From the Olympus Website--A little better translation than DPReview

Started Feb 14, 2013 | Discussions
SirSeth
SirSeth Veteran Member • Posts: 9,892
No matter what the future holds....
3

... the present is that Olympus has a massive credibility problem with it's current 4/3rds DSLR users that releaseing "statements" just can't fix. It's either release a DSLR camera or continue to suffer scorn and despair of users. It's not as much pessimism and dooms day personalities imo as it is the company has shot themselves in the foot far too many times. No company can cut 3 lines of cameras, nearly fold due to top level fraud, and then put forth a convincing face for users who have had money burning holes in their pockets for years now. They either give people a good product to buy or suffer the loss of credibility they brought on themselves.

Personally, I don't care if they make another DSLR or not, but I hope they release something that is a hit like the OM-D but that can use 4/3rds lenses credibly. That might be an OM-D pro that can use both micro and 4/3rds lenses well. It might be an E-7 straight up. Maybe they will do a mirrorless E-x or E-xxx with native 4/3rds mount or with a translucent mirror like the E-10/20. Who cares, but it's egg on their face until they do.

That's my opinion,

Seth

-- hide signature --

What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?
--
wallygoots.smugmug.com
wallygoots.blogspot.com

 SirSeth's gear list:SirSeth's gear list
Olympus E-1 Sony Alpha a7 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 Sony FE 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +4 more
Craig from Nevada
OP Craig from Nevada Veteran Member • Posts: 3,516
Re: Cost accounting and reality.

John King wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

John King wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

Lets assume world digital camera sales are above 115 million cameras

Let's assume Olympus has market share of about 10 percent or about sales of 11.5 million

Lets assume Olympus Imaging loses $170 million this year on cameras only, but breaks even on lenses and accessories.

Olympus is losing almost $15 on each camera it sells.

Let's assume a ladder ... (very old joke about the chief financial controller and the managing director)

Sorry, but you would not even passthe first unit of cost accounting on that analysis ...

AND there are two units in that subject that you have to pass in order to obtain a professionally recognised accounting qualification ...


Bird Control Officers on active service.

LOL, John

I am an economist, not an accountant.

Micro economics is a science; economics is ...

It was just for illustrative purposes to highlight the depth of the problem. $170 million is a pretty steep loss.

Anyone can illustrate anything using that kind of example, Craig.

We have a federal treasurer here who really believes that moving a $22Bn deficit from 2012/13 FY backwards into the (closed ... ) 2011/12 FY translates into being a surplus for 2012/13FY. BTW, that made the federal deficit some $44Bn for 2011/12FY ...

If I had ever prepared books of account for any of my clients in that way, the tax office (ATO) and companies office (ASIC) would have had to stand behind my professional body to take their turn to put me in jail for fraudulent accounting.

It's not just Olympus that have been involved in dishonest accounting practices .

BTW, who would have thought that the average Australian buys a new mobile phone every 6 months? I wouldn't have, but the statistics show that it is something like that. My last one was 4 years old when retired (still works for emergency numbers ... ); and the CEOoDO's last phone was about 10 y.o. when the battery started to die. Her current one is now about 3~4 y.o.

With 7Bn+ people on this planet now, why do you think that world wide digital camera sales might be 115 million p.a.?

If the camera companies combined had the imagination of the wheel nuts on a truck, they could probably move a lot of their stocks of digi-cams in the third world.

It would certainly make a "contribution margin". This is money earned from selling stock at a loss that would otherwise be scrapped. This then makes a contribution to defraying sunk costs. i.e. far better to make a loss of (say) $100M from running at a loss, than it is to shut down operations when fixed costs are (say) $300M.
In the first case, one makes a loss of $100M. In the second case, the loss is $300M ...


John, I am an agreement with everything you have said.

Actually, I looked up the number for camera sales may be on the low side.  Some numbers point to 140million by 2015. I did find a number with 115 million and I can't relocated the cite, so let's use another number.   Numbers are all over the place.  So let's call world wide digital camera production 140 million.

http://www.isuppli.com/Home-and-Consumer-Electronics/News/Pages/Digital-Still-Cameras-Market-to-Grow-in-2010-But-Decline-Soon-to-Follow.aspx

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1297728975.html

However, Olympus, had about 6 percent of the market share for all digital cameras in 2010-at least according to this source:  http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1000532/0

So lets say 7 percent world  market share  or 10 million units  per year and losses of $170 million come in at $17 per unit.  So $15 was a bit low.  This was a back of the envelope estimate and still is.

The sunk cost question is interesting.  It appears that as is the case of automobiles, the unit cost drops per unit of production  From a loss minimization standpoint, it would make sense to keep producing so long as you cover your variable costs  plus one dollar or Yen (in the short run).

I am not on an expert on camera production. Again, how much of the production is  actually Olympus owned versus third party manufacturing Olympus products is another question.  I do know that parts for cameras are manufactured by third-parties and assembled at the point of production.

How much of the $170 million is cash versus, let's say depreciation expense is another question. Cash is a problem at Olympus.

The question is how much of this loss is sustainable in the short-run versus the long-run.  I would point out the problem that Olympus has is similar to other manufacturers. The market for cameras mature--the cellphone camera is now driving the market.  This is not a short-term cyclical thing, such as a recession, but a long-term market development.  This has to factored in as well. The problem Olympus has it that the market for the types of products it produces is getting tougher. Too many cameras chasing too few customers.

 Craig from Nevada's gear list:Craig from Nevada's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-4 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
John King
John King Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
Re: Cost accounting and reality.

Gidday again Craig

Craig from Nevada wrote:

John King wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

John King wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

Lets assume world digital camera sales are above 115 million cameras

Let's assume Olympus has market share of about 10 percent or about sales of 11.5 million

Lets assume Olympus Imaging loses $170 million this year on cameras only, but breaks even on lenses and accessories.

Olympus is losing almost $15 on each camera it sells.

Let's assume a ladder ... (very old joke about the chief financial controller and the managing director)

Sorry, but you would not even passthe first unit of cost accounting on that analysis ...

AND there are two units in that subject that you have to pass in order to obtain a professionally recognised accounting qualification ...


Bird Control Officers on active service.

LOL, John

I am an economist, not an accountant.

Micro economics is a science; economics is ...

It was just for illustrative purposes to highlight the depth of the problem. $170 million is a pretty steep loss.

Anyone can illustrate anything using that kind of example, Craig.

We have a federal treasurer here who really believes that moving a $22Bn deficit from 2012/13 FY backwards into the (closed ... ) 2011/12 FY translates into being a surplus for 2012/13FY. BTW, that made the federal deficit some $44Bn for 2011/12FY ...

If I had ever prepared books of account for any of my clients in that way, the tax office (ATO) and companies office (ASIC) would have had to stand behind my professional body to take their turn to put me in jail for fraudulent accounting.

It's not just Olympus that have been involved in dishonest accounting practices .

BTW, who would have thought that the average Australian buys a new mobile phone every 6 months? I wouldn't have, but the statistics show that it is something like that. My last one was 4 years old when retired (still works for emergency numbers ... ); and the CEOoDO's last phone was about 10 y.o. when the battery started to die. Her current one is now about 3~4 y.o.

With 7Bn+ people on this planet now, why do you think that world wide digital camera sales might be 115 million p.a.?

If the camera companies combined had the imagination of the wheel nuts on a truck, they could probably move a lot of their stocks of digi-cams in the third world.

It would certainly make a "contribution margin". This is money earned from selling stock at a loss that would otherwise be scrapped. This then makes a contribution to defraying sunk costs. i.e. far better to make a loss of (say) $100M from running at a loss, than it is to shut down operations when fixed costs are (say) $300M.
In the first case, one makes a loss of $100M. In the second case, the loss is $300M ...


John, I am an agreement with everything you have said.

Actually, I looked up the number for camera sales may be on the low side. Some numbers point to 140million by 2015. I did find a number with 115 million and I can't relocated the cite, so let's use another number. Numbers are all over the place. So let's call world wide digital camera production 140 million.

These forward estimates (LOVE that term! on a par with "forward planning". I assume that by these terms the people using them are using them in contrast to "backward estimates" and "backward planning") are ignoring the developing world, and the huge increase in market size this necessarily implies.

http://www.isuppli.com/Home-and-Consumer-Electronics/News/Pages/Digital-Still-Cameras-Market-to-Grow-in-2010-But-Decline-Soon-to-Follow.aspx

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NEWS/1297728975.html

However, Olympus, had about 6 percent of the market share for all digital cameras in 2010-at least according to this source: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1000532/0

I would be surprised if it were as high as that, given the well-ventilated issues with corporate governance at Olympus - using the term extremely loosely ...

So lets say 7 percent world market share or 10 million units per year and losses of $170

million come in at $17 per unit. So $15 was a bit low. This was a back of the envelope estimate and still is.

The sunk cost question is interesting. It appears that as is the case of automobiles, the unit cost drops per unit of production From a loss minimization standpoint, it would make sense to keep producing so long as you cover your variable costs plus one dollar or Yen (in the short run).

I am not on an expert on camera production. Again, how much of the production is actually Olympus owned versus third party manufacturing Olympus products is another question. I do know that parts for cameras are manufactured by third-parties and assembled at the point of production.

How much of the $170 million is cash versus, let's say depreciation expense is another question. Cash is a problem at Olympus.

Agreed.

However the injection of some $500M into the company by Sony as part of their mutual technology sharing agreement will have helped dramatically. This amount is not (as I understand things) reflected in the books of Olympus, as it is a separate joint venture company. Having such a relationship with such a huge company as Sony cannot but help current cash flow problems.

Further, the cash flow problems are caused by a one-off event (hopefully!!), so are not properly brought to account on the P&L as any kind of recurrent expenditure. One could also raise a very good argument that depreciation should remain in a "Provision" account on the balance sheet; not be amortised into the P&L account. One can also raise valid arguments that the current arrangement is also correct. Accounting is far trickier than most people assume ...

The question is how much of this loss is sustainable in the short-run versus the long-run. I would point out the problem that Olympus has is similar to other manufacturers. The market for cameras mature--the cellphone camera is now driving the market. This is not a short-term cyclical thing, such as a recession, but a long-term market development. This has to factored in as well.

Agreed. As I have said for many years, how many 10x8 or even 5x4 cameras does one see in use? There is an optimum size for most things also. Mobile phones that were too small to use were all the rage for a couple of years. This trend has largely reversed. Fashion can be a fickle master ...
Translating this into the Olympus camera world, many are not prepared to give up the optical excellence of their 4/3rds lenses for the size of the µFT cameras. Equally, many people my age (many of whom have the readies required to buy really very expensive cameras), are opting for smaller and lighter kit that will do the job "adequately".
Canon & Nikon are also trying to prise their way into the smaller MILC market. Time will tell as to their success. ATM, it seems that Olympus and Panasonic are well ahead of the rest of the pack there.

The problem Olympus has it that the market for the types of products it produces is getting tougher. Too many cameras chasing too few customers.

Many (most?) keep on forgetting that Olympus practically own the medical imaging market outright. They took it away from Leitz and Nikon, amongst the big players.

One has to take out the provisions for fraudulent and corrupt behaviour from the accounts, IMNSHO. If one predicates one's crystal ball gazing with them in the picture, one is assuming that the fraudulent and corrupt conduct will remain as part of on-going operations. This assumption is fatally flawed ab initio, IMNSHO.

-- hide signature --

Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --
.
The Camera doth not make the Man (nor Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
.
I am a Photography Aficionado ... and ...
"I don't have any problems with John. He is a crotchety old Aussie. He will smack you if you behave like a {deleted}. Goes with the territory." boggis the cat
.
Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/v/main-page/

Bird Control Officers on active service.

 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II +17 more
ravduc
ravduc Senior Member • Posts: 2,060
Re: No matter what the future holds....
2

Olympus needs to make money, as many of you have mentioned, but reputation is an important factor as well. Maintaining their reputation with former and new customers is as important in the long term as making money now. They have other immediate means of making money (ex. medical). Olympus Imaging has a long tradition of making excellent products and they, I am sure, do not want to let their customers down. It's not only a question of money, but also of reputation and pride in what they do. Imho this is what they have been saying in the last week. They need to take care of their four thirds customers.

 ravduc's gear list:ravduc's gear list
Leica Digilux 2 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Leica Digilux 3 Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 +20 more
Craig from Nevada
OP Craig from Nevada Veteran Member • Posts: 3,516
Re: Cost accounting and reality.

One has to take out the provisions for fraudulent and corrupt behaviour from the accounts, IMNSHO. If one predicates one's crystal ball gazing with them in the picture, one is assuming that the fraudulent and corrupt conduct will remain as part of on-going operations. This assumption is fatally flawed ab initio, IMNSHO.

-

The bad behavior hurt them for sure.  In my opinion,  if the scandal had not occurred they would be in a tough spot now regardless.

They are a small manufacturer in a very competitive industry, one that is struggling. Their balance sheet might be better, but they would still be facing many of the same challenges. They may or may not have the right technology, but as with the consumer electronics industry in Japan, they are not really well-positioned with the right products.

Point and shoot is a dead end with the possible exception of the high-end XZ-2.

The DSLR market is full and Olympus now has about 1 percent of the market (In US political lingo we Olympus owners are the 1 percent). I am having trouble seeing how they can grow this market. I can't see DSLR doing much except maybe keep the E-5.  Olympus had their chance when the transition from film to digital occurred a decade ago and everyone was starting out.  Chances like that don't come everyday.

This leaves the micro FT market.  They are a leader here with OMD, but their line of lenses to this point doesn't really do much for me and the photography I like.  I like going out armed with my E-5, 12-60mm and 50-200mm. They can't match this right now with a bunch of primes and the entry level zooms.    I wonder if this line is profitable?  I figure the mircro line gets reduced to E-PL and the EM-2 (?).  The EP gets the boot. They try to do a professional OMD.

You point out that they have a joint venture with Sony and with it some capital of $500 million.To put this in perspective, 3 years at $170 million equals about that much.  The loss this year is twice what was estimated. Sales are just not there.

The reorganization has to stop the bleeding.   That will require fewer lines of cameras to support and few cameras.  If they stay in the imaging business, they will need to do what General Motors did, cut the brands down and the number of models.

-

 Craig from Nevada's gear list:Craig from Nevada's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-4 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 Fujifilm X-T1 +17 more
John King
John King Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
Re: Cost accounting and reality.

Craig from Nevada wrote:


One has to take out the provisions for fraudulent and corrupt behaviour from the accounts, IMNSHO. If one predicates one's crystal ball gazing with them in the picture, one is assuming that the fraudulent and corrupt conduct will remain as part of on-going operations. This assumption is fatally flawed ab initio, IMNSHO.

-

The bad behavior hurt them for sure. In my opinion, if the scandal had not occurred they would be in a tough spot now regardless.

They are a small manufacturer in a very competitive industry, one that is struggling. Their balance sheet might be better, but they would still be facing many of the same challenges. They may or may not have the right technology, but as with the consumer electronics industry in Japan, they are not really well-positioned with the right products.

Point and shoot is a dead end with the possible exception of the high-end XZ-2.

The DSLR market is full and Olympus now has about 1 percent of the market (In US political lingo we Olympus owners are the 1 percent). I am having trouble seeing how they can grow this market. I can't see DSLR doing much except maybe keep the E-5. Olympus had their chance when the transition from film to digital occurred a decade ago and everyone was starting out. Chances like that don't come everyday.

This leaves the micro FT market. They are a leader here with OMD, but their line of lenses to this point doesn't really do much for me and the photography I like. I like going out armed with my E-5, 12-60mm and 50-200mm. They can't match this right now with a bunch of primes and the entry level zooms. I wonder if this line is profitable? I figure the mircro line gets reduced to E-PL and the EM-2 (?). The EP gets the boot. They try to do a professional OMD.

You point out that they have a joint venture with Sony and with it some capital of $500 million.To put this in perspective, 3 years at $170 million equals about that much. The loss this year is twice what was estimated. Sales are just not there.

The reorganization has to stop the bleeding. That will require fewer lines of cameras to support and few cameras. If they stay in the imaging business, they will need to do what General Motors did, cut the brands down and the number of models.

-

Craig, there is an awful lot of crystal ball gazing in your analysis ...

Firstly, Olympus has a considerable success on their hands with the OM-D. Quite a number of people I know here with FF cameras are buying the OM-D ... They are more than pleasantly surprised at the IQ that this camera produces ...
Like very surprised!
Like maybe even: "Why am I lugging 10+ kgs of camera gear around " surprised ...

Secondly, one does not steer the ship by looking over the stern ...

Thirdly, Olympus realises both of the above, and are taking the (right) steps to address both the current problems and the issues arising therefrom. They also make most of their money from medical imaging, so have this to fall back on if determined to continue. Compare this with (say) Nikon, where they are all but totally reliant on their camera business ...

Not one of us can predict the future of Olympus, or any other company.
IBM nearly went broke because of their attempt to introduce a proprietary bus structure into PCs (anyone remember the PS/2 bus ?) and followed it up with the disastrous "Windows killer" OS, OS2 ...

At the time, IBM was the largest company in the world, IIRC ...

-- hide signature --

Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --
.
The Camera doth not make the Man (nor Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
.
I am a Photography Aficionado ... and ...
"I don't have any problems with John. He is a crotchety old Aussie. He will smack you if you behave like a {deleted}. Goes with the territory." boggis the cat
.
Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/v/main-page/

Bird Control Officers on active service.

 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II +17 more
Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 36,375
As the still owner of several 4/3rd lenses...

I agree that's all they need. Release *whatever* that can use those lenses well, and I could care less.  Of course, no more 4/3rd lenses but I rather see the company survive providing backward compatibility than out of misplaced pride, support a money pit.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

Raist3d Forum Pro • Posts: 36,375
Re: No matter what the future holds....

ravduc wrote:

Olympus needs to make money, as many of you have mentioned, but reputation is an important factor as well. Maintaining their reputation with former and new customers is as important in the long term as making money now.

Maintaining reputation bottom line wise is as important as it can make them money. Otherwise they can have all the reputation in the world with a chapter 11 and that's no good.

But I agree with Sir- just supporting the 4/3rd lenses as they are now to me is enough to keep reputation and keep more opportunities for money.

They have other immediate means of making money (ex. medical). Olympus Imaging has a long tradition of making excellent products and they, I am sure, do not want to let their customers down. It's not only a question of money, but also of reputation and pride in what they do. Imho this is what they have been saying in the last week. They need to take care of their four thirds customers.

Pride goes nowhere in this game long term if the whole division gets canned for not making money. I rather see them survive with 4/3rd lenses as a backward compatibility support.

-- hide signature --

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

bofo777 Senior Member • Posts: 1,267
MAGIC

I have read hundreds of posts on this subject and wonder where we loyal Olympus good people will be a year from now. I still love my E-5 and all the wonderful Olympus and Leica lenses I have. Next year if nothing has come out I won't go screaming in the streets and switch to THOSE other brands. I am still excited every time I push the shutter of my E-5 and amazed at the finished photograph---as long as the magic is still there it will still have an honored place in my camera bag.......

 bofo777's gear list:bofo777's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +7 more
Messier Object Veteran Member • Posts: 6,232
Re: MAGIC

I can understand this sentiment, but the reality is that the magic fades as the light fades.

Peter

 Messier Object's gear list:Messier Object's gear list
Olympus E-5 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +11 more
bofo777 Senior Member • Posts: 1,267
Re: MAGIC

I have no problem with my 2.0 and 1.4 lenses and usable product up to 2500 iso with my E-5.  I have shot many very usable shots in dim buildings and churches with wonderful results.  Outside the golden period of sunrise or sunset I have never had a problem.  Somehow the much maligned E-5 is still a very magical camera  ...I guess you will be one of those guys running in the streets.

 bofo777's gear list:bofo777's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 12-60mm 1:2.8-4.0 SWD +7 more
OM 6Ti Plus Contributing Member • Posts: 755
Some of your style ramblings, from me this time

Hi Collin,

That would explain why you chose not to ​bold​ the bit about ​without any changes ​:-P then. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a new DSLR, but I suspect that it won't be an E7, given what has been said; I reckon that the new flagship will be waiting for CAF to be sorted and production volumes of the latest Epson VF to be available since it is, inevitably, going to be a m4/3 body, albeit about E30 size, which will have to last into 2017 - seems hard to imagine right now.

So if there is going to be a ​new​ DSLR this year I think the best it will be is an update of the E30 with the EM5 sensor, maybe the 5-axis IBIS if they can do that while keeping the OVF and, of course, video, but with the limitations an OVF imposes.

For all those who are crying out for better CAF, I would suggest they sit down and try and design a predictive-focus algorithm given all the variables involved. I still remember Trevor Carpenter's attempts with the 70-300 at ​Butterflies​ in Flight now that would be a good test target for anyone's algorithm.

Everyone has their own favourite camera and, ironically, I discovered mine the other day after finding an OM auto-bellows standing on end in the corner of the front-window of my local LCE (London Camera Exchange) like an abandoned puppy begging for attention. I brought it home and discovered that it refused to mate with that alien, the E-510, unless I inserted an extension ring between it and the alien body. Not having one to hand at the time I dug into my OM case and extracted my all-time favourite camera; the OM4Ti and wandered around looking for a suitable macro subject. I started to remember why I liked the OM4; because there is no screen on the back it is much easier to grip firmly and keep the elbow into the body, plus, of course, the viewfinder. The body is that bit wider than the EM5, which I have tried and found too narrow, with nowhere for my left hand that felt secure, given that I have very dry hands that find polished shapes difficult to grip without risking the cherry-pip effect and an LCD that comes virtually to the edge of the body so no place there without putting thumb prints on the screen.

When sizing up shots with the OM4 I became aware that I was now more conscious of my nose banging into the back of the camera than I remembered. Why was that? After some thought a penny dropped at the back of my mind and, putting down the OM4 I went to my rucksack where the E1 lives and pulled it out, sure enough, when you lift it to your face the asymmetric lens position allows the body to nestle next to the nose - ​for those who use the right-eye that is​ leaving the left eye free to see what is coming into frame. The ergonomics of the E1, for me, were particularly well thought-out and I would love to see that body brought into the 21st century with 1/8000 shutter, the E5 AF system, but with the E1 AF-assist retained and the shutter damped to retain it's quietness plus of course as many of the EM5 goodies as can be incorporated.

So, My vote - far too late to influence anyone at Olympus - if there is going to be a native 4/3 DSLR would be for Olympus not to go back to the film era with another OM look-alike, but celebrate your original vision for digital with the E1 and revisit that design, please, pretty-please? You have the technology ​NOW ​ that you couldn't get for 2003.

regards,

Mike:-)

Messier Object Veteran Member • Posts: 6,232
Technology trumps magic every time

bofo777 wrote:

I have no problem with my 2.0 and 1.4 lenses and usable product up to 2500 iso with my E-5. I have shot many very usable shots in dim buildings and churches with wonderful results. Outside the golden period of sunrise or sunset I have never had a problem. Somehow the much maligned E-5 is still a very magical camera ...I guess you will be one of those guys running in the streets.

My main interest is bird/wildlife and I shoot with the ZD300mm /2.8.  Most bird shots  need to be cropped, and I'm using 1/1000 sec and faster. In anything other than good light the E-5 sensor produces  noise in shadows and even blue sky which becomes more noticeable in close crops, and needs a lot of work PP to remove. In those situations ISO 800 really is the best I can get out of the E-5. So yes I'll be happy with a new E-7 (or whatever) as it will extend the range of lighting situations in which I can shoot with my big lens

Peter

 Messier Object's gear list:Messier Object's gear list
Olympus E-5 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EOS 7D Mark II Olympus E-M1 II Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm 1:2.8-3.5 SWD +11 more
Roger Engelken
Roger Engelken Veteran Member • Posts: 5,022
Magic in the Application of Technology?

Perhaps the magic is in utilizing the technology to develop a system that brings out the best in the optics, the lens.  I have not had the privilege to use the ZD 300mm f/2.8, but I have no doubt but that with the right "magic" inside the camera body, there is very little that lens, and many, many other lenses would not be capable of.

 Roger Engelken's gear list:Roger Engelken's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Olympus E-M1 II
CollBaxter
CollBaxter Forum Pro • Posts: 12,724
Re: Technology trumps magic every time
2

Ditto.

What amazes me is that on m4/3 they have had to put electronic spectacles  on the lenses. On 4/3 lenses we don't need them,  we just need some cataracts removed.

Think about this . If a new 4/3 camera was released with the new sensor and tech.  The SG lenses could performed as well as the more expensive m4/3 lenses could cause some embarrassment to Olympus and m4/3.

Collin
(Aficionado Olympus DSLR )
http://collinbaxter.zenfolio.com/
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter
Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away. (George Carlin)
New Seventh Wonder of the World.
http://www.pbase.com/collinbaxter/image/95297052.jpg

 CollBaxter's gear list:CollBaxter's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS Olympus E-500 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-620 Olympus E-5 +15 more
Denjw
Denjw Veteran Member • Posts: 5,316
Re: Technology trumps magic every time

Agree fully with this Peter.

-- hide signature --
 Denjw's gear list:Denjw's gear list
Olympus E-300 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-5 Olympus E-M1 Olympus E-M1 II +16 more
rovingtim Veteran Member • Posts: 8,640
Craig, we have the actual figures

Craig from Nevada wrote:

Lets assume world digital camera sales are above 115 million cameras

73 million

Let's assume Olympus has market share of about 10 percent or about sales of 11.5 million

7% ... or 4.8 million

Lets assume Olympus Imaging loses $170 million this year on cameras only, but breaks even on lenses and accessories.

Olympus is losing almost $15 on each camera it sells.

Oly's camera division losses doubled from last year.

This is from the link I posted earlier.

Rriley
Rriley Forum Pro • Posts: 21,846
Re: Don't forget reality.
2

rovingtim wrote:

I'm not sure how the camera division could justify the release of a new 4/3rds body unless its a game changer.

weird thinking on so many levels

1) it isnt SLRs that got them into the current mess, its m43
2) theyre in the business of selling cameras, no cameras - means no business
3) rebooting 43rds would give them 2 fields of cameras that almost intersect. Indeed if they ever figure out the AF thing they will intersect almost completely. Getting life into 43rds would at worst bring them back to 4 years ago, but this time they would have m43rds going for them as well.

So while there isnt a lot of risk or downside in keeping 43rds going, there is the upside that they would sell cameras in the market sectors they have been absent from of late, predominantly the more westernised countries. Pretty easy to see 20-50k sales in that over a year.

Ideally they should drive towards a position of nearly complete parts commonality, this expands the market base but increases the parts buy volume. Achievable through major cost of outsourced components such as sensors, shutters, LCDs, imaging processors, etc. The positive impact is camera sales up, parts costs down throughout the division..

If I were them I would be working on a 43rds mount camera in the US$600-700 range strongly based on one of the m43 products, and plan for an intersect model between Exx and Ex in the future. It was Ogawa that claimed they were in the business of dreams, if you kill the dream you are out of business.

-- hide signature --

Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

 Rriley's gear list:Rriley's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Olympus E-3 Olympus E-5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 +1 more
John King
John King Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
Re: Craig, we have the actual figures - but do "we" understand what they mean?

rovingtim wrote:

Craig from Nevada wrote:

Lets assume world digital camera sales are above 115 million cameras

73 million

That looked very like it was the figure for the quarter to me, but I could have been mistaken ...

Let's assume Olympus has market share of about 10 percent or about sales of 11.5 million

7% ... or 4.8 million

Lets assume Olympus Imaging loses $170 million this year on cameras only, but breaks even on lenses and accessories.

Olympus is losing almost $15 on each camera it sells.

Oly's camera division losses doubled from last year.

Once again. Is it the 20th time in the last week? These are carry forward losses and liabilities. Not provision for non-current (future) losses or liabilities. Not trading losses from the current year (they made a trading profit ... IIRC ... ).

This is from the link I posted earlier.

Isn't it amazing how everyone with a simple cash book program on their computer is suddenly a high-flying corporate accountant/financial controller?

Hands up everyone who holds an accounting degree, membership of their professional accounting body, and a practising certificate ... ROTFL ...

-- hide signature --

Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --
.
The Camera doth not make the Man (nor Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
.
I am a Photography Aficionado ... and ...
"I don't have any problems with John. He is a crotchety old Aussie. He will smack you if you behave like a {deleted}. Goes with the territory." boggis the cat
.
Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/v/main-page/

Bird Control Officers on active service.

 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II +17 more
John King
John King Forum Pro • Posts: 14,941
Re: Don't forget reality.

Rriley wrote:

rovingtim wrote:

I'm not sure how the camera division could justify the release of a new 4/3rds body unless its a game changer.

weird thinking on so many levels

1) it isnt SLRs that got them into the current mess, its m43
2) theyre in the business of selling cameras, no cameras - means no business
3) rebooting 43rds would give them 2 fields of cameras that almost intersect. Indeed if they ever figure out the AF thing they will intersect almost completely. Getting life into 43rds would at worst bring them back to 4 years ago, but this time they would have m43rds going for them as well.

So while there isnt a lot of risk or downside in keeping 43rds going, there is the upside that they would sell cameras in the market sectors they have been absent from of late, predominantly the more westernised countries. Pretty easy to see 20-50k sales in that over a year.

Ideally they should drive towards a position of nearly complete parts commonality, this expands the market base but increases the parts buy volume. Achievable through major cost of outsourced components such as sensors, shutters, LCDs, imaging processors, etc. The positive impact is camera sales up, parts costs down throughout the division..

If I were them I would be working on a 43rds mount camera in the US$600-700 range strongly based on one of the m43 products, and plan for an intersect model between Exx and Ex in the future. It was Ogawa that claimed they were in the business of dreams, if you kill the dream you are out of business.

-- hide signature --

Riley
any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended
support 1022 Sunday Scapes'

I would go along with most, if not all, of that ...

-- hide signature --

Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
(see profile for current gear)
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --
.
The Camera doth not make the Man (nor Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
.
I am a Photography Aficionado ... and ...
"I don't have any problems with John. He is a crotchety old Aussie. He will smack you if you behave like a {deleted}. Goes with the territory." boggis the cat
.
Gallery: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/v/main-page/

Bird Control Officers on active service.

 John King's gear list:John King's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-510 Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm 1:2.8-3.5 II +17 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads