# Canon at the London Summer Olympics



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 31, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10844"></g:plusone></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10844"></a></div>
<strong>The 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4X


</strong>Lots of the new Canon 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x lenses on loan at the London games. I’ve spoken to a few photographers that have used it and I have yet to hear a single negative comment. That could change once they hear the price when it comes time to buy one. :)</p>
<p>I’ve heard the same stuff we hear about the new super telephoto lenses. It’s fast, light, well balanced and pretty creative in its design with the 1.4x teleconverter built in.</p>
<div id="attachment_10845" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/olympics01.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-10845" title="London Olympics Swimming Men" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/olympics01-575x329.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="329" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">The Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x in action. – Click for larger</p></div>
<p><strong> Where did all the lenses go?


</strong>So you can’t find any big white lenses in your local photo store? That’s because Canon is hoarding them all for themselves, the proof is below! This view kind of reminds me of <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com" target="_blank">LensRentals.com</a>.</p>
<div id="attachment_10846" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 585px"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/578761_10151061384227645_743962392_n.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-10846" title="578761_10151061384227645_743962392_n" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/578761_10151061384227645_743962392_n-575x431.jpg" alt="" width="575" height="431" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">All our lenses in one place! | From Canon France | Click for Larger</p></div>
<p><strong> <span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## JoeDavid (Jul 31, 2012)

So does anyone know who the lucky guy with the 200-400 is? He's not using a pro body (note how he's holding the camera for a vertical shot). 5D Mark III maybe?


----------



## JEAraman (Jul 31, 2012)

JoeDavid said:


> So does anyone know who the lucky guy with the 200-400 is? He's not using a pro body (note how he's holding the camera for a vertical shot). 5D Mark III maybe?



He's using a pro body.


----------



## mws (Jul 31, 2012)

JoeDavid said:


> So does anyone know who the lucky guy with the 200-400 is? He's not using a pro body (note how he's holding the camera for a vertical shot). 5D Mark III maybe?



I have a grip, but still hold it that way. The grip just isn't as comfortable as the camera.


----------



## JoeDavid (Jul 31, 2012)

JEAraman said:


> He's using a pro body.



Yea, the viewfinder looks like a 1D X.


----------



## vlim (Jul 31, 2012)

that's my basement 

No prototype of a 7D markII used in London ?


----------



## kirillica (Jul 31, 2012)

vlim said:


> that's my basement
> 
> No prototype of a 7D markII used in London ?


What for if they have 1DX? )


----------



## vlim (Jul 31, 2012)

testing a new body... Not by photographer but by Canon's engineers.


----------



## dolina (Jul 31, 2012)

I have a negative comment about it...

It isn't available!







Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon EOS-1D X
Lens: EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM
Image Date: 2012-07-28 11:10:17 -0500
Focal Length: 150.0mm
Focus Distance: 23.80m
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.0031 s (1/320)
ISO equiv: 1600
Exposure Bias: +0.67 EV
Metering Mode: Matrix
Exposure: shutter priority (semi-auto)
White Balance: Manual
Flash Fired: No (enforced)
Orientation: Normal
GPS Coordinate: undefined, undefined
Photographer: Lee Jin-man
City: London
Country: GBR XEN
Title: London Olympics Swimming Men
Caption: Brazil's Thiago Pereira, left, United States' Ryan Lochte, center, and Japan's Kosuke Hagino pose with their medals for photographers for the men's 400-meter individual medley swimming final at the Aquatics Centre in the Olympic Park during the 2012 Summer Olympics in London, Saturday, July 28, 2012. (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)
Software: Adobe Photoshop CS Macintosh


----------



## viggen61 (Jul 31, 2012)

So, anyone think some of those cameras & lenses will see the light of day in the "Refurb" store in about a month? ;D


----------



## Stone (Jul 31, 2012)

The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jul 31, 2012)

That room full of L glass must be worth hundred of thousands of dollars. It's a robbers dream the lenses are being held in a broom closet.


----------



## acoll123 (Jul 31, 2012)

Will the 200-400 come with a hood? Neither of the two in the photo have one . . .


----------



## KitsVancouver (Jul 31, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> That room full of L glass must be worth hundred of thousands of dollars. It's a robbers dream the lenses are being held in a broom closet.



Maybe I missed something, but do we know where that photos of all the lens-room comes from? Is it a staging area at the Olympics where Canon lends out gear?


----------



## KitsVancouver (Jul 31, 2012)

Stone said:


> The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.


Actually, the front element's diameter is much smaller than I had thought. I'm actually really surprised. 

I wonder why neither of the photographers in the photo is using a lens hood.


----------



## KyleSTL (Jul 31, 2012)

KitsVancouver said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.
> ...



Yup, 100mm diameter front element (theoretical), smaller than 300mm f/2.8 (107mm).

My guess in that there is a lens overall length restriction that prevent use of hoods with really big lenses. There is a 400mm f/2.8 at the top of the frame without a hood as well. All the other lens in the frame are 70-200mm with hoods (and one Nikon 200mm f/2 with hood). I've noticed in the coverage I've watched that the really big lenses (400mm f/2.8 +) do not have hoods.


----------



## BillyBean (Jul 31, 2012)

Caught this guy at the fencing on Sunday. Not sure what kit he is carrying, but no doubt one of you guys will recognise it.

I've got to say that the 5D3 (on its first real outing) performed superbly - really happy with it. I was about 300m back from the action (no press pass!) with nothing more than a 200mm f4 IS, and yet the 5D3 nailed some great shots in very challenging circumstances - very fast action, high ISOs and so on. The only bit that really failed was the metering - neither spot nor evaluative really got close, so in the end I dialled in -1 exposure comp, which seemed to get things about right. With the bright spotlighting and white clothes on pitch black background, this was never going to be easy though...

These snaps are heavily cropped, btw, and were taken at high iso, so the quality is not perfect, but acceptable in my opinion. You can see more at http://www.shakespearesswords.org.uk/#/2012-london-olympics/4567286090


----------



## Wiki Tango (Jul 31, 2012)

Petapixel wrote about that 'room of dreams', titeling 
*Canon’s Drool-Worthy Gear Room at the London Olympics*
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/07/31/canons-drool-worthy-gear-room-at-the-london-olympics/

giving the source for the pics: INKIBOO on flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/inkiboo/7604804042/#in/photostream
and 3 pics following


----------



## Kernuak (Jul 31, 2012)

Stone said:


> The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.


It's definitely handholdable. I had a go with one at Focus on Imaging in March (the only one in Europe at the time) and it felt to be a similar weight to my 300mm f/2.8 IS, even with a 1D MkIV attached to it. It was difficult to judge the exact weight for sure, as I think the balance was better on a 1 series camera, which always helps and I didn't have the 300 with me for a direct comparison. I probably held it to my eye for a couple of minutes without any problems at all.


----------



## briansquibb (Jul 31, 2012)

Kernuak said:


> Stone said:
> 
> 
> > The 200-400 is not as massive as I thought it would be, looks pretty hand holdable to me.
> ...



I had a play with it at focus and agree that it feels the weight of the 300 f/2.8IS. There was a 300 on trial there too


----------



## Rat (Jul 31, 2012)

KitsVancouver said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > That room full of L glass must be worth hundred of thousands of dollars. It's a robbers dream the lenses are being held in a broom closet.
> ...


Canon Professional Services is present at all big sporting events, from F1 races to world championships to, well, the Olympics. CPS is a service organisation that requires you to own multiple pro bodies and L lenses, but once you're in, you're all set. If anything of your gear breaks down, they make sure you get on the spot repairs or replacements and the such. The rest of the year it's quick repairs, too, while us mere mortals have to wait for weeks. With the platinum membership, you basically will never miss a shot because of a faulty Canon. 

And I imagine you can borrow some fancy goods, too, judging by the amount of 200-400's that can't be all there for replacements 

[edited because it's all free *yay!*]


----------



## DanoPhoto (Jul 31, 2012)

I had to take a cold shower after looking at the gear room..... ;D 

Oh, to dream.... :


----------



## Razor2012 (Jul 31, 2012)

That gear room was awesome. Just think, walk in, grab any equipment you need and you're off. Those photogs out there have it made.  8)


----------



## dr croubie (Jul 31, 2012)

So, about september there's going to be more 1DX refurbs available from the refurb store, than new models from normal shops?

Or are they going to pull a dodgy, try and sell them back to normal shops as "new" models...?


----------



## Rat (Jul 31, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> So, about september there's going to be more 1DX refurbs available from the refurb store, than new models from normal shops?
> 
> Or are they going to pull a dodgy, try and sell them back to normal shops as "new" models...?


I think neither. The Olympics is a lot of photographers, but you can safely assume they'll mostly keep working after this event is over. The one big event will be replaced with many smaller events, so I'm pretty sure they'll use this stuff to supply CPS departments around the globe.


----------



## AHumphreys (Jul 31, 2012)

Just out of curiousity I will be attending the Olympics next week (on vacation) and I am a CPS member in the USA.
Can I get access to trying out a supertele or two from my CPS membership, or do I need a press pass as well?


----------



## sublime LightWorks (Aug 1, 2012)

KyleSTL said:


> KitsVancouver said:
> 
> 
> > Stone said:
> ...



I'm watching the ladies gymnastics and there seems to be no issue with big lens hoods at that venue. Several 400mm lenses shooters with full hoods on the lenses.


----------



## lipe (Aug 1, 2012)

this ain't fair, hoarding all the good stuff ;D

i thought i am hoarding canon equipment, but this is the extreme hoarding.


----------



## dr croubie (Aug 1, 2012)

sublime LightWorks said:


> I'm watching the ladies gymnastics and there seems to be no issue with big lens hoods at that venue. Several 400mm lenses shooters with full hoods on the lenses.



Probably depends on the sport more than anything.
Gymnastics has some high-power downlights, could produce a bit of flare, whereas Swimming has a lot more diffuse lighting from multiple sources like skylights and such.

Also probably has a lot to do with space, Swimming's fairly popular so they cram as many in as they can, they have more trouble selling Gymnastics tickets so there's more room to stretch the legs and put a hood on...


----------



## Flake (Aug 1, 2012)

Well seeing as no one else has said anything!

Who one earth is the owner of the (200 - 400mm?) in the centre left of the photo? It can't be the guy on the extreme left as he's shooting Nikon, which leaves the one with the sunglasses. If it is him then he has both hands on the camera he's using and that one appears suspended in mid air. Tripods aren't allowed only monopods, he doesn't seem to be taking very good care of expensive equipment which earns his crust.

The Olympics is pretty much a disaster for the UK, greedy hospitality companies raised prices so high that no one used their facilities, and now they're cutting prices to less than they were normally. London is pretty quiet, no real bonus from visitors to bars & restaurants.

Our politicians has passed draconian laws which give an already dodgy Police force powers far in excess of what is needed, yesterday they arrested some kid for tweeting an insult against a competitor - the insult was that they guy had let himself & his father (deceased) down. Photographers are simply not tolerated anywhere in the vicinity of the Olympic park, and certainly not inside, the only ones allowed are accredited hacks with the large passes shown in the photo.

Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.


----------



## akiskev (Aug 1, 2012)

Flake said:


> Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.


Sad to hear that..


----------



## briansquibb (Aug 1, 2012)

akiskev said:


> Flake said:
> 
> 
> > Another sad example of Britains obsession with security and the removal of freedom & the rights of the people.
> ...



I would go down the security route but the freedom and rights is not my view


----------



## Flake (Aug 1, 2012)

Just to illustrate how draconian the Olympics act is, it is a criminal offence for spectators to take and display their images taken within the Olympic venue (and that includes outside it) and to display them on the web. So no flikr photobucket image shack etc. If the person who posted the image of the fencing is not an accredited photographer within the games then he or she could be prosecuted just for posting that image on these forums.

The situation is so bad that the NUJ (national union of journalists) has published some legal guidelines as to what to do if you are stopped by a member of the 'security' squad http://londonphotographers.org/2012/07/olympics-legal-guidelines/


Any camera equipment exceeding 30cm is banned, if you try to take it in, it will be confiscated, and will not be returned!

Anyone thinking of visiting the UK with a large camera should be aware that you will be viewed as a potential terrorist where ever you are, and Police interest is often heavy handed and ignorant. The internet is full of the problems of photographers and UK Police
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/538834/amateur-photographer-wins-10-000-police-payout
Even Pros aren't safe
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/jun/14/police-press-freedom


----------



## briansquibb (Aug 1, 2012)

It is not a criminal offense - it is a civil offense only - part of the T&C of going on the site

As for the comment about visiting the UK with a camera - that is utter BS


----------



## Flake (Aug 1, 2012)

All these newspapers and other media must be making it all up! After all I'm sure a group like 'I'm a photographer not a terrorist' was formed because there was no problem and any one even daring to mention it was 'talking BS'?

Of course there's a problem in the UK why do you think there were demos like pap the Police? because photographers had nothing better to do?

Just to hammer the point home have a read of these:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/16/02-olympic-venues-row-security-photography

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

http://www.alamy.com/pressrelease/releases/archive/2012/04/30/152.aspx

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/899005-photographers-starting-to-fight-back-against-excessive-security-measures

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/13/olympics-2012-branding-police-sponsors

The uploading of images is covered by Ts & Cs but if any Olympic branding is visible then that is covered by the Olympic games act.

I don't know if you live in the UK, but if you think there isn't a problem then you're not getting out enough !


----------



## adebrophy (Aug 1, 2012)

Although there are real issues of photography in public places, that have been well documented, it really doesn't seem _that _draconian here. I've done quite a bit of public shooting at events recently (official but not showing ID) and wasn't challenged by anyone. 

With regards to the Olympics, I'm sorry to hear about the experience (direct experience?) of the poster above but I went to the sailing in Weymouth and there were stacks of white lenses in the audience and the security were actually really polite and friendly. A friend went to an event in London and said the event was buzzing with a great party atmosphere. 

What is true is that there's a cultural predisposition towards complaining and cynicism that's having an awfully hard time keeping up with the fact that the country seems to have pulled off something rather decent - and potentially something rather brilliant. 

I applaud the determination of those who continue to moan in the face of this risk of triumph - that there is a true Brit.


----------



## briansquibb (Aug 1, 2012)

Flake said:


> All these newspapers and other media must be making it all up! After all I'm sure a group like 'I'm a photographer not a terrorist' was formed because there was no problem and any one even daring to mention it was 'talking BS'?
> 
> Of course there's a problem in the UK why do you think there were demos like pap the Police? because photographers had nothing better to do?
> 
> ...



I do get out enough and I have never been stopped by the Police. I regularly shoot in central London

If you read the posting I was responding to it was quoting the out of date articles from last year for which the law has been clarified and verified as not being relevant.

Perhaps you should read the post carefully before having a dig


----------



## Flake (Aug 1, 2012)

I've been stopped by the Police, on my own street! Testing a 70 - 200mm lens. An officious and undertrained WPC told me she had a child in the back of her car and it was an offence under the data protection act to photograph it!

The case of Murray Vs Big Picture makes it crystal clear that it is not illegal to take pictures of children while in a public place.


----------



## briansquibb (Aug 1, 2012)

Flake said:


> I've been stopped by the Police, on my own street! Testing a 70 - 200mm lens. An officious and undertrained WPC told me she had a child in the back of her car and it was an offence under the data protection act to photograph it!
> 
> The case of Murray Vs Big Picture makes it crystal clear that it is not illegal to take pictures of children while in a public place.



Never been a problem for me


----------



## Caps18 (Aug 1, 2012)

dr croubie said:


> Also probably has a lot to do with space, Swimming's fairly popular so they cram as many in as they can, they have more trouble selling Gymnastics tickets so there's more room to stretch the legs and put a hood on...



Gymnastics tickets are some of the hardest tickets to get.

And The Olympics is another one of those times where as a non-professional I would like to bring in my DSLR with 300mm f/4 lens, but I would worry about the restrictions on DSLRs at the venues.

And the decision to have the Olympic flame not accessible or visible by the public is a problem.


----------



## Ziggy (Aug 1, 2012)

AHumphreys said:


> Just out of curiousity I will be attending the Olympics next week (on vacation) and I am a CPS member in the USA.
> Can I get access to trying out a supertele or two from my CPS membership, or do I need a press pass as well?



More then likely, I would say you need a press pass. For I shot the US Open Golf once and Canon was there, but they were in an area where you needed press credential to get to. They are set-up to help the photographers who are covering the event.

Also as for Lens Hoods, I normally don't keep mine on any of by big glass when I shoot indoors. Never see a need and it becomes more of a burden and can interfere with my fellow photographers...


----------



## inkiboo (Aug 1, 2012)

Flake said:


> The Olympics is pretty much a disaster for the UK, greedy hospitality companies raised prices so high that no one used their facilities, and now they're cutting prices to less than they were normally. London is pretty quiet, no real bonus from visitors to bars & restaurants.



This is simply not true. And in reference to your post about being banned from posting on Facebook and Flickr, that is also not true.


----------

