Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2012 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed
  
 
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


Here's a chart showing the primes-only:




Dec 03, 2012 at 08:18 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


Something is weird here. Canon doesn't have a 16mm prime, and I doubt so many are shooting the Nikkor 16mm fisheye!


Dec 03, 2012 at 08:25 PM
mpmendenhall
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


carstenw wrote:
Something is weird here. Canon doesn't have a 16mm prime, and I doubt so many are shooting the Nikkor 16mm fisheye!


Maybe a 16-35/2.8 mis-reported as a prime?



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:28 PM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


Focal lengths, no percentages for those who like that sort of thing:


As for the 16mm, there are four listed as "lens 16mm" and one listed as "lens 16 mm"; three hosted on Canon EOS 5D Mark II, two on Canon EOS 1D Mark II. Maximum aperture reported for the 16mm was f/2.8 (twice, two different bodies) - which would be consistent with the Nikkor 16mm.

Edited on Dec 03, 2012 at 08:36 PM · View previous versions



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:34 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


Probably you are right. There are informative lines like this:

canon eos-5d mark ii, lens: 16-35mm at 23mm, f4.5, 1/45, iso 400

And then there are less informative lines like this (which are probably not shot at 16mm):

canon eos -1d mark 4, lens 16-35mm, f2.8, 1/15, iso 400

I suppose the latter got counted as 16mm. I think these should just be removed. Almost no one shoots zooms smack in the middle of the range, but this would probably be the straight-forward statistical solution.



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:35 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


michaelwatkins wrote:
As for the 16mm, there are four listed as "lens 16mm" and one listed as "lens 16 mm"; three hosted on Canon EOS 5D Mark II, two on Canon EOS 1D Mark II.


So 11% is just four lenses? Okay, so these numbers are really way too small to make any statistical conclusions about anything at all.

I was wondering, because while I think that pros tend towards Canon, I am pretty sure that Nikon is a much larger share of the pie than the 10-15% these stats suggest. More like 35% or so, but for this, I have no numbers, just observation across many segments.



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:36 PM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


carstenw wrote:
Probably you are right. There are informative lines like this:

canon eos-5d mark ii, lens: 16-35mm at 23mm, f4.5, 1/45, iso 400

And then there are less informative lines like this (which are probably not shot at 16mm):

canon eos -1d mark 4, lens 16-35mm, f2.8, 1/15, iso 400

I suppose the latter got counted as 16mm. I think these should just be removed. Almost no one shoots zooms smack in the middle of the range, but this would probably be the straight-forward statistical solution.


Not in my data. I excluded every line which had a focal length range, and then had an eyeball look at it. There are only 5 images shot with what I figure to be a 16mm focal length prime in the data I parsed... albeit data I have parsed and reviewed very quickly.



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:37 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


michaelwatkins wrote:
As for the 16mm, there are four listed as "lens 16mm" and one listed as "lens 16 mm"; three hosted on Canon EOS 5D Mark II, two on Canon EOS 1D Mark II. Maximum aperture reported for the 16mm was f/2.8 (twice, two different bodies) - which would be consistent with the Nikkor 16mm.


The Nikkor 16mm is a fisheye. I cannot imagine that this should account for almost half of the 11% in that slice!



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:38 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


carstenw wrote:
So 11% is just four lenses? Okay, so these numbers are really way too small to make any statistical conclusions about anything at all.

I was wondering, because while I think that pros tend towards Canon, I am pretty sure that Nikon is a much larger share of the pie than the 10-15% these stats suggest. More like 35% or so, but for this, I have no numbers, just observation across many segments.


Agreed, way too small, and represents just one news agency and only a tiny percentage (probably a minute fraction of one percent) of all images shot and used over the year even for that one agency.

But it was fun looking at the data.



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:40 PM
michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


carstenw wrote:
The Nikkor 16mm is a fisheye. I cannot imagine that this should account for almost half of the 11% in that slice!


That's true.

Enough number crunching. I've not even looked at the images very closely yet.



Dec 03, 2012 at 08:41 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


mpmendenhall wrote:
Everyone on this forum knows that the EXIF lens data doesn't mean much --- how many people really bother to program in the right parameters on their adapter chips? We'll never know which Reuters photos were taken with Takumars, MC-Zuikos, Contax, Leica-R, etc.

zhangyue wrote:
I guess alt lens might contribute... maybe 0.01%.


There is a Reuters video from the Olympics, which shows at least one remote camera set-up with a ZE lens. I believe it was the 50/1.4, though now am not 100% sure... I guess that would count as alt.



Dec 03, 2012 at 09:01 PM
eosfun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


"How to lie with statistics" part X


Dec 03, 2012 at 09:40 PM
curious80
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


The original pie shows canon 60D accounting for about the same number of pictures as Nikon D3 or Nikon D3s. Even if we accept that Canon heavily dominates this segment, I find it hard to believe that there are as many 60Ds in use as Nikon D3 or D3s.


Dec 03, 2012 at 09:48 PM
deadwolfbones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


There are almost certainly more.

Unless of course you mean in the Reuters pool, in which case you're probably right.



Dec 03, 2012 at 10:18 PM
curious80
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · EXIF data from Reuters' best of 2012: analyzed


deadwolfbones wrote:
There are almost certainly more.

Unless of course you mean in the Reuters pool, in which case you're probably right.


Yes I meant in the Reuters Pool, not in general.



Dec 04, 2012 at 02:39 AM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password