Is Olympus now doomed?

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by RichA, Jun 7, 2008.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Back to Kodak for sensors? While the Kodak sensors had a certain
    "something" this is not good news...

    From a post on Dpreview:

    Ok here is the .../four-thirds-kameras-rueckzug-von-
    Its in German, but it is basically saying:

    A Panasonic Rep confirms at a Public Photo Exhibition that Matsushita/
    Panasonic will no longer Produce 4/3 DSLRs /Devices. They are looking
    for 2/3 Type DSLRs with larger sensors.
    RichA, Jun 7, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Absolutely not at all.
    Hans H. Siegrist, Jun 8, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Well its an ambiguous rumour that isn't clear whether they mean
    withdrawing from 4/3 dSLRs and/or sensors. Also 2/3 sensors are SMALLER
    than 4/3 - what they mean is 3:2 ASPECT RATIO cameras.

    Nevertheless, it could be the best thing to happen to Olympus! This
    could be the exit strategy they have been looking for from the dead end
    4/3 format they bought into so over-enthusiastically. Now perhaps they
    can launch a new series of cameras which actually has a competitive
    imaging area and realise that telecentricity is not the only way.
    Kennedy McEwen, Jun 8, 2008
  4. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    All it proves is Panasonic (sponsor of the genocide 2008 Olympics in
    Beijing) are exiting that format. Olympus will ride their growth
    constrained format for the forseeable future.
    Alan Browne, Jun 8, 2008
  5. Panasonic manufactures two or three Leica-designed lenses for 4/3, with plans to
    introduce at least two more. Do you think they will stop making the current
    lenses and not introduce the new ones?
    John Rethorst, Jun 8, 2008
  6. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    If Panasonic make lenses for other companies to use, that may be a
    lucrative (if narrow) market. The 4/3 format permits them to do exactly

    The Olympus 4/3 format, so promising, quickly came up short as the other
    co's accelerated the pixel count race. Oly quickly met the limits of
    the sensor size at 10 Mpix going over 200 px/mm. This is even denser
    than the Sony A-350 which is not stellar.

    Because they can't make the sensor larger, they will likely be slow to
    grow pix counts with acceptable noise at ISO 800 and lower.

    Having said all that, the format generates great prints up to 12" that I
    have seen. I don't doubt that it can go to 15".

    FujiFilm is likewise constrained in their high dynamic range sensor for
    S2/S3/S5 IS-Pro range. Still at 6 Mpix (hosting 12 Mpixels, one of two
    for the HDR).

    Oly might have to do the unthinkable (a couple years ago) and go back to
    full frame 35mm cameras with digital sensors. This would be backed up
    by their range of existing lenses for 35mm, many which are very good.

    Anyway, I've been quite the critic of the 4/3 format (not the aspect
    ratio; just the sensor dimensions) and this has borne out with time.

    Alan Browne, Jun 8, 2008
  7. Hi there,

    why would it be necessary to revert to Kodak sensors? Just because
    Panasonic's camera division doesn't develop and produce new 4/3 DSLRs, why
    should Panasonic Semiconductor division stop developing and producing 4/3
    sensors, if Olympus keeps buying them in bulk?

    Best Regards,
    Martin Boening, Jun 10, 2008
  8. RichA

    Yoshi Guest

    There's nothing "dead end" about Olympus DSLRs. Most folks dont need a 20MP
    camera capable of making 30x40" prints. Of you guys had a clue instead of
    being silly immature gearheads you might realize this. In the mean time, I
    suppose you will go on having fantasies about 100 MP cameras.

    Yoshi, Jun 11, 2008
  9. RichA

    Bruce Guest

    The whole thing has now been officially denied by Panasonic, who have
    reaffirmed their commitment to Four Thirds.
    Bruce, Jun 11, 2008
  10. Yes there is - and you identified in your juvenile response.
    Perhaps not, but I just measured the crop that I have been framing this
    evening for my stairway - 23x33" - and that is STILL beyond what any 4/3
    camera could yield sharply!

    At the bottom of that same stairway hang two similar sized prints that
    WERE shot with Olympus cameras - but they weren't 4/3 cameras. They
    were cameras from a generation before Olympus merely aspired to
    If you had a clue you would realise that the limitation you succinctly
    describe IS the dead end for Olympus.

    Better to aim for the target and occasionally fall short than aim short
    of the target all the time!
    Kennedy McEwen, Jun 11, 2008
  11. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    There is no reason to be bound by print size when technology allows
    higher resolution.

    35mm (FF) has 3.5 times the surface area v 4/3 and this allows either
    larger prints or tighter crops from higher pix count sensors at a given

    So for similar price points for similar systems (and some of the best
    Oly lenses are VERY expensive), the 4/3 user has locked himself into less.

    As to your blanket condemnation of those who didn't "take the bait",
    well I suggest a little introspection.
    Alan Browne, Jun 12, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.