Olympus Supporters UNITE! (TOP)

With everything that's going on in the world, this is what you worry about? Way too much time on your hands there Skippy.

SF Photo Gal aka Queer Chick
Canon 1DsIII & 5DII/Panasonic GH1-GF1-LX3
 
I think it is important for people who believe in something to support it. So, kudos to Mike for speaking up publicly.

That said, the kinds of companies that I support and feel loyal to are, for the most part, small or tiny companies doing interesting things with a high level of quality. Not corporate entities like Olympus.

But having said that, Olympus does some things really well and I hope they survive through it all. If this causes them to re-invent who they are as a company then it may be a better company in the end. Push out the bad energy / bad decision making and focus on what they do well.
 
Yes, but you'll understand that employees have no say in it?

What we know by past experience, and TOP reminds us, is that Oly optics are or have been at the same level of Zeiss or Leica, even better than Nikon and Canon.

I am not sure people here realise what loss it would be, if the company was to disapppear. It doesn't need to, quality wise.

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric
 
Don't worry about it. Some other company will badge these cheap Chinese cameras. Perhaps Kodak?
 
If Oly does survive, it will be under intense pressure to show that it can focus on getting its stock price up so that those who haven't sold can recover what they lost. The medical division will, of course, be the focus of this effort. Unprofitable divisions are likely to be sold off. Appeals from Oly camera users will have no effect on the future of the imaging division. The only thing that will determine its future is whether it can make profit.
 
Yes, it'ìs like you dismissed Zeiss or Leica, as the TOP post argues.

But neve rmind: we have plenty of ignorant people in this forum.
There is no basis whatsoever for comparing Olympus with Zeiss or Leica.

Shedding tears over Olympus is pointless. The company has made multiple grave errors over the last decade and would have been dead long ago, if not for Panasonic.

Panasonic pulled Olympus out of the mire, first by making some good sensors for Four Thirds DSLRs to replace the terrible Kodak CCDs, then by developing the whole Micro Four Thirds concept and allowing Olympus to use it.

So Olympus 4/3 and m4/3 owners have a lot to thank Panasonic for.

Olympus needs Panasonic. Panasonic has no need of Olympus.

--
Colin
 
I think it is important for people who believe in something to support it. So, kudos to Mike for speaking up publicly.
Olympus is a camera manufacturer, not a religion.

Olympus isn't something you believe in, it merely makes things that people choose to buy, or not.

If you really believe in Olympus, who don't you buy up some of the many thousands of unsold Olympus DSLRs and Zuiko Digital Four Thirds lenses? There is no stronger statement about the company than the fact it could not sell its products, but continued manufacturing them regardless.

--
Colin
 
One owner of the 14-35mm lens said this on the B&H web site:

I have many Leica M and Hasselblad last generation primes (9 of them), and I can seriously say that this lens is at the same level, but remember, this is a zoom not a prime.

That lens is why I keep my Olympus E5. I've shot a local park many, many times - lots of thick, convoluted and intertwined trees and shrubs and plants - and it was not until I used the 14-35mm lens that I was finally able to capture what my eye was seeing.

I usually go light when I'm out there now and travel with smaller cameras. But I'll head out a few times this winter with the E5 and that lens.
 
This comment in response to the article referenced in OP indicates otherwise.

"Amen. A good family friend—sadly departed from this vale of tears—was the patent attorney (and glass physicist) for Carl Zeiss. Before that, he worked for Leica in Solms, designing new glass types. In both cases he said that the only Japanese company that Leica or Zeiss regarding as being serious competitors (in terms of coming close to being in the same class, quality-wise) was Olympus."
 
I think it is important for people who believe in something to support it. So, kudos to Mike for speaking up publicly.
Olympus is a camera manufacturer, not a religion.
That's right.
Olympus isn't something you believe in, it merely makes things that people choose to buy, or not.
Objectively speaking, that's true.

But subjectively, there is a lot of history in such companies, and that emotional factor can influence what people buy (or avoid). Struggling companies like Olympus and Kodak were huge in the photography industry. People make decisions to buy stuff for many, many reasons, history and emotion being one of them. And "believing in them" can indeed be one reason. Someone has to believe in them, otherwise what is the point of their existence. Surely, up until recently the stockholders of Olympus believed in the company.

However, my comment above was simply a broad statement: if you believe in something then support it. A company, an idea, a friend, a religion, your kids, anything...
 
There is no basis whatsoever for comparing Olympus with Zeiss or Leica.
Go tell the Online Photographer, or those who have 4/3 lenses. QED,
It is true that like Leicas, most Olympus 4/3 lenses never show off their best potential because of focusing inaccuracies.

--
MFBernstein

'Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit.' - Ed Abbey
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top