Staying on Brand ???

Another m43 thread here got me thinking about Brand loyalty (em1x in the wild).

My closest photography chums who I shoot with most regularly have generally all used the same brands ever since I have known them. ... Yet they are all different: canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony. (However two had recently switched away from canon when I first met them - to Sony and fuji)

But not me...I  have always tried to use the tool that is best for me. My initial digitals were - back in the vey early days - were Fuji's (compacts), Minolta A2 (bridge), Sony A100 (DSLR), Panasonic G1 (1st m43 mirrorless), Sony A77 (translucent mirror), Panasonic gx7, gx8, then finally Olympus em1-mk2.

Now I only list them to show that I am obviously not brand loyal. And was prepared to switch as leaps in technology or useful features arrived.

Most people will I note moan about what their brand is lacking or not providing and yet still continue to stick with it.

However I have now reached that fortunate stage where I can jump between Olympus and Panasonic at will without having to reinvest in lenses ... And certainly will do when significant improvements arrive !

But mostly people seem to develop an 'affection' for whatever they buy, cars, clothing, electronics, etc, and of course cameras

If that is definitely the case with human nature, then obviously all brands need that loss leader bargain cheap camera to 'lock' people in initially, otherwise surely the manufacturer will fail?

So although I fully appreciate that high end is the only way for profit - and happily is where I can now consume, brands still have to lure/temp potential users in the first place.

Are you brand loyal or a potential switcher?

I've always thought brand loyalty is for suckers but I have been a Panasonic user for many years now just because of camera natural progression.  My investment has reached a point where I really have little alternative other than Olympus and I would add an EM1-III to my collection now if I could justify the spend.  Cameras aside I have no brand loyalty for anything other than Flower Pots Beer.

Brands doesn't come into it and because of a word you used, "tool". Exactly what it is. I love all formats and brands. Fairly lucky that my lenses don't care what I mount them on and no native m4/3 lenses, so what's not to like

Don't really see where one is better than the other, just different. In some areas I shoot, m4/3 is better than FF and in others, FF is better than m4/3 all using the same lenses.

All the best Adrian and brand loyalty or format loyalty, never.

Danny.

I've been an Olympus shooter for a long time.  No idea how the Panasonic, Sigma, Samyang, Tamron, Sony, Voigtlaender, Nissin and Zeiss stuff got there.

Andrew

History: Nikon compact > Sony bridge > Panasonic system. Switching systems comes with a high threshold for me. Buying a new system and selling the old one would cost money and I am old so reluctant to waste time on learning the ways of another brand.

If my €-situation develops favourably, I might complement with FF. It just so happens that the Panasonic S5 has what I want at a cost I could imagine I might be able to afford some day. But if I can't I might consider the Canon RP. Or forget about FF.

i used Olympus for a number of years then switched to Nikon, it just worked better, they aren't everyone's cuppa tea but for me i just find the stuff works and very well, dipped my toe with a panansonic or two, didn't really grab me then i got a 2nd hand Fuji which i think is great, not tempted to switch or even buy anything new, i simply don't do enough photography these days to justify it

When I was in high school, I was on the photo staff for the school newspaper and year book.  I used a Minolta film camera(remember those?).  I can still smell the D76:-| That camera was stolen after years of use.  I then got a Canon film camera.  It broke and with the digital age at hand, I bought a Canon 400D(XTi), which I still have.  I wanted something that could also shoot video.  The logical thing for me to do would have been to stick with Canon.  But, I wanted something smaller, so went with Panasonic.  I have now had Panasonic for a few years.  I'm too lazy to switch.  In reality, the thought of selling cameras and lenses seem to be a headache that I can do without.  I might add a FF, but time will tell.

I'm definitely not brand loyal. I've switched completely a few times and dabbled in other systems.

At the moment, for the photography I'm doing, and the amount of weight/bulk I'm happy to carry, Panasonic m4/3 still seems like the best compromise.

That doesn't mean that I'm content with the system. Switching to Sony for superior AF and image quality is very tempting, but the larger telephoto/macro lenses and lack of focus bracketing have put me off for now.

Brand images can inspire emotional responses, and I freely admit my fondness for what was formerly Olympus. I'm not certain that makes me a sucker.

My first 35mm camera was a Konica 35mm compact rangefinder my parents bought me for graduation or something. When I decided I wanted something better, I bought a Canon AE-1 Program. Never bought a lens for it, didn't shoot with it as much as I did that old Konica. Later had a Canon "Snappy 50" for carrying about on shore leave.

When digital arrived, I was more interested from the technology end than the photography part. I started out with a Kodak DC210, followed by a DX6490, then a P820, P880 and finally a P712. There was a Canon Powershot A70 in there briefly, before it got the dreaded stuck lens error. I bought all of them new, but near the end of their market period when they were marked down. Digital was expensive.

I enjoyed shooting the Kodaks a great deal, but wanted something more capable, something with interchangeable lenses. Did my homework online, and the Olympus E-520 seemed to represent the best value in terms of features, if not "capability" in terms of sensor performance. I figured no matter how bad it was, it was going to be a lot better than the tiny Kodak sensors I was used to.

And it was. And I loved that E-520. The first lens I bought for it, it came with the 14-42 and 40-150 kit lenses, was the 70-300mm zoom. Then I wanted a "serious" lens, and I bought the 14-54mm/f2.8-3.5. Some friends liked what I did with it, thought I had a "good" camera and asked me to shoot their wedding for them. I did. You get what you pay for, but they seemed pleased. I realized I'd need a flash for a wedding, so I bought the FL-50R. As I recall at the time, it cost more than the camera.

I enjoyed shooting that wedding, scary as it was, and so I wanted a more capable camera. Naturally, the investment in lenses (and flash) made me look at Olympus, and the E-30 was not long out, so I bought that (flippy screen and all), and I think I was pretty much in camera heaven at that point. Shot a couple more weddings and saved a third. Bought more lenses, the 50-200mm/f2.8-3.5 being the most expensive and had a ball, walking my Golden Retriever around the condo property, shooting wading birds, sunrises, sunsets, lizards, roses, spiders, parties.

Micro four thirds arrived about the same time as I got the E-30. Pricey. Did make me want something small. I knew Olympus. I had Olympus lenses. I understood the menu system, I understood how the camera worked. I bought a used E-410 and the 25mm/f2.8 pancake. Went with me when I travelled for work or home.

Kept watching the E-PL series, but it was the E-PM1 as a refurb that made me take a chance. Kit lens, but bought the Lumix 20mm/f1.7 for size and brightness. Shot the outdoor night reception with that at the second wedding, which I'd shot with the E-30.

By now I have a fair amount of money invested in lenses, and more in terms of time and experience in how the camera works. When Olympus released the E-M5, I read the reviews and was impressed. I was making the most money I'd ever made in my working life and kept looking at the E-5 versus the E-M5. In October 2012, I bought the E-M5, the grip and battery holder and a factory demo 14-150mm/f4-5.6.

I retired in May 2013. I watched the Olympus DSLR forum and read the speculation about what the E-6 would offer, but it was not to be. I pre-ordered the E-M1 in September 2013, based on my experience with the E-M5 and to preserve my investment in 43s lenses.

Since then, I've sold all my four thirds bodies and lenses, bought back another 25mm/f2.8 and adapter, and have been fortunate enough to buy many other Oly bodies as used or refurbs, while buying the PEN-F, E-M1 Mk2, E-M1x and E-M1Mk3 as new. Somewhere in there I bought a Lumix GM1. I could never figure out the menu system and I didn't like the jpegs. It was small though. Sold it.

I'd say it's the investment in understanding the camera, and the satisfaction with how it performs, that really makes the commitment for me; although the lenses and other bits of kit are compelling as well. And with each new body, or each new software update in the case of the E-M1, there were a lot of new things to learn, and there still are. I don't feel I've mastered any of the E-M1s in the way I felt I had with the E-520/E-30. Not sure I ever will, but it's fun to explore features I haven't really figured out yet. I bought the E-M1x just because I thought it was probably going to be the last, best body ever made by Olympus the camera company, and I wanted to own it.

It was just pure GAS that made me buy the E-M1 Mk3. Having Live ND in a smaller body than the E-M1x would be fun hiking the gorges in the Finger Lakes, though I usually seemed to get away with a small aperture/low ISO. But hey, Starry focus!

I'm pleased and satisfied with what Olympus, now OMDS, offers. I've bought a couple of Fuji compacts to try and get a feel for what that's about. Hard to adapt to, never felt they offered anything the Oly compacts couldn't offer. So although I confess to being somewhat Fuji-curious, not enough to make the investment in time and money to find out.

Olympus the camera maker is no more, and it seems like parts of this forum are a dead pool for OMDS. Not sure where that leaves "the brand." For me, I have the cameras. I expect they'll work probably as long as I'll be able to reasonably hold them. Still plenty of pictures to take, and a lot more to learn.

I have no reason to look elsewhere.

Adrian Harris wrote:

Are you brand loyal or a potential switcher?

I'm fairly brand loyal until I switch. The Pen-F is my second Olympus (had an XA years ago). However we now have three Oly bodies and a bag full of lenses. The next body need not be an Olympus.

Brand loyalist, due to familiarity, results, confidence.  Same as with Ford cars and CZ pistols, I tend to stick with Olympus camera gear, even for video.  Dell for computers, Z-grip Max pens, Dreyer for ice cream.

Got to the point with me that I can't be bothered to change brands. Also not sure which one I would go for, probably Sony, but what I've got does me.

Only real reason I would have to switch would be for changes sake, so Olympus and Panasonic it is for the foreseeable future.

I think we all tend to be brand loyal for convenience - most of us don't like to learn a new system once we FINALLY get one figured out.

That said, I think the fatter the wallet, the more choice.

That said, in my opinion, sometimes more choice makes us less skilled photographers - rather than really work and stretch the capabilities of a single system, we buy, buy, buy rather than solve, solve, solve.

Do notice I said we - us. All of the pros I have interacted with have less gear, not more.

Seems to me that less gear can lead to more skill. What am I going to get rid of next . . .

WileEC_ID wrote:

I think we all tend to be brand loyal for convenience - most of us don't like to learn a new system once we FINALLY get one figured out.

That said, I think the fatter the wallet, the more choice.

That said, in my opinion, sometimes more choice makes us less skilled photographers - rather than really work and stretch the capabilities of a single system, we buy, buy, buy rather than solve, solve, solve.

Do notice I said we - us. All of the pros I have interacted with have less gear, not more.

Seems to me that less gear can lead to more skill. What am I going to get rid of next . . .

It should be easy for you - you have been a photographer for a long time, although maybe your needs are changing.

Some of us are still learning how to take the images we want (based on any equipment), we are maybe thinking about taking different kinds of pictures and manufacturers are producing new equipment that has more features and better performance.

I've discovered that my cycle of equipment upgrades is getting longer, from 18 months to maybe 48 months.  I'm also increasingly buying used and selling as well as buying.

I understand the discipline of shooting with gear with limited capabilities but I feel that I need all the help I can get.  I'm not persuaded that a phone is all I need.

Andrew

Long ago I had a Honywell Pentax H1A and slightly later an H3V, I had a Vivitar Series I  28-70 lens on it.   My first digital camera was a Canon 3.2MP chrome fixed lens A7 I think (if I remember).  I thought it would be my toy camera, and surely I'd take the H3V when I really wanted good pictures ....  after a year I realized that had never happened.  Digital was fun, cheaper than film, able to be manipulated on a computer .... It eventually died - sensor failed.  Menus showed up, but no image.  I bought a Panasonic FZ7 superzoom with a "Leica" labelled lens. I quickly realized that it was likely the best lens and camera I even owned.

When Panasonic introduced Micro 4/3 cameras I was intrigued. I first had a Panasonic G10 (slightly degraded G2),   replaced it with a G7 and replaced that with a G9.  I've had the G9 for a couple of years now and I can't imagine what more I will ever need.  I realize it won't last forever but I have no idea what I will buy at that time.

Someone else spoke about the convenience of staying with brand.  It is true that the FZ7, the G10 and even the G7 had mostly the same menu items.   The G9 has all of those items ... plus about 50% more at least.  It was nice to have a head start, but it took me a while to learn about the new features and how to use them.

ahaslett wrote:

WileEC_ID wrote:

I think we all tend to be brand loyal for convenience - most of us don't like to learn a new system once we FINALLY get one figured out.

That said, I think the fatter the wallet, the more choice.

That said, in my opinion, sometimes more choice makes us less skilled photographers - rather than really work and stretch the capabilities of a single system, we buy, buy, buy rather than solve, solve, solve.

Do notice I said we - us. All of the pros I have interacted with have less gear, not more.

Seems to me that less gear can lead to more skill. What am I going to get rid of next . . .

It should be easy for you - you have been a photographer for a long time, although maybe your needs are changing.

Some of us are still learning how to take the images we want (based on any equipment), we are maybe thinking about taking different kinds of pictures and manufacturers are producing new equipment that has more features and better performance.

I've discovered that my cycle of equipment upgrades is getting longer, from 18 months to maybe 48 months. I'm also increasingly buying used and selling as well as buying.

I understand the discipline of shooting with gear with limited capabilities but I feel that I need all the help I can get. I'm not persuaded that a phone is all I need.

Andrew

I think I hear what you are saying.

For me, The Nikon gear was getting the job done - mostly. In truth there are times when the big stuff is just the wrong system to use, for a variety of reasons. I have another camera I have used for two or three years and was wondering what option there might be to replace it with, knowing in that time frame sensors will have improved. That's when I discovered the MFT system - and it was far more capable than what I was using - and able to cover most of what I have used the Nikon system to do - so sold a lot of Nikon gear - totally covering my investment in Oly gear and now have a mix of Nikon, Oly, Sony, Panasonic (for my wife), and my iPhone.

I do know what I want and a very clear sense of what is and is not acceptable in an image that I take - that makes it easy to decide whether a given option is viable for me, or not. In truth, I've invested a lot of time, mostly in the field working out the photographic problems that come up - most of the time growth on my part is the key - but there are times when gear is the key - learning to know the difference is a part of the journey.

All that said - I think I read a lot of people wishing for more and better AI in their cameras - making getting better shots easier. I'm less about that - I wish to have the skill first, then if some parts get better, so be it. That said, the skill will always trump camera "features". An easy example - many bird photographers are drawn to the EM1X for it's Bird AI feature - when in truth many skill bird photographers have found it to be not really ready for prime time - in the real world it is inconsistent. If you use it for the conditions it seems to handle best, it's okay. I'd rather just use the same skill that has worked for me for some 15 years - and has gotten better as the S-AF systems have improved and allowed more precision. Am I against progress - no - but if I'm in a far away place and get the chance to photograph a species I've never seen, and I count on that new feature and get junk because it doesn't work as advertised, then I'll be pretty disappointed - but if I use what has worked and improved, then I get the shot.

So, better skill that gear jumping or accumulating. I think that is what I was intending to say - and still say. I've taught enough classes and done one-on-one training with people, I do understand the dynamic of still trying to figure out the kind of shots that really turns an individuals crank. In that setting, I think less specialization is better - I encourage a good bridge camera (Sony RX10 IV, for example) over an ILC. Find out what focal ranges interest you - what kinds of subjects - what kind of light and distances. Then, if you are still really wanting to go further with it - some are, some not so much, then make the investment in an ILC system that best serves those interests. I'm really glad to be aware of the MFT platform, as it is a great option for many and at a lower price point, but still high quality images - just a little less forgiving - demanding a bit more of the photog.

At the end of the day, it is great to have so many solid options - and mostly at many price points, too.

In days of yore, when Olympus was a camera manufacturer, my mother's friend recommended an Olympus OM-1 as a starter camera. With manual focus and manual exposure, it sure was a good starter camera.

When that camera and I took a ~25m tumble down a waterfall, only I survived. With money invested in OM glass and multi-spot metering, the recently released OM-4T was the logical choice.

Enter digital. I went Nikon APSC but compared to my OMs, it was awkward to lug around while carrying children on my shoulders. That lasted about five years.

Enter E-PM1. To see if MFT would be adequate, I purchased an E-PM1 as a test which it passed, as I rarely picked up my D200.

Enter E-M5 II. 5 axis IBIS, high-res, live composite, etc.. I never looked back to Nikon. (Gave my Nikon kit to my friend's daughter who proceeded to lose all in Italy a month later. )

Enter E-M5 III. PDAF! 20MP! Uber-IBIS! More than enough for me. I don't shoot enough fast motion subjects to warrant the faster shutter speeds of E-M1s. I am content and am careful with the tripod socket.

So, one could say I am loyal to Olympus. I feel no particular affinity to them but recognize that they usually have a model that suits my needs.

We could argue minutiae about Panasonic MFT vs Olympus MFT vs a future with no MFT but in the meantime I have more than I need.