More idiot questions...

[ChrisR]

Firstly apologies for the idiot question, whilst my dad was a motorsport photographer for a number of years back in the 70s he's not around any more so can't bug him for answers

Now at the moment I have an ok little point and shoot thing, but have been hankering after a DSLR or a Micro 4/3.

I'm off to the US next year for a trip to Washington DC, which is going to involve going and seeing a good few ice hockey games. Bad news (from a photography point of view) is our seats are way way up and right at the back, so I'm not sure if it's even worth trying to get something to take any decent enough (for me!) pictures at the games.

So my dumb question is going on the view from this website of sections 402 at the back, am I ever going to be able to shoot anything that won't look pish? I'm guessing not without spending a fortune on a biiiig lens?

http://www.channel1media.com/capitals/seatviews/

Not necessarily wanting action shots with a lot of movement, at worse I can just grab some face off type shots.

Although should be going to some training sessions too which I'd imagine will enable me to get closer.

If that's the case then I might try the 4/3 out as the size is better for lugging around, and can still get a lot of nice shots out of them.

Am I also right in thinking a 4/3 with a big zoom will be crap for getting any kind of shots from that distance?

Cheers!

 

[unofficialPete]

4/3 system has a 2x crop, so a 200mm lens has a field of view equivalent to 400mm in full frame/35mm terms. So for reach, they are arguably better. Where the mirrorless micro 4/3 cameras fall down is AF but in the new models, it is surprisingly quick.

I've shot low light sport with my Canon and pitch side the 85mm f/1.8 is suitable but back in the stands you need something long but it also needs to be fast to be worth it.

Personally, I'd not bother, leave those shots for the pros and take the setup that suits your holiday better, unless that is the main aim of your trip!

 

[ChrisR]

Well we've got 4 games, but to be honest I'd rather watch and take some atmospheric shots rather than sit trying to take action shots of the game.

Like you say, will leave the pros rinkside for that

I'm swaying more and more to a Micro 4/3 purely for the size, the wife isn't too keen on the idea of a DSLR as they are pretty big (although the Nikon 5100 I was looking at is pretty compact for that type of camera).

They aren't cheap though, not sure which to go for either, the GF3 of the E-PL3 seem to be the 2 favourites for what I'd use them for.

No flash on the Olympus though, but it looks nicer

Would probably go for the GF3 package with the 14mm and the zoom lens, not sure I can justify the £300 on the 20mm just yet so that works out a not too expensive way of doing things.

But will see, need to have a play with them I think.

 

[Revels]

I think the lack of light will be your main stumbling block really.

 

[ChrisR]

Yup from what I've been reading about people shooting ice hockey that seems to be one of the main issues.

Least I know now, I'm sure there's a few other things in Washington that I can take snaps of