First try at Hockey

[justadad]

Well not only have I only just started taking pictures, I had to try and do it at my daughters hockey game. I think I am in need of some photoshop help and camera help.

[KABeach]

Greetings and welcome to PhotoCamel!

Overall, I've found hockey to be one of the most challenging sports I shoot. It is a tough combination of low (and often inconsistant) light, fast speeds and difficult shooting locations.

First, it looks like you did a good job with shooting - I don't see the softness of the images often found with shooting through glass (a problem I usually have). Did you shoot from the bench?

Now, as far as your images are. In general they are under exposed. This is a very common problem with hockey - the bright white ice throws off the meter and underexposes for the faces (where you want the exposure to be correct). As a quick glance, it appears you are at least a full stop under exposed. Note: In order to correctly expose for the players, you will blow the highlights for the ice.

Now, the second issue is something you probably not going to want to hear - you lens is too slow for indoor sports. I shoot hockey with a mix of a 50/1.8, 85/1.8 or 135/2.... Occasionally, if I have a REALLY bright rink I'll shoot with a f/2.8 lens... an f/4 or f/5.6 lens is just too hard to work with without big strobes.

A quick, fairly inexpensive solution is to pick up a 50/1.8 lens. I like a longer lens (the 85/1.8 is a great lens) but the 50/1.8 is very usable lens if you have good shooting positions.

Keep shooting! I look forward to seeing more!

Cheers!
Ken

[justadad]

Hi Ken
Thanks for teh comments. The shots were all through the glass this time around. The first gaem i tried I used teh bench but the lense on my camera just did not allow me to get what I wanted. So I moved down teh boards and through the glass. I knew I was looking at a new lense to shoot hockey. I have a few people keeping there eye out for a new lense for me. I was looking at maybe a 80-200 2.8 as used this would be in my price range. Not sure if I could swing 1.8 for something in the 200mm range or below but will keep my eye out for a shorter 1.4 and try that.

As for being underexposed, I would agree. I am just not sure what you mean by a full stop. Remember this is my first week with a DSLR. The first 3 days with teh camera I was in the auto modes and am not just getting into Manual settings to get better shots. If you could explain here or in a PM I would really appreciate it.

[cyclohexane]

Ken's hit the mark with his comments.

The 85mm f/1.8 would probably be less than a good used copy of the 80-200mm f/2.8. The 50mm f/1.8 is another good lens to have.

To add a "full stop" of exposure, halve the shutter speed. You can also open up your aperture a "full stop"; grab a lens with a traditional-style aperture ring- they're marked in full stops of aperture. The ones in-between that aren't listed are one-third stops.

[KABeach]

First, let me say, I'm really impressed that these images were shot through the glass. You have very little of the diffraction and contrast issues I usually have when shooting youth hockey. Very well done.

As far as lenses are concerned - the 80-200/2.8 is THE general use sports lens. It often isn't the best lens to have for any given sport, but can be used for almost all of them.

However, for indoor sports, the 85/1.8 is my number 1 indoor sports lens. I'd say I use it for 75% of my hockey, 80% of my basketball, 50% of my volleyball, 50% of my waterpolo, etc... If I only had 1 lens for shooting indoor sports, this would be it (and for several years it was my only good indoor lens, until I got a 135/2). If you shop around, you should be able to find a clean used 85/1.8 for $200-$300. Now, this lens doesn't help with outdoor field sports, but indoors, it is invaluable.

I will expand my comments on F-Stops in my following post.

Cheers,
Ken

[KABeach]

In photography, there are 3 basic ways to manipulate the amount of light that hits the camera: Shutter Speed, Aperture and ISO.

Shutter Speed is the amount of time the shutter is open (usually measured in 10th's of a second). The faster the shutter speed, the more action is "frozen", the slower, the more aparent the motion is. On your camera, each change in shutter speed setting changes the amount of light by 1/3 stop.

Aperture is the amount of light the lens is letting in (measured in F-Stops). On the D70s, aperature is also measured in 1/3 stops. Aperture affects Depth of Field - if you are interested, this is a topic I will address at a different time.

ISO is the light sensitivity of the sensor. The higher the ISO, the more sensitive. Higher ISO also means more noise, less detail and loss of color saturation. Again, on the D70s it is marked in 1/3 stops.

Now each of these settings interrelates with the other. With any given light level, a change in one setting with need to have an equivelent change in another to keep the exposure the same. You can see this if you put your camera on "A". Notice, as you adjust the "Aperture" Command wheel the shutter speed automatically changes.

Full stops for shutter speeds are: 1/8, 1/15, 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500, 1/1000, 1/2000

Full stops for aperture are: f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22.

Full stops for ISO: 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600.

Now for an example:
If I were to meter a scene and got an exposure of 1/125, f/5.6, ISO400 then I could shoot using those settings, or I could make some adjustments. The following would give me an identical exposure:

1/250, f/4, ISO400
1/500, f/2.8, ISO400
1/1000, f/2, ISO400
1/125, f4, ISO200
1/60, f/4, ISO100

Now, using "A", "S", "P" or one of the programmed "scenes" provided by Nikon, this is all handled automatically.

The power of photography lies in the use of the "M" setting - allowing you to choose your own settings. You use the meter as a guide, but when the situation requires it, "M" allows you to decide how to correct for a metering problem.

As an example: The exif of your second image shows your settings at 1/125, f/5.6 (no ISO displayed, I'll assume 1600). This is the exposure your meter thinks will give you the best image, based on its limited understanding of the scene. In reality, the ice is too bright and makes the skaters too dark by comparison. The solution is to "open up a stop". To open up means to let in more light. So, you could adjust the shutter speed 1 stop: 1/60s or your aperture to f/4 or your ISO to 3200. Since your camera cannot shoot at 3200, that rules out iso, your lens probably cannot open to f/4 which only leaves your shutter speed... this is where an f/1.8 lens makes a difference - you could open up to f/4 or preferable to f/2 (making it now 2 stops over exposed) allowing you to move the shutter speed up to 1/500s.

I know there is a lot here, and I don't know if I explained it all correctly, so please ask about the parts you don't understand. I've seen some basic photography classes spend weeks explaining all the concepts I've just thrown out at you.

Cheers!
Ken

[justadad]

Thanks Ken, it may be making sense now.

So far I have shot everything at 800 ISO and in manual mode. I had tried adjusting the shutter speed but found that the slower speeds that corrected some exposure issues left me with blurry images in the action. In this weekends games I should try to shoot iso1600 and leave shutter speed at 1/125.

Now two questions for you. I will be trying a 85 1.8 lens that I can rent from local camera shop for 16.00. This I hope will give me a test at what I should buy for a indoor lens. If I am shooting at 1.8 then am I correct that I should start with shutter speed around 1/250 and iso at 800. and then make adjustments from there?

Also in your experience what impact will shooting with "TV lights" have. Will it be the same challenges as a standard arena? By TV lights I am referring to how and NHL type arena is lit for TV coverage of a game. I have the chance to take pictures at the 4 nations cup. I will rent some appropriate lenses again for this event but would like to know if I stay with the 85 1.8 for this or should I go to the 70-200 2.8

[cyclohexane]

The D70 looks pretty good at ISO 1600; don't worry about high ISO noise- if your exposure is good, it'll be fine even with a "noisy" camera. A sharp image is better than an unsharp one. Keep doing what you're doing with composition, and get the shutter speed up.

TV lights probably won't help you as much as you think they might help you. You might be able to get with a f/2.8, but I'd pack the f/1.8 anyways. While I don't shoot hockey (yet- I have a friend who plays, and I'll get around to him one day), indoors I'd have at least my 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.4 by default. Honestly, I'd bring both- though I'd try to worm a 200mm f/2.0 (I'm constantly trying to finance this lens) for the long end instead.

[KABeach]

Originally Posted by justadad

So far I have shot everything at 800 ISO and in manual mode. I had tried adjusting the shutter speed but found that the slower speeds that corrected some exposure issues left me with blurry images in the action. In this weekends games I should try to shoot iso1600 and leave shutter speed at 1/125.

With your existing lens, yes, I would lean in that direction. That shutter speed is still really too slow for hockey, but with that set-up, you don't have a lot of other options.

Now two questions for you. I will be trying a 85 1.8 lens that I can rent from local camera shop for 16.00. This I hope will give me a test at what I should buy for a indoor lens. If I am shooting at 1.8 then am I correct that I should start with shutter speed around 1/250 and iso at 800. and then make adjustments from there?

With an 85/1.8 and the same exposure you have above, I would start at ISO1600, 1/500s, f/2... and adjust from there. Remember, parts of the ice will be blown, so don't be fooled by the odd look on your LCD screen...

Also in your experience what impact will shooting with "TV lights" have. Will it be the same challenges as a standard arena? By TV lights I am referring to how and NHL type arena is lit for TV coverage of a game. I have the chance to take pictures at the 4 nations cup. I will rent some appropriate lenses again for this event but would like to know if I stay with the 85 1.8 for this or should I go to the 70-200 2.8

Well, even in the pro's each arena is different. Many of the pro rinks should give you enough light to use a 70-200/2.8 (but not all). However, if you don't have access to the photo "cut-outs" then the 85/1.8 might be a bit short. Now, I've not shot any pro hockey, my information is based on descriptions I've gotten from others who shoot NHL.

Now, one other issue I want to mention. When you try out that 85/1.8, you are going to find you are have a lot more out OOF (out of focus) shots. This is a DoF (Depth of Field) issue. The wider the aperture, the shallower the DoF... (FYI, Depth of Field is the area of "acceptable" focus).

To show you how much of a difference it makes, at a distance of 30ft with your current lens at 85mm and f/5.6 the DoF is 8.69ft... with the 85/1.8 at f/1.8 the DoF is 2.69ft... this leaves a LOT less room for error with focusing.

The reason I'm pointing this out is, I don't want you to be disappointed the first time you use a shallow DoF lens... it does take practice to get used to it (BTW, the D70 and 85/1.8 is a great combination - I used to use it all the time.... With practice you will get used to that shallow DoF (in fact, I LOVE the look of shallow DoF - by comparison, my 300/2.8 at 30ft has a DoF of 4in).

Good luck and have fun!

Cheers,
Ken

[Shortie]

Originally Posted by Squirrel

With your existing lens, yes, I would lean in that direction. That shutter speed is still really too slow for hockey, but with that set-up, you don't have a lot of other options.

With an 85/1.8 and the same exposure you have above, I would start at ISO1600, 1/500s, f/2... and adjust from there. Remember, parts of the ice will be blown, so don't be fooled by the odd look on your LCD screen...

Well, even in the pro's each arena is different. Many of the pro rinks should give you enough light to use a 70-200/2.8 (but not all). However, if you don't have access to the photo "cut-outs" then the 85/1.8 might be a bit short. Now, I've not shot any pro hockey, my information is based on descriptions I've gotten from others who shoot NHL.

Now, one other issue I want to mention. When you try out that 85/1.8, you are going to find you are have a lot more out OOF (out of focus) shots. This is a DoF (Depth of Field) issue. The wider the aperture, the shallower the DoF... (FYI, Depth of Field is the area of "acceptable" focus).

To show you how much of a difference it makes, at a distance of 30ft with your current lens at 85mm and f/5.6 the DoF is 8.69ft... with the 85/1.8 at f/1.8 the DoF is 2.69ft... this leaves a LOT less room for error with focusing.

The reason I'm pointing this out is, I don't want you to be disappointed the first time you use a shallow DoF lens... it does take practice to get used to it (BTW, the D70 and 85/1.8 is a great combination - I used to use it all the time.... With practice you will get used to that shallow DoF (in fact, I LOVE the look of shallow DoF - by comparison, my 300/2.8 at 30ft has a DoF of 4in).

Good luck and have fun!

Cheers,
Ken

great narative - many thanks

[justadad]

thanks for all the help. you guys are truly awsome.