"no cameras with removable lenses"

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Steven, May 21, 2013.

  1. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    So, I recently attended an outdoor music/food festival . I ended up not taking a camera with me because the rules stated - no professional cameras, with interchangeable lenses, only point and shoots. I briefly considered trying my luck with GX1 and 20mm, but decided against it.
    While at the festival, I did notice 2 people with m43 cameras - 1 person with EPl2 and 14-42mm ( I was really upset when I saw that :mad: how did that get past security? :eek: :smile:) and GF1 with 20mm/1.7. So, I guess, m43 is not yet at the "professional" level :) :rolleyes:

    This whole experience has me looking at something like RX100 more closely. or maybe X100 ? :confused: mmm...
  2. bassman

    bassman Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 22, 2013
    New Jersey
    The Bassman
    I've been turned away from NFL games for having a lens greater than 3" long.
  3. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    I should mention that I have not seen one single person with a regular DSLR who was not an obvious press guy, so the security must've been on a lookout for those but let the "point and shoot"-looking m43 stuff pass.
  4. suntoryjim

    suntoryjim Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 6, 2013
    I would've showed up with my 15mm F8 body cap lens on the camera, and the 20 1.7 in my pocket. :wink:
  5. A lot of the security guards don't know the difference between a larger point and shoot and a smaller ILC camera with a small lens on it.
  6. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Be proud! "We" keep feeling slighted by DSLRs so thus be proud that we are in the same league with them now :wink: :smile:

    I've had something similar happen to me with my E-PL5.

    Bottom Line is that appearance & size don't matter anymore - removable lenses (or not) is the key.
  7. battleaxe

    battleaxe Mu-43 Top Veteran

    I got away with taking my G2 and 14-42mm a few years back to a concert that didn't allow ILC cameras. The security guard thought my G2 was one of those big superzooms. Lens was a bit short(I think the 45-150mm if I had it would still have been barely passable and more usable in that situation).
  8. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I totally do not understand this ILC discrimination! I can totally understand an event saying "no photography" or even "no flash-photography" but why this??? Are they afraid of people getting good pictures? Of coarse it is all but impossible to say no camera now a days because of cell phones.
  9. Johnny_Alucard

    Johnny_Alucard Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 28, 2013
    I went to a football match at Wembely last month. I checked the camera policy before I left, and it was the same 'no ILC camera' rule. I did a bit of research to see what people had got away with at that stadium before, and accounts varied. It sounded like it all came down to which steward frisked you, as there was no consistency and no definite policy being enforced. So I took my E-P3 + 20mm and hid my 45mm in the mum's handbag. Got it all in and got some nice shots. Reckon I could have easily got the 75mm in and got some even better shots.

    I think most Mu4/3 cameras + a pancake would easily pass off as p&s compacts to stewards who don't anything about photography!
  10. Savas K

    Savas K Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jan 10, 2013
    Imagine. Frisked for a camera. What's this world gotten to?
  11. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    It's a plot by Instagram.
  12. suntoryjim

    suntoryjim Mu-43 Regular

    Feb 6, 2013
    I think what is more disturbing is the entertainment industry demonstrating that they own the rights to the light that falls on their property.

    Hopefully Google Glass will become their more pressing concern and focus.

    Sent from my SGH-T999 using Mu-43 mobile app
  13. AceAceBaby

    AceAceBaby Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jan 21, 2013
    It's gotten to events being partially subsidized by selling photo rights to professional publications and the like, who want to at least have a chance of being able to "sell" the best images of the event without too much inevitable competition from people who didn't pay for any rights.
  14. carpandean

    carpandean Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 29, 2010
    Western NY
    I'm confused. Where do the 90% of DSLRs that are entry-level with kit lenses fall? They are neither professional cameras, nor point and shoots (actually, one could argue that since the lens is never changed and the camera is operated in P mode all of the time, then it is far closer to a point and shoot.) This is like saying, "no race cars, only compact cars."
  15. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    As a former pro photog, I was never afraid of competition. News was terribly competitive, news was all about competition. The last thing that concerned be were amateurs with a camera. But, amateurs, especially a bunch of them at an event with no assigned seating, did get in the way, a real PITA.

    Most of the rules are conjured up by security administration who feel they're getting paid to come up with rules to protect the venu, their client. I can understand some of the rules, if every other person had a dSLR with a Bigma on the other end ... things could start getting unwieldy. A long lens could "invade" the private space of an adjacent seat, the loud and continuous mirror-slap of a dSLR going off in your ear ... and now you have a lot of annoyed people ... it only takes one to push a lens away ... soon a fight.

    A P&S doesn't create those problems.

    On top of the venu rules, individual artists pile on their rules. With the internet and everybody armed with long lenses ... every miscue, every drop of sweat-spittle-snot from every orifice is captured and posted ... most professionals artists don't wants that ... so more rules.

    How many security admin types now the dif between a dSLR ana mirrorless ... they don't ... and even if they did, it probably wouldn't matter because the more rules they have the greater the opportunity to exercise their power.

  16. madogvelkor

    madogvelkor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 22, 2013

    Yeah, that's why cameras like the RX100 and X100/10/20/F1 are going to become more popular. Or Coolpix A, Ricoh GR, etc....

    I'd like to see Canon put their 1.5" sensor in a more compact body than the G1X, that would attract a lot of interested...

    It's obvious that the rules make no sense and are written by people who don't know anything about cameras other than things that look like DSLRs are "professional". So you get situations where people with a FF compact could use their cameras but people with an entry level Canon kit can't. Or you can't bring a telephoto lens, but if you have a small sensor camera with 30x zoom like the Sony HX50 it is a compact camera and OK...
  17. AceAceBaby

    AceAceBaby Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jan 21, 2013
    I'm not talking about freelance photographers or photojournalists. I'm talking about situations such as Formula 1 motor racing at the Circuit of the Americas, where anyone with "pro" looking gear will be told to leave it outside, because the product (access to create "professional" images of the sporting event) has been sold, likely for millions of dollars, to some media giant or other, or is considered too valuable by the rights holders (FOM) to simply "give away" to the public when there may be a potential to monetize it. When the World Challenge races at the same venue, they might have no restrictions at all, because it's not worth anything to anyone, or they see the benefit in allowing wider access (publicity).

    The venue itself may also reserve the rights to sell photography rights on their premises, and hold any event organizer to that rule as a stipulation in the contract for use of the venue. Whether or not anyone leverages that right is moot, the contract is in place, and generally over-keen security will enforce it, just the same as they will enforce, eg, no booze (or sometimes even food) from outside the venue, for similar reasons (contracts relating to concessions/food vendors in the venue).

    It's not about how threatened or otherwise any individual pro photographer feels, and nobody, not even the press, has any guaranteed right to do as they please on someone else's private property.

    We can all roll our eyes at it all, but the guy in the black sweater at the gate with the walkie talkie isn't going to know (or care to know) the finer distinctions between an iPhone, a Leica or a Costco Rebel. One of those three cameras will "look" more pro than the others, and that is what they will target.
  18. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    Yes, I think that's the reason. They just don't want a bunch of people with big cameras pushing other people and starting fights.
  19. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    No argument at all. It is all about money and/or the potential of money.
  20. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Now you know how DSLR owners have felt for quite some time now :smile:
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.