What should Olympus do?

[Djarum]

As for the out of camera pleasing colours, maybe. The problem with this is the sheer number of people who shoot raw and use raw converters and that's been shown to produce virtually identical results between panny's and oly's. The second problem is that half the people don't particularly prefer or notice the olympus colours/jpegs. So you're left with a very very small subset of people who'd buy a camera specifically for the OOC jpegs AND sees/notices and prefers the oly jpegs. If that's your whole sell for a camera.... that's a very tiny target market.

I think the market for just shooting OOC is quite large, especially since Oly is marketing the E-PL1 and E-PL2 as an upgrade to point and shoot. Only more serious or enthusiasts do RAW, and I think that number is small in comparison to those who prefer just jpeg. Aside from color of Oly jpegs, they do seem sharper because of the weeker AA filter used. This is noticable compared to the G2/GFx cameras. We'll have to wait to see for the G3. I have no data to prove it, but if you look at some of the forums, many people picked Oly over Panny because of it.

So you're target audience is now some one who wants a slimline body only and not an slr body, wants to use manual lenses, and wants and EVF for that slimline body with manual lenses.

I may not be in marketing, but I think your target audience is so small... that oly would cease to exist even if they won over all those customers.

I disagree. Not considering how they market their cameras. Yes, some enthusiasts are doing manual/legacy lenses, but this is small compared to the people really buying these cameras.

When the E-P1 came out, I don't know exactly what their target audience was. But the E-PL1 and E-PL2 have been targeted and marketed I think by Olympus as a step up from the Point and Shoot. These two models have never been sold as dSLR or enthusiast/pro replacements.

 

[celer]

Neat places olympus could go with their mu43 cameras

So having just bought an gh2, I carefully considered all the various mu43 cameras, and I still want a smaller bodied mu43 camera, so I might pick up an Olympus mu43 camera.

Assuming they can't easily win the IQ war here are some other places they could set themselves apart from the rest of the pack:

1. Always sell Olympus 4/3s adaptors with every mu43 camera, bring both old 4/3s customers into the mu43s world cheaply, and let mu43 customers buy 4/3s lenses from them.

2. Make their cameras extensible in ways that are unheard of today.

- Allow HD video streaming over USB, so it can be easily captured on a computer in real time. (I would have bought one of their cameras on this feature alone.)

- Make it so that users can drop simple programming scripts onto the camera to perform tasks, and allow the scripts to be assignable to a button or two on the camera. (Imagine if you could configure the camera, meter the light, choose a delay, name a file something specific, choose how to focus, choose the post image processing steps, import haar cascade filters ( Haar-like features - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ) and detect when they have entered a frame, etc.)

3. Create and use an open Bluetooth protocol for controlling and interfacing with the camera Make it so you can control about 80% of the features on the camera via Bluetooth.

- This protocol should be able to work with most mobile phones (and they should make the software available)
- Should be able to see what the camera can see (i.e. look at the image)
- Should be able to configure all the various manual settings
- Should be able to start video / stop video, etc
- Make it so the camera can interface with other bluetooth devices (GPS), filestorage, bluetooth headsets (microphones), etc.

 

[Pan Korop]

- Allow HD video streaming over USB, so it can be easily captured on a computer in real time. (I would have bought one of their cameras on this feature alone.)

It seems to me the E-)P1 and E-P2 at least have it readily available, if not in HD. I use an accessory radio remote screen and release for "special viewpoints". The transmitter plugs in the USB, sends radio signal to the receiver screen. I guess one could tap the USB for other uses.

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

 

[celer]

It seems to me the E-)P1 and E-P2 at least have it readily available, if not in HD. I use an accessory radio remote screen and release for "special viewpoints". The transmitter plugs in the USB, sends radio signal to the receiver screen. I guess one could tap the USB for other uses.

Hmm, that is pretty cool, do you know if it is simply sending analog video over to the display, or do you think it is sending some sort of digital video (HDMI/MPEG, etc)?

My hope with USB be would be that the camera would simply stream H264/MPEG4/MJPEG directly to the computer via USB, so you wouldn't have to have a capture card or other special hardware. (For some reason it seems really difficult to get reasonable quality HD video streamed directly to a computer, I have tried some of the latest Logitech web cameras and they are lack luster.)

 

[Alanroseman]

Oly and what now

Speaking only for myself now. Therefore one man’s real world venture to µ43.

When I started exploring the move to smaller and lighter, the Oly 4/3 system served as a point of confusion, and nothing more.

It took time to weed out all the 4/3 vs. µ43 stuff I was reading. In retrospect I consider it time wasted. That said, had I not spent that time I may have ended up with a 4/3 instead of µ43. for a couple of reasons.

Being older (probably not wiser) I immediately gravitated towards a name I'd associated with cameras and lenses for many many years Olympus.. Panasonic was decidedly more difficult for me to accept as a serious maker of still cameras. I'd never seen an Olympus LCD TV, or Olympus surround sound amplifier. So in the beginning, for me, Panasonic began the race in a decided second place. (goes to show you about first impressions)

Looking at Olympus alone, I had to decide between 4/3 and µ43. In short order I decided Oly was competing with itself in a very narrow market segment. Even in retrospect I can not find an suitable answer to that question. For me.
Once I discovered that 4/3 wasn’t really buzzing with interest, and the reviews were more dated than the µ43 I decided on µ43. This left me with some doubt about Olympus’s vision for the future of their systems.

Still my reluctance to trust a video camera, TV set, electronic mfg. company with my still images remained. So... I bought one of each. An Oly, and a Panasonic. GF1 / EP1. with kits lenses.

As I knew I wanted at least two bodies at the end of the day, (that’s how I’ve always done it and old habits die hard). After very non scientific testing I came to the conclusion that built in EVF was going to play a role in determining my second body, and Oly just didn’t have it... or plans for it.. or thoughts of it, that I could ascertain. Easy decision now.

I’d held and shot the GF1 / bought a 20mm... was very very impressed with performance and IQ. The GF1 build quality was rock solid too. My issues with committing to Panasonic for stills were quieted. Sold the Olympus, bought a G1 as my second body.

Panasonic has continued to refine, and expand the µ43 platform at what is a very brisk pace.. some missteps, perhaps, but at least they are taking steps. Improving the system expanding the choices... giving me an EVF on many models, and choices still if I don’t want one..... choices.

My next purchase will be another Panny body lest Olympus gets back on the horse, drops 4/3.. commits all out to µ43 with some fast primes, built in EVF etc. Did I say built in EVF... it’s not a concept... it’s already here, and we like it.

It’s quite possible that everyone else here is much smarter, better informed, younger more in touch etc. than am I. I’ll give you all that and more. For me, 4/3 simply muddies the water at this point, and my guess is that it continues to do so. Further, I worry that there continue to be new members, new shooters etc. that have to make the distinction before they can proceed.

I hope Oly can find the way to the future and stop worrying so much about small missteps that they continue to suffer paralysis by analysis.

Cheers, Alan ( all µ43 and happy to be so)

 

[John M Flores]

Oly should carve their niche as the pro/serious enthusiast M43 maker, leaving Panny to video and more consumer-oriented markets. There'll be some overlap, and that's where the two will battle with GF/EP-L.

But above EP/EP-L, Oly should create a kick-ass E-5 style M43 body and get their wonderful zooms to M43 ASAP. The longer they hold onto 43 the longer it will take for that to happen. As great as the E-5 appears to be, it's probably not bringing new photographers into the fold. An M43 E-6 with awesome M43 pro zooms will.

I'd switch from Pentax and use M43 exclusively if they can make that happen.

 

[phrenic]

I think Olympus needs to swing big...you look at all those Pen models and the variations really are rather small. I'm happy with my e-p1 and I feel like even despite numerous generations of successors they all have the same fundamental design and characteristics. I would hope they have a little more ambition and resources for future models. Or maybe it will be the e-pl3 with a 5% faster af speed and dr..

That said I own more Olympus lenses than panny, for me they hit a sweet spot for the price-performance..maybe they can continue there but it would be nice to have some high end pieces to be proud of.

 

[squeegee]

I disagree. Not considering how they market their cameras. Yes, some enthusiasts are doing manual/legacy lenses, but this is small compared to the people really buying these cameras.

When the E-P1 came out, I don't know exactly what their target audience was. But the E-PL1 and E-PL2 have been targeted and marketed I think by Olympus as a step up from the Point and Shoot. These two models have never been sold as dSLR or enthusiast/pro replacements.

yes but the point was....

if they're target audience is the step up crowd from p&s, why would the person looking to step up pick olympus over sony or panasonic. The other individual was arguing that the target audience would be manual lens people, for which I'd agree olympus has an advantage with IBIS but that the crowd would be too small to sustain a company.

I agree the step up crowd would be a large audience and probably one that would make you more money as a company. But then the question is what makes your e-pl so much better that some one would pick it over the G's or NEX's.

It is fair to say the jpegs look nicer, but then it's also fair to say the panasonics focus better and the nex's have better iso and is smaller. There's no clear reason to pick olympus here. I'd hesitate to say that jpeg quality trumps the other aspects for people coming from the p&s crowd. I would go as far as to say, if jpg's did matter that much, it would show up in the sales numbers. The fact that it doesn't means people care about other aspects (what ever they are) more. (or their sales department is grossly incompetent)

Actually I'll even take this one step further... when average joe buys a camera (not forum enthusiasts)... how many of them walk into a store with an SD card, take pictures with all the cameras, go home to their computer, and look at the resulting jpgs to see which one looks better. How many p&s people just read online reviews and buy what ever is recommended. Or, do they walk into a store and say "oh that camera looks cute", picks it up, presses the shutter button a few times, asks a few not really important questions to the sales person, then buys the camera that's physically nice looking or attention grabbing or the one that's on sale. Do you think people coming from a p&s crowd even really know there's differences in jpg quality? (I'm not demeaning them, I'm serious, I never gave it a second though when I bought my first slr from a p&s).

 

[Allan Crowson]

Less uncertainty, more mft lenses, faster focus, EVF

Olympus should find a major way to reduce the uncertainty concerning the future of FT, which affects uncertainty about its plans for mFT. Decide already, and let people know so they can make their plans accordingly! It's called respect for the customer.

Beyond that, focus on mFT now, bring out mFT equivalent lenses for some of the most widely loved FT lenses: 14-54mm; 50mm; 12-60, etc.

Improve autofocus. Panasonic has shown that good mFT autofocus is possible.

Offer built-in EVF. I do not find the Gx/GHx form factor objectionable at all. But you do not have to adopt the SLR look. My E-PL1 with the EVF attached sits taller than my E-300!. A Pen with a built-in EVF in the top left corner of the back of the camera would go well. You could even retain the pivot. Some astute engineer would probably love the challenge of combining the built-in pivoting flash in with the built-in pivoting EVF…. As for the LCD panel, pivoting is the way to go.

In fact, the more I think about it, the best "form factor" I ever had, and that I miss the most, was the Sony F-707/717 series, with the pivoting body. That would be an interesting approach as well. In fact, speaking of Sony, find out what it would take to license their liveview approach from the A55. You can include that with the FT series to keep that going. The E5 will not draw in enough people to grow the company. The E-620 had the potential to do that had it been kept up to date.

One possible lineup (from "lowest" to "highest"):

• Digicams with shiny colors, superzooms, etc. You mainly need this segment for name recognition for people moving up; I still laugh at the thought of people who ask "Who is Pentax? Are they any good?" who nevertheless consider themselves knowledgeable!
• "High quality" fast compacts, à la XZ-1
• E-PLx for those moving up from digicams: fixed LCD, one model with and one without built-in EVF
• E-Px "high end" Pen: pivoting LCD, built-in pivoting EVF, built-in pivoting flash, moving to good manual controls, perhaps with a "ring around the lens mount" physical control à la XZ-1/OMx cameras
• E-620 replacement, updated with video and EVF.
• E-5 top dog, pushing the performance of the current E-x series

Above all enunciate clearly what you are going to do, and then do it. It's time to let us know where you are going to Stand, and then Deliver.

Opinions are like chins: nearly everyone has at least one. That one is mine! :smile:

 

[macboy001]

Big 4/3 is a dead-end; I don't understand why it exists, especially after m4/3. I

I used a GF1 once when I had to take pictures at sports events, the laughable shutter lag meant many pictures of an empty pitch, the players having run through. I bought an E-1 with HG lenses and couldn't be happier with the jpegs OOC. I need rapid response and good glass. I came originally from Canon 1Ds, but Canon couldn't design good dust removal if their life depended on it, and the weight of the gear was far too much. So I for one, bought Olympus again (albeit old) because its has a big 4/3, and will probably buy an E-5.

 

[Unregistered]

I am a relatively new micro 4/3 user and have gone for Olympus so feel like I have something to say on this matter specifically why I chose what I did!

Well firstly I am a mover up from p&s rather than most people here that appear to be moving down from SLR. I wanted a camera that was easy to start of with but had lots of potential learning opportunities to learn camera stuff and a big(ger) sensor than p&s.

My choices were firstly micro 4/3, sony or samsung - I very quickly went for micro 4/3 because as it has the support from 2 companies I thought it was the most future proof (no one wants to buy new glass because their system is no longer supported!).

Secondly it was a choice of oly or panny. Well from the reviews (I like most punter am not going to go round shops taking and downloading pictures in various formats and settings) saw that the oly gave better jpegs (which is important for novice users that want to build up their skills slowly) had a flash, also had more fun features like the art filters (I went for the E-pl1 by the way) and also looked more friendly (many people are scared of the whole SLR-esque looks of some of the pannys). Oh and also the inbuild IS was a plus, I am cheap and the opportunity to be able to play with cheap MF legacy lenses without having to worry too much about too blury shots very tempting! So thats why I went for it and I believe lots of people like me are choosing olys for the same reasons. And therefore I think that what oly should concentrate on is "fun" features and accessability.

As for full 4/3s well I dont see the the point, anyone choosing a new full system will go for the Nikkon, Sony or cannon route as I believe that everyone thinks its just a matter of time till 4/3 is unsupported and no one wants to follow a lame system. The only argument I can see for oly remaining to support full 4/3 is to keep the current customers happy, well I say screw them the fact is this will not put people off the micro 4/3 system (too much) because they will know even if olympus leave them again they will still have panny producing new products.