Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Herbert Keppler speaks out

Subject: [OM] Herbert Keppler speaks out
From: "William Sommerwerck" <williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 16:40:27 -0700
Though I generally agree with Burt's analysis, it's obvious (???) he's 
deliberately (???) overlooking some major points.

24x36 sensors are expensive. But knowing that doesn't minimize the resentment 
of photographers who own unique lenses or large lens collections and see no 
good reason why their existing lenses shouldn't give full performance on a 
digital camera body. The higher cost of a "full frame" body is minimal compared 
to the cost of replacing their lenses. Assuming they _can_ be replaced. (See 
below.)

Of course, some companies (Canon, Minolta, Pentax) have gotten away with 
periodically obsoleting their lens mounts, so their owners are more or less 
inured to this. Nikon and Olympus owners aren't. Nikon has maintained mount and 
aperture compatibility, while the manual-focus OM lenses have _never_ changed.

There _isn't_ going to be an (equivalent) 21/2 or 85/2 or 24/shift for this 
new-format camera, and Olympus knows it. If you're trying to make money by 
getting owners to replace "all" their existing lenses, it won't work, simply 
because this camera will _never_ have the range of lenses that Nikon, Canon, or 
Olympus offered for their 35mm cameras. It's going to be a couple of zooms 
covering the 20 to 300mm (equivalent) range, plus a handful of specialty lenses 
(macro, mirror, _maybe_ a shift and full-frame fisheye). And that's it.

Camera makers want to sell _their own_ lenses, so it's highly unlikely other 
companies will make lenses for this new body.

As for size... The space taken up by "mechanism" is needed for batteries and 
electronics. Though an OM is larger than an XA, most readers would agree it's 
easier to handle, simply because the extra space makes it easier to position 
the controls "well." If a smaller format has any advantage, it's smaller 
_lenses_, not smaller bodies.

"Small, highly flexible and convenient digital SLRs and lenses could bring us a 
new SLR renaissance. Or will the new Olympus system, if refused the asked-for 
help and support from other manufacturers, suffer the same fate as the tiny 
half-frame 35mm Olympus Pen F SLR system that vanished in the early 1970s?"

If this new system is well-designed, it won't need support from any other 
company to be successful. And you _can't_ draw comparisons with the Pen F. The 
F never vanished -- it was reborn as the OM, which is only _very_ slightly 
larger than the F.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz