I too agree with you Manuel. The thing that I find interesting about the
digital market is that new camera models seem to be being released every
few months or so (it sometimes seems less than that to me) with nothing
really radical to set them apart (OK, I'm difficult to please!). I guess
that with such rapid turnovers and variable development times with each
model means that only the best financed companies can survive, ones which
try original approaches may fall by the wayside. It seems to me that
Olympus might have made a really good business decision, especially since
the digital market seems to have claimed some prize maufacturer's scalps in
recent times. The decision might even save their business. Anyway, who
knows, the more money that Olympus make on consumer cameras the more they
might have to spend on some really impressive piece of hardware!
Best wishes,
Gareth.
--On 27 February 2006 11:08 +0000 Chris Barker <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> I agree with you Manuel. Provided that they produce some DSLRs of
> the robustness of the E-1, including a top-plate LCD panel, I see no
> snags with the "non-professional" line. People tend to gravitate to
> the marque that they trust, or which they hold in high esteem;
> perhaps Olympus can do that with their DSLR line. Certainly, my E-1
> impresses my young students with its robustness and general looks.
> Since Olympus has a certain following and since its optics are of top
> quality, there is little reason for the company not to expect that it
> can carve the niche that it did with the OM line -- only a niche
> though, not a top slot with a big proportion of professionals.
>
> It would of course be better for the company if it could take more of
> the market from Nikon or Canon, but we can't have everything ...
>
> Chris
> ~~ >-)-
> C M I Barker
> Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
> +44 (0)7092 251126
> www.threeshoes.co.uk
> homepage.mac.com/zuiko
>
>
> On 27 Feb 2006, at 08:53, Manuel Viet wrote:
>
>> Am I the only one to hold another analysis ? While I'd really love
>> to see Oly
>> competing in the pro dslr market, I don't think they'll loose
>> anything by
>> staying outside. Everybody's speaking about "margins", but what are
>> those
>> margins really ? Canon can't choose between full frame and aps-c,
>> nikon is
>> frown at for sticking to a small sensor, and most others are already
>> bankrupts. Are Canon and nikon big sellers ? They may be the
>> biggest in the
>> pro market, but what's that market compared to the total
>> photography market ?
>> As far as economy goes, Oly has a strong hold in the consumer
>> market, where
>> the margins really are because cameras are cheaper to build and the
>> market is
>> wider ; and there, they're selling Mjus by the dozen. Add to this that
>> olympus has a long time policy to avoid paying patents' licenses at
>> all cost,
>> and you have a perfectly bankable outsider, able to enter any
>> market at any
>> time, with strong r&d capacities, and time to learn what the market
>> really
>> wants. Long live olympus ! Basicaly I view today's pessimistics as
>> I would
>> have looked at people complaining that leica wasn't building
>> foldings in the
>> 30's.
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
----------------------
GJ Martin, School Geographical Sciences
G.J.Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|