You say we are the worse enemy because we recommend an om-1 vs an om2000. I
disagree. The om-2000 is a disgrace. If I were buying my new camera 20 years
ago and olympus offered the om-2000 as the (only) entry body (instead of the 1)
I would have gone with another brand. I know the om-2000 has some nice features
(prefire) and I'm not all concern with the system aspect (winders, ...) but to
me the om-2000 just feel cheaps. It is not enjoyable to use. The shutter is
obnoxious (one reason I avoid the Bessa-R), the back feels flimsy and as a few
of the heavier users have reported the om-2000 just doesn't hold up. I don't
think it is olympus users fault olympus chose this route (actually I suspect
this was a decision by cosina not olympus to offer a/this new body).
I think olympus could offer a 'real' entry system camera similar to the om-2sp
for less than $400 and still make a profit if they had wanted. For example take
the Aria - which sells for around $550 during rebate weeks. The om-2sp would
not have a metal focal plane shutter or built in winder and the design already
exists (they could use modern manufacturing techniques for the electronics and
share parts from the om-4/om-3 series such as the shutter).
Would there be a market for a $350 or $400 brand new om2-sp - I don't know -
but if there was then I think they COULD do it financially. Personally, while 5
or 10 years ago it might have made financial sense (to me) for olmpus to have
offered such a camera - today it doesn't. I believe in 5 years most film based
slr will be on their last leg and in 10 years they will be relics. Kind of sad.
However, 5 years ago it would have been hard to make those claims. If olympus
didn't make an offering then - there is no reason to think it would do so now.
Alan
< 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 >
|