Originally posted by Bassat I honestly believe the question is phrased improperly. Brand doesn't make a hill-of-beans difference in the outcome, for the most part.
As a multiple system shooter myself, I understand where you're coming from. However, certain camera brands are
synonymous with a specific style/type of camera form factor: Do you associate Leica with thick monolithic medium format SLRs with the ergonomics of a concrete cinderblock? Do you associate Nikon with svelte, minimalist pocketable auto-focus rangefinder* style camera with a voluminous lens catalog? I don't think anyone here does**. Leica is well known for clean but striking modernist camera design with classically German over-engineered rangefinders. Nikon Is well known for robust,reliable SLR cameras built with a functional Japanese post-modernist/industrial design aesthetic.
Each camera manufacturer brings tangible style, functional and ergonomic benefits which appeal to different people. It isn't the brand so much as the features and qualities of the cameras that make them more suitable to different photographic scenarios.
Originally posted by Bassat If you are shooting only one brand of camera, you are leaving a lot of fun on the table.
I couldn't agree more, but not everyone has the coin*** to fund an alternate system. Some people don't have the time to invest in learning how to work with a new camera, or wouldn't get enough use out of the camera to justify the purchase in the first place.
* I'll fight fair, the Nikon SP is a lovely compact rangefinder camera - but it has been discontinued for quite a while and has been absent from the consumer zeitgeist for even longer.
** at least, not yet. I'm sure they are working on increasing the number of lenses for the Z system, they better get a move on to regain the marketing momentum they have already lost.
*** or spousal approval.