Reuters best photos of 2012 dominated with Canon's

I was going to post the URL's, but they are being blocked even though I wasn't advertising.

<p>Stephen Penland beat you to it...</p>

<p><a href="../casual-conversations-forum/00b5aT">http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00b5aT</a></p>

It is something like 90% of them.

<p>"It is something like 90% of them."</p>

<p>Well, of course it is! :-)</p>

<p>According to Thom Hogan that is because Reuters supplies Canons to their PJs. Hope nobody hurt themselves over this. A chest can only take so much pounding.</p>

<p>"Reuter's best photos of 2012 dominated by good photographers."</p>

<blockquote>

<p>According to Thom Hogan that is because Reuters supplies Canons to their PJs</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>...Which is what Thom kinda <em>has to</em> say, isn't it?</p>

<p>Even if it's true - Reuters won't be choosing Canon because they think they're crappy cameras...</p>

<p>By my count:<br>

Canon 88<br>

Nikon 6<br>

Sony 1<br>

The most used lens was the 16-35 followed by the 70-200.</p>

Do we know the percentage of 7D and 5Dll used?

<p>Husain, I'm seriously considering making a formal complaint to the mods about you and your explicit and implicit 7D bashing.</p>

<p>Why is Canon being preferred?</p>

<p>It is worse if you bash a person, Keith. I don't think the 7D would mind (It's a joke!) :-)</p>

<p>Are they being sponsored, or is it by choice? If it is by choice, why would the Canon cameras be their choice?</p>

<p>Keith, it is quite legitimate to know which Canon cameras are mostly used! What is wrong with it?</p>

<p>Nikon did or said something that made Reuters mad in 1993 - which is when they replaced all their Nikons with Canons. </p>

<p>My guess is that it is purely a marketing deal - where Reuters shooters can get there hands on demo, free, replacement, unreleased product, etc... in return for prominent placement of Canon logos, shirts, etc...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>There you go, David. I am seriously considering a divorce from Nikon now, even if I have been a faithful Nikon user for many years. I keep finding myself in the Canon forum. What's up with that?! :-)</p>

<p>Husain, your agenda is patently obvious - you're looking for "proof" to back up your obsession that the 7D is an inherently broken camera.</p>

<p>I can say the same about your agenda, Keith!</p>

<p>Yeah, my agenda is simple enough to understand, but for the avoidance of any doubt, I'll state it explicitly:</p>

<p><strong>The Canon 7D is a <em>great</em> camera - still not bettered as a brilliant all-rounder by any subsequent APS-C camera, three years in. "Problems" with it are almost <em>never</em> the fault of the camera, and I'm happy to demonstrate that it can provide images a damn' sight better than would humanly be possible if the bashers and flamebaiters were right about it being fundamentally flawed...</strong></p>

<p>And this thing is, I've proven this to be the case, again and again and again - I'll continue to set the record straight every time the need arises.</p>

<p>Yes, Keith you have shown some good pictures (which could have easily been taken by 500D with a good lens) but how you have achieved them is another story! For example, somewhere else I have pointed out that one of pictures you said was taken at ISO 8500 was in fact at ISO 6400!</p>