I was going to have a chat with my mate the camera salesperson about
this yesterday but he was on vacation so I just contented myself with
a trawl through the trash buckets. Anyone want a Topcon 35mm with a
non working aperture diaphragm? :)
The E1 was made as a pro cam and that means big. Then there's the
market for the prosumer which means 'smaller but you can add a
booster to make it look big.' That's a bigger market than you might
think.
Real estate agents I've seen tend to be pretty crap photographers.
Even when they hire a pro, they don't get a good one.
I battered my head against a wall reading E300 and especially E330
reviews because I really liked the concept but so many writers simply
couldn't cope with the idea of something innovative. You could feel
them trying to be interested but not quite clearing the first hurdle
(it looks like a brick). When the E500 came out my poor little heart
sank because there it sat on the shelf, looking just like all the
rest. Sigh. I suppose that was Oly learning a lesson just a bit too
late again.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 11/05/2007, at 1:21 AM, Jeff Keller wrote:
> I think if Olympus had put the E1 in a package closer to what the
> E410 is,
> Olympus would have sold 5 times as many. There was an interview of
> some
> Olympus people I believe by a Ukrainian camera club that was posted
> here a
> couple years ago. The Olympus people discussed that if the E-1 were
> made
> small like the OM-1, then it wouldn't be considered "professional".
> I like
> the ergonomics of the E1 but if it were half the size, they
> probably could
> have made the same impact the OM-1 did. Instead Pentax and even
> Canon came
> out with SLRs noticeably smaller first. It's a shame that it took
> Olympus so
> long to come out with the E410 but I'd bet they will make a lot of
> money
> from it anyway.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|