1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

does EM-5 set benchmark?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by Al., Apr 26, 2012.

  1. Al.

    Al. Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 3, 2010
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Price I mean, Is it a camera for the eliteist?

    Sells in the UK for £999 body only, which translates to $1600 in the US

    Add a few prime lenses 12mm , 20mm, 45mm, another £1000

    extra kit eg bags, batteries, cards etc another £500

    What about the working man?, manual workers, with familes and mortgages, can they aspire to owning such exotic equipment, or do we say, as Marie Antoinette once reputed to have said," let them eat cake"

    The point I am making, is ....Has the EM-5 , set the benchmark, When the expected GH3 or G5 comes out, is the benchmark now set at £1000, It will most probably have new sensor, maybe weather sealing and a few more Gizmo's

    But Can manufacturers justify these prices?

    lets look at Olympus EM-5 ( These are just my guest/emates) I am only a painter and decorator , not an economist

    R&D £50
    Materials, £50
    Manufacture £100
    promotion £25
    Frieght £25
    = £250
    olympus profit £100%?
    = £500(out of factory)

    advertising Olympus UK £25
    = £525
    Dealer profit 60% ? = £315

    add 20% VAT = £168
    Total..........................£1000 ish

    Has Frenzy dies down, stock piles build up and demand falls. then the price falls, R&D has been paid for, promotion drops and profits drop

    Then, in 6 months, us poor church mice can pick them up for £600, then maybe dropping £100 a year for next couple of years
  2. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    The E-M5 is $1000 body only in the US. There are amateurs walking around with the $1200 NEX-7, $1300 D7000, $1500 EOS 7D, $1700 X-Pro1, $2,300 Sigma SD1 Merrill, and even the Leica M9 for seven thousand. Elitist? Hardly. And don't even get me started on the people who barely understand aperture but have a Canon L-series lens. Hell, YOU have a GX1 and two lenses, at a cost about equivalent to an E-M5.

    Personally, my experience has been that shrewd buying and selling means that you can have any gear you want for nearly free. If you roll over to a new camera body every year or two, the cost isn't $1000. It's about $100/year as a camera lease that you then get rid of when the M6 is out. That's the same price to process... fifteen rolls of film. Or buy a reasonably nice dinner for four.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Al.

    Al. Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 3, 2010
    Hull, East Yorkshire, UK
    Yes, I know amateurs that are doctors, solicitors and drive porches and Bentleys

    I am talking about average Joe, who has to save hard

    When the GF1 and Pens arrived they were affordable and gave :43: to the average person who wanted a small portable camera with excelent performance
  4. ripleys baby

    ripleys baby Straw clutcher

    Aug 10, 2011
    For the elitist ? No I don't think so. It may be more to do with how you spend the money you have. I recall a few years ago being asked how come I could afford such an expensive camera.
    Eos1 kit (film) I chose to drive a ten year old ex bt van , he had a new Merc.
    Now I am unemployed AGAIN ! This new emp 5 d
    Type thing is further from my reach. However I could sell my van and get a slightly cheaper car.
    Had a big Bronica kit once too. I financed that by giving up smoking for three years.
  5. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    Why does everybody with some money to spare have to be a rich doctor? People buy houses for hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even a basic new car is about $20,000. The ever popular Macbook Pro is easily $2,000. A plane ticket and hotel stay for two people for a few days will set you back a few thousand. But buying a camera for $1000 is elitist and not "average Joe"?

    You're being an ass.

    Besides, you can go buy an E-PM1 for about $400 new (or whatever it is in the UK). Nobody has taken that away. There's just a bigger, badder option for people who have the money to spend. There's no "benchmark", and your price breakdown makes no sense. (though at UK 999, you guys are getting fleeced).
  6. ripleys baby

    ripleys baby Straw clutcher

    Aug 10, 2011
    We in the UK are always being shafted !
    On just about everything
  7. songs2001

    songs2001 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 8, 2011
    OM was originally for the elite. The pen series used half sized for those that couldn't or didn't want to pay for full size film.

    The Pen series also included non interchangeable cameras.

    That's why people are upset that Olympus downgraded the OM name

    It doesn't really matter anyways, a ep3 with a vf2 costs the same as a EM5. So it's not more expensive. It just feels that way.
  8. ripleys baby

    ripleys baby Straw clutcher

    Aug 10, 2011
    The OM1 for the elite ? Wrong I think .
    I sold my second hand Zenith E to buy one when they first came out. I was in my first job on minimum wage. Extra lenses were out of the question for a while though.
  9. songs2001

    songs2001 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 8, 2011
    OM1 was 389 with a 50 1.4 in 1972. Cost in 2010 money comes out to 2,000.

    http://basepath.com/ClassicCameras/full.php?image=13&title=Olympus OM-1 - 1972

    Min wage was 1.60 in 1972, it would take you 240 hours to buy the OM1.

    Min wage is 7.75 in 2012. It'll take you 170 hours to buy a OMD kit with 12-50 lens, or 180 to buy a OMD body and 45 1.8 or 200 hours to buy a OMD body and 25 1.4 Leica lens.

    Or if you worked 240 hours in 2012, for 1860, you can get the OMD body, 25 1.4, refurbished 45 1.8, free flash that comes with the body and an extra FL300 flash with the rebate and a neckstrap.

    So in real terms, the OMD of today is much cheaper than the OM1 of 40 years ago.
  10. ripleys baby

    ripleys baby Straw clutcher

    Aug 10, 2011
    I, unlike most of my pals , did not go out and get slaughtered every weekend . Plus I worked in pub collecting glasses 3 nights a week. It's really not difficult. My brother bought the lovely Canon A1 . That was expensive.

    Oh I didn't have the 1.4 !!!!!
    • Like Like x 1
  11. pictor

    pictor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 17, 2010
    I don't know what you mean by saying that, since the pen wasn't significantly cheaper when it arrived. BTW, I don't think that the E-M5 is for the elite, because it is not even an extraordinarily expensive camera compared to the competition.

    BTW, I did not expect the price difference between the E-P3, when it was introduced, and the E-M5 to be as small. But then, I have always thought that the prices of the E-P1, E-P2 and E-P3 were extraordinarily high. Of course, there are people who cannot afford the E-M5. However, there is no law, that every camera must not cost more than average Joe can afford.

    There are also other cameras, which are much cheaper, like the Panasonic G3, which offers everything one really needs. The G3 most probably has the same sensor, an integrated EVF and much more. It costs about half the price. One looses the weather sealing, the better controls and IBIS compared to the E-M5.
  12. songs2001

    songs2001 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 8, 2011
    I don't think it's that different now. You can work a minimum wage job and save up and buy an "elite" camera like the Canon 5D mark II.

    When I say it was "elite" I mean it was never marketed toward the family snapshooter like the pen was.

    Also on that same page, is the Canon F1 that sold for 540 back in 1971 with a 1.4 lens, which was marketed equivalent to something like a Canon D1x professional level camera.

  13. ripleys baby

    ripleys baby Straw clutcher

    Aug 10, 2011
    I'm going to back track now. My lovely father just reminded me of another deciding factor in this.
    Disposable income !
    In my teens I was lucky enough to have a job/s.
    In fact in the 70's you could quit one on Friday knowing you could walk into a new one on Monday. My folks never charged me a lot for keep either. So I suppose I was rich by today's standards. I had more disposable income than my parents did. No mortgage no kids no bills !
    Great days. Petrol less than 50p a gallon , pint of quality beer 16 p.
    Boo hoo , I wanna go back !
  14. willo

    willo Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 25, 2010
    There will always be different cameras at different prices points, just because the E-M5 is expensive it doesn’t mean all cameras suddenly shoot up to that price. Companies have to accommodate the different price segments, you can be sure that Panny and Oly sell more entry level stuff than the high end cameras.

    The E-M5 isn’t elitest, it’s targeted at people who are willing to pay extra for the weatherproofing, EVF and build quality. If you’re budget doesn’t stretch to the E-M5 then go for the G3 which is just a good a camera.
  15. songs2001

    songs2001 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 8, 2011
    I suppose living in England? was a lot different in the early 70s than in the US. I don't think there military drafts.

    On the plus side it did give servicemen an opportunity with little or no living costs to buy cheap Japanese made cameras.
  16. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium

    I think your numbers are way out.... I doubt that Olympus make more than 30-40% profit, possibly less, and the dealer probably only has a margin of 5-10%.

    They probably make a higher percentage on batteries, some lenses and other accessories.

  17. Iansky

    Iansky Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 26, 2009
    The Cotswolds, UK
    In the UK we have always paid a higher price for kit than in the US and we have been paying in £ sterling the same price as paid in the US in $ ($1000 = £1000) and this has been going on for years and will continue as long as there is a market for cameras.

    What I always do is when wanting an upgrade, I review my current gear to see what "I want to keep" versus what I will continue to use and then trade in /sell my excess kit to help fund the new equipment - I have been doing this for years and it works as well as preventing a build of nice to look at but never used kit (also reduces earache from "Er indoors").

    I am not susprised at the cost of the EM5 and if it proves as good as it appears on paper it could be well worth the cost - time will tell and it is only with use by "Users" who will put it through it's paces to validate it from a shooters point of view rather than a reviewers point that we will learn the true value for money of the camera.

    I also suspect that Panasonic will answer in kind this year as they have already hinted at a "Very, very high quality camera" and the GH2 is about due for a renewal so it could be interesting as well as increase further the growth of Mu43 versus DSLRs.

    This will also increase the availability of used or in many cases hardly used cameras purchased by those who want the latest but do not shoot much, again it is good for the market especially in these financially challenging times.
  18. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    First of all this is not a PEN series camera. There are plenty of PENs at affordable rates and they r excellent value for money . Olympus is aiming this camera at serious shooters and not casual ones. Moreover anyone buying OMD will tend to keep it for at least 2 years and I am one of them . Now EP3 and G3 will offer u almost same performance at lower price.
    Now this isn't elite camera neither .Look at Leica M9 and Fuji Pro 1 , they are even more expensive . Panasonic MFT are even cheaper and u can pick up GF3 or USD 599 with dual lens kit. Olympus P2 which is not very far away from OMD in IQ is available for USD 229 body only at camera. What else do u want my friend . Now just wait for six months and u might get OMD for USD 799. Now if UK govt charges truck load of taxes from u guys then we can't do anything mate .U can ask someone in USA to buy camera and ship it to u .
    • Like Like x 1