# Industry News: AP Photographers will only shoot with Sony gear going forward



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 23, 2020)

> In a pretty stunning move, one of the world’s largest news agencies has signed an exclusive agreement with Sony to use only their cameras for photojournalist work. This has usually been dominated by Canon and Nikon gear.
> The terms of the deal were not disclosed, but I imagine the AP did get a pretty good deal on the switch. Both Canon and Nikon have aggressively pursued professional news agencies in the past decades, and this looks to be similar in nature.
> *From the Associated Press:*
> Sony Electronics Inc., a global leader in imaging, and The Associated Press, the trusted global news organization, announced today a new collaboration that will make Sony the exclusive imaging products and support provider for AP news photographers and video journalists around the world.
> With journalists in nearly 250 locations in 100 countries, AP provides factual, compelling journalism in all formats, including 3,000 photos and 200 videos each day. The news agency has a distinguished history of...



Continue reading...


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 23, 2020)

Can you merge threads? 





__





Sony strikes deal with Associated Press


Wow. Maybe political testimony / hearings will get quieter with silent shooting: https://www.dpreview.com/news/8983805391/ap-partners-with-sony-to-exclusively-provide-its-visual-journalists-with-sony-camera-gear - A




www.canonrumors.com





- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 23, 2020)

To me it sounds more like a marketing decision by Canon and Nikon in that they don’t see the ‘deal’ as worth the cost. I’d expect to see a lot more retraction of sponsored/supported/subsidized photography moving forwards.


----------



## spomeniks (Jul 23, 2020)

Saw the headline and thought it was April 1 again..


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 23, 2020)

Curious to know what the actual photogs think of this


----------



## Sharlin (Jul 23, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Curious to know what the actual photogs think of this



Apparently this



AP Director of Photography said:


> We tested cameras from several manufacturers in really harsh zones from the Arctic to the rainforest, to hostile environments, to hurricanes. The overwhelming response from the photographers was that they really liked the Sony equipment: the way it worked, the way it felt, and the image quality.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 23, 2020)

Moving on has anyone heard about their R5's or R6's being delivered yet .


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 23, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Curious to know what the actual photogs think of this





I just chatted on Twitter with a PJ working at our city's largest paper about this news, and apparently 11 out of 16 of the paper's PJs/video producers are primarily shooting Sony now.

- A


----------



## Jerry Jaz (Jul 23, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> Moving on has anyone heard about their R5's or R6's being delivered yet .


Mine is still on order from ABT. Got a note from B&H today saying that they still didn’t have a clue as to when they were going to be delivered.


----------



## snappy604 (Jul 23, 2020)

didn't know the sony's had good weather sealing


----------



## jolyonralph (Jul 23, 2020)

Maybe AP have some great Canon gear to sell off now?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Apparently this


Pros are happy to use whatever works - they're generally entirely brand agnostic, and will shoot with whatever they're given as long as it's up to the job.

He was hardly going to say "we thought they were crap", was he?



All this means is that Sony have given AP a good deal - probably something of a loss leader, for the publicity.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 23, 2020)

I presume AP probably put up a tender to supply camera gear to get the best price. Canon and Nikon probably decided not to go all out to win it and Sony did.
The photographers will have to learn to use it - they won't have decided on it.
The Sony gear will be more than up to the job anyway. AP are probably leasing the gear at a great price.
Canon as a brand has depended heavily on its pitch side visibility. Sony are probably trying to attack that.
AP is probably a loss leader for Sony.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

Yep, just a business decision, nothing more and not a big deal, really...


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jul 23, 2020)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if an AP PJ decides to continue to shoot on his/her on gear, whatever the brand, that's no problem. It''ll be that if a PJ uses AP-supplied gear that it will be all Sony. Do we know how many full-time PJ use company supplied gear vs their own? When I shot for my college paper we basically all used our own gear.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 23, 2020)

Found this snippet super interesting:



> We will get some a7R IVs for the videographers



I personally get caught up a ton on the photo "news" cycles, YouTube, etc, but at the end of the day the AP decided that an 8 bit 422 camera that only has bin or crop modes is enough to get the job done. Puts the hype cycle in perspective.

(Either that or the deal includes A7S3s and they just can't say it until they're released)


----------



## Rezen73 (Jul 23, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



I love it when an anti-trust law circumvention plan comes together.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 23, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Yep, just a business decision, nothing more and not a big deal, really...



It is a big deal in terms of marketing. There are many more "citizen journalists" active now with their own websites and blogs. They buy cameras, and they help feed the marketing machine.

This was a smart move by Sony and probably worked out quite nicely for AP too. I doubt Canon marketing-execs are saying "not a big deal." Hopefully they are working on other opportunities that can help promote Canon in this extremely competitive and complex business environment. For those of us who do appreciate Canon and have bought in, competition is important, but a healthy, prosperous company is essential.


----------



## nchoh (Jul 23, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> To me it sounds more like a marketing decision by Canon and Nikon in that they don’t see the ‘deal’ as worth the cost. I’d expect to see a lot more retraction of sponsored/supported/subsidized photography moving forwards.



Sony is much larger than Canon by several factors. Sony also has several business lines that would benefit from this agreement. All in, Sony would probably benefit a lot more from such an arrangement than Canon. Certainly marketing is part of any such strategic decision, but I think it is mostly due to the fact that Sony has muscle that Canon simply cannot match.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> It is a big deal in terms of marketing. There are many more "citizen journalists" active now with their own websites and blogs. They buy cameras, and they help feed the marketing machine.
> 
> This was a smart move by Sony and probably worked out quite nicely for AP too. I doubt Canon marketing-execs are saying "not a big deal." Hopefully they are working on other opportunities that can help promote Canon in this extremely competitive and complex business environment. For those of us who do appreciate Canon and have bought in, competition is important, but a healthy, prosperous company is essential.




Agree. This is an important symbolic move even if Sony is losing its shirt in the process.

Curious: AP's biggest rival is... Reuters, I assume? Are they exclusive to any manufacturer?

- A


----------



## unfocused (Jul 23, 2020)

Good marketing move by Sony. Good cost saving move by AP. Unfortunately they don’t have many staff photographers left anymore and this won’t affect stringers, freelancers or staff photographers on papers that are members of AP, who make up the bulk of photojournalists today.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 23, 2020)

I


nchoh said:


> Sony is much larger than Canon by several factors. Sony also has several business lines that would benefit from this agreement. All in, Sony would probably benefit a lot more from such an arrangement than Canon. Certainly marketing is part of any such strategic decision, but I think it is mostly due to the fact that Sony has muscle that Canon simply cannot match.


 I don’t believe that for a second. Yes Sony is bigger by a long way but it’s profitable businesses are life insurance and semiconductor manufacture, neither benefit from a collaboration with a news agency. Canon and Nikon have a very long history of supporting many photo intense events including the Olympics on many occasions, along with the big news agencies, National Geographic etc etc. Sony, going by previous history, would liquidate their camera business at the drop of a hat if they saw a strategic advantage to it and don’t forget in the scheme of things their camera division is not a high income or high profile part of the corporation.

Obviously the deal is worth more to Sony than Canon and Nikon because they won the tender.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> It is a big deal in terms of marketing.


Yes, but that's all it is. It proves nothing about Sony cameras' "superiority". 

As I pointed out on another platform, the press release says this:


> *With journalists in nearly 250 locations in 100 countries, AP provides factual, compelling journalism in all formats, including 3,000 photos and 200 videos each day. The news agency has a distinguished history of powerful visual journalism, winning the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography — AP’s 54th Pulitzer and 32nd for photography — and garnering recognition from the Royal Television Society for excellence in video.*


All of that happened without any help from Sony.

So as long as people keep this in perspective - it's a marketing coup, but it's nothing to do with AP making a choice based on "better" camera equipment - fine.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Agree. This is an important symbolic move even if Sony is losing its shirt in the process.


You're grossly overstating its significance. Did anybody care about (or even _know_) what AP was using before the announcement?

In a day or two they won't care about this, either.


----------



## reefroamer (Jul 23, 2020)

jolyonralph said:


> Maybe AP have some great Canon gear to sell off now?


Believe me, it’s probably had the crap beaten out of it. I was an AP reporter years ago, working alongside AP photogs. Those cameras get a beating. We'll see how the Sonys hold up to that kind of abuse. They can’t afford to have stuff break down in the field.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

reefroamer said:


> Believe me, it’s probably had the crap beaten out of it. I was an AP reporter years ago, working alongside AP photogs. Those cameras get a beating. We'll see how the Sonys hold up to that kind of abuse. They can’t afford to have stuff break down in the field.


I imagine that part of the deal will be "over supply" by Sony to cover off reliability questions: not necessarily because I have reason to believe that Sonys are flimsy, but because I've always had the sense that Sony itself sees its cameras as "disposable".


----------



## HikeBike (Jul 23, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> AP Director of Photography said:
> 
> We tested cameras from several manufacturers in really harsh zones from the Arctic to the rainforest, to hostile environments, to hurricanes. The overwhelming response from the photographers was that they really liked the Sony equipment: the way it worked, the way it felt, and the image quality.



Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.


----------



## reefroamer (Jul 23, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Good marketing move by Sony. Good cost saving move by AP. Unfortunately they don’t have many staff photographers left anymore and this won’t affect stringers, freelancers or staff photographers on papers that are members of AP, who make up the bulk of photojournalists today.


Exactly.


----------



## Aaron D (Jul 23, 2020)

Sounds like 'fake news' to me.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

HikeBike said:


> Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.


To be fair, that's not quite the message: "liking the way it felt" is hardly gushing praise for Sony ergonomics, it just suggests that they're tolerable.

I mean, I _like_ carrots, but they're never my first choice when I'm pulling dinner together..!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 23, 2020)

HikeBike said:


> Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.




Agree, but it's likely more than just grip, buttons and menu systems. For example: the 5-series never had a tilty-flippy, which is pretty huge for video and non-eye-level shooting positions.

- A


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 23, 2020)

reefroamer said:


> Believe me, it’s probably had the crap beaten out of it. I was an AP reporter years ago, working alongside AP photogs. Those cameras get a beating. We'll see how the Sonys hold up to that kind of abuse. They can’t afford to have stuff break down in the field.



I once strung for the AP (about 25 years ago) briefly and a few other nationals. You do NOT want to buy a used camera from any of those guys. I don't think they were deliberately trying to harm their cameras (film back then), but if harm had to come to a camera to get a better shot, harm was going to find its way to that camera. 

As a stringer, I was using my own personal camera (Pentax K1000), so I was the camera wuss in the area. Of course, it got stolen anyway.


----------



## Dj 7th (Jul 23, 2020)

This is good for Sony especially in the PR area. They entered the mirrorless game early and this might be some level of benefit for their early plunge. I really do not see this as a preference for Sony, Nikon or Canon. The decision was made a while ago to explore mirrorless and a year ago, Sony was the major mirrorless company. 
I think the lesson here is the advantages of mirrorless in the photo and video journalistic work.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 23, 2020)

HikeBike said:


> Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.



If you count the silent shutter as part of the ergos, then it makes perfect sense. I still haven't gotten rid of my A9II, and right now it's the best PJ camera I have. I'm hoping the coming R5 bests it, but as it is now, that silence is critical in some journalistic situations.

The "feel" of the new Sony cameras is much better with their ergonomic improvements. Not quite Canon, but if the Canon is a 1DXIII and sounds like a jet engine, then well, yeah. The cameras mentioned in the article were all ergo updated ones. This doesn't, of course, fix the intolerable menus. It is true that PJs are apt to keep to some specific sets of settings, without needing to do those 10-minute treasure hunts into the menus for the obscure feature now and again that the amateurs do.

It's not unthinkable that for their use they liked Sony better as of July 23, 2020. If the R5 is as good as I hope, there may be some forehead slapping, though, come July 30.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 23, 2020)

HikeBike said:


> Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.



Ahhh the wording of a press release. "really like" does not mean "prefer"

If you gave 10 photographers each of the following:
- A9
- A7R
- 1DX
- R5
- Z7

They'd "really like" all of them. And they should—they're all great cameras! What would they "prefer" -- who knows? These sorts of statements are always really carefully worded for reasons just like this 

Edit: Keith beat me to it.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> This is good for Sony especially in the PR area.


Oh, nobody's disputing that - it's just difficult to see anything meaningful in the decision beyond it being useful marketing for Sony.

Even SAR recognises that it's all about marketing:









Impressive successful partnership for Sony: AP to Equip all Visual Journalists Globally with Sony Imaging Products! - sonyalpharumors


AP video journalist Renata Brito covers protests at the Spain-France border, Nov. 12, 2019, using Sony equipment. (AP Photo) Sony is now providing AP press journalists Sony Alpha gear. Dpreview interviewed the head of AP to discuss the Sony deal: We have a few hundred staff photographers around...




www.sonyalpharumors.com


----------



## nchoh (Jul 23, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I
> 
> I don’t believe that for a second. Yes Sony is bigger by a long way but it’s profitable businesses are life insurance and semiconductor manufacture, neither benefit from a collaboration with a news agency. Canon and Nikon have a very long history of supporting many photo intense events including the Olympics on many occasions, along with the big news agencies, National Geographic etc etc. Sony, going by previous history, would liquidate their camera business at the drop of a hat if they saw a strategic advantage to it and don’t forget in the scheme of things their camera division is not a high income or high profile part of the corporation.
> 
> Obviously the deal is worth more to Sony than Canon and Nikon because they won the tender.



Yes, Sony would drop a business line at the drop of a hat if it decided it didn't fit the corporate plan. But when the corporate plan calls for a certain direction, it will invest. Consider also that Sony has movie studios and games which are all somewhat related to vision. The knock on effect to all the related Sony businesses is much more than to Canon or Nikon.

Yes, the deal may be worth more to Sony than to Canon, but more importantly, the cost benefit to Sony is much higher than Sony than for Canon or Nikon.

IMO.


----------



## mpmark (Jul 23, 2020)

good, hopefully I'll get my R5 sooner rather then later as AP wont be jumping the line.


----------



## Eclipsed (Jul 23, 2020)

bergstrom said:


> not much point in having your gear use for video work when CNN and the likes won't report on the protests that are STILL happening, unnamed ununidentified THUGS dresses as soldiers making ilegalarrests cops pepper spraying MOTHERS etc..



Who could forget how the Miranda decision interpreting the US Constitution secured us the essential rights:

Identification for the police arresting you (shown to your pals at the time of your arrest).
Arresting officers prohibited from wearing military-style clothing.
(Clothing and your inability to dox arresting federal offercers does not make an arrest illegal. Legality depends on what happens before (the pretext, probably cause, reasonable suspicion, etc.) and after (humane treatment, right to a speedy trial, right to counsel). Not worrying worry-warts is not a right.

Meanwhile: AP sucks - who cares?


----------



## goldenhusky (Jul 23, 2020)

Imagine if the news was "AP Photographers will only shoot with *Canon* gear going forward" CR servers will go down, now that this is Sony *"It is no big deal" It is a big deal people. *This is why people like me were saying Canon needs to innovate, get in to mirrorless space fast enough and should lead the pack interms of technology. The Canon Defence Forces on the Internet called us Sony Fanboys. I for one not a fan Boy of any company. Canon makes extraordinary lenses and great bodies just work. The Sony cameras I have has to be reboted once in a while during a shoot (very rarely though), Suddenly will say there are no images on the card when there are a few hundred images. There is always some nuances with Sony and then the ergonomics and then the touch sceen which Sony never seems to get it right but for auto focus, image quality, value for money, etc Sony has surpassed Canon a while back. With R5 I thought Canon woke up but guess what it is difficult to get rid of the old habbits.


----------



## jcfalconer (Jul 23, 2020)

Sounds like there may be some good opportunities to buy used Canon gear coming to market.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 23, 2020)

jcfalconer said:


> Sounds like there may be some good opportunities to buy used Canon gear coming to market.


I do not want to buy a used pool camera or lens from any wire service.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 23, 2020)

goldenhusky said:


> Imagine if the news was "AP Photographers will only shoot with *Canon* gear going forward" CR servers will go down, now that this is Sony *"It is no big deal" It is a big deal people. *This is why people like me were saying Canon needs to innovate, get in to mirrorless space fast enough and should lead the pack interms of technology. The Canon Defence Forces on the Internet called us Sony Fanboys. I for one not a fan Boy of any company. Canon makes extraordinary lenses and great bodies just work. The Sony cameras I have has to be reboted once in a while during a shoot (very rarely though), Suddenly will say there are no images on the card when there are a few hundred images. There is always some nuances with Sony and then the ergonomics and then the touch sceen which Sony never seems to get it right but for auto focus, image quality, value for money, etc Sony has surpassed Canon a while back. With R5 I thought Canon woke up but guess what it is difficult to get rid of the old habbits.


I think you are confusing "it's not a big deal from a financial perspective" and "it's a big deal from a marketing perspective." Most people who would agree that it is a big deal for marketing purposes. But, in terms of the actual number of cameras and lenses being sold, it's not a big deal because the crash of the photojournalism market is a decades-long phenomenon that makes the crash of point-and-shoot cameras look like small potatoes.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 23, 2020)

Jerry Jaz said:


> Mine is still on order from ABT. Got a note from B&H today saying that they still didn’t have a clue as to when they were going to be delivered.



The note I got was as a result of me signing up to be notified when stock became available. It was an automated response - I got the same notification on the 100-500L. They come every two weeks.

I haven't received any kind of order update that pertained to my specific pre-order. Have you?


----------



## jcfalconer (Jul 23, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I do not want to buy a used pool camera or lens from any wire service.


That's certainly your prerogative. However if they are all now suddenly required to switch to Sony, there may be some fairly new and unused equipment they need to get rid of.


----------



## thelebaron (Jul 23, 2020)

jcfalconer said:


> That's certainly your prerogative. However if they are all now suddenly required to switch to Sony, there may be some fairly new and unused equipment they need to get rid of.


 assuming its priced accordingly, why not? hefty difference in buying something thats got a fair few miles on it and buying something thats flat out broken, if they are dumping old equipment well they were still using it until that point


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jul 23, 2020)

AP photographers reading an R5 review


----------



## brad-man (Jul 23, 2020)

First they paint their longer lenses white to confuse on the sidelines and now this. Have they no shame?


----------



## ziffhunker (Jul 23, 2020)

So what does this mean to us in any way, how many of you are an international news service?


----------



## mppix (Jul 23, 2020)

We should probably acknowledge that most if not all modern ILC are "good enough" for most things.

Sony has a bit of a headstart as they now have all photo and videogear on a single mount. Canon will have to follow (rip 5DV).

Bottom line is that this is good news. Sony is now officially a serious camera manufacturer and CaNikon need to continue innovating. Expect more new cool stuff.


----------



## tgara (Jul 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> It is a big deal in terms of marketing. There are many more "citizen journalists" active now with their own websites and blogs. They buy cameras, and they help feed the marketing machine.
> 
> This was a smart move by Sony and probably worked out quite nicely for AP too. I doubt Canon marketing-execs are saying "not a big deal." Hopefully they are working on other opportunities that can help promote Canon in this extremely competitive and complex business environment. For those of us who do appreciate Canon and have bought in, competition is important, but a healthy, prosperous company is essential.



That may play with Amateur gear heads, but pros by and large don’t care which gear they use as long as it captures the photo they intended. That said, I wonder if the photo credit on AP images will now include a mention of Sony.... “Image by AP Photographer Joe Blow using a Sony XYZ”....


----------



## dolina (Jul 23, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Pros are happy to use whatever works - they're generally entirely brand agnostic, and will shoot with whatever they're given as long as it's up to the job.
> 
> He was hardly going to say "we thought they were crap", was he?
> 
> ...


Very good analysis.

Deals like these will be very important moving forward as the camera hardware market is shrinking year after year for the past 10+ years.


----------



## gmon750 (Jul 23, 2020)

It's AP's loss. I can only guess that Sony offered them serious deals, and it wasn't really anything about the cameras themselves.


----------



## degos (Jul 23, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Yep, just a business decision, nothing more and not a big deal, really...



Yeah yeah...

If it was a Canon-exclusive deal this forum would be alight with how it showed Canon's dominance in professional imaging etx


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

In 2020 doesn't really change much of anything. There are so many media outlets where content is abound. A decade ago this might means something. Not anymore. Where does AP post content that most readers see anyhow. Certainly not news print.


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

degos said:


> Yeah yeah...
> 
> If it was a Canon-exclusive deal this forum would be alight with how it showed Canon's dominance in professional imaging etx


Because it's basically not relevant in 2020. There are very few newspapers in print. AP isn't exactly what is once was a few decades ago. Images on TV come primarily from the average consumer than staffed photojournalist anyhow. Images from sporting venues on the other hand aren't dominated by AP. People don't wait for AP images anymore.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 23, 2020)

tgara said:


> That may play with Amateur gear heads, but pros by and large don’t care which gear they use as long as it captures the photo they intended...



Which market is bigger? "Amateur gear heads" or "pros"? When Sony markets their cameras to vloggers and "citizen journalists," having a little blurb which states, "Official gear of the Associated Press" becomes a part of the branding and, for some consumers, the cachet. That's it. Why does Gator Ade like to be called an "official sports drink" of certain leagues? Or Nike to be associated with leagues and individuals?

If a photographer buys a Sony and goes out and takes a million photos, but only shares them with a few friends and family members, there is only negligible word of mouth advertising. But if a vlogger with even a relatively small following mentions using Sony gear, many more eyes are now seeing the brand. We can speculate all we want about how many extra sales this will generate, but Sony has already determined, likely using resources we don't have, that extra sales will indeed be worthwhile.

Again, this was a smooth marketing move by Sony. More power to them for making it.


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Don't know if one sees a great deal of AP images everywhere in today's landscape. There are more Getty images if anything. News outlets simply don't wait on AP with 24 hours new coverage. Every since CNN came to the forefront the AP is basically irrelevant in the current state of journalism


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> It is a big deal in terms of marketing. There are many more "citizen journalists" active now with their own websites and blogs. They buy cameras, and they help feed the marketing machine.
> 
> This was a smart move by Sony and probably worked out quite nicely for AP too. I doubt Canon marketing-execs are saying "not a big deal." Hopefully they are working on other opportunities that can help promote Canon in this extremely competitive and complex business environment. For those of us who do appreciate Canon and have bought in, competition is important, but a healthy, prosperous company is essential.


The independent doesn't care about AP anymore. They faded long ago with the advent of the 24 hour news coverage.


----------



## criscokkat (Jul 23, 2020)

mppix said:


> We should probably acknowledge that most if not all modern ILC are "good enough" for most things.
> 
> Sony has a bit of a headstart as they now have all photo and videogear on a single mount. Canon will have to follow (rip 5DV).



I'm sure that's why they did not cripple the R5 or R6. The new paradigm says the camera should also be equally as strong as a videocamera.


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


You're actually making it more stunning than what it is. Not as if the worlds media is dominated by AP images and reporting. The major networks have long ago cut cost and slimmed budgets. Images and news feeds come from an abundance of sources nowadays.


----------



## criscokkat (Jul 23, 2020)

tgara said:


> That may play with Amateur gear heads, but pros by and large don’t care which gear they use as long as it captures the photo they intended. That said, I wonder if the photo credit on AP images will now include a mention of Sony.... “Image by AP Photographer Joe Blow using a Sony XYZ”....


I wouldn't be surprised if it did include that on certain markets like AP's posts on Twitter and such.


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Can you merge threads?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As if they all are AP photographers. Most of them are not.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

degos said:


> Yeah yeah...
> 
> If it was a Canon-exclusive deal this forum would be alight with how it showed Canon's dominance in professional imaging etx


That comment says more about you than it does about what would actually happen. Canon _has _dominated the news agencies - for years. We just accept it as how things were or are, and now we'll accept that Sony are getting a run at it.


----------



## nikkito (Jul 23, 2020)

Yeah yeah yeah, I still don't like Sony .


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 23, 2020)

Interesting blog from the AP honcho Derl McCrudden, deputy managing editor for visual and digital journalism:









AP Definitive Source | New Sony gear ‘a game changer’


AP has a long history at the forefront of imaging technology, from the first transmission of photos over the wire to the early days of digital photogr...




blog.ap.org





The reason for the switch to Sony? Mirrorless, standardisation, and "Sonys are good at video"...


----------



## jam05 (Jul 23, 2020)

*I remember when the Dream Team told Michael Jordan that he must wear only Reebok attire during the 1992 Olympics. Being paid by Nike at the time, Jordan proceeded to cover the Reebok emblem with an American flag. Many Americans are very disdainful when being told what they must wear, use, and purchase. Newbies mostly likely will tow the company line. Senior staffers most likely will continue to do as they wish, being that many have multiple gigs.*


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 24, 2020)

jam05 said:


> The independent doesn't care about AP anymore. They faded long ago with the advent of the 24 hour news coverage.



Care to show the market research backing up this assertion? How many people under 40 are watching cable news? Compare to how many get their news through social media, search engines, and aggregates, where AP pops up a lot.


----------



## jam05 (Jul 24, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> It is a big deal in terms of marketing. There are many more "citizen journalists" active now with their own websites and blogs. They buy cameras, and they help feed the marketing machine.
> 
> This was a smart move by Sony and probably worked out quite nicely for AP too. I doubt Canon marketing-execs are saying "not a big deal." Hopefully they are working on other opportunities that can help promote Canon in this extremely competitive and complex business environment. For those of us who do appreciate Canon and have bought in, competition is important, but a healthy, prosperous company is essential.


You're making it a big deal. More than what it is. There are not many staff photographers anymore. AP images aren't seen nearly as much as Getty images. That's just the way it is. Most 24 hour news outlets owned by the big 3 receive images and live stream from wherever the source is. Most often from smartphones. Gone are those days of waiting for AP wire transmissions. Journalism has long evolved, with staff being cut to a third of what it once was in the 70s and early 80s.


----------



## David - Sydney (Jul 24, 2020)

brad-man said:


> First they paint their longer lenses white to confuse on the sidelines and now this. Have they no shame?


I think that Sony painting their lens white was a poor marketing decision (aside from the heat reflecting capabilities from the colour white). Canon is known for their big whites so Sony white lenses actually increase the impression of Canon users unless you look very closely at it and know what to look for. Sony should have gone for a different colour if they wanted to differentiate from a distance.


----------



## bgoyette (Jul 24, 2020)

Sony decided it wanted a prestigious sponsorship, and so they made AP an offer they couldn't refuse. Reminds me of the Kodak/Fuji wars leading up to the LA Olympics (Fuji beat out the yellow box for the rights to the 84 Olympics, so Kodak sponsored the US team, and bought all the broadcast... all you saw were Kodak ads for the entire run of the event.) Canon and Nikon largely have a lock on this segment, and Sony wants a piece. Even the statement from AP about their confidence in Sony seemed to be the tail wagging the dog.


----------



## RickWagoner (Jul 24, 2020)

It has nothing to do with support or product..its a money move. Sony Put up the most money and they should because they need to get in the game of having their gear be used by real credited people that have exposure. This deal is well in the millions of dollars to AP and gear at manufacture cost to anyone AP.


----------



## RickWagoner (Jul 24, 2020)

Also when you are working for a company like AP it don't matter what gear you use at all, not even down to the feeling of the gear matters. The people have no choice as they do what the company tells them, that is why they get paid. Real professionals that work for a company could not care or think about what gear they like...


----------



## bellorusso (Jul 24, 2020)

This could have been expected. Canon is lagging for many years, ignoring mirrorless movement, releasing crippled cameras, their sensors are always kinda never the best on the market, being always late to all new trends. How is this unexpected to anyone? Sony really does a very good job taking over the industry. I wish Canon started thinking straight.


----------



## slclick (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Careful - I once compared someone's rambling writing style on here as being like Donald Trump's, and got dumped on by Admin for being "political".


Careful is never a force for change, I could not care less if I was dropped from CR for stating the truth and truth for a righteous cause. It's just a web forum. US politics these days are life and death.


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 24, 2020)

When I switched from Nikon to Canon (5D Mark 3), the A7/R was fresh to the market and gave me brief pause, but it was not the right decision at the time. Sony FF Mirrorless was not serious until the A9. Now with the arrival of the R5, worthy of the RF-L lenses, I plan sale of all of my EF gear with my first RF lens in the mail, wondering if this AP move is the beginning of a dark era for Canon. How will this account switch change Sony's development patterns?

It has been said time and time again, Sony is pulling on Canon with mirrorless what Canon pulled on Nikon with AF and OIS. This is the seismic result 7 years after the fissures formed.

Today, we have the cameras that Canon really needed much sooner, I don't mean to sound ungrateful but Canon is now paying the price for not responding sooner, maybe they couldn't have responded sooner? EF Legacy was too heavy? Maybe the R5 under it's heavy wraps just couldnt have been developed quickly enough to stem the threat.

Will Canon pick-up up the pace? Or will it give up and lean back on it's other business units to earn profits? They still have only a handful of native RF lenses, the system is not complete while most EF-RF adapters are out of stock on B&H/Adorama/Amazon. Sony has been the talk of the internet for years now, countless enthusiasts have switched now a major account has followed suit. First time camera buyers with some money look no further than A7III, Sony's momentum is now validated and tremendous and this is only the first account that will turn to Sony with video becoming ever more important. All because of Sony Semiconductor.

I just hope our piles of cash in RF lenses is going to a system that will still be growing in 10 years; Sony is required to grow now (or will these major accounts leave them reliable and complacent?). The R5 is a solid statement that Canon will not give up but we need a lot of "R5"-like moves in these next few years. All of the sudden Canon is fast becoming the underdog.

It is a bit disturbing that Associated Press is dancing around like some cheap advertisement supplement for a major corporation. Sony must be shelling some serious money and promises for all of this. And media is in a state of decline right now, money is tight while distrust is ever mounting. Meanwhile, DPR is right there covering this switch like an inauguration, executive interviews and all. It's all just too well orchestrated to seem truly genuine. Just how long will this exclusivity last?


----------



## sanj (Jul 24, 2020)

Sony makes very capable cameras. Canon makes great cameras. This decision is all about Sony's bagging a deal. It does not reflect anything else.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 24, 2020)

AP, PJ, A9, A7 - I don't know what that means. R5, RF - those I understand.


----------



## Kannon (Jul 24, 2020)

I wonder, whether Sony's excellent rice-cookers and VAIO laptops are included in this deal?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 24, 2020)

bgoyette said:


> Even the statement from AP about their confidence in Sony seemed to be the tail wagging the dog.



It's still harmful to Canon - the Sony's horse just sped up a little.


----------



## chrisgibbs (Jul 24, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I just chatted on Twitter with a PJ working at our city's largest paper about this news, and apparently 11 out of 16 of the paper's PJs/video producers are primarily shooting Sony now.
> 
> - A



NYT chief photog Doug Mills was one of the first converts to the A9. Dave Burnett has been shooting Sony for a while too.

If you know any Unit Stills guys (filmset photogs) they've been FUJI & SONY mirrorless for as long as they've been available, no Sound Blimps required anymore, a win-win for them.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 24, 2020)

snappy604 said:


> didn't know the sony's had good weather sealing


in combination with an underwater housing it probably is 

https://www.leedervillecameras.com....nderwater-housing-for-sony-a7ii--a7rii--a7sii


----------



## Gazwas (Jul 24, 2020)

Big statement move from Sony that just happens to coincide with the week before they announce the very long awaited low light, high ISO eating PJ’s reporter come photographers wet dream camera in the all encompassing A7SIII. Its one way to steal the thunder from the R5’s 30th July release day in that the AP side stepped Canon’s first professional mirrorless camera in favour of Sony.

Canon is not the darling of the YouTube generation and its looks like they are loosing footing in the press world with stories like this. Considering journalists are getting younger and younger which means by default Sony fans, this is not the message Canon needs at the start of its professional mirrorless journey.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 24, 2020)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> including 3,000 photos and 200 videos each day.


Does anyone else find these numbers not impressive for today's world?


----------



## brad-man (Jul 24, 2020)

So, what? Canon is *******?


----------



## herein2020 (Jul 24, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> When I switched from Nikon to Canon (5D Mark 3), the A7/R was fresh to the market and gave me brief pause, but it was not the right decision at the time. Sony FF Mirrorless was not serious until the A9. Now with the arrival of the R5, worthy of the RF-L lenses, I plan sale of all of my EF gear with my first RF lens in the mail, wondering if this AP move is the beginning of a dark era for Canon. How will this account switch change Sony's development patterns?
> 
> It has been said time and time again, Sony is pulling on Canon with mirrorless what Canon pulled on Nikon with AF and OIS. This is the seismic result 7 years after the fissures formed.
> 
> ...



I agree 100% and as much as I love some things about Canon when it came to mirrorless video they frustrated me to the point that I bought a GH5 when I really needed a gimbal camera. Either Canon got too complacent or they truly did not have the technical agility to answer Sony's mirrorless challenge. 

I know this is a Canon forum so people are really downplaying this news but the 2nd and 3rd order effects are what's going to hurt Canon more than just the deal itself. Of course a lot of news is filmed on cell phones and its easy to say the AP deal isn't a big deal, but marketing really is; and Sony will now have a steady stream of it coming from the AP that I am sure they will use for years to come.

I know nothing about the AP, I'm not even sure that they had a single official camera vendor before this, but I'm sure somewhere in the deal Sony will get to use their logo and marketing on images produced all over the world by professional photographers for years to come; which could have the domino effect of influencing the younger generation who will in turn also lean towards Sony. And if Sony does start to make real profit in this segment they will in turn invest more R&D to improve their reliability, weather sealing, ergonomics, and menu systems.

It is comical when users on this forum state they need a camera without video features because they think the camera will cost less yet stories like these continue to prove that video is very important in this day and age. If you read the full press release the deal is more than just photography, it includes their professional video line and 5G, and around the Internet there is emphasis on how Sony's hybrid offerings and mirrorless video features are already used by many in the AP. The feedback alone from this many pro shooters will give Sony the telemetry from pro users that they need to greatly improve their cameras.

I feel like even if Canon had approached the AP and tried to offer a deal that Canon's lack of a history of hybrid mirrorless would not have done them any favors when video journalism is required as well.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It's still harmful to Canon - the Sony's horse just sped up a little.


It really isn't. If Canon had still wanted the gig, they'd have outbid Sony. It clearly wasn't important enough to them to do so.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

Gazwas said:


> Considering [professional] journalists are getting younger and younger


And fewer and fewer to the point of irrelevance...


> which means by default Sony fans


Hah! _Seriously?_

Aside from it being complete speculation - sorry, you have _no idea_ how old PJs are these days, or what they prefer to shoot with (still plenty of Canon kit at major sporting, news and political events, I've noticed) - you're effectively claiming that AP went this way because it was _kewl..!_


> this is not the message Canon needs at the start of its professional mirrorless journey.


All - _all - _it is, is a deal that was tendered, bid on and signed before the Canon R5 became public knowledge.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 24, 2020)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but if an AP PJ decides to continue to shoot on his/her on gear, whatever the brand, that's no problem. It''ll be that if a PJ uses AP-supplied gear that it will be all Sony. Do we know how many full-time PJ use company supplied gear vs their own? When I shot for my college paper we basically all used our own gear.



Freelancers can continue to shoot on whatever they like, only the staff photogs are being moved to Sony. There are probably at least 250-300 AP staff photogs across the world and thousands of freelancers. There are at least two staffers where I live. Larger areas will have even more.


----------



## nchoh (Jul 24, 2020)

reefroamer said:


> Believe me, it’s probably had the crap beaten out of it. I was an AP reporter years ago, working alongside AP photogs. Those cameras get a beating. We'll see how the Sonys hold up to that kind of abuse. They can’t afford to have stuff break down in the field.



Interesting point. Which leads me to think that in about 2 years time Sony will have a line of cameras that can take the beating.


----------



## nchoh (Jul 24, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I think you are confusing "it's not a big deal from a financial perspective" and "it's a big deal from a marketing perspective." Most people who would agree that it is a big deal for marketing purposes. But, in terms of the actual number of cameras and lenses being sold, it's not a big deal because the crash of the photojournalism market is a decades-long phenomenon that makes the crash of point-and-shoot cameras look like small potatoes.



I don't think it's a big deal from a marketing perspective either. It is one thing to see a the whole sideline with big white Canon lenses. It's very different when a single AP photographer is lost in a mass of other news photographers taking photos with Canon or Nikon gear. Other than the announcement, nobody will remember that Sony is the exclusive supplier of camera gear for AP.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> You're grossly overstating its significance. Did anybody care about (or even _know_) what AP was using before the announcement?
> 
> In a day or two they won't care about this, either.



I knew what they were shooting on(Canon), but I’ve worked in TV for over two decades and known some of their staff photogs for the same amount of time.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 24, 2020)

HikeBike said:


> Hold up. They preferred the ergonomics of a Sony over those of a Canon? I...can't fathom that to be true.



I think you’re reading into that too much and putting words into someone’s mouth. You can still like something without preferring it over something else.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 24, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> There are at least two staffers where I live. Larger areas will have even more.



I'm surprised by that. I live in a state capital city and when the AP Capitol Bureau photographer retired a few years ago, they eliminated the position. I think the AP Bureau is down to one reporter and the entire statehouse press corps has probably shrunk by 75% in the last decade. The few remaining reporters are expected to shoot web video on their phones. The local paper still has a couple of staff photographers but they are way down from what they once where and they were once known nationally for their photojournalism. Most of the reporters and photographers I knew have either retired, changed careers or gone into public information/public relations.


----------



## yestostills (Jul 24, 2020)

Please keep this in mind. As a former news videographer, who worked for the larger news stations, where Sony offered giveaway prices on video cameras to maintain market share when it came time to upgrade. Using the same ploy in the new digital print media platform.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> I knew what they were shooting on (Canon), but I’ve worked in TV for over two decades and known some of their staff photogs for the same amount of time.


I knew it was Canon too - but it's just not something that comes up, because it's not that important to most people.


----------



## Pape (Jul 24, 2020)

Maybe AP saves money ,needing only buy gears for poorest photographers ?


----------



## unfocused (Jul 24, 2020)

nchoh said:


> I don't think it's a big deal from a marketing perspective either. It is one thing to see a the whole sideline with big white Canon lenses. It's very different when a single AP photographer is lost in a mass of other news photographers taking photos with Canon or Nikon gear. Other than the announcement, nobody will remember that Sony is the exclusive supplier of camera gear for AP.


I agree, but would say it's a big deal because Sony can make a big deal out of it. They will be able to say that "this" Pulitzer prize winning photo was shot with Sony, as inevitably an AP photographer will win a Pulitzer. Not that magazine print journalism matters as much anymore, but Sony will certainly be buying lots of ads in photography oriented publications highlighting AP photographers and their prize winning photos. It's as big of a deal as Sony wants it to be. If they don't promote it, then yeah, it's not a big deal, but certainly they are doing this so they can promote it.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

unfocused said:


> They will be able to say that "this" Pulitzer prize winning photo was shot with Sony, as inevitably an AP photographer will win a Pulitzer.


They _could, _but what does it get them _really_?

Not much, I imagine - or Canon would do/have done the same, given that plenty of Pulitzers have gone to Canon shooters.

They don't push this, because PJ isn't a significant "influencer" for most people. Canon will mention that this, that or the other Ambassador is a Pulitzer Prize Winner, but nothing much apart from that .

It's part of a company's marketing arsenal, but it's not common currency, and it doesn't carry much weight in reality. True for Canon, and it'll be true for Sony.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 24, 2020)

unfocused said:


> The few remaining reporters are expected to shoot web video on their phones.


Well, Sony does make phones.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

unfocused said:


> The few remaining reporters are expected to shoot web video on their phones


Which underlines the point that for PJ - even Pulitzer winners - it's the content, not the kit, that counts.

I think everyone accepts that it's _what the camera is pointed at_, not the brand of camera in use, that makes for good photo journalism, and this same fact undermines the value of PJ as a brand-seller.


----------



## Adelino (Jul 24, 2020)

They must really hate Sony if they want to shoot them all. Good thing they will only fire at the Sonys from now on.


----------



## Alam (Jul 24, 2020)

It make sense since canon mirrorless offerings are overkill and monstrous for this kind of job for now, but i wonder why nikon lose?
Lack of pro video camera probably?


----------



## Pixel (Jul 24, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Agree. This is an important symbolic move even if Sony is losing its shirt in the process.
> 
> Curious: AP's biggest rival is... Reuters, I assume? Are they exclusive to any manufacturer?
> 
> - A


Reuters? Um no.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 24, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> If you count the silent shutter as part of the ergos, then it makes perfect sense. I still haven't gotten rid of my A9II, and right now it's the best PJ camera I have. I'm hoping the coming R5 bests it, but as it is now, that silence is critical in some journalistic situations.
> 
> The "feel" of the new Sony cameras is much better with their ergonomic improvements. Not quite Canon, but if the Canon is a 1DXIII and sounds like a jet engine, then well, yeah. The cameras mentioned in the article were all ergo updated ones. This doesn't, of course, fix the intolerable menus. It is true that PJs are apt to keep to some specific sets of settings, without needing to do those 10-minute treasure hunts into the menus for the obscure feature now and again that the amateurs do.
> 
> It's not unthinkable that for their use they liked Sony better as of July 23, 2020. If the R5 is as good as I hope, there may be some forehead slapping, though, come July 30.


This deal was cooked up months ago, way before the R5/R6.


----------



## 1D4 (Jul 25, 2020)

Jerry Jaz said:


> Mine is still on order from ABT. Got a note from B&H today saying that they still didn’t have a clue as to when they were going to be delivered.



I'm hoping the B&H email you're referring to was just the "You are receiving this message because you asked to be notified when the Canon EOS R5 Mirrorless Digital Camera (Body Only) (B&H # CAER5) becomes available" you got if you signed up for email updates, because their website has been saying "shipping will begin Thu Jul 30". I was hoping to have it in hand next Friday


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 25, 2020)

Pixel said:


> This deal was cooked up months ago, way before the R5/R6.


That's the point Tiggy is making in the last part of his post.


----------



## Skyscraperfan (Jul 25, 2020)

I think each photographer should decide which camera he prefers within a price range. It very much reminds me of the shoe deals in professional fottball. Players have to wear a specific brand, even if the feel more comfortable in other shoes.


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 25, 2020)

Surely Canon knew this was brewing. I have no idea how it can't be unsettling.


Ordering an R5 just became a leap of faith. Canon's product reaction in the coming few years will be interesting. They has better kneel down, and rub some dirt on their hands.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 25, 2020)

If Canon really aren't going to produce a 5DV then this means the writing is on the wall for future development of the EF mount, yet Canon (and Nikon) isn't fully developed in the RF (/Z) mount. I guess that Canon not wanting the AP business could be an indication that they don't want to commit to what they may now see as as obsolete system and they are not yet ready with the RF. Nikon probably in a similar position, especially when as has already been suggested, it's probably a loss leader.


----------



## dflt (Jul 25, 2020)

Canon must keep it's cool. Continue on the same road, that will make them angry .


----------



## StevenA (Jul 25, 2020)

I attribute this move by the AP as proof that Canon and Nikon spent too much time soaking the public through incrementalism while Sony pushed the limits with mirrorless tech. Sony gains status at the expense of the others' complacency.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 25, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Apparently this


Not to take anything away from Sony but this guy would have said the exact same thing but substituted the words Canon or Nikon in the sentence. This is all about $. All three manufacturers have great equipment to supply photographers.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 25, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> Surely Canon knew this was brewing. I have no idea how it can't be unsettling.
> 
> Ordering an R5 just became a leap of faith. Canon's product reaction in the coming few years will be interesting. They has better kneel down, and rub some dirt on their hands.


I have no idea what you're saying here.


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 25, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> I have no idea what you're saying here.




The dirt was a reference to Gladiator. Canon had better not loose the FF Mirrorless fight with Sony. 

If enough press follows AP's lead will Canon continue developing these expensive L lenses? That is my concern.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 25, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> The dirt was a reference to Gladiator. Canon had better not loose the FF Mirrorless fight with Sony.
> 
> If enough press follows AP's lead will Canon continue developing these expensive L lenses? That is my concern.


as long as sales are good, Canon will keep building L lenses. Personally, I don’t look at which news orgs are using which brand to make any of my purchase decisions. Maybe others do? I doubt if AP is a huge percentage of Canon’s sales, but admittedly I don’t have those numbers.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 25, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> The dirt was a reference to Gladiator. Canon had better not loose the FF Mirrorless fight with Sony.


Understood


> If enough press follows AP's lead will Canon continue developing these expensive L lenses? That is my concern.


They unquestionably will. Photo journalism - and the equipment decisions that news agencies make - are _not _significant influencers across the photography market at large. 

Simply put, many (most?) people will pay no mind to what AP has done here. 

To make this point clear: do you know which cameras Reuters uses? Or Bloomberg? Or United Press International?

And so on.

Most people neither know nor care about them, and that applies just as much to AP. They _were_ using Canon previously - and most people will have been utterly disinterested in that fact, too.

For further context: I found this interview with AP's Director of Photography "interesting" because of how _uninteresting _it was:








'We're confident that they can deliver': We talk to AP's Director of Photography about switch to Sony


We spoke to AP's Director of Photography J. David Ake about why the agency has decided to switch to Sony cameras, and what it means for AP staff photographers and videographers.




www.dpreview.com




This is the most interesting part for me:


> *Up to now, has AP been using a mixture of different platforms, from different manufacturers?*
> Yes, we have. We used one manufacturer for stills, and a different manufacturer for video. And we’ve been happy with those brands, we’ve used them for years, and they’ve supported us with their equipment. It was really the thought that we wanted to go mirrorless that took us down this path, and then we found that the synergy between video and stills could be really good, and Sony could support both of those at the level that we needed


Clearly Sony got the gig (ignoring the likely financial incentives that will have sweetened the deal for AP) because - at the time it was signed off on - Sony happened to align best with an idea that AP had that it would be a good idea to have equipment uniformity across its stills and video teams, at a time when mirrorless was a draw too.

_Not because Sony kit is intrinsically better. _AP is clearly being very careful not to suggest that.

As the article also says:


> The AP has been thinking about switching to mirrorless on the stills side for a couple of years


If that's also when they started talking seriously to Sony - and these things do take time - I can understand AP's decision, because at the time Sony probably was the obvious choice to satisfy AP's aspirations.

But none this says anything about any inherent superiority in Sony equipment that will drive people away from Canon. 

Despite the spin that DPR editor and Sony shill Barnaby Britton - "unbiased DPR" my arse - has tried to put on it when he says this:


> it's hard to overstate the PR value for any brand of having its cameras and lenses appear in the hands of pros on the sidelines at events like The Olympic Games, watched by millions of people all over the world.


I'll bet that _nobody ever_ bought into a camera system simply because they saw it being used at a sporting event on TV..!

Meanwhile: 








Lensrentals discovers cracked sensor mounts inside some of its Sony a7-series rental fleet


Roger Cicala is back at it again, measuring flange-back distances of Lensrentals' fleet of stills cameras this time. But he wasn't expecting to find this...




www.dpreview.com


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 25, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Understood
> 
> They unquestionably will. Photo journalism - and the equipment decisions that news agencies make - are _not _significant influencers across the photography market at large.



Good post Keith. My RF50 just arrived, I got a deal on a brand new one. Now to wait or pull the trigger on the R5.

Taking this from both sides:

I always saw Canon and Nikon as companies fueling their development of lenses such as this heavy, majestic beast (holy crap its big) from corporate account sales. After all who needs F1.2? And as a side note, Canon really hit their stride in the more recent years as evidenced by the excellent 35 F1.4 III, 16-35 F2.8L III and F4L IS.

Canon has bled users since the A7R2, sales must be way down while A7III has been a runaway success. But I think tricks (and I mean this in a good way) such as the 600 and 800 F11 show a different order of understanding at Canon (these lenses are for birders and weekenders but not PJ), this battle isnt over however fighting a semi-conductor designer/fabricator/implementor will be hard. This is the Sony that developed the most beloved Playstation brand after being jilted back in the 90s, learned much from the Playstation 3 failure, won the Bluray-HDDVD format war, built the best SACD player for just $1500, owns a cinema production division, beat Bose at their own game in wireless noise cancelling headphones, but will probably not break the iPhone-Galaxy smartphone stonghold either. 

And finally, I do find it alarming that a News source is allowing itself to be an Advertisement Supplement for a corporation. This is in an era where the people do not really trust the media, the media is not delivering what people want to know either. I am with you : something is UP.

None of this matters anyway Chris Nolan is still using film and every blessed frame of his movies are pure perfect tack sharp photography. Canon please make some RF pancake lenses, those arent for PJ either but traveling hobbyists trying to squeeze some fun out of work travel.


----------



## Pixel (Jul 26, 2020)

Skyscraperfan said:


> I think each photographer should decide which camera he prefers within a price range. It very much reminds me of the shoe deals in professional fottball. Players have to wear a specific brand, even if the feel more comfortable in other shoes.


In a perfect world sure....but the newspaper industry is in the toilet and the AP is also a non-profit.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 26, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> Good post Keith


Thanks.

I just balk at the notion that AP's choice of camera brand is _suddenly _something of significance and importance, when as far as I can tell it hasn't been of any real concern to anyone (apart from AP's own photographers, presumably), up to this point.

"It matters _because it's Sony_..." doesn't sit well with me.


----------



## heybhouse (Jul 26, 2020)

I'll believe it when I see it.


----------



## Admin US West (Jul 26, 2020)

Warning, several posts have been removed for political flaming. If you don't like the moderation, you will be shown the door. That happened as well.


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 26, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Thanks.
> 
> I just balk at the notion that AP's choice of camera brand is _suddenly _something of significance and importance, when as far as I can tell it hasn't been of any real concern to anyone (apart from AP's own photographers, presumably), up to this point.
> 
> "It matters _because it's Sony_..." doesn't sit well with me.



I'm a known pessimist, just hoping this isnt the beginning of a dark time for Canon. But if it is, they already have 2x F1.2 lenses and very competitive high ISO performance to find their way through it.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 26, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> I'm a known pessimist, just hoping this isnt the beginning of a dark time for Canon. But if it is, they already have 2x F1.2 lenses and very competitive high ISO performance to find their way through it.


Cheer up! The force is strong with Canon.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 26, 2020)

analoggrotto said:


> Good post Keith. My RF50 just arrived, I got a deal on a brand new one.[..]heavy, majestic beast (holy crap its big) [..]



If you think the RF50 is big, I recommend renting the RF85/1.2, it makes the 50 feel small, light and soft


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 26, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> I'll bet that _nobody ever_ bought into a camera system simply because they saw it being used at a sporting event on TV..!


I'd happen to disagree on this point. 
I think Canon as a brand stood out at the Olympics and World Cups with their logos and white lens.
Not too many people bought the white lens but they did buy into the brand being what the very best photographers used.
I think it has been very influential in getting people into buying Canon cameras and lens.

In the case of AP I'd assume Sony just offered an attractive deal better than what Canon or Nikon were prepared to do.
Silent photography has started to become a requirement in news reporting and Sony up to now have had the mirrorless edge with Canon not having a total professional camera. Up to the R5 their professional cameras tended to be mirrored (dual memory cards).
I'm sure Sony would like to nudge Canon off the stage at sporting events but alot more agencies would have to switch first.
Its not significant in itself unless its the start of a pattern.


----------



## analoggrotto (Jul 26, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> If you think the RF50 is big, I recommend renting the RF85/1.2, it makes the 50 feel small, light and soft



I would buy one but I really want an RF 100mm or 135mm prime.


----------



## David_E (Jul 28, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> _Moving on has anyone heard about their R5's or R6's being delivered yet ._


There is little likelihood of receiving one before they are shipped. B&H says shipping begins on 30 July.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 28, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Apparently this


Good article. I stand by my earlier comment that while this is not a big deal financially (a couple hundred photographers according to AP), it is a great marketing opportunity for Sony if they take advantage of it and I'm sure they will. In the midst of a shrinking market, the professional space is now clearly occupied by three brands instead of two. What that will mean is anyone's guess. It could spur all three to innovate and market more aggressively to avoid losing market share and try to gain against their competitors. But it could also mean fewer resources available for product development.


----------



## PerKr (Jul 28, 2020)

Good for Sony I guess. Honestly though, I think the consumers moved on.. Back in the film days, having your gear show in the photographer trenches was key. Similarly important though was having "your" photographer's pictures being seen in magazines along with a note on the equipment used for the particular image. Who here remembers reading photography magazines and seeing great pictures with little texts under them saying it was taken with a Nikon F5 or EOS 1V with an 300/400/500 f2.8/f4 at f5.6 and 1/600?

Really, YouTube and Instagram influencers is where you actually need to be now. Social media is where people look for advice on gear, where "your" guys can explain why your gear is the best for what they do and where your gear is showcased the best. Sony's success with E-mount is basically down to their presence on social media while Nikon and Canon were being a bit traditional


----------

