Tedolph can save Olympus!

But…. I think using print size as a base line is kind of outdated. The only people I know who actually print their images any more are two of my friends that never use any social media, where the majority of image sharing/usage takes place.

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

Actually, that is a debunked rumor that Olympus stopped selling the Pen F. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen F.

It's not being promoted on OMDS marketing materials, so that's 'stopped selling' after a fashion. I suspect none have been manufactured for a good while, but there are still some in the distribution chain.

Olympus != OMDS

When OMDS took over, they removed the Pen-F from the Olympus online shop. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen-F.

Raist3d wrote:

acfo wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

Actually, that is a debunked rumor that Olympus stopped selling the Pen F. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen F.

Debunked? Where and when by who? Its discontinued - even they stopped selling it here new

Olympus was selling the Pen-F up to the takeover by OMDS on their online shop.

OMDS decided to stop selling the Pen-F for whatever reason they had. That may have been due to lack of stock, lack of capability to produce stock or maybe the upcoming ep7 or a mixture thereof.

If it was due to lack of stock, the rumor that it wasn't a profitable venture would be debunked as well. However we have no way to tell.

If you would push me to voice an opinion I'd say that if they were able to sell the existing production they would have met their business target.

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

My error, sorry. I was referring to the new EP7

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

My error, sorry. I was referring to the new EP7

I though so. So, my question becomes why not just leave the accessory port? It can't cost much and does other things besides the EVF. What are we missing?

Tedolph.

victorav wrote:

acfo wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

Actually, that is a debunked rumor that Olympus stopped selling the Pen F. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen F.

It's not being promoted on OMDS marketing materials, so that's 'stopped selling' after a fashion. I suspect none have been manufactured for a good while, but there are still some in the distribution chain.

Olympus != OMDS

When OMDS took over, they removed the Pen-F from the Olympus online shop. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen-F.

Well actually omds is the former consumer camera division of Olympus. So no longer owned by Olympus, but I believe the remaining staff were transferred from Olympus.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

My error, sorry. I was referring to the new EP7

I though so. So, my question becomes why not just leave the accessory port? It can't cost much and does other things besides the EVF. What are we missing?

Tedolph.

I am going to assume that either the lack of sales or lack of availability (or both) of those accessories did not warrant the continuation of them and hence no need for the port. Besides if an EVF were needed, the corresponding E-M 10 would fit the bill. In fact, it was the lack of an EVF on my PL7 that prompted my first E-M10 series purchase. I really liked the PL7 but the rear screen washout in the bright Florida sun was a no go. I considered the add on EVF to just make the whole camera too ugly compared to the E-M10.

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

Actually, that is a debunked rumor that Olympus stopped selling the Pen F. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen F.

It's not being promoted on OMDS marketing materials, so that's 'stopped selling' after a fashion. I suspect none have been manufactured for a good while, but there are still some in the distribution chain.

Olympus != OMDS

When OMDS took over, they removed the Pen-F from the Olympus online shop. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen-F.

OK. I suspect that they stopped making it some time ago, and whether you can get it or not depends on whether there are any left in the distribution chain where you are.

Yes, but that is a different matter. Here in Germany we expect 10 years of spare parts supply after the product has stopped being sold so the exact date is significant to us.

gary0319 wrote:

But…. I think using print size as a base line is kind of outdated. The only people I know who actually print their images any more are two of my friends that never use any social media, where the majority of image sharing/usage takes place.

Lots of photographers still print:

Wedding Photographers (Albums)

Portrait Photographers (medium sized prints)

Model Photographers (Composite Cards)

Boudoir  Photographers (prints of all sizes)

Gallery  and Art Photographers (large prints)

Food Photographers (magazines and menus)

Promotional Photographers (t-shirts, cups, throw pillows)

Industrial photographers (10k reports, annual reports)

Advertising Photographers (bus/van wraps, bill boards, etc.)

Lots of us still print and make $$ doing so.

Tedolph

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

My error, sorry. I was referring to the new EP7

I though so. So, my question becomes why not just leave the accessory port? It can't cost much and does other things besides the EVF. What are we missing?

Tedolph.

I am going to assume that either the lack of sales or lack of availability (or both) of those accessories did not warrant the continuation of them and hence no need for the port. Besides if an EVF were needed, the corresponding E-M 10 would fit the bill. In fact, it was the lack of an EVF on my PL7 that prompted my first E-M10 series purchase. I really liked the PL7 but the rear screen washout in the bright Florida sun was a no go. I considered the add on EVF to just make the whole camera too ugly compared to the E-M10.

Again, do you mean E-pl7 or E-p7? The E-pl7 had an accessory port and there were three different EVF's you could have chosen for it. No need to buy a new camera-especially one with the exact same sensor and JPEG engine!

Tedolph

Tedolph

JDLaing50 wrote:

You can’t put a rangefinder in a ep5 body.

Why not?

Tedolph

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

If one takes the time to review the marketing material for the PL7, it becomes readily apparent that the target market for this camera is folks that prefer a tilt down selfie screen to an EVF, like cosmetic variety like white leatherette cases, prefer latte to beer, etc.

Little wonder that it was not introduced to the US market where everything needs to be offered supersized, and feature jammed packed. I also rather think the PL7 is a pretty poor design match for the armchair engineers on this forum.

Are you talking about the E-pl7 or the E-p7?

The E-pl7 (what you are calling the "PL7") had both a tilt down screen and an EVF port.

Tedolph

My error, sorry. I was referring to the new EP7

I though so. So, my question becomes why not just leave the accessory port? It can't cost much and does other things besides the EVF. What are we missing?

Tedolph.

I am going to assume that either the lack of sales or lack of availability (or both) of those accessories did not warrant the continuation of them and hence no need for the port. Besides if an EVF were needed, the corresponding E-M 10 would fit the bill. In fact, it was the lack of an EVF on my PL7 that prompted my first E-M10 series purchase. I really liked the PL7 but the rear screen washout in the bright Florida sun was a no go. I considered the add on EVF to just make the whole camera too ugly compared to the E-M10.

Again, do you mean E-pl7 or E-p7? The E-pl7 had an accessory port and there were three different EVF's you could have chosen for it. No need to buy a new camera-especially one with the exact same sensor and JPEG engine!

Tedolph

Tedolph

Yes the E-PL7. As I noted, the add on EVF(s) made ,IMO, the camera too ugly for my taste. Sold the E-PL7 to a friend and bought the E-M10 at a good price.....no harm to the bank account. And, you are right, it was the same  innards that I liked in the E-PL7.

victorav wrote:

acfo wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

acfo wrote:

tedolf wrote:

victorav wrote:

tedolf wrote:

Now that the dust has settled with the Olympus spin off Tedolph freely gives his plan to Olympus. The plebeians here correctly asses that m4/3 is just not competitive with other larger formats unless it takes advantage of its reduced size potential. Right now this plays out in wildlife photography mostly. Others have noted that Fuji has carved out a niche even without any real advantage in the APS world probably due to the control layout. Leica (and now Nikon) play the retro card and that seems to succeed.

So, here is the plan: Olympus uses the old E-p5 body, takes out the flash and drops in the optical rangefinder from the Voigtlander Bessa rangefinders and makes three lenses with rangefinder cams on the back, the 17mm f/2.8, the 20mm f1.7 and a 42.5mm f1.7. In every other regard it is just the old e-p5 with the EVF accessory port.

Checks all the boxes: Retro, Rangefinder, Compact but still can use all the m4/3 lenses.

Done.

Tedolph

Maybe just stick an evf on the ep5.

They did. It was called the Pen F.

Then they stopped selling it.

Tedolph

Actually, that is a debunked rumor that Olympus stopped selling the Pen F. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen F.

It's not being promoted on OMDS marketing materials, so that's 'stopped selling' after a fashion. I suspect none have been manufactured for a good while, but there are still some in the distribution chain.

Olympus != OMDS

When OMDS took over, they removed the Pen-F from the Olympus online shop. Olympus never stopped selling the Pen-F.

OK. I suspect that they stopped making it some time ago, and whether you can get it or not depends on whether there are any left in the distribution chain where you are.

Yes, but that is a different matter. Here in Germany we expect 10 years of spare parts supply after the product has stopped being sold so the exact date is significant to us.

Well both Olympus and omds stopped selling it in Canada, and was market as discontinued.

Olympus and OMDS cannot have both stopped selling the Pen-F in Canada because they where not concurrently in charge of the sales process.

tedolf wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

But…. I think using print size as a base line is kind of outdated. The only people I know who actually print their images any more are two of my friends that never use any social media, where the majority of image sharing/usage takes place.

Lots of photographers still print:

Wedding Photographers (Albums)

Portrait Photographers (medium sized prints)

Model Photographers (Composite Cards)

Boudoir Photographers (prints of all sizes)

Gallery and Art Photographers (large prints)

Food Photographers (magazines and menus)

Promotional Photographers (t-shirts, cups, throw pillows)

Industrial photographers (10k reports, annual reports)

Advertising Photographers (bus/van wraps, bill boards, etc.)

Lots of us still print and make $$ doing so.

Tedolph

Point made.... but, how many of these would use the camera you propose. Maybe more than I think?