Olympus to sell off camera division

[Pitachu]

You seems that Olympus is fighting a war with Full Frame and APS.
I don't think this is the case. I honestly don't think that Olympus mgt
team is that dumb (or they are really running against machine guns).

Olympus is just focusing on its strengths and a certain market segment
which appreciates M43. As long as there is enough customers in this
segment, they will continue.

Olympus also probably know that even though its customers like me
are currently loyal, if it venture into Full Frame, I definitely will not
follow along, simply because there are much more established
full frame systems to choose from.

Olympus really has no other choice, either to
1) give up its M43 camera division or
2) continue as long as they are not losing or losing too much money
Changing to FF format is NOT an option. It is only suicide.

Although I am only one vocal person here who voice out my likes for MFT, "is talking about 1 person's individual personal liking for Olympus MFT due to certain aspects (trekking and weather seal)", I assure you that there are a few hundred like me in Singapore More than half the Olympus users I mingle with are aware that FF have better Image Quality, BUT we still continue to use Olympus for various reasons.

Olympus MFT market share was 2.8% worldwide in 2019. With the emergence of better mirrorless camera models from competitors such as Sony, Panasonic (full frame), Nikon, Canon, Leica and Fuji (APS-C) what will be the likely market share for Olympus MFT in 2020?

Probably less than 1% worldwide.

Even so, Olympus top management may decide to continue and keep Olympus Camera Imaging Division on life support. If for no other reason but as an expensive money-losing hobby for the corporation. That is, until the investors and shareholders of Olympus lose their faith in this approach and demand the winding up or sale of Olympus Camera Imaging Division.

Discussion so far seem divergent in different paths.
(A) is talking about commercial viability of Olympus Camera Imaging Division in view of their fixation on MFT (sustained dramatic fall in world wide sales).
(B) is talking about 1 person's individual personal liking for Olympus MFT due to certain aspects (trekking and weather seal)

As to quality of Olympus MFT lenses. Some may be good. But definitely not all.
Don't forget competitors' lenses are good too. Actually, some competitors' lenses (Zeiss , Leica & Canon RF) are excellent.
Sony had opened up their E mount to Tamron and Sigma. And Sigma made some very good "Art" lenses in Sony E mount.
Sony has their own G Master series.
Zeiss makes lenses for Canon EF mount and Sony E mount.

Some Olympus lenses are made in Vietnam. Initially, some of the better lenses were made in Japan.
But later production location for some of these were later shifted to China.
And probably then to Vietnam in view of US-China trade war and tariffs.

If you think [Made in Vietnam] or [Made in China] is equal to [Made in Japan] or [Made in Germany], then you are entitled to your opinion.

About Olympus insisting to make more MFT in 2020. That may be the corporate equivalent of the Infantry Charge against machine guns.
Which was done in WW1 in Battle of the Somme in 1916 and again by Japanese commanders in WW2 using infantry Banzai charge into American machine gun fire. It is suicidal. Yet it was done because that was the way they always operated and were trained and the commanders (management) were unable to change their mindsets when the battlefield scenario has changed.

 

[tommyk]

I don't think Olympus management are dumb. They are probably very smart group of executives to run such a big division. (Just like the smart group of executives who runs big corporations like Enron, Worldcom, Kodak and nearer home - Hyflux etc..)
But why are they failing to grow sales or at least gain market share?

The question of IQ, smartness of Olympus management is secondary at least.

The market dictates the demand. The consumers chooses among the options.

As of now, Olympus MFT is just not attractive to the mass market but very attractive to the niche.

The question is can they survive just by selling into the niche of photographers, eg less than 1% of market?

So, IMHO MFT as a mount will not survive the onslaught of the handphone.

I could very well be wrong. While it is probable I am wrong, but the far higher probability of being right remains.

Nothing is cast in stone of coz.

There is still time for Olympus to change and adapt.

But time is running out - fast.

 

[Pitachu]

But why are they failing to grow sales or at least gain market share?
> I think only Sony is gaining market share. Canon, Nikon, and a few others are losing market share as well.

The question is can they survive just by selling into the niche of photographers, eg less than 1% of market?
>Olympus will not survive by just selling M43. The new CEO already said Olympus need the Imaging division for it Medical Division (probably R&D) to justify why Olympus is still keeping the Imaging Division.

So, IMHO MFT as a mount will not survive the onslaught of the handphone.
I could very well be wrong. While it is probable I am wrong, but the far higher probability of being right remains.
>You are not wrong, but as long as Olympus can justify keeping its Imaging Division, M43 will be around.

There is still time for Olympus to change and adapt.
> I do not agree. Nikon & Canon is still struggling with its FF mirrorless. Olympus don't even have FF DSLR customers to convert, so there is no chance it can make any headway unless it comes up with some innovative features for its FF.

 

[sadwitch]

Base on your "insightful forecast and predictions" and insistence on painting a gloomy picture on MFT specifically Olympus since Panasonic was barely mentioned as though they have not got a stake in the success of MFT, I can assure you the demise of Olympus MFT will NOT bring you joy as you'll lose something to complain and compare about everyday. Same goes for other "detractors" here.

In that vein, shouldn't we just let Olympus continue forging its MFT format alone, making its kamikaze business decisions, catering to a non-existent market... etc... etc .... so people can continue to enjoy using and enjoy complaining about this fully realised format...? WIN WIN...NO...?

And with that i dare say, (photography) life without MFT would be very boring....NO?

Olympus MFT market share was 2.8% worldwide in 2019. With the emergence of better mirrorless camera models from competitors such as Sony, Panasonic (full frame), Nikon, Canon, Leica and Fuji (APS-C) what will be the likely market share for Olympus MFT in 2020?

Probably less than 1% worldwide.

Even so, Olympus top management may decide to continue and keep Olympus Camera Imaging Division on life support. If for no other reason but as an expensive money-losing hobby for the corporation. That is, until the investors and shareholders of Olympus lose their faith in this approach and demand the winding up or sale of Olympus Camera Imaging Division.

Discussion so far seem divergent in different paths.
(A) is talking about commercial viability of Olympus Camera Imaging Division in view of their fixation on MFT (sustained dramatic fall in world wide sales).
(B) is talking about 1 person's individual personal liking for Olympus MFT due to certain aspects (trekking and weather seal)

As to quality of Olympus MFT lenses. Some may be good. But definitely not all.
Don't forget competitors' lenses are good too. Actually, some competitors' lenses (Zeiss , Leica & Canon RF) are excellent.
Sony had opened up their E mount to Tamron and Sigma. And Sigma made some very good "Art" lenses in Sony E mount.
Sony has their own G Master series.
Zeiss makes lenses for Canon EF mount and Sony E mount.

Some Olympus lenses are made in Vietnam. Initially, some of the better lenses were made in Japan.
But later production location for some of these were later shifted to China.
And probably then to Vietnam in view of US-China trade war and tariffs.

If you think [Made in Vietnam] or [Made in China] is equal to [Made in Japan] or [Made in Germany], then you are entitled to your opinion.

About Olympus insisting to make more MFT in 2020. That may be the corporate equivalent of the Infantry Charge against machine guns.
Which was done in WW1 in Battle of the Somme in 1916 and again by Japanese commanders in WW2 using infantry Banzai charge into American machine gun fire. It is suicidal. Yet it was done because that was the way they always operated and were trained and the commanders (management) were unable to change their mindsets when the battlefield scenario has changed.

 

[ricohflex]

Is MFT on its way out?
Other people have asked this question before.

The answers depend on which YEAR you ask the question.

Because the answers will change according to:
• what majority of users want at that point in time
• What Olympus has improved in its MFT cameras up to that point in time
• What the competitors have improved to offer alternatives to MFT up to that point in time
• Economy at that point in time
• Camera market situation at that point in time


MFT was announced in 2008.
Leica had M9, full frame mirrorless digital ILC but using rangefinder and retaining M mount since 2009.
Sony introduced A7 full frame mirrorless digital ILC with EVF in 2013.

In 2017, the answer to {Is MFT on its way out?} was maybe not, but wait and see.

By 2019 Leica, Nikon, Canon, Sony and Panasonic have full frame mirrorless digital ILC with EVF.
Fuji stays in APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF.
Leica, Nikon, Sony also have APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF. (for those who want small)
Canon is rumored to later introduce APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF. (for those who want small)

Leica, Nikon, Canon and Sony have all adopted the 1 Mount concept for their mirrorless ILC with EVF.
Their APS-C and full frame mirrorless have the same mount (L mount, Z mount, RF mount, E mount).

Thus in 2020, the answer may be different.

By 2025, it may not be necessary to ask the question.
Things change so much just in 1 year, then not to mention 5 years.
Wait & see.

 

[Pitachu]

I cannot post too many urls to photo related sites here but here is a more neutral site.

Why are Canon and Nikon failing the fullframe mirrorless market? - Quora

There are tons of articles you can get on the web that say a lot of other manufacturers except Sony that are not doing well with Full Frame Mirrorless.

In my opinion, if Olympus venture into Full Frame, it may be a very short suicide mission.
On the other end, if it stays on the current M43, Olympus may keep it for R&D purposes
as long as the losses from the Imaging Division is manageable.

Also, I personally think that One-Lenses systems is not that appealing.
I have both Canon FF and APS camera and don't interchange lenses.
It is only Only 1 way (APS can use FF lenses but not vice versa)
and normally, it does not make sense for me to buy a FF lenses
to attached to a APS body as the handling is unbalanced and
terrible).

 

[sadwitch]

Is MFT on its way out?
Other people have asked this question before.

The answers depend on which YEAR you ask the question.

Because the answers will change according to:
• what majority of users want at that point in time
• What Olympus has improved in its MFT cameras up to that point in time
• What the competitors have improved to offer alternatives to MFT up to that point in time
• Economy at that point in time
• Camera market situation at that point in time


MFT was announced in 2008.
Leica had M9, full frame mirrorless digital ILC but using rangefinder and retaining M mount since 2009.
Sony introduced A7 full frame mirrorless digital ILC with EVF in 2013.

In 2017, the answer to {Is MFT on its way out?} was maybe not, but wait and see.

By 2019 Leica, Nikon, Canon, Sony and Panasonic have full frame mirrorless digital ILC with EVF.
Fuji stays in APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF.
Leica, Nikon, Sony also have APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF. (for those who want small)
Canon is rumored to later introduce APS-C mirrorless digital ILC with EVF. (for those who want small)

Leica, Nikon, Canon and Sony have all adopted the 1 Mount concept for their mirrorless ILC with EVF.
Their APS-C and full frame mirrorless have the same mount (L mount, Z mount, RF mount, E mount).

Thus in 2020, the answer may be different.

By 2025, it may not be necessary to ask the question.
Things change so much just in 1 year, then not to mention 5 years.
Wait & see.

If by 1-mount you mean that a 24mm will stay at 24mm be it on a FF mirrorless or a APSC then i'll say it's STUPENDOUS, maybe they've figure a way to move the sensors flange distance on the fly or something? BUT if it still becomes a 36mm / 38.4mm on an APSC depending on the factor, then it's no difference to what we currently have. It's like would you actually buy a DX lens to use it on a FX where you're only using a crop portion of the sensor??

By 2025... if MFT is still kicking around, we should ALL REJOICE as we can have this discussion ad infinitum.
and if by 2020 Olympus announce closure of MFT, we should be SAD as we have nothing else to say to one another or fight over for.
Hopefully the silver lining is we'll start to discuss on composition, techniques, light and post processing...etc....

 

[tommyk]

Is disagreement something bad, when we discuss something like a camera's future?

Do we all need to agree about whats happening and what's going to happen?

Is this a forum or an article from the mainstream press?

 

[tommyk]

Olympus has just launched Em1 mk III, which is a good sign about Olympus's commitment to M43. This is a signal that the EM1X might not be the last professional body.

There is a new feature on the new camera - Starry Sky AF which supposedly allows photographers to take astrophotography shots without a tripod.
Can such technology replace some extent of good optics? I do not want to comment too much on such feature without testing the camera, but the marketing materials and youtube videos sure seem very impressive.

 

[ricohflex]

This reminds me of the mid 1990's when fake "panorama" compact film cameras were sold. Almost every camera manufacturer jumped on the band wagon. Yes, even Olympus. The Olympus OZ-10 had a fake "panorama" feature. When you activate the "panorama", two flaps slide into position to mask off the top and bottom of the film frame. You are actually cropping your normal 35mm photo "in-camera". Disgraceful con job, right? But most camera brands committed this SIN. Why?
Because the fake "panorama" gimmick sold cameras and made tonnes of money for the manufacturers. Snake oil salesmen at the camera shops will encourage novice buyers to pay more to buy the camera with the fake "panorama" feature.

Leica did not stoop down to try this low class trick on their M and R series camera buyers - because their target customers would know better and cannot be fooled.

Hasselblad X-Pan and Fujifilm TX, Widelux, Globuscope, Roundshot, Fuji 617 and Linhof Technorama are true panorama cameras.

Which brings me back to this Starry Sky AF by Olympus in the year 2020.

It makes you ask the question - before Starry Sky AF, did photographers using various brands of cameras take good + sharp photos of the starry sky?
Even in the film camera days? And later using digital cameras? What do you think is the answer?
It is a matter of establishing the precise infinity point on a particular lens. Which can be effected in daylight and noted or marked on the lens barrel.

But then again if this "feature' succeeds famously, then other brands will follow suit - because it earns MONEY $$$ for the company.
Never mind the ethics.

If the "feature" fails, then Olympus will be lampooned which may affect Camera Imaging Division.

 

[Pitachu]

This reminds me of the mid 1990's when fake "panorama" compact film cameras were sold. Almost every camera manufacturer jumped on the band wagon. Yes, even Olympus. The Olympus OZ-10 had a fake "panorama" feature. When you activate the "panorama", two flaps slide into position to mask off the top and bottom of the film frame. You are actually cropping your normal 35mm photo "in-camera". Disgraceful con job, right? But most camera brands committed this SIN. Why?
Because the fake "panorama" gimmick sold cameras and made tonnes of money for the manufacturers. Snake oil salesmen at the camera shops will encourage novice buyers to pay more to buy the camera with the fake "panorama" feature.

Leica did not stoop down to try this low class trick on their M and R series camera buyers - because their target customers would know better and cannot be fooled.

Hasselblad X-Pan and Fujifilm TX, Widelux, Globuscope, Roundshot, Fuji 617 and Linhof Technorama are true panorama cameras.

Which brings me back to this Starry Sky AF by Olympus in the year 2020.

It makes you ask the question - before Starry Sky AF, did photographers using various brands of cameras take good + sharp photos of the starry sky?
Even in the film camera days? And later using digital cameras? What do you think is the answer?
It is a matter of establishing the precise infinity point on a particular lens. Which can be effected in daylight and noted or marked on the lens barrel.

But then again if this "feature' succeeds famously, then other brands will follow suit - because it earns MONEY $$$ for the company.
Never mind the ethics.

If the "feature" fails, then Olympus will be lampooned which may affect Camera Imaging Division.

Agreed. Many of Olympus new features (eg. Keystone, Fish Eye Defish, Focus Stacking, Multiple Exposure Merge etc) can all be done easily using simple software on the PC). But I really love it to be able to be done on the Camera as it is not worth the time doing all this on the PC for social media shots.

In fact, I love the De-Fish feature so much that I bought the Olympus 8mm Fisheye just because of this feature as it gives me an option to have a super-wide at 11mm (35mm equivalent) in addition to Fisheye shots.

 

[Pitachu]

This reminds me of the mid 1990's when fake "panorama" compact film cameras were sold. Almost every camera manufacturer jumped on the band wagon. Yes, even Olympus. The Olympus OZ-10 had a fake "panorama" feature. When you activate the "panorama", two flaps slide into position to mask off the top and bottom of the film frame. You are actually cropping your normal 35mm photo "in-camera". Disgraceful con job, right? But most camera brands committed this SIN. Why?
Because the fake "panorama" gimmick sold cameras and made tonnes of money for the manufacturers. Snake oil salesmen at the camera shops will encourage novice buyers to pay more to buy the camera with the fake "panorama" feature.

Leica did not stoop down to try this low class trick on their M and R series camera buyers - because their target customers would know better and cannot be fooled.

Hasselblad X-Pan and Fujifilm TX, Widelux, Globuscope, Roundshot, Fuji 617 and Linhof Technorama are true panorama cameras.

Which brings me back to this Starry Sky AF by Olympus in the year 2020.

It makes you ask the question - before Starry Sky AF, did photographers using various brands of cameras take good + sharp photos of the starry sky?
Even in the film camera days? And later using digital cameras? What do you think is the answer?
It is a matter of establishing the precise infinity point on a particular lens. Which can be effected in daylight and noted or marked on the lens barrel.

But then again if this "feature' succeeds famously, then other brands will follow suit - because it earns MONEY $$$ for the company.
Never mind the ethics.

If the "feature" fails, then Olympus will be lampooned which may affect Camera Imaging Division.

Anyway, this is clever marketing. The EM1.2 is now S$1998 and the pre-launch price of the EM1.3 is S$2398. Let's see if Olympus is able to convince its customers to pay $400 more for the new features,
which are mainly software upgrades due to a faster processor (faster AF, starry sky AF etc). Increasing IBIS from 5 stops to 7 stops should be quite cheap because the EM5.3 already have 6.5 stops. The joystick is a really nice upgrade and probably require a new mould for the back.

All in all, there are all minor upgrades. My personal opinion is the EM1.3 may not be very attractive to EM1.2 and EM5.3 users, but for Olympus users with Older cameras, it is probably worth it

 

[ricohflex]

For Mac OS X users DeFish is a free program by Ken Turkowski to convert circle shaped Fisheye shots into rectilinear images.

Upgrade path for existing Olympus users is one thing.
Competitors' offerings also have impact on new buyers who are not yet embedded/invested in any system yet.
Fuji X-T4, Fuji X-H2, Sony A6600 (SGD$1,900) on Amazon .sg, Nikon Z50 with 16-50mm lens (Lazada price SGD$1319) etc....

 

[sadwitch]

This is exactly what i mean, without the 12-45mm F4 and EM1-MK3 we won't be here continuing this discussion

Who knows, this may be the "salted fish does its flip" or another nail in the coffin situation if you know what i mean.

Just like dpreview said, you'll be hard pressed to find a similar system with a combination of these "features" and it does everything really well without winning in any particular category. Its more than the sum of it's parts in short and that's where the value of the system lies.

Looking at the sample jpegs at dpreview, i think they've improved the image processing pipeline again compared to EM5 Mk2.

And with the "gimmicky" starry sky mode, my bet is all other camera brands (especially those with IBIS) will follow suit shortly.



This is good fun if you have an open mind

 

[sadwitch]

It is in disagreeing that MFT was born probably.

Of course it's going to be a rough road for anyone who disagrees with so called "trends"

and without this hardheadedness, MFT would not be still here in 2020.

Is disagreement something bad, when we discuss something like a camera's future?

Do we all need to agree about whats happening and what's going to happen?

Is this a forum or an article from the mainstream press?

 

[ricohflex]

salted fish does its flip = 咸鱼返生

Small + Light + Cheaper were the main attractions of MFT. But now A6600 and Z50 are both smaller. lighter and cheaper than EM1 Mk3 and E-M1X.
But A6600 and Z50 have bigger APS-C sensor than MFT. The world has changed.

In January 2009 KODAK introduced its new Z980 Digital Camera with a big splash of publicity and optimism. "Everything is wonderful" marketing spin.
In January 2012 KODAK files for bankruptcy.

No company that is going to collapse will tell you so. Look at what Kodak did in 2009. Rather similar to what Olympus is doing in 2020.
Wait 3 years and see what happens to Olympus.

 

[tommyk]

The Olympus Break Free Em1 ad is one very interesting movie advertisement.

I am sure it is not for serious photographer.

But I am not sure who is it for, to watch through the entire thing that is 10 minutes long without understanding the specific features of the camera.

Olympus always has very good promotional campaign, but this one borders on the abstract. Is this like modern art where it can be appreciated only by a few?

 

[Pitachu]

salted fish does its flip = 咸鱼返生

Small + Light + Cheaper were the main attractions of MFT. But now A6600 and Z50 are both smaller. lighter and cheaper than EM1 Mk3 and E-M1X.
But A6600 and Z50 have bigger APS-C sensor than MFT. The world has changed.

In January 2009 KODAK introduced its new Z980 Digital Camera with a big splash of publicity and optimism. "Everything is wonderful" marketing spin.
In January 2012 KODAK files for bankruptcy.

No company that is going to collapse will tell you so. Look at what Kodak did in 2009. Rather similar to what Olympus is doing in 2020.
Wait 3 years and see what happens to Olympus.

1. The Z50 should not even be compared to the EM5.3, let alone the EM1.3 and EM1x.
The Z50 has no IBIS, only 11 fps, shutter speed of 1/4000.
The 6600 has IBIS, but also 11 fps and shutter speed of 1/4000.
The EM5.3 has 6.5 stops IBIS, 30 fps and 1/32000 shutter speed
It is more appropriate to compare the Z50 with the EM10.3

2. The reason why I choose EM5.3 over the Sony 6600
The Sony 6600 series has a sealed body but has limited APS lenses and they are not sealed.
If I use Sony FF lenses on the 6600, not only the focal length are not what I am used to
(eg. 24-70 becomes 36 to 105mm???, 50mm becomes 75mm) the cost of the whole system
will make my system goes way over my budget and a much heavier camera bag.

But you have every right to choose the Sony 6600 over Olympus.
I just don't like to configure my system that way.

 

[ricohflex]

Actually there are weather sealed lenses made for Sony E mount.

It is true Z50 is quite basic in specifications. But what is special about it, is that it is cheap. And it is one way for Nikon to insert its Z system into the new buyer's consciousness. For Canon, the RP (full frame) serves the same "Normandy beach head landing" purpose for the Canon RF system. The idea is to quickly seize the new buyers' loyalty and ease their entry into Nikon Z or Canon RF system. Canon is rumored to be preparing an APS-C body with RF mount.
This marketing approach is wise and it pays rich dividends in the long run.

If weather seal is your thing, Fuji X-T3 has sealed lenses too.
With the X-T4 coming out, prices for X-T3 will drop. You can find mint used body at even cheaper price.
And its APS-C sensor is bigger than MFT.

 

[Pitachu]

Actually there are weather sealed lenses made for Sony E mount.

It is true Z50 is quite basic in specifications. But what is special about it, is that it is cheap. And it is one way for Nikon to insert its Z system into the new buyer's consciousness. For Canon, the RP (full frame) serves the same "Normandy beach head landing" purpose for the Canon RF system. The idea is to quickly seize the new buyers' loyalty and ease their entry into Nikon Z or Canon RF system. Canon is rumored to be preparing an APS-C body with RF mount.
This marketing approach is wise and it pays rich dividends in the long run.

If weather seal is your thing, Fuji X-T3 has sealed lenses too.
With the X-T4 coming out, prices for X-T3 will drop. You can find mint used body at even cheaper price.
And its APS-C sensor is bigger than MFT.

Sony only have 2 weather sealed E-mount lenses.
Honestly, if they have more lenses like Fuji, Olympus or Panasonic,
I would have gotten a Sony 6600 instead.

I was actually choosing between the X-T3 and the G9 and in the end, I settle on the G9
because my brother already has 3 M43 lenses to interchange with me That is how I
started with M43 and subsequently, fell in love with the EM5.3 and sold my G9.

We can go on and on arguing that other larger formats are bigger and better.
I agree with that but I do not agree Olympus should follow that path.

I really feel that 20Mp meet my needs, just like a Mobile Phone meet the needs
of the rest of the people using a phone to take photos. We just do not need the
slightly higher quality at the expense of lugging heavier gear.

Hence, I would prefer Olympus to stay on M43 than to join the bandwagon
of larger formats, which are now so overcrowded with Nikon, Canon and
Panasonic jumping in.