NIKON: The Most-Used Camera of World Press Photo 2018

[richardHaw]

Last weekend I started the racing car season. And traditionally I’m taking a “photography of the photographers” at the end of the race and do some camera counting: I believe there are more Nikon’s than the year before: I guess around 50/50 (Nikon / Canon) where last year I would have evaluated the Nikon share to 45%. And like last year: no hybrids, no Sony’s.

Canon used to be very dominant in the 90s up till the 2000s as you mostly see white lenses
that was the scene at the box when I go and watch sports 

[Ilkka Nissilä]

• Nikon: (2018) 52.0%; (2017) 30.6%; (2016) 27.2%; (2015) 18.4%
• Canon: (2018) 30.2%; (2017) 55.5%; (2016) 63.6%; 2015-60.5%
• Fujifilm: (2018) 5.2%; (2017) 8.3%; (2016) 2.3%; (2015) 0.0%
• Sony:  (2018) 5.2%; (2017) 0.0%: (2016) 2.3%; (2015) 0.0%

While the sample size is small compared to total user base, the prized entries of a prestigious competition do tell us something about what some successful photojournalists have used in the previous year.

I think Nikon's success in these numbers may have a simple explanation: autofocus.

The new autofocus module (Multi-CAM 20k) was introduced in 2016 (in the D5 and D500) and it takes some time for gear to get into the field and be used, so an increase in usage by successful photojournalists may reflect increased trust in Nikons in this type of work. I've updated my FX Nikons regularly and feel the AF had issues in some 2010-2012 launches where the pixel density increased by AF consistency got worse (whereas the 2007-8 launched cameras were well received in AF). The D810 from 2014 has very accurate AF and the D5 is incredible in AF performance. Those two cameras popped at the top of this competition's gear list which is probably not a coincidence.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

Without those 32 'no data' entries, the results don't really help with any understanding of the market in any way.

Why? There is no reason to believe, for example, that the users of a specific camera removed EXIF prior to submission any more than users of other cameras.

What would be more interesting as a data set is the 72+K pool of users.

Obviously not. Why would anyone want to know what camera was used to take an unremarkable photograph?

Winners come and go, partially dependent on luck, timing, and skill.

Skill, yes. And the skillful often can recognize when a camera works well or not, and choose their kit accordingly. In photographing many one-of-a-kind situations,the reliability of the gear is of key importance.

That is the last 5 years of data would be more interesting, as it takes the luck out of the equation.

No, it wouldn't. The D800/D800E AF had issues and partly because of that Nikon lost their users' trust (the D600 also contributed to that, but perhaps not so much in professional photojournalism). Even with D4, some users stuck with D3s likely because of the same reasons. I believe the D810 and later the D5/D500/D850 have restored some of the trust that was lost.

What this data definitely doen't give us is an insight into this being a 'new era' for Nikon .. that's for sure!

What it tells us that successful photojournalists use gear that works well for them (in any given period) and I believe there is a disconnect between the general camera-buying public and the Nikon products' current quality. But eventually the word gets out and old mistakes are forgotten.

[JKoerner007]

LOL! awesome answer dude!! 

I didn't realise that the internet was reserved solely for your usage and opinion!

You seem to consistently fail at inferences, and your grades must have been F in logic.

Aside from deftly avoiding my main counter-points, the statement, "If you don't care, why post at all?," had nothing to do with 'me' ... but rather your own hypocrisy in posting/commenting on a topic where you claim not to care (i.e., those who truly don't care, don't bother.)

Anything else you need spelled-out for you?

[JKoerner007]

While the sample size is small compared to total user base, the prized entries of a prestigious competition do tell us something about what some successful photojournalists have used in the previous year.

I think Nikon's success in these numbers may have a simple explanation: autofocus.

The new autofocus module (Multi-CAM 20k) was introduced in 2016 (in the D5 and D500) and it takes some time for gear to get into the field and be used, so an increase in usage by successful photojournalists may reflect increased trust in Nikons in this type of work. I've updated my FX Nikons regularly and feel the AF had issues in some 2010-2012 launches where the pixel density increased by AF consistency got worse (whereas the 2007-8 launched cameras were well received in AF). The D810 from 2014 has very accurate AF and the D5 is incredible in AF performance. Those two cameras popped at the top of this competition's gear list which is probably not a coincidence.

Indeed, which is why AF headed the list I made for reasons for the turnaround. High ISO capability is also important, where again Nikon leads.

Your personal, long-term experience in this regard is appreciated, and we agree the steady rise in Nikon's use among the most discriminating users for "once-in-a-lifetime" moments  is not a coincidence. With Nikon currently setting the standard for creating the features most likely to prevail in challenging conditions makes owning their gear a virtual necessity, not a luxury.

[JKoerner007]

Obviously not. Why would anyone want to know what camera was used to take an unremarkable photograph?

Agree with all your responses to Arthur, save a nitpick on this one.

The 72,000 represent photojournalists worldwide, so a sampling of "what cameras they used" would represent 72,000 of the most discriminating professionals who rely on cameras for their livelihood, in particular their ability to nail a once-in-a-lifetime moment, during a fleeting window of opportunity.

That 51.5% of the top 100 individual entries from this pool used Nikon cameras is great; however 52% of the 72,000 did as well.
Meanwhile only 5.2% of the total 72,000 professional journalists used Sony, while only 2.1% of the top 100 came from Sony.

Thus while the leading post of this thread showed the breakdown of what cameras made "the top 100," this post here showed the total breakdown of the 72,000. This second post actually provided the very information Arthur sought, but apparently failed to read (or comprehend). His wanting to "merge" all this date together for "an average" would muddy the very point that listing the figures chronologically underscores: Nikon is moving up in the world among professionals.

The chronological figures in the linked post show that Nikon's usage among discriminating fanciers has nearly tripled in 4 years, steadily rising each year, while the usage of Canon gear by the same professional pool has been cut by more than half, steadily declining each year. (Meanwhile Sony gear has been a virtual afterthought, fluctuating between being used by ~5% of journalistic professionals to not being used at all.)

[arthurking83]

You seem to consistently fail at inferences, and your grades must have been F in logic.

Aside from deftly avoiding my main counter-points, the statement, "If you don't care, why post at all?," had nothing to do with 'me' ... but rather your own hypocrisy ... in posting/commenting on a topic where you claim not to care. (I.e., Those who truly don't care, don't bother.)

Anything else you need spelled-out for you?

LOL! I'm not totally sure what your personal issues are in finding a need to turn a conversation into a personal attack .. but yes, all my grades at school were F's from grade one all the way into high school, and then into uni!
F's all the way, 'without fail' .. other than total failure in education.

Does that help you feel more important now?
If so, then all the more power to you, and hopefully you can now sleep a lot easier at night.

There is one very obvious clue in those statistics, which stood out like a sore thumb .... clearly shows why those statistics are irrelevant and meanignless as to how they relate to the uptake of Nikon cameras by professionals.

Why? There is no reason to believe, for example, that the users of a specific camera removed EXIF prior to submission any more than users of other cameras.

Obviously not. Why would anyone want to know what camera was used to take an unremarkable photograph?
....

So by this reasoning, the gear used to capture 'the unremarkable shot' is not worthy of being counted?
I'm assuming that CIPA take this into account when they do their sales/shipment reports on the state of the camera business too?

....
Anything else you need spelled-out for you?

If I sound a bit simple, maybe its due to my F's in logic .. so you may have to explain the reason that the title of the thread doesn't seem to relate to the topic of the thread?

title says Nikon is the most used camera in the World Press Photo 2018, and yet the only data presented is that Nikon cameras were predominant amongst the WINNERS of the contest.
They are two vastly different concepts.

We have over 72K of no data, which in almost all likelyhood will change the outcome of the usage pattern of 'the most used camera brand' in the competition.
I have no idea as to how those 72K of non data will affect the outcome of most used camera, but the obvious clue I noticed would indicate that this is almost certain to be true.

[JKoerner007]

LOL! I'm not totally sure what your personal issues are in finding a need to turn a conversation into a personal attack .. but yes, all my grades at school were F's from grade one all the way into high school, and then into uni! F's all the way, 'without fail' .. other than total failure in education.

Does that help you feel more important now?
If so, then all the more power to you, and hopefully you can now sleep a lot easier at night.

Actually, a quick review of this tragic dialogue shows you turned this personal (jumping in here and speaking pejoratively of 'fanbois, pixelpeepers and internet jockeys'), while I and everyone else were discussing the data.

There is one very obvious clue in those statistics, which stood out like a sore thumb .... clearly shows why those statistics are irrelevant and meanignless as to how they relate to the uptake of Nikon cameras by professionals.

I have serious doubts about your qualifications regarding 'clues' ...

So by this reasoning, the gear used to capture 'the unremarkable shot' is not worthy of being counted?
I'm assuming that CIPA take this into account when they do their sales/shipment reports on the state of the camera business too?

It's clear you don't actually read before you type.

If I sound a bit simple, maybe its due to my F's in logic ..

I'm sure of it.

In addition to being simple, you're also a narcissist, forever attempting to turn a discussion of Nikon and current professional usage results into a discussion about 'you.'

title says Nikon is the most used camera in the World Press Photo 2018, and yet the only data presented is that Nikon cameras were predominant amongst the WINNERS of the contest.
They are two vastly different concepts.

Not so.

Again, since you don't actually read before you type, you wouldn't know the difference.

We have over 72K of no data, which in almost all likelyhood will change the outcome of the usage pattern of 'the most used camera brand' in the competition.
I have no idea as to how those 72K of non data will affect the outcome of most used camera, but the obvious clue I noticed would indicate that this is almost certain to be true.

The only matter we agree on is that you "have no idea" ... but, hey, at least that's some sort of common ground.

[arthurking83]

I'm afraid I can't descend to the same self serving depths that you seem so eager too.

If you can't critically analyse your own writing and take notice of at least one of the clues (that you pointed too), at least you seem to have fun in your malformed view.

[richardHaw]

here's a hug from me to both of you 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

A friendly warning for contributors: Do heed Forum Guide Lines. They are put there for a reason. Personal attacks are a violation of those rules and action will be taken if members cannot control themselves.

[Les Olson]

"Without those 32 'no data' entries, the results don't really help with any understanding of the market in any way."

Why? There is no reason to believe, for example, that the users of a specific camera removed EXIF prior to submission any more than users of other cameras.

"What would be more interesting as a data set is the 72+K pool of users."

Obviously not. Why would anyone want to know what camera was used to take an unremarkable photograph?

There is no need for users of any specific camera to be systematically more likely to have removed the EXIF.  There were, eg, 11 users of Canon 5D III, and 11 users of D5 and D810.  If only 5/39 images with no EXIF were taken with   a 5DIII that would be clearly number one camera.  Is it so implausible that the judges might be biased toward images of (say) civil conflict, and that (say) Leicas are best suited to that context, and the photographers did systematically remove those EXIFs to avoid endangering the people portrayed?

Plus there were two sub-categories in each of the four genre categories, "singles", and "stories" with up to 10 images.  It is illegitimate to treat the multiple images in the "stories" as independent and add up the total number of "prize-winning images" for each camera.  The correct metric is cameras used by prize-winning photographers.  (So, yes, the images with no exif could be from three or four cameras, in which case they would not have a large impact on the results).

I am sure the judges would be pleased by your vote of confidence, but equating prize-winning with "remarkable" and not prize-winning with "un-remarkable" is unjustified.  Even if you knew what criteria were used to judge, why would you care?  It isn't the cameras used for the best images you care about, it is the cameras used for the images that are best in regard to things cameras make a difference to.  If there was a category for "Best Photo Needing Fast AF" I might be interested in which cameras were used, but there isn't.   If you look at the collection (https://www.worldpressphoto.org/collection/photo/2018) you can see that the success of some of the images may have depended on the camera - eg, the Photo of the Year, where faster and more accurate AF might have made some difference, although positioning - by luck or choice - was more important.  I have no idea which camera was used for that image, but it is of no interest to know what camera was used unless the excellence of the picture is due to something the camera contributed.  For many of the winning images, there is no question that any camera would have done as well, so the camera used is irrelevant. 

This is not to say that data from the whole pool would be useful: I don't see why I would care what cameras any number of photojournalists find best suited to their work, any more than I care what motor vehicles taxi drivers find best suited to theirs.

[Ethan]

I studied Statistics at Uni among other disciplines as I was trying to get to grips with the laws of Probability in relation to manipulating the Roulette casino game with a formula.

Three takes from Statistics studies:
1- The Law of Probability where x and y meet at Infinity
2-Laurenz Chaos Theory
3- The validity of Surveys
and here lies the rub. Stats are as relevant as the formulation method and objective.

As for the result of the data shared by Jkoerner. It so happens that I agree based on my personal experience where I was surprised and almost shocked as of last month to see a sea of Nikon straps among the media and press scrum.

No Sony in sight........ever.......as well as Fuji - Olympus to that matter.

Now back to your scheduled programming......

[MFloyd]

Last weekend I started the racing car season. And traditionally I’m taking a “photography of the photographers” at the end of the race and do some camera counting: I believe there are more Nikon’s than the year before: I guess around 50/50 (Nikon / Canon) where last year I would have evaluated the Nikon share to 45%. And like last year: no hybrids, no Sony’s.

I forgot to add the picture. My "body count" is approximately 50/50  This dates from last Sunday (Le Castellet, France). And no Sony's of course ...




and this is what's all about: AF, VR, etc.
Nikon D5
Nikkor 70.0-200.0 mm f/2.8E FL
ƒ/14.0  70.0 mm 1/40s ISO 100

[MFloyd]

....
2-Laurenz Chaos Theory
....

I think there is a slight misspelling: Edward Lorenz (1917-2008) 🦋