I used it for my daughter's soccer game and loved it. Will post photos soon. I'm also thinking of adding another telephoto lense for our upcoming safari trip. Peace Camera in Raleigh has a few used ones I've looked at, but the price tag even for a used is quite high.

Ivy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just purchased a Canon 40D with the 70-200 lense. I used it for my daughter's soccer game and loved it. Will post photos soon. I'm also thinking of adding another telephoto lense for our upcoming safari trip. Peace Camera in Raleigh has a few used ones I've looked at, but the price tag even for a used is quite high.

Ivy

Exactly... the 70-200 is expensive but when you start looking at longer primes the prices goes waaaay up.

For your safari, the 100-400 f4.5-5.6 might work, and its way cheaper than the primes..... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest question would be outside of Canes photos do you really need that much of a camera (and lenses)? Most people who own higher end cameras never use them to their ability and for the price tags they have it really is a steep jump for recreational use. However, SLRs are the only ones out that offer lenses I believe. I have not been in the market for a camera since I bought mine. So weighing out the pros and cons could be something that does not matter due to that. If you picked one of the two cameras, I would go with the best (cheapest) deal. I don't know anybody who uses RAW images, so the mega pixals are not something that should matter, since no SLR is going to be so low it bites.

I own a digital rebel and I love it, but I also work in a media field and have used it for everything from Canes games to jets taking off the flight deck of a carrier, where I was sitting in front (and to the side) of the jet. The pic. of Justin as my avatar was taken at the first pre-season game (Caniac Carnival) from the last row in one of the 100 sections on opposite side of the ice when he was sitting on the boards in front of the bench, the pic in my sig. was taken in the 200s across the ice also. I have action shots of the players at both goals from about mid ice, 200 level and they are very clear. I use one for a background on my computer after cropping it to just the goal from Justin beating Ollie during a Caps game at home. It's a great action shot with the puck in the air still.

Shooting from the 300s you should still get some good shots, but will require some cropping down and a steady hand since close ups that far away can make a blurry photo with the slightest movement you may not believe happened. High speed settings do help, but there are so many variables. As for the lense, I use a 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 LD, Tele-Macro (2:1) lense. I would tell you that if you were sitting in the 300s, do NOT get anything smaller than that. I sometimes find myself wishing I had 400mm and if I can find one for a good price I will pick it up before the next Canes game I go to. Depending on how far up in the 300s you are, the 300mm may not be enough for shots you want. I can't say I have ever tried from that high up, but upper 200s and lower 300s are not too far apart.

Some examples of images with that lense:

Justin scoring from last row (100 section) center ice area non-edited.

Avatar Photo Unedited, taken from same location as above

Was hoping I had some from the 200 level, but I don't on this computer for some reason, so they must be on my laptop back in the states. They are about the same though, just a higher angle.

Hope that helped some, if you want to see any more photos as an example let me know what you are looking for and I will see if I have it from that game on 9/16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points all. You're right on the mark with asking the question of whether or not that much camera is needed outside of Hurricanes pictures. If you are buying it just to use at Canes games, then you have money to burn! :P

I have one disagreement though, as I do think F5.6 (long end of your 70-300mm) is too slow for hockey action.

Also I shoot in RAW most of the time, as it gives you far greater control in post processing than JPEG does.

That being said, I agree RAW is not for everyone!

My biggest question would be outside of Canes photos do you really need that much of a camera (and lenses)? Most people who own higher end cameras never use them to their ability and for the price tags they have it really is a steep jump for recreational use. However, SLRs are the only ones out that offer lenses I believe. I have not been in the market for a camera since I bought mine. So weighing out the pros and cons could be something that does not matter due to that. If you picked one of the two cameras, I would go with the best (cheapest) deal. I don't know anybody who uses RAW images, so the mega pixals are not something that should matter, since no SLR is going to be so low it bites.

I own a digital rebel and I love it, but I also work in a media field and have used it for everything from Canes games to jets taking off the flight deck of a carrier, where I was sitting in front (and to the side) of the jet. The pic. of Justin as my avatar was taken at the first pre-season game (Caniac Carnival) from the last row in one of the 100 sections on opposite side of the ice when he was sitting on the boards in front of the bench, the pic in my sig. was taken in the 200s across the ice also. I have action shots of the players at both goals from about mid ice, 200 level and they are very clear. I use one for a background on my computer after cropping it to just the goal from Justin beating Ollie during a Caps game at home. It's a great action shot with the puck in the air still.

Shooting from the 300s you should still get some good shots, but will require some cropping down and a steady hand since close ups that far away can make a blurry photo with the slightest movement you may not believe happened. High speed settings do help, but there are so many variables. As for the lense, I use a 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 LD, Tele-Macro (2:1) lense. I would tell you that if you were sitting in the 300s, do NOT get anything smaller than that. I sometimes find myself wishing I had 400mm and if I can find one for a good price I will pick it up before the next Canes game I go to. Depending on how far up in the 300s you are, the 300mm may not be enough for shots you want. I can't say I have ever tried from that high up, but upper 200s and lower 300s are not too far apart.

Some examples of images with that lense:

Justin scoring from last row (100 section) center ice area non-edited.[/post]

Avatar Photo Unedited, taken from same location as above

Was hoping I had some from the 200 level, but I don't on this computer for some reason, so they must be on my laptop back in the states. They are about the same though, just a higher angle.

Hope that helped some, if you want to see any more photos as an example let me know what you are looking for and I will see if I have it from that game on 9/16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the best lens out there, but the price was super nice when I picked it up compared to the Cannons. I do have minor challenges with it, but it has always given me a good shot from the 200s and lower no matter the lighting when I toy with settings on the camera. I can't complain for the price I paid for it. If somebody other then me paid for the lens, I would jump all over a Cannon lens. I spend too much money on hockey gear which I use way more then my camera :)

For the normal shooter however, as my pics prove, its not a bad lens (not sure why I kept saying lense..jet lag maybe?) and can give some good shots. Just a matter of how much money a person is willing to sink into the products to get the best possible product. I don't use my camera much anymore really, so for me it was the smarter way to go. (I am now working in the video field, so its used only for personal photos)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone for the information! I think we have decided to go with the Canon Rebel XSi. We will also be buying an additional lense that will help out some with pics from the 300 level (cannot remember which one it is right now, but it is not a cheap one). We are actually going to get our lense from Peace Camera. The guy we talked to this past weekend was pretty helpful. Even found a couple of camera bags we liked better than other ones we had picked out somewhere else. We have decided to get 2 bags. One bigger one to "tote" all the stuff we are planning to buy over an extended amount of time and one to take "out on the town" where we only the camera and 1-2 lenses. We are just beginners in all of this and hope we can get the hang of it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... it's all Greek to me. What about a Nikon S550? I know for the 300's it's not going to do much, but sitting in the 100's and even lower 200's, does anyone have any experience with these? Or the Nikon P80?? Any feedback?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm... it's all Greek to me. What about a Nikon S550? I know for the 300's it's not going to do much, but sitting in the 100's and even lower 200's, does anyone have any experience with these? Or the Nikon P80?? Any feedback?

Unfortunately I haven't had any experience with these. The problem I have seen with point and shoot cameras is that they react too slow for fast action. That being said, I am sure from the 100's you'd likely be able to get some fine shots with it. I did notice that the P80 says it has enhanced speed, not sure what that means but maybe the reaction times have improved. Best thing to do is visit the store and give them a try. :-)

-Gregg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...