Canon at the London Summer Olympics

[Rat]

That room full of L glass must be worth hundred of thousands of dollars. It's a robbers dream the lenses are being held in a broom closet.

Maybe I missed something, but do we know where that photos of all the lens-room comes from? Is it a staging area at the Olympics where Canon lends out gear?

Canon Professional Services is present at all big sporting events, from F1 races to world championships to, well, the Olympics. CPS is a service organisation that requires you to own multiple pro bodies and L lenses, but once you're in, you're all set. If anything of your gear breaks down, they make sure you get on the spot repairs or replacements and the such. The rest of the year it's quick repairs, too, while us mere mortals have to wait for weeks. With the platinum membership, you basically will never miss a shot because of a faulty Canon.

And I imagine you can borrow some fancy goods, too, judging by the amount of 200-400's that can't be all there for replacements

[edited because it's all free *yay!*]

 

[DanoPhoto]

I had to take a cold shower after looking at the gear room..... ;D

Oh, to dream.... :

 

[Razor2012]

That gear room was awesome. Just think, walk in, grab any equipment you need and you're off. Those photogs out there have it made. 8)

 

[dr croubie]

So, about september there's going to be more 1DX refurbs available from the refurb store, than new models from normal shops?

Or are they going to pull a dodgy, try and sell them back to normal shops as "new" models...?

 

[Rat]

So, about september there's going to be more 1DX refurbs available from the refurb store, than new models from normal shops?

Or are they going to pull a dodgy, try and sell them back to normal shops as "new" models...?

I think neither. The Olympics is a lot of photographers, but you can safely assume they'll mostly keep working after this event is over. The one big event will be replaced with many smaller events, so I'm pretty sure they'll use this stuff to supply CPS departments around the globe.

 

[AHumphreys]

Just out of curiousity I will be attending the Olympics next week (on vacation) and I am a CPS member in the USA.
Can I get access to trying out a supertele or two from my CPS membership, or do I need a press pass as well?

 

[sublime LightWorks]

The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.

Actually, the front element's diameter is much smaller than I had thought. I'm actually really surprised.

I wonder why neither of the photographers in the photo is using a lens hood.

Yup, 100mm diameter front element (theoretical), smaller than 300mm f/2.8 (107mm).

My guess in that there is a lens overall length restriction that prevent use of hoods with really big lenses. There is a 400mm f/2.8 at the top of the frame without a hood as well. All the other lens in the frame are 70-200mm with hoods (and one Nikon 200mm f/2 with hood). I've noticed in the coverage I've watched that the really big lenses (400mm f/2.8 +) do not have hoods.

I'm watching the ladies gymnastics and there seems to be no issue with big lens hoods at that venue. Several 400mm lenses shooters with full hoods on the lenses.

 

[lipe]

this ain't fair, hoarding all the good stuff ;D

i thought i am hoarding canon equipment, but this is the extreme hoarding.

 

[dr croubie]

I'm watching the ladies gymnastics and there seems to be no issue with big lens hoods at that venue. Several 400mm lenses shooters with full hoods on the lenses.

Probably depends on the sport more than anything.
Gymnastics has some high-power downlights, could produce a bit of flare, whereas Swimming has a lot more diffuse lighting from multiple sources like skylights and such.

Also probably has a lot to do with space, Swimming's fairly popular so they cram as many in as they can, they have more trouble selling Gymnastics tickets so there's more room to stretch the legs and put a hood on...

 

[Flake]

Well seeing as no one else has said anything!

Who one earth is the owner of the (200 - 400mm?) in the centre left of the photo? It can't be the guy on the extreme left as he's shooting Nikon, which leaves the one with the sunglasses. If it is him then he has both hands on the camera he's using and that one appears suspended in mid air. Tripods aren't allowed only monopods, he doesn't seem to be taking very good care of expensive equipment which earns his crust.

The Olympics is pretty much a disaster for the UK, greedy hospitality companies raised prices so high that no one used their facilities, and now they're cutting prices to less than they were normally. London is pretty quiet, no real bonus from visitors to bars & restaurants.

Our politicians has passed draconian laws which give an already dodgy Police force powers far in excess of what is needed, yesterday they arrested some kid for tweeting an insult against a competitor - the insult was that they guy had let himself & his father (deceased) down. Photographers are simply not tolerated anywhere in the vicinity of the Olympic park, and certainly not inside, the only ones allowed are accredited hacks with the large passes shown in the photo.

Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.

 

[akiskev]

Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.

Sad to hear that..

 

[briansquibb]

Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.

Sad to hear that..

I would go down the security route but the freedom and rights is not my view

 

[Flake]

Just to illustrate how draconian the Olympics act is, it is a criminal offence for spectators to take and display their images taken within the Olympic venue (and that includes outside it) and to display them on the web. So no flikr photobucket image shack etc. If the person who posted the image of the fencing is not an accredited photographer within the games then he or she could be prosecuted just for posting that image on these forums.

The situation is so bad that the NUJ (national union of journalists) has published some legal guidelines as to what to do if you are stopped by a member of the 'security' squad http://londonphotographers.org/2012/07/olympics-legal-guidelines/


Any camera equipment exceeding 30cm is banned, if you try to take it in, it will be confiscated, and will not be returned!

Anyone thinking of visiting the UK with a large camera should be aware that you will be viewed as a potential terrorist where ever you are, and Police interest is often heavy handed and ignorant. The internet is full of the problems of photographers and UK Police
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538834/amateur-photographer-wins-10-000-police-payout
Even Pros aren't safe
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/jun/14/police-press-freedom

 

[briansquibb]

It is not a criminal offense - it is a civil offense only - part of the T&C of going on the site

As for the comment about visiting the UK with a camera - that is utter BS

 

[Flake]

All these newspapers and other media must be making it all up! After all I'm sure a group like 'I'm a photographer not a terrorist' was formed because there was no problem and any one even daring to mention it was 'talking BS'?

Of course there's a problem in the UK why do you think there were demos like pap the Police? because photographers had nothing better to do?

Just to hammer the point home have a read of these:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/16/02-olympic-venues-row-security-photography

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

http://www.alamy.com/pressrelease/releases/archive/2012/04/30/152.aspx

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/899005-photographers-starting-to-fight-back-against-excessive-security-measures

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/13/olympics-2012-branding-police-sponsors

The uploading of images is covered by Ts & Cs but if any Olympic branding is visible then that is covered by the Olympic games act.

I don't know if you live in the UK, but if you think there isn't a problem then you're not getting out enough !

 

[adebrophy]

Although there are real issues of photography in public places, that have been well documented, it really doesn't seem that draconian here. I've done quite a bit of public shooting at events recently (official but not showing ID) and wasn't challenged by anyone.

With regards to the Olympics, I'm sorry to hear about the experience (direct experience?) of the poster above but I went to the sailing in Weymouth and there were stacks of white lenses in the audience and the security were actually really polite and friendly. A friend went to an event in London and said the event was buzzing with a great party atmosphere.

What is true is that there's a cultural predisposition towards complaining and cynicism that's having an awfully hard time keeping up with the fact that the country seems to have pulled off something rather decent - and potentially something rather brilliant.

I applaud the determination of those who continue to moan in the face of this risk of triumph - that there is a true Brit.

 

[briansquibb]

All these newspapers and other media must be making it all up! After all I'm sure a group like 'I'm a photographer not a terrorist' was formed because there was no problem and any one even daring to mention it was 'talking BS'?

Of course there's a problem in the UK why do you think there were demos like pap the Police? because photographers had nothing better to do?

Just to hammer the point home have a read of these:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/16/02-olympic-venues-row-security-photography

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

http://www.alamy.com/pressrelease/releases/archive/2012/04/30/152.aspx

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/899005-photographers-starting-to-fight-back-against-excessive-security-measures

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/13/olympics-2012-branding-police-sponsors

The uploading of images is covered by Ts & Cs but if any Olympic branding is visible then that is covered by the Olympic games act.

I don't know if you live in the UK, but if you think there isn't a problem then you're not getting out enough !

I do get out enough and I have never been stopped by the Police. I regularly shoot in central London

If you read the posting I was responding to it was quoting the out of date articles from last year for which the law has been clarified and verified as not being relevant.

Perhaps you should read the post carefully before having a dig

 

[Flake]

I've been stopped by the Police, on my own street! Testing a 70 - 200mm lens. An officious and undertrained WPC told me she had a child in the back of her car and it was an offence under the data protection act to photograph it!

The case of Murray Vs Big Picture makes it crystal clear that it is not illegal to take pictures of children while in a public place.

 

[briansquibb]

I've been stopped by the Police, on my own street! Testing a 70 - 200mm lens. An officious and undertrained WPC told me she had a child in the back of her car and it was an offence under the data protection act to photograph it!

The case of Murray Vs Big Picture makes it crystal clear that it is not illegal to take pictures of children while in a public place.

Never been a problem for me

 

[Caps18]

Also probably has a lot to do with space, Swimming's fairly popular so they cram as many in as they can, they have more trouble selling Gymnastics tickets so there's more room to stretch the legs and put a hood on...

Gymnastics tickets are some of the hardest tickets to get.

And The Olympics is another one of those times where as a non-professional I would like to bring in my DSLR with 300mm f/4 lens, but I would worry about the restrictions on DSLRs at the venues.

And the decision to have the Olympic flame not accessible or visible by the public is a problem.