# Any Mirrorless Cameras used in the Super bowl?



## bmwzimmer (Feb 2, 2015)

Watching the game from home, I didn't see a a Single Mirrorless camera out there. Pretty much 100% DSLR's. 
I did see about 9/10 or more in the sideline using Canon and some big whites.
After the game when everybody was on the field, I noticed about 1/4 were shooting Nikon with some wide angle lenses.

What were your observations either from home or if you were actually there covering it?


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 2, 2015)

Everyone is still shocked at that interception and the pass play call at the 1 yard line. 

No I didn't spot a mirrorless at the game, tons of 1Ds and D4s.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 2, 2015)

I bet there were a couple of people in the stands using MILCs. Lots of white lenses there, definitely Canon > Nikon overall numbers.


----------



## zlatko (Feb 2, 2015)

Lenny Kravitz probably brought his Leica, which is mirrorless.


----------



## Ferris (Feb 2, 2015)

No.

Mirrorless cameras are unable to contain the minimum amount of air.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 2, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Lenny Kravitz probably brought his Leica, which is mirrorless.



Hope it didn't get melted by the jets of flame...


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 2, 2015)

Apparently the demand for Blurry 36MP High Resolution Exmor shots was not what Sony had hoped ;-) They couldn't AF track Beast mode.


----------



## infared (Feb 2, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Apparently the demand for Blurry 36MP High Resolution Exmor shots was not what Sony had hoped ;-) They couldn't AF track Beast mode.



Well...if the last play of the SeaHawks had been Beast Mode...the game would have been over. What dumb bells...they let the Ball-Deflators win!!??


----------



## pdirestajr (Feb 2, 2015)

At the end when everyone was on the field, I saw a Canon shooter holding his camera over his head UPSIDE DOWN with an UWA on it! I guess that way he can hit the shutter button easier?! Was odd.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Feb 2, 2015)

I'd expect to see a few mirrorless at the next World Cup (real football  When the Olympus 300mm f/4 and the E-M1-2 (even better focusing) arrive we should start to see a few M4/3 cameras at Big Events. Also a few improved iPhone 6s or maybe iPhone 7 for news shooters.


----------



## Greatland (Feb 2, 2015)

I didn't see any, but I sure saw a lot of photographers using the 200-400!!


----------



## mjbehnke (Feb 2, 2015)

Yes, I agree... I saw a Dumb play from the 1 yard line, a fight, and lots of white lenses.


----------



## Halfrack (Feb 2, 2015)

Greatland said:


> I didn't see any, but I sure saw a lot of photographers using the 200-400!!



AKA sports shooter crack...

Wide angle upside down most likely was shooting left handed with another camera in their right hand.

The surprise was no Hass/Phase/Pentax for the trophy bits.

Anyone see a camera covered in gaff? Aka the 50mp beta body?


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 2, 2015)

Greatland said:


> I didn't see any, but I sure saw a lot of photographers using the 200-400!!


I noticed that, too.


----------



## jdramirez (Feb 2, 2015)

That was a fun game watch... I was yelling that Brady was cursed... beat in three super bowls by three miracle catches...


----------



## zlatko (Feb 2, 2015)

pdirestajr said:


> At the end when everyone was on the field, I saw a Canon shooter holding his camera over his head UPSIDE DOWN with an UWA on it! I guess that way he can hit the shutter button easier?! Was odd.



Holding the camera upside down was probably to get the camera up higher. That camera was held up over a lot of heads. Holding it upside down allowed the photographer to reach the shutter button while having the camera up a few inches higher. Also at the end, another photographer held up a camera on a monopod -- a way to get it up even higher. I'm pretty sure it had a remote trigger and an 8-15 fisheye zoom on it.


----------



## IgotGASbadDude (Feb 2, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Also at the end, another photographer held up a camera on a monopod -- a way to get it up even higher. I'm pretty sure it had a remote trigger and an 8-15 fisheye zoom on it.



I've often wondered why this method isn't used more often. I even thought about using it to get a wide angle shot from the top of the Empire State Building. In the end, it was too cold that night so I bailed on the idea.


----------



## jdramirez (Feb 2, 2015)

IgotGASbadDude said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > Also at the end, another photographer held up a camera on a monopod -- a way to get it up even higher. I'm pretty sure it had a remote trigger and an 8-15 fisheye zoom on it.
> ...



I did a monopod over a team photo... but 24mm was problematic. I couldn't quite angle it to get the girls closest to me.


----------

