| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/05/2009 07:11:17 PM · #1 |
//news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-10189546-39.html
"Twelve megapixels is, I think, enough for covering most applications most customers need," said Akira Watanabe, manager of Olympus Imaging's SLR planning department, in an interview here at the Photo Marketing Association (PMA). "We have no intention to compete in the megapixel wars for E-System," Olympus' line of SLR cameras, he said.
Instead, Olympus will focus on other characteristics such as dynamic range, color reproduction, and a better ISO range for low-light shooting, he said.
Increasing the number of megapixels on cameras is an easy selling point for camera makers, in part because it's a simple concept for people to understand. Even though having more megapixels can enable larger prints and enlargement of subject matter through cropping, adding megapixels comes with some drawbacks.
--------------------
Very sensible from Olympus, the war between Canon, Nikon and Sony (especially) for insane megapixel ratings is getting stupid now, especially as this website proves you can take amazing images with a 3mp camera.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2009 07:46:37 PM · #2 |
| Refreshing indeed! And he is absolutely correct. Let's just hope the market rewards that kind of honesty. Also very interesting is his claim that sensor-based AF performance will soon exceed current phase-detect system performance. If true, a potential game changer. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 07:50:25 PM · #3 |
| i agree with their decision |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 07:58:00 PM · #4 |
Of course, in a dozen years or so we might look back at that statement and laugh, much in the same way as we look back at when Bill Gates said that no one would have much practical use for a computer that had more than 640k worth of memory (or whatever the number was, exactly)...
Message edited by author 2009-03-05 19:59:14. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 07:59:12 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
Of course, in a dozen years or so we might look back at that statement and laugh, much in the same way as we look back at when Bill Gates said that no one would have much practical use for a computer that had more than 128k worth of power (or whatever the number was, exactly)... |
640K of memory :)
|
|
|
|
03/05/2009 08:11:51 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by alanfreed:
Of course, in a dozen years or so we might look back at that statement and laugh, much in the same way as we look back at when Bill Gates said that no one would have much practical use for a computer that had more than 640k worth of memory (or whatever the number was, exactly)... |
Interesting question. Maybe so, maybe no. It seems to me that around the 12Mpx point is where an image exceeds the amount of detail present in most 35mm film exposures. 35mm was the de facto standard for *consumers* for decades due to the balance of cost, size and performance. What he proposes is that for a compact SLR, e.g. smaller than full frame, that balance again exists. Image quality meets or exceeds the needs of most consumers, making other concerns primary. We'll see. Markets don't always respond the way we expect them to. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 08:47:26 PM · #7 |
I'm sure Nikon and Canon are breathing a hefty sigh of relief at news of Olympus dropping out of the 'competition' heheh.
Seems like an iffy marketing strategy though. Consumers make buy decisions based on an easily understood parameter (megapixels). Let's take that away and instead offer things such as 'expanded dynamic range' and 'better iso performance'.
If the target audience is someone who is never going to print bigger than an 8x10 (if they print at all), I'm betting that sticking to 'bigger is better' might prove to be the wiser choice. The alternatives require more technical knowledge to appreciate than the average happy snapper is going to have (or care to have). |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 09:02:22 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
...The alternatives require more technical knowledge to appreciate than the average happy snapper is going to have (or care to have). |
I thought the happy snapper was the turtle living in the creek out back... ;-)
Not sure I completely agree that tech knowledge is required. If the thing just works, cranks out great images in low light, and things print up great without lots o' messin', plus the camera is between the size of a 5D and a P&S, they may well have found a broad market. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 09:04:59 PM · #9 |
| Well you never know. I'm no marketing expert. Still waiting for Canon to release the 5DmkII-Lite so I don't have to pay for a video camera in my slr... |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 09:51:13 PM · #10 |
| I want more mega-pixels and better iso performance. Oh, and I would like it to weigh less and have infrared built in. Maybe have it run on pressure waves instead of batteries and if possible have the images transfered direct to a server instead of a memory card. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 10:28:15 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Well you never know. I'm no marketing expert. Still waiting for Canon to release the 5DmkII-Lite so I don't have to pay for a video camera in my slr... |
That's my major complaint about video on dSLR's as well. I don't want it so why should I pay for it. Someone needs to release a build-your-own camera, sort of like a customizable PC.
|
|
|
|
03/05/2009 10:31:04 PM · #12 |
| I think Olympus just gained some respect among enthusiasts. Perhaps they will revise their thinking a few years down the road, but building a reputation of excelling in other important characteristics seems a good idea to me. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 10:33:14 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by JEason:
That's my major complaint about video on dSLR's as well. I don't want it so why should I pay for it. Someone needs to release a build-your-own camera, sort of like a customizable PC. |
Red
However, this is WAY more expensive.
Message edited by author 2009-03-05 22:33:49. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 10:56:08 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by violinist123:
...The alternatives require more technical knowledge to appreciate than the average happy snapper is going to have (or care to have). |
I thought the happy snapper was the turtle living in the creek out back... ;-)
Not sure I completely agree that tech knowledge is required. If the thing just works, cranks out great images in low light, and things print up great without lots o' messin', plus the camera is between the size of a 5D and a P&S, they may well have found a broad market. |
Well, just because a camera works well in the real world doesn't mean it will work well in the consumer's eyes. I think what  violinist123 is getting at is that dynamic range isn't a simple, quantifiable value for most consumers. Yes, there is a value, but it means nothing to the average clueless consumer, who consumes more than the picky and wise consumer. It's marketing hype. Go to a big electronics place and they have two or three attributes for the camera- zoom range (given in X increments) and megapixels are always two of them. |
|
|
|
03/05/2009 11:27:11 PM · #15 |
This is an unusual declaration by Olympus as they do not own any sensor fabrication plants of their own. Panasonic is their supplier (for the time being, perhaps), but the announcement could be a signal that they may be ready to jump to another manufactuer's product such as Foveon (unlikely...noisy) or Fuji's Super CCD EXR technology (if it can be used with LiveView), or even back to Kodak who supplied earlier 4/3rds cameras. All three are part of the 4/3rds consortium.
Could also be a cost saving measure. Oly will be making cameras probably with less expensive sensors, and be able to pass that cost savings on to the consumer, while other manufacturers fight it out in the megapixel wars making more expensive offerings. With a bit of marketing education, consumer Joe & Jane will see they don't need bazillion MPs and in these hard economic times will go with the cheaper Olympus with better quaility images.
Message edited by author 2009-03-05 23:28:28. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 06:29:05 AM · #16 |
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.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2009 07:52:10 AM · #17 |
I agree 100% with Olympus' decision!
|
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:14:21 AM · #18 |
| Maybe other companies will follow and help make cameras a bit cheaper. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:31:54 AM · #19 |
I dunno... I definitely prefer the images I'm getting from my 21mp 5DII over the older (but still awesome) 12.8mp I was getting from the original 5D. I, for one, don't want to go back.
My choice of using my 1DIII vs my 5DII usually comes down to frame rate or FF vs crop. If my 1DIII had 21mp and still managed to keep up the frame rate, I'd go for it. (though, admittedly, I'd have to buy a lot more storage) |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:34:10 AM · #20 |
I don't know how many megapixels are enough, but Panasonic took the same approach with their smaller point and shoot camera the LX3. This little camera has a "cult" following of photographers who use it along with their digital SLR's.
//www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/lx3.shtml |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:35:54 AM · #21 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
Still waiting for Canon to release the 5DmkII-Lite so I don't have to pay for a video camera in my slr... |
Are you paying extra for the video? The 5DII came out costing LESS than the original 5D and yet offers more. That's a major win in my book.
I don't hardly use the video ... I'm just not a video guy. Do I feel like I wasted money getting the 5DII? Definitely not. It's my new favorite camera. I still have the original 5D. I haven't used it since November 25th when I got the 5DII.
|
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:36:56 AM · #22 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
I dunno... I definitely prefer the images I'm getting from my 21mp 5DII over the older (but still awesome) 12.8mp I was getting from the original 5D. I, for one, don't want to go back.
My choice of using my 1DIII vs my 5DII usually comes down to frame rate or FF vs crop. If my 1DIII had 21mp and still managed to keep up the frame rate, I'd go for it. (though, admittedly, I'd have to buy a lot more storage) |
Yea 21 MP on a FF is ok. I was refering mainly to a crop sensor. The noise levels on a 12MP seem to become too high. It seems like FF sensors can go even higher than 21MP but as far as crop sensors I think 12 is enough. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 08:39:38 AM · #23 |
i would agree for 99.9% of the population 12 is enough
and for another .09999 up to 100 Mpix would be fine
and for another .00000999 up to 1000Mpix would be fine
and for another ,,,
you get the idea ... |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 09:03:02 AM · #24 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
Originally posted by violinist123:
Still waiting for Canon to release the 5DmkII-Lite so I don't have to pay for a video camera in my slr... |
Are you paying extra for the video? The 5DII came out costing LESS than the original 5D and yet offers more. That's a major win in my book. |
I'm sure it isn't included for free. I would rather not pay for an unwanted feature that's all. |
|
|
|
03/06/2009 12:02:11 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by violinist123:
...The alternatives require more technical knowledge to appreciate than the average happy snapper is going to have (or care to have). |
Originally posted by kirbic:
I thought the happy snapper was the turtle living in the creek out back... ;-)
Not sure I completely agree that tech knowledge is required. If the thing just works, cranks out great images in low light, and things print up great without lots o' messin', plus the camera is between the size of a 5D and a P&S, they may well have found a broad market. |
Originally posted by spiritualspatula:
Well, just because a camera works well in the real world doesn't mean it will work well in the consumer's eyes. I think what violinist123 is getting at is that dynamic range isn't a simple, quantifiable value for most consumers. Yes, there is a value, but it means nothing to the average clueless consumer, who consumes more than the picky and wise consumer. It's marketing hype. Go to a big electronics place and they have two or three attributes for the camera- zoom range (given in X increments) and megapixels are always two of them. |
Well.....I'm one of those people that's not too terribly technically oriented, but knows enough to make a reasonably intelligent camera buying decision.
Not only can't I afford cameras like the 5D MKII or the D3/D3X, I am not really sure I *want* to carry around $10K worth of equipment in my world.....I'd constantly be worried about the d@mn thing!
I'm not making my living from it; I am starting to get much better customer requests to a point where I desperately need to upgrade, and though moving up to a D200 from my D70 would be a good step, I really want the D300 for all of the better technical touches that would make it a easy 4-5 year keeper for me.
My D70s has served me well, but technically, and capability-wise, it's pretty dated now.....and as the D200 is approximately the same vintage, I don't see any good reason not to save for the D300.
I like the thinking behind Oly's stance, and it speaks to someone like me who doesn't make his living with his camera, yet demands soooooo much more from his camera than the average person. I think that there are enough of us slightly better informed users who don't demand the absolute latest & greatest to support their theory.
I really don't think Olympus is making any bad moves because in the first place I'd be willing to bet that the average Joe may not have even ever heard of them. The people that have them seem to be fiercely loyal to them, and they seem to pay attention to hwta the company's doing, so I believe that their move has merit.
Time will tell!
|
|
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: 09/26/2025 07:11:21 PM EDT.
