Mike FL: Here is how Olympus made $160,000 in 6 months:
"It is already known that the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II (above), for example, is made in Vietnam, where labour costs are lower than Japan and China.
However, Sasa has suggested other cameras may also be assembled in Vietnam.
In the company’s Annual Report 2015, Sasa said: ‘In terms of manufacturing, we will develop a more efficient production system by leveraging the strengths of our different manufacturing sites.
‘For example, lenses and other components requiring sophisticated technologies and masterful techniques could be produced at the Shenzen Plant in China, with assembly of cameras performed at the Vietnam plant to take advantage of its low labor costs.’
@Karroly,I agree in the most part, and wasn't commenting in the negative re: this type of business practice. My comments are directed at @Mike FL.
I could / can not understand the purpose of his post re: Olympus returning to profit. I might be doing him a diservice, but it seemed to me that his post was denegrating them by inference, in that using a Vietnamese labour force was somehow a bad thing.This stand-point is how many often perceived "Made in China" not so long ago (some still do!) As China's wealth has increased, so presumeably has the wealth and expectations of its labour force. This in turn will make other countries appear more attractive from a commercial point-of-view. In this case Vietnam.
Long term, whether it's good for the planet or the human race is another thing. In the short term, it's good for the citizens of said countries, good for Olympus and the like' and also good for you and I, who might like to purchase these products. Which was my point, really.
@Mike FLYour post implied that Olympus only entered profit by employing the, apparently, cheap Vietnamese labour force as if this somehow degraded the validity of their position.
However, the use of ever cheaper resource, be it labour or otherwise to maximise profitibility is a fundamental principle of cost-effective capitalism.
This business practice enables the likes of you and I in the first world to benefit from lower prices, or at least enables the manufacturer of the products we choose to bring them to market at competetive prices.
As Thorgrem put it "Who cares" as long as the products pass Olympus QC?
To be clear, I will avoid a discussion on the social implications of this type policy on the indiginous populations, as it wasn't the intention of my post.
Thus in answer: No I don't think Vietnam is complaining, I expect they're happy for the business; I think you might be though.
And people in vietnam should be excluded from the labour market, why?It seems to me China was the cheap labour force not so long back. Now they're viewed as the technically proficient and menial assembly tasks are now ofloaded to Vietnam.
......Oh look Capitalism in action and the beneficiaries complaining, what a surprise.
KevinSB: Someone will step up and fill the void... Make some tweaks in Raw Therapee and it could easily replace adobe CR....
Marty4650: The problem for Olympus is the EM5 is almost three years old now, and is still one of the finest MILC cameras you can find. And as each day passes, they have to sell them for less and less.
So the obvious solution is to create a replacement model, with WIFI and a better EVF, with everything else the same, then ratchet the price back up to $999 again, for another three years.
I thought the EM-1's C-AF wasn't that good on M43 lenses? I believe I read somewhere (Cameralabs, maybe?) that they could see no or very little appreciable improvement with native M43 lenses. I'm overjoyed with the quality of the images from my EM-5 coupled with the tiny primes so only keep the Canon and big white lenses for things like motorsport. I'd love it if Olympus or Panasonic could get close to a DSLR C-AF on the next iterations. I don't tend to shoot multiple frames- often, I'm more of a track and shoot when ready sort of photographer. For that you really need the tracking to be spot on. I have had success with the EM-5, by letting it aquire focus at the point of capture, but the hit rate and overall sharpness seems to suffer quite a bit with that method, in my hands at least. There's also manually prefocussing too, but, why bother, if you have a DSLR :-).
The one thing stopping me from ditching my Canon kit is lack of reliable CAF on my EM-5 with native M43 lenses. If that gets improved to a point near that of a regular enthusiast DSLR then the EM5 II would be a serious proposition for me. I cannot justify the EM-1 and have no 4/3 lenses to pair it with.
Just a Photographer: Its not going that well with 4/3 at the moment.Hope they'll be able to come up with a game changer.
Many people looking for a small system are now looking towards Fuji due to their APS sensor, retro look and more or less same weight and AF performance.
"A larger sensor will always outperform a smaller sensor, no matter what"
Lens size when lugging up a mountain?
"APS sensor ....... more or less same weight."
Don't think so, camera's maybe - system - No.
Rodger Kingston: Would have been useful if the cost, weight, and size of these interesting tripods could have been translated into figures us parochial Americans could understand.... maybe dollars, ounces, and inches.
zzzr: Still not even close to Sirui T-025X which weight only 0.7 kg and fold down to 30cm. It even rated to support 6kg.
Oh, and it costs less than half of these giottos. If you seriously consider lightweight tripods, you better check that out.
+1, I have some Giotto gear, a ball head and a Monopod, and it's really well made. However, I also have one of these small Sirui carbon fibre tripods and have to concur, it is really well made, very small and very light. Perfect for my M43 kit. I probably wouldn't use it for anything much heavier though.
Allen Yang: I prefer Nikon D7100 to this!
BBking83 - I'm with you up until the "1" bit. I don't get that. Why did my EM-5 start at "5" and not "1" surely someone in marketing, way back when, could spot the numbering anomaly? If EM-5 had been "1" then this camera could have been "2"
What happens when EM-1 becomes 2 then 3 then 4 then doh! ???
Alan G Thompson: The main issue is: What can Adobe add to PShop? It's a very mature product. Being able to fix blurred images? really? At the level of photograph users skill, who takes blurry photos? What can adobe add to Lightroom and Photoshop thats worth paying for? Not much if nothing, so the answer is as there is little value in upgrading they make you rent it! How stupid do you think we are?
For new users LR at over a £100 and CS6 at over £600 is a very expensive proposition. £10 to £20 will seem like a good deal for a top quality combination.
I suspect most amateur users like me, with fully paid for none pirate copies of CS5 and LR5, are somewhat disenchanted with Adobe's antics. I personally cannot help but resist the cloud as long as possible in the hope that some other vendor comes up with a truly competitive product. Otherwise I fear we might all be assimilated into the collective :-(
Please be careful. It might be my set up but I don't thinks so. If you're using a completely sRGB workflow and are certain that none of your images have other embedded profiles such as aRGB or ProPhoto then you should be okay. Otherwise checkout my experience here.
AngryCorgi: Is it just me or is Marissa Mayer insanely cute?
It seems professional retouchers are the new elite. Hope they can afford the renewals on Creative Cloud next year. It'd be a shame to lose such talent ;-)
In these uncertain times (if there ever were any certain ones) I suspect that it is very difficult for most people not earning a living from photography to suck-up the concept of yet another monthly charge; it certaintly is for me. To move to a monthly subscription would make my photography seem like a tax rather than a pleasure that I'd previously enjoyed at my convenience. Basically if I stick with Adobe and they "cloud" Lightroom (which I guess they will within a couple years), I lose my edits too.
I love photography as a pastime and, I suppose, aspire to producing great photographs. Up until now, for the most part, it has been possible to access the best tools that even the professionals have access to and to guage the quality of my efforts against the great good, perhaps no-longer.
Adobe, with this very cynical move have alienated the enthusiast and at a stroke placed those that can afford it in a (perceived) tier of there own. I for one will not pay the Adobe Tax.
Marques Lamont: $49.99 USD per month for 12 months is not bad. It's like renting software.
It's $12.50 per week. That's the same as eating McDonalds twice a week.
This is just to eliminate piracy. I don't think it's a bad thing, as piracy almost KILLED the design industry.
I don't buy the piracy angle, it's all about shareholders and the stock market. Steady reliable income streams are more attractive than stock that peaks and troughs every 18 months or so upon release cycles.
I believe this sort of model is being pushed at corporate level and is high risk to Adobe not least of which can be seen on the forums here and this thread in particular.
I suspect they've got it wrong and will lose a lot of custom and good will. However, from their perspective, I suppose they view PS Elements as the hobbyist option and PS CS for the Pro's. Unfortunately, most people who get serious about their hobby want the best that they can get and Elements doesn't seem to fit quite as well with that type of user. I wonder if some significant updates will come to Elements when they realise that their income stream just halved overnight!
Marcin 3M: Pity.Only thing for me is to decide, if cs6 upgrade as a final step is a good option, or shuld i rather try different options.I have Corel products, including latest psp and aftershot. Time to give them a try... Or jump to PhaseOne programs.Sorry to see, how some era is dying, or rather is being killed. Hope the new will fill the gap.
Adobe killed Photoshop for me originally when they announced that you couldn't get CS6 without having CS5. Against my better judgemnent I bought CS5 only to find that they backed off that stance and allowed CS3 owners (Which I was one a month or so earlier) to then upgrade to CS6. As a cash strapped amateur hobbyist I was and am still vey upset with this sort of highly dubious business tactic. With CS5 being so rarely used I cannot justify such an upgrade to CS6 and definitely not the cloud. I use Lightroom 4 and PSP X4 more than CS5. PSPX4 is in no way as polished as PS but it's very much easier and more intuitive to use when I need to do a bit of detailed masking etc. Aftershot Pro is IMHO useless at recovering highlights so I'm staying with Lightroom for now (until they cloud it!)
hoggdoc: Hey what happened to the other changes that were 1.2 update that was pulled. I thought they were fixing a few problems then would be releasing the update in it's original form.
Has there been any word from the Mother Company about addressing some of the requests for additional features like FOCUS PEAKING when in MF mode? With the millions of SONY dollars in the bank I hope they spend a little on improvements on the OM-D before releasing an upgrade.
I use LR2 quite a bit and like it. I hardly ever use CS3. I was resisting the urge to upgrade at £190 because even at that price the cost seemed extortionate for a product I rarely use. The only reason would be to protect my initial £500 investment. Upgrading at Approx £200 every 3 or 4 years was high, but a luxury I'd afford myself.
Adobe seem determined to force my hand, so here's my solution. I'll keep CS3 for as long as it'll work. I might buy later versions of LR, but Raw Therapee is catching up fast, (half an hour this-morning gave me a good feeling about this option) Canon's own DPP is very usable and in some cases gives better results.
retaining CS3 will enable me to make sense of most online tutorials. Gimp's not 16bit enabled so I'm not sure about that, but for what I do PSP is probably enough alongside Raw Therapee and / or LR.
Adobe have basically lost my £1 / week subscription, because they wanted to up it to £4 / week. So good luck and thanks for all the fish.