What Olympus actually promised:

Started May 27, 2013 | Discussions thread
pris Senior Member • Posts: 2,191
Re: High Angst always precedes the typical 3-4 year upgrade.

illy wrote:

pris wrote:

This is another puzzling part. Who needs new camera more often than every 3 years? (Sure, this is where the choir chimes in pointing out that E-5 wasn't all they wanted so it's more than 3 years for them... but heck, it was their decision that it wasn't enough of an upgrade for them. It was for many others. Someone always will be unhappy no matter what. I seem to remember the latest Canon iteration being widely accused of being a lame warm-up with nothing to show and intended just to keep the price high. I'd say E-5 over E-3 was much more than that.)

not everyone is on the same upgrade path so a camera every 3 years seems like a long development cycle

I don't understand this, sorry. Flagships in every system are updated around these timelines, why is it not enough? Notice, I am not talking about how this plays into the whole "system health" argument, I am talking about particular person buying and using a camera - why would such person want a more frequent upgrade unless they just collect cameras in another GAS bout?

also keeping the camera line looking fresh would entice more people and fresh customers to join 4/3rds, it is a business after all and needs to make money to survive.

Maybe, maybe not. Releasing cameras of a line that hasn't proved to be successful could have deepened the bleeding. Olympus' decision to make a lateral move in a form of m43 and take the fight with competition into new territory was probably better idea than continuation of a losing battle?

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