Reading mode: Light Dark

The news from Olympus is not all bad ...it seems......

Go to last post
The fact that they got a rotten management for 20 years is a huge accident - but it could happen to any company in any country.

I do hope they manage to sort out all their financial and management problems and regain some traction in the camera business.
--
Andrew
Novice photographer
 
Morpho Hunter said:
Norman Day, aka Morpho Hunter, OM Fan, insectman, Plusiotis, and plusiotis (in lower case), but often referred to as Trollin' Norman,
wrote:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=40102376
Click to expand...
Why do you hate Olympus so, Norman?

Remember this?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=39945022

Surely, you should understand that, with your reputation for being so out of touch with business and financial realities, that your posting a link to someone else's comments diminishes all that person's hard work. You're essentially said "Windsprite hasn't got a clue. All he can do is attract loons."

You're basically ruined the good news, by marking it as "fit only for the clueless".

Oh, and your attempt to make the 150th post and get the last word bashing the Sony NEX7 was pretty tacky, too...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=40097592

You have real expertise in macro. Why not share that with the group, and just be Norman Day, instead of Trolliin' Norman? What do you get out of it, that's better than the feeling of having done something good for others?

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Pangloss said:
The fact that they got a rotten management for 20 years is a huge accident - but it could happen to any company in any country.

I do hope they manage to sort out all their financial and management problems and regain some traction in the camera business.
Click to expand...
I quite agree.

I'm most afraid that they're going to go the way of Contax or Pentax. Bought up by huge companies (Kyocera and Hoya, respectively) who only really wanted a different part of their business, and the camera divisions were either scrapped entirely (Contax) or sold to a less viable company (the Ricoh purchase of the Pentax camera division).

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Morpho Hunter said:
Olympus fanboy.
Click to expand...
Not really. You've made so many posts bashing newer models, and going on and on about how your 510 was so much better than anything newer, that no one could ever call you a fanboy. The majority of your posts deal with all the things that, in your mind, Oly is doing wrong.

--
Rahon Klavanian 1912-2008.

Armenian genocide survivor, amazing cook, scrabble master, and loving grandmother. You will be missed.

Ciao! Joseph

http://www.swissarmyfork.com
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Pangloss said:
The fact that they got a rotten management for 20 years is a huge accident - but it could happen to any company in any country.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
I quite agree.

I'm most afraid that they're going to go the way of Contax or Pentax. Bought up by huge companies (Kyocera and Hoya, respectively) who only really wanted a different part of their business, and the camera divisions were either scrapped entirely (Contax) or sold to a less viable company (the Ricoh purchase of the Pentax camera division).
Click to expand...
Twenty years of (apparently) fraudulent accounting is some accident. And whether it could happen anywhere, or was a result of distinctively Japanese management practices (such as having few or no external board members) is one of the questions yet to be answered.

Whether it is a good or bad thing, from a photographic point of view, for camera manufacture to be a big part of a small company or a small part of a big company remains to be seen.

Nikon is the only large company making cameras for which cameras are a major (> 30% or so) part of the business. Canon's camera business is a relatively much smaller part of its total business, and Sony's or Panasonic's camera divisions are tiny compared to the company as a whole. Film camera companies could be small, because film cameras are technologically simple; digital camera manufacturers cannot be small unless (like Leica) they can hook up with big companies (Panasonic) or other small niche companies (Phase One). The entry of very large corporations into the camera manufacturing business is a recent development, and it remains to be seen how it affects camera development.
 
As a Panny G3 user this is good news. The Pen series is nice but needs a viewfinder, flash, and much better sensor. As a lifelong dslr user the present 4/3 cameras are just to small and hard to use and hold, even my G3 with a half case is hard to use!

In my opinion the ideal 4/3 camera would look like a Pen and be five inches wide and about three inches high, this design might just finish off the dslr for many shooters!
 
.... and Ricoh is a good company, and Sony is - at least - a very active company.
--
cheers

Mr.NoFlash
 
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
Norman Day, aka Morpho Hunter, OM Fan, insectman, Plusiotis, and plusiotis (in lower case), but often referred to as Trollin' Norman,
wrote:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=40102376
Click to expand...
Why do you hate Olympus so, Norman?

Remember this?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1000&message=39945022

Surely, you should understand that, with your reputation for being so out of touch with business and financial realities, that your posting a link to someone else's comments diminishes all that person's hard work. You're essentially said "Windsprite hasn't got a clue. All he can do is attract loons."
Click to expand...
Apart from windsprite's name being 'Julie', she is one of the most level headed, fair and knowledgeable inhabitants of 1022. One of the few clued up in a society for the clueless.
Joseph S Wisniewski said:
I'm most afraid that they're going to go the way of Contax or Pentax. Bought up by huge companies (Kyocera and Hoya, respectively) who only really wanted a different part of their business, and the camera divisions were either scrapped entirely (Contax) or sold to a less viable company (the Ricoh purchase of the Pentax camera division).
Click to expand...
Contax of course never existed as a camera company. The company was Yashica, which came to an agreement with Zeiss before it was acquired by Kyocera. I suspect the real problem was that the collaboration arrangement gave Zeiss simply too much power, which fitted with a secondary manufacturer like Yashica, but didn't sit well with a major corporation like Kyocera. The existence of the Contax brand relegated the Yashica one to a second string marque and when the move to AF came, Zeiss prevented Contax going there, leaving Yashica doing a half hearted effort of its own, which was never going to succeed without Contax alongside. The lack of AF stopped Contax taking on Nikon and Canon, as it might have and in the end Kyocera jacked in the whole load in favour of devoting their optical expertise to phonecams. It's not as though Kyocera didn't pile in a load of R&D investment into the Contax line, but in the end the way the brand was set up, and Zeiss' intransigence meant that it missed the main chance, and wasn't a viable option for a large corporation like Kyocera, with the added problem that the still photography market isn't really an option for anyone but large corporations.

Olympus is actually in a very similar position to Contax. An absolutely world class optical design and manufacturing outfit which has, by dint of incompetent management, managed to miss not one but two main chances. It's inconceivable that an optical house of that quality will simply go away, it is far too attractive an asset to somebody at some stage. It's also a strong enough brand name that it will likely still be used somewhere in the consumer photography market. What is less likely is that the current Olympus product lines will continue for long as separate and identifiable entities. They have effectively abandoned DSLR's, and have no real chance of getting back there and the EVIL market is increasingly competitive and the whole of mFT will get squeezed between Sony and Nikon (and possibly Canon, when they make a move), with Olympus increasingly the minor player in mFT due to lack of R&D investment.
--
Bob
 
Harold66 said:
mike peoria said:
As a Panny G3 user this is good news. The Pen series is nice but needs a viewfinder, flash, and much better sensor.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed and what this means is a NON panasonic sensor
Click to expand...
It's an interesting tendency for the Olympus faithful to blame their woes on Panasonic's sensors. In fact, Panasonic makes very good sensors. If you look at the G3 sensor it has a 45% QE and 2.8 e- read noise. That is fully in the same class as for instance the Sony sensor in the D7000 and K5 (and NEX5N). Of course it lacks a little for area, but that will be the case with any four thirds sensor.

I suspect that to secure a better sensor all Olympus has to do is pay for it , which might be problematic at the moment. If another company were to take over Olympus' camera division, that issue might go away.
--
Bob
 
Morpho Hunter said:
Olympus fanboy.
Click to expand...
well you dont hear that every day...

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'
 
When digital cameras first became popular, in the 1990's, Olympus had a huge advantage over most. I watched them slide downhill making poor decisions over the years. So sad. The same people making financial decisions were also in denial about the increasingly poor designs until they had lost a huge share of the market.

The were not alone, Kodak and Polaroid were even worse with digital cameras, acting almost clueless.
 
Remember that Nikon is a small member the Mitsubishi "family"of companies!
Derek
Sante Patate said:
Nikon is the only large company making cameras for which cameras are a major (> 30% or so) part of the business.
Click to expand...
 
Scales USA said:
When digital cameras first became popular, in the 1990's, Olympus had a huge advantage over most. I watched them slide downhill making poor decisions over the years. So sad. The same people making financial decisions were also in denial about the increasingly poor designs until they had lost a huge share of the market.

The were not alone, Kodak and Polaroid were even worse with digital cameras, acting almost clueless.
Click to expand...
theiy are not the only ones...

http://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/Buying-Myspace-huge-mistake-aap-740399364.html?x=0
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top