Are you biased towards a certain brand, and why?

I had a particular look I was after and that did influence my choice of film but I was not that brand loyal. When I went digital, I wanted to continue with that look and went with what was the closest to what I preferred. I also had a bit of a bias toward smaller cameras and that also came into play.

--So far, I am very pleased with my choices for DSLR but am always looking at the latest stuff as it is announced.
Variance is Evil!

happypoppeye said:

As far as the investing thing goes, I know what your saying, but I don't invest in cameras or lenses. I don't buy lenses for the value they will have ten years down the road. I buy equipment to use ...now. I know your talking more than monetary value here also, but that word drives me crazy when talking about camera gear. I use Nikon because I like Nikon, but if someone else came out with something that is just lightyears above Nikon than I would switch in a second. Don't really get the Nikon, Canon, all the rest kind of fighting either... I use Nikon but thats it, doesn't mean any other system is any lesser.

Click to expand...

So is this to say that if you were to have "spent" thousands of dollars on Nikon gear and it was working for you, but then someone came-out with something that looked better, you'd buy it? I'm sure you must have more money than I do.

Greg

camillako said:

but all major manufacturers make GOOD and EXCELLENT CAMERAS

Click to expand...

I dislike Sony for that juicy rootkit story.
I own a couple of Sony stuff, but I will try to avoid it in the future.

--
Iván József Balázs
(Hungary)

Smena8M, Zenit SLR, Kodak PS, Nikon PS, Canon PS, Olympus PS, Minolta Maxxum SLR, Olympus digitall PS, back to Konica Minolta DSLR. Last one got me stuck for 5 years getting burried under Minolta A lenses. Lenses will stay, I'll get Sony FF camera soon.
---
http://www.stan-pustylnik.smugmug.com

Hello Ralph.........it's been a while.

Briefly, I now shoot Canons for the compact line and Nikon for my DSLRs. 10 years ago it was reversed.....

My first digital was the CP800 since I've been happy using Nikon film SLRs but shortly after I researched a little more and chose Canon, and a few years later I decided on a Canon DSLR since the compact was great.

After having Canon QC issues with a 40D and a couple of L lenses I went to the D300 and comparable Nikkor pro glass without any issues and tack sharp results.

I feel that either of their lens systems and bodies offer more options than any other competitor........I've been spoiled by fast glass......
--
Regards,
Hank

Absolutely not - wouldn't even think of buying anything that "looked" better - looked being the word there. I'm not one to chase gear and I'm just about the opposite of a gearhead - I buy after the product is tried and proved to be true.

If something comes out and proves to be an advancement in new technology somehow that the competition cannot copy or won't mirror for quite a while, and provides some sort of addition to the quality of picture or something like that, than yes, I would go with them. Will this happen ...probably not. ...and I can almost guarantee that I have less money than you, cause I ain't got none!!!

Playsinthedirt said:

happypoppeye said:

As far as the investing thing goes, I know what your saying, but I don't invest in cameras or lenses. I don't buy lenses for the value they will have ten years down the road. I buy equipment to use ...now. I know your talking more than monetary value here also, but that word drives me crazy when talking about camera gear. I use Nikon because I like Nikon, but if someone else came out with something that is just lightyears above Nikon than I would switch in a second. Don't really get the Nikon, Canon, all the rest kind of fighting either... I use Nikon but thats it, doesn't mean any other system is any lesser.

Click to expand...

So is this to say that if you were to have "spent" thousands of dollars on Nikon gear and it was working for you, but then someone came-out with something that looked better, you'd buy it? I'm sure you must have more money than I do.

Greg

Click to expand...

--
http://www.OneFrameStudios.com
http://www.pbase.com/happypoppeye

I prefer Nikon and Leica digital camera bodies, and lenses, period; and, doubt I'll ever purchase any other brand, as long as these two companies continue to meet my needs.

--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

Ralph46 said:

Hi all,

I guess this is neutral territory away from the brand-related forums, where people often argue emotionally for "their" brand. I suppose most of us have a most favoured brand or, indeed, one which we particularly dislike.

But why is this? Very few of us will be employees or shareholders of a camera company. So why do we prefer one brand to another (even though we may be rational enough to not always buy this brand)?

Come on and admit to your preference and also tell us how this preference came about. Possibly some interesting stories out there.

My story is straight forward. I have bought only Canon cameras, compacts and SLRs, since 1979. That is the year I moved to the outskirts of Krefeld, northwestern Germany. The German Canon headquarters with repair lab are 20 minutes drive away. Any quirk there is on any equipment and I can drop it off there. I can talk to the guy who will be working on my stuff and I have sometimes been able to take it back with me fixed up after a few minutes.

And I am happy. I find Canon is certainly the best choice for the demanding compacts I have used exclusively for the last few years (S and G series). Now I have reverted to a DSLR again. Nikon probably have the better budget priced standard zooms at the moment, but they are geographically further away, so my DSLR is - - -a Canon.

Cheers, Ralph
--

• -Better a small camera in the pocket than a big one on the shelf --

Click to expand...

I totally agree with you; and, this is quite easy to accomplish (IMO), provided one has chosen the right kinds/brand of lenses suitable for ones needs/interests and next the "digital rot" camera body, to begin with. With me, I started out in determining primarily the type of lenses, I prefer based on my needs/interests/preferences, as with most things I tend to purchase for the long haul --- and, regardless of the Brand/Company, this is still pretty much the system I would follow, in determining a brand I am going to invest in for my needs.

--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

BDW_12 said:

I've invested time and money in a system and so far that system is working for me. Not sure I'd call is a bias.
--
--Bruce

Click to expand...

What you are labeling "bias" is simply a preference.

And we all have preferences based on our past experiences with products. And this applies to everything, not just cameras.

A "bias" implies an irrational preference, based on something emotional rather than logical. Some of us prefer driving Toyotas, others might prefer Fords. Some like Apple computers, some prefer PCs. Some people prefer a type of wine that others might not fancy.

When it comes to cameras, I doubt ANYONE selects a brand and spends lots of money on it out of some irrational prejudice. Normally, they have had a prior experience with that brand and liked it, or they just prefer the feature set, the quality or the prices. Or maybe they bought the brand because their brother owns it, and they can share lenses?

All of the above are RATIONAL reasons, so they become "preferences" and not "bias."

I think good photographers are the LEAST sentimental about their gear. You see them constantly switching brands when something better comes along. On each forum you will find some brand user bashing his own brand.

The "investment" factor comes later, after you have made the brand decision. For example, my first DSLR was an Olympus E510 with two kit lenses. Total cost $550. I intentionally spent very little because I wasn't sure if I liked the system. I wanted the "investment" to be something small that I could walk away from if it didn't suit me.

Howver, after two years of using that brand, I discovered it was perfect for me. There were so many things about it I liked that I then made the next step. I committed to the brand by buying an E30 and a few fairly expensive lenses. Now, I have $2500 "invested" and I'm financially committed. Now, it isn't so easy or painless to switch.

I think the "bias" part comes after the fact. After selecting a brand for good and loigical reasons, some folks feel the need to bash all other brands. And that is irrational. That is real bias.

The simple fact is every brand has strenghts and weaknesses, and one size doesn't fit all. since we are all different people. But every brand is capable of high quality results, so the brand bashing is completely silly.
--
Marty
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132/show/
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/marty4650/sets/72157606210120132
Olympus E-30
Zuiko 9-18mm
Zuiko 14-54mm II
Zuiko 40-150mm I
Zuiko 70-300mm
Zuiko 50mm f/2.0 macro

I used to shoot with a Nikon N70 SLR (only one lens though). Then I purchased one of the first Nikon Coolpix cameras and I was hooked on digital. When time came to upgrade to a DSLR I started by looking at Nikon but found that the (then) new image stabilized lenses were much cheaper from Canon than Nikon, so I jumped ship to Canon. I've never regretted the move.

Since then my casual observance is that Canon offers a more interesting selection of lenses, e.g. I own the MP-E65mm super macro, and the new tilt/shift TS-E17mm lens. Also, Canon seems dedicated to full-frame DSLRs and it feels that Nikon is joining in only out of market pressure. In reality though, either Canon or Nikon would be a great choice.

Another thing I've noticed over the years is that image processing software tends to support these two lines first and it often takes a long time (if ever) for some other lines to be supported. (This would be a non-issue if manufacturers agreed on a RAW file format standard; sorry, Adobe's DNG isn't widely adopted (yet).)

--

As for Sony, they make good hardware but they don't respect their customers. Sony was caught perposely infecting music CDs they manufactured with a "rootkit" (google it) (court cases still pending). There was another similar incident in the last year, but I can't recall what that was right now. I won't buy anything from Sony.

--
A pixel is a terrible thing to waste.

dang I don't know where to start. Ok my preferences for digital not necessarily in order. Leica M, Nikon d3 but I owned mostly canon digital slrs and just sold my 5d yesterday. no more canon for a while and probably no Nikon d3whatever for a wile. Why to big to heavy. Hey I am old I don't need to carry so much its no fun.

Over the years I have been partial to Canon f1 first version, Olympus OM1 had a bunch of these over the years. Best reflex finder on a camera to my eyes. Nikon F big heavy did I say heave?. Minolta srt 100 my second favorite reflex finder. Now that was a nice camera. OM4,4t had the 4t longer than any camera I have ever owned. Contax g2 nah nice effort but not there for me anyway I had the Leica M at the same time so I sold the contax. The formula one racing Fuji 645 S complete with roll bar my favorite all time mf camera. A few super ikonta b cameras. Retina 2c and 3c cameras a bunch of these fabulous lens. Let me think nikon sp which I didn't like dang I was only 17 what did I know I wanted my brothers Leica lllf rdst so we traded. Mamayaflex one of the first in the country that got lost somewhere. My all time favorite p and s film camera is the NIkon 35ti.

The one camera I keep comming back to is the Leica M, maybe I am a marquee snob but I really like them mostly cus I have used them so many years its a bit like an old friend and because they are not so big but still can deliver stellar image quality. So now I am waiting for an M9 but I somehow doubt this will be my last camera. Sigh so many cameras so little time.
--
bosjohn aka John Shick [email protected]

It's more preference than bias. The 5D has been out for some time and there was lots of noise about 5DII. I waited to see what Canon has to offer. There I was 28yr Nikon F/F2A "loyalist". While I was sitting on the fence, Nikon came out with D700 - the small brother of D3. The D700 had more than I bargained for and 5DII suddenly slid into proverbial black hole. Canon failed to crank the fps higher, etc, etc. Having (already) Nikon lenses didn't slow me down for a moment to go after Canon gear. I was looking for quality+ and I found that in D700. I'm also well aware that it's not a perfect camera.

Leswick

Nikon and Olympus for SLRs and Canon and Ricoh for compacts.

My bias is for lenses that fit my bodies, and vica versa. Fairly simple. And I prefer a larger company for more choices. Most of us are sorta stuck, happy or not, with what we've spent bucks on for a decade or more. After that we spend time defending our brand.

I'm biased towards the brand I'm using at the moment. I mean, naturally you choose a specific piece of equipment based on what you think is the best at the time, but in light of many factors such as the overall system, future proofing etc.

You're also likely to spend more time understanding and exploring the system so when someone asks for a recommendation, you're more likely able to give an informed opinion on that system, and not others.

But I don't really carry that bias to other products with the same brand name except for possibly with regards to customer service. Customer service policies tend to run company wide so experience with one product should be a good indicator for others.

But after a period of time and when there's a new generation of technology, all bets are off. There'll be little residual bias/loyalty and I'll likely reassess the market situation from scratch at that point, but giving consideration to the pros of any existing equipment I own.

Ralph46 said:

But why is this? Very few of us will be employees or shareholders of a camera company. So why do we prefer one brand to another (even though we may be rational enough to not always buy this brand)?

Come on and admit to your preference and also tell us how this preference came about. Possibly some interesting stories out there.

Click to expand...

I'm stuck with Canon because of glass investment.
I'd go Nikon in an instant too, but the 7D brought me back some hope
after reading the reviews. I look at it as whatever gets it done without
being shafted for bucks versus a tribal company thing that I don't own
stock in.

Like you I have been using Canon cameras since 1981. They have served me well and I have enjoyed using the cameras. Am I a fanboy, I don't know, but I don't feel the need to upgrade my cameras that often so what I have meets my needs. I have recommended people buy just about every brand depending on their need. I personally think Olympus and Panasonic SLR and micro 4/3rds cameras are great and have recommended them to several people. I have good friends who shoot Nikon cameras, we don't sit around and argue who has the best camera, we go out and shoot together and discuss photography - not gear.

The problem really comes do to many people being very insecure and thus they have to defend every purchase. They are so worried they made the wrong decision they have to trash everyone else who found a reason to buy something different from their choice. Often their main argument is that the some uses a brand just because it is popular or looks good or some other strange reason.

This debate is not limited to cameras, go look at message boards discussing smart phones. These discussions make the camera wars seem pretty tame. I still say it just comes down to people have way too much insecurity and to protect their ego they lash out. I have seen violent on-line debates about the best minivan to buy. Sorry if you are arguing about minivans you have way too much time on your hands.

One last problem that intensifies the problem is the huge increase in viral marketing. You really don't know if the person talking trash really feels this way of if they are being compensated for going onto message boards to trash certain brands.

They way I sort it out is like the old judging method - drop the highest and lowest scores. For me if someone is way too positive and fanboyish I just ignore their posts, the same is true for those who talk trash on other brands. I will say both are good for a big laugh - what is funny is I think most are laughing at them when they actually think people take them seriously.

Ed

I think it is natural to end up biased to the brand you shoot for a long time, especially if you started on that brand.

Photography is doing and learning, and I think you are more likely to develop an interest in that which your camera is good at. People who buy Pentax soon discover that they can easily use old K-mount glass, so they buy some and like it. They have now turned into photographers who like easily using old MF glass, and for that Pentax is great, so now Pentax will be seen as the superior brand.

The more you use a system the more you know about the ergonomics, the lens selection, the quirks and how to work around them. Combined with having your shooting and gear choices influenced by your current system, your own brand just looks best

--
My Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36164047@N06/

happypoppeye said:

As far as the investing thing goes, I know what your saying, but I don't invest in cameras or lenses. I don't buy lenses for the value they will have ten years down the road. I buy equipment to use ...now.

Click to expand...

Not that kind of investment. I'm talking about investing in the continuing use of a system over an extended period of time rather than skipping between whichever companys brings the "latest widget" to market.

Because of the Minolta glass that I've been collecting since the mid-80's:



No regrets whatsoever.