My first blog post for my new photo-centric site is about brand loyalty for no reason in particular. Just popped into my head and spilled onto the page. You are reading spillage, just so you know.
After years of talking to photographers of all stripes, I have found three common reasons for brand selection. This is in no way a scientific sampling with fancy algorithms and prepared questions but gleaned form talking to hundreds of mostly amateur photographers that I’ve run into while travelling and at youth sporting events over the years. It applies to ILCs (interchangeable lens cameras) far more than compacts. Once brand preference is established with an ILC and even a small collection of lenses and accessories is acquired, moving to another brand of ILC carries the baggage of a monetary investment that may or may not be even partially recoverable. It also requires dealing with learning all of the quirks and features of a new brand. Cameras are cameras and they all do pretty much the same thing but the names of the features and how they are accessed from the controls and menus can vary quite a bit from brand to brand. A compact camera is a simpler all-in-one unit that is often used in point and shoot mode, so changing brands doesn’t carry the same baggage.
The most common reasons related to me for brand choice are research, gift or hand-me-down and “it was on sale”. Research is my favorite but having knowledge of photographic hardware and methods is really needed to make an informed choice, especially if you are shopping for advanced models. Many review sites and reviewers have a lot of brand bias and even if they don’t, they often add or remove an inordinate amount of points based on features or capabilities that few if any actual users of the equipment will ever need or use. Researcher beware. The gift or hand-me-down can be a real plus because if it was from a relative or (very good) friend who is an actual photographer or enthusiast, they likely bought the brand that they use or are passing along their current camera after upgrading to a newer model. This may mean that they have a collection of lenses and accessories available to try before buying if and when you want to expand your system. Also, access to the source’s experience with the quirks of the brand can significantly shorten the learning curve that comes with any ILC. “It was on sale” is a brand choice method that has really become common since the club stores have started selling bundled kits. A body, two lenses and maybe a flash is an instant brand anchor.
I am a Sony shooter. I started with Minolta back in the ’70s and stuck with the brand through the acquisition and two mount changes. I always liked the Minolta innovation and bang for the buck and Sony hasn’t disappointed me with either. The other major brands all have great cameras and features but never quite enough to lure me away. Brand choice hasn’t carried a lot of risk for the last 20 years or so since all the majors make great stuff but these days the growing prevalence of phones that offer fantastic photo and video capability has really put the screws to the companies that make “real” cameras. Falling revenues have forced once-competitive companies like Olympus to sell off their imaging businesses with the future of the brand in question. Canon and Sony are widely diversified and can deal with lower profits but companies with mostly imaging or imaging only revenue streams are struggling. I always say that with all of the staggering innovation on the equipment side, that it’s a great time to be a photographer but with the massive shift to camera phones, it’s not such a great time to be a photo equipment manufacturer. All of the reasons for brand choice mentioned above are still valid but a little research into long-term viability may be a good idea when choosing. Sort of happy about my decision to stick with Sony right about now.