Rumors (now denied): Olympus to shut down camera division in less than 8 months

Status
Not open for further replies.

hoodlum

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
390
Location
Toronto Canada
And then a more positive article ............ https://photofocus.com/news/olympus-addresses-rumors-of-sale/?fbclid=IwAR0-bQzaIZ2oOrpUOUtyzjuJD0g_0iWHF527v6PhmdlKccShT0RQgPqLYI4

I think I will just continue using what I have, buy the lenses that I need / want and leave the rumormongering (is that even a word ?) to others :biggrin:
It is amazing how much FUD has been posted over the past few days. Below is the key portion of the statement.

"For Imaging, however, we currently have no plans to sell the business. The task is therefore to stabilize and strengthen its market position. To achieve that, we are actively running marketing activities, and have already established a clear and exciting product roadmap for the coming months and years. We are actively pursuing future technology developments that will enhance photography and video for creators. Furthermore, Imaging is and will continue to be an important technology and innovation driver for our other businesses."
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
378
Location
Thessaly, Greece
@Bytesmiths
I am still laughing after reading your “Fool Frame” wording ! :laugh:

I am sure there are quite a few better details that can be found in the product a proper FF rig over smaller formats when in really capable and decided hands (in a similar way proper MF trumps FF when you can pay for it and have a caddie to do the heavy lifting for you) but it looks like the m43 format really addresses most real needs of real life people looking to get great results with real life weight/cost and educated user abilities. Most people would seldom get any better results with bigger formats in real life shooting, I am convinced.

But if the prospective buyers only see now affordable FF as better by definition, what can be done to change their minds in this ever decreasing ILC market?
 

MarcioK

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Nov 9, 2012
Messages
14
Nikon has other optical ventures like eyeglasses and photolithography, but unlike Olympus and Panasonic, are mostly reliant on their consumer and pro imaging market both for revenues and identity.
Not anymore. In the latest forecast, the Precision Equipment Business of Nikon should bring more revenue and profit than the Imaging Products Business.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Ross the fiddler

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
3,880
Location
Blue Mountains, NSW, Australia
Real Name
Ross
Have a go at the attitude of this admin guy (Peter) on 'that' rumour site. He really makes himself look like a lost cause.

1574313544206.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

barry13

Mu-43.com Editor
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
9,400
Location
Southern California
Real Name
Barry
I never understood why Japan stuff while generally excellent on the hardware side always lack in the software logic side - is the japanese way of thinking that more inflexible to the other oriental societies in the general area and this propagates to their products? building on what @Aristophanes notes, what I see is that in this mostly software driven age (FPGA hardware description languages included) they seem to be more & more missing the ever accelerating train for many years now... (....Sony AF engine aside)
IMO, hardware companies are terrible with software. Lots of car companies are including 'app' support on many new cars, but I've yet to see one that has a real ecosystem with updates and new apps released, let alone third-party apps. Maybe Tesla is an exception, but they're more of a Silicon Valley startup than a traditional car company. And hopefully Android Auto is helping, but I haven't had my hands on it.

Samsung had cameras with Android built-in, but unless there's an official Android Camera or CE version, strong third-party support for such devices seems unlikely.
 

JonSnih

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
141
Location
CZE
Yeah its quite obvius, wonder why he dont published and spread similar rumors regarding Nikons situation and their statments in the finacial report for image business...their statment is no less worrying than Olympus.
Two reasons. He is personally a Nikon or Fuji fanboy (I am not sure which one). Second he has got a certain bias towards the m4/3. I dont know why. He only keeps posting m4/3 rumours because of solid revenue he get from clicks/views.
 

JonSnih

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
141
Location
CZE
There ya go.

I swear, I don't understand why people buy 50Mpx cameras, just to open Photoshop and throw away half the pixels! I might only have 20Mpx, but I use them all! I suspect that for anything that needs over 300mm, most Fool Frame users are actually using so-called "crop frame" anyway!
Sometimes if you want more than an entry level FF CSC (such as the A7iii, the Z6) you end up with a megapixel beast because there is no other option.
Sometimes ppl buy megapixel beasts just to talk about it (look at the detail I have and you can only dream about).

I really hope that the E-M1iii will feature a 24MP sensor or thereabouts (to prioritize read-out speed) and not a 42-47MP monster.
 

Ross the fiddler

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 20, 2012
Messages
3,880
Location
Blue Mountains, NSW, Australia
Real Name
Ross
Two reasons. He is personally a Nikon or Fuji fanboy (I am not sure which one). Second he has got a certain bias towards the m4/3. I dont know why. He only keeps posting m4/3 rumours because of solid revenue he get from clicks/views.
Maybe a Nikon fanboy. :rolleyes:

1574331002319.png
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2015
Messages
129
Location
Switzerland
Real Name
Siegfried
reading this,
I see they are downscaling the camera business in favor to the currently much more profitable medical business

my gut tells me they are surely not exiting the camera sector but definetely streamlining and moving upstairs where margins are higher looking to better harvest what they can from then not few people willing to pay the premium for mighty able compactness - most probably scale down and slow down the lens roadmap as well as they move R7D resources towards medical

as I see it, if someone is heavily interested in best compactness & lightness even at a cost in a plenty capable system I see no real alternatives - I read the fellow member answers and articles suggesting that the competitive APS-C systems are bigger and heavier at their high end lens/bodies combinations so there is an established customer base looking for what the higher end m43 system has to offer and willing to pay for it so plenty of milk there for a streamlined higher end lineup for the following years (or at least until an ground braking competitor move like what the Sigma FP or the Nikon fresnel lenses are)

at the bottom line, given how the market is moving, I expect all camera systems to move higher in prices so the price difference will still favor the m43 system compactness

as for me, I favor compactness a lot but my weak wallet makes the decisions and the total system value for me may not point towards the m43 system in the future - as is Olympus target group is moving away from my territory
From your link I copied this from the Olympus statement......?

Crucial-business-1.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

gary0319

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Messages
555
Location
Sarasota FL
There ya go

I went on a photo club walk yesterday to a shoreline wildlife refuge. Three out of ten of us were shooting Olympus! The two guys with big Canon DSLRs on huge tripods spent most of the time helping each other scroll through menus, trying to get auto-focus to do what they wanted it to do.
Nine members from my camera club on an outing 2 days ago to the Tampa Aquarium. Eight shooting Olympus E-M1 II, one Sony A7II. Of the 60 members in my club over half (the most active) are now Mirrorless and more than 20 of those shoot Olympus. Same 30+ percent......
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,147
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
The upside of all this may be that Olympus might be a bit more bold with their choices to show they are serious. Even though it's not that critical, a 24 MP sensor would help. They would then have the same resolution as many of the APS-C and FF cameras. JMHO, but mu43 could probably benefit from some computational tech at high iso.
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
378
Location
Thessaly, Greece
but what mpx limits do current lenses pose on the system?
higer mpx sensors maybe just a gimmick unless you use ultra high quality stratospheric price lenses - but it does sound cool in advertising

I have been wishing for long now for an extra stop in field shallowness or lack of noise through computational techniques, I hope someone over there does read the forums
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,147
Location
Southwest Virginia
Real Name
Steve
but what mpx limits do current lenses pose on the system?
higer mpx sensors maybe just a gimmick unless you use ultra high quality stratospheric price lenses - but it does sound cool in advertising

I have been wishing for long now for an extra stop in field shallowness or lack of noise through computational techniques, I hope someone over there does read the forums
That hasn't been the case for FF so far. Many older digital-era lenses have done just fine. Of course, a 24 MP mu43 sensor has smaller pixels then the new Sony 61 MP A7R3
 

gary0319

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Messages
555
Location
Sarasota FL
but what mpx limits do current lenses pose on the system?
higer mpx sensors maybe just a gimmick unless you use ultra high quality stratospheric price lenses - but it does sound cool in advertising

I have been wishing for long now for an extra stop in field shallowness or lack of noise through computational techniques, I hope someone over there does read the forums
Maybe someone can offer what the Line Pairs per MM are required for the Pixel density of a 24 mpx 4/3 sensor (or for the new Sharp 33.7mpx 4/3 video caamera).
With LPMM now over 80 for the 12-100 Olympus pro lens it doesn't seem to be problem so far....
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,481
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
what mpx limits do current lenses pose on the system?
If you have a body with Hi-Rez, it's easy to find out!

Simply shoot a (tripod-mounted) shot in normal and in Hi-Rez.

See a difference? If so, your lens is shooting above the basic system resolution. If not, you're lens-limited in resolution.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,481
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
higer mpx sensors maybe just a gimmick… I have been wishing for long now for an extra stop in field shallowness
You do understand that your two statements are at odds with each other, right?

Higher resolution sensors will result in more depth of field for a given subject area, all other things being equal.

People who keep begging for "more megapixels" seldom consider that!
 
Joined
Nov 6, 2017
Messages
378
Location
Thessaly, Greece
Higher resolution sensors will result in more depth of field for a given subject area, all other things being equal
I see this correct only if pixel peeping - isn’t the circle of confusion a product of lens geometry alone?
I am lacking in the specific mathematics of sensor/lens physics computations field.

I am pro-computational in small quantities to get over some limitations of the sensor size, mostly DoF related, properly executed to be considered high quality enhancements and not blur filter effects.

As far as mpx goes, I consider 16 sensor mpx resulting in 8 good screen/print mpx after all the bayer stuff computations more than enough for the maximum prints a sane person needs. Anything extra would not hurt but is not really needed - I’d prefer more dynamic range and less noise over extra mpx any day.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,481
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
isn’t the circle of confusion a product of lens geometry alone?
Yes. But I was talking to the "equivalence" crowd.

If you use up the extra pixels in a high-res sensor by cropping, you'll invoke the Equivalence Gods™ and wind up with less DoF.

So to summarize, the lens geometry does indeed determine circles of confusion, but pixel pitch (resolution) determines how many pixels will be affected by those circles of confusion.

The Fool Frame equivalence police will try to convince you that an ƒ/2 lens is really an ƒ/4 lens, but they conveniently ignore that going from 24 megapixels to 50 megapixels essentially does the same thing. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom