# What happened to Nikon and high ISO's



## gsgary

The Most Popular Cameras and Settings for Reuters' 2012 Photos of the Year


----------



## Derrel

Reuters is a "Canon house".


----------



## tirediron

Interesting, whereas Canon has long been the go-to choice for sports photographers, Nikon has always reigned supreme in the PJ world. It would be interesting to see if there are any 'unlisted' factors.  I find the use of the 16-35 especially interesting.  I know Nikon's version is nothing to write home about; it's decent, but that's about it.   I can't imagine passing up the 14-24 in favour of anything else when you need to shoot UWA...


----------



## tirediron

Derrel said:


> Reuters is a "Canon house".


Are these just Reuter's images then?


----------



## pgriz

They forgot to mention other important information such as

time of the day
day of the week
geographic latitude
air temperature
barometric pressure
married status
colour of the photographer's eyes.

Because, they are all important components in making outstanding images, just like the camera used.

Or could it be...  it's really still about the photographer's skill (and not just a little bit of luck)?


----------



## Derrel

tirediron said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> Reuters is a "Canon house".
> 
> 
> 
> Are these just Reuter's images then?
Click to expand...


Yes, these are ALL "Reuter's images". This article was discussed a while back. 
link at bythom.com 
At his blog _(PJ Followup, Dec 5, 2012)_ Thom Hogan says: 

_"The large Canon bias is mostly because Reuters has tended to buy Canon product for thier staff. 
We are not looking at an un-biased sample in terms of brand. 
Plenty of photojournalists and other agencies have Nikon gear, it's just that Reuters is a Canon shop."_

<tbody>

</tbody>


----------



## tirediron

Ahhh, I get it; I was thinking it was "Best images according to Reuters" not "Best images from Reuters"; makes total sense now.


----------



## gsgary

tirediron said:


> Interesting, whereas Canon has long been the go-to choice for sports photographers, Nikon has always reigned supreme in the PJ world. It would be interesting to see if there are any 'unlisted' factors.  I find the use of the 16-35 especially interesting.  I know Nikon's version is nothing to write home about; it's decent, but that's about it.   I can't imagine passing up the 14-24 in favour of anything else when you need to shoot UWA...



For me you can't beat a Leica M9 for PJ work, the ME got a glowing report in Photo Pro, reviewer said it produced better images than his 1DX and need let post work and no cropping due to being able to see outside the frame it also brought back his love for photography


----------



## runnah

Biased sample group to be sure. That's like asking Ford employees their favorite make of car.


----------



## Derrel

I have read the Leica M9's images are simply OUTSTANDING, in every way. Malleable, great color rendering, high acutance, and a gorgeous "look". I would love to be able to afford a Leica digital system with some really awesome lenses. But, I'm pretty well stuck using what I've got. Right now, my only good rangefinder is my 15 year-old Bessa R, which is LTM, not Leica M, and all I have lens-wise are the 35/1.7 aspherical, the 50/1.5 Nokton, and the 75/2.5 Color-Heliar. I just wish I had a digital body to use them on.


----------



## runnah

Derrel said:


> I have read the Leica M9's images are simply OUTSTANDING, in every way. Malleable, great color rendering, high acutance, and a gorgeous "look". I would love to be able to afford a Leica digital system with some really awesome lenses. But, I'm pretty well stuck using what I've got.



Yeah the price is a bit more than most freelancers can afford. Most of the freelancer I know have very old gear and only buy new stuff when they absolutely have to.


----------



## gsgary

Derrel said:


> I have read the Leica M9's images are simply OUTSTANDING, in every way. Malleable, great color rendering, high acutance, and a gorgeous "look". I would love to be able to afford a Leica digital system with some really awesome lenses. But, I'm pretty well stuck using what I've got. Right now, my only good rangefinder is my 15 year-old Bessa R, which is LTM, not Leica M, and all I have lens-wise are the 35/1.7 aspherical, the 50/1.5 Nokton, and the 75/2.5 Color-Heliar. I just wish I had a digital body to use them on.



Im looking at an M8 for B+w and would love a Bessa m mount, ive just bought the new m mount 50f1.5


----------



## MartinCrabtree

Derrel said:


> I have read the Leica M9's images are simply OUTSTANDING, in every way. Malleable, great color rendering, high acutance, and a gorgeous "look". I would love to be able to afford a Leica digital system with some really awesome lenses.



Will all that minutia make a poor photo great? Nah.............


----------



## DiskoJoe

I do have to say that the high ISO features on the 5D Mark iii are quite impressive given the small amount of noise they produce.


----------

