><<Given the declining market share, Olympus USA's refusal to advertise the
>OM system, Dr. Maitani's retirement, and a significant price increase in
>OM lenses, it is "obvious" that Olympus must be seriously thinking about
>"throwing in the towel.">>
>
>Or the price increase is to make up for low revenue and it keeps the system
>alive.
>
>I do wish they would let us (the public) in on their plans.
>
>Charlie
Another idea is, that the high prices lead to small demand. So Olympus
doesn't need to refresh its reserves. In this way, Olympus has few
production costs but can keep "offering" its system (it's still prestigious
for Olympus, what about a optical manufacturer, which doesn't offer a range
of 35mm lenses ?). In other words, any different situation would increase
the costs for Olympus to hold the OM system.
BTW range of 35mm lenses, in my opinion, the Olympus left range of lenses
is very esthetic in a way, the most lenses have an aperture of 1:2 from
21mm to 250mm and three macros have also 1:2. Further the reduction on
fixed focal lenses is logical, because there are enough zooms around.
Nevertheless, an addition of an 1:2;8 17-35mm and an 1:2,8 80-200mm would
be logical.
Matthias
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|