Gear snobbery from regular professionals (vs big names)

Messages
247
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#1
I just wanted to ask people about something I've noticed.

When I look at the gear advice on forums and talk to local professional photographers there is an insistence on full-frame DSLR and associated lenses as essential tools for any professional. Then, I read some of the big high-profile photographer singing the praises of recent innovations like the Olympus OM-D, other CSCs, high-end compacts and other equipment like that.

Now, the local guys could be perfectly right and justified in what they say, but when I point to the articles by these guys there is a certain amount of scepticism.

Why do the really big names feel able to embrace stuff other than the Canon/Nikon full-frame hegemony when others don't?

I am genuinely interested in understand the cultural, practical and psychological stuff at play.
 
Messages
18,456
Name
David
Edit My Images
Yes
#2
Big names are usually subsidised by such firms... as are alot of the 'why I moved to Canon/Nikon from Nikon/Canon' videos you see.

Zack Arias, great tog, love his work and have learned alot from his videos, but Fuji have bunged him a shed load of cash and gear and fund his travel around the world. No wonder he loves their cameras...
 

StephenM

I know a Blithering Idiot
Messages
3,522
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
#3
No idea. If so, possibilities that occur to me are:

1. Big names will get the work regardless - they have nothing to prove so can use what suits them. Or

2. Big names got there by the creativity of their work, which doesn't depend very much on the equipment used (beyond a minimum standard).

3. Some cameras are batter suited to some work than others - possibly your "big names" and "locals" are working in different areas.

4. Lack of confidence in using "lesser" equipment - a fear that they wouldn't be as good, or (dare I say it) local customers being gear snobs and not trusting someone who uses the same camera as them to be able to produce anything better than they could do themselves - after all "it's a great photo - you must have a good camera" ought to work in reverse before the event...
 
Messages
2,953
Name
stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
#4
Could be wrong but I reackon the big names are getting gear thrown at them by manufacturers in return for 5 star reviews etc
Tin of worms now opened !!

I've saw many big names go on and on and on about (for example ) fuji and how special it is and how it's the new full frame and how canon and nikon are no longer needed etc etc etc but then they are doing their clients work with blads and 1dx's
 
Messages
1,516
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
No
#5
I'd rather trust the opinion of someone who just gets on with earning with their kit every day, rather than someone who's position in the spotlight (more often then not now based on training courses rather than delivering images to clients) affords them kit from manufacturers and shoots/speaking slots for them to talk at shows.

Thats not to say that there are not people using Fuji or Olympus professionally - just because they deem them the most appropriate camera for their circumstances.

Canon and Nikon have a wider range of bodies and lenses, accessories, support at major events etc and that is also why they are in the majority (not just the capability of the kit).
 
Messages
6,521
Edit My Images
No
#6
Big names have been singing the praises of certain brands for years. Case in point David Bailey and the Olympus advertising campaign in the 70s.

To be fair, there are plenty of different cameras and formats, for example In the past I have used Nikon, Hassleblad, MPP and Sinar all in the same week. Different tools for different jobs. I think that still holds true today.
 
Messages
1,516
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
No
#7
Big names have been singing the praises of certain brands for years. Case in point David Bailey and the Olympus advertising campaign in the 70s.
Thats true but the difference now is that social media,forums and seminars often present that as "advice" when it was clearly advertising back in Bailey's day. People understand a full page ad in a glossy mag for what it is.....and advertorials have to be clearly marked.... but as we can see from the OP it isn't always clear in a more connected environment.
 
Messages
10,202
Edit My Images
No
#8
The "big name" photographers aren't photographers, they're brands - they shoot photographs, they sell books, guides and tutorials, they're developing accessory brands. They don't get the job because of the make of the gear they use but because of the brand they've created. It suits them to work with manufacturers because brands feed on mutual publicity. Fuji have been very prominent in making these relationships, but Canon and Nikon have doing it for longer (Joe McNally, Andy Rouse, etc.). It just seems that Fuji has selected a rather louder group of brand ambassadors.

When it comes to every day pro's Fuji and Sony are still playing catch-up, in part on reputation but I'd guess it's more to do with a lack of professional support services.
 
Messages
9,523
Edit My Images
No
#10
Big names have been singing the praises of certain brands for years. Case in point David Bailey and the Olympus advertising campaign in the 70s.

To be fair, there are plenty of different cameras and formats, for example In the past I have used Nikon, Hassleblad, MPP and Sinar all in the same week. Different tools for different jobs. I think that still holds true today.
I agree,photographer having been putting their names behind cameras for years :)
 
Messages
890
Name
Jay
Edit My Images
Yes
#11
Big names tend to say 'I am not paid by X company' but then carefully fail to say they get free gear, travel expenses and various other perks that are not technically 'cash'.

I think you can tell how many get 'gifts' by the number that suddenly went to mirrorless etc from DSLRs all of a sudden, just around the the time that the camera companies realised the sales of the new style cameras were not what had been projected by their finance depts.
 

Nod

Krispy and Kremey
Messages
35,046
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
#12
I wish Fuji would throw me a bone for the plugs I have given their kit!
 
OP
OP
I
Messages
247
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#13
And yet, even if they are given stuff, they still turn out cracking images from this kit which justifies their arguments about why they like it - and this still doesn't explain why these guys can turn out top notch images from equipment that other people isn't up to the standard required by professionals.
 

MartynK

Opting Out.
Messages
4,918
Name
Martyn
Edit My Images
No
#14
And yet, even if they are given stuff, they still turn out cracking images from this kit which justifies their arguments about why they like it - and this still doesn't explain why these guys can turn out top notch images from equipment that other people isn't up to the standard required by professionals.
It's largely because a good photographer, who knows and understands his craft, will produce excellent work using any brand; and a poor photographer will generally take indifferent photographs, even if you give him the gear recommended by a highly successful pro. Having said that, there's no doubt that many well known pros do have advantageous relationships with particular brands, but I doubt if they'd sell their soul if it meant using equipment they have no confidence in.

I don't know how much experience you have, or what type of photography you're interested in, but I'd just use what works for you, and that you can afford. All the leading manufacturers produce excellent equipment, and producing results to match really depends on knowledge and experience.
 
Messages
16,827
Name
George.
Edit My Images
No
#15
Maybe, just Maybe, these guys are invited to promote the various products because they are so good at what they do ? ie they can churn out excellent results from virtually any equipment they use.

George.
 
Messages
2,128
Name
Jacob
Edit My Images
Yes
#16
I'm far from a big name in any way but I have been working with Panasonic for the last few months using the GX7 and GH4.

There is the fact that I've been loaned gear/paid to do workshops etc which helps with liking the gear but for me it is the rate that the smaller manufacturers Oly/Pana/Fuji/Sony are advancing their cameras when Canon/Nikon are mainly regurgitating the same specs over and over again.

The GH4/GX7 especially have a bunch of features such as live histogram/silent shutter/wifi/tilt screen/small size which make them much more enjoyable to use compared with my Nikons I was using in the past.

My advice would be take reviews from 'big names' with a pinch of salt in the same way that you should take any review, especially if the photographer reviewing the gear isn't making any meaningful images. Then you should combine reviews with actually handling the camera in person before you make any decisions.
 
OP
OP
I
Messages
247
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
#18
I guess my point in the OP is that some professionals I come across locally don't seem to be able to accept that professional results are possible from anything other than their beloved FF Canon/Nikon gear, and I was wondering why they thought that way.
 
Messages
6,157
Edit My Images
No
#19
I think the real thing is here that most professionals use Nikon, Canon, or in advertising, Phase One or Hasselblad - however this new generation of cameras that are emerging have some innovative new features, yet also have the image quality and features that we're also used to from top end SLRs - Zack Arias et al's postings haven't made me even consider for ditching my Nikon kit for one moment - but dammit I've come close to buying a fuji setup *for myself*
 

big soft moose

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy...
Messages
24,048
Name
Pete
Edit My Images
Yes
#20
I guess my point in the OP is that some professionals I come across locally don't seem to be able to accept that professional results are possible from anything other than their beloved FF Canon/Nikon gear, and I was wondering why they thought that way.
A good photographer can get great pictures using virtually anything - I remember seeing Andy Rouse get some really great shots with a Fuji S602 bridge camera (back when his weapon of choice was a 1DS mk1 ) - that's because 'great shots' are about ability and skill not which camera you have in your hands.

That said if you had the choice (and money wasnt a limiting factor) would you chose to use the best possible camera for the job , or put more presure on yourself to make up for your gear being barely adequate ?
 

Nod

Krispy and Kremey
Messages
35,046
Name
Nod (NOT Ethel!!!)
Edit My Images
Yes
#21
I guess my point in the OP is that some professionals I come across locally don't seem to be able to accept that professional results are possible from anything other than their beloved FF Canon/Nikon gear, and I was wondering why they thought that way.
Can't speak for them since I'm not one of them but it may well be because they've invested heavily in their chosen systems and find it hard to accept that they should be able to get good results from "inferior" equipment. Having said that, the Fuji X-T1 isn't really a budget alternative and the XF series lenses are certainly well built and solid feeling! Technology has come on in leaps and bounds in the photographic world and very few current pieces of kit can be described as crap, whether it's an entry level CSC or a top of the range FF DSLR (or even an MF or LF back.) For most of us enthusiasts, the law of diminishing returns applies so we go for whatever we can afford, while a pro may feel that he/she needs top end kit to be taken seriously.
 
Messages
1,052
Name
Phill
Edit My Images
No
#22
(some and not all, wouldn't want to start a fight.) rave about full frame as they are 'true' to the old 35mm film cameras. some think its better as they are bigger and more pro looking. some rave on as they have nothing else to waste there money on and just a few have real reasons. ive seen many shots on here, on pros websites and at exhibitions and ill be buggered if I know if the shots are taken on a ff or crop camera. crop has come on leaps and bounds in the last 3-5 years and I dare say now a camera like the d7100 or 70d will give an old ff camera a good run especially when it comes to dynamic range.

BUT.. personally I just nod when these people start talking then walk off because your gear is only as good as your ability to use it.
 
Messages
2,716
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
No
#23
Big names tend to say 'I am not paid by X company' but then carefully fail to say they get free gear, travel expenses and various other perks that are not technically 'cash'.

I think you can tell how many get 'gifts' by the number that suddenly went to mirrorless etc from DSLRs all of a sudden, just around the the time that the camera companies realised the sales of the new style cameras were not what had been projected by their finance depts.
That's not correct. There is no "one size fits all" approach to brand association. I was a fully independent Olympus user for years before I recently became an (independent) Olympus ambassador. In other words, I have always purchased my own equipment in the same way as everyone else, and therefore when I talk about my kit it's because I have had ample time to satisfy myself regarding its quality and performance and will happily share my findings - not because I am paid or given freebies. There are in fact quite a few independent brand ambassadors who were firmly established with their tools before entering into any association. As you say, there are also a great many photographers who are given all of their equipment for free in return for promotion, but don't assume everyone falls into that category. For independent ambassadors our perks normally include getting to try out and test new equipment before it comes to market, which is useful if we're thinking of investing in something new as soon as it's available. We can sometimes borrow extra equipment when we need it, and have access to potential students for either our own or co-run workshops. I think you have described the chicken before the egg scenario. I personally think that if a well-established professional has invested a small fortune in the equipment of any manufacturer, and is known to use it widely (which in itself is useful marketing for the camera company) then it's only right that the photographer should get some recognition for that.

I am not held to a contract and I am free to use whatever kit I wish, my camera bag has all sorts of stuff in it from several brands. And that's how I like it. It's also worth remembering that if a brand ambassador is a full-time working photographer and they are using the camera equipment in question for all of their professional work, then that tells you that the photographer has genuine belief in its quality and performance. No photographer of any merit is going to risk their hard-won reputation for the sake of a few freebies.

Edit: I will also add that gear snobbery appears to be an amateur pursuit, or the realms of wannabe professionals. As was said earlier, this is largely about insecurity and perceived self-image. I am yet to encounter any established pros who care much about branding, it's simply a case of using what works for you.
 
Last edited:
Messages
17,921
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
#24
The GH4/GX7 especially have a bunch of features such as live histogram/silent shutter/wifi/tilt screen/small size which make them much more enjoyable to use compared with my Nikons I was using in the past.

.
I'm sure nikon and canon offer bodies with live histogram, wifi, silent shutter.

And how much of that do you really need to take photos and enjoy photography or even make a living at it?

Some people like the bigger cameras anyway.
 
Messages
1,516
Name
Mike
Edit My Images
No
#25
Edit: I will also add that gear snobbery appears to be an amateur pursuit, or the realms of wannabe professionals. As was said earlier, this is largely about insecurity and perceived self-image. I am yet to encounter any established pros who care much about branding, it's simply a case of using what works for you.
Absolutely this.
 
Messages
890
Name
Jay
Edit My Images
Yes
#26
"For independent ambassadors our perks normally include getting to try out and test new equipment before it comes to market, which is useful if we're thinking of investing in something new as soon as it's available. We can sometimes borrow extra equipment when we need it, and have access to potential students for either our own or co-run workshops."

So you do get quite a few perks and also (indirectly) money from courses partly associated with the camera company. I am not by any means saying this is wrong, Its perfectly fair as long as pro photographers ("Rockstars") pushing products are up front about perks to their audience and make the perks-link open and specific. Its when people say blatantly "I am not paid by this company" while surrounded by lots of brand new gear with said company name on. Please note my comments are and have been aimed at the pro speaking and rockstar circuit. I have no reason Lindsay to think you are at all dishonest in any way or push products inappropriately.

I suppose during the last couple of years I have seen quite a few 'high end' speakers and its really pretty obvious that many of them are getting quite a bit back from the camera companies in various ways. Some sales techniques for moving the resistant market away from DSLRs can not only be manipulative but also highly offensive. I have heard one speaker, who drives a very expensive car in one of his training videos outside of his very expensive house, sneer across the room at people who have made efforts to attend his lecture, calling owners of DSLRS in the audience "so last century" in a very nasty tone because they are still using DSLRS and not mirrorless/compact - the product he was vigorously pushing at a training event that had no reason at all to even mention gear types. Having seen much of this pushing, frankly I am fed up of it. It takes the audience for fools.

Gear snobbery is promoted by camera manufacturers and should not just be called as being all down to amateurs and hobbyists. Camera manufacturers encourage snobbery and gear greed at every turn and aim to make people feel good gear is 'outdated' at every opportunity as it brings profits, lots of lovely profits. The market to amateurs must be vast when compared to the relatively small amount of kit pros buy (with the exception of sports and wildlife photographers).

I am not saying new camera designs are flawed or lesser or that new develpments are a bad thing - I am sure many people have moved over to them for all sorts of honest /practical reasons. Camera makers however are not interested in improving peoples lives - they want to improve sales and/or reduce manufacturing costs. The new camera designs are cheaper and less complicated to make. Make it cheap, sell it high. Profit margins must be much better than from DSLRS and users will have to rebuild much kit from scratch - more profit.

From stats occasionally seen on the web I think the camera companies were certain they could sell cheaper to make, dearer to buy cameras with no effort at all - they expected a flood of purchasing. It did not happen as far or as fast as they planned and that info leaked into the public domain.

Around that time, a whole host of pros on the lecture circuit 'suddenly discovered' the new designs which had been out for a while and perhaps most enlighteningly did not then integrate them alongside their existing personal systems but suddenly needed to declare they had thrown out all previous gear as totally useless (despite slower focusing and poorer low light focusing at that time) and would only ever use the new designs in the future, for everything. Which seems to me to be a strange over-reaction, from so many folks at around the same disappointing sales period. Way too much co-incidence there. If something looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

As I said though I am not knocking the new camera designs, just the sales techniques.
 
Messages
9,523
Edit My Images
No
#27
I think Nikon are the greatest cameras ever made
I think Canon are the greatest cameras ever made
I think Olympus are the greatest cameras ever made
I think Fuji are the greatest cameras ever made

Any of the above manufacturer wish to supply me with their top of their range camera + plus a good zoom,please pm me :whistle:
 
Last edited:

KIPAX

Seriously Likeable
Messages
20,544
Name
KIPAX
Edit My Images
Yes
#28
I guess my point in the OP is that some professionals I come across locally don't seem to be able to accept that professional results are possible from anything other than their beloved FF Canon/Nikon gear, and I was wondering why they thought that way.
OK come to one of my jobs where I use a canon 1dx and an f1.8 lens... I am forcd to use iso 25600 and f.1.8 to get enough speed (usualy about 800 shutter) to capture the action... you can come along anytime you want and show me how you get pics like mine with lessewr equipment... please do.. you could save me a fortune...

no I ahvent read the whole thread.. but I saw this and thought... what a complete and utter##### :)
 
Messages
2,128
Name
Jacob
Edit My Images
Yes
#29
I'm sure nikon and canon offer bodies with live histogram, wifi, silent shutter.

And how much of that do you really need to take photos and enjoy photography or even make a living at it?

Some people like the bigger cameras anyway.
No camera with a mirror offers true silent shutter it's impossible and actually shooting travel and street work all those features have now become key to the way I work. Can I work without them? Yes. Is my life much easier with them? 100%.

Some people do like bigger cameras that fine, I never said anything about other people's choices. When I'm travelling with 2-3 cameras and 4-5 lenses the weight saving for me is in multiple kgs. It's all about your intended uses.

Lindsay summed up what I mean to say but much more eloquently in the post earlier.
 
Messages
3,001
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
#30
Maybe, just Maybe, these guys are invited to promote the various products because they are so good at what they do ? ie they can churn out excellent results from virtually any equipment they use.
Well, I guess that's possible. Nowadays though it's equally likely that they're favoured with the freebies because of their talent for self-promotion and the size of their fanbase.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,128
Name
Jacob
Edit My Images
Yes
#31
Well, I guess that's possible. Nowadays though it's far more likely that they're favoured with the freebies because of their talent for self-promotion and the size of their fanbase.
From my experience it's a mixture, some manufacturers like to work with the guys with huge followings and not so great photography, others like to work with those who are producing amazing results with their gear. Most just fall somewhere between that and like to work with both
 
Messages
12,032
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
#32
I just wanted to ask people about something I've noticed.

When I look at the gear advice on forums and talk to local professional photographers there is an insistence on full-frame DSLR and associated lenses as essential tools for any professional. Then, I read some of the big high-profile photographer singing the praises of recent innovations like the Olympus OM-D, other CSCs, high-end compacts and other equipment like that.
That's because they realise that camera's don't take photographs, people do. Equipment doesn't matter. You merely use what's best for the job, Sometimes a small format, light camera is the best tool for the job.. sometimes it's not.


Now, the local guys could be perfectly right and justified in what they say, but when I point to the articles by these guys there is a certain amount of scepticism.
Because they're photography will be technically in nature only, and photographers these days are so reliant on processes that they've forgotten what it;s all about. Take away they're equipment, and they're dead in the water.

Why do the really big names feel able to embrace stuff other than the Canon/Nikon full-frame hegemony when others don't?

Because they understand that equipment doesn't alter what actually makes a photograph good: Story, power, narrative, communicated meaning etc. ANY camera can do that, so they will happily use what's best for the job. They also realise that just as a car mechanic will not service your car with one single spanner, a photographer does not use one single camera. Real photographers eventually realise that anything that helps them work easier, faster, and more efficiently is a good thing. They have no insecurity about what others think of them, or being judged by their gear.

Then there's the "big names" that aren't really big because of their photography, but big because of their promotional videos and "training" profile... these are often sponsored by camera manufactures, so they use what they're told to use, and they promote what they are paid to promote.

Look at the PROPER big names though.. not the Chase Jarvises and Zach Ariases of this world... I mean the proper big names... Nick Night, Tim Walker, Mario Testino etc... You'll never hear them talking about their cameras. Why would you? They talk about Photography!! Do you hear Adrian Newey talking about tools used in the garage, or do you hear him talking about the CAR and what it can do this season?

You do NOT need a full frame camera. the VAST majority of people in here don't even print their images.. you do not need full frame. If you need full frame, you'll KNOW you need full frame and won't have to ask people if you need it. If you need to ask if you need it, you don't need it.

Your worth as a photographer is in your images, not your gear.
 
Messages
23,657
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
#33
OK come to one of my jobs where I use a canon 1dx and an f1.8 lens... I am forcd to use iso 25600 and f.1.8 to get enough speed (usualy about 800 shutter) to capture the action... you can come along anytime you want and show me how you get pics like mine with lessewr equipment... please do.. you could save me a fortune...

no I ahvent read the whole thread.. but I saw this and thought... what a complete and utter##### :)
Not being argumentative Tony, but before the super high ISO's available on the 1dx did you not take on those jobs or did you 'put up with' the IQ from a 1dIII or IV?

I appreciate that many cameras and lenses would be completely unsuitable, but surely there's also some truth in the old adage 'The best camera is the one you have in your hand'.
 
Messages
2,716
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
No
#34
Could be wrong but I reackon the big names are getting gear thrown at them by manufacturers in return for 5 star reviews etc
Tin of worms now opened !!

I've saw many big names go on and on and on about (for example ) fuji and how special it is and how it's the new full frame and how canon and nikon are no longer needed etc etc etc but then they are doing their clients work with blads and 1dx's
A lot of sweeping statements being made in this thread, by people who have gained a particular impression of the co-branding mechanism, rather than any experience of it or any in-depth knowledge of the photographers who take part.

I know quite a lot of photographers who are ambassadors for one brand or another. In the vast majority of cases this is how it works: the photographer in question will have used that brand of equipment throughout much of his or her career, in which they have become successful in some way (perhaps quietly, or perhaps more publicly). The key point is that they are not being incentivised to invest in the manufacturer in question, that has been their choice and their equipment uptake is as genuine as the next person's. The brand then recognises their investment and sees the value in bringing that brand association to their audience. There is no coercion, none of this ridiculous "if you give us great reviews we'll give you a ton of free kit" nonsense - that is in fact incredibly rare, usually short lived, and has nothing to do with a genuine ambassadorial role. I'm not saying there aren't "a big names" out there who are given something to review with an understanding the reviews will be positive, of course they exist, but this is a very small proportion.

And by the way I agree that if someone is raving about a camera they ought to be using it in their work! If they don't, then I would take these so-called "reviews" with a pinch of salt. I think most people are intelligent enough to pick the wheat from the chaff. The genuine brand ambassadors out there are hard-working pros who have been in the industry a long time and who have genuine achievements under their belt - there is absolutely nothing wrong with their chosen camera firm rewarding them for what has no doubt been a huge investment over the years, with some extra equipment. I can also tell you that the equipment is normally passed over on a loan basis - whilst some of the 'reviewers' under discussion in this thread will no doubt be given a camera here or there, most brand ambassadors are not. The benefits for the photographer are mostly in the recognition (and credibility) that comes with such an important role, which can be very good for marketing purposes. Benefits do not have to be financial to have value, and I will say again that in the vast majority of cases these positions are hard earned and well-deserved.

I've lived in different parts of the world and the UK is notorious for its resentment of success.
 
Messages
2,716
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
No
#36
Alternatively, the UK is indifferent to the worship demanded by (so called) successful people.....

Regards...
How many times have you had your car keyed? Assuming you have a car worth keying, one that suggests a degree of 'success' of course.

So if somebody achieves anything of merit and becomes known for their achievements, then to your mind they are demanding worship? So much bitterness in this thread ....

To be honest, the tone of your comment kind of sums up the point I was trying to make. If there is indifference, then why would we even be discussing any of this?
 
Messages
342
Name
Steven
Edit My Images
No
#37
How many times have you had your car keyed? Assuming you have a car worth keying, one that suggests a degree of 'success' of course.

So if somebody achieves anything of merit and becomes known for their achievements, then to your mind they are demanding worship? So much bitterness in this thread ....

To be honest, the tone of your comment kind of sums up the point I was trying to make. If there is indifference, then why would we even be discussing any of this?
Assume I have a car worth keying huh, that betrays your mindset quite clearly.

Actually, cars keyed twice. Both new as well.

And no, not bitterness. I'm not a bitter person.

Regards...
 
Messages
2,953
Name
stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
#38
A lot of sweeping statements being made in this thread, by people who have gained a particular impression of the co-branding mechanism, rather than any experience of it or any in-depth knowledge of the photographers who take part.

I know quite a lot of photographers who are ambassadors for one brand or another. In the vast majority of cases this is how it works: the photographer in question will have used that brand of equipment throughout much of his or her career, in which they have become successful in some way (perhaps quietly, or perhaps more publicly). The key point is that they are not being incentivised to invest in the manufacturer in question, that has been their choice and their equipment uptake is as genuine as the next person's. The brand then recognises their investment and sees the value in bringing that brand association to their audience. There is no coercion, none of this ridiculous "if you give us great reviews we'll give you a ton of free kit" nonsense - that is in fact incredibly rare, usually short lived, and has nothing to do with a genuine ambassadorial role. I'm not saying there aren't "a big names" out there who are given something to review with an understanding the reviews will be positive, of course they exist, but this is a very small proportion.

And by the way I agree that if someone is raving about a camera they ought to be using it in their work! If they don't, then I would take these so-called "reviews" with a pinch of salt. I think most people are intelligent enough to pick the wheat from the chaff. The genuine brand ambassadors out there are hard-working pros who have been in the industry a long time and who have genuine achievements under their belt - there is absolutely nothing wrong with their chosen camera firm rewarding them for what has no doubt been a huge investment over the years, with some extra equipment. I can also tell you that the equipment is normally passed over on a loan basis - whilst some of the 'reviewers' under discussion in this thread will no doubt be given a camera here or there, most brand ambassadors are not. The benefits for the photographer are mostly in the recognition (and credibility) that comes with such an important role, which can be very good for marketing purposes. Benefits do not have to be financial to have value, and I will say again that in the vast majority of cases these positions are hard earned and well-deserved.

I've lived in different parts of the world and the UK is notorious for its resentment of success.
That's why I said "I could be wrong" thank you for clearing it up for me :)
 
Messages
2,716
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
No
#39
Assume I have a car worth keying huh, that betrays your mindset quite clearly.

Actually, cars keyed twice. Both new as well.

And no, not bitterness. I'm not a bitter person.

Regards...
I think you misunderstood why I said that - it's 'worth keying' if someone decides to dish out a little of the bitterness I mentioned.

I'm very sorry your cars have been keyed - as I said, that kind of behaviour is rare in many other parts of the world, even when there are a lot of 'successful' people around. It appears to be part of British culture unfortunately. I have several friends who have bought new (or desirable) cars only for that to happen. I would say that the mindset over here is that if somebody has achieved something (be it a good position in the business world, or things like new cars) then there are plenty of people who want to punish you for it. When I lived overseas it's more likely that your friends will celebrate your achievements with you.
 
Messages
2,716
Name
Lindsay
Edit My Images
No
#40
That's why I said "I could be wrong" thank you for clearing it up for me :)
I just wanted to say that the majority of brand ambassadors aren't even close to what's being described in this thread and I felt it was important to make that point, and I did agree with the points you raised about smoke and mirrors.

I think I'll leave now because there are signs this may become a witch hunt.
 
Top