Reading mode: Light Dark

Olympus must innovate in order to survive

Go to last post
Davud

Davud

Well-known member
Messages
238
Reaction score
145
With the flurry of a announcements from industry heavyweights in recent weeks, Olympus future looks bleaker than ever. Olympus became relevant in the start of this decade by offering something that no company could or was willing to do: Small, affordable, high quality cameras and lenses. EVF, IBIS, WR, good video for the time and attractive designs were the icing on the cake. Now every camera manufacturer has caught up with what Olympus were offering in 2011 and added more features with each iteration.

Once there was a mega pixel war, now there is a battle in every corner. 14-bit raw, 500+ AF points, high bitrate,high framerate,high resolution video, log formats, good tracking AF,... to name a few. With the inherent characteristics of the smaller sensor (DR, Noise, DoF) and the fact that the difference in weight, size and price (the three deciding factors for the vast majority of m4/3 users), is a fraction of what it was compared to the rivals back in 2011,one can argue that today, for a person who is not deep into any system, m4/3 is going to be at the bottom of the list.

There has been so much talk recently about Olympus or Panasonic going FF. Panasonic brand is as much about video as it is about photography and it could benefit from entering into FF market, especially if it could partner up with a company with a history in FF, like Leica or Sigma. But I don't think Olympus should go FF, where the market is so saturated that it is bound to fail. Instead it should do what it always does that makes it so especial: INNOVATE.

Easier to say than done. But here are some areas that I think there is chance to improve:

1- Computational photography: Do what smartphones do, with much higher speed and quality. Adding one or two extra sensors to measure depth, using AI to reduce noise, smart HDR processing, median noise reduction, intelligent AF, refocus, portrait lighting, ...

2- Global shutter

3- Hand-held Hi-res

4- 6-axis IBIS

5- Production of niche products: Pen-F is a success story and it should not be forgotten. (My personal wish: Olympus SIX digital. An 18x18mm monochrome, square sensor in MFT body with slot-in color filters)

And in glass department:

6- Continue PRO lens line-up with stand-out distinctive lenses: A Perspective control UWA with zero optical distortion (eg: 9mm f/2 PC Zero-D) , a short zoom with wide aperture (eg: 14-28mm f/1.8), a mid-telephoto macro with sync-is (eg: 100mm f/2.8 macro IS), etc.

7- Refresh current lens line-up with updated technologies and trends, i.e. weather resistance, Sync-IS, better coatings, Phase Fresnel glass, etc.
 
Davud said:
With the flurry of a announcements from industry heavyweights in recent weeks, Olympus future looks bleaker than ever.
Click to expand...
We hear this every time a new camera comes out, and Olympus keeps Not Dying. The imaging division spent 7 years in the black, and still didn't pack it in.
Davud said:
1- Computational photography: Do what smartphones do, with much higher speed and quality. Adding one or two extra sensors to measure depth, using AI to reduce noise, smart HDR processing, median noise reduction, intelligent AF, refocus, portrait lighting, ...
Click to expand...
They already use software NR, HDR, AF, distortion correction. Anything else can be done in post. We should note that gimmicks like Art Filters haven't saved Olympus yet. Next.
Davud said:
2- Global shutter
Click to expand...
That will be nice. However, Olympus doesn't make sensors, meaning that even if they were first to market, they'd only have any sort of exclusive for 6-12 months. Next.
Davud said:
3- Hand-held Hi-res
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's not going to happen. Next.
Davud said:
4- 6-axis IBIS
Click to expand...
Which axis did they miss? Next.
Davud said:
5- Production of niche products: Pen-F is a success story and it should not be forgotten. (My personal wish: Olympus SIX digital. An 18x18mm monochrome, square sensor in MFT body with slot-in color filters)
Click to expand...
They already do that. Sometimes it works (Pen-F), sometimes it doesn't (Air). Next.
Davud said:
And in glass department:

6- Continue PRO lens line-up with stand-out distinctive lenses: A Perspective control UWA with zero optical distortion (eg: 9mm f/2 PC Zero-D) , a short zoom with wide aperture (eg: 14-28mm f/1.8), a mid-telephoto macro with sync-is (eg: 100mm f/2.8 macro IS), etc.
Click to expand...
I guess that might work, but Olympus already has a lens advantage over Canon and Nikon, and is doing OK compared to Sony and Fuji.
Davud said:
7- Refresh current lens line-up with updated technologies and trends, i.e. weather resistance, Sync-IS, better coatings, Phase Fresnel glass, etc.
Click to expand...
Again could help, but I don't think they can afford to redo the entire lens lineup. That's like flushing years of R&D, marketing, inventory etc down the drain.
 
Davud said:
With the flurry of a announcements from industry heavyweights in recent weeks, Olympus future looks bleaker than ever. Olympus became relevant in the start of this decade by offering something that no company could or was willing to do: Small, affordable, high quality cameras and lenses. EVF, IBIS, WR, good video for the time and attractive designs were the icing on the cake. Now every camera manufacturer has caught up with what Olympus were offering in 2011 and added more features with each iteration.
Click to expand...
Another prophet of doom who has no idea what he is talking about.

E-M1 II may be nearly two years old and it is still perfectly comparable with the newest flagship models, if not ahead of them. 60 frames/sec, 80 mpix hi-res, pro-capture, focus stacking, live composite, 6.5 stops Sync IS ...

It shows Olympus is in fact ahead of all others as far as innovation is concerned, and if some are keep forgeting this, it will become very evident with its next model.
 
That’s good then. Olympus always have been at the forefront of bringing the latest features to mainstream use (even though generally not inventing them). There is no reason they would not continue to do so.

With regard to lenses, it is the longer telephoto usage (due to the ‘crop’ factor) where smaller sensors really benefit in providing a small overall kit size. This is what Olympus need to concentrate on most. Perhaps phase freznel technology needs to be their next target?

Computational image processing will also filter into all sensor sizes eventually, but if Olympus could do what they do best, and be the first mainstream camera manufacturer to fully embrace it, they could pretty much make resolution, dynamic range, noise and depth of field pretty much a non-issue for a while.

Olympus have always been prepared to push new technology to produce small and enjoyable camera systems and so have a huge advantage over the likes of Nikon and Canon who tend to follow rather than lead.

I really don’t see how the latest releases change anything. It has been the same since the days of film and It is just the normal cycle of the other manufacturers temporarily catching up.
 
Yes... it is easy, as someone heavily invested already in m43, to overlook what a new customer would see in the shiny camera shop today. That is, a new customer wanting a current technology mid to upper mid camera and lens outfit. I hope Olympus regains the momentum of the original EM5 with some real "wow" features in a new model and at a price that is attractive as well. That will alleviate the angst that m43 is under threat for survival.
 
They will, just keep the faith 😊
 
Davud said:
With the flurry of a announcements from industry heavyweights in recent weeks, Olympus future looks bleaker than ever. Olympus became relevant in the start of this decade by offering something that no company could or was willing to do: Small, affordable, high quality cameras and lenses.
Click to expand...
The flurry of anouncements seem to be about larger, expensive, high quality cameras and lenses.

It still seems to be the case that Olympus are making *small* and *affordable* high quality cameras and lenses.

So what has changed?
 
You're a bit late to the party, I suggested this innovation two days ago

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Peter Del
 
Paulmorgan said:
LOl how long has all this crap being going on, from as far back as about 2004 from memory.

Its a company that has bought huge amounts of innovation to the world of modern camera`s.
Click to expand...
(Agreeing with your response)

Can I suggest buying some of the crazy good lenses on offer by Olympus (and Panasonic - as an afterthought) whilst we are waiting.

Panasonic has released some excellent bodies in recent months for those that are tired of waiting for some more body-excitement from Olympus. Those that are truly desperate could buy something with a Lumix brand on it :) Just for once .... maybe we could even tape over the “Lumix”?

If the rumour is true then there is something truly exciting from Olympus in the works. Just wait it out.

“Patience mon cher” - lets not panic .... yet
 
SpinOne said:
SpinOne said:
1- Computational photography: Do what smartphones do, with much higher speed and quality. Adding one or two extra sensors to measure depth, using AI to reduce noise, smart HDR processing, median noise reduction, intelligent AF, refocus, portrait lighting, ...
Click to expand...
They already use software NR, HDR, AF, distortion correction. Anything else can be done in post. We should note that gimmicks like Art Filters haven't saved Olympus yet. Next.
Click to expand...
OTOH a lot of PEN F fans gush over the art filter knob (which I'm not a fan of).

In any case, there's still room for improvement. I've just been going through a thousand plus photos from a 2-week trip. A lot of those photos are from smartphones belonging to our friends. The quality of some of the photos is extremely impressive and I think camera makers still have a way to go in terms of using computational techniques to improve things such as HDR, star trail reduction, boosting shallow DoF effect, and fast, multi-image blending for noise removal.
SpinOne said:
Click to expand...
 
[No message]
 
I am not this bullish, but I am going to wait to see what Olympus and Panasonic introduce.

However, if Olympus is sticking with a new m43 body, I'm sure they have something more in store that just a refresh of the E-M1 II.
 
Photo Pete said:
That’s good then. Olympus always have been at the forefront of bringing the latest features to mainstream use (even though generally not inventing them). There is no reason they would not continue to do so.

With regard to lenses, it is the longer telephoto usage (due to the ‘crop’ factor) where smaller sensors really benefit in providing a small overall kit size. This is what Olympus need to concentrate on most. Perhaps phase freznel technology needs to be their next target?

Computational image processing will also filter into all sensor sizes eventually, but if Olympus could do what they do best, and be the first mainstream camera manufacturer to fully embrace it, they could pretty much make resolution, dynamic range, noise and depth of field pretty much a non-issue for a while.

Olympus have always been prepared to push new technology to produce small and enjoyable camera systems and so have a huge advantage over the likes of Nikon and Canon who tend to follow rather than lead.

I really don’t see how the latest releases change anything. It has been the same since the days of film and It is just the normal cycle of the other manufacturers temporarily catching up.
Click to expand...
 
I think they need to be better at selling the narrative that they already have.

The internet at large is full of stories about how great FF is compared to any other option. This leads people - a great many of whom are not especially familiar with the various options and the pros and cons of each - to quickly become sucked in to the story that the marketers are selling.

In simplistic terms, the narrative of the day is currently "FF is good, everything else is bad. Buy FF or you will be a rubbish photographer."

No point in explaining that the photographer is rubbish or brilliant irrespective of the tool in their hand.

Olympus should double - or treble - their marketing budget and their ambassador publicity. In this day and age, people want to see professionals using the gear they are considering more than ever before.

Olympus are much smaller so they need to shout louder to be heard. They are not really very good at making themselves heard. They already make amazing, pro quality cameras and lenses which can be and are used for professional work.

They need to get much much better at getting that point across, in backing up professionals who choose their brand and in making their brand the one people want.

Only part of that is done by making fancy new stuff - which, of course, they still have to do - more of it is done by making people walk into camera shops and say "I would like to buy an Olympus please" and when the salesman says "How about a SocanIkonuji?" the customer says "Well, they're nice - but I want an Olympus".

They used to be able to do it - older readers may recall a series of ads on UK TV in the 80's and early 90's starring photographer David Bailey and actor George Cole, with the tagline "Oi! Who do you think you are - David Bailey?". There was another with Eric Idle and James Hunt (and they are all on YT if anyone wants to see them)

That was 30 years ago and I still recall them vividly, which means they worked well as adverts. That is the sort of public awareness they need to get back.
 
It's possible. But highly unlikely. Other camera companies may have caught up on paper but on performance, some still lack in those catch ups. IBIS?, 4K video with 60p?, battery life? etc...

There are some technologies that MFT has that has not been achieved by other makers. Pre-burst in RAW files, Focus peaking while shooting, 4K in 60p for more than 10min, IBIS of 6.5 stops, video lock, and many more small features that MFT users take for granted.

Where MFT has caught up is with dynamic range, high ISO ability, and low light performance. But you won't see many of those examples because only a few have the ability to push the MFT into that territory with success. And for those that do, you'll find them buried under the masses of photo dumps of everyday random nothingness from the masses on line.

Thus, if there is one thing the MFT does better than other companies it is: use their small size advantage to implement innovations that larger sensor cameras have difficulty with. And they MFT makers know where they stand and what they need to do to move ahead. Think of the physical challenge of a global shutter, and any other new innovation that will someday be in digital cameras. It will be in the MFT first. Because it's easier to implement it with a smaller sensor which requires less power, and produces less heat.


Larger sensors have their small advantages in resolution and wide angle of view, but they also have many limitations because of its size. Requires more processing power, more electric power, larger mechanics to make IBIS move, problems with overheating, limited 4K video recording without cropping in, slower bursting performance, and the requirement of larger lenses. And very large and heavy lenses for supertelephotos.

Thus, the advantages for future technology will be in the MFT. And they will as they always have, lead the others and set standards for new innovations.


When people talk about is smaller sensors dead because FF is getting cheaper to buy. I wonder if photography is dead because video is the main form of media marketing and is of higher value to the corporations than photos. Newspapers, magazines, and books are a thing of the past. Everything is online and all the ads and marketing is via video. So if anything, photo is dying much like video killed the radio star.


That's the way I see it in the world of cameras and technology. Speaking of which, all the corporate evangilist are talking about 3D video and marketing. That is what they see in the future, not photos. They see video in 3D virtual reality man....
 
Agree on the word innovation. Let's face it, the only problem with M43 is the sensor size, so to mitigate that, Olympus need to do everything else better. I think it's as simple as that. Panasonic will be moving into FF because their market is slightly different.

Here's some ideas:
  • No restriction on customising dials and buttons
  • Ability to program your own exposure modes (seriously !! why can't I do that now)
  • Global shutter (that's unlikely to be exclusive though)
  • Weather sealed as standard on everything including entry level
  • Monochrome only option on cameras
  • AF that beats current DSLRs for sports
  • Video that competes with Panasonic
  • Ease of use (firmware)
 
Davud said:
…. and the fact that the difference in weight, size and price (the three deciding factors for the vast majority of m4/3 users), is a fraction of what it was compared to the rivals back in 2011,one can argue that today, for a person who is not deep into any system, m4/3 is going to be at the bottom of the list.
Click to expand...
often stated but I cannot be the only person who doesn't comply with your definition of the majority of users:

I bought into m4/3s because it was a natural progression for me, FZ50, E520, E620...my G5 was comfortable as has been every camera I have bought since (with the exception of the GX7 the smallest and lightest). Weight and size aren't the factors, comfort is. That includes usability, ergonomics, handling and ease of use. Price wise I could have bought into Nikon or Canon as cheaply. I liked everything about m4/3s cameras and I still do despite owning a relatively heavy G9 which is still very comfortable with my 100-400. If I were starting today m4/3s would still be very much my system of choice, I honestly have no interest in anything else. I do sometimes envy people who are shooting with big Canikons and hugely expensive bazookas but would I go down that path, not in a million years.
 
Kiwisnap said:
I think they need to be better at selling the narrative that they already have.

The internet at large is full of stories about how great FF is compared to any other option. This leads people - a great many of whom are not especially familiar with the various options and the pros and cons of each - to quickly become sucked in to the story that the marketers are selling.

In simplistic terms, the narrative of the day is currently "FF is good, everything else is bad. Buy FF or you will be a rubbish photographer."

No point in explaining that the photographer is rubbish or brilliant irrespective of the tool in their hand.

Olympus should double - or treble - their marketing budget and their ambassador publicity. In this day and age, people want to see professionals using the gear they are considering more than ever before.

Olympus are much smaller so they need to shout louder to be heard. They are not really very good at making themselves heard. They already make amazing, pro quality cameras and lenses which can be and are used for professional work.

They need to get much much better at getting that point across, in backing up professionals who choose their brand and in making their brand the one people want.

Only part of that is done by making fancy new stuff - which, of course, they still have to do - more of it is done by making people walk into camera shops and say "I would like to buy an Olympus please" and when the salesman says "How about a SocanIkonuji?" the customer says "Well, they're nice - but I want an Olympus".

They used to be able to do it - older readers may recall a series of ads on UK TV in the 80's and early 90's starring photographer David Bailey and actor George Cole, with the tagline "Oi! Who do you think you are - David Bailey?". There was another with Eric Idle and James Hunt (and they are all on YT if anyone wants to see them)
Click to expand...
Hahahahah, thanks for pointing it!

here's the link, it's a pearl :-D :-D :-D :


With the PEN, they hired Kevin Spacey, but it's rather counterproductive now :-(
Kiwisnap said:
That was 30 years ago and I still recall them vividly, which means they worked well as adverts. That is the sort of public awareness they need to get back.
Click to expand...
I agree with your post, better advertisment would surely help Olympus sales.

--
Cheers,
Frederic
http://www.azurphoto.com/
 
Last edited:
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