Sorry, I haven't been following this thread, but if you don't mind my
jumping in...
Just about all the early AF cameras were designed using Honeywell
technology. What they didn't realize was that buying Honeywell's IC's
didn't convey the right to use Honeywell's patented technology. Hence,
Honeywell sued and won a massive settlement from almost every major
camera maker, including Olympus, based upon the volume of their use of
Honeywell's patents.
Fortunately for Olympus, they had used Honeywell technology in only a
few models, most notably the OM-77/OM-707 camera. As we all know, the
OM-77 _didn't_ sell like hotcakes (OK, it cratered!), so Olympus' debt
to Honeywell was relatively small. Other camera makers had based their
whole highly-popular camera lines on Honeywell's patents, and got hit
with huge bills from the court as a result.
With the demise of the OM-77, Olympus was free to "start fresh" and
invest in the development of their own AF technology. Other makers were
not so fortunate, since their whole line was based on Honeywell's
technology. {At the same time, Olympus realized that sales of large
cameras were falling off (see below). Why invest in development of a
line of cameras that wasn't selling?}
But this sort of "wheeling and dealing" is well known in the camera
industry - Pentax's patent on the instant-return mirror (which has
expired, I'm given to understand) is one of the most well known.
Olympus holds many patents as well, from relatively minor ones such as
the "sunflower" circuit connection method, to laser-head read/write
technology that's being used in many products today.
But I seriously doubt that Olympus licensed OTF from anyone - Maitani
was using it in the OM-2 for over a decade before anyone else even tried
it, and when they did it was in an entirely different manner than in the
OM-2. And the progressive feed-back loop that's used to create Olympus'
Super FP isn't used by anyone else - including Minolta! You're right -
it doesn't make sense.
Why did Olympus "get out" of the AF/SLR market? That's easy - it's a
dead market! I've mentioned this before, but back five or six years
ago, PMA reported that total _worldwide_ sales of _every_ SLR were less
than 1 million. That included EOS's, Maxxim's, even 645's, the whole
lot. In that year, Olympus sold over 1 million original Stylus cameras
ALONE! Do the math!
ClassicVW@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> Your memory may be correct, but I always thought that Super FP was Olympus'
> patent.?? It still doesn't add up that Oly got out due to lack of AF patents.
> There were Nikon, Canon, and Minolta all there with Olympus at the start and
> they didn't get out. And what about AF technology for the ZLRs? Isn't that
> the same AF patents that would have hindered their SLRs? Why did the ZLRs
> flourish? I think C.H. may be close or right on with his comment that if Oly
> can't get 250f a market, they don't even go in. But that STILL can't
> explain to my satisfaction why they got out so early instead of giving it a
> fight for that 25hare? Could you imagine what a technological coup it
> would have been early on for Olympus if they could have shrunk the AF SLR as
> successfully as they did the Manual focus? I suspect it was someone in charge
> that just decided for the company that they would not continue.
>
> George S.
>
> wright@xxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> << Olympus did not invent OTF
> exposure, or OTF flash control, but licensed it from Minolta. I think even
> the Super FP technology was invented by Minolta, but licensed by Olympus.
> Maybe Minolta got tired of Olympus one upping them on their own technology?
> >>
>
> < 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 >
< 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 >
|