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

231–240 of 384 posts

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#231

Post by bayindirh »

ISL wrote: post #229
bayindirh wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sony's image sensor fab business is a bit different. First of all, there's two companies: Semiconductor and Imaging. Sony opens some of their technologies to other customers by transferring Imaging unit's patents to Semi and allows them for re-licensing. So, not everyone is using the same sensor even if they are coming out from the same fab. Second, there's customer tailored sensor business. Sony can provide a custom…

Totally agreed, but if that one fab company falls over, much of the imaging industry has a problem. That's the monoculture.

In bigger semiconductor business we have three main fabs. Intel, TSMC, Global Foundries. Intel is closed to outside customers, so again we have a duopoly there.

It's not very very different in the bigger picture if you ask me.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#232

Post by lifeformed »

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…

> it feels like you get the same kind of judgement that Android users experience when they show up with green texts in iMessage.

Is this a real thing? Do people actually care about that?

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#233

Post by barbegal »

pkulak wrote: post #153
barbegal wrote: post #31

Photography is one of those areas where devices don't go obsolete very quickly. With a good lens from 50 years ago I can still take an excellent photo on a digital camera from 15 years ago. Sure you won't have all the bells and whistles of the latest cameras and you'll sacrifice a few stops of dynamic range but for the average hobby photographer that doesn't really matter. The only customers who will upgrade every fe…

Man, I hate this phone analogy. Every shot I take with M43 looks nothing like anything taken with a phone. I just took these shots a couple days ago, for an example. There's no way you get anything close to this with a phone. https://photos.app.goo.gl/TSFhhA5igk1iEfRbA

Which is true, but very few professionals would use a Micro four-thirds camera to take these type of photo over a DSLR.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#234

Post by sudosysgen »

bayindirh wrote: post #222
ISL wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Sony's image sensor fab business is a bit different. First of all, there's two companies: Semiconductor and Imaging. Sony opens some of their technologies to other customers by transferring Imaging unit's patents to Semi and allows them for re-licensing. So, not everyone is using the same sensor even if they are coming out from the same fab. Second, there's customer tailored sensor business. Sony can provide a custom…

I know that Canon had fabs for their sensors at least back in the day, probably also now.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#235

Post by etangent »

_ph_ wrote: post #190
eropple wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point M43 is, in my neck of the woods, basically a video format anyway. I do on-site videography (my schtick being "we can run a four-camera live show from anywhere I've got Ethernet and power") and all my cameras are M43 because they hit a great spot on the price/quality curve. (Sony's APS-C cameras are very respectable too, but the glass is pricey.) Never used an Olympus, never understood the point of one.…

Never used an Olympus, never understood the point of one. I see a connection there :). The Olympus cameras are extremely capable, yet small in size. An E-M10 or E-M5 have a tiny body and there are extremely compact lenses to match them. Yet, despite the smaller sensor (compared to 35mm) you don't sacrifice much of image quality (or none at all for many tasks) due to the excellent lenses.

> The Olympus cameras are extremely capable, yet small in size.

That advantage evaporated after Sony released A7 in 2013, which was almost equal in size yet contained a vastly larger and more capable sensor. Olympus hung on while A7 line was still expensive, but now that one can get an older used model for as much as a new micro-four-thirds one, Olympus bit the dust. Many saw this coming for a long while.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#236

Post by sudosysgen »

lifeformed wrote: post #232
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…

> it feels like you get the same kind of judgement that Android users experience when they show up with green texts in iMessage. Is this a real thing? Do people actually care about that?

Oh yeah. Lens snobbery is definitely a thing.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#237

Post by tormeh »

Derbasti wrote: post #135
Someone1234 wrote: post #14

That's a legitimate shame for open standards. M43 has its proponents and critics, but either way it is rare to see a somewhat successful multi-vendor standard in photography that actually worked . The main problem is that the market itself has been shrinking, and there's just not enough room to have so much competition (Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, Fuji, Canon, and Nikon). M43 was successful, but it succeeded in an area…

But where are those small cameras? Panasonic's GM series is all but abandoned, and the E-M10 is hardly small compared to a Fuji X-E3 or Canon M50. To me, that always felt like M43's Achilles heel; it promises to be small and light, yet most kits actually end up just as big as APS-C. I still love my GM1, though.

It is pretty small, especially when you look at lenses. When I go on short vacations, I can fit my M43 Olympus and three lenses into the same carry-on backpack I simultaneously pack all my clothing, electronics and bathroom accessories in. I've owned an APS-C before, and realistically speaking you'll have to pay extra for check-in luggage and wait at baggage claim if you're going to bring such a camera.

This is obviously all nonsense if you're enthusiastic (or professional) enough, but I struggle to bring my camera along as it is.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#238

Post by Zombieball »

etangent wrote: post #235
_ph_ wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never used an Olympus, never understood the point of one. I see a connection there :). The Olympus cameras are extremely capable, yet small in size. An E-M10 or E-M5 have a tiny body and there are extremely compact lenses to match them. Yet, despite the smaller sensor (compared to 35mm) you don't sacrifice much of image quality (or none at all for many tasks) due to the excellent lenses.

> The Olympus cameras are extremely capable, yet small in size. That advantage evaporated after Sony released A7 in 2013, which was almost equal in size yet contained a vastly larger and more capable sensor. Olympus hung on while A7 line was still expensive, but now that one can get an older used model for as much as a new micro-four-thirds one, Olympus bit the dust. Many saw this coming for a long while.

While the high price of an A7 probably slowed new customers rushing to Sony over Olympus I think the primary reason customers stuck with Olympus was "vendor lock-in" with lens mounts. People likely bought multiple m43 mount lenses to go with their Olympus or Panasonic. A customer would be more likely to buy another one of these brands if they had an existing lens collection over switching to the A7.

Note: I am reluctant to use the term vendor lock-in as the idea behind m43 was to have multiple camera manufacturers adopt a common lens mount. The fact that Sony and Canon have their own mounts is a net negative in my opinion.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#239

Post by entropea »

drummer wrote: post #91
noncoml wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but your reply only makes my argument stronger, that is that Canon is not the king anymore, as it used to be for DSLRs.

Lol just wait for the upcoming two bodies being announced in a few weeks. Canon is going to trash the competition. And the new lenses are unmatched.

Sony also has new bodies being announced in a few weeks and Sony's lens lineup is already unmatched. Even Sigma ART glass beats out most Canon lenses in DXOMark's tests and cost much less.

Re: Olympus quits camera business after 84 years

#240

Post by sudosysgen »

mauvehaus wrote: post #113
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,…

If you don’t need autofocus, mirrorless and adaptors for old glass are a killer and cost-effective combo. I bought an a7ii and PK and M42 adaptors, and I couldn’t be happier. The body is full-frame, and the flange distance is so small, you can probably adapt any mount to it, with the possible exception of some of the old rangefinder mounts. I picked up a 50 mm f/4 Macro Takumar for under $100 on eBay. I already had a…

Absolutely! I did the exact same - got myself an MD 50 1.4, Vibitar Series 1 70-210, and a Tokina 35-70 2.8, all for under a hundred dollars (!)

To note, you don't have to isolate yourself to manual focus - there are to manual to autofocus adapter for the Sony E mount. Indeed, there's the original Techart LM-EA7, as well the much cheaper knockoff that is the Fotodiox Pronto. As far as I know, this is one of the few instances of an American knockoff of an innovative, expensive Chinese product :). The knockoff is so egregious that it actually can use firmware updates from the original.

If you do decide to go with the knockoff, it's only about 170$ to make your manual lenses autofocus, though it's slightly slower than native and doesn't work in video. It can't completely autofocus lenses longer than 135mm, so if you're shooting telephoto you will need to focus very roughly and then it will correct it.

Post reply on HN