Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Naming, was Re: E1 vs E300

Subject: [OM] Re: Naming, was Re: E1 vs E300
From: "Andreas Pirner" <AndreasPirner@xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:50:19 +0100
Winsor Crosby wrote:
> I hope they don't adopt that pretentious little conceit for a naming 
> system. The old OM naming system seemed kind of rational with 
> sequential numbering for the models, odd for manual exposure models, 
> and adding a zero for the consumer level models. What's up with the 
> current system. E-1 I understand, but E-300? Where is the E-3 it came 
> from? Are they continuing the E-10, E-20 series with a zero thrown in 
> for lens interchangeability? And the subtitle. Protect us from future 
> e-bolts, e-amps, and other electrifying terms. And please don't keep 
> E-volt like the silly "Rebel" sobriquet.

That naming scheme went wack with Oly much earlier: 

XA (top of line), XA2 (lesser full auto pendant), 
XA3 (successor to XA2), XA4 (with wider lens)

IS-1 (is IS-1000 in Europe) got just sequentially 
numbered IS-2 (IS-2000) and IS-3 (IS-3000) -- all 
with 35mm as widest focal length. Then came IS-5000 
with 28mm as widest. Parallel we got IS-100, IS-200, 
IS-300 and IS-500 with some little confuser thrown 
in like IS-100s, IS-21, IS-30, IS-31 ... any clues 
for a naming convention?

And PLEEEZE, don't look at those P+S thingies like 
Epic (mju in Europe), Infinity, Stylus, SuperZoom, 
LT, AZ, AF, MD, O-product, Ecru.

Hey, thoses marketing guys seem to have short 
memories, fads for fashion and an extra creative 
naming department.

Andreas

==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz