High Noise when shooting hockey games (low light) with a A57. Please help!

[SchmidtyImages]

Hello everyone,

I found a few forums threads with a similar topic, but couldn't find a resolution. I'm a new at this so please be easy. I recently got a Sony A57 because I thought it was a good start to get into photography and also to do side projects. I'm starting to rethink my purchase. I was taking pictures for an ice hockey tournament and wasn't getting the results that I wanted. I used this lens SAL75300 | 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 Telephoto Lens | Sony | Sony Store USA 75 - 300 lens. I feel that my problem is the F stop would be too high for the low light setting. I am looking into a f2.8 lens, but I don't have the $2000 to drop right away. Is there any other solution to this, am I doing something wrong? I try to keep my ISO at the right spot so I get enough exposure, but I can't stop the weight of the noise. I understand that I'm not going to get professional crystal clear photos, but I feel like I could take better pictures on my cell phone. Also, I hear that these cameras add a little more noise with the auto focus? Also, that the shutter priority is bad for a sport like hockey. Can anyone give me some advice with a lens, or a setting that I can change? I feel that I take some great pictures, but the noise ruins it. I'm going to be shooting for a cancer benefit (hockey tournament) and I really want to take some good pictures to raise some money.

Here is an example. It's not too bad, but not the quality that I'm looking for. Also, looks a bit under exposed. Thank you for reading!

 

[gsgary]

That is bad, woefully under exposed no wonder you are getting bad noise but the lens you have ius only good on sunny days

 

[SchmidtyImages]

Yes, as I said I am pretty new at it. You seem like a professional, how would you shoot a hockey game?

 

[Overread]

If you underexpose a digital photo you will get more noise (esp after you brighten it in editing) than if you were to have exposed that photo correctly using a higher ISO. Whilst higher ISOs incur more noise, it gives you far less noise than if you brighten darkened (ie underexposed) photos.

So your first and almost only option is to boost the ISO higher. Yes you get more noise, but you need the fast shutter speed and you can't open the aperture up any wider (ie use a smaller f number). So ISO is the only option left to you unless you can increase the lighting levels (ie add a flash - which has its own factors such as positioning which can be more limiting unless you are "the" pro for the venue at a sports event).


You might also want to search and read up on the topics of:
1) Reading the histogram on the camera
2) Expose to the right theory. This builds right off the back of learning to read the histogram in the camera and directly relates to the noise and general quality of the shot.

 

[SchmidtyImages]

If you underexpose a digital photo you will get more noise (esp after you brighten it in editing) than if you were to have exposed that photo correctly using a higher ISO. Whilst higher ISOs incur more noise, it gives you far less noise than if you brighten darkened (ie underexposed) photos.

So your first and almost only option is to boost the ISO higher. Yes you get more noise, but you need the fast shutter speed and you can't open the aperture up any wider (ie use a smaller f number). So ISO is the only option left to you unless you can increase the lighting levels (ie add a flash - which has its own factors such as positioning which can be more limiting unless you are "the" pro for the venue at a sports event).


You might also want to search and read up on the topics of:
1) Reading the histogram on the camera
2) Expose to the right theory. This builds right off the back of learning to read the histogram in the camera and directly relates to the noise and general quality of the shot.

Thank you Overread. So do you feel it's a good option to get a lens with a lower Fstop (2.8) this way I can keep the ISO a bit lower and also increase the shutter speed?

 

[Overread]

I think its a very good move, getting a lens with a larger maximum aperture is going to help you a lot:

1) You let in more light for your AF system to work with, that means faster and more reliable results.

2) Jumping up from a 70-300mm to an f2.8 lens (either zoom or a prime) is a BIG jump in quality. You'll see faster AF, better optical quality and reduced aberrations.

3) Wider max aperture means you can use that wider aperture and keep your ISO a little lower without sacrificing your shutter speed. Note that f2.8 will introduce its own challenge of a reduced depth of field, so you might not use the lens wide open at f2.8 all the time, but having the option helps a lot (and no matter the shooting aperture the f2.8 will always be there for the AF system).

 

[2fastlx]

You can save a few bucks and get either the tamron or sigma 70-200 2.8. I use the tamron on my a77 and it works pretty good. I think the sigma version focuses faster but I believe the tamron has a slight edge in sharpness.

 

[SchmidtyImages]

Thank you, it means a lot! I wasn't aware of the depth issue, but even if I can shoot at F3.5, it still gives me a nice boost.

 

[SchmidtyImages]

You can save a few bucks and get either the tamron or sigma 70-200 2.8. I use the tamron on my a77 and it works pretty good. I think the sigma version focuses faster but I believe the tamron has a slight edge in sharpness.

I thought this lens was for Nikon and Canon?

 

[2fastlx]

You can save a few bucks and get either the tamron or sigma 70-200 2.8. I use the tamron on my a77 and it works pretty good. I think the sigma version focuses faster but I believe the tamron has a slight edge in sharpness.

I thought this lens was for Nikon and Canon?

They make them for sony also.

 

[2fastlx]

One other option even more frugal would be the minolta 70-210 f4 beer can lens. The optical quality is good and it is quite a bit faster than your current setup. They can be found for under $150 or so.

 

[ConradM]

What ISO were you shooting at?

 

[dash66]

you might want to bump up the ISO just a bit If you shot at 100, see about bumping it up to 200 or even 400. You will probably see a big difference.

 

[pjenks]

along with increasing the ISO, look into a noise reduction softer such as NeatImage....it makes a HUGE difference in the final prints. You can also adjust your exposure using photo editing software. Photoshop works wonders. Happy Shooting.

 

[SchmidtyImages]

I was shooting at 800 ISO if I recall. Great, I will have to check out the noise reduction software. I currently own photoshop so I can look into ways that will improve this. The noise reduction filter only seems to make it foggy.