So hardly anyone is blindly buying it because of the Canon logo.
In fact, lets tear this down a little more.
Nobody but an absolute beginner would buy a camera purely on the basis of the logo it sports: and most beginners would be so influenced by the endless torrent of Canon-bashing ordure on the internet (even here, on a nominally pro-Canon website) that they'd "know" never to go within a million miles of one!
The stark, troll-busting reality of the matter is that people who buy Canon
know what they're doing. They know not to expect perfection, but they have the emotional and intellectual intelligence to recognise
bloody good when they see it; and either aren't affected by, or are able to deal effectively with, supposed Canon "failings".
Simply put, we know what works for us.
To suggest that we might persist in using gear which routinely fails to deliver out of blind, gullible brand loyalty, is beyond asinine.
Case in point - me.
I started as a Nikon shooter, back in D70 days (I really liked that camera); was horrified by how appalling the D200 I "upgraded" to was; and moved to a Canon 30D - around 2006.
So that's one brand change.
I've been with Canon pretty much ever since, but at the end of last year and into this, I gave Olympus a serious chance, due to a chronic shoulder problem that made waving a Canon pro body and 500mm f/4 around handheld, impossible.
Olympus
on paper was a perfect next step. I bought an E-M1X, m.Zuiko 300mm Pro f/4, m.Zuiko 40-150mm f/2.8, and TCs - a theoretical match and then some for what my Canon kit did for me, in a
much smaller, lighter package.
That's another brand change.
But it didn't work out: I'm good at dealing with noisy files, but Oly image quality really fell off a cliff in proper low light bird/wildlife shooting conditions, and it took far more work than I was willing to put into the files, to get them anywhere near to the standard of IQ I was after.
Much worse, the 300mm with TCs on flatly refused to lock focus in even marginally less than perfect light (a bird only slightly shaded by a branch, for example), light which my Canon gear would have no problem working perfectly in.
(Olympus UK's advice? "
Take the converter off, then...")
I sold the Oly kit off (at a substantial loss) and came back to Canon.
Another brand change.
The notion we define ourselves by a camera logo is demonstrably arrant bloody nonsense. Canon gear
just works. And I can say that against a background of not just
trying but
owning cameras and lenses from other firms.
Even though my Olympus adventure was ultimately disappointing, I still defend Oly from its trolls on 43rumors.com because there's a lot to like about Olympus equipment; because I understand (a fact lost to many, it would appear) that my experiences aren't
everybody's experiences; and because I'm not so dazzled by the Canon logo that I'm blinded to the merits of other camera companies.