Lens for Ice Hockey Photography

[ikolbyi]

For the past 2 years I have been using the Canon EF 135mm f/2 L, prior to that the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 IS USM II. I still own both lenses.

Pros/Cons regarding: 70-200

• ISO needs to be set between 5000-6500
• Has better reach, only cropping photographs 30-60%
• Fast focus

Pros/Cons regarding the 135mm prime:

• ISO needs to be set between 3200 - 4000
• Less reach, cropping photographs 50-70% - loosing a lot of detail
• Slower but manageable focus

I'm getting tired of throwing away 50%+ shots because I have limited reach and the more I crop the more detail I loose. I also have this issue shooting Lacrosse and Baseball, but the f/4 speed is enough for outdoor natural light.

So I have 3 options:

1. Purchase a 1.4x extender. This will make the 135mm a 189mm @ f/2.8 and my 70-200mm a 98-280mm @ f/5.6
2. Sell the 135mm, purchase used for about $1,800 Sigma 300mm F/2.8 APO EX HSM
3. Sell the 135mm, purchase used for about $1,600 Canon EF F/2.8 L IS (version 1)
4. Sell the 135mm, purchase used for about $2,500 Sigma 120-300mm F/2.8 HSM

Option 4 is the most versatile but this is coming from a non-existent budget. This recently became more of a challenge/ impacting because my camera body was upgraded from APSC to FF.

Recommendation by anyone who have used those 3 lenses?

 

[Shuttrfingr]

I see that nobody's answered your post and I didn't because I'm a Nikon guy and I have not used the lenses you listed but I do shoot ice hockey so here's my $0.025 worth.

I'm not sure what the "Canon EF F/2.8 L IS (version 1)" is that you've mentioned, I'm assuming the 70-200? Anyhow, I've had great success with a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens on my Nikon but having an extra 100mm on occasion for hockey would be nice and f/2.8 is MUST for indoor sports so, looking at the lenses you listed, I would choose the Sigma 120-300mm F/2.8 HSM.

 

[John_G]

Well here goes another Nikon guy... I own the 120-300 and a 1.4 TC. I use it for field lacrosse and indoor/box lacrosse ( hockey rink no ice ) The 120-300 can give you excellent results on a hockey rink size field. As the previous post stated the 2.8 is a must.

good luck

-john

 

[lonewolf1983]

also a nikon guy and have the original 120-300 F2.8 HSM and use it for motorsport mostly (also dogs and cycling)

Its really versatile, and yes the F2.8 will be very important indoors, on a body with a good AF system it should deliver the goods.
I looked at the Sigma 300mm prime too, but most info I found indicated IQ was the same as the zoom, but slightly faster AF and less size/weight (and drop-in filters, which would actually be handy)
I took the versatility option and happy with the results I get

 

[SushiEater]

I have Sigma 120-300mm OS (not sport) for sale if you are in Los Angeles I can let you try it. It is in Canon mount. But that is the lens I would recommend in your situation.

 

[TigTillinghast]

There are some great deals right now around the holidays for the 70-200 2.8 II. Selling the f/4 for the f/2.8 might do the trick, especially if you also grab the 1.4x III teleconverter. Very versatile.

Hockey really does demand a zoom, unless you have two bodies.

If you were shooting the 5D4 as a body, I'd use the 100-400 II and stick that ISO up at 6400 without worrying too much about it.

 

[Bazoo]

If you were shooting the 5D4 as a body, I'd use the 100-400 II and stick that ISO up at 6400 without worrying too much about it.

This. The 100-400 ii is perfect for focal length. The lighting is different in every rink but at 6400 iso there is plenty of wiggle room for different exposures. I shoot my daughter quite a bit when she skates with the 5d mk iv /100-400 is ii. I set my ISO on Auto and max it out at 6400. at F4.5 the auto ISO rarely goes above 1000, and is typically in the 200-800 range, at F9 its typically between 3000-6400.

The 100-400 ii is an absolutely brilliant lens, I know it's not in your option list, but since someone else mentioned it, I have to add my 2 pennies.

 

[ikolbyi]

I ended up purchasing the Sigma 300mm f/2.8 + 1.4x converter. Found one for sale locally 14 months used just under $2,000. I'm happy with the results.