>Hi Perrone, >I'll tell you what... when I see a long row of Pro sports >shooters at a Superbowl or the Olympics, all shooting insanely >high density DX cameras and 70-200's instead of the 400/2.8's, >I'll believe everything you just said .
Pay attention to this year's London Olympics. The word I got from Ronal Tanawacki, Michael Corrado (both NPS reps who service SI, USA Today, ESPN, etc.) both told me that they are furiously filling orders for 200-400s and no more 400/2.8s and 600/F4s. Robert Hanashiro of USA Today who was scheduled to cover the Olympics told me the same as he was explaining why the ThinkTank Shape Shifter is now his primary bag, as did John McDonough of Sports Illustrated (who has shot over 10 superbowls and will be in London).
>I understand people dream on about always getting smaller and >lighter. I'm not convinced DX will really downsize lenses >significantly on a sports field because of the noise inherent >in deep cropping, among maybe some other reasons.
The issue is that with DX, you need to crop much less. That's essentially the point. Put it this way, if you need a 300mm to fill the frame on an FX camera, with a DX camera you can now fill the frame with a 70-200, with the same aperture, and with the flexibility of the zoom. You save travel costs if you are flying, you save wear and tear on your back, etc.
>I could easily be wrong, which is why I said I will believe >all this when I see all the 70-200's lined up at the next >Superbowl . (meaning the theory of endlessly scaling up >resolution really works in the real world and no one will know >for sure until that mythical camera is in place).
The problem for the Superbowl guys and soccer guys, is that you are covering the game from BEHIND the end zone. And to reach out to the other end of the field, you really need to be on a 500-600. So the 300s and 400s are going to remain for the time being. I do predict we will see a change by some this fall though at the weekly games.
>I can also understand why DX might work for secondary cameras >- I was thinking about the main workhorse camera, which I >assume now is usually a D3/D4 or some otrher brand >equivilent.
The D4 is going to be popular not just because it's a pro workhorse, but because of it's connectivity. It's Cat5 connection and it's wireless ability are now required for the wire guys, and the big boys who need to get images online in minutes, and not hours. For fixed shooting positions like at UEFA, World Cup, and Olympic soccer, there are Cat5 connections at the shooting positions. That is tied up to the press booth, and the images can be reviewed in real time and posted to the internet. We started seeing this just a couple of years ago. In London it will be prevalent at the large venues. Neither Nikon nor Canon is doing this with the smaller bodies. There isn't the room physically. By the time we see the D5, this will all be wireless.