Khen Lim (castanet.xiosnetworks@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> "Decades of not having a firm grip"? Decades? I'm sorry for being pedantic
> with your choice of words but when you write stuff that is critical, I'll be
> very watchful of everything you write or say.
> "Uncompetitive"? Boy....you sure know your stuff...
You are as entitled to your opinion of what's going on at Olympus as
any of us are. I'll tell you what I, as a serious photography
hobbyist, am seeing (sorry, folks, that this is so long):
Three decades ago, Olympus introduced a truly innovative landmark
camera, the M-1, which, among other features, demonstrated that a
fine 35mm SLR need not be huge or ergonomically inferior. For many
years after that, Olympus introduced variations of this camera and
many lenses (which are good enough to be popular even today).
Effective autofocus is introduced to the 35mm SLR market. Olympus
essentially sat it out. Their limited support of AF is strange
considering the overwhelming desire for autofocus among the vast
majority of buyers of 35mm SLRs. Virtually every other SLR
manufacturer offered several autofocus models. Olympus offered only
a few -- and none at all in their "professional" (single-digit OM)
models.
The last OM-4 was introduced in 1987. Despite the fact that 35mm
SLRs still are popular, Olympus offered no significant additional
development of the OM line even though other 35mm SLR manufacturers
continued to add features to and market their own cameras. It seems
odd that the company innovative enough to build the original OM
cannot find or implement any new useful photographic features
(nevermind AF, still not present on a "pro" OM).
While I am not a professional photographer, being a member of this
list for the past five years has allowed me to see the comments of
other Olympus users, many of whom don't have anything positive to
say about their experience of Olympus' support for professional
photographers or for its dealers over the years.
Digital SLRs are made available starting in 1991. Fuj!, Canyon and
Nykon began selling DSLRs in 2000; Pentacks in 2001. It was October
2003 before Olympus actually put functional E-1s into the hands of
photographers, by which time F, C, N, and P had updated their DSLRs.
Only Minolta took longer to introduce a competitive DSLR. And
they're gone now, even after grabbing the life raft offered by
merging with Konika.
Olympus introduced additional consumer (maybe you could call them
"prosumer") DSLRs. The E-1 -- even though it didn't exactly leapfrog
the capabilities of DSLRs from the other companies when it was
introduced -- remained un-updated while C, N, and P continue to
upgrade their cameras. Contacks, Kod@k, and K-M leave the market
(OK, K-M gets rebadged as Sonny).
While the Four-Thirds sensor is touted as providing equivalent
capability to larger sensors in a smaller package, and while the E-1
_is_ smaller than most of its competition, it wasn't until much
later that Olympus introduced a DSLR that revolutionized camera size
the way the OM did. Meanwhile, comments surface about the relatively
poor high-ISO performance of the sensor.
Present day: Olympus introduces the E-400, a solid addition to their
"consumer" line. For reasons that seem to be based largely on poor
forecasting of both old and new model sales, this attractive,
well-specced, well-priced camera is not made available in the U.S.
-- a market every other DSLR manufacturer deems important to its
sales success.
At Photokina 2006, Olympus shows a non-functioning representation of
the next model in the E-singledigit line and issues some vague
statements about when in the next year (!) customers actually will
be able to buy this camera. That means the E-1 will be _it_ for four
years or more -- an eon in the electronics business. Professional
photographers, facing performance requirements no U.S.-available
Olympus camera can meet, start looking at other DSLR systems.
Last I checked, businesses exist to make a profit. It is difficult
for me to understand why a company which can have such flashes of
engineering brilliance can be so obtuse about the market into which
they sell. It would be one thing if only Olympus made DSLRs. But
they're not alone.
The road to bankruptcy court is littered with companies which were
engineer-driven but couldn't sell to save themselves. Huge mansions
full of nice furniture are owned by people who figured out how to
sell just sugar water or scraps of fabric at a huge markup.
Does Olympus not understand why 35mm and DSLR buyers purchase the
cameras they do? Do they not understand that many people seeking to
buy a DSLR (at least in the U.S.) will walk into a large store
carrying C and N and probably Sonny and not consider Olympus (or P)
because they don't see them in the store?
Do they not understand that many buyers are influenced by the brand
of equipment that professional photographers use (a market in which
Olympus is absent)? Sure, it's a halo effect, but it's what fuels
Apple and Sonny and NASCAR and half the clothing manufacturers in
the world to immense profitability.
Does Olympus not understand that people have become conditioned to
the notion that a year-old electronic product is viewed as outdated
and a four-year-old product is viewed as obsolete?
Do they not understand that someone like me might be reluctant to
spend a few thousand more dollars on technology (lenses,
Olympus-specific flash units, etc.) without having confidence in
that company's ability to map out and execute its own future?
I don't consider myself sheeplike in any way, but I have to say that
if I were looking at starting from scratch today with a DSLR system,
I'd need some serious convincing that Olympus should be considered
as a system I could grow into.
Yes, I stand by "decades" and "uncompetitive" (and "clueless" while
I'm at it). As critical as those words may seem, most DSLR buyers
don't have a Khen with an inside track to what's going on inside
camera manufacturers. They can do no more with Olympus' imprecise
announcements about E-thingy availability than look at the past --
which just isn't pretty.
Given Olympus' demonstrated track record of not understanding what
sells in a given market (m:robe anyone?), it seems quite unlikely to
me that they suddenly will catch on to the need for offering
products that, at least on paper, hold up to what the competition
offers. If Olympus can pull out of their tailspin in the next six
months or so, great! I just don't see great reasons to be really
optimistic that Olympus will turn it around. We may see the next
company to leave the DSLR market. I won't be happy about that. And I
have much less invested in Olympus than most here.
Steve
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|