People make it all possible: people in management, R&D, financing, manufacturing, quality assurance, distribution, dealers, support, etc. I don't buy your argument that companies that manufactures things have no real loyalty to their customers. I worked for 38 years in technology companies that cared for their customers since they are the only source of income. This post is one more example of your bashing of those that conceive of, develop, manufacture, distribute and support products that people want or need.

Yes, many people, including myself, are loyal to companies who's products they like and who stand behind their products. They also are willing to pay a little extra because of their loyalty and because they like those companies to be around for a long time.

I think brand loyalty is partly emotional and partly rational based on experience, and the ratio of one to the other varies with the individual. To use your automobile example, my family has been a Ford family for a very long time (at least after they quit making Hudsons). So my preference for Fords has a lot to do with keeping up a family tradition. But balancing that is having had bad experiences with three GM and one Chrysler products, all of them maintenance nightmares. In the camera arena, I'm partial to Canon. Part of it has to do with having accumulated a set of good Canon lenses that would be somewhat difficult financially to replace if I switched to another brand. Also, though, I simply like the feel of the Canon, the controls layout, the quality of the glass, etc., so that's the emotional side of it.

I also think age is a factor. The older we get, the more we get "set in our ways", as the saying goes. Maybe that's just another way of saying that once you've had the experience to know what works best for you, why change? That doesn't mean unwillingness to try truly new, innovative and significant advances in technology. It just means having the experience to recognize that most of the stuff out there being market as such, really is not. It's just the same sheep in different colored wool, so to speak.

Frans,

I have just about as many years as a journalist reporting on the photography business as the experience you refer to. But my position was different, the part of business I related to was advertising, marketing and public relations. So my perspective was different, and what I saw and experienced was not at all like what the people who made the products see and experience. But also for a couple of years I was on the other side of the fence, working for a camera company as a western US representative selling a brand to camera stores.

One thing that also has to be taken into account, when someone is hired and paid as an employee in return allegiance to the company is expected. In fact people I believe naturally provide a lot of allegiance to a company that provides a person's livelihood, and to a large extent being a part of a company is not unlike being a part of a community, loyalty comes naturally.

But on the other side of loyalty there is betrayal. General Motors assumed the loyalty of a lot of Americans who provided it willingly, and were not offended when Smith as CEO said "What's good for General Motors is good for America". I think today many if not most Americans feel GM betrayed the country, their employees and their customers.

Saab, an independent Swedish car brand was bought by General Motors, and GM took everything of value it could from Saab including the engineering for two of the most successful Cadillac models recently, and as soon as times turned bad GM pulled the plug on Saab. The people of Trollhatten, Sweden where Saab cars are made (and the rest of Sweden as well) felt betrayed, and with good reason. And, just talk to almost any US Saab dealer and betrayal is surely the most apt word there is to describe what they have experienced.

Loyalty can be misplaced sometimes when it is given to another person, but it is more likely betrayed when given to an object, an inanimate thing that cannot reciprocate by its very nature.

I think Loyalty stems from any product that one has a good history with. It is like many buy Canon cameras because they have always had canon but so is true on the side of Nikon or any other brand. I think many times people lost their ability to become objective about products they use vs others. Loyalty should be to people not products.

I'll state my young 16 year old opinion. I am a Nikon DSLR user and of course I am very loyal to it even challenging a more expierienced photographer than I. MY reasons for sticking behind it is my urge to be using the best, but a more unemotional reason is the lens factor. You start out in a brand buy a kit of lenses, flashes, etc... and you stay loyal to that brand because you don't want or need to buy another kit of in my instance Canon lenses. Of course that is just the camera side.

Caleb

I am 60 yers older than you and not so stuck in my ways. I was 20 when I got into photography and one of my first 35mm cameras was a Nikon. It wasn't a Canon because Canons in those days were not sold in the US military PX stores on bases as far as I know. In other words maybe Nikon got the edge in reputation because of a marketing decision made by a military PX store buyer. Anyway, your wisdom is conventional, but I would wonder how wise it is to be conventional. Maybe that's because at 76 I am thinking it is maybe a good time to trade in my system for something unconventional.

Let me add one more thing to that. The reason I started with Nikon is because it was family tradition. Starting with my grandpa it has always been Nikon.

Caleb

David, I think what the PXs in the US were selling back then were Ricoh 35mm rangefinder cameras (bought one in San Diego on my first Midshipman cruise). Long before that, and before I had any money, I was lusting after Asahi Pentax SLRs in a PX in Nagoya, Japan. I think the first "decent" camera I owned was a Ricohflex 620 TLR in high school. But nothing back then inspired brand loyalty the way Canon has, and I didn't own my first Canon SLR (Rebel G) until I was about 56 years old.

Hey, looking for something unconventional? How about a Holga? :-)

Bill,

I was based in Alaska in '52 or '53 when one of the squadron pilots said he picked up a Nikon at the PX in Japan, I asked him to get me one, and he did. That's all I know directly about it, other than second hand info from the stories told about the early days of Ehrenreich in New York when his company started importing Nikons for sale in the US.

I'm pretty loyal to brand because I have a bunck of lenses for one brand. I don't see any manufacturer as making a camera so far better than another to demand my loyality. I have had several 35mm Nikon's so I have a Nikon DSLR. But I have a Canon point and shoot, a Maymia 6x7, a Hassleblad X-Pan and a Pentax 645. They all work much better than I use them.

Quote:
I'm pretty loyal to brand because I have a bunck of lenses for one brand. I don't see any manufacturer as making a camera so far better than another to demand my loyality. I have had several 35mm Nikon's so I have a Nikon DSLR. But I have a Canon point and shoot, a Maymia 6x7, a Hassleblad X-Pan and a Pentax 645. They all work much better than I use them.

I have little brand loyalty, to anything...cameras, cars, toothpaste. I have lots of buying "habits" but no brand loyalty. Anyway, really liked the part in red....applies to most of the products in my life!!

No real brand loyalty here, I liked more what Canon offered over any of the others at that moment so that's what I went with.

Had Oly offered an update to the E3 at PMA I would have likely picked that up but I wound up getting a 1DMkII N instead.

My next body providing I can find a decent deal will either be a 1DsMkII, Hassy H1, or a Pentax 645N II. While I would love to delve into the world of MF I'll probably end up with the 1DsMkII just for the convenience of compatibility.

I understand where your coming from and now days with major
improvements being announced almost daily it is hard to stay with one brand. I am one of those who has primarily stayed with one brand. It's like wearing a comfortable pair of shoes, but Minolta's gone, I still have 3 with lenses all in use. I have owned Nikon , Canon and assortment of high end European range finders. Liked them all. But I am going to miss wearing those comfortable shoes eventually.

There is always something new and different. But unless you try it you may never know it is even more comfortable. It might even save your life, well maybe, it has happened.

One nice thing about the compact interchangeable lens cameras which have come onto the market recently is that the distance between the rear of the lens and the sensor is less than the standard SLR lens-to-sensor distance. This opens up space for lens adapters.
At present, a lens adapter for SLRs is up against the issue of "basically no space" for it. That's why they have not been successful I think.
For example, with the right adapter (if one is made yet) you can put your Canon SLR lens on an Olympus PEN.
The financial gains would go to the makers of the new cameras, by pulling away photographers who have invested heavily in lenses from a different manufacturer. So the makers of the new cameras should be making lens adapters.
This sort of thing could make the committed lens buyers mobile!

In a sense, your title answered your own question about Brand Loyalty. A lot of people care as much or more about brand than about the product under the label. And these days who made the product is a question. Just because a product has a brand name on it it today very often means nothing in respect of who actually made the product.

LCD displays and TV's are good examples, there are many more brands than there are factories that make LCD displays or TV's.

True, loyalty is who ever gives for the least $$$ is the new hero. Perhaps off-the-beat but -- Seems the trend is -- quality assurance, set off by a cadre of product liability lawyers replacing inspection and product integrity?.

I see no evidence from photographers or from the photo industry what you suspect has any legs. Brand loyalty despite the switch from film to digital remains very high. The products at any price point are now extremely competitive with little to distinguish them. And, there has been almost no one falling on their face with a product they should be ashamed of.

Well said I could have not said it any better, By the way I too have used Canon camera's for years as well, why leave a company that makes a fine product's

I bought a Minolta X-700 when they came out, it seemed to have all the features I was interested in and I fell in love with it. Then when I finally went to digital, Minolta had nothing to offer, I looked at several cameras and settled on a Canon Digital rebel. This camera was easy to fall in love with. As far as brand loyalty goes I recently upgraded to a Canon 7D, I was fond of my first Canon and that influenced my choice, and one thing I did not want was a Nikon. I know this may sound weird but I got this thing about Nikons, its like everybody will feircely tell you how wonderful they are and seem to act as if they are in some special clique and that really turns me off. I want to get a motorcycle one day and I would not even consider a Harley for the same reason.

ed

Brand loyalty, in marketing, consists of a consumer's commitment to repurchase or otherwise continue using the brand and can be demonstrated by repeated buying of a product or service, or other positive behaviors such as word of mouth advocacy. autobody san diego