The coming year and Olympus-> (E-X, E-330)

statik

Leading Member
Messages
663
Reaction score
0
Location
NY, US
I am sure many of you want to see an end to these threads. However, there has been so much negative speculation here lately, that it is becoming easy to start believing it as fact, and get frustrated (myself included). I thought about all this recently and came to some conclusions.

The E-500 is a very significant camera. Not only is it seemingly popular, but it represents something more important. Olympus started selling it in the third quarter last year. Many E-500 users will be happy with what they have for years to come, but as an entry DSLR, it is inevitable that many users will want to grow. Probably about a year after their purchase onward, increasing numbers will want more. Olympus is not going to expect them to move up to an E-1. They will release a newer version to meet the needs of these users.

More significant, are the F2 zooms. Olympus is not selling these lenses to use on the current E-1 or E-500. They are much more capable. Just as Olympus has spared no expense with the F2 zooms, it is rational to assume there will be a body out this year of equal caliber. Olympus is the only DSLR manufacturer producing a lineup that directly competes or even bests the Canon L and Nikkor zoom lineups. Other manufacturers have some great lenses, but IMO lenses like the 35-100 are in direct competition with some of the Canon and Nikkor popular top offerings.

Many suggest that the Jan. 26th announcement will be an EVF E-330. Some suggest that will be all for this year. It seems overly obvious based on the two reasons I suggested that there is more coming. Furthermore, the E-330 will likely be significant in the same manner as the E-500 mentioned above.

Olympus has to be aware of the magnitude of where they stand. Olympus is a solid pro offering away from competing with Canon and Nikon as a system. If they continue to release lenses like the ones they are releasing now, and add in some more high performance primes, they will be a legitimate player.

What I am trying to point out here is that the facts suggest very good things for Olympus in the future. Don't let others bring you down. For that matter, don't let others fill your mind with false hopes. All those who say they have seen X or heard Y, are not really backing anything up with specifics. I think my point is simply to encourage everyone to stop worrying about the future and enjoy what they have now, but be confident good things are very likely to come. Even in its current state, the E-1 is in a league with the Nikon D1X and Canon 1D. That is hardly a bad place to be. It makes sense to perhaps hold off on any major purchases until there is evidence of these good things, and certainty that Olympus is going in a direction helpful to you, but I think that there are major signals that Olympus is serious right now.

Everything I have pointed out here is just rational conclusions based on the facts as they are. It is important to draw our ideas from fact and not the speculation that is floating around. I think that the facts as a whole lead to what I have suggested, which is a pro offering along performance lines consistent with the F2 zooms.
 
I don't disagree with your projections - E330 soon, delayed E3 later this year, Exx to follow whenever - but the stuff about letting others bring you down or give you false hope sounds like the beginning of an alarming cult.

They are just cameras you know...
--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
Olympus can finish these speculations by communicating with it's E-system customers. Or simply by putting something buyable on the table.
 
I have to disagree. The F2.0 zooms never made sense to me. How many users really can afford the f2.0 zooms? I certainly don't have US$10K to spend on 3 lens. If Oly is preparing the E-3 to meet the demands of the people who buy f2.0 zooms, they're in trouble, because the market will be so small, it will never make economic sense.

Personally I would be much happier if the E-3 was competitive with the D200 and 20D for about the same price.
More significant, are the F2 zooms. Olympus is not selling these
lenses to use on the current E-1 or E-500. They are much more
capable. Just as Olympus has spared no expense with the F2 zooms,
it is rational to assume there will be a body out this year of
equal caliber.
 
begin rant

Think about it... Canon and Nikon already have the 2 kings; D2X and 1DsII, The mid-range is covered by D200, 20D (probably soon to be replaced) and 5D for those who are stuck in the past. ;) Even if we (Or Olympus) don't like it, E-1 is in that group, but it's 5MP are starting to be awful long in the tooth.

KM also have a very capable body in that middle group, which might get a 8-10MP upgrade soon.

Then there are the entry cameras, D70,D50,300D,350D,5D, stDS,E-300,E-500, none of these are over 8MP, and I guess the manufacturers are hesitant of putting 10+MP in them, to seperate them from the middle cameras.

What could you improve? For example, what is lacking from cameras like 350D and E-500? They both deliver very good 8MP photos, just like their film ancectors. Olympus has catched up with Canon/Nikon in auto-focus and auto-exposure. (Although they still need much work to match D2X/1D)

More fps? Larger buffer? Entry-level camers have never had those, and they don't want to make those cameras too good, right? :)

Olympus wants to be considered an alternative to C&N, they may not have the technology for indoor sports, but that market is very specialized and small. Instead they are targeting (very wisely, IMHO) nature/wildlife, press and studio photographers on a budget. These markets are huge, compared to the cutt-throat sports shooter.

I'm quite optimistic, I think we will see 4 new 4/3 cameras in 2006: E-330, E-30, E-3 and the Panasonic. E-330 might be a joint development with Panasonic, but I doubt it. Panasonic has shown they can design good cameras, and they are pushing their Lumix brand quite aggressivly.
BUT

Putting 10-12MP in a 4/3 sized sensor, and keeping the noise down for a decent ISO 800 will be a remarkable feat, (And it seems that they have done just that, if our super-secret secret reporter was right) and remember, 5D is already giving us a very clean ISO 3200 images!
This will always be 4/3s achilleses heel, but we knew that.

I think the super lenses will be the trump card, almost all of them are tack sharp wide open, no need to stop down to f8 to get good sharpness. Not many lenses can claim that, and specially not zooms.

end rant

--
http://www.4-3system.com/
http://jonr.light.is/
 
Haha! That is too funny.
I agree with Pixelangst though, "just cameras"??? haha.
I don't disagree with your projections - E330 soon, delayed E3
later this year, Exx to follow whenever - but the stuff about
letting others bring you down or give you false hope sounds like
the beginning of an alarming cult.

They are just cameras you know...
--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
The E-1 was designed to compete with the 1D and D1X. Therefore, a E-X should reasonably be in competition with the 1Dmark2 and D2X, no? The F2 zooms are not cheap. However, to gain a full stop over the competition, I think many will buy them.
Personally I would be much happier if the E-3 was competitive with
the D200 and 20D for about the same price.
More significant, are the F2 zooms. Olympus is not selling these
lenses to use on the current E-1 or E-500. They are much more
capable. Just as Olympus has spared no expense with the F2 zooms,
it is rational to assume there will be a body out this year of
equal caliber.
 
I am satisfied Olympus will deliver.

If they did not deliver until the end of 2006, I'd still be happy waiting.

I have all three Oly 4/3 bodies and it will give me time to accumulate some more of the 2.0 lenses.

I do think you will all be pleasantly surprised at what comes out. And then some of you won't. Welcome to the human race. And if it is a race...........who is winning?
 
Well, I can't afford 1Ds MkII & D2x either. They are for very small pro market and very expensive. I guess it will just be dream camera for me if E-3 is like them, which will be fine since I can't afford f2.0 zoom either.

Now if E-3 is performance & priced like D200, I will be happy Oly 4/3 system owner.
The E-1 was designed to compete with the 1D and D1X. Therefore, a
E-X should reasonably be in competition with the 1Dmark2 and D2X,
no? The F2 zooms are not cheap. However, to gain a full stop
over the competition, I think many will buy them.
 
The E-1 was designed to compete with the 1D and D1X. Therefore, a
E-X should reasonably be in competition with the 1Dmark2 and D2X,
no? The F2 zooms are not cheap. However, to gain a full stop
over the competition, I think many will buy them.
When taking into consideration the competition's supeior high ISO performance, these gigantic and heavy f2 zooms allow Olympus to not even keep pace with the competition.

No matter which way you slice or dice the numbers, A Canon Digital Rebel with an f 2.8 zoom, ISO for ISO, can get higher shutter speeds, or better DOF isolation.
 
Frankly, i think that's likley.

With current technology a camera that matches the barking top end pro cameras with a 4.3rds sensor is probabaly not do-able.

Something that is noisier but lighter than a D200 is.

There is a rumuor that has the ring of truth that the stillborn E2 never launched because the 20D did the same for less, so it is not unreasonable to expect that the E3 will be around the $2000 mark.

This is Olympus' traditional market. My OM1 and OM2 were notably cheaper and did less than the top line pro Canons and Nikons, but many pros used them because they were lighter and handier, and the lenses were excellent.

And they sold a lot of units on the basis that people could reasonably state that, for them, they were the best camera available, whereas if you bought a Canon or Nikon at the same price point you were buying a compromise camera bacuse you couldn't afford the real thing.

I'd like to see an E3 in the same role, and, as with the OMs, if the price is reasonable I'll buy one.

There is actually a lot to be said for NOT having a stupidly expensive camera in the range, but making your top line camera a little different, and sanely priced.
--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
What Olympus fails is not in their technical prowness, but their marketing and their ability to infuse conidence into the customer base, and their ability to materialize something that can competet and compete to like of like RIGHT NOW. A body that would be measurably better and rightful replacement for the E-1 late in the year ( probably Photokina 2006 ) is OK for some but certainly not OK to the majority of PRO needing the feature and performance NOW. Especially when they see the Canon 1ds Mk.II being all along for so Long ( and probably a replacement to be introduced end of 2006 / early 2007 ). Not to mention the impending Nikon(s)

If Olympus continue to be lacking behind consistently, its just going to be a case of too little too late. I have my E-300 and would welcome up market models surely, But if what Olympus deliver is not up with the Big Guys. Then there is little sense in me spending the money buying all those Big Lens for an inferior bodies. And adding to that, I am still not seeing Olympus Commitment to made the system a system. Where is those Fast fix focals and light weigth ( less bulky please ) lens.

In a realistic manner, what might come forth does not matter. Its what is avialiable and what WILL come forth that counts

--
Franka
 
Most of the time, one would like some DOF. At f2.8 on the Canon you are into fuzzy eared portrait mode, whether you want it or not.
--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
Well you can't, can you, because there is no light to play with. That's what we are talking about.

Better ISO performance gives the Canon a couple of stops over the Oly, where you have DOF to play with.

Better DOF performance gives the Oly a couple of stops over the Canon, where DOF is tight.

Swings and roundabouts.

--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
I'm a typical dSLR prosumer customer, I think. Willing to spend more than I need to to get a top of the line camera, but I draw the line at cameras that get too big and heavy to be convenient. I liked the Nikon N80. I bought some pricey glass for it, but nothing too big/heavy.

I bought the E-1 over the D70 because the E-1 provided more pro features, better ergonomics and resolution was arguably the same (5MP 4/3 vs 6MP APS) with different aspect ratios. External white balance sensor, Oly colors and buttons not menus for important features. The E-1 and 14-54 was a few hundred bucks more, but the value proposition was there.

If I didn't have my E-1, I'd be buying a D200 since it now occupies the same market space and price point. I'm not going Canon full frame but I want a step up from 5MP. The E300 and E500 don't have the features of the E-1.

Olympus needs to offer me competitive resolution with the D200 and compelling details again- size, ergonomics, image quality that beats the D200. Or I'll keep the keep the E-1 as backup and move to Nikon. If the Olympus option is viable, I'll be buying more glass. I need a wider angle lens. I'd like the 50-200mm zoom. Don't forget that the superzooms like the f2.0 models are often rented by pros, not owned. But a shop needs to see enough demand to buy a rental lens for its customers. My local shop doesn't have any due to lack of demand.

There must be lots of other Olympus users like me who are waiting to see their dSLR direction.
 
I think you are exactly right.

And the E1 got a fairly hostile reception and promptly sank without trace.

The E500 has outperformed the reviews (which were positive, but not ecstatic) in sales terms, and I think that will generally have reviewers looking to find the positive aspects when the E3 appears.

Reviewers are human, and they like to be right. After the E500, Olympus is perceived to be on a roll. Give a dog a good name and he's everybody's pet.

Let's just hope the E330 doesn't blow the goodwill by being a daft idea.
--
http://www.pbase.com/acam/
 
Louis,

I agree with much of what you wrote here...
This is Olympus' traditional market. My OM1 and OM2 were notably
cheaper and did less than the top line pro Canons and Nikons, but
many pros used them because they were lighter and handier, and the
lenses were excellent.

And they sold a lot of units on the basis that people could
reasonably state that, for them, they were the best camera
available, whereas if you bought a Canon or Nikon at the same price
point you were buying a compromise camera bacuse you couldn't
afford the real thing.

I'd like to see an E3 in the same role, and, as with the OMs, if
the price is reasonable I'll buy one.

There is actually a lot to be said for NOT having a stupidly
expensive camera in the range, but making your top line camera a
little different, and sanely priced.
...However, the one major differnce in those days was that you could put the same film through each camera. Coupled with the quality OM glass we knew we could get images that were equal if not higher quality than the C/N crowd. I expect the next Olympus pro body to be capable of producing images of equal, if not higher, quality than anything you can get from the C/N pro bodies. Therefore, I would be disappointed if the E-1 replacement was initially priced less than $4,000.00 USD. If it is priced less than it's competitors it will be dismissed as not being as capable. This doesn't mean that I think that olympus should ignore the prosumer level. I think this is the most important segment of the market currently and needs to be addressed by Oly soon. However, I was hopeful that Olympus would release the pro body first and get what they can from that market and then release the prosumer level to satisfy all of us who want a rock solid camera and didn't take a financial leap to get the pro level model.

Regards,
Drew
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top