Comments on: Samyang Optics’ Unusual Three-Brand Market Testing

By: Michael Webb

Michael Webb — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 22:27:00 +0000

You might want to really research the true ownership of the three brands. Just because they look like the same len and actually are the same lens, that does not mean they are the same company selling the lens under three brands. It appears thet Samyang is selling the lens to several different companies as OEM and letting them label them as they see fit. You can see the same thing in many other products like flash brackets and triggers .. With the production capabilities in asia most of the factories have the capability to prodcue more product than one company could sell, so they produce at super high volumes and drive the price down but then have to sell the finished goods to who ever will buy them. The factory only is concerned with production. The branding and marketing and selling is up to who ever buys them. Vivitar doesn’t actulaly have any factories. Bower is a name thats been around for a whle and mostly sells rebranded asian sourced products mostly to the mail order photo dealers. Bell and Howell is the same. their name is “licensed” to an awful lot of import goods now days, even heaters. Most of the lenses can be found under several brands. So far I’ve found them sold in the following brands. Rokinon, Vivitar, Samyang, Bower, Bell and Howell, Pro Optic, Polar, Walimex, Falcon,Opteka. Im sure there are a few I havent found yet. In the old days this kind of business practice was no big deal. you went down to the local shop and bought what brands they carried. They usually had the name brands and a few budget brands. One shop sold one lens with a certain brand name and a shop in a differnet town sold the exact same lens in a different brand. Today with the internet its easy to cross shop and compare and spot this practice ….. but in super reality how many people really do the research. Not as many as you would think. so they can still do this. FWIW Rokinon does stand out a little more than the rest, since they are now selling cinema versions of many of the same lenses with focusing gears and clickless aperture rings.

By: le_requin

le_requin — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:08:00 +0000

My intuitive explanation is this: Rokinon sounds a lot like a premium photography brand with a long tradition, similar to “Nokton” or “Voigtlander” (the characteristic “i” and “o” sounds and a consonant like “k” or “t” in the middle) and thus emphasizes quality, which means it should be able to fetch the highest price of the three. Samyang sounds Asian, but not Japanese, and thus triggers expectations of an affordably priced Hong Kong product or even a knockoff with an excellent value for the money. This means it should sell in high quantities based on that expectation, but at a lower price than a Rokinon. Depending on where the mathematical sweet spot is, splitting into two brands may actually make sense to cover both markets with a single product. The same thing is done with food all the time. Same product, different packaging and brand, one more than twice the price. People fall for it all the time.

Bower, despite its similarities to “Bowens”, does not sound like a photography brand, or if so, maybe the type of custom brand a photo retailer might put on a cheap studio flash or something like that. At the very least, it doesn’t scream quality, but it also doesn’t scream low-cost or value-for-money. It also sounds like it is an American brand. Everybody “knows” that good lenses are either made in Germany or Japan, or at least somewhere in Asia. Made in USA photo equipment doesn’t have the best image, mostly because there isn’t really a well-known tradition of US-based products.

Also note the focus on the home pages. The Rokinon brand emphasizes the lens itself, suggesting that the company is very proud of it and that the craftsmanship and precision deserves showcasing. Bower focuses on an image implied to be taken using their products instead (even though it is clearly a stock photo of course). However, it looks like it focuses on lighting and/or fun, not on a specific optical attribute like sharpness or even artistic value (i.e. they are not suggesting that the best photographers in the world use their products, like Leica does with their spotlights of Magnum photographers and so on). It looks like any old photo company that produces all sorts of photo producs, not a company with a long tradition or a passion for optics.

The Samyang page’s imagery and color palette is more focused on an economic aspects with a photo of a building which presumably houses their offices and a picture of business people in suits as well as a generic chemistry lab picture that could really be related to anything. Samyang presents itself as a company that is about money and business relationships, not photography. I don’t think it does a good job at selling to end users, maybe more to distributors.

By: Dean Hill

Dean Hill — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 19:36:00 +0000

I’ve also found them under ‘Bell & Howell’ Ian old Cine name IIRC

By: Jens Marklund

Jens Marklund — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:09:00 +0000

I think all of the brands uses the AF chip. I can’t see why they would add it to some and not others. It depends on the lens (focal length). I know the 85mm does, and I think the 35mm as well.

Oh, and it’s controlled by the AF system, not the sensor. Only works with higher end cameras.

By: Jens Marklund

Jens Marklund — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:08:00 +0000

But at the same time, very correct within my sentence ;)

By: Malcolm Debono

Malcolm Debono — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:48:00 +0000

They also have the brand Walimex which apparently they use within Europe since it’s based in Germany - http://www.walimex.com/en/start . In fact, Amazon UK and DE have these lenses in stock.

By: Jaron Schneider

Jaron Schneider — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:47:00 +0000

They use a few glass manufacturers to make their lenses. Samyang has made at least one of their lenses. But you’re right, my word “owned” is incorrect.

By: Spy Black

Spy Black — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:37:00 +0000

Vivitar is owned by Sakar, not Samyang.

By: Jaron Schneider

Jaron Schneider — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:10:00 +0000

Was always my intent to write this piece as a follow up to my original. I wanted to get a sense as to how people felt about the brands before discussing Bower’s poor acceptance by consumers.

And yes, Vivitar is also owned by Samyang.

But think whatever you like about this article. I just personally find the situation interesting.

By: Spy Black

Spy Black — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:08:00 +0000

The Vivitar version is also available at B&H, although it appears they’re phasing them out. My hunch is that Samyang was simply trying to establish themselves in the American market, where they can be discriminated upon for being Korean. So they came in through third-party discount brands that are more commonly known. There is enough knowledge of their products in the US now that they may feel confident enough to sell under their own name and be respected for what they make. I think from here on in you may be seeing only the Samyang brand name. We’ll see.