No Pro cameras?

philspace

Is this normal? On the news this AM, while covering the first National's home game tonight in DC, they are saying that one of the "banned" items along with guns, drugs, backpacks, food and booze include "Professional Cameras" which is supposed to equal any camera with a detachable lens or tripod. I can understand security problems with a tripod - but WTF is up with limiting a Digital Rebel or an old cheap 35mm :dunno

This has put me over the edge, I was going to consider going to a Nationals game with the grand kids, but not now. I have no interest in selling pictures of a game, but I would like some decent shots of my grand kids - screw them.:pissed

Is this standard for all pro games?

JohnR

Is this for all MLB games??

Go to a AAA game, those are just as fun and cheaper.

wxwax

Never had a problem with the Braves or the Mariners. Both were exceptionally camera friendly. Dumb move by the Nationals, if true.

dragon300zx

This depends on why they are doing it. If they are limiting it to cameras with interchangeable lenses (our slr's) because of a security risk that I can understand. It would be quite easy (labor intensive yeah but still not complicated) to modify one of these camera's and turn it into a gun. But if they were to make their screeners do their job this would be just as easy to deter. If its just cause they don't want good pics getting taken and possibly sold, well I say we boycott.

Shay Stephens

They probably have an agreement with a professional photographer or photographic organization that doesn't want any competition with selling and or licensing photos they take from the events.

If people don't like these arrangements, they need to call and or write the people in charge to complain about the policy. The more they hear from the fans, the more pressure they will be under to change the policy.

It's not security related ;-)

philspace wrote:

Is this normal? On the news this AM, while covering the first National's home game tonight in DC, they are saying that one of the "banned" items along with guns, drugs, backpacks, food and booze include "Professional Cameras" which is supposed to equal any camera with a detachable lens or tripod. I can understand security problems with a tripod - but WTF is up with limiting a Digital Rebel or an old cheap 35mm

This has put me over the edge, I was going to consider going to a Nationals game with the grand kids, but not now. I have no interest in selling pictures of a game, but I would like some decent shots of my grand kids - screw them.:pissed

Is this standard for all pro games?

wholenewlight

philspace wrote:

. . .drugs . . . booze . . . "Professional Cameras" . . .

these three items all have the same effect on me - they cause my vision to blur and make me choose irrational decisions (making my wallet lighter, etc).

Seriously, I took pics at a philly and a baltimore game last year with a D70 and no problems.

mercphoto

Shay Stephens wrote:

They probably have an agreement with a professional photographer or photographic organization that doesn't want any competition with selling and or licensing photos they take from the events.

If people don't like these arrangements, they need to call and or write the people in charge to complain about the policy. The more they hear from the fans, the more pressure they will be under to change the policy.

It's not security related ;-)

I agree that is the likely reason for the ban. From what I've been told, and I've done some investigation into this, at Formula One races you need a special permit to have a camera with a lens greater than 200mm. The special permits are given to people with certain credentials (and a certain willingness to pay the permit fee), and then they can bring in what they want. Its a policy specifically so that professionals can have somewhat limited competition for sales, and the public can get somewhat useful shots on their own, and Bernie gets a piece of the commercial photography action as well.

As a private citizen, I understand Shay's feelings about the policy. As a photographer who covers a local track that I have an exclusive arrangement with, I can also understand the other side of the coin.

But it boils down to this: the ball game is on private property. He who owns the sandbox writes the rules. And ultimately, that I have no problem with.

philspace

wxwax wrote:

Never had a problem with the Braves or the Mariners. Both were exceptionally camera friendly. Dumb move by the Nationals, if true.

It was on the news again while I was at work - no tripods or detachable lens cameras - it has to be some agreement with the pros since I can go anywhere in DC with my big Lowepro over the shoulder with no problems - except work :bluduh

Revision 1 - security retraction - I forgot that POTUS will be there tonight throwing out the first ball - I will reserve my judgement until I see how the next home game is handled. If it lightens up I will be in grand kid heaven with the camera