Well, amidst all the doomsday sayers concerning the MKIII AF issue and the release of the D3, I recall hearing multiple predictions that the SuperBowl would have just as many Nikon shooters as Canon shooters. Well, I kept my eye out, and I saw exactly one Nikon shooter...and he was at the coin toss. During the game, and in all the photos that photogs are in that I saw after the game, I saw all Canon. To boot, most of them were shooting 1D IIIs, with a few IIs thrown in.
Yep, I also saw many Canon 1-series bodies and definitely a few Mk3s. Very few Nikons (pretty sure I saw at least one near the end. In this thread a couple of folks claim to have seen the opposite.
I was at the AFC championship game and I saw about six cameras with long black lenses and about a dozen with white ones. However, from where I was sitting, the black lenses could have been canons with Sigma lenses. FWIW. Either way, I'm sure they all got some great pictures.
Tim
I just watched the replay of the Superbowl (It was also shown live early this morning) and I noticed a few black lenses on the sidelines (But they could have been Sigma lenses on Canon bodies) and quite a few white Canon lenses.
The thing is, The D3 hasn't been out that long, And there are still people waiting to take delivery of their cameras so this could be a reason why we aren't seeing that many Nikon's yet. Give it a few months for Nikon to fill the orders and the Pros have the chance to work with the new cameras and we may see more black lenses at more major sporting events in the lead up to the Olympics.
Funny how noticable some things are. Even my wife kept saying "hey there is your camera". I did not even get into the fact that it might not be exactly the same, ie. my 1D2 v. 1d2n v. 1d3.
I also saw quite a few Nikons, and they were fairly easy to identify by the black/gold straps, despite what color lens was hung. Still far outnumbered by Canon, but that sort of thing can't change overnight, even ignoring the fact that supplies of the D3 are still fairly tight.
It's also pretty hard for me to imagine any pro shooter at the Super Bowl wouldn't be using the 300 and/or 400/2.8L; it just doesn't get any better for that kind of shooting, and most of the guys at that level use what lenses they want.
Well after the game was pretty much over, the mob of photogs following the head coaches as they went to midfield seemed to be predominately Canon as well with quite a few 16-35's it seems. Pretty easy to spot the wide-ish hood.
TimNurse wrote:
I was at the AFC championship game and I saw about six cameras with long black lenses and about a dozen with white ones. However, from where I was sitting, the black lenses could have been canons with Sigma lenses. FWIW. Either way, I'm sure they all got some great pictures.
Tim
I don't think I've ever seen a sigma lens on the sidelines of a major sporting event. If one has enough money to buy pro cameras, they certainly have enough money to buy the appropriate lens.
Jman13 wrote:
John - I don't think they selected that photographer to do the coin toss based on his equipment brand.
They picked him on his ability to get the shot ... when the importance of getting the shot (in focus, exposure, etc) fell on one photographer's shoulders, he chose Nikon. If there was a better photog for the situation, they would have chosen them.
First impressions are important, and the first close-up TV event was the coin toss. Most people don't concentrate on the sidelines during the game and having Nikon front and center at the start was powerful.
Before you call me a Nikonian, I only own Canon equipment. After being an early adopter, I waited to buy another MKIII until "the fix" was implemented for a couple months on the production line. Now that "the fix" is rumored to need V 2.0, if Canon handles it as poorly as V 1.0 and V 1.1, it won't take much for me to go to the dark side.
However, from where I was sitting, the black lenses could have been canons with Sigma lenses. FWIW. Either way, I'm sure they all got some great pictures.