Shell Wildlife Photographer of the Year: Canon and Nikon

[AdamJL]

Well I went to see the exhibition yesterday at the Natural History Museum (anyone who lives around London or the South East should get along and see it! It runs until February), and I was surprised at the amount of pictures taken by Nikons; so many winning and highly commended pictures were captured by Nikons.
My girlfriend thought it amusing, and I must admit, I felt a little upset.

So why did Nikon have such a huge presence in the competition? Why weren't the Ls more represented?

You can see for yourself the pictures taken here:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/index.jsp

I counted 46 Nikons vs 38 Canons.... but my count was probably a little off because I'm tired.

Anyway, this is just a light-hearted discussion, plesae don't get too emotionally involved! :D

[weka2000]

People who own Canons are not exhibitionists :lol:

[theflyingkiwi]

well there are a couple of things that I can say about that. first off show your gf a picture showing all the white glass at the sporting events. that's got to say something :) And they are also have the biggest market share.

the other thing is don't get hanged up with the equipment that others use. It doesn't matter on the equipment, what matters is the result that they get. What you should be getting away from going to something like that, is insprition to do the same kinda of work. You should be looking what they have done, the composition, the lighting etc.

The camera is just a tool, be happy in knowing that what you use is a dam good camera and you can get the same kinda of results.

[nitsch]

Some superb images there.

It's not about the gear. There is one specially commended shot in the bird section that caught my eye and it's shot with a 300D with a MF lens. Skill, patience and to some degree luck are all important, what make your gear is is probably irrelevant (except to us of course! :) )

[maxyedor]

Exactly why does it matter what camera they were shot on? Do you feel more vindicated in your purchase when you see a great shot that was done with a Canon?


But to answer your question most professional wildlife photogs do use Nikon, Nikon has made the absolute best SLRs in the world right up untill about 2000 or 2001 then Canon sort of took over the Digital arena. Wildlife photography is next to impossible to do professionaly because the guys that make good money at it tend to stick around for a while. Most of them are so used to the ergonomics of Nikon that they would be rendered useless by a Canon. When I switched from Nikon to Canon, it wasn't just that I was used to my F5s and F6s and hadn't figured out the 1D yet, everything was backwards. The lens mount turns the oposite dirrection, as does the zoom, and focus rings. The apperture dial is in a funky spot, basicly I had to learn how to use a camera all over again. I was able to lighten up my workload while I was making the transition, and spend more time practicing with my new gear, otherwise I'd have likley never made the switch. Pro wildlife photogs don't have that luxury, if they take a month off, there are a million hobbiests who would gladly take over their job, and while the results aren't the same, they are willing to work for penuts (or worse yet free) because the idea of a photo assignent that they can brag to their freinds about is all they care about.

[FretNoMore]

As they say, pictures aren't really taken by cameras, they are taken by photographers... I don't find it surprising at all some of them use Nikon gear.

Why would you be upset by this, are you that insecure in your choice of brand? ;)

I've seen great pictures taken using mobile phones and cheap P&S cameras, stuff that puts my pictures to shame but that doesn't make me throw my Canon dSLR equipment in the nearest lake. :)

[Jim G]

Who cares? What other people shoot with has no impact on your own shooting beyond informing your buying decisions regarding what lens is most suited to your desires...

Hey, more film photos have won competitions than digital ones - I don't think many people feel the desire to go back to that though :p

[AdamJL]

haha, yeah I know it's not about the gear... but when you get to a certain professional level, it IS about the gear and what it can offer you. I see press photographers love Canons, whilst the few nature shows I've been to are flooded with Nikons!

Exactly why does it matter what camera they were shot on? Do you feel more vindicated in your purchase when you see a great shot that was done with a Canon?

......

Anyway, this is just a light-hearted discussion, plesae don't get too emotionally involved!

It doesn't matter to me... I'm just curious!
I feel no vindication when I see Canon shots, because Canon are certainly not perfect!

In regards to the rest of your post, you are probably very right in that good wildlife photographers stick at it for decades, and if you're comfortable with a system, then don't go changing!

[AdamJL]

Who cares?

Lighten up dude... I never said I was miserable or that I felt let down.
I said I was a little upset, but at the end, that this post was light-hearted discussion, therefore humour applies!

[condyk]

I'd like to get to that show if I can but can't find daily opening times anywhere on the site. As to brand ... well that's a debate not even worth having. Thanks for the heads up Adam.

[fWord]

Beautiful pictures there...I've gone through many books in this Wildlife Photographer of the Year series and have always been in awe at the work it contains within. Very inspiring, but also a sad reminder to me that I've got very much to learn and don't even have the fraction of the talent these guys have.

When it gets published as a book and finds its way into the local library, I'll be borrowing it for sure!

Speaking of brand, yes I noticed in past issues that Nikon is really popular with the experienced pros. Only in more recent issues does Canon seem to be getting its name in somewhat.

Fortunately for us, whichever is the case, there's a great deal of photos taken with old cameras and old MF lenses. This is a relief. However I'd kill to even get a chance (ie. the time and the money) to photograph in their locations, brave the terrible conditions and see the beautiful sights. It'll be an unforgettable experience, I'm sure.

[luckyart60]

For whats is worth, I looked in on the site on line gallery mainly to look at the photo results, from the ones I checked most were taken by canon cameras. Like others here have said, its the results not the camera

[dpastern]

...But to answer your question most professional wildlife photogs do use Nikon, Nikon has made the absolute best SLRs in the world right up untill about 2000 or 2001 then Canon sort of took over the Digital arena...

I disagree here completely. The eos1n is a damn well fine camera, equal to a F4/F4s or F5 easily. The F6 was released in 2004 or so, ten years after the eos1n. It still more than holds its own against the F6. Canon released their 1V back in 1999 from memory, and again, it's a solid improvement of the 1n predecessor.

There is a thing that I've noticed amongst many professional photographers, and it's like "you ain't a real pro unless you're using Nikon or Hasselblad gear". Of course, it's bollocks, but many working pros seem to think this, and many that are trying to get into the game will get suckered into this type of crap thoughts.

Look at Arthur Morris, some of the best bird images are taken by him, and he shoots Canon. True, Moose Peterson and John Shaw both shoot Nikon gear. I think a lot of it relates to that old F lenses can be used on the newest Nikon digital camera bodies, and making old lenses redundant hurt Canon somewhat (but was the right thing to do imho). Many of these pro photographers have got thousands and thousands of dollars invested in lenses and they are loathe to change systems because of it. Add to that, Nikon gear isn't bad at all, it's just as good as Canon's gear (but different in the way that it operates).

I personally wouldn't use a Nikon camera as the ergonomics don't sit well with me.

Dave

[Pete-eos]

I've had enough of this argument, lets sort this out already.

Canon vs Nikon (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=canon&word2=nikon)

:lol:

[condyk]

I've had enough of this argument, lets sort this out already.

Canon vs Nikon (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=canon&word2=nikon)

:lol:

Canon wins ... but most of the entries relate to front and back focus issues and recall problems :confused: :p

[Hellashot]

Market share may be different in different parts of the world. At USA sporting events and at the Olympics - pro shooters there are 90% Canon.

In Outdoor Photographer magazine (Ithink) 1/2 to 2/3 of the user submitted shots that are shown in each issue are from Canon cameras.

[Hellashot]

I've had enough of this argument, lets sort this out already.

Canon vs Nikon (http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=canon&word2=nikon)

:lol:

Now thats a website that will likely be sued and removed soon since it claims no affiliation to google but it is OBVIOUSLY piggybacking on their name. :)

[condyk]

Been there a long time already. I doubt Google lack a sense of humour given all the cash those guys have ;-)

[JulianL]

As they say, pictures aren't really taken by cameras, they are taken by photographers... I don't find it surprising at all some of them use Nikon gear.

Why would you be upset by this, are you that insecure in your choice of brand? ;)

I've seen great pictures taken using mobile phones and cheap P&S cameras, stuff that puts my pictures to shame but that doesn't make me throw my Canon dSLR equipment in the nearest lake. :)

I have yet to see a decent picture taken by a cell phone. The images are tiny, the exposure is poor and images are very soft and many times blurry.

Anyway, I agree with your other comments. I would add that the camera of choice at sporting events seems to be Canon. Look at all the white lenses on the sidelines at a football game or in the pit lane at a Formula One race (Brazilian Grand Prix is on in a couple hours! Go Kimi Raikkonen!:D

[FretNoMore]

I have yet to see a decent picture taken by a cell phone. The images are tiny, the exposure is poor and images are very soft and many times blurry.
...

Good images are far from only about technical quality. ;)

[Wilt]

It is amusing (black humor sort of way) to me. 'It is not about the gear', 'it is not about the camera'...'it is about the photograper'...

...and then I turn around and see the virtual obsession that many on POTN have, with filling one's camera bag with red stripe L's!

[Tareq]

I like both.
after 3 years i will start to collect Nikon Products, hehe;)

[pparker]

I would'nt get upset about it. Both Nikon and Canon produce excellent lenses. Next year, Canon may have the largest percentage of winners.
I've owned both Nikon and Canon Supertelephotos. I favor my Canon 600 f4 L IS over any lens I've ever owned.

[mbellot]

So why did Nikon have such a huge presence in the competition? Why weren't the Ls more represented?


Sheesh. Isn't it obvious.




Nikon has paid off the Shell Wildlife Foundation. ;)


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Pete-eos]

It is amusing (black humor sort of way) to me. 'It is not about the gear', 'it is not about the camera'...'it is about the photograper'...

...and then I turn around and see the virtual obsession that many on POTN have, with filling one's camera bag with red stripe L's!

Thats because when I take a crap picture I can't blame my gear when I've got the L on! :lol: Its 100% me being useless!

[AdamJL]

I'd like to get to that show if I can but can't find daily opening times anywhere on the site. As to brand ... well that's a debate not even worth having. Thanks for the heads up Adam.

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/Exhibition/Visiting.jsp ;)