On 01/10/06, Steve Dropkin <steve@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Khen Lim (castanet.xiosnetworks@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>
> > "Decades of not having a firm grip"? Decades? I'm sorry for being
> pedantic
> > with your choice of words but when you write stuff that is critical,
> I'll be
> > very watchful of everything you write or say.
> > "Uncompetitive"? Boy....you sure know your stuff...
>
> You are as entitled to your opinion of what's going on at Olympus as
> any of us are. I'll tell you what I, as a serious photography
> hobbyist, am seeing (sorry, folks, that this is so long):
>
> Three decades ago, Olympus introduced a truly innovative landmark
> camera, the M-1, which, among other features, demonstrated that a
> fine 35mm SLR need not be huge or ergonomically inferior. For many
> years after that, Olympus introduced variations of this camera and
> many lenses (which are good enough to be popular even today).
>
> Effective autofocus is introduced to the 35mm SLR market. Olympus
> essentially sat it out. Their limited support of AF is strange
> considering the overwhelming desire for autofocus among the vast
> majority of buyers of 35mm SLRs. Virtually every other SLR
> manufacturer offered several autofocus models. Olympus offered only
> a few -- and none at all in their "professional" (single-digit OM)
> models.
It clearly shows that you do not know the background behind why Olympus had
little to show here. Read my postings on this issue.
The last OM-4 was introduced in 1987. Despite the fact that 35mm
> SLRs still are popular, Olympus offered no significant additional
> development of the OM line even though other 35mm SLR manufacturers
> continued to add features to and market their own cameras. It seems
> odd that the company innovative enough to build the original OM
> cannot find or implement any new useful photographic features
> (nevermind AF, still not present on a "pro" OM).
And as a follower of Olympus, you hadn't heard of the OM-3Ti and its
significance? And praytell, what would you add beyond the OM-4Ti - not OM-4
- along the same lines when the generation was moving to AF-SLRs??? And go
back to my previous response and re-read my posting on the REAL reasons
behind Olympus not fielding a competitive AF-SLR.
And exactly how do you define a PROFESSIONAL camera?
Good lord, and the Full-Synchro flash isn't "useful photographic
feature"??????????
A motordrive with counterbalancing shfts not a "useful photographic
feature"?
Focus-by-wire digital focusing not a "useful photographic feature"?
And have you forgotten about Olympus' innovations in the compact camera
industry that others are now following??????
Wake up.
While I am not a professional photographer, being a member of this
> list for the past five years has allowed me to see the comments of
> other Olympus users, many of whom don't have anything positive to
> say about their experience of Olympus' support for professional
> photographers or for its dealers over the years.
I can't comment on the company's activities in America. So no comment.
Digital SLRs are made available starting in 1991. Fuj!, Canyon and
> Nykon began selling DSLRs in 2000; Pentacks in 2001. It was October
> 2003 before Olympus actually put functional E-1s into the hands of
> photographers, by which time F, C, N, and P had updated their DSLRs.
> Only Minolta took longer to introduce a competitive DSLR. And
> they're gone now, even after grabbing the life raft offered by
> merging with Konika.
Yasuo Asakura produced the Camedia E-1 and E-2 and they were DSLRs except
the lenses were non-removable. This is the SAME PERSON who designed the E-1
and the complete E-System. Having worked with him at R&D, I'll assure you he
knows exactly what he's doing but if you believe you know better, you should
talk to him then.
And do you know why Minolta is no longer around? If you don't, ask me.
Olympus introduced additional consumer (maybe you could call them
> "prosumer") DSLRs.
At Olympus there is a difference between consumer-grade and prosumer-grade.
Make sure you know how to tell the difference.
Olympus' move from the bottom up is the smartest strategy to broaden appeal
with the growing masses who are moving up from compacts. Olympus is not just
about the E-1 just like the OM-1 that eventually also spawned the OM-10,
OM-20 all the way to OM-40 Program. These were VERY IMPORTANT products as
well. Unfortunately they may not be as GLAMOROUS as the high-end OMs but
they earn revenue for us to further develop even better products.
And for your information the next E-x camera is already under development
and so are two E-xx DSLRs and the money to do that came from the successes
of E-300, E-330 and E-500 sales.
The E-1 -- even though it didn't exactly leapfrog
> the capabilities of DSLRs from the other companies when it was
> introduced -- remained un-updated while C, N, and P continue to
> upgrade their cameras. Contacks, Kod@k, and K-M leave the market
> (OK, K-M gets rebadged as Sonny).
I'm not sure what you're trying to drive at here.
While the Four-Thirds sensor is touted as providing equivalent
> capability to larger sensors in a smaller package, and while the E-1
> _is_ smaller than most of its competition, it wasn't until much
> later that Olympus introduced a DSLR that revolutionized camera size
> the way the OM did. Meanwhile, comments surface about the relatively
> poor high-ISO performance of the sensor.
There will FOREVER be comments against our products. We have been facing all
these since the OM days. Sometimes we listen when they are GENUINELY
constructive. As for the others, we do what other camera makers do - IGNORE.
So unless there is something worthwhile and well thought of to say, it's
best not said. I've been to sites that have run by people who are "fantastic
closet camera designers" - these are the people who tell the world that Four
Thirds has maxed out on 8Mpix and others are no better - at 10Mpix. What
experts we have.
Present day: Olympus introduces the E-400, a solid addition to their
> "consumer" line. For reasons that seem to be based largely on poor
> forecasting of both old and new model sales, this attractive,
> well-specced, well-priced camera is not made available in the U.S.
> -- a market every other DSLR manufacturer deems important to its
> sales success.
You're no different from most others. I've said before over and over and
over again. The E-400 will come to the US market but not now. There isn't
enough stock yet because we don't have sufficient production lines. Is that
OK by you?
There are OTHER markets that have to wait even longer. Consider yourself
privileged in America. And for chrissakes, learn to be patient.
At Photokina 2006, Olympus shows a non-functioning representation of
> the next model in the E-singledigit line and issues some vague
> statements about when in the next year (!) customers actually will
> be able to buy this camera. That means the E-1 will be _it_ for four
> years or more -- an eon in the electronics business.
I'm not even going to repeat myself again about this issue. It's difficult
to talk when people act like ostriches and stick their necks in the sand. It
is all too painfully obvious that when a person doesn't understand the
background behind a strategy, they begin to speculate and the drivel is
driving me nuts. I have revealed much about where the company stands but
does anyone ever listen? No. Unless I say things that agree with others.
Professional
> photographers, facing performance requirements no U.S.-available
> Olympus camera can meet, start looking at other DSLR systems.
Go ahead.
Last I checked, businesses exist to make a profit. It is difficult
> for me to understand why a company which can have such flashes of
> engineering brilliance can be so obtuse about the market into which
> they sell.
It is difficult for you and others to understand because you plainly don't
want to understand.
It would be one thing if only Olympus made DSLRs. But
> they're not alone.
>
> The road to bankruptcy court is littered with companies which were
> engineer-driven but couldn't sell to save themselves. Huge mansions
> full of nice furniture are owned by people who figured out how to
> sell just sugar water or scraps of fabric at a huge markup.
You remind me of people who condemn because it's fashionable to and right
now, taking pot shots at Olympus seems a favourite pasttime. When they do
well, people will come clamouring and say, "oh, I've always believed in
you!"
Does Olympus not understand why 35mm and DSLR buyers purchase the
> cameras they do?
They understand it better than you.
Do they not understand that many people seeking to
> buy a DSLR (at least in the U.S.) will walk into a large store
> carrying C and N and probably Sonny and not consider Olympus (or P)
> because they don't see them in the store?
If you want Olympus to understand YOU, why not humble yourself a little and
ask if you have tried to understand THEM? You cannot go on TRYING to
understand them if you don't do your homework. Instead through the devil's
playground - your mind - you have wild fantasies and torrid thoughts,
fascinating speculations and put-them-down attitudes.
Do they not understand that many buyers are influenced by the brand
> of equipment that professional photographers use (a market in which
> Olympus is absent)? Sure, it's a halo effect, but it's what fuels
> Apple and Sonny and NASCAR and half the clothing manufacturers in
> the world to immense profitability.
Good one.
Does Olympus not understand that people have become conditioned to
> the notion that a year-old electronic product is viewed as outdated
> and a four-year-old product is viewed as obsolete?
Good expert opinion. You obviously know better than Olympus. You should make
an appointment and train them.
Do they not understand that someone like me might be reluctant to
> spend a few thousand more dollars on technology (lenses,
> Olympus-specific flash units, etc.) without having confidence in
> that company's ability to map out and execute its own future?
Nobody is putting a gun to your head.
I don't consider myself sheeplike in any way, but I have to say that
> if I were looking at starting from scratch today with a DSLR system,
> I'd need some serious convincing that Olympus should be considered
> as a system I could grow into.
I, for one, won't be going all out to convince you. You're welcome to buy
Canons and Nikons and god-knows-what. I'll show you the E-5 in the very near
future and watch you weep and regret. Don't worry, I'm much more patient
than you.
Yes, I stand by "decades" and "uncompetitive" (and "clueless" while
> I'm at it). As critical as those words may seem, most DSLR buyers
> don't have a Khen with an inside track to what's going on inside
> camera manufacturers.
That is WHY I'm sharing with all of you. There's absolutely no frikking
point when even inside information is going to be rejected, is it!!?? What
is the point in wasting my breath when people just don't want to listen and
prefer that their "versions" are better???????
They can do no more with Olympus' imprecise
> announcements about E-thingy availability than look at the past --
> which just isn't pretty.
You neither know nor understand their strategy. So you throw darts at them.
That's nice. Little wonder America hardly relates foreign policies well.
Given Olympus' demonstrated track record of not understanding what
> sells in a given market (m:robe anyone?),
The m:robe wasn't even designed with anything but the JDM in mind but you
didn't know that, did you. The fact that it is sold outside Japan is because
other markets wanted to sell them, not Olympus Japan.
it seems quite unlikely to
> me that they suddenly will catch on to the need for offering
> products that, at least on paper, hold up to what the competition
> offers.
Such an expert is wasted trolling at the List. As I'd said, with your
brilliant economic analysis, you should be working on the inside at Olympus.
If Olympus can pull out of their tailspin in the next six
> months or so, great! I just don't see great reasons to be really
> optimistic that Olympus will turn it around.
Like you'd said, you have YOUR opinions. It's just sad that everyone's
poisoning every other person's mind here. You have my word on this though -
I will forward this mail to Shinju-ku. Let them know who you are and how
highly you think of them. After all like you'd said, if you didn't like
Olympus, you wouldn't be throwing in your "constructive criticisms". I
suppose that showing your pessimistic mindset is "constructive criticism."
We may see the next
> company to leave the DSLR market.
And would you want to be the first to say to me, "I told you so?" Would that
make you happy? Instead of making the best with what we have, I suppose you
like to put people down.
I won't be happy about that. And I
> have much less invested in Olympus than most here.
>
> Steve
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
--
Khen Lim
XIOS Network Solutions
IBM Business Partner
+60 +16 528 6010 / 016 528 6010
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|