On Thu, 16 Dec 1999, Mike Stoesz wrote:
> Good Morning/Day/Evening to all;
>
> I have a suggestion for something we may be able to pull-off.
>
> I will be attending PMA-PhotoMarketing Assoc. Convention in Las Vegas in
> early February and perhaps several other members could join me in
> presenting a list of concerns to the upper level management people at
> Olympus.
>
I think the list would be rather short. In fact it would contain
only one wish, which would go like this:
"Continiue the manual OM-program"
Seriously, how likely is it that they will? When I bought the bulk of
my equipment, everybody and their dog bought SLR-cameras. So it made
very good sense for Olympus to be competitive on that market and
target amateurs and prof's as customers.
Today, almost none of the people I know would dream about buying an
SLR-camera, let alone one with manual focus.
First, the selection in the local shops is limited to a Nikon F60
(or is it 90 or something), Minolta 5000i (or something) and Canon
Eos 500 (or something), bulked with a zoom (Sorry for not being more
precise here, but I do usually not bother to look carefully at
auto-focus stuff). These cameras are big and clumsy and are often
displayed next to compact-style APS-cameras with the same
zoom-capabiliteis. So people think "Hey, that lit' compact-guy can do
the same as the big SLR-guy - and cheaper!" . Most people don't think
much further than that when selecting their camera.
Second, the digital market has exploded, and not only are there more
cameras to select from but they've also grown cheap such that the
average Joe-Homepage-Maker can buy one and show off his stuff on the
net - which is a BIG factor, I think.
Third, the general interrest in photography seems to have been
reduced significantly in the general population. Sure, more and more
cameras are being sold (at least so I am told), however those who buy
the cameras do not use them as the enthusiasts did just 10 years ago.
They're used for the occational shots of the family vacation etc.
Often not for creative photography etc (and indeed, most "modern"
cameras are not suited for that kind of advanced usage either). I
particulary observe this in the local photo-shops, where there once
(again 10 years ago) was a huge wall of glass-cupboards showing off
all sorts of nice equipment (lenses, bodies etc) and an equally big
section of film- and image-processing stuff. Recently, I had a
difficult time tracking down a bottle of Tetenal Superfix in the town
where I lived.....
So in general, the photo-business has grown from the pro/enthusiasts
being the majority to the pro/enthusiasts being a very small niche.
If I was running a company, I'd have no doubts on in which market I
would aim for profit. Sure, if an OM-5 came out, I'd probably be the
first one to buy one. As would (I am sure) many of you. However it's
also rather cirtain, that the profit from selling (say) 500000 cheap
digital cameras or compact cameras would be many orders of magnitude
larger than selling 5000 expensive OM-5's. A company such as Olympus
has a responsibility to its shareholders (if publicly traded) or to
it's owners to generate profit - in fact to optimize profit.
So while I am sure that Olympus excecutives will welcome any
appreciation of their products and history, I am reluctant to believe
that any plea for further development will yield anything but a "We
will have to look into that". I guess - and am sad that it is so -
that the best we can hope for is status quo: that Olympus will sell
and maintain OM3 and OM4's, keep the OM2000 around to have a flow of
lenses still on the market.
But if at any rate Olympus will resume the OM-program, then I shall
be most happy to admit being wrong in the above ;)
--thomas
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|