Black Ikon, Did you cover the logo?

[monopix]

Why should anyone care if someone else choses to cover (or leave uncovered) anything on their cameras?

Because the OP asked...

 

[Ken Ford]

Because the OP asked...

No, the OP asked:

Did you cover the logo too?

He *didn't* ask:

Is it silly to cover the logo?

or

What is your opinion about covering the logo?

Big difference.

 

[Bob Michaels]

I could honestly not tell you if there was a logo or if mine said just "Zeiss" or "Zeiss Ikon" on the front of either my silver or black body.

Now I would say that I am very familiar with them over the years I have been shooting with them. But I just have never paid any attention to what the front looks like. I am always on the other side.

 

[monopix]

No, the OP asked: <snip>

Er.. Who exactly were you quoting ?

And...

Why should anyone care if someone else choses to cover (or leave uncovered) anything on their cameras?

Youd beter wach out Mabelsound doesnt spoot that speling mistake or therell be all hell let lose around here.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

You must live on a different world to me mate.

Yep... California. 🙂

 

[Ken Ford]

Er.. Who exactly were you quoting ?

What? The OP, as noted.

 

[hiorgos]

Don't understand why to cover the logo makes some people angry..

I stand with the childish crowd who have an inherently flawed, merely relative, personal sense of experience. Yes indeed, I prefer the NO-BRANDED look on most any camera, except the Rolleiflex because the stylized writing on those puppies does actually seem aesthetically pleasing. But because I do not have an inherently universal wrap on human experience, this is probably screwed, too.

Something like this, just because you can do it or you have the idea to do it. Because the camera can actually look more nice and cool without the white brand name..

If you own a Porsche do cover up the name plates? 🙂

I would not buy a Porsche (or any other expensive car) even if I had the money. And for sure I would cover the name, would be fun 🙂

 

[ZeissFan]

I think I might have offered the first mean-spirited reply. I just think it's self-absorbed to think that anyone cares what camera you are using.

Furthermore, to cover up the logo is a act of self-indulgence. Sort of like: "Look at me. I'm so important and great that I cover up the name of my camera."

And in any case, if you're a non-brand person, you should be true to that endeavor and cover up or remove brand identity from everything that you own: Cars, televisions, refrigerators, clothing, tools and even food packaging. When you look at it this way, you'll see how childish this is.

I like my cameras and never have to make an excuse for covering the brand name.

Personally, I don't care. It's your camera, and you should do what you want. Don't be a sheep and do it just because others are doing it. Know why you're doing it. Don't do it just be part of the cool crowd. When you do that, you invariably end up looking like a dork.

 

[Ken Ford]

I think I might have offered the first mean-spirited reply. I just think it's self-absorbed to think that anyone cares what camera you are using.

Furthermore, to cover up the logo is a act of self-indulgence. Sort of like: "Look at me. I'm so important and great that I cover up the name of my camera."

And in any case, if you're a non-brand person, you should be true to that endeavor and cover up or remove brand identity from everything that you own: Cars, televisions, refrigerators, clothing, tools and even food packaging. When you look at it this way, you'll see how childish this is.

I like my cameras and never have to make an excuse for covering the brand name.

Personally, I don't care. It's your camera, and you should do what you want. Don't be a sheep and do it just because others are doing it. Know why you're doing it. Don't do it just be part of the cool crowd. When you do that, you invariably end up looking like a dork.

I see you're continuing with the mean spirited posts...

 

[Pablito]

I cover and uncover mine every other day. One day on, one day off. I think about this a lot.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The classic rationalization for taping up chrome Leicas was that they wouldn't glint and attract sniper fire. Fortunately I've never had to worry about that.

In 40 years of using Leicas I've never been noticed very much anyway -- which has been my intention -- and I really don't believe that taping over logos makes a blind bit of difference: it's always struck me as completely pointless, as if people looked so carefully at my camera that they (a) knew what a Leica was and recognized it and (b) would notice whether ot not it had tape on it and (c), especially in the light of (a), thought, 'Oh, that can't be a Leica because it has tape on it'.

Cheers,

R.

 

[AhtoT]

Let me state for the record that I'm sympathetic to the logo-obscuring crowd. Not for stealth, which I think is somewhat oversold. Rather, if you grew up a certain way, it's kind of embarrassing to be spied in public carrying a very expensive item. I think of my M2 and M7 and kind of anti-status-symbols...I love to use them but don't especially want people to know what they are.

Well said, exactly my thoughts. I cover my M6's lettering with black tape for exact same reason. But ZI is somewhat different as I don't think it is a status symbol, even if it may cost the same as used M. ZI is not a Leica (even if Ken Rockwell tells you it is better than Leica). 😛