Olympus praise

Bas Hamstra said:

Bas Hamstra said:

It has been a few years since OMDS has taken over, and that our original suspicions that they'd feign interest only to dump inventory and run were wrong. OMDS seems at least interested in keeping the business alive.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is promising. Do you think the same engineer team is largely still there? That would be interesting to know.

Bas Hamstra said:

In many ways, photography has reached a plateau. More pixels are less enticing, and faster shutters are less alluring. Short of AI, I don't think we'll ever see radical innovations with profound impact in the market.

Click to expand...

Fully agree. Today's (and even yesterday's) cameras are overkill. Way more pixels than we actually need, more dynamic range than we need, over the top AF. I had an interesting discussion in the Leica forum, that was kind of refreshing. In their opinion the pixel peeping tech-focus mentality does not help our photography further at all. To paraphrase one of the replies on wanting to count eye-lashes in a portrait: it's like inspecting the fabric of a new shirt under a microscope, to verifiy if it will be good enough to wear. Good analogy ;-)

Regards,

Click to expand...

Only fair if it is an Olympus microscope

David Mantripp said:

Bas Hamstra said:

Ok call me nostalgic, but Olympush was so far ahead of its time with their innovations! Think about it:

• Mirrorless interchangeble lens cameras Olympus and Panasonic were the very first and started nothing less than a total revolution in the camera world
• Five axis IBIS in body image stabiization, once deemed of questionable merit, in lens stabilization was the main thing 10 years ago. Now everyone has IBIS.
• Face and Eye detection long before Canon and Nikon, the EM10 in 2014 already had it 10 years ago, possibly years further back in other cameras too, I'm not sure
• Automatic sensor cleaning by sensor vibration, Olympus invention and licensed to other manufacturers. It is also said that the Olympus version is the only one that actually worked ;-)
• In camera focus stacking (Olympus feature won many highly reputed macro shooters over from their full frame systems to Olympus, just see YouTube)
• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first
• High Resolution images by sensor vibes (I love the whole idea, it's SOOO out of the box thinking, so creative)
• Live composite perhaps a lesser known feature, but basically it's in camera star trails, traffic trails, light painting stuff, by combining several shots in camera. And it works very well, I actually discovered my em10 already had it (discovered after years)

Click to expand...

You could add Pixel Mapping (auto-removal of hot pixels), which was on the E-1. Not so prominent, but still belatedly widely copied by others.

Oh, and Live View? On the E-330? A feature that DPReview's great Mr Phil Askey said at the time was "a solution looking for a problem".....

Click to expand...

Yes Good points indeed... The E330 was a regular (but small) true DSLR, right? With 4/3 sensor. Interesting to know that was the first LV ever...

Bas

jrsforums said:

Emerald Slick said:

jrsforums said:

• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first

Click to expand...

E-M1X in 2019, the first to offer this feature. E-M1 III in 2020.

Click to expand...

panasonic implemented ‘Pre-burst’ with 6K/4K photo on GH5 and G9 in 2017.

Click to expand...

. . . a year after Olympus, in 2016, had implemented Pro-Capture in the E-M1ii. (The 2019 date, above, is incorrect.)

. . . Steven

Sdlv said:

jrsforums said:

Emerald Slick said:

Sdlv said:

• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first

Click to expand...

E-M1X in 2019, the first to offer this feature. E-M1 III in 2020.

Click to expand...

panasonic implemented ‘Pre-burst’ with 6K/4K photo on GH5 and G9 in 2017.

Click to expand...

. . . a year after Olympus, in 2016, had implemented Pro-Capture in the E-M1ii. (The 2019 date, above, is incorrect.)

. . . Steven

Click to expand...

Ok…G85 had pre-burst in 4K photo….2016

G7 & GX8 in 2015

Bassam Guy said:

Let's not forget the OM innovations that I was thrust into in 1978 when my parents, advised by a pro photographer friend, bought me an OM-1 for my birthday in February 1978. Tiny (relatively), rugged, TTL metering, fully manual (battery only powered light meter). These seem mundane today only because of Olympus' innovation.

They followed that up with high speed flash synch (pulsing flash to permit extremely high synch speeds) on the OM-2 (which I never owned), and then the amazing 8 averaged spot metering on the OM-4 (which I still own). . . .

Click to expand...

Interesting recollections . . . I recall the innovation for which Olympus was most famous was off-the-film metering, which it introduced around 1980 in the OM-2. The user would use TTL metering normally, but the actual exposure would be determined by another, presumably more accurate, exposure reading off the film plane. You could do the same in flash photography. It was advanced stuff at the time.

Those wonderful Olympus film cameras . . .

. . . Steven

I believe the E-M1X was the first with subject detection. Originally with Trains, Planes, Autos but later with Birds

Woody S said:

Only time will tell if OMDS will be as innovative as Olympus was. But that also depends on what innovations are still possible from an engineering standpoint, what are deemed worthy of investment and what ones are of interest to camera users.

Click to expand...

How about live graduated ND filter, I believe this is a first

I've been with Olympus ever since the E-510 (2008) and never really felt the desire to leave, the E-5 cemented that and have been happy ever since,

At times I felt that some other photographers looked down their noses at Olympus however people always loved the images I got with the system without knowing where they came from, it's a great system and I'm going nowhere at the moment,

Long live Olympus (OM Systems)

Great list! My history with Olympus started with my dad, who had the XA and another point-and-shoot 35mm film camera in the 80s that he liked a lot. He was a physician, and had started out with the brand with the purchase of an Olympus microscope. Since learning the connection between my MFT cameras and the imaging company, I have come to see the Olympus ethos as one of experimenting and pushing the limits of imaging engineering. That in turn lends a “gadget fun factor” to the cameras. And also certain quality quantity to the menu system…

Living on assignment in Japan, I have been gradually exposed to various aspects of corporate culture. One of these is actually also legally enforced: company acquisitions and divestitures are made with more protections for employees than in other countries, certainly my home country of the US. In the US, a private equity acquisition would be expected to quickly gut the workforce, sell off the assets, and devalue or discard the brand. In Japan, it doesn’t quite work that way. Of course this doesn’t mean that we should expect OM System to keep humming along like it did when it was Olympus’s camera division. And as others have alluded, Olympus was humming under false pretenses when it came to financial security and top-level management anyway. One could argue that OM System is in a better place with respect to the latter…

Nice topic, especially with all the additions. An impressive history of thinking and dare being different.

I always liked Oly because their inventions made difficult pictures easier, and the impossible possible. They weren't just innovative techies, they were innovative technies that understood photography. I often compare with Sony: a very capable company that joined in the digital era without a history in photography (like Nikon, Fuji, Canon etc). They pushed technology ahead, but not (yet) photography.

Ps someone mentioned live composite was introduced with the em1 (ii?), I have to check, but IIRC the em5 i already had it.

And the biggest monkey in the room. PEOPLE, with this thing FULL FRAME IS BETTER. Either ignorance or snob value. My OM 1 can produce anything as good as full frame, especially with modern software. And NO expert on this site will persuade me differently. I KNOW because i also have full frame. (hardly ever use it ) I sold a sony 60 MPXL camera because it gave me nothing that an olympus gave me. Only a slow computer.

FURTHER. I use an E1. And recently bought a fantastic E3, which i now use most of the time.

Bas Hamstra said:

Ok call me nostalgic, but Olympush was so far ahead of its time with their innovations! Think about it:

• Mirrorless interchangeble lens cameras Olympus and Panasonic were the very first and started nothing less than a total revolution in the camera world
• Five axis IBIS in body image stabiization, once deemed of questionable merit, in lens stabilization was the main thing 10 years ago. Now everyone has IBIS.
• Face and Eye detection long before Canon and Nikon, the EM10 in 2014 already had it 10 years ago, possibly years further back in other cameras too, I'm not sure
• Automatic sensor cleaning by sensor vibration, Olympus invention and licensed to other manufacturers. It is also said that the Olympus version is the only one that actually worked ;-)
• In camera focus stacking (Olympus feature won many highly reputed macro shooters over from their full frame systems to Olympus, just see YouTube)
• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first
• High Resolution images by sensor vibes (I love the whole idea, it's SOOO out of the box thinking, so creative)
• Live composite perhaps a lesser known feature, but basically it's in camera star trails, traffic trails, light painting stuff, by combining several shots in camera. And it works very well, I actually discovered my em10 already had it (discovered after years)

Several, if not most, of these points were laughed at as "gimmicks" at first, but they actually have totally proven their value and most have been taken over by other manufacturers. Also I have the impression that Olympus users were not just brand loyal, but they just loved Olympus for bringing well priced inventions time after time. And then they just stopped existing. Is OMS still Olympus, the trendsettter, the myth, the legend? I am not sure.

Click to expand...

Olympus was a small fish in a big pond. They had to make a splash to survive. I think OMDS will have to do the same.
The problem is that innovation is risky. Sure, a lot of the innovations paid off but a lot didn't. The big boys had the luxury of sitting back and watching what Olympus did. What didn't work, they ignored leaving Oly to take the rap. What worked, they took on board, made it better and called it their own. It's good to be big.

Of course a lot of modern camera features are there because of the work put into video technology. Still shooters have a lot to thank video shooters for.

Bassam Guy said:

It has been a few years since OMDS has taken over, and that our original suspicions that they'd feign interest only to dump inventory and run were wrong. OMDS seems at least interested in keeping the business alive.

Click to expand...

I think it’s still too early to say that with certainty. All of OM System’s new products may still have been largely developed by Olympus.

That said, I don’t especially care. Whether you use a market-leading system (e.g. Sony E or Canon RF) or a dead system (e.g. Canon EF, Nikon F), your purchases lose value over the years. In the first case, because the products get replaced (my α7C was just replaced by an α7C II). In the second case, because no new products arrive, and eventually the old ones are too outdated to be worth much to mainstream users.

I take the view that I can, barely, afford nice photography gear right now, and, if I use it, I’ve got the value out of it. If the gear has some resale value in five or ten years, all the better – but that’s a bonus.

I agree with Bas in the original post that Olympus did a lot of things right.

Some of them are pretty subtle. For example, the OI.Share method of geotagging (synching clocks, recording a track, and then embedding geotags in the Raw and JPEG files on the camera’s card) is the most reliable and energy-efficient method short of a built-in GPS receiver (which I think all cameras should have, but that’s another story).

And the in-camera Raw development (to JPEG) is better than the alternatives I’ve tried – and my full-frame Sonys don’t even have this pretty important feature.

First off, let me say that I totally agree with the sentiment here that Olympus for a long time has really represented a fundamentally different approach to building cameras, which has resulted in some great innovations. I hope this continues.

Bas Hamstra said:

Is OMS still Olympus, the trendsettter, the myth, the legend? I am not sure.

Click to expand...

They're still introducing functionality that no one else is (expanding Live ND, introducing Live GND), so I would say "yes". I suspect we'll see more computational photography features from them in the future. If I had to guess, HDR that's more "baked into" the shooting experience would be next. Meaning, you don't have to go into "HDR mode", have multiple exposures, wait for processing, etc. You would simply turn it on and every photo you took would be HDR - just as smartphones have worked for yours.

jrsforums said:

Sdlv said:

jrsforums said:

Emerald Slick said:

jrsforums said:

• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first

Click to expand...

E-M1X in 2019, the first to offer this feature. E-M1 III in 2020.

Click to expand...

panasonic implemented ‘Pre-burst’ with 6K/4K photo on GH5 and G9 in 2017.

Click to expand...

. . . a year after Olympus, in 2016, had implemented Pro-Capture in the E-M1ii. (The 2019 date, above, is incorrect.)

. . . Steven

Click to expand...

Ok…G85 had pre-burst in 4K photo….2016

G7 & GX8 in 2015

Click to expand...

Ok...E-100 had pre-burst in 2001.

Bas Hamstra said:

Ok call me nostalgic, but Olympush was so far ahead of its time with their innovations! Think about it:

• Mirrorless interchangeble lens cameras Olympus and Panasonic were the very first and started nothing less than a total revolution in the camera world
• Five axis IBIS in body image stabiization, once deemed of questionable merit, in lens stabilization was the main thing 10 years ago. Now everyone has IBIS.
• Face and Eye detection long before Canon and Nikon, the EM10 in 2014 already had it 10 years ago, possibly years further back in other cameras too, I'm not sure
• Automatic sensor cleaning by sensor vibration, Olympus invention and licensed to other manufacturers. It is also said that the Olympus version is the only one that actually worked ;-)
• In camera focus stacking (Olympus feature won many highly reputed macro shooters over from their full frame systems to Olympus, just see YouTube)
• ProCapture I'm not quite sure but I think Oly was first
• High Resolution images by sensor vibes (I love the whole idea, it's SOOO out of the box thinking, so creative)
• Live composite perhaps a lesser known feature, but basically it's in camera star trails, traffic trails, light painting stuff, by combining several shots in camera. And it works very well, I actually discovered my em10 already had it (discovered after years)

Several, if not most, of these points were laughed at as "gimmicks" at first, but they actually have totally proven their value and most have been taken over by other manufacturers. Also I have the impression that Olympus users were not just brand loyal, but they just loved Olympus for bringing well priced inventions time after time. And then they just stopped existing. Is OMS still Olympus, the trendsettter, the myth, the legend? I am not sure.

Click to expand...

Perhaps another feel good moment and a trip down memory lane, however, everything that you mentioned is meaningless to potential new buyers.

Niche brands like Olympus in the broader camera market are greatly challenged. For most photographers (users), particularly casual ones, brand familiarity and availability trump technical specifications. That’s a fact. Olympus, and now OMDS, indeed struggle with recognition among the general populace, especially with the decline in the Micro Four Thirds (M43) market.

The point about size advantage is interesting. While some enthusiasts appreciate the portability of M43 systems, it hasn't translated into mass adoption. Indeed, market dynamics are complex, and factors like marketing, brand perception, and trends play significant roles. Does Kodak & Polaroid ring a bell?

The analogy with Kodak and Polaroid underscores the importance of adaptation and innovation in a rapidly changing industry. Just because a company pioneers a technology or format doesn't guarantee long-term success. Flexibility and responsiveness to market shifts are crucial for survival.

For OMDS to survive it must evolve its approach and perhaps focus on more mainstream appeal or innovation rather than relying solely on its technical prowess or historical legacy. Adaptation and relevance in the face of changing consumer preferences are indeed critical considerations for any company. Just ask Kodak & Polaroid.

I don't think OMS is anywhere near what Olympus was (is) in the optics world.

Samuel Dilworth said:

Bassam Guy said:

It has been a few years since OMDS has taken over, and that our original suspicions that they'd feign interest only to dump inventory and run were wrong. OMDS seems at least interested in keeping the business alive.

Click to expand...

I think it’s still too early to say that with certainty. All of OM System’s new products may still have been largely developed by Olympus.

That said, I don’t especially care. Whether you use a market-leading system (e.g. Sony E or Canon RF) or a dead system (e.g. Canon EF, Nikon F), your purchases lose value over the years. In the first case, because the products get replaced (my α7C was just replaced by an α7C II). In the second case, because no new products arrive, and eventually the old ones are too outdated to be worth much to mainstream users.

I take the view that I can, barely, afford nice photography gear right now, and, if I use it, I’ve got the value out of it. If the gear has some resale value in five or ten years, all the better – but that’s a bonus.

I agree with Bas in the original post that Olympus did a lot of things right.

Some of them are pretty subtle. For example, the OI.Share method of geotagging (synching clocks, recording a track, and then embedding geotags in the Raw and JPEG files on the camera’s card) is the most reliable and energy-efficient method short of a built-in GPS receiver (which I think all cameras should have, but that’s another story).

Click to expand...

the OM Systems Tough TG7 has built in GPS, tagging and logging.

Samuel Dilworth said:

And the in-camera Raw development (to JPEG) is better than the alternatives I’ve tried – and my full-frame Sonys don’t even have this pretty important feature.

Click to expand...