>>3918850>Of course phone snapshits can be used for commercial purposes too but the administrators haven't thought that far yet. Or if they have, they decided it was a better than not allowing people to take selfies and risking a drop in attendance as a result.
Nah, they have no qualms with phone photography, since the likelihood of it being used to sell stock photos, advertising images, etc. is low. And any promotional purposes on social media far outweigh lost revenues/proper licensing.
But for anyone with a "professional looking" dslr (basically a DSLR with a physicaly long lens), it's hard to distinguish professionals looking to snap portfolio/stock photos, from advanced amateurs; and they're willing to ban people broadly with large cameras in general.
For zoos the licensing isn't as big an issue, it's more the loud shutter noises and flash that disrupt the animals. Normal visitors will snap a few photos with their phone and then leave, but autists with a DSLR will go "SNAP SNAP SNAP" all day long bothering the animals
The licensing issue is definitely a much bigger issue in Museums (especially special exhibits), Performances/events, and sports venues.
I've never heard malls banning bringing in a DSLR, unless OP is either:
1) trying to shoot "street" shots like eggy, and mall security doesn't want the shoppers to be creeped out
2) OP is clearly bringing in a tripod and trying to take architecture style shots, and the mall requires a release signed first