The demise of OLYMPUS camera business

[lantau]

4x5 FP4 Plus stock may nearly be gone here in the UK. A number of suppliers are sold out, and a few that remain have even raised the price by close to 10%. I've picked up a few boxes to ride me out for the next couple months, though unless production starts again, I fear I'll have to switch to something else.

AFAIK Harman is back. On 18th June, they posted on Instagram that their 'staff and machines are being phased back in to operation'. They showed video of their first fresh rolls of 135 HP5+ running off their finishing line.

I would think that any shortages are more likely related to problems in the distribution chain, caused by Covid.

 

[Anon Ymous]

I mostly do landscape or macro where a need for automation or AF is secondary, so fossil it may be but that works.

Agreed, I also shoot landscapes and my OM2S does a fine job, but lack of AF meant that many loyal customers would eventually switch to something else. And by the time they switched to a new camera - lens mount system and the associated costs this involved, they had absolutely no reason to switch back to Olympus. It's a shame that Olympus is basically gone, but there's not much of a market for more than 3-4 camera manufacturers.

 

[Lucid]

AFAIK Harman is back. On 18th June, they posted on Instagram that their 'staff and machines are being phased back in to operation'. They showed video of their first fresh rolls of 135 HP5+ running off their finishing line.

I would think that any shortages are more likely related to problems in the distribution chain, caused by Covid.

Whew, I was starting to get worried.

 

[Auer]

3 years of no profit straight losses and some people still want to say that Customers are to blame because they want "Stupid full frame".

Full frame is pretty much the only reason to shoot digital over 35mm film (sometimes).
I had no interest in M4/3 for anything except maybe a way to adapt old lenses to digital for fun, but even that incentive was gone with FF mirrorless becoming very affordable.
But yeah, why should a photographer care for resolution, the "Photographic Experience" is so much more important....

 

[lantau]

What are you going to do with all that resolution? Everyone behaves as if they were the top professional image maker of the world. It's a nice to have, but it also increases overhead. Heavy cropping is all I can come up with. But for 98% of all work done my 16mp camera is great.

The real reason is because people just want it. Like I just wanted to use LF and so I bought a 4x5 camera. Fair enough. But you make it sound as if there was a limit. And sensors are only going to get better. Sure a bigger sensor will always be better, so get a 6x6 then if it's so important.

I use digital to take good quality pictures of memories. It's a competent system, quick, small and has amazing and affordable lenses. When I want to use equipment for the sake of it I use film. In any format.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

It's really too bad. My first Olympus is an XA. I got it at a thrift store on a fluke and fell completely in love with the design. The image quality is mind blowing for a point and shoot. Sadly, the camera market has been shrinking due to the use of smartphones as cameras. You pay for a phone and you get a DSLR quality camera for free. Smartphones is a the biggest disruptor in modern times. Ask any NY taxi driver that owns a badge.

 

[lloyd]

https://www.thewanderinglensman.com/2014/02/the-practical-difference-part-2-between.html

a bit dated but.....

 

[benjiboy]

A sad sign of what the future for film may be facing. At least film sales are up.

It's an even sadder story for digital cameras, Steve the digital cameras in smartphones are so staggeringly good these days even in medium-priced ones that the average person in the street sees no need to own a camera, certainly, my children who are in their fifties, their friends and their children don't own cameras and see no need for them, and the average consumer is the main market for image-making devices, so the camera manufacturers are in for a tough time in the future.

 

[Bormental]

3 years of no profit straight losses and some people still want to say that Customers are to blame because they want "Stupid full frame".

Full frame is pretty much the only reason to shoot digital over 35mm film (sometimes).
I had no interest in M4/3 for anything except maybe a way to adapt old lenses to digital for fun, but even that incentive was gone with FF mirrorless becoming very affordable.
But yeah, why should a photographer care for resolution, the "Photographic Experience" is so much more important....

I disagree with every single sentence, but I 100% agree with the spirit of this post. I have never used legendary Olympus film cameras, I only evaluated their products during the digital era. I have seriously looked at them on 3 occasions, and every single time they presented themselves as the most backward manufacturer. The noise was always higher, the DOF control was always worse, dynamic range was never great, the weight savings were minimal and $$ savings were non-existent. Handling their cameras in stores never revealed any ergonomic advantages, they felt similar to competitors. There was another company that showed middle finger to full-frame users and they're still growing their market share.

 

[Auer]

I disagree with every single sentence, but I 100% agree with the spirit of this post. I have never used legendary Olympus film cameras, I only evaluated their products during the digital era. I have seriously looked at them on 3 occasions, and every single time they presented themselves as the most backward manufacturer. The noise was always higher, the DOF control was always worse, dynamic range was never great, the weight savings were minimal and $$ savings were non-existent. Handling their cameras in stores never revealed any ergonomic advantages, they felt similar to competitors. There was another company that showed middle finger to full-frame users and they're still growing their market share.

Fuji's growth was largely due to the success of their Instax gear. They still are at 6% or so overall.

 

[markjwyatt]

I disagree with every single sentence, but I 100% agree with the spirit of this post. I have never used legendary Olympus film cameras, I only evaluated their products during the digital era. I have seriously looked at them on 3 occasions, and every single time they presented themselves as the most backward manufacturer. The noise was always higher, the DOF control was always worse, dynamic range was never great, the weight savings were minimal and $$ savings were non-existent. Handling their cameras in stores never revealed any ergonomic advantages, they felt similar to competitors. There was another company that showed middle finger to full-frame users and they're still growing their market share.

My only digital at this point is a Fujifilm XT-2, and I really love it. In the family we have one of the early generation Olympus digitals (8 MP), but its not much to write home about. At the time it was probably pretty good.

 

[MattKing]

I expect Nikon will be the next to go.
The smaller sensor has some disadvantages, but I'm absolutely amazed at the quality I can get when my kit lens equipped OMD EM10 Mark II produces a jpeg and I send it electronically to Costco for a 12"x16" RA4 print.
All in a package about the size of a Trip 35.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I expect Nikon will be the next to go.
The smaller sensor has some disadvantages, but I'm absolutely amazed at the quality I can get when my kit lens equipped OMD EM10 Mark II produces a jpeg and I send it electronically to Costco for a 12"x16" RA4 print.
All in a package about the size of a Trip 35.

Nikon is a small company. Canon is much larger. So what Matt said is more likely.

 

[Paul Howell]

Pentax might be next, smaller than Nikon, lack deep pockets for R&D, their one and only mirrorless was not well liked, keeping the K mount it was too thick. Sigma is a family owned business, they have taken a loss on camera bodies for years and seems not to care much.

 

[Auer]

Pentax might be next, smaller than Nikon, lack deep pockets for R&D, their one and only mirrorless was not well liked, keeping the K mount it was too thick. Sigma is a family owned business, they have taken a loss on camera bodies for years and seems not to care much.

Pentax is an oddball, somewhat surprised Ricoh hasn't sold it off yet. That said, I have a few bodies and a slew of lenses and if youre looking for a rugged DSLR with decent IQ there not bad at all, and priced well.
Pretty cool compact prime lenses too.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

It's an even sadder story for digital cameras, Steve the digital cameras in smartphones are so staggeringly good these days even in medium-priced ones that the average person in the street sees no need to own a camera, certainly, my children who are in their fifties, their friends and their children don't own cameras and see no need for them, and the average consumer is the main market for image-making devices, so the camera manufacturers are in for a tough time in the future.

Around here in Norfolk and Suffolk it is very common to see people with bird watching equipment including some high-end long telephoto lenses. However, I very rarely see anyone else out 'photographing' in the more general way we think about it on this forum.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Pentax is an oddball, somewhat surprised Ricoh hasn't sold it off yet. That said, I have a few bodies and a slew of lenses and if youre looking for a rugged DSLR with decent IQ there not bad at all, and priced well.
Pretty cool compact prime lenses too.

I've not owned a Pentax camera but do have a high opinion of the company based on my experience with the digital spotmeter, and the 645Z still seems to be popular. I find the smaller format options slightly confusing, there is a FA for full-frame and DA for APS-C, but they seem to have a lot of options.

 

[Rob Skeoch]

In Canada, Olympus was running at 2% market share. If that was true in other markets, then those numbers are unsustainable for a midlevel consumer product. Maybe Leica could survive with that amount of share. In Canada, Pentax has an even smaller market share, although they do well with "sport optics" which is likely keeping them afloat. "Sport Optics" are binoculars, and rifle scopes. That said, I think Pentax will be next to go. Nikon's market share has dropped to third position, as they were slow to adapt to mirrorless which has caught up to them. They've brought to market a first generation of mirrorless, while Sony is flying past with multi-generations of up-dates, new features, and new models. However Nikon makes a great product and that will keep them going. The market has switched to full-frame. I'm not saying that everyone needs a full-frame, just that the market has switched, and the market is the driver in cameras.
In years gone by Olympus had a presence in the pro market with cameras like the OM1 and OM2. Great products but little market share. They didn't convert to AF well, and lost more share when things went digital.I thought the OM4TI and less popular, but very nice OM3TI, were great products, but not the build quality of Nikon. Olympus did make a 180mm f2 that I saw once at a news photographers tradeshow that was a beautiful looking lens and always endeared me to the system.
It's unfortunate for those the have bought into the Olympus system as it's unlikely the new owner will develop new products. It's the same company, I believe, that bought the computer line from Sony, and ran it into the ground.
That's how I see it anyways.

 

[Billy Axeman]

Don't expect Pentax to fall over soon. On the contrary, Ricoh has shown some remarkable success with the GR and Theta brands. At the moment the line of Pentax APS-C and FF camera's is quite limited, but a new APS-C is expected end of this year with a final announcement probably in September.

Being a fan of both Pentax and Olympus (film and digital) it is an attractive idea to see Ricoh taking over most of Olympus Imaging. There are quite a few similarities between the two and a merger could be quite harmonious. Ricoh could expand the line of cameras with MFT (remember the Pentax Q), get access to EVF technology, and combine the know-how for making small high quality lenses as they are both doing now. Last but not least Pentax could also learn a thing or two from the Olympus design department without ditching the classic appearance.

 

[benjiboy]

Many of these optical equipment big five .leading manufacturers of cameras are now making lenses for high-end models for smartphone makers. because that's where the market is nowadays, for example, some Chinese Huawei smartphones have Leica lenses.

 

[baachitraka]

Bring all camera manufacturers under one roof and each taking the manufacturing of one format cameras and lenses to take down the threat of smartphones.

 

[BrianShaw]

Please don’t forget, smartphones was the biggest contributor to the proliferation of amateur imaging-making, both still and moving. Why try to “take it down” as a “threat”? Threat to what? Do you really think there’s a valid (both sales quantity and profitability) market for new film cameras?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I got one of their first m43 - the E-PL1 with the digital eye viewfinder. The viewfinder fell off. I didn't notice that and I ran it over it with my car. . I'm using the camera now as a light meter for LF photography. It's got spot metering as well as center weighted. It also allows me to see the shot in BW before setting up the LF camera and record the settings in video mode for transcribing at home to paper.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The smaller DOF is actually better if you shoot landscapes.

 

[baachitraka]

Please don’t forget, smartphones was the biggest contributor to the proliferation of amateur imaging-making, both still and moving. Why try to “take it down” as a “threat”? Threat to what? Do you really think there’s a valid (both sales quantity and profitability) market for new film cameras?

May be a threat, in loosing a discrete device called as a camera and as well as the existing business around it??