• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

The demise of OLYMPUS camera business

baachitraka said:
May be a threat, in loosing a discrete device called as a camera and as well as the existing business around it??
Click to expand...
Understood... but that only matters if one feels specific gear is more important to the act of making images.

I like cameras and film (a lot) but make more (and sometimes better) images with an iPhone. Right now there are probably more mobile phone photographers and videographers than folks like us who like the traditional gear. I’m not predicting that to change much... if anything it will become “the only way” before too much more time passes.
 
MattKing said:
I expect Nikon will be the next to go...
Click to expand...
With luck not because...
BrianShaw said:
...Do you really think there’s a valid (both sales quantity and profitability) market for new film cameras?
Click to expand...
I'm currently waiting for B&H to get in the next batch of four F6 cameras it orders and receives roughly twice a year so I can purchase one. Reported annual worldwide production of those is 250 units. I wouldn't expect Nikon to manufacture them if doing so weren't profitable. While not inexpensive, the F6 isn't in the same league as a Leica.
BrianShaw said:
...Right now there are probably more mobile phone photographers and videographers than folks like us who like the traditional gear...
Click to expand...
That statement puts you in the lead for an "understatement of the century" award. No, make that of the millennium.
 
Sal Santamaura said:
... next batch of four F6 cameras it orders and receives roughly twice a year so I can purchase one. Reported annual worldwide production of those is 250 units. I wouldn't expect Nikon to manufacture them if doing so weren't profitable.
Click to expand...

At that rate I wouldn’t expect them to be continuing “production” too much longer. Those are very low numbers. What do you think the profit margin is at both the retailer and manufacturers level... not to mention whatever gets sucked out by middlemen?

Makes me want to liken it to a ultra-high-end custom auto manufacturer. Even Maybach could keep going only for so long.

And when you get yours, I’m sure it will be nice!
 
Henning Serger's posts here at PHOTRIO are the source of those data. I can't find the recent thread in which he reported 250 units per year, but this four year old one described Nikon's Sendai plant and how it's set up to make the F6:


Somewhere else in PHOTRIO's archive there's an exchange where a European F6 buyer (possibly Henning himself) was asked why they special-ordered their camera from a local dealer and had to wait for it, rather than just buying one from B&H. One of those four-unit batches had apparently just been received by B&H, so immediate retail delivery was possible at that moment. The answer was that the B&H price was substantially higher than what was charged at a local European dealer. So I guess Nikon's profit margin (it distributes itself in the U.S.) and B&H's margin are more than adequate.
BrianShaw said:
...And when you get yours, I’m sure it will be nice!
Click to expand...
Thanks. First, B&H needs to get some so I can order one.
 

MF or small format is too much of a compromise in comparison to LF and not to mention about smartphones.

But the comfort overrules all the compromises with smartphones. :-|

As I age I may want to slow down and enjoy looking all the details on the scene through naked eye and make images.

I expect the camera of all format coexist in the future and there will be market for everything.
 
Sal Santamaura said:
So I guess Nikon's profit margin (it distributes itself in the U.S.) and B&H's margin are more than adequate.
Click to expand...

often, as I know you know, the loss of one business unit is propped up by profit of another business unit. That can persist until some wise accountant says enough-is-enough.

im guessing that’s what went on at Olympus.
 
BrianShaw said:
often, as I know you know, the loss of one business unit is propped up by profit of another business unit. That can persist until some wise accountant says enough-is-enough.

im guessing that’s what went on at Olympus.
Click to expand...
Thom Hogan seems to agree with this analysis. His latest weekly commentary on photographic news (Friday June 26, 2020) summarizes how Olympus likely wants to divest the camera operation while keeping the brand and intellectual rights in Japan.

http://www.bythom.com

He noted that in the previous fiscal year, Olympus only sold 340,000 cameras. This year with the virus, sales are surely way down for Olympus and all the other companies. I am afraid we may see more shakeup among the traditional camera companies soon.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Another reason I saw for this selloff was the pressure from an activist shareholder (ValueAct Capital ?).
 
Many would just get a larger sensor camera or simply use their phones. With Panasonic getting in with FF with the L mount it would be interesting what they do with M4/3.

I think a small group who are spending hours outside with a few F2.8 zooms the M4/3 was more portable whereas the larger systems were quite heavy and large. But there is only so many of them. Many people on holidays etc or street photographers may not want to take that much lenses anyway. Ie walking out for the day and spending 10hrs with that camera bag with that kit. Many people in general might spend certain time with their "big" kit with the larger formats, so only so many people would actually walk out for the day with this big kit and spend the whole day with it.

I've watched various videos by Olympus Visionaries while they acknowledge it is not the the same as FF they argue the point that M4/3 are suitable and sufficient for commercial work. Maybe. The argument is that they want more depth of field than less and still able to handhold it. But ... I think at the end of the day provided all the work is professional most people don't care for more blur or less blur. If provided an option they prob want more blur. Commercially, tripod and lighting equipment is seen as an asset than a liability they are professional tools. Remember with larger sensor they are better in high ISO so you can raise the ISO to up the f stop for more depth of field too.
 
Auer said:
Fuji's growth was largely due to the success of their Instax gear. They still are at 6% or so overall.
Click to expand...
Are they keeping the Instax? Will it continue o be produced?
 
There's also the cost of lenses and other ancillary equipment they sell. Plus, R&D is over; there are no updates. It reminds me of the Epson scanners that really haven't changed much in years. PLus there's the cache that Nikon has as the famous 35mm camera company still making film cameras that works with all their old lenses. Like a loss leader.
 

good on you!
 

It comes into its own for video. Being able to shoot stills is just a bonus. I do agree however that it has an image problem because full frame is considered superiour in spite of its hefty price tag and significant bulk.
 
At the risk of being mistaken for Les Sarile, here is a comparison shot of a borrowed Canon 5D Mark II (complete with grip and RRS plate), a later Canon autofocus film camera, an OM-4T and an almost current OMD micro 4/3.
The OM-D is a bit shorter than the OM-4T, considerably narrower, and definitely less deep.
And the irony is, of course, that this is taken with a cel phone.
 
Wow.... are you still shooting that same body.?
If so, that is a long haul.
 
Don't discount the size factor in the full-frame cameras. A lot of the gear guys feel macho with an enormous, bulbous "full-frame" camera equipped with a penile cannon-like zoom lens. The smaller complete package of µ3/4 just did not do it for them, even though they posted most pictures on social media (but still not enough pixels, equivalence, dynamic range, card slots, ISO-cheating, whatever).
 
Last edited:
I will join the Olympus wake, but not grieve. The OM bellows were much better than Novoflex and the ringflash with its cross polarizer was an excellent piece of equipment, but my OM4 ate batteries.

The PenF digital is a useful "digital back" for analog era lenses (except for its buttons having an unfortunate tendency to interfere with my focussing.)

I ditched my first fullframe digital Kodak-something (too much noise) and gave away my FFCanon to a strong grendchild. It was too big and cumbersome for the digital snaps I wanted , so I bought an Olympus.

Right now i have with me an R8 loaded with film with five of its very heavy lenses but they can also be utilized on the olympus and with internal sensor jiggling I can often do without a tripod..

With Olympus production gone, no chance of getting a barebones and small non-autofocus, almost buttonless , but -high quality PenF successor, but presumably no market for such devices.

p.
 
ph said:
With Olympus production gone, no chance of getting a barebones and small non-autofocus, almost buttonless , but -high quality PenF successor, but presumably no market for such devices.
Click to expand...
Don't give up yet. Olympus is still making cameras and lenses. The sale to the financial group is sometime in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register