What are the best camera settings for hockey photography? - Frank Myrland Photography (2024)

Thanks for the kind words!

The majority of them are shot on a Canon 5DMk3 with a Canon 70-200mm 2.8 lens.

If you want to read more about the best options for lenses, you can see my other blog posts here: https://frankmyrland.com/best-lens-for-ice-hockey-photography/

Reply

Hi Jay — awesome to hear! Your shots look great and I’m glad that some of what I’ve shared has been helpful.

The 50-135 should do a great job for you .. and it also gives you a bit more light to work with at a max aperture of 2.8 compared of your usual F4. Often people think about the long zoom lenses and having a ton of reach, but it’s absolutely true that the wider angle shots can show the speed of the game in a really cool and dramatic way that long lenses can’t do.

Good luck!

Reply

Hi Steve, thanks for commenting! I would definitely recommend that you change from Auto ISO to manual. As long as the lighting conditions are unchanging, which they should be in most arenas, then you can dial in the right exposure and then leave your settings and trust that images will come out consistently.

On Auto ISO, your camera’s exposure will vary a lot based on the background of the shot. If the background has lots of white ice or boards, the camera will opt for a darker exposure, whereas if the background includes lots of dark seats or stands, the camera will boost the ISO to try to make the whole image lighter to compensate. So manual ISO makes life more predictable!

In terms of grain, it’s not something that can avoid completely. Gentle use of noise reduction in Adobe Lightroom or a similar editing program will help .. just don’t overdo it or you will lose all the textures in the image.

Note that ISO performance does depend a lot on the model of camera — both on how new the camera is and whether or not it is a full frame camera with a large sensor.

As the Nikon D7500 is not a full frame camera, there’s a little less leeway with high ISO values. I’d recommend trying not to go above ISO 1600 where possible .. but personally I would prefer a sharp picture with grain over a blurry picture.

Try starting with something like f2.8, 1/250 or 1/500 and ISO 1600 and then adjust to taste!

Reply

Ive been taking some hockey images here: https://www.barr-photography.com/work/page-4hockey

Would a Full Frame camera be better at hockey than my crop sensor camera with my 70-200 lens? Some of the Full Frame cameras such as the Nikon D810 or even the D780 doesn’t have a better auto focus system than a Nikon D500 Crop sensor camera. My Nikon D7500 starts having bad noise at ISO 3200. I shoot at F/4, 1/000 and 3200 ISO. I would shoot F2.8, but my dof takes a hit.

Reply

That sounds like a very unusual problem! I take it nothing about the lighting in the arena itself has changed? Light is light, regardless of camera, so I almost wonder if there is a camera setting turned on somewhere? I’m not familiar with the Sony A7VRIV myself but I hear it’s a great camera so it’s unusual to hear that it would seem to underperform against an lower end model.

Personally I prefer a higher ISO in order to keep the exposure near where I want it to be since brighting images in post will introduce more grain into the shot as well.

The amount of grain that is “acceptable” for a final image also depends on personal preference, but also on how and where you are sharing the images. I know I can get caught up in trying to fine tune the image at 100% zoom and forget that most people will either see it on social media or in small prints where all my minor modifications aren’t even noticeable.

A dynamic, interesting, well-composed picture with some grain beats a forgettable picture without grain every day of the week in my book 🙂

Reply

Hey Nate, i have the A7R4 as well and tried shooting indoor hockey last week.

I have the 90mm 2.8 G and i do have the same “issue” with noise. Many reviewers mention that having so many pixels (61) on a full frame might cause the higher noise.

I wrote to a professional photographer in landscape and wildlife and told me to try a higher speed, 1/800 or above and ISO around 1600.

Will test this on next tuesday.
By ghe way, it’s an amazing camera for daytime landscape, falls…

Good luck

Reply

Hi Garry! Unfortunately this problem will exist whenever there isn’t much light to work with. High ISOs are a necessary evil in most poorly lit arenas or else you would end up with a blurry shot.

The goal is to find the balance, where your shutter speed is fast enough to capture the action, your aperture is wide enough to bring in as much light as possible without missing focus, and your ISO is as high as needed in order to result in a properly exposed final image, which may result in an image with a lot of noise.

That’s as much as you can do — unless you can convince the arena you are in to purchase better lights!

Reply

Hi Jennifer! It sounds to me like the high ISO is the culprit here.

How far you can push the ISO before the colours start to fall apart, as you’ve described here, depends on a couple things:

– Is the camera full frame or crop sensor?: Cameras with full frame sensors (like the Canon 6D) can handle higher ISOs better than crop sensor cameras (like your 80D). Normally I hate saying that the camera is a factor, but this is the one exception where a “better” camera really does help!

– How recently the camera was made: Modern technology continues to improve cameras, which includes how well images hold up with high ISOs. The older the camera, the more pictures will start to “break down” at high ISOs.

Though rink lighting doesn’t usually give much wiggle room, my first recommendation would be to bring your shutter speed down a bit to 1/500 and, if possible, bring down your f-stop/aperture a bit too. As a result of this, you’ll be able to lower your ISO.

You can see that the majority of images shot in this article are at ISO 2000 on a full frame camera. With your 80D, see if it’s at all possible to get your settings to ISO 2000 (or even 1600) and you’ll start seeing more vivid colours!

A little bit of a boost during editing does certainly help, but it’s best to try to get as close as possible to the final shot right in camera.

One more important point is that the quality of the glass at the rink you are shooting through is important too. If you are shooting through scuffed up glass full of puck marks, it pretty much doesn’t matter what your camera settings are .. the colours and contrast are going to come out very dull.

Reply

I’m glad that you enjoyed the article!

Reply

Sorry, wrong link…

This is the right link: https://www.amazon.ca/Canon-EOS-2000D-18-55mm-3-5-5-6/dp/B08KSH2LQW/ref=sr_1_18?keywords=rebel+t7&qid=1639455404&sr=8-18

Reply

Thanks for the kind words, Mikael!

If you want to squeeze every bit of light out of the area then you could probably afford to slow the shutter a couple notches as 1/1000 is quite fast for kids hockey, but freezing the action completely like that is also a stylistic choice so your call entirely!

For a lens, it’s tricky because prices start going up pretty quickly when looking at zoom lenses with wide apertures.

On a really tight budget the 50mm 1.8 or 85mm 1.8 could be intrigued choices. Having no zoom is certainly a challenge so it’d definitely be about waiting for the play to come to a specific point on the ice. It also depends if this sort of lens blends with the other types of photography you do away from the ice.

Beyond that, your best bet might be to save up for a 70-200mm 2.8 or see if an older model of that same lens is available on the used market. With a bit of luck you might be able to find a perfectly capable lens with some big savings.

You could also consider renting a lens for one game before committing to a purchase, just to see if you like the experience and if it delivers the results you are expecting.

Good luck!

Reply

Hi Christine!

Sounds like there are two different possible issues at play:

If the pictures are grainy, that is a result of a high ISO which may be necessary based on the lighting conditions in the arena. But the only way you can lower the ISO is if you slow down the shutter speed (which may make the pictures blurry) or if you widen up the aperture, which leads to the second possible issue: focus.

If the images are not sharp then it’s either because the shutter speed is too slow (anything slower than 1/500 will likely come out with some blur) or because the focus missed.

Focus is the hardest part because everyone is moving so fast. Since you’ve done sports before, you’ll be familiar with tracking a fast moving event, but with less lighting in a rink the camera can struggle even more to lock focus.

If you haven’t already seen it, I’d recommend checking out my article about focus: https://frankmyrland.com/hockey-photography-guide-focus/

You definitely will want to read more about the different focus tracking modes and maybe even play with the in-camera settings on tracking speed.

As for the location, if it’s ever possible to shoot clean instead of through the glass, I’d take it. Glass steals away contrast and can also distort your image.

And, as always, practice makes perfect! Just like lacrosse, hockey has its own little quirks that take some time to get used to.

Good luck!

Reply

That’s an interesting question. Certainly I would say the 70-200 if hockey is priority, but you have the right idea about thinking of how you might use the lens for other situations.

Regarding whether 4.5 is enough, it depends on your tolerance to what a high ISO does to a picture. Yes, you’d certainly be giving up picture quality with the 100-500 — some of which you could maybe scrape back in post production but not all.

If you have the opportunity, before committing to a lens would you be able to take some pics in an arena at f4.5 with an acceptable shutter speed for motion and see how it looks?

As a personal philosophy, I also support buying the 70-200 because limitations teach the art of patience. I’ve seen many an eager sports photographer taking pictures every 2 seconds, even with the play on the opposite side of the field, arena, etc. It’s rare those images turn out.

I’ve found more success in waiting for a play to develop into specific areas of the ice that are “sweet spots” based on my lens. And once a play develops through that area, a quick burst gets more useful photos than zooming all over the ice “chasing the play” ever could.

Ultimately, every photographer has different needs for different lenses! While I would confidently say the 70-200 is the best choice for hockey, you will have to balance your personal needs and tolerances as well. Best of luck to you!

Reply

I can’t say that I have direct experience with that camera or much of the Nikon lineup. It’s a full frame camera, so you can expect great quality and solid performance, even in low light, despite being an older model.

Where you are likely to miss out with an older camera for action pictures is on the auto focus — technology moves pretty fast so each generation of camera really seems to improve on focus tracking.

With that said, I think getting action shots is as much about the photographer as it is the camera, so I think that with some practice and patience the Nikon D3s would help you get some shots you can be proud of!

Reply

Thanks for the question! My favourite place to shoot from is the corners — just like you mentioned this is the best place to be able to see faces. Unfortunately, the quality of the glass and the puck marks do vary quite a bit from arena to arena. If they haven’t replaced the glass for a while, you just might not have the option.

If I’m in an arena with glass that has lots of marks, I’ll still try to find a little spot that is clear. All you need is enough space for your lens to shoot through.

In the NHL they have the luxury of being able to remove a small covering and shoot through the glass. But if you don’t have that luxury, you simply have to manage with what you can.

If you do have to shoot through foggy or low quality glass, you can bring a lot more life back into your pictures by adding contrast, lowering “blacks” or adding “dehaze” (Adobe Lightroom feature). Glass removes a lot of contrast from an image, so adding that punch back into the picture helps a lot.

Reply

Nice, that’s a pretty good budget to work with!

Regardless of which brand you go with (Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc.), I would recommend getting a full frame camera. This means the camera sensor size is larger, which is much better for getting great shots in low light conditions. Canon full-frame starts with the 6D and Nikon starts with the D750.

The first lens you would want to get for hockey-specific photos would be the 70-200 f2.8. All brand makes this lens or a close variant of it. This gives you a wide aperture (important for making the most of limited light) and enough zoom range to cover some ground.

If you want to invest a bit more, you could also take a look at the 24-70 2.8. Again, all brands will make a lens like this or a close variant. Adding this would push you over your budget, but this would give you a wider angle lens and an option for if you wanted shots after the game on the bench or something.

An alternative to the 24-70 would be something like a 17-40 f4 or even a prime (non-zoom) lens like the 50mm 1.4, which is a great portrait lens.

Lots of options, but a full-frame camera and a 70-200 is the best place to start!

Reply