Are you biased towards a certain brand, and why?

I started with Canon and just didn't get the quality of picture I was looking for. I switched to Nikon and am getting results I could never imagine from Canon.

In the SLR/DSLR world, I’ve used Canon equipment for many, many years, not because I think Canon is “better” or “worse” than Nikon or any other brand, but because I have so many Canon lenses and related stuff, it would cost me a fortune to change brands.

Besides, it seems like Canon and Nikon leapfrog each other – at any given moment one is the most advanced, the best, etc – then the other one jumps ahead for a while. To try to keep up with that would be crazy at every level. When a significantly more advanced Canon body comes out, I buy it. When a new Canon lens appears that fulfills a need, I buy it and add it to the "collection". In each case thereby deepening my defacto committment to the brand.

Since my primary photographic subject is bird dogs in action hunting upland birds in wilderness places, I do much more of my shooting with a P&S than the far better, but much too heavy, delicate and clumsy DSRL system. I change P&S brands willy-nilly in an effort to get the best field camera I can find. I’ve been using a Leica DL4 for the past year or so, but am considering moving to a GF1 to get interchangeable lenses and a bigger sensor.

Dave_Anderson said:

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



No regrets whatsoever.

Click to expand...

if I may go a little bit off topic..
what is that white flash and camera combo?

I did not know Minolta came out with such a model..
interesting

--
http://www.johnparas11.zenfolio.com

I was originally a Pentax shooter, but after a while I decided that I wanted to try and start shooting for some money. I took a long, hard look at Pentax and came to the conclusion that they were not the company for what I wanted. I ended up starting over with older manual and film equipment and enjoyed the fact that Nikon's manual equipment would work on more modern AF bodies just like Pentax. I would have gone Canon, but the lost me by not having a back and fourth compatibility with their older manual equipment. So I jumped into Nikon. I eventually moved on to digital, and actually considered going to Pentax, but the *ist D was merely a lobotomized AA powered version of the D100, so I stuck with Nikon and got a D70. I still have a FM2N and N80 and enjoy the fact that almost all of my lenses can be swapped back and fourth between them. When the SB800 hit the market I was completely sold. The capability of their flash system has kept me loyal since. I now have a D300 and am waiting for the D700 replacement before I sell off my D80 and buy it.

I do have Canon equipment in my studio and have shot extensively with different bodies and configurations of speed lights and lenses, but just never found the system satisfactory. They were at one point the best for noise reduction, but honestly that was it. I could never fall in love with the ergonomics of the system, and felt what they had in advantage with NR and lens selection was completely lost in function. All of this, of course, is just my opinion and others' mileage may vary.
--
Wow...that's a pretty killer camera! Are you any good?

-Jake-

johnparas11zenfoliodotcom said:

Dave_Anderson said:

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

http://dave-anderson-photo.com/photos/609218594_RRjde-L.jpg

No regrets whatsoever.

Click to expand...

if I may go a little bit off topic..
what is that white flash and camera combo?

I did not know Minolta came out with such a model..
interesting

Click to expand...

See section 2.2.1 here: http://www.jwhubbers.nl/mug/af-bodies.html It was sold to commemorate this:



It didn't come with the white lens when I bought it though...

/hijack

I started taking photos with a Canon AF-1, then dropped photography for a bit and then started shooting with a Sony high-end P&S, and bought the tiny T-7 for fun. My brother then bought another high end p&s Sony and that prompted me to buy an a300. I now have a Sony a850 + 24-70 Zeiss and plan to build upon it. My major factor for me was ergonomics...I am of the belief that the photographer makes the photograph, not the camera. I'm also a "click at the right moment" shooter rather than a fast fps shooter (never used it on my a300, ever). The Sony 300 fit great in my hand and I would say that the Nikon d700 felt good, but I now need high MP for the size prints I produce so the a850 was perfect both for my hands and needs. Honestly, I HATE the Canon's bubbly feel and I dislike the rotary dial on the back.

I'm sure they all produce great images and I'm not a pixel peeper, so Sony just fit best for my needs.

--
mandmp; Pro for 40 years and still making money.
100% of my income is due to a camera for the last 37 years.

I never stick to a brand. I always go with what's best for my needs after taking everything into consideration. At the moment, I've got two Canon compacts, a Nikon D700 and a Sony R1.

I sometimes have the urge to buy more things from a brand I'm particularly fond of and I have that OCD desire sometimes to choose just one brand, but it's not logical. I think that's just a psychological desire to simplify things. Canon good, Nikon bad is much easier for your mind to compute than the real complexity of the issue.

I've got a limited budget and high demands, so I have to be logical about the cameras I buy and make a rational decision about which camera is best for the job.

All of my cameras have a specific purpose and were chosen based on specs, performance, usability and image quality. There's no one brand that is the master of everything.

May the company that makes the best cameras, make the most money whoever that ends up being.
--

Tony

Hi Hank,

nice to cross your path again too. Together of course with all the other nice folks who are kind enough to contribute to this thread.

Thanks to you all,

Ralph
--

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

Marty4650 said:

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

Click to expand...

Hi Marty,

Thanks to you and all others for your answers. I did mean the term "bias" exactly in the way that you defined it, i.e. (if I understand you correctly) to mean an irrational preference.

The rational preferance is quite easy to explain. You will find this most often among (D)SLR owners, who have built up a system of lenses and other accessories for a certain brand. Perfectly understandable.

During the last few years I have not owned or used a DSLR but abandoned it (size and weight) for Canon compacts (Canon for the reason in my OP). It is thus in the compact forums that I have found the "bias" for certain brands that interests me. For a compact user it is no great deal to change brands for the next camera. Still you get very emotional reactions of approval or rejection which are sometimes hard to understand from a purely rational point of view.

It is the unknown reasons for this that interest me and motivated my post.

Cheers, Ralph

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

My first real camera was a used Rolliecord. Since then I have owned and used:

Mamiya C3
Minolta Autocord
Canon rangefinder (Leica clone)
Pentax Spotmatic
Nikon F Photomic
Nicon F2 Photomic
Minolta Maxxum 9000
Sony Alpha a100 (2)

I'm sure there are others in the mix that I have forgotten. I bought my first Alpha because it was the first 10MB DSLR available for less than US$1000. The bonus was that I could use my Maxxum lenses.

If there was a good reason to switch I would, but I have very few complaints about the Alpha.

I still own two Acorn Risc PCs - since the days when the current MS OS was DOS 3, which made you totally dependant on being able to handle command line files, like AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS.

Even then, the RiscPCs had a GUI that you did not see on an IBM comaptible platform until Windows 95. Knowing where all your files were was a job done by the OS, and not the user's responsibility.

The catch was - Acorn machines were aimed at the British educational sector, and the commercial sector went for MS simply because Acorn did not want to know about it. Hence the Riscos software base was limited.

Only two makes of camera were supported - Canon and Olympus.

I settled for Olympus, which latched me into their SmartMedia, then their 10x zooms and their xD cards.

Some of the models I had (C-1400L, C-2500L, C/D-40ZOOM) eat batteries, but the models I now own and use (Stylus 800, SP-570UZ, Stylus 7020) last for 3 Gigs worth of taking and downloading movies.

As to noise, the SP-570UZ is the cleanest of all of them, but 800ISO shots from the Stylus 7020 are still salvageable with 'NeatImage'.

Henry

--



Henry Falkner - SP-570UZ, Stylus 7020, Stylus 800
http://www.pbase.com/hfalkner

1. Better lens selection at lower prices

2. Better ergonomics of both camera controls and menu systems (except burying MLU deep in custom functions; it's not a "custom" function, it's a feature)

3. Better software, with more frequent upgrades

As the OP for this thread I thank all of you who have contributed your answer. I am happy that there are so many and each one is interesting. My cameras have almost always been a part of my life and I see that other people feel that way too.

So far the reasons given here for brand preferences have been largely rational, which is sensible and understandable. For the owner of substantial DSLR equipment from one manufacturer it will be perfectly clear that he will stick to this company as long as tolerable.

For the owners of compacts, on the other hand, it should be rationally unimportant where your new camera comes from. Other than perhaps unusual memory cards (today no longer an issue) there is normally nothing to stop you changing. But look into the forums for these compacts and you will see wild and emotional exchanges and "fanboy" (terrible term) and "troll" accusations being thrown around like crazy - and these can be the mildest expressions. Nothing against this - it adds to the entertainment value.

But it does leed me to believe that there must be unusually strong feelings for many associated with a brand and these will not be "preferences" (rational) but "biases" (partly irrational).

So I am still interested for people who will come forward and say openly "I am irrationally biased towards company XX and this is because.....

Cheers, Ralph

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

My dad bought me my 1st good camera when I was 13 in 1957 it was a Kodak Retina IIIC. It was a wonderful little rangefinder camera. I still have it and it is in working condition.

Next when I graduated from graduate school, in 1967, I bought a Pentax Spotamatic camera with a 50mm Takumar lens that was razor sharp. It was an excellent camera and very comfortable to use. I still have this camera in working condition. I also bought a Pentax 645 which took fabulous pictures. I still have it but it is like carrying a brick or two around all day.

I always wanted a Nikon. I bought a Nikon FM in the early 70s. It was fair. Actually my Pentax was a much better camera. I traded it in on a Nikon 8008. This was the worst piece of crap camera that I ever owned. It was supposedly auto focus. This cured me of wanting a Nikon ever again. I put an ad in the paper and sold it. Because it was a Nikon, it was very easy to sell.

I then bought a Canon A2E 35mm. I still have it and it was a great camera. Since then I have been a Canon fan. Canon Digital Rebel, G-1, G-3, G-7, G-10., 20D, and 40D and a great deal of Canon Glass.

Last year, on the Dpreview reviews, I noticed that the Panasonic Cameras were always getting very good reviews. I started paying attention to their new models and finally took the plunge and bought the GF1. It is just a wonderful camera. It is easy to carry with sling strap. It is inconspicuous. It has very very good IQ. Since buying this camera, I just have not used my 40D once and I gave the G-10 to my son. The only problem that Pany seems to have is getting their cameras to market. They are not readily available. It is like I am a 13 year old boy again with my little rangefinder Retina IIIC. I love photography, I love camera equipment, I love my new GF1, and I love Panasonic.

Brand doesnt bother me, i have owned (or do own) 5 different digi cameras, from 5 different brands

Kodak DC3200
Olympus C760UZ
Sony DSC S60
Fuji S9500Z
Canon EOS 1000D

All have stregnths and weaknesses, but the brand is not going to make my decision for what i buy
--
MattyJ
Canon EOS 1000D - 18-55mm - 75-300mm
http://www.pbase.com/mattyjsmith

I am not really biased, I think, but I do appreciate a camera that has a nice feel to it. I like objects and tools that are well put together, engineered well. I guess that is why I still haven't found anything to surpass my 1961 vintage Rolleiflex 3.5F. In the digital world I prefer my outdated Lumix L1, it has a feel to it that no Canon or Nikon has. I am sure the Canon and Nikon can outperform it, but I like to hold and use objects that have a certain quality feel to them.
--
Oll an gwella,
Jim

Ralph46 said:

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 am biased toward Pentax because my first SLR was a Pentax H2, bought in 1962. Wonderful camera that I still love, I think was best of breed back then.

• I am biased toward Fuji, because early on they put the relatively larger sensors in P&Ss giving great low light performance in a small package.

• I am biased toward Nikon because of their wonderful line of DSLRs and lenses.

• I am biased toward Canon as my first DSLR was the 20D, again best of breed in the amateur line when it was announced. I am now firmly in the Canon camp with two DSLRs and six Canon lenses. Unless something drastic changes I'm in the Canon system for the foreseeable future.

--
Don
http://www.pbase.com/dond

I did own an Oly for travel but now it's just Nikon.

Ralph46 wrote:

Photographers (amateur and pro's) tend to be very biased and prefer the very brand they are using, just like audiophiles, car-lovers etc. etc.

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)?

Click to expand...

Most of this comes from the need to justify the expense of sometimes thousands of dollars/euros without any clear pay-off. Once we spend the money, we need to defend our decision to do so in front of our spouses, friends and fellow forum members.

It is the same mechanism that prompts users of a specific kind of software to justify its purchase although they might never use even 5% of its functionality. (99% of the people on these forums are hard-pressed to get the most out of PSE, but some purchase PS just to show they are "serious"). Even those that purchased a certain kind of software (PSE, PSP, Bibble, LR etc.) sometimes confess they use Picasa or the software that came with their camera. There is no justification to buy something because everybody else does so.

Let's just face it: hobbies are expensive. Anglers spend thousands of dollars on carbon-fibre rods with space-age technology, music lovers will buy tube amplifiers and video lovers buy blue-ray players and 20 channel surround processors. Sometimes we (yes, I'd include myself) end up overspending just a little bit or wanting to show that we have the latest and the greatest - feeling just that little bit guilty over what might essentially be considered an unnecessary purchase, we need to defend our decision.

Ralph46 said:

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 actually bought into a Pentax DSLR (K110D) at first because I still had some 70-ies K-mount lenses lying around in the attic (50mm/F1.7, 135mm/F2.8). Once bitten by the bug I had purchased a Sigma 24-135mm and a Pentax DA16-45mm and it was too hard to justify a switch so I ended up with the very capable though not perfect K20D.

Eventually, even though at any moment in time on brand may have slightly better contenders than another, technology has the effect of evening the odds, over time. We've gotten used to the fact that it is hard to find a really bad car anymore, or a really nasty LCD TV. In all honesty, I'd be equally happy with a Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony or other camera. Some may be marginally better than others in a comparable price bracket - for a while, until next year's model is released and manufacturer A leapfrogs its competitor, only to be bettered again next year.

I am happy with my K20D, but I am aware other people may prefer other brands. H@ll, there may very well be better brands out there but I too have to defend my expenditure to my spouse and the rest of the world so I'll say Pentax is the best brand out there ;-)

On a serious note: use your camera to its fullest extent, learn everything it has to offer. Eventually the limiting factor will be you yourself, the photographer. There always happens to be a better mousetrap but you may very well not need it if the mice you are catching today are suitable and taste well!

Mike

--
http://www.flickr.com/newmikey
http://www.pbase.com/newmikey