I agree. A camera is certainly not less noticeable because the logo is
covered with tape. I would guess a big-rep pro who is not getting free
cameras might cover the logo in order not to provide free advertising
for the maker. But an uncelebrated user -- even a highly skilled user
-- is of no real promotional value to the manufacturer. Among some
Leica users the black-out practice seems to be a pretension of sorts.
It's a way of calling attention to the value of their camera. That
alone is enough to make the practice abhorrent to me. But that's just
me.
On Sep 3, 2005, at 12:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 9/3/2005 9:36:36 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jbuhler/405353
I dunno. To me, a camera with a masked over or filled in logo is
*more* conspicuous than a camera with tape over the markings.
To each their own.
Godfrey
==========
Puzzled. Why would someone gung-ho about Pentax cover over the logo? I
mean I
could understand if one covered over the Canon logo.
Marnie aka Doe ;-)
