Brand Loyalty - Why?

"Bruce" wrote in message ...
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:54:37 +0200, Ofnuts

Perhaps using Cosina lens caps on Canon L lenses would reduce the risk
of them being stolen. ;-)

But, but...., Cosina has made some very fine lenses...! ;-)
--DR

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:24:21 -0500, Mr. Curious
wrote:

In fact, I even scrape their name off of any included camera-strap that
might come with a camera. If that's not possible then I might magic-marker
it out. ...

What's wrong with sharpie or el marko? I think this guy's a magic
marker shill!

(Oops! Sent this by email first. Gotta move those buttons apart. :P )

In article ,
says...

What causes this phenomenon of brand loyalty? Peer pressure? Ignorance?
Insecurity? Stupidity? Some psychotically desperate need to "belong"?

Uh, the fact that I've invested over $15,000 in Canon glass and
accessories?

That fact help you out any?

--
Giftzwerg
***
"While liberals wave the Justice Department's report on CIA
interrogation techniques at the rest of the world and tearfully beg them
for forgiveness, the rest of us are wondering why we don't reduce the
deficit by selling the rights to these interrogations on pay-per-view.
The contestants on your average Japanese game show go through more
intense ordeals."
- Doctor Zero

In article ,
says...

There is no such thing as brand loyalty in the SLR world. It's really
brand slavery...

Another aspect comes up when people are really trying to defend their
decision to buy a particular product rather than admit that another might
have advantages. It quickly becomes an irrational argument that is more
about "mine si bigger that yours!"

The problem is that "advantages" in the SLR system world tend to be
fleeting. 12-18 months after "it's all over," and Canon rules the whole
world ... Nikon comes back and eats their lunch with a new slate of
bodies.

I'm a Canon shooter. I was green with envy when the D300 / D700 came
out. Now I've upgraded to the 5D MkII, and I've got the same
performance - *without* freaking out and panic-selling all my glass and
accessories.

Forget all this heatseeking gearhead bull**** and go out and shoot some
pictures, already.

--
Giftzwerg
***
"While liberals wave the Justice Department's report on CIA
interrogation techniques at the rest of the world and tearfully beg them
for forgiveness, the rest of us are wondering why we don't reduce the
deficit by selling the rights to these interrogations on pay-per-view.
The contestants on your average Japanese game show go through more
intense ordeals."
- Doctor Zero

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:24:21 -0500, Mr. Curious wrote:

I see all this bickering over different brands of cameras and camera
gear. I've *never* understood this. If some company comes up with an
innovative technology or better ways of incorporating past technology to
create a better camera or optical system (and it has passed all
reasonable tests) I jump "brand name" in a heartbeat. I've always done
that in the past with SLR gear and I do it today with digital camera
gear. I already paid the company what they wanted, they deserve nothing
further from me, nor do I owe them one damn thing more. They should be
on their knees thanking me every day that I bought anything at all from
them.

In fact, I even scrape their name off of any included camera-strap that
might come with a camera. If that's not possible then I might
magic-marker it out. Or more usually just use some other better quality
strap and throw theirs in the garbage with their bold corporate name on
it. If they want me to advertise like a minimum-wage sandwich-board in
front of a store for them then they're going to have to pay me a monthly
advertiser's salary of my own choosing. I can think of nothing sillier
and more demeaning than wanting to walk around with some corporate logo
visible on my shoulder or back. As if I'm now their obedient dog with my
owner's collar and they own me somehow. Yet people do this willingly,
proudly, walking around like little branded slaves. Just bend over while
they get the iron hot and burn their logo into your hind-quarters.
You're absolutely no different than branded cattle if you walk around
with a corporate logo on you. Just say, "MoooOOOOoo!"



I wonder what your car looks like.


shakes head

What causes this phenomenon of brand loyalty? Peer pressure? Ignorance?
Insecurity? Stupidity? Some psychotically desperate need to "belong"?

I don't get it. Not in the least.

On 2009-08-28 03:24:21 -0700, Mr. Curious said:


I see all this bickering over different brands of cameras and camera gear.
I've *never* understood this.

Mostly, just because it is fun.

Camera systems are expensive, so making a bad choice can be an
expensive mistake. Beginning photographers especially are nervous about
getting the 'wrong' camera.

Most experienced photographers, though, understand that there are not
very many bad cameras out there. When was the last time you saw a "Not
Recommended" rating at DPReview? The fact is, manufacturers devote a
lot of resources ensuring that any new camera they introduce will not
be a failure. Some 'rumored' cameras will never see the light of day
and manufacturers have even been known to cancel expensive roll-out
events (or hold the event anyway and introduce nothing, as Nikon did at
WPPI this year) rather than introduce an unsuccessful camera.

So experienced photographers know that if you get a DSLR camera from a
major manufacturer that you are going to get one of the finest cameras
ever made. But that does not keep us from rattling each others' cages
once in awhile, especially if we see noobs who are still a little
insecure about their choice.

And of course, we know that there are a few nuts who adopt a brand as
if it was a religion. It is especially fun to rattle their cages.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

John McWilliams wrote:
Bruce wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 09:55:17 -0400, Bob Haar
wrote:
On 8/28/09 7:48 AM, "Ofnuts" wrote:
There is no such thing as brand loyalty in the SLR world. It's
really brand slavery...
Another aspect comes up when people are really trying to defend
their decision to buy a particular product rather than admit that
another might have advantages. It quickly becomes an irrational
argument that is more about "mine is bigger than yours!"


The lengths to which people will go in order to avoid "Buyer's
Remorse"! ;-)

No doubt Edsel owners were heard loudly singing the praises of their
uniquely able automobile.

Actually, other than a terrible looking front end, and rejection in
the market place, was there anything wrong with that marque? Now,
rejection in the market place is a horrible thing for a car that was
meant to honor a beloved family member. .....

I'm told that the big problem was that they marketed it to the "up and
coming", not understanding that that was a niche already occupied by Lincoln
and Cadillac--the people who are _there_ drive Rolls, Ferrari, or old
clunkers.

On 2009-08-28 05:17:42 -0700, David Kilpatrick said:

Mr. Curious wrote:

In fact, I even scrape their name off of any included camera-strap that
might come with a camera.

I just fit nice Dynax straps to new Alphas, to confuse people. I also
put Canon lenscaps on my Nikon.

David

I use R-Straps. I will attach rubber bands and things like that to them
to give an appearance of them being something I repaired. I will even
put black gaffer tape over the brand on my camera, just to keep the
white lettering from distracting subjects or attracting the wrong kind
of attention. My cameras are not beat up, but careful application of
gaffer tape and they look like they are totally worthless. Plus, some
places that like to "tax" (demand bribes from) professional
photographers will assume that you are a poor amateur and you can get
away without paying the tax (bribe). The tape gets removed when the
camera goes up for resale and the camera looks all pretty again.
Besides, you never know when a little bit of gaffer tape might come in
handy.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On 8/28/09 08:38 , Mr. Curious wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:17:42 +0100, David Kilpatrick
wrote:

Mr. Curious wrote:

In fact, I even scrape their name off of any included camera-strap that
might come with a camera.

I just fit nice Dynax straps to new Alphas, to confuse people. I also
put Canon lenscaps on my Nikon.

David

I like that idea, but you're still a walking billboard, a slightly more
entertaining one. Now if you had put a Hasselblad lens-cap on them or other
more wild combinations. I think I'd prefer a "Fischer Price" lens-cap so
everyone is amazed and impress by my using a toy camera. I believe that
Adorama sells many brands of replacement lens-caps with company logos on
them, very inexpensive. You could hunt there for more humorous combos.
Might even be more fun if people started marketing novelty lens-caps and
straps with Ferrari, Rolls Royce, etc. on them. What with how often they
try to compare cameras to cars.

Personally I don't even like telling anyone what camera I have used. The
camera deserves no credit, let alone the company that created it. Does a
chef give credit to his cookware? On the menu is there an entry of: "Chef
Antoine prepares Roast Lamb Cutlets with Mint Sauce served on a bed of Wild
Rice and Spring Shallots, all professionally cooked on Kuhn Rikon Duroply
and All Clad." Is that going to somehow make their meal better or a more
pleasurable experience? Allow them to charge more for it? Will the meal
come with a complimentary brochure showing the various cookware available
from those companies and who to contact? Any self-respecting chef on earth
would be highly insulted if anyone gave the least bit credit to his
cookware.

As for the other replies. Okay, I guess I "get it" from the financial point
of view. I guess that's never been a concern of mine, and why I
"didn't/don't get it".

I'm starting to see that those who most loudly proclaim their brand loyalty
are doing so out of the tightest financial constraints. The less they can
spend the more brand loyal they are. Would that about sum it up?




That's not always the case. I can pretty much afford what I want
to buy. I shoot Nikon. I picked Nikon based a number of factors that
were relevant at the time. I stay with Nikon because 1) I've gotten
good service from them. 2) My hardware continues to work
together--lenses, bodies, old, new....and 3) as has been pointed
out, here, the differences between brands are fleeting. If what I'm
shooting works, and something comes out by Canon that's better for
my needs, I can keep shooting what I've got until Nikon produces a
better product yet.

A little patience, and a little skill go a very long way.

I do, get a tickle out of tweaking the other side, though. I was
at a pro-bono shoot for Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation motorcyle
ride in South Bend this summer. A D700 on a speed strap at my side,
and a D300 in my hand, and a shutterbug comes up and starts talking
cameras. And looks down at the D700.

"What are you shooting? EOS....."

I cut him right off, "Excuse ME?"

He jumped back in horror, and I thought he was going to have a
stroke. "Oh, geez...Sorry man. I"m SO sorry."

He backed away like I was holding a .357.

I chuckled about that all day.

Some of my buddies shoot Canon. One of my colleagues shoots a
Pentax off the clock. My brother always wanted a Hasselblad.

And they're all fiercely rabid about their brands.

I'm just amused.

I like what I'm shooting. I get the pictures I want. Anything
more is comedy.

There's a LOT of marketing money put into building brand loyalty.
And there's a lot of money riding on brand loyalty. Truth is,
though, that you shoots what you likes, and let it end there.

"Mr. Curious" wrote in message
...

I see all this bickering over different brands of cameras and camera gear.
I've *never* understood this. If some company comes up with an innovative
technology or better ways of incorporating past technology to create a
better camera or optical system (and it has passed all reasonable tests) I
jump "brand name" in a heartbeat. I've always done that in the past with
SLR gear and I do it today with digital camera gear. I already paid the
company what they wanted, they deserve nothing further from me, nor do I
owe them one damn thing more. They should be on their knees thanking me
every day that I bought anything at all from them.

In fact, I even scrape their name off of any included camera-strap that
might come with a camera. If that's not possible then I might magic-marker
it out. Or more usually just use some other better quality strap and throw
theirs in the garbage with their bold corporate name on it. If they want
me
to advertise like a minimum-wage sandwich-board in front of a store for
them then they're going to have to pay me a monthly advertiser's salary of
my own choosing. I can think of nothing sillier and more demeaning than
wanting to walk around with some corporate logo visible on my shoulder or
back. As if I'm now their obedient dog with my owner's collar and they own
me somehow. Yet people do this willingly, proudly, walking around like
little branded slaves. Just bend over while they get the iron hot and burn
their logo into your hind-quarters. You're absolutely no different than
branded cattle if you walk around with a corporate logo on you. Just say,
"MoooOOOOoo!"

shakes head

What causes this phenomenon of brand loyalty? Peer pressure? Ignorance?
Insecurity? Stupidity? Some psychotically desperate need to "belong"?

I don't get it. Not in the least.

I think it's because the Nikon owners are a bunch of really smug *******s.
Yeah. That's it.

;-)

Sorry, I can't explain it. That strange behavior has been around as long as
there have been brands, not only of cameras, but pretty much anything else.
Cars, snowmobiles, televisions, you name it. When I was younger the big
brand wars were Ford vs Chevy, RCA vs Magnavox, etc. Brand wars are nothing
new, not in the least. I've shot with Hasselblad, Pentax, Mamiya, Nikon,
Canon, Minolta, and Olympus. Whatever suits the need, I use. Couldn't give a
rat's ass about the label.