It seems to happen more though in the London area than in the rest of the UK
i was in london... indeed.
i love wales and scottland. never had a problem there.
thought i have hardly seen any police or security guards there anyway.
a pain in the ass... to be frank.
i was wandering around with my 5D MK2 and a 16-35mm.
the 70-200mm f4 was in my bagpack (honest i did not use it because i feard the attention it would create).
when im a tourist i like to make photos of buildings and places... suprise suprise.
and many of the beautifull buildings are government buildings.
itÂ´s not that i setup a huge gitzo tripod in a tube station causing an obstruction.
im not shooting with flash or a tripod in the national gallery.
i only want to shot architecture and buildings (handheld) that have been photographed a billion times before by generations of photographers.
in 2009 i was in london with my small lumix LX3.
i could take photos anywhere.
police was ignoring me... i was no terror threat.
and honest i felt like a terror threat when this police officer approached me the first time (happend another 2 times in 3 days).
where are the friendly bobbys from the movies?
today they walk around with machine guns!
the terrorist have done a perfect job i would say.... to scare our rights away.
i wonder.. did the british police carry machine guns when the IRA crisis was at itÂ´s peak?
so what makes a DSLR so special compared to lets say a mFT camera?
reading that article on amateur photographer it makes me wonder if that question was answered by british politician?
are these people really that clueless or is there a hidden agenda to ban DSLR cameras?
i mean it makes absolutely no sense (but if you see a sense please explain).
what kind of terrorist would wander around with a big DSLR and a 400mm tele when he could use a much smaller and less flashy bridge camera with a 35x zoom?