Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 384 posts

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#101

Post by eropple »

cannam wrote: post #87
eropple wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My three primary cameras right now are a LUMIX G9 (newest, the recent firmware upgrades put it on par with the GH5 for what I do and it has a full-size HDMI port which matters a lot ), a GH4, and a G7; my off-cam/desk webcam is now my oldest camera, which is a GH3. The latter three all have the same sensor but the GH3 is a lot slower and has worse dynamic range and internal processing.

Gosh, this is educational. I've always assumed (as a happy Olympus user) that m43 was mostly a photography format, and video people were all using Canons. I've recently been hooking up my Olympus as a webcam, through tedious necessity - and of course it took a bit of adapting. I had no idea any mirrorless camera had a standard full-size HDMI port on it.

I know some Canon video people, and they definitely have a reason to do that at the "big" end (C100 and up): the Canon autofocus stuff is the real deal. But I don't shoot dynamic environments for video--I run video game events and mostly shoot static angles (players, commentary, the venue, etc.). In my realm--not film, but video--what I see on the high end are Sony A7's and Blackmagic Pocket Cinemas (the 4K is M43, the 6K is EF-mount), with a lot of LUMIXes and a few (very few) Canon mirrorlesses. Some people use Fujis they already own for photo stuff. Nikon does not exist.

The G9 and GH5 both have full-size HDMI (the GH4 does with the bottom adapter we all call "the Brick") and lemme tell you: it is a life-changer. Having to balance micro-HDMI (G7, GH4) and mini-HDMI (GH3) cables were bad enough and I look forward to adding more G9's to the kit so I can stop doing it entirely.

Video is a real rabbit hole, though, and not having to spend wild money on video cameras for completely acceptable quality has really helped me out. The way I typically run is that I go from the camera to a Blackmagic HDMI->SDI micro converter, but those top out at 1080p60--which is fine, currently, for stream-first stuff, but I'd like to move to "stream at 1080p, record for YouTube at 4K" as I turn my event production stuff into a real business--so I've added a Blackmagic Quad HDMI capture card that all of these cameras can just throw 4K60 at natively. Of course, SDI cables can run 100 feet and HDMI starts getting mad around 15, so there are baluns in my future, too...it's all weird.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#102

Post by oweqruiowe »

Shocker! I have owned two of their micro 4/3 digital cameras and loved them. Great rangefinder style in the $600 range with quality lenses in the box. I remember the first time I took the camera out with the telephoto lens and being shocked by the quality of the photos. Learned then that quality of camera + lens really makes a difference in nice looking photos.

Edit - replaced 'DSLR' with digital

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#103

Post by eropple »

cannam wrote: post #99
eropple wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're definitely cheap, but so are the Panasonics, like the G7. What I'm saying is that I don't know what Olympus brings to the table given that they're more photo-forward, but not really much better than the Panasonic cameras, and much worse for video. That 25mm Panasonic lens is a boss, though. I have two, along with the shorty 20mm Panasonic (which is not as good; it doesn't do AF-C, wtf?) and the 42.5mm Panason…

What Olympus brought was in-body image stabilisation. Panasonics never had it (maybe they do now? I haven't been paying attention lately) and it makes all the difference if your thing is photography with just any lens that will fit.

That makes a lot of sense now that I think about it. The G7 and later have Panasonic's newest lens stabilization stuff with compatible lenses but you don't see IBIS until you go up to the S1 full-frame, which costs as much as everybody else's full-frame and the lens selection isn't great so you might as well go buy a Sony A7-of-some-flavor.

I run and gun with the G7 for photos, as it is my lightest camera by far, and I've been pretty pleased with its fast focus and in-hand shooting, but I could see how it could improve.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#104

Post by auxym »

jagger27 wrote: post #97
ptero wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with 90% of your points: competition is healthy and sad to see a company go. The market today is a duopoly, with Canon and Nikon as two pillars of high-end DSLR world. This, sadly, is unlikely to change because high quality lenses are very hard to make. Development takes years and the market is relatively small. And as glass, even for a serious hobbyist, ends up being much more expensive than the camera body,…

They might control the DSLR space, but they certainly hold no candle to Sony, Fujifilm, and co in the mirrorless space. There’s no shortage of extremely high quality lenses there too. I thought mirrorless cameras were already outselling DSLRs.

Sony's A7 lineup seems to even be starting to take a large bite out of the high end DSLR market. I wouldn't be surprised to see them overtake Nikon soon.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#105

Post by geerlingguy »

jagger27 wrote: post #97
ptero wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with 90% of your points: competition is healthy and sad to see a company go. The market today is a duopoly, with Canon and Nikon as two pillars of high-end DSLR world. This, sadly, is unlikely to change because high quality lenses are very hard to make. Development takes years and the market is relatively small. And as glass, even for a serious hobbyist, ends up being much more expensive than the camera body,…

They might control the DSLR space, but they certainly hold no candle to Sony, Fujifilm, and co in the mirrorless space. There’s no shortage of extremely high quality lenses there too. I thought mirrorless cameras were already outselling DSLRs.

> I thought mirrorless cameras were already outselling DSLRs.

In volume, yes. In profit, it's still close, but mirrorless has been closing the gap for a long time.

And Sony used to be king of the hill with mirrorless, but Canon and Nikon have quickly caught up and the playing field is a bit more level (even as Sony holds the crown for most of the technical features).

The thing is, ecosystems matter a lot past the hobbyist stage and there are still a zillion more Canon and Nikon lenses floating around that people love and use.

That said, I now use both Sony (APS-C mirrorless) and Nikon (full frame DSLR), and like both for different things. But I wish I could have my Nikon lenses on my Sony (with no compromise), and wish Nikon made some of the great smaller-sensor size lenses that you can get for APS-C or micro 4/3rds.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#106

Post by ben7799 »

easygenes wrote: post #26
akersten wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Past a certain price point, kit from any brand delivers photos and photographic performance that one would have a hard time finding technically wrong or inferior to that of another brand. So by all accounts, we should see a lot of variety in the cameras and lenses that are used professionally. However, take a look at articles like this[0] to see just how prevalent Canon gear is at professional events. Apparently, the…

For professionals, a lot of that selection also comes down to serviceability. When Sony started gunning for more of the professional market with the A9 they had to up their service game and it’s still considered lacking.

Bingo.. having used Canon service quite a few times they are just fantastic at that part.

The brand wars are mostly an amateur thing.. once you decide on a brand if you're really serious and especially if you're running a business you don't jump brands over little differences in sensor performance because it's too much financial churn and you lose your muscle memory switching to a camera with a different control layout.

But it really sucks if your gear goes down and it's hard to get it serviced.

Canon's service is fast, excellent, and much more affordable than replacement.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#108

Post by anta40 »

akersten wrote: post #5

Sad to see them go - photography's such a great hobby and having competition in the space is healthy. There's a few brands out there still, but there is a noticable stigma in the professional community around equipment that isn't Canon. If you're not using L-glass, it feels like you get the same kind of judgement that Android users experience when they show up with green texts in iMessage. As a matter of principle, I…

> There's a few brands out there still, but there is a noticable stigma in the professional community around equipment that isn't Canon

Weird. How do arrive at that conclusion? Typically pros pick Nikon or Canon FF DSLRs. It's very common at least among photojournalists & wedding photographers.

Now mirrorless is the hot stuff. Sony/Fuji/Olympus started earlier, and after a few year, Nikon & Canon decided to join to camp.

If you are into high end studio/gallery work, you'll use medium format equipments like Hasselblad/Phase One/Fuji/Pentax.

An don't forget Leica. At least still historically relevant because their of of the pioneers of 35mm photography. Fine film cameras, but not really sure about their digital ones.

I still pick Nikon as my primary system, simply because the lens compatibility: old lens from the 60's/70's work fine on their FF bodies (those pre-AI lenses need to be modified first, though, unless you shoot with a DF). Can't say the same thing with Canon, which historically have different lens mounts (FL, FD, EOS).

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#109

Post by ksk »

ISL wrote: post #71
akersten wrote: post #5

Sad to see them go - photography's such a great hobby and having competition in the space is healthy. There's a few brands out there still, but there is a noticable stigma in the professional community around equipment that isn't Canon. If you're not using L-glass, it feels like you get the same kind of judgement that Android users experience when they show up with green texts in iMessage. As a matter of principle, I…

To me, the big monoculture risk is Sony's image-sensor fab. As I understand it, Sony, Fuji, Nikon and many others all rely upon the output of one company's manufacturing process. There's a good reason for it -- they appear to make the very best sensors (edit: in terms of dynamic range and noise) in the commercial-camera market. Canon makes their own sensors, which are good in absolute but not relative terms, which ap…

I don't think its quite accurate to say Canon sensors hold anyone back. Canon photographers continue to win awards, continue to create world-class images, etc, etc. Canon gear is very well represented in the professional photography community. They wouldn't be using the gear if they couldn't get their work done. There are several gear "measurebators" online arguing about base ISO DR and +6EV exposure recovery, who produce nothing with their cameras. We can safely ignore them :)

Sony sinks tons of money in their tech because other companies use them as a factory, so that makes total business sense (and along with samsung and a few others, they do have cutting edge imaging tech). Canon is different in that its much more vertically integrated so it rarely makes sense to drop millions of dollars on sensor fab upgrades unless they're going to make the money back. They have dozens of filed patents on all the technology that the competition is using, so I don't think they're lacking on the IP front.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#110

Post by Galaxeblaffer »

jagger27 wrote: post #97
ptero wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with 90% of your points: competition is healthy and sad to see a company go. The market today is a duopoly, with Canon and Nikon as two pillars of high-end DSLR world. This, sadly, is unlikely to change because high quality lenses are very hard to make. Development takes years and the market is relatively small. And as glass, even for a serious hobbyist, ends up being much more expensive than the camera body,…

They might control the DSLR space, but they certainly hold no candle to Sony, Fujifilm, and co in the mirrorless space. There’s no shortage of extremely high quality lenses there too. I thought mirrorless cameras were already outselling DSLRs.

It's all moving to mirrorless and in this space no one can beat Sony when it comes to lens selection, autofocus and price. Nikon, Sigma, Panasonic and Cannon have switched to new mounts for their mirrorless lines so obviously there isn't allot of native lenses yet.
Post reply on HN