The Pulitzer Prize Photographs / Capture the Moment

Eye-level

Banned
Just read through this excellent book on Pulitzer prize photos edited by Cyma Rubin and Eric Newton updated 2007 edition. Just an excellent book for amateur and pro photogs alike... It covers 1945 through 2007 and has 150 images and a short explanation of them. One of the very interesting things to me was how most of the photos up to 1960 were made with Speed Graphics...then for just a few short years Leica and Nikon S3's win a few of them and then by 1965 the Nikon F asserts the dominance of the SLR...up through about 2000 it is F, F2, F3, F4 etc...in about 2000 the canons began to creep in and in 2001 the Nikon D1 begins to take over. Nikon dominates photojournalism for 40 years...by 2005 though canon starts winning the Pulitzers and over 90% of modern day PJs are using the canons...WTF happened there? I guess superior zoom lenses???
 

RickSawThat

Senior Member
It's a very interesting finding about the type of camera used. Your guess about the lenses intrigued me to search out the question. I'm sure there are just as many articles and posts about either one being better but I found this article interesting.

Canon versus Nikon lenses
 

Eye-level

Banned
That snap is in there tracsoft...along with several other fireman related pictures...a few of people falling from burning buildings, OKC bombing, 911, etc...

It appears that most Pulitzer prize winning photographs are spur of the moment depictions of human tragedy for the most part...
 

Eye-level

Banned
Rick...perhaps Nikon has abandoned the pros for a probably more lucrative consumer market at least lens wise.

When you look through the book you see a lot of 28mm, 35mm, 85mm, 105mm primes throughout the Nikon era of Pulitzers...there is a 50 and a 24 and a 300 here and there too...
 
Last edited:

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Marketing and advertising budgets can make a company more popular than the other for a while. And then it swings back to the other. If it wouldn't be for this healthy competition, I don't think we would be in this fantastic digital age, with the cameras we can buy now.
 

westmill

Banned
I think it has gone in cycles over the years. Nikon will bring out a product then cannon better it eventualy putting them back on top
for a while then its Nikon turn all over again. Cannon is also a cheaper option with middle of the road pro gear that attracts many,
with the well built F4 range. Im amazed Nikon has not followed suit to be honnest. With Nikon, it seems you either buy consumer grade,
or full fast pro that cost the earth. Nikon could make a 17-55 and a 50-150 pro F4 for half the price of 2.8s. Same with the 24-70 and
70-700 for FX... why not make cheaper pro grade F4s. This would totaly transform things !
I use Nikon rather than cannon for the feel of the camera personly.
I have a bond with my camera thats hard to explain. Ive tried cannon in the past, and I just didnt bond with the cameras.
Few cameras have done this. I bonded with my olympus E1. A very very underated camera. I also bonded with my Bronica RF645 and the
three lenses. It might sound silly, but it effects the way I take pictures. When I use the Nikon it simply feels part of me.
We work together as a team. I know.... sad innit lol :p
 

Phillydog1958

Senior Member
I once worked for Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc. for 9 years and I'm a Kansas State University Journalism School grad. I'm not a photog. I think my pic postings on this site, confirm that :). My degree is in Public Relations/Advertising and with a minor in marketing. I'm a sales guy. I'm no longer in the newspaper business. I got out in '98. Newspapers are becoming dinosaurs, for many reasons, including the internet. That's another subject, which many books have been written on. I will say that there might be a shift or trend of photographers moving toward one brand of camera over another.

To really find out why, one would have to seek out young photogs at the J-school level, because I know that old photogs become loyal to a specific brand and usually stick with that brand for life. Plus, it's too expensive of a feat to switch brands, although I'm sure that some old-pro photogs have made that switch for various reasons. Most don't. Old newspaper photogs don't get sucked into Nikon and Canon marketing to the point of just suddenly switching brands. I can't speak for the commercial photog who shoots weddings and graduation portraits, but I know newspaper photogs and how they tend to think.

There was a time when newspapers offered a monthly equipment allowance to assist with maintenance and acquisition of new camera equipment. I really doubt that many newspapers are still doing that, due to lost revenue streams that newspapers are experiencing. As they say, "Those were the good ole days." I would think that the shift of camera brands often occurs at the most elementary levels. Young photojournalism students are probably the source of brand change in photojournalism. Besides, we all know that younger people are more susceptible to marketing influence. I now work in the veterinary industry. The company I work for, goes after student veterinarians.

We attempt to establish brand loyalty at the most basic level -- while they're still in school and impressionable. Perhaps, Canon and Nikon are doing that. I don't know for sure, and if they're not, maybe they should be. It's easier to prevent a habit from occurring before it becomes a habit, than it is to break or change a well-established habit. Just a little food for thought . . .
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Eye-level

Banned
It is just fascinating to me that Nikon is the number 1 camera in the world in terms of sales yet the 100 best AP photographs of 2011 with the exception of like 2 shots were made with Canons...

Personally I will always be a Nikon shooter for reasons Westmill described above...
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
When I was younger and got to officially shoot the Montreal olympics, both Canon and Nikon were offering us whatever we needed. If we wanted to keep the equipment afterwards, we only had to pay 50% of retail price at the time.

I know of some photographers that got the equipment free also. So, branding is just marketing. Of course, both have little difference in quality and pixel size and quantity, but don't forget that the real picture happens behind the lens and is not brand dependent.
 

Eye-level

Banned
Faas is my kind of camera person...look at how he has his hood taped on...must have knock that sucker around a lot taking snaps huh? Anybody who uses tape on their rigs is allright in my book! Hell it might even be an East German rig with the hood being taped on and all...LOL

:)
 

Phillydog1958

Senior Member
This guy won two Pulitzers...he died a few days ago...the camera he is using in the first one is a Contarex with what appears to me to be a 85 Sonnar...

Eye of combat photographer Horst Faas*Pictures - CBS News


Yes, I heard about this photographer's passing. He captured the Vietnam war and brought it to our doorsteps each morning. He made people question what the war was really about. One thing about Pulitzer photos and stories is that they often do have great composition and creativity, which pulls the reader/viewer into the story, but what's also important is how the news story or photo impacts society and allows for the improvement of mankind, in some way. For example, in 1975, the Philadelphia Inquirer won a Pulitzer for an investigative series on the IRS and their unequal application of federal tax laws. The piece changed the rules.
 

Eye-level

Banned
After a little more research I have discovered that Canon still has a program in place supplying lenses and bodies to pro journalists. Nikon ceased doing this years ago. Perhaps this is the real reason Canon's are so ubiquitous in modern photo journalism.
 
Top