[Gary Tenney]

Since the 920 came out I have been thinking about why Nokia put the "Carl Zeiss" words on the ceramic next to the camera on the 920 as opposed to "Nokia" like on their international variants of the 920. When the Lumia 900 came out in April I figured they just put it on to highlight that aspect of the phone (makes sense). Later when the international 900s were shipped they had the traditional "Nokia" on the back. This was obviously also true of the 920 when it launched both in the US and internationally.

As I have thought more about this, I wonder if it has something to do with US carriers tendency to ruin the look of a phone by putting their logo all over it. Verizon is especially bad at this. When I look at most smartphones it seems like wherever there is a branding for a phone such as HTC or Samsung, the carrier will usually put their own branding somewhere close by. I have been thinking that Nokia has been putting Carl Zeiss on their US phones instead of Nokia so carriers would not ruin the aesthetics of the phone by putting their branding on the back side of the phone. I assume that carriers would have a more difficult time justifying branding a phone if the manufacture's brand is not close by. If you look at the HTC 8X there is an HTC logo on the back which is always accompanied by either T-Mobile, Verizon, or the AT&T globe. There is obviously no such branding on the back of the 920. It seems to me like AT&T would have been more likely to put their brand on the back of the Lumia 920 if Nokia's branding was clear and visible on the back of the phone. Since Nokia's branding is on the front of the phone you also see the AT&T globe.

Obviously this is just a theory but it makes sense to me. It seems to me that Nokia sacrificed some of their own brand visibility for the sake of maintaining the integrity of the clean and pure design language of the 920. Let me know if you think I am way off on my theory or if it makes sense to you. It just seems curious to me that the US version of the 920 is the only one that has "Carl Zeiss" prominently labeled in large text rather than "Nokia" in the back.

None of this is true for the iPhone obviously, but I think that is more of a reflection of Apples incredible negotiating power compared to other phone companies. (Don't think for a minute that Verizon would not brand the heck out of the iPhone if they could get away with it.)

Edit: I know that in about all of the international versions of the 920 it says "Carl Zeiss" in small text with the "Nokia" in larger text, but in the US there is no "Nokia" anywhere on the back, just "Carl Zeiss" in large print.

[hipporama]

The 920 in India has both Nokia and Carl Zeiss on the ceramic strip.

[Sharpmango]

Uk Nokia also says carl zeiss and Nokia on the back strip. Your theory may have merit however

[Huime]

CZ lens is always part of the branding. It has been there since the N-series. But welcome to Nokia family tho.

[Gary Tenney]

Yeah, the Carl Zeiss lens is going to be featured as a part of the phone (the 720 also has Carl Zeiss branded on it). But the Lumia 920 and 900 are the only Nokia phones I am aware of that only have Carl Zeiss on the back, but do not have any Nokia branding also on the back. It just seems weird that they choose to brand the 920 differently in the US as opposed to the rest of their 920s (by having Carl Zeiss in large print, but not having any Nokia branding on the back). I guess my point was not so much that it is weird that they have "Carl Zeiss" on the back, but that they do not have "Nokia" on the back in the US on their 920 and 900.

[Coreldan]

My Finnish 920 also has both Nokia and CZ

[Gary Tenney]

My Finnish 920 also has both Nokia and CZ

Yep. As mentioned in the post, all countries outside of the US have Nokia and CZ. The US oddly only has the CZ brand on the back and no Nokia brand.

[ttxzee]

the plate on NL 920 always Nokia and CZ, the NA version of NL900 only said CZ

[WanderingTraveler]

This makes me wish they pulled off Carl Zeiss lens on the 822.

I mean, while it isn't as beautiful as the 920 (which shouldn't be tainted by carrier branding, which AT&T did a perfect job of masking), but Verizon threw up their logos on the 822.

[anon(5698912)]

It probably has to do more with advertising than anything else.

[mythra]

Another theory to consider is that the Nokia brand is not strong in the US at the moment. The Carl Zeiss brand, though, is viewed in high respect. Internationally, Nokia still has a strong brand image. So it might just be a matter of what will make a Customer buy the phone.

The brand image ultimately ties back to how you will show off your phone to your friends, how you will feel about carrying it and displaying it to others, etc. In the US a Carl Zeiss lens achieves it better than Nokia. Nokia has been out of the US for a long time and they are only now making a comeback. When their brand is more respected then maybe we will see a change. I believe it will take another couple of years for that. The EOS will definitely put the Nokia hardware on the map. Then WP needs to strengthen a bit more. That combination will make it a strong brand.

[anon(5698912)]

^ very true.

[AngryNil]

Nokia should scrap logos on the front face completely. I hate it how they have good looking devices with logos squished in at the top. The Nexus devices look fantastic without a front logo, and so does the AT&T 8X.

[Nabkawe5]

CZ actually represents something dude , its Carl Zeiss optics which brings amazing consistency in shooting experience due to their high standards of creating on top notch all around good lenses.