Access denied because you had "Too Much Camera"?

JonK wrote in post #13595935
flash poses an issue how?!

The cumulative effect of hight intensity light exposure ( flash ) can be damaging to items.

Hint: Conceal your big lenses and enter the event with a 50mm lens on the camera!

Walking through the front gate with an artillery piece around your neck is inviting undue attention.

harcosparky wrote in post #13596649
The cumulative effect of hight intensity light exposure ( flash ) can be damaging to items.

It's also very intrusive in a quiet setting.

Buylongterm wrote in post #13596260
You do have a valid point and I'm sure it wasn't the only thing Daley bulldozed. Lol

Park is ok, but It sure isn't Migs Field. (definitely miss it)

I loved watching planes take off and land at Migs the times I visited Chicago. I hadn't heard that it was plowed under. Bummer.

Best I can say... the owners and managers of different attractions have the option of determining what can be done in those places. Their option - their choice - visitors can just live with it regardless of the reasoning or lack thereof.

Flash photography in particular can be distracting to other visitors and damaging to old paintings, murals, and documents. Don't try a flash in a cathedral in Italy if you want to keep your visit undisturbed. I saw restored murals in a monastery that dated from the 12th century. I'd never consider using a flash in there and risk contributing to possible accelerated deterioration.

No Angle wrote in post #13596222
I got into it with a lifegaurd at Malibu before it went cold here and was told that I needed a permit because I am "Pro" because I had a tripod and a big lens.lol I told him to go get the rules and show me where it says I can not bring this stuff on the beach. All it said is that you can not setup so that you are blocking or preventing people access to and from the beach with equipment like tripods and reflectors or cause disturbances with shoots that need more than one person to take the shots aka "crews". I fell into neither catagory. I told him I was there legally and to call the cops if he felt it was needed. He did and the cop just said to move further down the beach away from most of the people. I laughed and said fine, but this is the area I wanted to shoot because of the rock jetty. He told me that he had to make me move, but agreed it was a bit stupid. I looked at the Life Guard and asked him if he felt like he earned his salary today by making a big bad photographer move away from his tower. He just turned and walked away. I guess artists are not appreciated these days.lol

I suggest showing some respect. It makes a better mark for all photographers and for the next photographer the lifeguard encounters. The lifeguard is going on information he was trained with. Inquire and educate. I had a ranger ask me to move along in sunset light while shooting with a big view camera. I asked him to allow me to stay until I got the shot while he watched. Unfortunately there is a lot of homeless camping that would take place if these rangers didn't do their job. They have to pack weapons too.

rick_reno wrote in post #13595800
Disneyworld won't bother you, I had my 70-200 out there photographing big butts. There were lots of them.

+1 on Disney, heck I got into some shop talk with 1 of the park photographers during 1 of the daily rain dessions. No problem going through security.

Regarding beach shooting some things are down right stupid. I can carry couple of baby strollers and beach umbrellas and set up my whole tent and what not but can't use tripod if I got some nice L glass. Need permit for that. The rules are made more for the movie folks but are being applied to avg. Joe now by some of these pack rangers. I once got stopped for taking baby deer picture with my 500mm f4 from my beat up car. ranger was nice when she found out what I was shooting but my point even if I was shooting picture of something else why in their mind would I use 500mm f4 with 1 series camera to take picture of some building that our govt thinks shouldn't be photographed while I can take a cell phone and do same thing from inside the building.

Come to think of it, the most restrictive place I've ever been was our gym.

They were nice about telling me it is prohibited, so I asked why....

They have high-profile athletes there, so it is really an anti-paparrazzi rule.

Well, that and the potential glass problems, as in broken glass, pools, jacuzzi, locker room....

Randy- I regularly take my gear with me to Phillies games in Philadelphia and Reds games in Cincinnati without any issues. I also attended a couple Cardinal games in St. Louis this past season with no concerns.

Never had a problem bringing any gear into Disney World, Bush Gardens, or cruising.

Not so much "too much camera" but led to quite a discussion over here


http://www.amateurphot​ographer.co.uk …aircase__news_3​10747.html

In most sporting venues they question lens over 6 inches. Probably the only time where 6 inches and over you get no action.

The Arizona memorial is completly surrounded by an active Navy base. On the memorial is not restricted, but around it is heavily controled. A similar thing happens at the Pentagon 9/11 memorial. The metro station is on the other side of the building. When you walk around to it, you must stay within the while lines and there is absolutely no photography. Once you enter the memorial its fair game.

gh8st wrote in post #13601585
In most sporting venues they question lens over 6 inches. Probably the only time where 6 inches and over you get no action.

Badadump! Pshhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....​..........

Randy Digby wrote in post #13595631
I've noticed just a few posts across several forums where access to a certain event or amusement park was denied because someone was carrying "Too Much Camera", or "Pro photographers are not allowed" (I'm certainly not a pro, just enjoy the hobby). Have any of you encountered such restricted access because of the equipment you carried? If so, please share the details. I just acquired my first "White" lens and we are headed to Disney World in a couple of weeks. Our primary job there will be baby sitters while our daughter and son-in-law run in the Disney half and full marathons. If I have the opportunity to carry the big lens (70-200) to the park one day, I sure would hate to be turned back at the gate and loose time carrying the equipment back to the room.

I've had this problem too (mostly at sporting events), my solution is the 200 2.8L prime. It's fairly short, black and never gets a second look from security. Sometimes i'll also stick a 85 1.8 (non-L) in my pocket. I don't bring a camera bag as this draws more scrutiny. It's funny, because the 200 is actually just as "professional" as my big white lenses, but the security guys don't know a thing about gear, they just know that big and/or white = professional. I'd like to sell the 200 (it's redundant to my 70-200), but this use keeps me hanging on to it.