Olympus Get a Real Camera Campaign – Clever but is it Effective?
Olympus recently launched an ad campaign in Australia named “Get a Real Camera”. The campaign revolves around the idea of criticizing camera phone users and telling them to get a real camera. The link getarealcamera.com redirects to Olympus’ new Pen range of Micro Four Thirds system. Now the question is whether it’s a good idea to criticize the potential market Olympus’ trying to convert by telling them their photos suck?
Now these are the common segments of camera users today:
- Pro DSLR users
- Amateur DSLR users like me
- Micro four thirds users who wants a compact interchangeable lens system
- Advanced point and shoots the likes of Canon Powershot S or G series and Fuji X or F series
- Leisure snapshotters who bring a compact point and shoot everywhere
- Finally the camera phone users.
This campaign assumes that most camera phone users take rubbish photos or it attempts to convince the masses of this idea. It seeks to invoke an emotional reaction from the audience and to react by getting a real camera. Let’s see how it will affect each of the segment and how successful it is in converting them into a micro four thirds users.
The professionals, honestly I doubt they would be affected by such campaign. First of all, the message contained within the campaign doesn’t apply at all since they don’t use camera phones for professional purposes. Second, their photos aren’t rubbish. Next, they already own an interchangeable lens system and if they are looking for a more portable camera, I’d think that they would go for a top-end all-in-one compact, Canon Powershot S95 for example, to meet their needs. Afterall, having another interchangeable lens camera seems to defeat the purpose of filling the gap between having a professional system and a portable camera that can be carried anywhere. So they’d probably just laugh off the advert and move on.
How about amateur DSLR users? If I’m representative of other users in this segment, I’d think it’s funny and it certainly grabs my attention (why would I be writing this post otherwise?). Is it effective on me? I’m happy with my DSLR and I’m not looking for a micro four thirds system so there’s no decision-making behavior for the ad to affect me. For others who might be considering the system, perhaps the ad gives them an additional product range to their consideration set, but the message about getting a real camera again isn’t really applicable.
For existing micro four thirds users, it’s clear. They are already using a real camera. Not so real if it’s from Sony or Panasonic, but close.
The advanced users perhaps might be aspiring to move on to a higher level of photography by equipping themselves with an interchangeable lens system, either a DSLR or Micro Four Thirds. But again, the effect of the ad campaign would be just to add more information to their consideration set which probably also includes Sony NEX and Panasonic Lumix G. Seeing this campaign alone wouldn’t really convince them that Olympus is superior. The compact users aren’t likely to be affected at all, for they are probably happy where they are or are aspiring to be better just like the advanced users.
Now let’s consider the exciting segment of camera phone users. There could be two types of camera phone users, those using it as an alternative to their existing DSLRs or compacts and those using it as their sole camera.
For the former, a camera phone isn’t their main tool for the trade and they know that they’re trading off image quality for portability. They are likely to feel secure with their current photo skills and know that they can still take good pictures even with a camera phone. True that the photos might be more noisy or less sharp or lack vibrance, but they know that’s what they get for leaving their main cameras at home.
The second group that uses only camera phone would be the one that’s most emotionally affected by this campaign. They know that they’re not using the best cameras in the market for one reason or another. Perhaps they seek to improve in photography and wish to get a better camera. This would be the perfect group of people for the micro four thirds to target for they need a better camera, they are open to all options of camera systems and they have no attachments to any existing camera brands. Now they come across this campaign that cruelly criticizes them and implies that their photos suck.
Would they feel any better about themselves? Would they be more determined to improve their skills? Perhaps some do, but how many would be put off, demoralized and give up altogether? Then is this campaign a success? Why not inspire them instead, like I am Nikon did.