| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/06/2009 12:24:18 PM · #26 |
In the end it will come down to marketing.
Olympus can pronounce all they want, and they can even be right. But, the uneducated will follow the "mine is bigger than yours" crowd. There is more than one person I know, who insist I got ripped off on my 40D because it has fewer pixels than their P&S or cheap DSLR.
Beta was better than VHS.
If Olympus can demonstrate, convincingly, that they have better pictures with fewer pixels, they could pick up market share from those in the know. But will it offset the market share lost to pixel envy, by those who do not do the research necessary. I don't know, but time will tell the story.
Personally, my bet is that they will have to jump back in at some point. Between advances in sensor technology, and that they don't seem to be killing Canon and Nikon in sales now, says to me that they may well have trouble holding that line.
We will see. I've owned a few Olympus products. I wish them well. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 01:42:47 PM · #27 |
 JEason wrote: "Someone needs to release a build-your-own camera, sort of like a customizable PC." I've often thought that. I suppose the customizable features on some cams are a step in that direction, and it is possible we may be moving along.
Number of megapixels is really such a small part of the equation, apart from file size and transfer speed which is increasingly less of a problem, that the announcement seens staggeringly vapid. -- At the present time, the number of megapixels would NOT be a determining factor in my buying decisions. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 02:31:03 PM · #28 |
considering the other expense that goes along with owning a particular brand of SLR/dSLR, and the fact that olympus is sort of at the back of the pack with market share, i don't see the philosphy doing them much good... how many canon or nikon owners are gonna jump ship when there is a 10% increase in dynamic range offered by olympus?
sigma tried the same sort of approach - i think it was a double image sensor capable of an extra couple stops of dynamic range. nice idea - probably better images. how far did it get them ?
i bought a car a few years ago - used. the place i bought it from let me take it home for a couple days to make sure i was content with it ( they let me really try it out. )
when that day comes with electronics - the philosphy might have merit.
Message edited by author 2009-03-06 14:33:08.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2009 02:46:07 PM · #29 |
My first "real" camera was an Olympus OM-2n, followed later by the terrific little XA-2. So I have a fondness for the brand.
Will this step cause Nikon or Canon owner to jump ship--not likely. It could, however, cause new buyers to start with Olympus, particularly if this gives them a reputation for better resulting images/low light performance than their similarly priced counterparts.
The more subtle, but the best, news here is that Olympus came out and said it, and will follow thru with products--this could help in the long-run: other manufacturers might decide they don't want to be left out of this (or they cannot afford to be left out of this). |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 02:49:59 PM · #30 |
| Stock sites and other online image brokers continually demand increasing file sizes from contributors. There's a force that drives demand for high mp cameras. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 02:52:15 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Stock sites and other online image brokers continually demand increasing file sizes from contributors. There's a force that drives demand for high mp cameras. |
True, but the vast majority of photographers (the casual consumer group) don't give a rip about that. All they care about is that the photos look good on screen and in print, without fussing with them. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 02:54:32 PM · #32 |
Originally posted by zeuszen:
Stock sites and other online image brokers continually demand increasing file sizes from contributors. There's a force that drives demand for high mp cameras. |
Olympus' view is focused chiefly on mainstream photographers. Studio and commercial photographers taking pictures for magazines certainly have a need for more megapixels, Watanabe said. "We don't think 20 megapixels is necessary for everybody. If a customer wants more than 20 megapixels, he should go to the full-frame models," Watanabe said.
really though, I'm more interested in what he had to say about changes in focus. Megapixels are boring, particularly on a site dedicated to 640x480 or 720 pixel images. Noise, focus and camera performance are the main limiters for point and shoot over SLRs these days.
Message edited by author 2009-03-06 14:57:08.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2009 04:43:42 PM · #33 |
My 3mp fujifilm s5000 was much better than my 6mp hp that preceded it, but I still wanted more.. when I hit 8m I figured a few more would not be wasted but I was more than happy and I still think that 8mp was plenty. Like most people who know even the slightest bit about cameras, I too want better low light performance, AF speed and such... Unfortunately, from working in sales, I can tell you that when you tell a consumer that there is more than MP's involved here is what you get in 90% of cases
1- they feel intimidated by the factors involved
2- people SUCK at fractions and ratios and that is what photography is all about so explaining this is like talking to a wall
3- people don't want to learn how to use things such as ISO
4- they can't fathom that what you see on the tiny crappy LCD on the back of the camera is not representative of what they really get
5- their standards are simply ridiculously low, people print the blurriest crap without seeing an issue with it.. I have even seen people not notice that there was no red in their picture ( I am serious, these were BG pictures instead of RBG :p) and EVEN after pointing it out, they did not see what was wrong with the horrible tint of the people's skin.
Simply put, in every possible logical or sensible way, this is a GREAT move by Olympus; unfortunately, people are not logical or sensible; they see a fancy add, hear coined terms and buy what is trendy, not functional.
... wow this really went on longer than I had anticipated! well, those are my two cents. |
|
|
|
03/08/2009 05:26:16 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by julienrl:
Simply put, in every possible logical or sensible way, this is a GREAT move by Olympus; unfortunately, people are not logical or sensible; they see a fancy add, hear coined terms and buy what is trendy, not functional. |
I mostly agree. But ultimately the camera manufacturers are responsible for marketing the buzz words that the semi-informed or casual shopper look for when buying a camera. I have to believe that they're running out of mileage with megapixels -- vanishing returns and all that. So maybe this is Olympus taking a first step on behalf of the industry to reeducate consumers and point them in a new direction.
|
|
|
|
03/08/2009 05:51:54 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by bvy:
I mostly agree. But ultimately the camera manufacturers are responsible for marketing the buzz words that the semi-informed or casual shopper look for when buying a camera. I have to believe that they're running out of mileage with megapixels -- vanishing returns and all that. So maybe this is Olympus taking a first step on behalf of the industry to reeducate consumers and point them in a new direction. |
I had not thought of that... Thanks for giving me a glimpse of hope!!! lol |
|
|
|
03/10/2009 07:10:58 PM · #36 |
I think this is a smart idea. 12 MP is enough for the majority of photographic uses. The E-system cameras are excellent cameras... the only areas people ever thumb their nose about is that they aren't doing high iso or some dynamic range as good as the other guy does. They pioneered things like pixel mapping, live-view, sensor dust reduction, etc. and other companies have benefitted from that innovation in order to make their cameras better. It is good that Olympus has decided to learn from that and see what others are doing better at and do better in those areas.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2009 07:56:44 PM · #37 |
Originally posted by OdysseyF22:
What does the market division look like, I wonder? Are many average users buying Oly cameras, or is it mostly photographers who would be looking for better features over more megapixels?
If Oly figures that they can't beat out Canon and Nikon anyway, perhaps it does make more sense for them to directly target the people who are buying (or are likely to buy) their cameras - and if those people are actual photographers, then this move could make a lot of sense.
Frankly though, I wish that Canon would get its act together and do this,too. The 50D appears to have reached the practical limit of megapixels/sensor size while maintaining ISO performance. I know I never really need 15 MP - I'd be happier with a 10MP camera that offered better performance. |
About market share, here are current results from an ongoing poll at //pma-show.com/:
Which camera brand do you own?
33%: Nikon
31%: Canon
14% Other
12%: Olympus
5%: Pansonic
4%: Fujifilm
ETA: It is perhaps easier and/or cheaper to increase the sensor resolution than it is to work on the other core issues like noise resistance, better/faster AF, actually useful liveview, in-camera stability.
OTOH, a camera manufacturer would want to exploit everything they can from a consumer before they move on to the next level of feature improvements. I bet there are people working on viable/cheaper solutions to the other important issues in their labs.. but they would be fools to release all that good stuff in a single mid-range model that would be affordable by millions. Imagine what they will make their profits on from the next release then??
Nikon in fact already tried something drastic by introducing D90 in low-mid range DSLR range... but I suspect if the motive was consumer oriented. It most probably was done to capture a bigger market share.. plus they may already have something better to offer in the pipeline, and so it is wise to make as much money as possible on the soon-to-be-outdated technology. That is generally what happens with technology products.
Message edited by author 2009-03-10 20:07:18. |
|
|
|
03/10/2009 08:20:59 PM · #38 |
For the majority of the photgraphic market (and this site does NOT represent this majority), they would jump at an inexpensive camera that
1) produces sharp jpg images for prints up to 8 by 10
2) has virtually no lag between pushing the shutter release button and the photo being taken
3) Does not require post-processing to get a good print (see #1)
4) Has a small, manageable set of, well, settings (Action Mode, Landscape Mode, etc) - easy to learn, hard to get yourself in trouble.
5) Durable. Water resistant, and drop-resistant.
I don't think 12+ mp is necessary to tap that market.
|
|
|
|
03/10/2009 09:30:18 PM · #39 |
I think its a good move. Im an amatuer by most means, the only professional work I have ever done was being a second wedding photog. I did about 25 weddings all together. All those were shot in Jpeg because of what the person that hired me to shoot in. Even then the average per wedding was 2000 shutter clicks, at 6-7MB each it adds up on data space. Mostly though I just like to take pictures of life in general, grab my camera and go, everything packed in a backpack including the laptop.
What I need in a camera is exactly what Olympus is offering, good glass, durable, fits for what I need it for. I love the inbody IS, pixel mapping, self cleaning sensor. Even the ISO it provides, even at 3200ISO I can get a good picture. I think they are doing a great job on a product I will continue to buy. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/27/2025 05:03:23 AM EDT.
