Canon and Nikon introduced their disasters at the same PMA, Canon
all-plastic body AV-1 and Nikons EM (techs hated it).
___________________________________
John Hermanson | CPS, Inc.
21 South Ln., Huntington NY 11743
www.zuiko.com | omtech1@xxxxxxxxxxx
Olympus OM Service since 1977
On 7/19/2013 1:09 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>> Two and four are really the same thing. They needed to move on after the
>> superb OM4Ti, and the central part of that follow on most certainly would be
>> AF. At that point there was simply no place for a new MF camera, the market
>> demanded AF. And I did fail to mention dealer treatment, which went south
>> when there were the OM 10 problems. Everything went down from there.
>
> The OM-10 was a disaster, for sure. However, as much as a disaster it
> was, it was also a brilliant camera for Olympus. It openned up the big
> retailers to the OM line and they were able to massively improve
> market share. However, that came at the price of cutting the camera
> stores out of the bulk buying discounts.
>
>
> --
> Ken Norton
> ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.zone-10.com
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|