Selective Focus: Ask and Ye Shall Receive–Knowing Your Customer Always Pays Dividends

Selective Focus: Ask and Ye Shall Receive–Knowing Your Customer Always Pays Dividends

1811

It’s often difficult to catch the pulse of buyers, but in a fast-changing, technology-driven market it would do the industry well to know about their expectations and what excites them. 

 

There are so many influences on consumers these days, with each vying for their attention, that it’s a wonder the buyer can keep it straight. But somehow they do, and those who are really into photography and imaging spend a good deal of time researching, chatting with one another and finding resources that apply to their hobby and passion. 

 

The price of cameras and lenses and even accessories these days makes it much more than an impulse buy, so deliberation and discussion is part of the game. In some cases, the consumer’s attitudes are shaped by the subtle and sometimes blunt marketing of the various manufacturers. Increasingly, however, consumers have formed virtual communities that can be as influential as any ad or marketing campaign, and the Internet is the new focus group. Think of sites like Trip Advisor and how it has influenced the travel market. Corrupt and whacked out as it is, the Internet is how disparate individuals connect and find their photo soul mates; it’s like a small town camera club gone worldwide.

 

But keeping track of all the forums, with associated alpha dogs and bullies and of course sincere folks, is no easy task. So there are other resources that the industry has come to rely upon. Research firms are one, and they are out there doing everything they can to get the lowdown from consumers—including point-of-purchase/inventory polls (although a nice historical snapshot, they are not necessarily a predictor of future buys in a speeded up tech world), follow-up surveys using lists culled from registration cards, and even counting clicks and data mining various websites. 

 

While the recent elections showed how some polls are quite accurate, it also demonstrated others are considerably less so. Realistically, the only way to find out what the photo buyer thinks about a particular product or line of products, or even the direction of technology, is to ask them—and then actually listen to what they say. 

 

One research firm I have come to rely on is InfoTrends, and I make a commitment to attend their meetings at trade shows, like photokina and CES/PMA, every year. I sit there and take copious notes, as it influences my ideas about the industry but also my direction for editorial coverage in the year ahead. While summaries, they are not making this stuff up and have the data to prove it. I have grown to trust them because they have been pretty much dead-on year after year, and I have been attending those meetings for many a moon. 

 

In fact, I can honestly say that anyone involved in marketing a product in this industry who is not paying attention to what they say is nuts. I am always quite amazed at how their predictions from the past year are supported by what happens in the year that follows. You could say, I suppose, that some past predictions became self-fulfilling prophesies, or in fact were somewhat self-evident: photo books good, low-end points and shoots bad, etc. But having gone to these meetings for many years, I can honestly say that if you played the odds they set, you’d be ahead of the game.

 

Another way I get to know what photo buyers are thinking is to conduct monthly mini-surveys among our readers at Shutterbug. The demographic is photo enthusiast to pro, with many “weekend warriors” included, and these folks are avid buyers and practitioners. I ask questions that I am curious about, and frankly use readers’ answers to help guide my editorial coverage. 

 

As I’ve done this job over the years, I’ve come to know the reader as very knowledgeable about photography and as someone who spends time browsing various sites and doing research on everything from new products to high-tech developments. They are quite meticulous in their knowledge and pride themselves on their awareness of all things imaging. (In fact, I once misidentified the maximum aperture of a lens and for weeks received numerous e-mails lambasting my mistake.) All this is to say that I find their responses valid and interesting. But here’s the “take it with a grain of salt” disclaimer: This isn’t your average snapshot crowd and they do not buy blister-packed cameras. Let me give you some recent examples of questions and results. I’ll round the numbers so it doesn’t seem too finicky.

 

I often try to gauge how certain camera or tech features are attractive to this group and why certain others are not. I feel that camera makers are sometimes seduced by their own technology, or chase a certain trend, like the recent “if the cameraphone’s got it I gotta’ have it too” craze. I posted a query right after the commencement of the Androidization of (some) cameras was announced last year, particularly about the newfound ability to download apps right into the camera itself. 

 

Well, this group was a bit less excited about all that, though 20% agreed that they were excited about being able to download apps into their camera. Most folks (50%) chose image quality as their first priority and, I assume, saw this all as just another feature or gimmick; the remainder (30%) said their iPhone or smartphone does this all already, thank you, so simply weren’t interested.

 

On a similar topic, late last winter after CES, when it was apparent that Wi-Fi was invading the camera market, I wanted to know how much this feature would influence their buy. It was early in the game, but the early adopters (15%) were game, while 30% simply had no interest. But the majority of respondents gave a “tell me more” response, wanting more knowledge on how it might work. 

 

I am eager to see how this year’s show responds to the need for more information (and frankly, for the most part, better performance) and how far this will go toward being as regular a feature in cameras as it is now in home printers, tablets and the like. At this point, I believe that bringing a camera out without Wi-Fi might be a mistake. It makes the industry look stodgy or at least technologically backward. But my advice would be to make it a feature, and not the headline, especially in advanced cameras; otherwise you’ll freak the enthusiast out that Wi-Fi is your dominant focus and sell point, not image quality.

 

In a similar vein, I asked folks about all those “art” filters and scene modes that are showing up in cameras, giving the user the ability to make special effects images at the moment of exposure or soon after, right in the camera. Well this one turns out to be a big “ouch” for those touting such features, at least to this group. Only about 5% thought this was a good idea and do or would use these often, while 75% said they’ll take care of that later in image-processing software themselves if need be, thank you. The remainder said they might do some onboard artsy work but finish it up, or do the heavy lifting later, when they process the images themselves. Clearly, special effects in cameras, like those star filters we used when we started out to get a twinkle in holiday lights, could be thought of as a nice thing to do but pretty much a passing fancy. 

 

Another piece of tech fluff, if you will, is the whole “cloud” movement, where various software companies, camera companies and the like offer off-site server storage for users’ images. Many of these are branded with the company’s name and proffer coupons, let them order prints and books, allow for firmware downloads and, in general, try to keep the user captive in their sphere.  

 

This one generated a certain amount of negative reaction from folks, with a mere 5% saying it struck them as a good idea for space-saving and giving them the ability to access their images from any device. Nearly half said they simply wouldn’t trust it and that it put images too far beyond their control. Yet some saw no great harm in it and would use it as simply another backup locale, although not their sole one. There have been too many balls dropped on this one for faith to have been made, with some of these sites going away with notice, and others leaving in the middle of the night, so folks are rightly wary.

 

Moving on to camera types and other hardware, readers responded positively to the growing “tough” camera models we’ve seen more and more of these days. A big 75% said they engage in activities that make it a good camera to have, saying they already own one or that it would be something they’d strongly consider in the future. A few doubt that image quality would be up to their standards, and some respondents said they didn’t make sense for their lifestyle. Sounds like an active bunch and a good category to grow.

 

Another trend we’ve seen is “fast” lenses for interchangeable-lens cameras, both DSLRs and mirrorless, and it looks like lens makers are on the right track. These are higher end lenses that have relatively wide maximum apertures and/or do not lose aperture width when zoomed, or fixed-focal-length lenses with max apertures in the f/1.4 to f/2 range. It took a while for these to make it into the digital world, but now that they have, folks are taking to them very favorably. In our survey, more than 50% responded to the trend positively and see them as great aids in working in low light and when they want shallow depth of field, while about 20% still opt for the image stabilization and high ISO route. Some folks are put off by the price (about 25%) and find cost the main impediment to owning one. I conclude that if they were more affordable, they’d sell very well to everyone in this group.

 

Another fairly high-tech item that requires a good deal of photo sophistication is a wireless flash system, particularly radio-controlled units with transmitter and receiver. Surprising to me was that about half of the respondents had already worked with or owned such a unit, and they find wireless flash a great way to get unique images. Very few said they don’t use flash, so this wouldn’t interest them, but almost 40% said they needed to learn more to get involved. 

 

The need for education about products was also reflected in the responses about memory cards, particularly with the numerous classifications, speeds and ratings being used today. Happily, more than 40% said they understand how to match card to camera to optimize their workflow, although the majority clearly need more information. (We responded immediately by doing a story on class and speed ratings, and it’s one of the biggest hit generators on our site.) Some say they just buy the fastest card they can to be safe (which with some cameras can be overkill); others expressed a real need for manufacturers to make matching card to camera and shooting needs a clearer proposition. That speaks to the need for retailers to be clearer about making a good match and for manufacturers to improve their packaging.

 

And, finally, as predicted by all the pollsters whose meetings I have attended, the mirrorless trend is certainly picking up speed and popularity among users. Nearly half the respondents told us that the features and usability of these cameras make them think they could use them as their main camera. However, about 30% feel they are probably best for snapshots and when they don’t want to lug around their DSLR. And about 25% said they prefer the “classic” design and functioning of a good, old DSLR. So it’s pretty much a split decision there, although garnering a positive response so quickly in the life of a product line speaks well to the quality of the products and their marketing. 

 

Like I said, I do this polling as much for my own information and guide as to serve as any industry barometer, but for me it adds to the knowledge I need to do my job. While the intros at photokina certainly spoke to these product and tech interests, I am eager to see what CES/PMA offer. This continues to be an exciting period for our industry, and the more we know about our end users the better off we will be. 

NO COMMENTS