Click Here!
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Recommend a good telephoto lens for shooting hockey games?

  1. #1
    Zero to Tutti Frutti AutomaticBzooty's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    898
    Liked
    3 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default Recommend a good telephoto lens for shooting hockey games?

    I'm a budding photographer; I've got a Canon Digital Rebel XT 8 MP, with a 28-135mm IS USM lens that's served me quite well.

    I'd like to start doing some sports photography--maybe shoot some pics at Toyota, Staples....maybe even at Culver Ice Center, where I play hockey. I think I'll probably need a good quality Canon-compatible telephoto lens, though...probably something reasonably fast, that's not going to break the bank.

    Anyone have any suggestions?

    Likewise, what are the rules about bringing those sorts of cameras into Staples?

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    All Star Blueline's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,738
    Liked
    619 times
    Karma
    9000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    22 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AutomaticBzooty View Post
    Likewise, what are the rules about bringing those sorts of cameras into Staples?

    Thanks!
    Simply put, you can't without a press pass. Nothing over 4 inches I believe.

  3. #3
    Go, Kings, Go rinkrat's Avatar




    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    209,527
    Liked
    7981 times
    Karma
    294001536
    Images
    6484
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    368 Post(s)

    Default

    Photography
    No commercial or flash photography of any kind is permitted. Camcorders or any other audio/visual equipment is prohibited unless authorized by team/promoter or performer. Specifically, the use of the following equipment is not permitted:

    Lenses greater than three-and-one-half inches in length
    Telephoto or zoom lenses of any kind
    Interchangeable lenses of any kind
    Monopods or tripods
    Flash equipment of any kind

    http://www.staplescenter.com/doublec...=eventpolicies

  4. #4
    Iím sicka the high hat!! santiclaws's Avatar




    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    13,876
    Liked
    16892 times
    Karma
    1671409
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    586 Post(s)

    Default

    How much money do you want to spend? Hope it is a lot, because you're going to need a very high quality lens to shoot hockey, especially at places like Culver, where the lighting is crap. TSC is better, but still not great.

  5. #5
    Go, Kings, Go rinkrat's Avatar




    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    209,527
    Liked
    7981 times
    Karma
    294001536
    Images
    6484
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    368 Post(s)

    Default

    I would recommend something in the 70-200 range. If you can afford to get a 2.8 then that is the way to go, Image Stabilization would help also.

  6. #6
    VF
    VF is offline
    Sittin' on the couch VF's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,405
    Liked
    150 times
    Karma
    1017600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    12 Post(s)

    Default

    I would agree with Mike, the 70-200mm is going to be a good fit on the XT sensor size. There are 4 varieties of the 70-200mm from Canon, two f/2.8 and two f/4.0 (both available with or without Image Stabilization). The f/4.0 non IS is going to be the cheapest, while the f/2.8 IS is going to be the most expensive (and heaviest). You are definitely going to want the f/2.8 for hockey, but if you needed to to save cash, you could get away with the non-IS version for hockey because you will be shooting at high shutter speeds where the IS isn't going to be helping you.

  7. #7
    Zero to Tutti Frutti AutomaticBzooty's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    898
    Liked
    3 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Thanks for the tips, everyone.

    Why the 70-200, though? Why not the 70-300? I see that the 70-200 f4.0 USM without IS is about $600 on Amazon, buy you can get a 70-300 4.0-5.6 with USM and IS for even less. Granted, at 300mm you'll be at a slower 5.6, but presumably when you're at 200 you'll be able to open it up even further....maybe even to 4.0?

    (And granted, it's not an L lens yes....)

  8. #8
    Go, Kings, Go rinkrat's Avatar




    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Posts
    209,527
    Liked
    7981 times
    Karma
    294001536
    Images
    6484
    Mentioned
    45 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    368 Post(s)

    Default

    5.6 is too dark and 300 is too close.

  9. #9
    Zero to Tutti Frutti AutomaticBzooty's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    898
    Liked
    3 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Gotcha. Thanks!

  10. #10
    Zero to Tutti Frutti AutomaticBzooty's Avatar




    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    898
    Liked
    3 times
    Karma
    1000000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    ....
    Last edited by AutomaticBzooty; September 7th, 2008 at 08:37 PM. Reason: Double post.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84