Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 15, 2013, 1:03 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

John, for some, nothing is going to be enough

No one this forum is looking to produce prize winning photos at ISO 25600 with 15 stops of dynamic range to be posted in the sports forum. They're looking for something better than the current Olympus DSLR's provide, which is rather pedestrian compared to what any full frame Nikon or Canon user is used to. Anyone needing that level or performace will buy, if they have not already, a full frame Nikon or Canon DSLR. I have a feeling Olympus knows their target market, and Nikon or Canon full frame shooters it ain't.

If this body doesn't sell enough to warrant continued production, it'll be discontinued like all the other DSLR's and people will have to eventually migrate to Micro four-thirds if they want to continue using Olympus products.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2013, 1:14 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

John, that old argument about "full frame" or APS-C vs 4/3 has been debunked for quite a while now. And if you cropped a full frame print down to the FOV of the 4/3 print the pixels left in the FF print are no more dense than the 4/3. Lots of studies out there proving the capability of the 4/3, but the CaNikon companies have the PR bucks to always push their view. In fact in recent tests, there was a DxOmark test that showed a very expensive FF Leica sensor being beaten by m4/3.
"...the latest tests published by DxOmark reveal that a $5,500 Leica M Full Frame Sensor Camera could not match the image quality of top tier micro 4/3 cameras like the Panasonic Lumix GH3 and the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (see above). This is no slight against the Leica, which is a phenomenal camera. It’s just more proof that the gap in image quality between micro 4/3 sensors and their “full frame” cousins has been closed. M43 for the Win!....."
This is not the only example, but is typical. Unless someone is trying to make gigantic prints, the 4/3 systems are fully competitive with the other cameras.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2013, 1:43 PM   #43
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
So, I can't help but ask from a business standpoint: are those 2 points really enough? For the dynamic range crowd, you have full frame offerings around $2,000 from competition that will still trump the sony 4/3 sensor. You're hoping to get back to focus performance Oly used to be at. Which is not the level of prosumer Canon/Nikon DSLRs have. And any 4/3 sony sensor still isn't going to perform as well as a larger aps-c sony sensor (with exception of jpeg processing ala what Canon seems to be doing with 70d - same raw output but better jpeg processing) So, I get that existing 4/3 owners will be happy. But at that price point, they're still behind the competition IMO. Such a camera would have to be around $800-900 to really grow some business from people not already invested in 4/3.
the latest talk speak seems to suggest improvements on the OMD sensor.
This is understandable since they would have had to make some deep modifications to the sensor to support rewiring for pdAF and changing the bayer layer.
The opportunities are for superior wiring and better developed noise strategies, as well as better photosite lightpipes

So how much better? despite talk of 15 stops DR I would think just incrementally better than OMD. That was what 12.3-4 at DxO
that is unless theyve learned the usefulness of black clipping in confusing DxO algorithms, theres a stop or so right there

To the extent that Dr/noise fulfil the promise of more sales, I think this is for the most part a lesser association.
Canon have made do against the superior Nikon sensors for some years now.
In any event these are things more difficult to translate to potential buyers, perhaps less wary, less informed than us.
What they would realise is the capacity to shoot both lens suites, the scope and depth of the options.
APSC cant compete with that. C&N will feel the need to always hold them back from FF, for them FF is the road ahead, so that isnt going to change

You could draw conclusions as to whether one or the other was leading, but it cannot be denied Canon are dangerously still in the race.
I would conclude the need all along was to be competitive, the Sony sensor seems to achieve that, the previous Panasonic didnt.

There is no construct to say were it goes from here, it is 'thought' that this new OMD is bigger than the last, but we dont know by how much.
An ability to shoot both lens suites is undoubtedly going to be its main attraction, compactness and style seem to rate highly too.

Olympus cannot hope to compete with C&N, just make a worthwhile profit. already theres a discount on OMD EM5 to the $699,
http://www.43rumors.com/superb-deal-...-yous-ave-200/
so theyre right in there on the high side of the cheapest volume produced SLRs available,
that C&N would make every month what Olympus could ever hope to produce in a year.
Give up any idea of true competition in the volume sense

This will be one of the best Olympus cameras ever
the question we are all muttering is, is it actually good enough for us

Last edited by Rriley; Aug 15, 2013 at 1:57 PM. Reason: additions
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2013, 2:40 PM   #44
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Rriley & Greg,

My point is, I don't think it's good enough to just make existing 4/3 owners happy. As a business, Oly camera is not doing stellar. Unlike 5 years ago, Oly no longer has the "smallest interchangeable lens system" market cornered. They don't have to compete with Canon and Nikon for volume. They do have to be profitable though. With all the money that R&D must cost, I can't imagine just stemming the tide of people leaving is enough to remain profitable.

Or, let me ask the OPs question a different way. Who, that isn't already invested in 4/3 glass would pay $1500 for the new camera? If you want Oly to be around in 5 years, still producing some type of ILC, THATs a question that needs answered.

Heck, forget about Canon and Nikon - how do you convince a potential buyer it's worth $400 more than a Pentax K-5?
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2013, 3:15 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnG View Post
Rriley & Greg,

My point is, I don't think it's good enough to just make existing 4/3 owners happy. As a business, Oly camera is not doing stellar. Unlike 5 years ago, Oly no longer has the "smallest interchangeable lens system" market cornered. They don't have to compete with Canon and Nikon for volume. They do have to be profitable though. With all the money that R&D must cost, I can't imagine just stemming the tide of people leaving is enough to remain profitable.

Or, let me ask the OPs question a different way. Who, that isn't already invested in 4/3 glass would pay $1500 for the new camera? If you want Oly to be around in 5 years, still producing some type of ILC, THATs a question that needs answered.

Heck, forget about Canon and Nikon - how do you convince a potential buyer it's worth $400 more than a Pentax K-5?
wasnt K5 a Sony creation?

Pentax problem is lenses, not the primes, the zooms
Really their K5II is arguably a lot better buy than 7D,
but they dont sell near as many at 39th in Japan.

every manufacturer outside of C&N has a problem of finding a profitable niche.
A juxtaposed however ironic fact is the only ones flippant to ignorant of mirrorless are C&N.
Ultimately mirrorless are cheaper to produce, require less research, have fewer unique capability features and have lightweight production assembly lines more suited to modular approaches.
Theyre already over the hump of EVF issues, it wont be long until pdAF on sensor kills the remaining bugs
just on that, Nex 6 achieved 70% hit rate on a CAF test with DPR, its in the review

If there is still room for compact quality gear, who else has the territory owned on the most compact high quality situation.
I quite believe that eventually all the bottom end ILC will be mirrorless.
The performance of mirrorless will only improve, SLRs wont.

But to the core of your question, the 1500 price.
Eventually the pdAF on sensor will go through to the lesser cameras, even Pen, and there is the cheap OMD to happen yet too.

Olympus must secure two things, a wider looking range on less manufacturing capacity, and wider and yes higher pricepoint coverage to extract more profit.

Last edited by Rriley; Aug 15, 2013 at 3:20 PM. Reason: additions
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 15, 2013, 4:58 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Olympus kinda reminds me of being in a similar situation of some of the smaller car makers. Toyota and Honda dominate the sales by far, but others like Subaru and Kia must sell enough to stay in business. Like Subaru, Oly doesn't have to equal the sales of the big two power-weights to stay in business, but stay appealing to its smaller base of potential buyers.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2013, 12:09 AM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

car manufacturers arent a bad analogy, provided you pick the right ones! most guys understand it.
Subaru arent a bad match, as they chose 4WD as their leading point of difference

what we have lacked in the Olympus world is a WRX - XTi !
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2013, 9:50 AM   #48
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rriley View Post
car manufacturers arent a bad analogy, provided you pick the right ones! most guys understand it.
Subaru arent a bad match, as they chose 4WD as their leading point of difference

what we have lacked in the Olympus world is a WRX - XTi !
Yep, I agree. And the OMD was a small step toward a WRX-XTi equivalent, at least on a road on the right direction. Hopefully the coming new Oly model comes closer to being the camera equivalent of that great sports sedan from Subaru. Great handling, nimble and quick, and well built.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2013, 7:23 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Steve.. if we get something thats the camera equiv of a WRX then I'll all for it .

The latest rumours seem to confirm the 1500 price, but whats surprising is that it no longer has a new sensor but the same Sony EM5 sensor minus AA filter and some other processors. If that's the case, there's no PDAF on chip and FT lens focusing is not going to be anywhere near E3/E5 which as we know aren't the most accurate or fast in CAF.

So is this new Oly OM pro which now seems to sport last years sensor and no PDAF on chip is it worth 1500? What if its still too small to use with the HG and SHG's without having to grip up at extra cost ?

I'd really like them to make the one beaut system .. let me stick the beastie on without an adapter and then plonk on an m43 lens and go walk about. Now that would be worth the $$$.
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 16, 2013, 11:48 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,066
Default

Harj
theres a guy, the 'source'
he reckons its is not a modified sensor, its a different sensor

think about it
if all that were true, same sensor, no pdAF, you might as well get EM5 for $800 instead
Rriley is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:28 PM.