What's your definition of a professional camera?

[mousehockey37]

I was stopped on my way into an event on Friday night with my Canon T3 and told it's a professional camera. Mind you, the signs on the door say "no flash photography or video recording allowed.".

I was turned back and made to take my camera to my car. I get into the arena, and a group that had arrived earlier in the afternoon for an add-on portion to this event was in there. There stands a guy with a camera newer and bigger than mine, mind you, he's not press, not with the event. So... because this guy apparently got in before security was set up, his camera is legit and mine isn't. That's a problem.

I go to the usher, point this out, she agrees with me this isn't right. She gets security to come out. Well, we point out the individual with the "professional camera" that isn't press or whatnot and off goes security. Where? Who knows, but they didn't go talk to the guy with that camera. What happens? The security person comes back, gets me, escorts me up to the front of the building and says to event staff... "this gentleman is going to his car to get his camera, he's allowed back in and allowed to have it, please let him through when he returns". Ok, that's a win... however, I still got stopped on the way back in, questioned and security had to look at their person and go.. "he's fine, let him through with it".

Now, I was lucky for whatever reason and stars aligned somehow (mind you, other people who entered later were denied entry with similar cameras. I was made aware of this as I was questioned by another camera owner at the intermission of the event).

So, with the ever-changing world of technology, what's considered a professional camera?

This show was worried about people taking video and such, well, let's just say, I respect the rules of no flash and my T3 can't record video... however, everyone around me had their iPhones recording the entire event.

Any thoughts or good stories of your own?

 

[chudlyfudly]

This is a really interesting post, which I hope will spark some good debate/responses.

I'll have a crack at the issue of what a professional camera is first, but I guess it's a bit of a minefield of personal experience and opinion. As a bit of background, I'm a professional photographer in the sense that I make around 70% of my income through photography, but having said that I don't keep on top of the latest and greatest gear especially well although I do keep an eye on the market. I mainly photograph weddings, family shoots, couple shoots, that sort of thing. I started out with Canon gear shooting a 5D mark iii with a backup 7D + a 1D mk iii. I'd argue at the time and probably still today that these would have classed as 'professional' cameras as I was shooting professional work with them. But my style evolved and longed for a smaller setup as I wanted to approach everything a little more candidly (and carry less weight..!). I eventually made a switch to Fujifilm cameras via the X-T1 initially (paired with my 5D) then going all in with three X-Pro 2s. They're lighter, they're not full frame, they're fairly small, they're mirrorless, but I'd still argue they're professional because I use them for work and have done for 2 years.

I guess from this respect I'd argue that a 'professional' camera for me is something with 2 card slots (which granted, the 7D didn't have), good low light performance, interchangeable lenses and the ability to easily adjust manual settings as well as capture RAW files (which to be fair, most cameras nowadays can I imagine). But then, enter my favourite photographer, Kevin Mullins - he'll shoot weddings with similar cameras to myself (he's a Fujifilm ambassador), but he'll also use the X100F happily for paid work. This is a fixed lens camera and has one card slot. It's arguably more of a point and shoot without actually being a point and shoot. In the past he's taken it a step further by using the X70, another mirrorless camera, which is even more of a point and shoot (it doesn't have a viewfinder)...he often uses the JPEGs out of the camera...for paid work....and he gets fantastic results.

Where am I going with this...? Well in my view I think that a professional camera could be anything in the right hands. I'm no Kevin Mullins, and I couldn't work with something like the X70, but he's made it work in the past and has the results and success to support this.

So, after waffling around the point...I suppose I'm saying that instead of banning professional cameras they should ban professional photographers. (joking of course)

But there is a certain amount of snobbery when it comes to what a camera looks like and whether it's professional or not, because of it's body. So take the Canon 1D (original mark 1), it had 4.1mp, but even today it would still look like a "professional" camera, probably more so than my X Pro 2s (which have 6x the resolution and can shoot up to ISO 12,800 compared to the 1D's maximum ISO of 1600). Whatever your opinion there though, it without a doubt looks more professional than my 12mp Samsung Galaxy S8. I know, I know, you have a much larger degree of tactile control with the 1D plus the ability to change lenses etc...I know this is an extreme example but still, on raw horsepower alone it kind of makes the issue of what "looks professional" being the benchmark for what can and can't be brought into an event such as the one you've described seem kind of silly.

 

[mom2rtk]

At our local arena they also say "no professional cameras allowed". When pressed, they say nothing with an interchangeable lens. If pressed further, they will say nothing with a lens over a specified length, I think 3".

I have been OK going in with my old T2i (smaller than my current full frame camera and more reach because of the crop factor) and a 50mm prime lens (I choose that one because it's very small so doesn't draw attention).

Bottom line is people at the gates can't tell one camera from another. They don't know and don't have time to figure out if your camera can do video. And in this day and age, it's much harder than ever to draw the line between professional and enthusiast gear and professional photographers and average guests who might go home and post images on social media.

I just expect it to be a crap shoot at the gates. Since ours has metal detectors, you can't really sneak a camera in either.

 

[havoc315]

I was stopped on my way into an event on Friday night with my Canon T3 and told it's a professional camera. Mind you, the signs on the door say "no flash photography or video recording allowed.".

I was turned back and made to take my camera to my car. I get into the arena, and a group that had arrived earlier in the afternoon for an add-on portion to this event was in there. There stands a guy with a camera newer and bigger than mine, mind you, he's not press, not with the event. So... because this guy apparently got in before security was set up, his camera is legit and mine isn't. That's a problem.

I go to the usher, point this out, she agrees with me this isn't right. She gets security to come out. Well, we point out the individual with the "professional camera" that isn't press or whatnot and off goes security. Where? Who knows, but they didn't go talk to the guy with that camera. What happens? The security person comes back, gets me, escorts me up to the front of the building and says to event staff... "this gentleman is going to his car to get his camera, he's allowed back in and allowed to have it, please let him through when he returns". Ok, that's a win... however, I still got stopped on the way back in, questioned and security had to look at their person and go.. "he's fine, let him through with it".

Now, I was lucky for whatever reason and stars aligned somehow (mind you, other people who entered later were denied entry with similar cameras. I was made aware of this as I was questioned by another camera owner at the intermission of the event).

So, with the ever-changing world of technology, what's considered a professional camera?

This show was worried about people taking video and such, well, let's just say, I respect the rules of no flash and my T3 can't record video... however, everyone around me had their iPhones recording the entire event.

Any thoughts or good stories of your own?

Those arenas and events are extremely inconsistent. Sometimes they are just on the lookout for "big" telephoto lenses, tripods, etc. You can easily often get away with a dSLR/ILC with a smallish lens attached. But other times, someone may stop you for any camera bigger than a phone, including all ILCs.
It's unlikely they give the security personnel extensive training, so the security personnel interprets for themselves, to some degree, the definition of a professional camera. And the security personnel likely don't know the difference between a consumer dSLR with kit lens compared to a full frame with a 1.4 prime.

 

[klmall]

At our local arena they also say "no professional cameras allowed". When pressed, they say nothing with an interchangeable lens. If pressed further, they will say nothing with a lens over a specified length, I think 3".

I have been OK going in with my old T2i (smaller than my current full frame camera and more reach because of the crop factor) and a 50mm prime lens (I choose that one because it's very small so doesn't draw attention).

Bottom line is people at the gates can't tell one camera from another. They don't know and don't have time to figure out if your camera can do video. And in this day and age, it's much harder than ever to draw the line between professional and enthusiast gear and professional photographers and average guests who might go home and post images on social media.

I just expect it to be a crap shoot at the gates. Since ours has metal detectors, you can't really sneak a camera in either.

So true; average security person doesn't have clue about what is allowed and what is prohibited made further complicated by smartphone camera technology so why bother prohibiting...........

A side note on a totally different security issue; when we flew last week to Baltimore with only carry-on luggage DS's full size but mostly empty toothpaste tube was missed totally in the TSA Pre-Check line but on the return trip it was caught and he was required to toss it. Again, what little confidence I had in airport security was further lowered.

 

[mousehockey37]

At our local arena they also say "no professional cameras allowed". When pressed, they say nothing with an interchangeable lens. If pressed further, they will say nothing with a lens over a specified length, I think 3".

I have been OK going in with my old T2i (smaller than my current full frame camera and more reach because of the crop factor) and a 50mm prime lens (I choose that one because it's very small so doesn't draw attention).

Bottom line is people at the gates can't tell one camera from another. They don't know and don't have time to figure out if your camera can do video. And in this day and age, it's much harder than ever to draw the line between professional and enthusiast gear and professional photographers and average guests who might go home and post images on social media.

I just expect it to be a crap shoot at the gates. Since ours has metal detectors, you can't really sneak a camera in either.

The bigger issue I had though, was once inside the venue, there was at least 1 other person with similar equipment. They apparently were in before security screened those people and security came back to make an "exception" for me. I'm grateful that they did. I'm also pleased in knowing that if you put the effort in, you can be rewarded as well.

 

[mousehockey37]

This is a really interesting post, which I hope will spark some good debate/responses.

I'll have a crack at the issue of what a professional camera is first, but I guess it's a bit of a minefield of personal experience and opinion. As a bit of background, I'm a professional photographer in the sense that I make around 70% of my income through photography, but having said that I don't keep on top of the latest and greatest gear especially well although I do keep an eye on the market. I mainly photograph weddings, family shoots, couple shoots, that sort of thing. I started out with Canon gear shooting a 5D mark iii with a backup 7D + a 1D mk iii. I'd argue at the time and probably still today that these would have classed as 'professional' cameras as I was shooting professional work with them. But my style evolved and longed for a smaller setup as I wanted to approach everything a little more candidly (and carry less weight..!). I eventually made a switch to Fujifilm cameras via the X-T1 initially (paired with my 5D) then going all in with three X-Pro 2s. They're lighter, they're not full frame, they're fairly small, they're mirrorless, but I'd still argue they're professional because I use them for work and have done for 2 years.

I guess from this respect I'd argue that a 'professional' camera for me is something with 2 card slots (which granted, the 7D didn't have), good low light performance, interchangeable lenses and the ability to easily adjust manual settings as well as capture RAW files (which to be fair, most cameras nowadays can I imagine). But then, enter my favourite photographer, Kevin Mullins - he'll shoot weddings with similar cameras to myself (he's a Fujifilm ambassador), but he'll also use the X100F happily for paid work. This is a fixed lens camera and has one card slot. It's arguably more of a point and shoot without actually being a point and shoot. In the past he's taken it a step further by using the X70, another mirrorless camera, which is even more of a point and shoot (it doesn't have a viewfinder)...he often uses the JPEGs out of the camera...for paid work....and he gets fantastic results.

Where am I going with this...? Well in my view I think that a professional camera could be anything in the right hands. I'm no Kevin Mullins, and I couldn't work with something like the X70, but he's made it work in the past and has the results and success to support this.

So, after waffling around the point...I suppose I'm saying that instead of banning professional cameras they should ban professional photographers. (joking of course)

But there is a certain amount of snobbery when it comes to what a camera looks like and whether it's professional or not, because of it's body. So take the Canon 1D (original mark 1), it had 4.1mp, but even today it would still look like a "professional" camera, probably more so than my X Pro 2s (which have 6x the resolution and can shoot up to ISO 12,800 compared to the 1D's maximum ISO of 1600). Whatever your opinion there though, it without a doubt looks more professional than my 12mp Samsung Galaxy S8. I know, I know, you have a much larger degree of tactile control with the 1D plus the ability to change lenses etc...I know this is an extreme example but still, on raw horsepower alone it kind of makes the issue of what "looks professional" being the benchmark for what can and can't be brought into an event such as the one you've described seem kind of silly.

What I highlighted is key. It's not the equipment, but the person behind it.

 

[mom2rtk]

The bigger issue I had though, was once inside the venue, there was at least 1 other person with similar equipment. They apparently were in before security screened those people and security came back to make an "exception" for me. I'm grateful that they did. I'm also pleased in knowing that if you put the effort in, you can be rewarded as well.

I had the same thing happen once without there being an earlier event before screening was set up. Honestly, that sounds like a very ineffective security setup. But my point is that the same thing can happen (inconsistent enforcement of policy) even with everyone going through security. I'm glad they let you go back out to get your camera, but honestly am surprised they did.

 

[DizneyMommy]

“Professional” is a subjective description, not a specific definition. The person is the pro, not the camera. Pros shoot with all different variety of cameras. They should outline specific features that aren’t allowed, lens length, video capability, etc.

 

[mousehockey37]

I had the same thing happen once without there being an earlier event before screening was set up. Honestly, that sounds like a very ineffective security setup. But my point is that the same thing can happen (inconsistent enforcement of policy) even with everyone going through security. I'm glad they let you go back out to get your camera, but honestly am surprised they did.

I'm surprised they did too. I was mad about the initial denial, but it irked me bad when I saw others that had them. I was, at the least, hoping they would've made the other gentleman take his camera out. This would've evened things up. Also, I'm intrigued that they still denied others entry after I got in with mine. I wasn't too happy about having to explain myself to other event goers during the intermission, but I explained what happened and such and they just kinda had to deal.

“Professional” is a subjective description, not a specific definition. The person is the pro, not the camera. Pros shoot with all different variety of cameras. They should outline specific features that aren’t allowed, lens length, video capability, etc.

I'll agree to this. The worst part is, every event, arena, security guard is different.

The craziest part to this was security made the big issue and tried blaming the "policy" on the event itself. When I talked with people running the event, they were just as shocked as I was. So yeah, I'm still trying to make sense of it all.

 

[HPS3]

It's funny that they still look at "size" to determine if it's professional or not. I'm pretty sure plenty pros shoot with Sony RX1's, Fuji X100 series and Ricoh GR's which can be shoved in a pocket.

 

[DSLRuser]

Photography is 20% equipment and 79% knowing how to use that equipment. I left 1% for random luck when something like a monkey takes an award winning shot. (google it)

A good photographer can take a cheap pin hole camera and make an amazing image from it.

 

[mom2rtk]

Photography is 20% equipment and 79% knowing how to use that equipment. I left 1% for random luck when something like a money takes an award winning shot. (google it)

A good photographer can take a cheap pin hole camera and make an amazing image from it.

Ultimately though the security guard at the gate can't tell who those people are by looking at them. So for now the focus will likely continue to be on the equipment as you enter the venue.

 

[xlxo]

Rules are so vague...

• some security flip out when they see any DSLR. Mirrorless really confuse them
• some state no lenses longer than so many inches (eg 4").

In addition to no flash, some events also state no focus assist lights.