Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 12, 2010, 10:15 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
FredS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 1,007
Default What lense for an indoor hockey game ?

I am going to a Calgary Hitmen hockey game tonight.
In the Calgary Saddle Dome.
I thought I would bring my E-520 with a 40-150 or 70-300
I am sitting in row 10 not to far up.
Which lense works better in low light ?
Probally wide open, ISO 800 and shutter 800 or 1000 if that can be pulled off ?

Thanks in advance
Fred..
FredS is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 12, 2010, 11:14 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Hi Fred,

I'm no hockey expert. The fellow here who has done extensive work photographing NHL hockey games is Greg Chappell. Here is a link to his most recent post in the micro fourthirds forum complete with photos and explanation.

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/ol...hl-action.html

He has also used the E-30 and E-620 dslrs as well. Her is a link to his hockey gallery images on Smugmug.com

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/Sports...26276321_p3Bss

I can only add that if I were going to the hockey game, I would take the 40-150mm. If it is the older vesion, it's a stop faster on both ends than the 70-300mm. Be prepared to shoot at ISO 1600 and 2000 and doing some noise cleanup in pp.

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2010, 11:30 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
folob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 855
Default

I'll go with the 40-150 (hoping it is the Mark I) as the 70-300 is way too slow. The 12-60 will be better but not that much.
folob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2010, 12:04 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
FredS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by folob View Post
I'll go with the 40-150 (hoping it is the Mark I) as the 70-300 is way too slow. The 12-60 will be better but not that much.
It is the MK II. f 4-5.6 ( not the best )

Fred..
FredS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2010, 12:15 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,531
Default

Greg's your man for this one ..he's got lots of experience shooting ice hockey and I think hes used both lenses, and the 70-300 did surprising well. It'll also depend on how well lit the stadium is going to be and yeah you'll be shooting pretty much wide open and at ISo800-1600.
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2010, 11:13 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Sorry I missed this earlier...was out and about today.

Is the Saddle Dome still where the Flames play? No doubt the possibility of good lighting is there. Just depends on how high they raise them. Either the 40-150 f4-5.6 or 70-300 work OK with NHL lighting, but will require your going all the way to ISO 1600 with the E520, which by now you've probably already found out. From 10 rows, assuming the lights are up to good levels, the main issues will probably revolve around the glass getting in the way with strange lines in odd places where the borders of the glass intersect the rink. That's one of the reasons why I stay in the lower rows (row 1 preferrably) of the upper deck.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2010, 1:04 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
FredS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Calgary Alberta
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
Sorry I missed this earlier...was out and about today.

Is the Saddle Dome still where the Flames play? No doubt the possibility of good lighting is there. Just depends on how high they raise them. Either the 40-150 f4-5.6 or 70-300 work OK with NHL lighting, but will require your going all the way to ISO 1600 with the E520, which by now you've probably already found out. From 10 rows, assuming the lights are up to good levels, the main issues will probably revolve around the glass getting in the way with strange lines in odd places where the borders of the glass intersect the rink. That's one of the reasons why I stay in the lower rows (row 1 preferrably) of the upper deck.
Thanks Greg.
Yes that is where the Flames play. Lately its the Calgary Shames
I now know what you mean about the glass. I moved to Row 6
Upper Deck . My view was clear of Glass .
The lighting was good so ISO 800 was OK. I tried some ISO 1600
shots. Noisy. I will have to try some noise reduction software.

Fred..
FredS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2010, 1:52 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

I saw your post. 1/800 second at ISO 800 is definitely good light! The last game I went to I took my E-PL1 and the micro 40-150 f4-5.6 and was shooting at ISO 2000 to get that high a shutter speed wide open at f5.6. Throwing 23,000 of anything on to an ice rink has to be quite a site...

I have a ticket to see the Stars play the Canadiens on the 21st and will be taking the E5 I'm picking up this Wednesday and the 50-200mm f2.8-3.5 SWD. My ticket is on Row 1 of the upper deck in Section 310, which is really close to the red line. I'm quite excited to see what I will be able to capture with the E5.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:06 PM.