Most popular cameras and settings for some of Reuters 2012 top pix

[David Lucas]

Amazing breakdown of the most popular cameras and settings for some of Reuters 2012 top pix.
"A single photograph captured using the most popular equipment and settings (for Reuters’ top 95 photos of 2012) would be shot using a Canon 1D Mark IV with a 16-35mm lens attached, set at 1/320s, f/2.8, and ISO 200."

Discuss.

Cheers
David Lucas
VP NPAC/APPC

[David Lucas]

Something to think about --> All the Wrong Emphasis: Reuters’ Best Images of Year Exif Data http://bit.ly/VgPLSw @fstoppers

Cheers
David Lucas
VP NPAC/APPC

[Louie Palu]

Is this what has happened to these boards that we have descended into caring what shutter speed and f-stop people are setting their cameras on and now a second post has started on this?

[Fred Lum]

Unfortunately traffic here has slowed down considerably Louie so we're not seeing as many new threads as we used to get. I see your point but Dave's second link is a good counter to the gear syndrome of the first. I think everyone (naturally) is curious about who uses what but I like to think that we're not that gullible to believe that brand choice will elevate us to the next level. and most certainly not exif data

[Mark Blinch]

I find the data interesting actually! It can actually say quite a lot about the trends in the way pictures are shot. I think though at the end of the day, people appreciate the pix more than the data, but its just getting attention because no one has ever taken the time to compile data such as this before.

[Louie Palu]

I hear your points and respect your views or interests however for me all this does is promote gear and camera brands and it sends the wrong message to younger photographers and students if we are not posting more on the content of pictures. It went overboard for me when two threads started on this.

I do believe that the "See this Work" section of this site needs to be merged into this set of the boards.

It should be about us looking at pictures and alot less if at all on shutter speeds, f-stops and camera brands.

[Kenneth Armstrong]

Louie, I found it most interesting that your response to the Lomography thread was to talk about the fact that you have published work with them and that they are "ingeniously simply made cameras"

Gear. You didn't go on to talk about what your thought process and creative mindset are when using them, or how why they allowed you to make great images. Just that the article is, and I quote you, "very cool."

So what's different here? Someone has compiled charts showing what gear the photographers used in making some of the top Reuters photos of 2012 and it is dismissed by you as being utterly unimportant. I don't totally disagree but I just found it interesting that your diatribe against gear and your "very cool" response to the Lomo article were posted on the very same day.

I personally looked at the Reuters graphs, noticed that some of the photos were taken with cameras and lenses that I own on settings that I sometimes use and thought to myself "very cool. I have had images published with that same gear" and moved on.

 

[Chris Helgren]

I also didn't get what the fuss was about with the Exif data.. a bunch of stats, it was interesting in the way statistics usually are. And then I returned to looking at photography on other websites, as usual.

I saw others complaining about these graphs, and just thought nobody was being forced to look at it. If it was on TV, just change the channel. I'll bet it takes you 2 minutes to look at the Exif data that was posted, and 20 or more to go through the "Best of 2012" gallery. So what's the problem?

[Louie Palu]

In the grand scheme of things it doesn't really matter what any of us personally think about this. At least we are talking about photography and that is what we should stick to (minus personal attacks). Maybe I am being provocative, maybe I like f-stops as well, the point of the matter is to stick to a dialogue. Then maybe there will be more traffic on the site.

[Kenneth Armstrong]

I hope you don't feel my post was a personal attack, Louie. I was just playing devil's advocate and even said I don't disagree with you.

[Louie Palu]

Nope never took it that way. It's cool we are just talking. Keep posting.

[Warren Toda]

...we have descended into caring what shutter speed and f-stop people are setting their cameras on...

In this year's Pictures of the Year contest, there's going to be a new category for "Best EXIF data".

 

[Steve Russell]

Is this what has happened to these boards that we have descended into caring what shutter speed and f-stop people are setting their cameras on ......

I think we have always cared about f-stops, shutter speeds, ISO, WB, etc...

I agree that content is king,
but how we capture that content is important too.
If you are a mess technically, your pictures will not communicate the content effectively.

What's the first thing we do when we roll up to an assignment?
I mean, besides teasing Tyler Anderson?
We check our  f-stops, shutter speeds, ISO, WB, etc...

Because of that I don't mind a thread or two about technical issues ( f-stops, shutter speeds, ISO, WB, etc...)
I'd hate for it to be a taboo subject.

[Jack Simpson]

...we have descended into caring what shutter speed and f-stop people are setting their cameras on...

In this year's Pictures of the Year contest, there's going to be a new category for "Best EXIF data".

 

.... very nice but that list missed Pentax Q 

 

Jack

[Louie Palu]

This is a great subject and discussion. I just think that as pro's we have to mindful that younger photogs and students read these boards. The "See this work" board is DEAD, so all the site traffic is driven here which means the way these boards are set up are dysfunctional in their setup right now. We need to merge the "see this work" into this as well.