Which brand has the worst fanboy zealots?

[Chris101]

... Anyone know
what guitar Bob Dylan used and uses?

Yeah, duh. Martin acoustics and Fender electrics. What kind of old hippie doesn't know that?

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

 

[Astro Landscapes]

There are different kinds of fanboys / zealots etc...

1.) The obnoxious, unshakable zealot who actively goes out and preaches their gospel AT other system users. Like Canon shooters that go on a Nikon forum and preach about how much better L glass is than comparable Nikon glass, etc. (Or the Nikon shooter who goes on the Canon forum laughing about their wide angle zooms lol...) Canon and Nikon are really the only two brands with a measurable number of these kinds of people.

2.) The cult follower who would rather die than use another system. Sigma's Foveon sensor is a great example of this- To them, bayer is the devil! But Canon, Nikon and Olympus all seem to have a few of these as well, though the majority are level-headed and would ADD other systems to their bag if they had the cash...

3.) The know-it-all camera geek who knows every intricacy of digital imaging technology, and who always pops up when a full-frame versus DX versus 4/3 debate pops up. These people usually get no more than three comprehensible words out before they slip into an impenetrable jargon of electronics terminology and physics theory that no right-brained artist could ever understand... Olympus definitely has it's share of these! But Foveon has many as well, as does Fuji, and Canon / Nikon, but more like FX versus DX in that scene...

4.) The protector / validator. I think Olympus in general, thanks to it's different sensor size, has to have more of these than other brands. People just don't understand that 4/3 is more than adequate for most all users, and so Oly gets questioned the most as a system. This has a lot to do with the superiority complex in all of us- People don't want to buy into a system if there is another system "better" than it, no matter what advantages there might be for price, size / weight etc. etc. Olympus users will forever find themselves having to post stunning images and say "it works just fine for me!"

Did I forget any? This is all in good fun, as I hope you can tell...

=Matt=

--



Cameras capable of making great photographs have become commonplace these days, but photographers have not. While technical innovations have made photography ever easier in recent decades, the art of producing images that other people will care about has become even more formidable. Galen Rowell

 

[Peter Kwok]

not a brand, with Guru Steve.

Steve Job is God himself. Bill Gate, on the hand, is the Great Satan.
--
Peter Kwok
http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok

 

[shay guevara]

--
'Good composition is only the strongest way of seeing the subject. It
cannot be taught because, like all creative effort, it is a matter of
personal growth. In common with other artists the photographer wants
his finished print to convey to others his own response to his
subject. In the fulfillment of this aim, his greatest asset is the
directness of the process he employs. But this advantage can only be
retained if he simplifies his equipment and technique to the minimum
necessary, and keeps his approach free from all formula, art-dogma,
rules, and taboos. Only then can he be free to put his photographic
sight to use in discovering and revealing the nature of the world he
lives in.'
Edward Weston, Camera Craft Magazine, 1930.

'Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, it's
too dark to read.' G. Marx

OK, but If we want to be taken seriously as cultpersons should we not be drinking

distilled toad sweat from a silver cup at midnight while dancing around a roll of Kodachrome 25?
--
Shay son of Che
Representing the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

 

[Chris101]

OK, but If we want to be taken seriously as cultpersons should we not
be drinking
distilled toad sweat from a silver cup at midnight while dancing
around a roll of Kodachrome 25?

That too, but as a zealot, I rather like the 'jumping up and down while firing my rifle into the air' part best!

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

 

[shay guevara]

OK, but If we want to be taken seriously as cultpersons should we not
be drinking
distilled toad sweat from a silver cup at midnight while dancing
around a roll of Kodachrome 25?

That too, but as a zealot, I rather like the 'jumping up and down
while firing my rifle into the air' part best!

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs .

--

Yup, I can go with that. Actually, if we have a cult it's time for a schism, Fuji vs Kodak flame wars is the way to go.

Shay son of Che
Representing the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

 

[Chris101]

OK, but If we want to be taken seriously as cultpersons should we not
be drinking
distilled toad sweat from a silver cup at midnight while dancing
around a roll of Kodachrome 25?

That too, but as a zealot, I rather like the 'jumping up and down
while firing my rifle into the air' part best!

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs .

--
Yup, I can go with that. Actually, if we have a cult it's time for a
schism, Fuji vs Kodak flame wars is the way to go.

Shay son of Che
Representing the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation

Which burns better? That's the side I'm on!

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

 

[kristian2000]

Actually, in the nit-picky tradition of these forums, I'm obligated to point out that the often used reference linking the Rev. Jim Jones and the Jonestown mass suicide is incorrect. The good Reverend was apparently too cheap to shell out for the good stuff to exterminate his flock, Flavor-Aid was the drink of choice.



--



Kristian Farren

 

[Chris101]

It's the healthy choice!
--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

 

[Pete Stavrakoglou]

"anti-fanboys" ...are worse than fanboys.

Is "anti-fanboys" a new classification? Do we have a definition?

Let's open this for a real definition.

And, of course, the important question, if an anti-fanboy collides
with a fanboy at the same point in spacetime, will they destroy each
other?

Now that's funny! LOL!

--
'Good composition is only the strongest way of seeing the subject. It
cannot be taught because, like all creative effort, it is a matter of
personal growth. In common with other artists the photographer wants
his finished print to convey to others his own response to his
subject. In the fulfillment of this aim, his greatest asset is the
directness of the process he employs. But this advantage can only be
retained if he simplifies his equipment and technique to the minimum
necessary, and keeps his approach free from all formula, art-dogma,
rules, and taboos. Only then can he be free to put his photographic
sight to use in discovering and revealing the nature of the world he
lives in.'
Edward Weston, Camera Craft Magazine, 1930.

'Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside a dog, it's
too dark to read.' G. Marx

--
My humble photo gallery: http://ntotrr.smugmug.com

 

[Mark3M]

Nothing... but Cults are based on belief, not fact.

Given that definition, OlyDSLR forum...

 

[davesmith]

I was checking this thread earlier today when Andy Westlake made a post titled something like "The official answer is...", where he put forward a thinly veiled attack at users of a brand that had had recent relatively poor reviews. Where did that post go? I was looking forward to reading the responses later in the day.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davesmith

 

[davesmith]

Just from a quick dpreview search, Andy's post started off "We've been exhaustively gathering our official fanboy statistics over the past few months, using a strategy of gently riling each forum in turn by giv"

And then obviously the post goes on (the quote is from the search results), but the link is now dead.

What gives?

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davesmith

 

[WBirch]

I'm 4/3's Agfa, 9/6's Canon and 16/10's Nikon.

..and 4/5's Epson.

 

[D P O'neil]

Not digital, but those who are incensed that anyone uses film.

--
Read my blog -> http://radio.weblogs.com/0101365/

I find that most people who use both digital and film….or even those
just using digital have no problems with people using film and aren’t
fanboys in any way. For those of us using both, we understand the
merits of both, and defend those merits to those spreading incorrect
information….or worse, those that will simply lie about certain
aspects as a method of forwarding their bias.

The common names in the anti-film brigade (I like the Black Knight
comparison) are Scott Eaton, Joe Lavee, DP O’Neill (and his club
letters)

That would be society letters David, you know the one's you don't have)

and Daniel Lee Taylor. Regardless of whether or not their

information is incorrect….or fabricated….they hunt down any threads
that mention film and have people using film and digital, and attack
them.

I’ve had the pleasure of answering a couple of dozen emails with
links to threads where laughable mistakes are made on their part as
well as outright fabrication is made. It can be denied in new
threads, but I guess they haven’t figured out we can link to these
threads showing just how vacuous there information can be.

Laughable really. Unfortunately for one of them, a well known
photography store in Toronto was laughing at his posts as well. He
hasn’t yet figured out that the way he treats people on line could
start harming his business. Live and learn I guess.

These people are the true fanboys.

--
Kind Regards
Dennis P O'Neil APSNZ
'War does not determine who is right, only who is left'

 

[jaydee46]

Just testing.Only got one answer though.

 

[WBirch]

Just from a quick dpreview search, Andy's post started off "We've
been exhaustively gathering our official fanboy statistics over the
past few months, using a strategy of gently riling each forum in turn
by giv"

And then obviously the post goes on (the quote is from the search
results), but the link is now dead.

What gives?

He lost his keyboard.
Attack me. I can take it, Dave.

WayneB.
=================

 

[mamallama]

not a brand, with Guru Steve.

Steve Job is God himself. Bill Gate, on the hand, is the Great Satan.

You're right on. At the last MacWorld I saw several young coeds on their knees praying to Steve Jobs. They were holding the MacBible and mumbling something. Steve was on stage prancing around waving around the new MacAir Notebook computer and the coeds were in some sort of Pentencostal heat. Strange.

--mamallama

 

[natureman]

(edited for length)

Nearly everyone likes to think that they have
the best gear, which is a natural emotion. > --

That is a fascinating assertion, rich with potential for explaining
the incessant gear/format bashing. I wonder if it is true?

I know it's not true that absolutely everyone thinks his or her gear
is best, because I don't feel that way. My gear is the best I can
afford, not the best anyone could have. The best gear would be wasted
on me, as I haven't yet mastered the full potential of what I own
now. Which leaves me fully aware that other people have better gear,
but certainly not distressed about the fact. Plus often enough, I see
other people saying that with today's level of technology, you can
make astonishingly good photos with nearly any brand or model of
camera. My hunch is that the margins of difference among the
available equipment become smaller and smaller until eventually it's
hard to tell from the end product what was used.

So how natural is it to feel that one's own gear is best? Some people
think that their own kids are best, or that they've bought the best
car or boat in its class. And it does seem as if the
ownership/association of these best things becomes part of
individuals' sense of self. An identification process takes place:
Because I drive this car (or shoot with this camera), I am worthy and
due respect. Possession translates into rank and status. It reminds
me of people's affiliation with their favorite sports teams. When my
team wins, the honor accrues to me. If you insult my favorite team,
you insult me...and, I must rise to defend my team's honor.

Some such dynamic seems to be in play when a camera review is
perceived to be short-changing a particular model. People react as if
an ethnic slur has been made, that honor demands amends be made.
Whether such behavior or emotion is natural or not probably belongs
in the realm of social science. Certainly it occurs frequently enough
and with sufficient intensity that this brand loyalty is quite real.

Ultimately it seems more like tribal than cult behavior. Brand
identification provides a sense of belonging. Prestige and rank
accrue in varying degrees corresponding to camera models' cost and
designation: P&S, compact, prosumer, pro. Different brand-tribes are
ranked by market share, latest releases, reviewers' reactions, etc.
With these notions of prestige and rank come perceived threats. And
it's the beating back of these threats---the sense of biased reviews,
latest claims by members of other tribes, disappointment or elation
in the tribe's newest offerings---that may drive the seemingly
irrational behavior so often dubbed trolling here on DPReview.

So which tribe is the worst? If you quantified the flaming posts,
assigning levels of heat to certain words or arguments, you might see
that one group is more vociferous than the others. I suspect that the
differences would be small though, and have more to do with
individuals' behavior than with groups. And I don't know if the
tribalism serves photography in any way. Still, day in and day out,
there is enough energy being demonstrated to see that the
jousting/flaming is meeting some deeply felt need.

I guess some people are drawn to participate in the photography flame
wars. Others watch bashing and blazing like spectators at the
Colosseum. And still others find it very tiresome indeed.

Very well said.

--
http://www.pbase.com/soenda

 

[The Davinator]

Nothing is more fun than watching the few film haters respond to my posts only to have it go unread.

Drives them crazy that some people choose to you both film and digital.....and that for some things we like the look of film. The other difference is that one of us sells our prints.....while the Black Knights have nothing to show us but for attacks and insults.

Funny eh?