A little hockey action...

Jerry Curtis

Not NHL, but next best thing - the Toronto Maple Leafs farm team in St. John's, Newfoundland.

"And he takes the puck around behind the net"


"And the defenseman breaks up the play"


Ready for the shot:


"And they fight for control of the puck"


Dancing? Thought this was hockey!


The team mascot, Buddy the Puffin, doing his thing during intermission:


This was my first attempt at shooting a sporting event with the 1.7X tele on my V1. All shot from row 13 in the stands near centre ice, manual at 1/125s, f/4, ISO800. Not sure if I used manual focus at infinity or autofocus on these.

I have s few more from another game if anyone is interested in seeing them.

ian408

The composition of these shots is pretty good. You can see faces but there's
no puck--to me, the action of the players tells me where it is though it might
not be so obvious to others.

White balance is good too.

The shutter speed should be higher to freeze the action. That might be more
difficult given your setup.

Good first try. Look forward to seeing more.

Ian

Jerry Curtis

ian408 wrote:

The composition of these shots is pretty good. You can see faces but there's
no puck--to me, the action of the players tells me where it is though it might
not be so obvious to others.

White balance is good too.

The shutter speed should be higher to freeze the action. That might be more
difficult given your setup.

Good first try. Look forward to seeing more.

Ian

Thanks for the comments, Ian. Good point about the puck. I was more interested in the players, but I agree - the puck should be the focal point.

Increasing the shutter speed is not an option with the setup I have. F/4 is the largest aperture at full zoom on the V1 and ISO800 is the fastest sensor speed. I have some shots at 1/200s, but the exposure is not as good. Even a strong flash like the Sony F32X (which I have) wouldn't do the job in this situation. Besides, I hate flash pics except when properly employed in portraits and the like.

In sports shots, though, I think some blurring can make the shot more dynamic - as long as the more stationary parts of the image are sharp. Don't you agree?

Thanks again for looking and commenting. I always appreciate constructive criticizm and usually learn something from it.

Steve Cavigliano

Jerry,

I agree with Ian's analysis. Your point about some motion being OK is valid too. In these shots though, I'd have to say maybe you have too much motion.

You did very well though, for the handicap you were working under.

My only suggestion would be to back off the zoom a bit, so you can get a wider aperture and maybe 1/320-1/400 speeds. Even if you have to under expose a little. I tried shooting pro hockey with the 828, but it has RAW capability that helps, an F2.8 max aperture at full tele and the rink had pro level lighting too. You had none of these benefits :uhoh

I think you can do a bit better, with the V1, but it's going to be challenging and it may never give you the image quality you desire. This is tough turf. Even Dslr's have major issues with this level of lighting (not to mention that most pro venues won't let you in with a long lensed Dslr).

Other than the motion blur and no puck, these came out very nicely
I was shocked to read you used a V1. Very clean shots :


Thanks for sharing,
Steve

Jerry Curtis

Steve Cavigliano wrote:

Jerry,

I agree with Ian's analysis. Your point about some motion being OK is valid too. In these shots though, I'd have to say maybe you have too much motion.

You did very well though, for the handicap you were working under.

My only suggestion would be to back off the zoom a bit, so you can get a wider aperture and maybe 1/320-1/400 speeds. Even if you have to under expose a little. I tried shooting pro hockey with the 828, but it has RAW capability that helps, an F2.8 max aperture at full tele and the rink had pro level lighting too. You had none of these benefits :uhoh

I think you can do a bit better, with the V1, but it's going to be challenging and it may never give you the image quality you desire. This is tough turf. Even Dslr's have major issues with this level of lighting (not to mention that most pro venues won't let you in with a long lensed Dslr).

Other than the motion blur and no puck, these came out very nicely
I was shocked to read you used a V1. Very clean shots :


Thanks for sharing,
Steve

Thanks, Steve,

I had no illusion that these shots were competitive with Sports Illustrated or anything If I had the gear and glass these guys have, I might come close. And you're right... professional gear is not allowed in this venue, anyway - unless you are the official photographer or press.

Unfortunately, backing off on the zoom for better f-stop is not much of an option, either, with my setup. With the tele converter lens, I'm limited to between about 3.5X and 4X zoom on the main lens. Less than 3.5X and the inside barrel of the extension lens becomes visible (vignetting). If I leave off the tele altogether and come back to wide angle to get a f/2.8, I would be cropping severely for a close-up action shot and still lose sharpness and detail. So it's a no win.

I'm not really a big sports fan anyway, so this is not that important - certainly not important enough to move up to better gear to get better shots of this kind of subject matter. My purpose for showing these was simply to demonstrate what *was* possible with very limited gear like the V1 and a tele conversion lens, and how clean a shot you could get (with a bit of NR) with the V1 at ISO800.

Thanks again for your comments. Always much appreciated!

ian408

Jerry Curtis wrote:

Thanks for the comments, Ian. Good point about the puck. I was more interested in the players, but I agree - the puck should be the focal point.

You're welcome.

The puck/ball will not always be the focal point but generally, a good
stick and ball sport will have it.

Jerry Curtis wrote:

Increasing the shutter speed is not an option with the setup I have. F/4 is the largest aperture at full zoom on the V1 and ISO800 is the fastest sensor speed. I have some shots at 1/200s, but the exposure is not as good. Even a strong flash like the Sony F32X (which I have) wouldn't do the job in this situation. Besides, I hate flash pics except when properly employed in portraits and the like.

As I replied, I tried to keep the equipment in mind. Getting really super
shots at an arena like that requires off camera strobes. Not something
most of us have ready access to.

Given the situation (and the nice seats you have), these are good first
shots. Don't give up--go back and get some more

Jerry Curtis wrote:

In sports shots, though, I think some blurring can make the shot more dynamic - as long as the more stationary parts of the image are sharp. Don't you agree?

Blur is a very subjective thing. In motion sports, like hockey, I would
prefer the subject to be in focus and the background OOF.

Jerry Curtis wrote:

Thanks again for looking and commenting. I always appreciate constructive criticizm and usually learn something from it.

Keep up the good work!

Ian

Jerry Curtis

ian408 wrote:

You're welcome.

Given the situation (and the nice seats you have), these are good first
shots. Don't give up--go back and get some more

Ian

Going to another game tonight and will be 10 rows up behind one of the goals. Gonna see if I can get some good saves or goal shots