Olympus faux-technical sounding names

Started 6 months ago | Discussions thread
RoelHendrickx
Forum ProPosts: 22,220
Like?
The letters are not the problem. It's the numbers.
In reply to Henry Richardson, 6 months ago

The letters are not the problem because (believe it or not) there is some logic to it.

Look for Art's post here.

But the numbers and their order are just ridiculous.

The PENs were logical : a succession of numbers.

But why did they call the E-M5 the "5", while the later model became the "1" and the slightly simplified model became the "10".

What would be logical is a numerical succession (higher number is newer edition), while e.g. keeping the numbers with one digit for the top range, two digit for the simplified range.

Nikon was on that path (D3, D70, D300) until they issued the D700 and D800 that trumps the double-digits.

At one point or another, all camera manufacturers seem to reach the end of logic in camera naming.  One would wonder how and why they could not design a naming scheme and stick to it.

-- hide signature --

Roel Hendrickx
lots of images: www.roelh.zenfolio.com
my E-3 user field report from Tunisian Sahara: http://www.biofos.com/ukpsg/roel.html

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow