# What a waste of 1-serie camera



## candyman (Dec 22, 2013)

Soccerplayer Jake Livermore (Hull City UK) damages the camera of Richard Heathcote


He committed to pay the 7000 euro damages and promissed to donate the same amount to charity


Interesting is why the 1-serie camera, standing behind the goal, is taped. Is it a new 1-serie model or....just photographers habit....


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 22, 2013)

I expected more resistance from the lens mount on a magnesium body which eventually supports lenses that weigh several pounds.  In practical use, a 6D with Samyang 14mm would be more appropriate to stand behind the goal. 8)


----------



## J.R. (Dec 22, 2013)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> I expected more resistance from the lens mount on a magnesium body which eventually supports lenses that weigh several pounds.  In practical use, a 6D with Samyang 14mm would be more appropriate to stand behind the goal. 8)



Guess you never played football. The player in question gave it quite a whack. 

Also, a 6D wouldn't make any sense ... you need the fps that the 1D bodies offer to shoot a fast game like football.


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 22, 2013)

candyman said:


> Interesting is why the 1-serie camera, standing behind the goal, is taped. Is it a new 1-serie model or....just photographers habit....



Maybe it's stadium policy to obfuscate any non-licensed brand names that might appear on tv, and that would include photogs behind the goal? I couldn't imaging another reason for taping the Canon label and model type (the next Canon 1 will not be high fps, but high mp). For the rest it makes sense as replacing tape is probably easier than thoroughly cleaning the camera exterior.


----------



## candyman (Dec 22, 2013)

Marsu42 said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting is why the 1-serie camera, standing behind the goal, is taped. Is it a new 1-serie model or....just photographers habit....
> ...




Maybe you are right though I doubt that such 'small camera' with smaller brandname will be visible on TV camera.
I agree about next Canon 1 not being high fps. But wonder how early the early pre-production versions will be made available to a select group. I am sure Canon is working on the successor of the 1DX


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 22, 2013)

candyman said:


> Maybe you are right though I doubt that such 'small camera' with smaller brandname will be visible on TV camera.



Most likely, "doubt" is not good enough as we're talking about multi-million advertising and sponsorship. In addition to that players often come very near photogs, so the "celebrating the goal of the century" shot that goes around the globe might very well include a tiny Canon label which Nikon might not find amusing if they paid for wall ads


----------



## Faaier (Dec 22, 2013)

The bottom tape seems to be protecting the contacts!? The "Mark Xyz" is usually closer to the lens and it seems to be a 1dx anyway. Would you need to tape the covers to avoid them to open?.... Or worse ...holding together the camera from a previous "attack".


----------



## Valvebounce (Dec 22, 2013)

Hi Folks,
I sit here looking at this image and can't help only seeing a broken lens? Looks like the lens mount left on the front of the body, or is there a third bit being the combined body mount ring and lens mount ring missing from the pic? I haven't seen any footage of the incident and therefore do not know anything about the incident, and I do not doubt that the body would need a visit to the hospital after such an amputation! 
Was it deliberate for said footballist to feel obliged to pay for the camera?

Cheers Graham.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 22, 2013)

Valvebounce has it right, it is just the lens and it has snapped where they are supposed to, it is designed into the lens, a relatively easily broken plastic mounting that joins the main lens body to the lens mount. Not saying the camera wasn't damaged internally too, but it isn't a write off by looking at that image.

I speak from experience.


----------



## WPJ (Dec 23, 2013)

But if your a pro and you put your camera there your taking the risk of something happening to it. You should not even think of taking money from the guy your making money off of should you?


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 23, 2013)

WPJ said:


> But if your a pro and you put your camera there your taking the risk of something happening to it. You should not even think of taking money from the guy your making money off of should you?



Under normal circumstances I agree with you, but when the fellow comes over and deliberately kicks the camera I have no problem with sending the bill to him.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 23, 2013)

J.R. said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > I expected more resistance from the lens mount on a magnesium body which eventually supports lenses that weigh several pounds.  In practical use, a 6D with Samyang 14mm would be more appropriate to stand behind the goal. 8)
> ...


I'm from Brazil, so I played a lot of football in school. Actually I was goalie and has suffered a few strokes of the ball, but fortunately none in sensitive parts. : 6D is obviously not suitable for the hardness of sports photography, but can be a "disposable" body to stay in a place with high risk of total loss along with Samyang 14mm. I would not put 1DX + EF14mm L behind the goal, unless the equipment belonged to a newspaper and had insurance. In addition, WI-FI capability can serve for monitoring and remote release. After all, nobody wants to get in the way of the ball, is not it?


----------



## Valvebounce (Dec 23, 2013)

Hi Don.
If the player was stupid enough to deliberately try to destroy the camera he should be facing criminal damage charges not just paying for the damage! If it was a regular joe on the street they would so why not a sports.... I want to say personality, but not sure that is fair to people that do have a personality?

Cheers Graham.



Don Haines said:


> Under normal circumstances I agree with you, but when the fellow comes over and deliberately kicks the camera I have no problem with sending the bill to him.


----------



## Zv (Dec 23, 2013)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Interesting. You could potentially have two or three 6D cameras and be trigerring them remotely via wifi and smartphones to increase the chance of getting the shot.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Dec 23, 2013)

Zv said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > J.R. said:
> ...


Yes, the price of 1DX + EF14mm L, I could have several sets of disposable 6D + Samyang 14mm shooting simultaneously. I think the probability of all 6D being hit by the ball is about 0.000000000000001%


----------



## Don Haines (Dec 23, 2013)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Don.
> If the player was stupid enough to deliberately try to destroy the camera he should be facing criminal damage charges not just paying for the damage! If it was a regular joe on the street they would so why not a sports.... I want to say personality, but not sure that is fair to people that do have a personality?
> 
> Cheers Graham.
> ...


I think that in this case, since the athlete admits what he did was wrong, offers to replace the camera, and also offers to donate the equivalent value to charity, that justice has been served without use of the courts. Guilt has been determined and a punishment set.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 23, 2013)

It's not a 14mm either, it is a 16-35 f2.8. Nit that that matters too much.......


----------



## WPJ (Dec 23, 2013)

Don Haines said:


> WPJ said:
> 
> 
> > But if your a pro and you put your camera there your taking the risk of something happening to it. You should not even think of taking money from the guy your making money off of should you?
> ...



don, I didn't get the part that he came over and kicked the camera. I thought it was a kick of the ball that hit the camera....i wish there was a YouTube of this to see.


----------



## old_york (Dec 23, 2013)

Not quite a vid clip....
But certainly includes a shot from one of the other photogs present, that Richard then used to challenge the player about it.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1897543-jake-livermore-broke-expensive-camera-celebrating-hull-goal-pays-back-owner


----------



## Stu_bert (Dec 23, 2013)

Faaier said:


> The bottom tape seems to be protecting the contacts!? The "Mark Xyz" is usually closer to the lens and it seems to be a 1dx anyway. Would you need to tape the covers to avoid them to open?.... Or worse ...holding together the camera from a previous "attack".


Yup, given the position it is to protect all the interfaces on the 1Dx. It is a 1Dx based on the dual buttons which were introduced with that body. I would guess the photog is being a little cautious given the unpredictable nature of british weather


----------



## WPJ (Dec 23, 2013)

old_york said:


> Not quite a vid clip....
> But certainly includes a shot from one of the other photogs present, that Richard then used to challenge the player about it.
> 
> http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1897543-jake-livermore-broke-expensive-camera-celebrating-hull-goal-pays-back-owner



I googled it and found the same article thanks...


----------

