Here is a good reason not to shoot a Canon anything

Tuolumne said:
Subversion of a free press hurts everyone. As I read the other posts, I see it has already happened in sports photography. That doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.

/T
Click to expand...

If it's subversion in areas that actually mattered then I would agree.

Perhaps I don't posses enough foresight or perhaps I give the photographers too much credit, but I don't believe the required attire with the Canon logos affect their core job task in anyway - that is unless the vest is made of poor materials and prone to excessive sweating!

Chaser said:
Yeah stop having opinions guys. Geeze let the professionals handle it. Average citizens are always throwing wanna be idealism around when we have professional journalists, sports photographers, and politicians etc to make all the hard decisions. If you hurry you may be able to catch greatest football bloopers 37 on espn2.
Click to expand...

Would you find it hilarious if a group of individuals who has never used a Rangefinder got together and bashed deficiencies of RF photography? I would be curiously aroused and then drop in to have a look and then disregard the conversation as useless.
 
Last edited:
I think it is solely a principals issue. If a can alter a photographer's integrity in any was than we are in a whole lot of trouble. The vests themselves should be a positive thing. Visibility means you are less likely to get smashed by a linebacker or a TV camera on a dolly.

ywenz said:
If it's subversion in areas that actually mattered then I would agree.

Perhaps I don't posses enough foresight or perhaps I give the photographers too much credit, but I don't believe the required attire with the Canon logos affect their core job task in anyway - that is unless the vest is made of poor materials and prone to excessive sweating!
Click to expand...
 
"Perhaps I don't posses enough foresight or perhaps I give the photographers too much credit, but I don't believe the required attire with the Canon logos affect their core job task in anyway - that is unless the vest is made of poor materials and prone to excessive sweating!"

I could live with this if the photographers were aloud to wear buttons that said:

"I went to the football game and all I got was this damn photo vest that Canon made me wear."
/T
 
We seem to be forgetting the other side of the coin. Without the free press of television, radio, and newspapers, there would be no NFL nor any other sports league to exist as the big time enterprises we know them now. The media covers sports to sell papers, but by the same token their coverage of the sport promotes more fan interest. One can't survive without the other. At this time, football is very popular so it has the upper hand but in the not too distant past the NFL was begging for news coverage. With Wellington Mara gone only Art Modell is left to remind the present day owners that the media is a partner in their success and not another client to be exploited.
 
Hey, I stopped watching Hockey when they started to put advertising on the boards. NASCAR has always been rolling billboards as long as I can remember. Just another reason to turn off the tube I guess.

Now if I could just get Canon or Nikon to PAY me for wearing one of their logo vests, I might not have to actually work for a living...
 
This is typical NFL behavior -- corporate to the nth degree. Everything must conform to their standards, and by decreeing uniformity they can earn even more money by getting suppliers to vie for exclusive contracts.

I have no problem with Canon bidding on what is no doubt a prestigious thing for them -- but if Canon thinks anyone believes the NFL awarded the prize based solely on Canon's merit they're crazy.

This is actually better than the contract for team uniforms -- Reebok is the exclusive supplier (not a team-by-team contract). At least a Nikon shooter can still use his equipment.
 
BillBingham2 said:
A great example of what I believe is true. At the heart of Canon is a marketing organization, at the heart of Nikon is a photographer!
Click to expand...

Not to start an anti Nikon pro Canon or VS argument..

But thats why a D40 doesn't include an autofocus motor, so your lens choices ar limited...

And that's why you need a D200 before you can use your old MF Fmount lenses...


And yes I know that Canon doesn't even allow usage of their old MF-mount lenses....


So in my believe at the heart of both companies we find marketeers and great camera engineers..
 
memphis said:
maybe I need to call up my buddy who's an nba owner and see if I can shoot the games here with my leica --- and get leica to kick me some money for advertising their product --- the sword custs both ways...
Click to expand...

Anybody thinking a free R9+180/2? :D
 
I think there is way too much adverizing in sports these days. But, I don't think I'd boycott Canon here, I'd rather boycott the NFL. It was the NFL who created this rule, not Canon.

I'd still like to get Canon, Nikon or Pentax to pay me a few bucks every time I leave the house wearing their logo. I may not be as large as a sports stadium, but I'm tall enough that if I wore a logo cap it could be seen in a crowd of average height individuals...
 
Al Patterson said:
I think there is way too much adverizing in sports these days. But, I don't think I'd boycott Canon here, I'd rather boycott the NFL. It was the NFL who created this rule, not Canon./quote]

Thats exactally right. You can't blame Canon. Besides the NFL has their own problems with Michael Vick.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom