Your idea/suggestion isn't wrong, it's just not economically viable, IMO.
R&D projects get prioritized at these big companies and the coffers aren't
bottomless. Unless something like your suggestion, being non-mainstream, is
some executive's pet project or a project that cheaply leverages other
tooling/technology/subsystems, it dies a quick death when the accountants look
at it.
Look at the Epson/Cosina RD1 where the paired Cosina's body with Epson's
digital technology, both of which pre-existed.
Skip
----- Original Message ---------------
Subject: [OM] Re: Olympus Trouble (OM-Digital??!)
From: "Simon Worby" <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:08:02 -0000
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
>Skip Williams wrote:
>
>> My opinion is that there isn't any market for OM bodies of any sort,
>> and there hasn't been for many years. Without AF lenses, an introduction
>> of a digital OM body would have been stupidity. We dinosaurs represent a
>> tiny, unprofitable minority as a primary user market.
>
>The E-1 will/can never be mass-market, either, even though it has all the
>mod-cons. But it means at least that Olypmus does have the technology.
>
>I just don't believe that a digital OM body would be expensive in terms of R&D
>or production. And whilst I agree that it's not a camera your average
>man-in-the-street would buy, I also don't think that necessarily makes it
>wrong.
>
>Simon
>==============================================
>List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
>List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
>==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|