As an ex Olympus Pro Photographer (35mm film days) watching this video made me realise ANOTHER big mess up Olympus made - Just listen to all those model numbers / iterations, OM this Em that mark this mark that etc etc - Jesus - create a camera and stick with it for at least a little while - no-one is going to buy an EMX/OM-E Mark iiia (or whatever) knowing that next week there wil be the Mark iiib and wondering if maybe they should have got the EOM-E mark11a or even waited for the Mark iv (a / b / c?).......
Olympus camera owner since 1973- probably 9 different Olympus cameras over that time period now have an OM-1. Love the computational features of the OM-1 as well as the weather sealing and ergonomics. Lenses are awesome. Pro-capture speed is great with the new sensor as is focusing. Love starry sky focus ability. Most camera video use is done off a tripod to record singing performances. Most "snapshot" videos are done on my Samsung S21 phone. My main use of the camera is photographs not video. I am feeling positive about the OM Digital Solutions future but not underestimating the challenges. I ignored the marketing regarding the "wow" factor and bought the OM-1 as it had the features I use the most.
Olympus EM1 M3 is enough for me. Best camera ever. Light and trustable, with 2x magnification. Mostly I don't need to carry a tripod to shoot many types of situations.
I think their move right now is in the right direction towards outdoor use. Olympus/om is the only ip rated weather sealed cameras on the market and their lenses seem to strike a good balance between weight and equivalent apperture :)
Valid points, Robin. As a counterargument I think the main thing Olympus has going for them is an unquantifiable something best described as user experience. Whenever I let full frame and aps-c boasting friends and ‘colleagues’ hold and use my EM-1 III with a matching pro lens they always end up mumbling something along the lines of ‘what a nice camera’. Back when I was in the market to upgrade from my tiny tourist EM-10 III to something to use on my reportages involving classic sailboats and the likes I looked at Nikon Fuji and Canon. In the end, though, I simply ended up with Olympus yet again. I need not worry about a wave hitting me whilst speeding through rough swells, the tiny camera doesn’t get stuck anywhere in all the ropes and wires and holding and using that excellent little body feels like second nature, really. The lenses have a wonderful rendering and as you always said: the whole setup doesn’t weigh me down one bit. The combination of the cute 12-45 and mentioned EM-1 is both very affordable and plenty sharp enough for a centerfold photo in a magazine and the versatility is amazing. I might not be an ambassador like you have been, but simply letting people hold the camera for a while has sold them on it quite a few times - even if they had Sony or Fuji already. Of course I would have loved all of these features in a full frame OM-4ti-like body with old Zuiko equivalent sized lenses but I’m afraid that’s just not possible yet. Never say never, though. Who knows what the future holds for us… Long reply, or at least longer than intended, but as a closer I’d like to thank you for all your efforts. You’re a great teacher on all things technical and very motivating and inspiring as well. Keep up the great work. Cheers!
Olympus probably gave up the video-centric market, but Panasonic sure didn't. They went the other way and became an important tool for serious videographers. So Olympus' failure wasn't a failure for M4/3. Just for Olympus.
It seems like some Japanese companies are too conceited and too slow to move with a market. Olympus with video features and Panasonic with phase-detect AF. I still hope for a G9 successor with Canon-like PDAF. I’m not holding my breath, however.
Panasonic is not going to add Phase defect auto focus, so stop it. Go get a wack Sony or the cheap Canons and enjoy your auto focus. Panasonic does not cater to youtubers, they cater to Real videographers, so learn manuel focus or go to another brand!!
As a filmmaker, I love Olympus, they do not cripple their lower end cameras like other manufacturers do. For example my EPL-9 shoots 52 Mbps in 1080p, while most lower end Panasonic cameras give you only 20 Mbps in 1080p.
My first SLR was an Olympus OM-1MD. I was 17 years old this was back in 1976. So yes, I will miss the company as I also miss Minolta. Fortunately camera companies continue to evolve and better technology will always be offered by present and new companies.
Funny enough, I got my hands on a used 1970s OM-1 and that made me do a deep dive on olympus. That led me to talking with some of the guys at my local camera shop and they let me play with a new om system om-1 and immediately fell in love with the ecosystem and ergonomics. I then sold my full frame sony kit and some of my film stuff. I now shoot with my EM1X and my film om-1 and then my film nikon n60. It's a solid kit for me and suits my needs as a portrait photographer.
Olympus should have made Zuiko branded lenses for multiple mounts. That was always their biggest strength. I will love to have a Nikon Z/Canon RF camera with Zuiko glass :)
That's much harder to do. You can. mount a FF lens on an MFT mount and it will work, just be a bit bulky. But you cannot mount an MFT lens on a FF camera, it will give a tiny circular image on the larger sensor. To do lenses for multiple mounts (and hence sensor sizes) they would need to be much bigger and heavier and thus negate what MFT is all about!
I changed Lumix g85 for Olympus E-m10 II and I am happy - I think that Olympus has better colors in photo and video is not important for me. But I would add to your video another point - Olympus is not so user friendly in terms of usage - Lumix is so easy to learn comparing to Olympus.
I love my OM-1, but my GAS tendencies are very drawn to full frame and APS-C, especially for landscape photography. It's easy to see how more megapixels and greater dynamic range at a competitive price point could trump the wonderful but less touted features of micro 4 3, for a number of potential customers. For example, see the Fujifilm X-H2 with 40 Mp for $1,999. Hopefully the lower price point and more compact form factor of the upcoming OM-5 will go partway towards reducing this gap, if it retains most of the features of the OM-1. Eventually, a higher megapixel option for landscapes would be great. If APS-C can have 40 Mp (assuming the image quality holds up), a 4 3 sensor should be able to have 30 Mp.
My point exactly, everyone is pushing progress, but Olympus M43 seems to stay stagnant especially in image quality and output. Let's hope they pay more serious attention before losing more customers.
I can relate I have a pulse lip and a song in here you're get lots of shots out of focus probably used for air I bought AX T3 great camera but the battery life sucks
@@xstensl8823 I can see a clear difference in image quality for landscapes when using hi-res mode, but it doesn't work so well on windy days. Hopefully 40 Mp will be like a high res mode that works on windy days as well. Also, 40 mp gives me more room to crop when my initial composition wasn't as good as I'd planned.
My favorite camera for travel and just bring around town is the EM-10 II. I wish it had a flip out screen and a mic jack. That would have made it my perfect travel camera.
Ah, the old flip vs. fully articulated screen debate ;) Personally, I specifically chose the E-M10 MkII over the E-M5 Mk II because of the flip screen. I find it's more discreet when shooting street from waist or chest level. However, I think I might like a third option even more: the vertical and horizontal articulating screen Fujifilm have, but only if it wouldn't be too chunky and would still be tough enough (I love the toughness of Olympus cameras generally!)
I'm new to your channel, I'm new to Olympus as well (well, I would say I'm new to OM System) but I love your way to review and be honest. Thanks for your work
Robin............You are so right. Nikon, Canon, Sony and Fuji an others have always included a 3.5mm Mic input on their consumer cameras. For Olympus to leave out this feature was and is beyond belief. Major camera sales are now to the consumer masses who have decided that they want to Vlog. No vlogger will buy a camera that does not stack up with video features. Olympus could have been a major player. I hope that the R & D department that was responsible for this stupidity were all sacked.
Most remarkable movement in the market I've seen is Fujifilm. How they seemed to have completely missed the boat when it comes to digital cameras and then all of a sudden take a significant share of the mirrorless market.
It also helps that they have the highly successful Instax camera brand. That does a lot to keep their brand front and center with consumers. Instax draws a lot of people into photography and I'm sure a fair percentage of those Instax customers buy a Fujifilm digital camera if they decide to upgrade because of their familiarity with Instax.
Olympus had a long history of tremendous innnovation but then being overtaken by competitors. 1959: the first Pen half-frame camera, a really tiny 35mm viewfinder camera. Canon and Minolta also adopt the format. 1963: introduces the Pen F, smallest 35mm SLR in the world with elecronic flash sync up to 1/500, not matched by any focal plane shutter camera for over 30 years. 1967: introduces Trip 35, similar design to the Pen but larger and full frame, sells over 5 million by 1984. 1973: OM-1 is the smallest full frame 35mm SLR in the world, from day one with lenses from 8mm to 1000mm and all cameras in the OM system could use motor drives without requiring any modifications. 1975: OM-2 is first camera with TTL flash metering, ironically based on Minolta technology. 1990: first bridge camera, the IS-1 introduced, called a zoom-lens reflex (ZLR). 2008: micro four thirds mirrorless system launched together with Panasonic. In all cases, the competition caught up. The Rollei 35 in 1966 was as small as half-frame 35mm cameras but was full frame, many competitors arrived soon after. Pentax introduced the ME in 1977, just a hair smaller than the OM-1, Canon AE-1 in 1976 was almost as small, Nikon EM in 1979, etc. and "power winders" for SLRs became commonplace (Canon would be first to build the motor into the camera in 1983 with the T50). Pentax, Nikon and Minolta were the earliest competing SLRs with TTL flash beginning in 1980. Bridge cameras really took off with digital cameras and we know about mirrorless. Ironically, despite all their innovations Olympus has never been as successful as their competitors. Their headstart with mirrorless, IBIS, weather sealing, etc. wasn't enough to survive the onslaught of Sony. I think the Sony A7 is what reallly drew Canon and Nikon to finally go mirrorless, not m43 or even Fuji X.
Sad but true on the pricing. There are other minor things, Take the battery, the grip and the lack of an external charger. The make a different package in the battery from the EM1mke, Em1ml3 and EM1x? Was that battery not good enough? Why make a different grip? I find the HLD-9 more appealing than the HLD-10. OM-S Do not need to follow other camera companies in changing the grip with every camera. Why must OM-S follow the phone companies. You want to sell these to the professionals and you don't give them an external charger? How can you use the camera if you need to charge the spare battery?
As others have said, their biggest mistake was the financial scandal, and putting the bulk of their R&D into the medical division, and adding audio recorders. Historically Olympus was an optical company, which is why their lenses have always been so good, and it was Maitani who put them on the camera map. Admittedly, they were a bit slow in the moving to digital and developing a solid professional camera system, but keeping Maitani's heritage and producing small, compact cameras may have played against them, as it did when the original OM-1 was released in the 1970s, because they were completely different to what professionals were used to (such as the shutter speed dial around the lens mount). The thing was, when people actually used them they soon realised how good they were and stuck with (I'm still shooting an OM-1, which I started using in the '70s). But that was the 1970s, when film cameras were simpler and electronics were just beginning to appear in cameras, for which the OM-2 was a big innovation. And back then, there wasn't the same drive to bring out new cameras every year, like now. It's the curse of big business with profits to chase and shareholders to satisfy, which inevitably led to the accounting scandals. Although M4/3 has always been an underdog in the macho "size matters" world of photography, Olympus were still innovating with the resources and market share they had. Let's face it, Canon and Nikon were very slow in moving to mirrorless, and probably only did it because of competition from Sony, an electronics megacorporation and not a traditional camera maker that had to partner with other companies for lenses etc, but they did have almost a monopoly on sensors. The fact that OMDS still carry the Olympus name does make me wonder if Olympus still has some sort financial investment in the OMDS through some accounting and corporate manoeuvring. With regards to the new OM-1, I've only had a little play with it (I won't pay that sort of money, not even for a full-frame camera) but it does just feel like an incremental upgrade from the EM-1iii, with a (long-overdue) new sensor, menu system and processor. It's very nice, but a bit overpriced. One other mistake I think Olympus/OMDS have made is over-focussing on wildlife photography. I understand it is just marketing, and specifically aimed at promoting the 150-400 and some of their other long lenses, but the cameras are capable of so much more, and are the perfect tool for photojournalists, documentary and sports photographers, with their robust, weather-sealed bodies and lenses as well as the compact size of the cameras and the fantastic lenses, which makes them the perfect tool for working in the field and other extreme environments. And 20MP is more than enough for nearly all print magazines and newspapers, and 4:3 ratio is better for a lot of print sizes too. As for video, Olympus was a photography centric company, and didn't really need to add lots of video features. Panasonic (another electronics giant like Sony) did that much better, already having a well-established video division, but they didn't do so well with stills. And BlackMagic did an even better job with M4/3 for video. Olympus sticking primarily with stills was actually a good idea as most still photographers aren't that interested in video and didn't need anything beyond the implementation it had, which was similar to what the Canon 5D Mk2 had, which kicked off the whole DSLR video "revolution". And let's face it, M4/3 is plenty big enough for anything up to 4K, and who really needs to shoot bigger than 1080P anyway?
I seldom do more than 1080, I understand. However if you are primarily a videographer you will want 4k now or if you don't need it know you want it now to be future proof.
I totally agree. I think that some of the blame should go to the market and non Olympus users, in the sense that, as you said referring to the original om-1, people looked down at it until they tried it and changed their mind. It seems to me that today is the same, where most people think that bigger is better (50mpx, full frame, 8k video...), so they don't even consider MFT as a whole, going instead for bigger systems thinking wrongfully they need those 30 or 50 mpx just because of marketing and some really picky "photographers" who love pixel peeping and provide misleading advices. If more people gave MFT a chance, I'm sure they would change their mind (and save some money too).
I suppose future proofing requires video it seems , but for a photographer who has no interest in blogging or video sector in making films , as I want a great camera for stills only . It is not just price that governs sales in a financial recession , it is goods that can deliver and will be capable of a long life . Therefore , future proofing is retaining stock of parts to conduct repairs and a willingness to update software on older stock to retain their value going forward . A small fee would be often agreeable if we only want to create pro cameras , but amateurs were always a backbone of the industry and enabled the professional to benefit . The new camera firm needs only to return with an EM10 model with a 24 megapixel sensor and call it the EM20. Price should be no greater than £800 with revised standard kit lens that was a fixed focal length . That could be from Sigma , who make very affordable glass . In short . Don’t bother inventing what already exists , but produce something new that youngsters will want and can afford . The rest of the market will follow and will move to pro line as and when it needs to .
I have talked about them prioritizing wildlife photography so I did not repeat it here. I agree with you. That was a huge, huge mistake. But I shall stop here before I get attacks from all the wildlife photography die-hards.
@@joestrahl6980 In Olympus you need 4K because their 1080p is absolutely terrible. You need to record in 4K and downsample in-post to get good quality.
Olympus didn't have a "downfall"....they evolved as a company and were forced by some shareholders to spin off the camera division. Not to say they haven't made mistakes, but Canon and Nikon have made much bigger ones.....
Well.....how many cameras does Olympus sell compared to say ten years ago? Now....that's true of every camera company. But Olympus sells significantly less than them. Not to mention that they simply don't have any strategy to deal with mobile (smartphones) or ariel (drones). And they are not a brand of choice for pros and content creators. So who is their audience? A fairly small one. That's not success. That can absolutely be called a downfall. The same can be said of Nikon. Canon is not anywhere in the same boat as they are more diversified in printers/photocopiers, and medical equipment (MRI, CT scan, X-ray) and they have deeper pockets to invest into RnD and they have mostly been able to pivot. Plus Canon simply has more brand equity than Olympus. Olympus is successful in medical equipment. They are in fact the number one brand in endoscopy equipment. Especially with their partnership with Sony where they make medical equipment together. But in cameras it's entirely fair to call it a downfall.
Nikon Canon and Sony did not get rid of their full frame and DX sensors. I think that was the point at which Olympus had a downfall. I was so fed up with my E5 image quality compared to Nikon that I ended up buying Nikon gear and basically stopped using my Olympus E-5 then. A LOT of Olympus users did the same. Letting their Olympus gear gather dust.
@@christophergrove4876 Which is odd, because the E5 was a DSLR that was easily the equal of anything Nikon or Canon was producing at the time. Not to mention that both of those companies were having *huge* numbers of cameras sent back for one issue or another.
@@mromagnoli E-5 easily equal to anything Canon or Nikon was producing at the time lol. Tell me you’ve never shot a Nikon D800 or 5D Mk iii without saying it. 🤣
@@marike1100 The E5 was introduced two years before either of those cameras. You've told me how little you know about the advancements of camera tech at that time. A closer comparison of those two would be the E-M1 mark one, which came less than a year after those two cameras....furthering Olympus paving the way to mirrorless as both Nikon and Canon continued to issue dinosaur crap to consumers and pros alike, who both gladly ate up their crap at the time that said mirrorless was both stupid and irrelevant. Gosh!
The only problem I had with Olympus is the price of their lenses. I realize that good optics cost money, but affordable high quality lenses would sell more cameras.
I was previously a Nikon user for about 10 years but because of the weight I wanted something smaller. So I sold my D610 and the 24-70 f/2.8G and bought the EM1 with the 12-24 f/2.8 lens. Initially I was happy but the camera kept back-focusing, even on still subjects. It became such a huge issue that I almost gave up on my Olympus setup but I decided to give it another chance (mainly due to getting used to IBIS and the weight) and bought the EM1 II. That camera was a big improvement. My focusing problem disappeared and the camera worked magnificently. As time went on I wanted to buy more lenses, mainly wide angle. I kept waiting for a 10mm or something like that that wasn't fisheye but it never came. The lens selection itself I felt was very limited for my needs. It seemed to me that either I had to pay 1000+ dollars for either a good wide angle or a good telephoto zoom lens, or pay little for low quality glass. Previously I had bought lenses from Sigma and Tamron for my old Nikon camera, but they didn't come out with anything (except for Sigma coming out with something that very quickly became discontinued.) There didn't seem to be any confidence in the system from any other brand than Olympus and Panasonic. And when I read that Olympus was getting out and sold its camera division I decided to stop looking for new glass because of lack of confidence in the future of M43. A while afterwards I read that Nikon had released an update on its Z6, so I decided to switch back to Nikon and bought the Z6 II with a 24-70 f/4, and I haven't regretted it. The EVF is much better, it has IBIS, great autofocus system and great low light performance. It is heavier compared to my M43 setup but the full frame mirrorless system has significantly lower weight compared to the DSLR. It was really unfortunate for the M43 system because I had confidence in it when I first bought the EM1 I.
Being an AMATEUR Pentax shooter, I feel they are in the same boat as Olympus. I think they catter to a niche like myself, who either doesn't care that much about video (I seriously don't give a crap about making video, I only want stills... and I wish I could buy a camera for cheaper that was void of any video option, but focus only on still photography) or those who simply have gotten used to a system and really REALLY love it. I can't tell you how much I feel at home with a Pentax, from button layout, to knowing exactly what kind of picture and colours to expect. I like getting my hands on all brands.. and no, Pentax isn't "better".. but to me, they FEEL better (in my hands, for my own taste and feel). It's the only system I feel extremely at home with button layout, menu system and just the way options are set. I really like Olympus too, I hope the new head company treats them well. Ricoh seems to respect Pentax, so there is that.
Aside from mistakes in the imaging business wasn’t the parent company embroiled in some accounting scandal….personally speaking I thought that had more impact than any mistakes made at Olympus Cameras.
@@robinwong True, but the cost of the scandal to the parent group was high. Selling the imaging business may have been the best way to quickly plug the hole. (Purely speculation, they haven't shown me their accounts! :-) And if JIP could see the same issues you are talking about they thought they were fixable - and so far seem to be moving that way. At least they have identified a clear target market(sports/wildlife) and tried to build a great camera for those communities. Can they do the same for other communities? The next 1-2 years will see them thrive or die.
Thanks for sharing - Interesting opinion. As I'm not too video at all on my olympus I actually don't care about vlogging capabilities. For me size, weight and weather sealing is why I use my OMD. I still use my EM5MII as secondary body and can't tell whether the photo is from it or my EM1MIII - not because of the missing quality increase but because image quality was already good enough for me. For me the sensor could have improved more towards low light performance rather than more frames per second. The price however - yes the OM1 is too expensive for what it's offering compared to the EM1MIII. Hope they will still be around for long time.
Sadly, once upon a time, the situation was opposite. When I purchased EPL3, some 12 years ago, I was excited to learn that is has an excellent video capabilities (continuous light measurement and stabilization during the exposure in 1080p) and a two-channel audio, although through the built-in mic. It was, and still is, quite a good travel "companion", both as a photo camera and a video cam...
My main problem with Olympus was too many cameras, some at very high price. There was more order in 4/3 camp. Jems were lost in bunch of mediocre cameras. Efforts should have been towards design of lenses at better price. 4/3 had entry-mid level-top for both lenses and bodies. That was much easier to navigate.
A few thoughts: 1. Olympus has never been as popular as Canon or Nikon. 2. The body does not take photos by itself. The kit is a body and a lens. Then the m43 still has the advantage when traveling or in rough terrain, for example. 3. Nikon was on the brink of bankruptcy not so long ago. He survived thanks to big financial help from Fuji. 4. I am not defending Olympus here. Perhaps the brand will not survive. If this happens, it will be a big loss for the photographic market.
I agree with your points. Olympus was never the top player, and does have some advantages over other cameras. But they also need to quickly adapt to current market demands. Because if they don't people can just buy other options, which we are not lacking of.
Fascinating. My father was quite loyal to Olympus cameras up through their early digital offerings (before M4/3), and I always quite liked their offerings when I borrowed them, so I've wondered how they ended up where they are.
consumer market shrunk and m43 is just not good enough for professionals considering the price. there's simply no reason to choose m43 when you can get full frame for almost the same price (keep in mind you need some fast primes on m43 to keep up with full frame in terms of image quality)
@@jmicah76 even the e1mx, mine gave my sony a9 a run for it's money. I actually traded all my sony ff stuff in and moved to olympus with the m43 mount.
Hi, Robin. I am Finn Wang (strangely not asian). I have followed you closely, have been inspired by your presentations and enthusiasm. I know what it feels like to be betrayed by someone you have given your best. I invite you to experience Norway and the exceptional nature this country has offer. You have to pay your own airline tickets, but after that the fair is covered. I switched from Nikon to Olympus when they launched the OMD EM1 and have never regretted the decision. It is now up to you. I can promise you a lifetime experience. Kind regards, Finn
I’m shooting with 3 Olympus bodies regularly right now; the EM5MkIII, EM1MkIII and a PEN-F along with an array of m4/3 and older (but still fantastic) 4/3 lenses. While I agree that Olympus has been slow to improve on the present sensor, I kind of like that all 3 cameras give me similar quality in the final image. That way I’m ready to go with a different lens on each body at a moment’s notice and don’t ever feel like I’m compromising. All that said, if OM Solutions does come up with an upgraded m4/3 sensor, I’ll probably jump on it!
Hi Robin. Technology Connections just released a video on the Olympus Pen EES-2, a camera released in 1961. An interesting peculiarity is that this camera shot half-frame, doubling your exposures per roll of film. It also features automatic exposure settings (well, namely just the aperture), and doesn’t require a battery. It’s an interesting piece I think you’d enjoy. Wishing you the best from California, US.
Mr. Wong, I really like how you are not an Olympus ambassador anymore. That way you can really talk about the pros and cons of the Olympus camera ecosystem. I feel like alot of Olympus ambassadors are biased when it comes to their review, etc. Thank you for your honest opinions and reviews now
I think one glaring mistake is Olympus abandoned the FF market. Although M43 does have inherent advantages - particularly smaller, lighter lenses with 2x crop factor (great for macro, birding and wildlife!) - many photographers want that larger FF sensor for less noise, greater DR, and shallower DOF (when desired). They could have made a FF line of Zuiko branded lenses which have become world renowned, that could be easily interchanged between FF and M43 bodies, as well as create the M43 line of lenses (just as Nikon has FX and DX compact lenses). They should have designed the OM-D mount larger, large enough for a medium format sensor. I think if Maitani were still alive, things would have been a lot different at Olympus. I look at my OM-2n, 2S and 4T film bodies (fantastic cameras!) and often wonder why they just did not put a digital framework around that body design, with a FF sensor. Oh yes and I agree with everything you said too - particularly about video and pricing.
And also not taking care of customers. In Spain the customer service is horrible. They don’t fulfill the promise of their promotions and do not send the lens that has been on promotion with the purchase of the camera…!!! These are the details that should be of paramount importance for the brand, in order to obtain customer loyalty..!!!
The camera division was spun off not because it wasn't successful, but because the direction and "politics" in Olympus changed. In fact, the investors who forced that spin-off divested from Olympus (sold their investment shared and left) within a few months of forcing the sale/spin-off. The financial scandal(s) were a burden for the company in general. That Olympus did not have particularly good marketing people was a HUGE issue. Consumers had all kinds of misconceptions about M43 in general, and they did nothing to remedy that or educate. OMDS is a bit better in marketing, apparently realizing that was a problem. Lastly....your keep mentioning "content creation" as if video is the only content worth creating. Before the video trend of the last few years, photos were absolutely the content many were creating and what was widely popular. Olympus did not see the trend in video, but neither did Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax for that matter. While Sony gave it some attention, but really only launched well into that relatively recently....and they certainly have been more nimble about responding to that market. Your whole video smacks of someone who doesn't know how the industry works, and conveniently ignores major points of tech history.
Hi Robin, I always enjoy your channel. I just thought it is a bit harsh to say that Olympus has had a Downfall. They are still trying hard to cope with the challenges all camera manufacturers are struggling with. I agree with all your statements, especially about their pricing. However, on the second-hand market, you can now buy Olympus cameras with features that are far superior to other cameras of the same price. I have an Olympus OM DE M5 mII a s well as a full-frame Sony. For some reason, that I do not understand myself, the Olympus is still my go-to camera when I am travelling. Best wishes from Scotland. Louis
The truth is the truth. Olympus decided to close down their imaging business and sell it off. If that is not a definition of downfall, I don't know what is. If they were successful, if the company was making healthy profit, why did they give up on the business?
@@robinwong "Having had several conversations with Olympus reps at NECCC this year, they (and OM Solutions) are a much better company following the acquisition. The reps are MUCH happier employees because the company is lean and flexible and able to focus on the core products as opposed to previous when they had to bend to the (parent company) Olympus bureaucracy, share in the Olympus mistakes, and the lack of focus on the imaging division (and their core products). I would think that the unmitigated success of the OM-1 proves them right. Regardless of the past, I would also think that the success of the new company would make it a tasteful property if OJ Holdings ever decides to sell it off." (CSARmedic from 43rumors). And it''s not the only person who said that. The employees are happier and free to be more flexible.
The fact that Olympus cameras are great second hand buys tells you a number of important things. Firstly it indicates as robin says, they are over priced new. It also tells you the cost of ownership if you buy new is big. If you sell your camera to upgrade, you don't get much back. Finally it also tells you about the slow innovation. The fact that old cameras are 90% of the quality and features of the current flagship is really going to hurt second hand prices of newer models. I saw an om-d e-m1 ii in very good used condition in my local camera shop for £375. The om-1 is £1999 new. Given that for most shots you'd not be able to tell which camera it was taken on,the older camera looks the best bet.
Hi, You are fully right, I never stopped to think this points before. I owned a ranged 35LC as a companion for my travels ( excelent definition for slides) an E-500, an EPL-1, EM5, and a EM1 MkII. Using flaship camera sensor in cheaper models could be a reason to sell them, but the opposite for pro models. The same image quality of EM1 Mark III is a good argument to sell EM10 Mark IV. Around 2006 or 2007 I asked Olympus why not a rangefinder or similar, by removing the mirror, the lens could be closer to the sensor. So lens construction could be simpler, more efficient, easier and compact. DSLR capabilities built into a tiny package. I never got a response. EP1 was launched in 2009.
Pretty good list of reasons as to why Olympus has such a big downfall with their camera business. I think it's fair to say that pretty bad mismanagment across the board led them to having to sell their camera business.
What one likes in a camera is very much a personal thing based on what one uses it for. I, for instance, take almost exclusively stills and mostly travel and outdoor events shots. For me the EM5 II is perfect for this. I have SONY APS-C cameras as well which I use in some circumstances but there is no equivalent as yet in SONY APS-C to the weather resistant, magnesium alloy, superb IBIS, ergonomic, stylish EM5 ii body and the weather and dust resistant lens lineup that Olympus offers. With SONY, one would have to go full frame to get similar features at much greater cost, size and weight when one includes the lenses. Yes, APS-C and Full frame are superior in low light and provide greater resolution if one does extensive cropping but for "tourist" use I love Olympus gear. What I find is missing is a rangefinder style equivalent to the EM5 with an EVF. Something like the PEN F but weather sealed. I would even be happy with a weather sealed version of the EPL-10 if it had a good viewfinder.
Camera marketing is beyond me. I spend a lot of time researching other camera gear. Yet Olympus products are still the best fit for me, a travel-centric hobby photographer, no video. While I enjoy Robin's videos, his camera priorities do not match mine. In fact no UA-cam photography channel aligns with my camera priorities. I want simple to use, relatively rugged, compact gear. I do not care about shallow depth of field. For travel and landscape photos backgrounds in focus is desirable. My new high-end cell phone takes nice photos but my Olympus gear (EM-5 MKIII, EM-1 MKII) is still much better, meaning it easily produces photos that please me.
Agree. I am just considering now upgrading from EM10.2 to EM1.3 just because of the landscape/travel photography and the high res shots using my pro lenses.
I think one of the biggest flaws was the AF that was not really good for birdwatching. Having long lenses with the 2x crop factor. Now the OM-1 have a much better AF but in the meanwhile other brands like Sony produced more reliable AF. Olympus was also pretty slow on developing new lenses. It took years to have a 100-400. And before the 300/4 there were no solutions longer than the 40-150 + mc14. Other brands could had benefits of the various sigma and Tamron 150-600.
Without the rhetoric, the sensor in the latest Olympus cameras work fine . So how do you intend to improve them ? What size images do you work with . I understand that past employees must be disappointed but that is a side issue to the actual cameras. We have mentioned cameras , but the lenses are really -out there.
I shoot on the E-M1 mk ii and absolutely love the thing. I primarily shoot wildlife and landscapes while hiking in the mountains around my home in British Columbia. The system is ideal because of it's compact size and weatherproofing, and is what drew me to m43 in the first place. I don't film video so those limitations do not affect me at all. Olympus is the camera company that I identify with the most at this point, and I hope that OM finds a way to continue that legacy for the many people like me that exist.
Here's a HUGE example of the problem: Look at pricing on B&H Photo. An OM1 body & 300mm f4 PRO lens costs $4,800 right now. A Sony A7 IV & Sony 200-600 zoom costs $4,396!!! $404 LESS!!! And Sony offers: better image quality, better AF, more control of DOF, better ISO performance, better dynamic range, and maybe most importantly - the future of Sony cameras does not seem to be on shaky ground. I have been fully invested in Olympus since I left full frame Canon years ago. It has really served me well and I have been happy with it. But, the things you mention are driving me away from staying within OM System going forward.
Bought my Olympus OM-1 in 1973. Very happy with my Olympus. Works still today like when new. Technology has sadly left it behind. However, I have kept it for occasional use. I can not duplicate yet digitally everything I can do with my set of lenses and my OM-1!
I sold my full frame gear (Sony a73) this year and invested in Olympus; am I crazy? Well, I needed some of the features Olympus had that Sony didn't. Really only thing the a73 was far superior in is low light. Can't really say anything else that I miss. But the advantages I get with my Oly, it was worth it. All that matters is if it matches your needs...if I needed low light a lot, would have kept my Sony 😉
My MkII is still great and I still love it. And I also have a Mk3 and an OM-1. All of them are great. If you are still happy with your Mk II, I would keep it
Thinking about this a couple of years later, and looking at the industry, I think that OM should bring out a new larger sensor camera and _maybe,_ a new mount. The only thing I question is whether they should approach another company and see if they could license a mount. The mount I would think would go well is the Nikon Z mount. It has potential, and despite the fact that Nikon is currently doing fairly well with it, they are not even close to a "strong" position. Two good brands making use of the mount would be good. If not that, then they should talk to Ricoh/Pentax about a new mount for the two companies.
Most of the points you made fall into the category of failure to continue investment in R&D. And, like the other camera manufacturers, Olympus failed to anticipate the impact of the iPhone camera. For my photography, a PEN-F, an E-M1 III and a mix of excellent MFT prime and zoom lenses will continue to serve well.
I need olympus/om to make a tiny camera for VLOGGING such EPL-10 or EP-7 but the big problem is LCD screen flips down and there are no MIC and 3.5mm(headphone) input. For HDMI/small HDMI I don't care because it is useless for travel VLOGGING. I like EPL-10 and EP-7 in IBIS with small form factor that Panasonic G100 can't give me like EPL10 or EP-7.
As a wedding and corporate photographer and videographer, I'm happy with my Nikon z9s and may end up leaving micro four thirds. I haven't sold my Panasonics but was very disappointed by the gh6.
2 роки тому+1
If you love something, you are almost in need to criticize it when needed, so I understand this completely. At some point they just lost touch. Another point I would add is THE NAMING, oh gosh, who decided to keep OM-D on the names. It's a pain to search for Olympus stuff online, not to mention the complete nonsense OM-1 which in most cases brings up the old one first because the switch from Olympus to OM-System or systems is so weird. At some point I was considering EM-1 III or OM-1, but at the, honestly, ridiculous price point, it really doesn't make sense anymore, when one can get APS-C or even FF cameras with much better features at the same price. Let's hope the OM-2(Please don't name it OM-Systems OM-1 Mark II) learns from some mistakes, it is very close! Thank you for your passion!
The opposition camera manufacturers plus mobile phones with Canara capabilities is making the market for everyone involved a difficult market to continue to do well in.
Your points are somewhat valid. However, most people don‘t have the time and knowledge to learn/operate a “tradition” camera. The popularity of the cell phone and its capablity to produce acceptable images is the key! Look around all the major camera brands, all of them are slowing down producing new models comapred to years ago…
Robin, I totally endorse your observations. I'll also add that Olympus, like so many other technology companies, failed to recognise that it's pointless investing money into developing innovative new features - such as their world-beating IBIS Image Stabilisation - unless you also invest money into educators who will explain how to use and get the best from your innovations. I make these comments as someone whose main career is now helping technology companies to educate buyers in how to get the best from their investment, as well as being a degree qualified professional photographer. It wasn't good enough that one of our ancestors invented the wheel. He/She also had to get people to understand what it's for. Which is why we (and Olympus / OMD Solutions) need educators like yourself and Rob Trek. Rick
Thank you Robin ... you speak the truth...I shoot with Olympus and Sony...coming from a Canon background. They all have their plus and minuses. It still boils down to the right camera for you. What is the tool that best helps you fulfill your vision? That can be the million dollar question.
I am a Pentax user, and wanted to try an Olympus especially their old CCD models. Both Pentax and Olympus are deeply rooted in photography like the Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm...etc. Especially Pentax is a super late comer to the video arena and many people gave up on it, but I don't think either Pentax or Olympus "failed", it was those videocentric shooter looking at the wrong place ! I find it silly shooting video with a DSLR/MLLC that was not designed to handle like that, you need to spend a lot to gear it up to make it easy to use, so why not invest on a real video camera, like the Canon XC15 and the like that also shoot stills ! video is not everything like photoshop is not a must have, as long as you are a real and experienced photographer you will be able to produce good result with the right tools.
I think you hit most of the major reasons Olympus failed. Smart phones were also a big factor. As you mention, the lagging video capabilities, for amateurs, this is huge and when your smart phone does better than your DSLR, there is a problem. Adding to this, for many amateurs, sensor size is a factor, not that they need it but larger seems better. Not leading with pro level products hurt and gave an opening for manufacturers to define the product as inferior based on sensor size alone. As for the OM-1, I bought one, but I returned it. Not enough feature/image improvements to entice me to give up the E-M1 mk3 and ergonomic choices that I really hated (embedding the too stiff dials for one).
Couldn't agree more! My E-M1 Mark II is still my favourite camera, BUT better resolution and better ISO performance means I now use a Nikon Z7. Is it technically possible to produce a four thirds sensor that produces better resolution and higher ISO performance??? If Digital Solutions came out with such a camera, I would be first to buy. OM 1 doesn't seem to be a 'remarkable' improvement hence never bought it.
Robin, you make some really valid points. I think another pricing issue that really hurt them was the price of some of their lenses. The 12mm prime was ridiculously priced and they are way over charging for the pro lenses too. When you look at the cost of the pro lenses vs great FF alternatives or Fuji it makes you very strongly consider switching because the price does not justify the cost. I know they are great quality but like you said so is everyone else.
My pet beef about the smaller cameras was their ridiculously high battery consumption when using the zoom. I needed spare batteries just on a day trip. Why couldn’t they have a manual zoom?
I must say when I started having interest in DSLRs and when on a research spree I'd say that the gear reviewers (DPreview) are to blame too. Because in every article the reviewers would say 4/3 sensor (before M4/3) is good but not better than APSC in the high ISO ranges. Back then I was very interested in night photography and for that I wanted a mid-range DSLR that would make super nice photos in the evening and night. So with that in mind I bought a camera that had an APSC sensor. If I didn't get influenced by those articles back then I'd probably had a Oly e-420/450.
Hi Robin, your videos are so clear and crisp that i could actually see each spray when you speak, no offense, it's just super sharp and clear 😃such as on 1:13 of video clip and other parts. i truly enjoy watching your videos because of your happy personality. Have a good day.
A lot of good points. The new OM camera for example is more expensive than a host of other full frame cameras that do it's job or better, so that was a huge misstep. In terms of video, I agree they could have syphoned off a lot of Panasonic buyers by simply upping their video specs in the short term.
So, I don't think Robin's wrong here, but I have a different take on why Olympus failed (it boils down to being greedy trying to push their lenses and high-end bodies). Here's my list of five mistakes: 1) PDAF. Olympus kept phase-detect autofocus out of the hands of their enthusiast-level customers for SIX YEARS. It was first introduced with the E-M1 in 2013, and didn't make it into the E-M5 line-up until the Mk III in 2019. PDAF should have been included with the E-M5 Mk II ('15) and then with the E-M10 Mk III ('17), and there was no excuse for leaving it off the PEN-F, given that it's priced basically the same as the E-M5 III. 2) MSC. Olympus made it nigh-impossible to use non-Olympus lenses with C-AF through an adapter (e.g., Metabones, Viltrox)---and only paid lip-service to Panasonic M4/3 lenses in terms of video AF performance---, making it really hard to transition to Olympus bodies from literally any other system. 3) Cheap, fast, AF lenses. Olympus Pro lenses are really something to behold. But a lot of people---especially on a 2x crop sensor---are more than willing to sacrifice image quality for a shallower depth-of-field, and Olympus has absolutely no answer for this. I suspect it's partly because CDAF suffers a lot with softer lenses, to which I would say, "see item (1)." 4) Focus-by-wire. I'm understanding of the fact that a clutch mechanism will add weight (and possibly bulk) to lenses, and that Olympus is targeting compactness, but focus-by-wire---not just Oly's, but in general---is... bad. Olympus knows it, too, or they wouldn't have included a clutch in all their higher-end lens offerings. 5) Kit lenses. The Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-5.6, and 14-150mm f/4-5.6 shouldn't exist, in my opinion. It's disappointing for inexperienced camera buyers to pay a lot of money for an ILC only to get the same depth-of-field as a high-end compact (e.g., Canon's G7 X, Sony's RX100), which is precisely what these lenses offer. The 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 is especially egregious, given that a major selling point of M4/3 is compactness and that Olympus makes the far more pocket-friendly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ pancake lens to boot. Olympus had an opportunity to break the mold and offer, for example, kits of either the 17mm f/1.8 or 25mm f/1.8 plus the 40-150mm f/4-5.6 II R, and that they didn't probably left a lot of people wondering why they didn't just buy a better cell phone.
they always tout the MFT as having faster readout speed, i expected them to already release a global shutter sensor right about now, i wouldn't mind having a 20MP sensor as long as it has global shutter, but they just kept improving incrementally
In 2011, I used SEMA-1for connecting an external microphone to my Olympus XZ-1. However, a few years ago, I chose Canon EOS M50 for my wife's UA-cam channel because M50 looks like Olympus E420, while Olympus E-M10 mark ___ looked more complicated, and you are right; I didn't see how to connect SEMA-1. If I had to buy a new one now, I'd buy Panasonic Lumix G100.
I like the TG-870. It has a lot of features that cameras from other companies do not have. I bought the TG-870, and I also bought the TG-830 years before. I watched your whole video all the way through, but you never talked about the "Tough" series. Maybe this type of rugged camera has been replaced by GoPro models, although I think the TG-870 has a lot of interesting features that GoPro cameras do not have.
Intriguing, and I am no Olympus expert. I have shot mostly Pentax and Nikon. I’ve found Pentax to be more focused on photography than vloging. I somewhat disagree with the video in that I don’t think a camera needs to do “everything”. I love that my Pentax are great at photography and only okay at video. That’s because I’m a photographer. I loves still image through real glass with a real viewfinder through the lens. I also like shooting something that is unique and funky. The little bit I used Olympus as a photographer, I enjoyed. I’m sad to see the brand fade.
All fair points Robin even on the OMD EM5 mkiii people compared that to the EM1 Mk II and chose the older camera even if it was 2nd hand as it was cheaper. So I think that shows that they also mis-managed their processor and indeed software dev. Even if the sensor is the same better UI, faster performance even untaxing software features like vertical video or separate photo/video custom modes can sway someone to upgrade or stay in a system. Sony is a good example of that, the sensor in the A6000 is the same as the A6600 but incremental developments to processors, software and hardware saw a progression which kept customers engaged…though they may have squeezed that 24mp sensor dry now I think 🤓
Back in the DSLR days the sensor quality was just too noisy to have JUST 4/3. They should have had a full-frame (or AT LEAST a DX) camera to bring out along side of the E-3 to E-5 to satisfy the pros while the sensors were being developed. (They had the full-frame lens tooling from the 35mm days... they should never have gotten rid of that back then.) Investing in 4/3 and micro4/3 ONLY was the biggest mistake. Pros would have stayed with them if they had both.
u are right~ Olympus cameras are really expensive and have no price advantage over other brands. Fortunately, the olympus and panasonic lens sets are reasonably priced
The digital age started so optimistically for Olympus, they made a number of innovations and the quality of their lenses was always excellent; but were also taking a risk in building a digital system from the ground up that wouldn't be backwards compatible and I think also pinning a lot of hope on the 4/3 system being so widely adopted that the idea of lenses that only fit one camera make would be consigned to history.
A used EP1 was my first mirrorless camera. It was fun to play around with old rangefinder lenses, but I was never super happy with the results. A few years ago I gave it to a family friend's kid who was showing interest in photography. I didn't fall in love with mirrorless cameras until I tried Fuji. I've been a Fuji-boy for the past 5-ish years now and I doubt I'll ever go back to anything else.
I agree. I was using E520 as my first DSLR. And then bought EP1. The small EP1 is gorgeous with champagne gold metal body. I still keep it today. I think nothing wrong as the first generation of the new format at that time. And I think they are not putting enough effort in marketing. They literally give the whole retro camera market to Fujifilm.
I don't mind lack of or no video functions, I would much prefer a photo oriented camera any day with a higher 30MP MFT sensor. I did fget a £400 discount on from Olympus UK this xmas though on a Em1 3 for macro photography, so I can't complain on the price. I also have FF and APSC. I enjoy all of them.
I was seriously looking forward to the E-M5 III when it was coming out, but the build of the camera was a serious disappointment. Replacing a great metal body with a brittle plastic one? And with micro-USB, several years after USB-C had become the standard? On top of that, it was quite a bit more expensive than the similarly specced Panasonic Lumix G90 and Fuji X-T30, and in many cases dangerously close to the far more capable G9, X-T3 and for that matter E-M II. I'm still waiting for that compact, affordable, well built and flexible MFT camera, but I'm losing faith in Panasonic, and if the rumoured OM-5 is either hobbled or overpriced, I'll probably start the transition to another system.
Biggest threat to compact cameras are mobile phone cameras . Not greater mega pixels . Full frame cameras are massive , which is why the quality OM brand should flourish.
Sometimes I personally have the impression, that modern photography has a lot to do with GAS. You hav many videos about "older" cameras and show how useful they still are. Does new requipment make you a better photographer? Do all those new capabilities improve what you do? How many photographers use full auto for reasons of convenience but can say, hey I am using an EM 1 MK whatever? I üersonally used Canon for many many years and have several lenses. My last was an 800D and I like that camera. My other APS-C is a Nikon D5200 and I like both of them. Several years ago I decided to try out Olympus and Panasonic. My first was the EM10 Mk3 and this really impressed me. This advanced to an M5 Mk3 and an E-PL9 with fixed focus and some pro lenses. Really love those cameras. Video has never really interested me and perhaps Olympus generally had someone like me in mind. Still photography and money to spare. So really I love your expression of "shutter therapy". Photographers have lots of technology to choose from and can take along what they need. I love traveliung with a Sony RX10 Mk IV (which I bought used), the E-PL9 to take along virtually everywhere and the M5 Mk3 for "serious" shots. What would be my ideal? A Lumix G 9 Body (love the grip and usability) with Olympus technology like the M5 Mk3 for example. Anyhow, love your video and the many herlpful insights and knowledge. Above all, you are a great inspiration and your enthusiastic "Let's do this" gives me a huge smile every time. Take care Robin.
I'm guessing they lost a big chunk of their casual consumers due to the rapid advancements of the smart phone yearly. And then a lot of their pro consumers didn't stay on (except the most adamant of course) and moved on to due to advancements on their big sensor rivals and competitive pricing? while Olympus was stuck in place for a bit?
Robin what camera is better as a travel / compact solution..between the EM 5 Mark II and the EM 5 Mark III and why?? Thanks sooo much for all of your thoughts and opinions in this new video.
Interesting that you never mentioned the word Panasonic - maybe you think they made some of the same mistakes as Olympus? (former EM1 owner, now shooting w / Panasonic G9 - which continues to add features several years after introduction)
The topic covers "Why Olympus Failed", not why Panasonic failed. They are two different companies. If I started talking about other companies, next you will hear Kodak, Pentax, and the video will be 1 hour long, which I think defeats the purpose of the discussion in the first place.
As an ex Olympus Pro Photographer (35mm film days) watching this video made me realise ANOTHER big mess up Olympus made - Just listen to all those model numbers / iterations, OM this Em that mark this mark that etc etc - Jesus - create a camera and stick with it for at least a little while - no-one is going to buy an EMX/OM-E Mark iiia (or whatever) knowing that next week there wil be the Mark iiib and wondering if maybe they should have got the EOM-E mark11a or even waited for the Mark iv (a / b / c?).......
Olympus camera owner since 1973- probably 9 different Olympus cameras over that time period now have an OM-1. Love the computational features of the OM-1 as well as the weather sealing and ergonomics. Lenses are awesome. Pro-capture speed is great with the new sensor as is focusing. Love starry sky focus ability. Most camera video use is done off a tripod to record singing performances. Most "snapshot" videos are done on my Samsung S21 phone. My main use of the camera is photographs not video. I am feeling positive about the OM Digital Solutions future but not underestimating the challenges. I ignored the marketing regarding the "wow" factor and bought the OM-1 as it had the features I use the most.
Olympus EM1 M3 is enough for me. Best camera ever. Light and trustable, with 2x magnification. Mostly I don't need to carry a tripod to shoot many types of situations.
Likewise.
I think their move right now is in the right direction towards outdoor use. Olympus/om is the only ip rated weather sealed cameras on the market and their lenses seem to strike a good balance between weight and equivalent apperture :)
Valid points, Robin. As a counterargument I think the main thing Olympus has going for them is an unquantifiable something best described as user experience.
Whenever I let full frame and aps-c boasting friends and ‘colleagues’ hold and use my EM-1 III with a matching pro lens they always end up mumbling something along the lines of ‘what a nice camera’.
Back when I was in the market to upgrade from my tiny tourist EM-10 III to something to use on my reportages involving classic sailboats and the likes I looked at Nikon Fuji and Canon. In the end, though, I simply ended up with Olympus yet again.
I need not worry about a wave hitting me whilst speeding through rough swells, the tiny camera doesn’t get stuck anywhere in all the ropes and wires and holding and using that excellent little body feels like second nature, really. The lenses have a wonderful rendering and as you always said: the whole setup doesn’t weigh me down one bit. The combination of the cute 12-45 and mentioned EM-1 is both very affordable and plenty sharp enough for a centerfold photo in a magazine and the versatility is amazing.
I might not be an ambassador like you have been, but simply letting people hold the camera for a while has sold them on it quite a few times - even if they had Sony or Fuji already.
Of course I would have loved all of these features in a full frame OM-4ti-like body with old Zuiko equivalent sized lenses but I’m afraid that’s just not possible yet. Never say never, though. Who knows what the future holds for us…
Long reply, or at least longer than intended, but as a closer I’d like to thank you for all your efforts. You’re a great teacher on all things technical and very motivating and inspiring as well. Keep up the great work. Cheers!
Same experience I have observed with every photographer I have let play with my OM-1.
The crowning irony is that Olympus actually pioneered the Live-view technology that made mirrorless cameras possible with their E-330 possible!
Mistake number 6: bad marketing and advertisement that do not show unique features of Olympus. Great video!
Olympus probably gave up the video-centric market, but Panasonic sure didn't. They went the other way and became an important tool for serious videographers. So Olympus' failure wasn't a failure for M4/3. Just for Olympus.
I don't think they gave up on video, they just did not pay enough attention.
They also wisely opened up a full frame front...
It seems like some Japanese companies are too conceited and too slow to move with a market. Olympus with video features and Panasonic with phase-detect AF. I still hope for a G9 successor with Canon-like PDAF. I’m not holding my breath, however.
Let's hope Panasonic comes to their senses and added Phase Detect AF. That would have been really awesome
Panasonic is not going to add Phase defect auto focus, so stop it. Go get a wack Sony or the cheap Canons and enjoy your auto focus. Panasonic does not cater to youtubers, they cater to Real videographers, so learn manuel focus or go to another brand!!
Look at the s5, it has! And some people Expect that the S1 will get it with the next firmware
@@thewalkingvloggingman7152 But, Manuel has to want to be focused.
I just got mine GH6. I am ok with their autofocus. Happy with camera
As a filmmaker, I love Olympus, they do not cripple their lower end cameras like other manufacturers do. For example my EPL-9 shoots 52 Mbps in 1080p, while most lower end Panasonic cameras give you only 20 Mbps in 1080p.
I am not a film-maker, and I'd appreciate it if they included the mic input as well as a flip out swivel screen instead of flip down for the E-PL9
My first SLR was an Olympus OM-1MD. I was 17 years old this was back in 1976. So yes, I will miss the company as I also miss Minolta. Fortunately camera companies continue to evolve and better technology will always be offered by present and new companies.
Funny enough, I got my hands on a used 1970s OM-1 and that made me do a deep dive on olympus. That led me to talking with some of the guys at my local camera shop and they let me play with a new om system om-1 and immediately fell in love with the ecosystem and ergonomics. I then sold my full frame sony kit and some of my film stuff. I now shoot with my EM1X and my film om-1 and then my film nikon n60. It's a solid kit for me and suits my needs as a portrait photographer.
Olympus should have made Zuiko branded lenses for multiple mounts. That was always their biggest strength.
I will love to have a Nikon Z/Canon RF camera with Zuiko glass :)
That's much harder to do. You can. mount a FF lens on an MFT mount and it will work, just be a bit bulky. But you cannot mount an MFT lens on a FF camera, it will give a tiny circular image on the larger sensor. To do lenses for multiple mounts (and hence sensor sizes) they would need to be much bigger and heavier and thus negate what MFT is all about!
I changed Lumix g85 for Olympus E-m10 II and I am happy - I think that Olympus has better colors in photo and video is not important for me. But I would add to your video another point - Olympus is not so user friendly in terms of usage - Lumix is so easy to learn comparing to Olympus.
I love my OM-1, but my GAS tendencies are very drawn to full frame and APS-C, especially for landscape photography. It's easy to see how more megapixels and greater dynamic range at a competitive price point could trump the wonderful but less touted features of micro 4 3, for a number of potential customers. For example, see the Fujifilm X-H2 with 40 Mp for $1,999. Hopefully the lower price point and more compact form factor of the upcoming OM-5 will go partway towards reducing this gap, if it retains most of the features of the OM-1. Eventually, a higher megapixel option for landscapes would be great. If APS-C can have 40 Mp (assuming the image quality holds up), a 4 3 sensor should be able to have 30 Mp.
My point exactly, everyone is pushing progress, but Olympus M43 seems to stay stagnant especially in image quality and output. Let's hope they pay more serious attention before losing more customers.
I can relate I have a pulse lip and a song in here you're get lots of shots out of focus probably used for air
I bought AX T3 great camera but the battery life sucks
@@garybrown9719 I like LSD and Shrooms too!
jesus 40mp? are you printing billboards?
@@xstensl8823 I can see a clear difference in image quality for landscapes when using hi-res mode, but it doesn't work so well on windy days. Hopefully 40 Mp will be like a high res mode that works on windy days as well. Also, 40 mp gives me more room to crop when my initial composition wasn't as good as I'd planned.
My favorite camera for travel and just bring around town is the EM-10 II. I wish it had a flip out screen and a mic jack. That would have made it my perfect travel camera.
Exactly!
My predicament with EM-10III too!! Am considering adding another camera EM-5 II or III just for the external mic input and fully articulate screen..😁
Ah, the old flip vs. fully articulated screen debate ;) Personally, I specifically chose the E-M10 MkII over the E-M5 Mk II because of the flip screen. I find it's more discreet when shooting street from waist or chest level.
However, I think I might like a third option even more: the vertical and horizontal articulating screen Fujifilm have, but only if it wouldn't be too chunky and would still be tough enough (I love the toughness of Olympus cameras generally!)
I'm new to your channel, I'm new to Olympus as well (well, I would say I'm new to OM System) but I love your way to review and be honest. Thanks for your work
Thanks so much Luca for the show of support, appreciate much! More content coming for sure
Robin............You are so right. Nikon, Canon, Sony and Fuji an others have always included a 3.5mm Mic input on their consumer cameras. For Olympus to leave out this feature was and is beyond belief. Major camera sales are now to the consumer masses who have decided that they want to Vlog. No vlogger will buy a camera that does not stack up with video features.
Olympus could have been a major player. I hope that the R & D department that was responsible for this stupidity were all sacked.
Most remarkable movement in the market I've seen is Fujifilm. How they seemed to have completely missed the boat when it comes to digital cameras and then all of a sudden take a significant share of the mirrorless market.
Agree. They innovated, listened to what consumers wanted and have amazing lenses to compliment the system.
It also helps that they have the highly successful Instax camera brand. That does a lot to keep their brand front and center with consumers. Instax draws a lot of people into photography and I'm sure a fair percentage of those Instax customers buy a Fujifilm digital camera if they decide to upgrade because of their familiarity with Instax.
Olympus had a long history of tremendous innnovation but then being overtaken by competitors. 1959: the first Pen half-frame camera, a really tiny 35mm viewfinder camera. Canon and Minolta also adopt the format. 1963: introduces the Pen F, smallest 35mm SLR in the world with elecronic flash sync up to 1/500, not matched by any focal plane shutter camera for over 30 years. 1967: introduces Trip 35, similar design to the Pen but larger and full frame, sells over 5 million by 1984. 1973: OM-1 is the smallest full frame 35mm SLR in the world, from day one with lenses from 8mm to 1000mm and all cameras in the OM system could use motor drives without requiring any modifications. 1975: OM-2 is first camera with TTL flash metering, ironically based on Minolta technology. 1990: first bridge camera, the IS-1 introduced, called a zoom-lens reflex (ZLR). 2008: micro four thirds mirrorless system launched together with Panasonic.
In all cases, the competition caught up. The Rollei 35 in 1966 was as small as half-frame 35mm cameras but was full frame, many competitors arrived soon after. Pentax introduced the ME in 1977, just a hair smaller than the OM-1, Canon AE-1 in 1976 was almost as small, Nikon EM in 1979, etc. and "power winders" for SLRs became commonplace (Canon would be first to build the motor into the camera in 1983 with the T50). Pentax, Nikon and Minolta were the earliest competing SLRs with TTL flash beginning in 1980. Bridge cameras really took off with digital cameras and we know about mirrorless.
Ironically, despite all their innovations Olympus has never been as successful as their competitors. Their headstart with mirrorless, IBIS, weather sealing, etc. wasn't enough to survive the onslaught of Sony. I think the Sony A7 is what reallly drew Canon and Nikon to finally go mirrorless, not m43 or even Fuji X.
Yes , the price is too high for the new OM 1 . In Thailand higher than Sony A7IV , Panasonic GH6
Wow, that is unexpected!
Sad but true on the pricing. There are other minor things, Take the battery, the grip and the lack of an external charger.
The make a different package in the battery from the EM1mke, Em1ml3 and EM1x? Was that battery not good enough?
Why make a different grip? I find the HLD-9 more appealing than the HLD-10. OM-S Do not need to follow other camera companies in changing the grip with every camera.
Why must OM-S follow the phone companies. You want to sell these to the professionals and you don't give them an external charger? How can you use the camera if you need to charge the spare battery?
As others have said, their biggest mistake was the financial scandal, and putting the bulk of their R&D into the medical division, and adding audio recorders. Historically Olympus was an optical company, which is why their lenses have always been so good, and it was Maitani who put them on the camera map. Admittedly, they were a bit slow in the moving to digital and developing a solid professional camera system, but keeping Maitani's heritage and producing small, compact cameras may have played against them, as it did when the original OM-1 was released in the 1970s, because they were completely different to what professionals were used to (such as the shutter speed dial around the lens mount). The thing was, when people actually used them they soon realised how good they were and stuck with (I'm still shooting an OM-1, which I started using in the '70s). But that was the 1970s, when film cameras were simpler and electronics were just beginning to appear in cameras, for which the OM-2 was a big innovation. And back then, there wasn't the same drive to bring out new cameras every year, like now. It's the curse of big business with profits to chase and shareholders to satisfy, which inevitably led to the accounting scandals. Although M4/3 has always been an underdog in the macho "size matters" world of photography, Olympus were still innovating with the resources and market share they had. Let's face it, Canon and Nikon were very slow in moving to mirrorless, and probably only did it because of competition from Sony, an electronics megacorporation and not a traditional camera maker that had to partner with other companies for lenses etc, but they did have almost a monopoly on sensors.
The fact that OMDS still carry the Olympus name does make me wonder if Olympus still has some sort financial investment in the OMDS through some accounting and corporate manoeuvring.
With regards to the new OM-1, I've only had a little play with it (I won't pay that sort of money, not even for a full-frame camera) but it does just feel like an incremental upgrade from the EM-1iii, with a (long-overdue) new sensor, menu system and processor. It's very nice, but a bit overpriced.
One other mistake I think Olympus/OMDS have made is over-focussing on wildlife photography. I understand it is just marketing, and specifically aimed at promoting the 150-400 and some of their other long lenses, but the cameras are capable of so much more, and are the perfect tool for photojournalists, documentary and sports photographers, with their robust, weather-sealed bodies and lenses as well as the compact size of the cameras and the fantastic lenses, which makes them the perfect tool for working in the field and other extreme environments. And 20MP is more than enough for nearly all print magazines and newspapers, and 4:3 ratio is better for a lot of print sizes too.
As for video, Olympus was a photography centric company, and didn't really need to add lots of video features. Panasonic (another electronics giant like Sony) did that much better, already having a well-established video division, but they didn't do so well with stills. And BlackMagic did an even better job with M4/3 for video. Olympus sticking primarily with stills was actually a good idea as most still photographers aren't that interested in video and didn't need anything beyond the implementation it had, which was similar to what the Canon 5D Mk2 had, which kicked off the whole DSLR video "revolution". And let's face it, M4/3 is plenty big enough for anything up to 4K, and who really needs to shoot bigger than 1080P anyway?
I seldom do more than 1080, I understand. However if you are primarily a videographer you will want 4k now or if you don't need it know you want it now to be future proof.
I totally agree. I think that some of the blame should go to the market and non Olympus users, in the sense that, as you said referring to the original om-1, people looked down at it until they tried it and changed their mind.
It seems to me that today is the same, where most people think that bigger is better (50mpx, full frame, 8k video...), so they don't even consider MFT as a whole, going instead for bigger systems thinking wrongfully they need those 30 or 50 mpx just because of marketing and some really picky "photographers" who love pixel peeping and provide misleading advices. If more people gave MFT a chance, I'm sure they would change their mind (and save some money too).
I suppose future proofing requires video it seems , but for a photographer who has no interest in blogging or video sector in making films , as I want a great camera for stills only .
It is not just price that governs sales in a financial recession , it is goods that can deliver and will be capable of a long life . Therefore , future proofing is retaining stock of parts to conduct repairs and a willingness to update software on older stock to retain their value going forward . A small fee would be often agreeable if we only want to create pro cameras , but amateurs were always a backbone of the industry and enabled the professional to benefit .
The new camera firm needs only to return with an EM10 model with a 24 megapixel sensor and call it the EM20. Price should be no greater than £800 with revised standard kit lens that was a fixed focal length . That could be from Sigma , who make very affordable glass .
In short . Don’t bother inventing what already exists , but produce something new that youngsters will want and can afford . The rest of the market will follow and will move to pro line as and when it needs to .
I have talked about them prioritizing wildlife photography so I did not repeat it here. I agree with you. That was a huge, huge mistake. But I shall stop here before I get attacks from all the wildlife photography die-hards.
@@joestrahl6980 In Olympus you need 4K because their 1080p is absolutely terrible. You need to record in 4K and downsample in-post to get good quality.
Olympus didn't have a "downfall"....they evolved as a company and were forced by some shareholders to spin off the camera division. Not to say they haven't made mistakes, but Canon and Nikon have made much bigger ones.....
Well.....how many cameras does Olympus sell compared to say ten years ago? Now....that's true of every camera company. But Olympus sells significantly less than them. Not to mention that they simply don't have any strategy to deal with mobile (smartphones) or ariel (drones). And they are not a brand of choice for pros and content creators. So who is their audience? A fairly small one. That's not success. That can absolutely be called a downfall. The same can be said of Nikon. Canon is not anywhere in the same boat as they are more diversified in printers/photocopiers, and medical equipment (MRI, CT scan, X-ray) and they have deeper pockets to invest into RnD and they have mostly been able to pivot. Plus Canon simply has more brand equity than Olympus. Olympus is successful in medical equipment. They are in fact the number one brand in endoscopy equipment. Especially with their partnership with Sony where they make medical equipment together. But in cameras it's entirely fair to call it a downfall.
Nikon Canon and Sony did not get rid of their full frame and DX sensors. I think that was the point at which Olympus had a downfall. I was so fed up with my E5 image quality compared to Nikon that I ended up buying Nikon gear and basically stopped using my Olympus E-5 then. A LOT of Olympus users did the same. Letting their Olympus gear gather dust.
@@christophergrove4876 Which is odd, because the E5 was a DSLR that was easily the equal of anything Nikon or Canon was producing at the time. Not to mention that both of those companies were having *huge* numbers of cameras sent back for one issue or another.
@@mromagnoli E-5 easily equal to anything Canon or Nikon was producing at the time lol. Tell me you’ve never shot a Nikon D800 or 5D Mk iii without saying it. 🤣
@@marike1100 The E5 was introduced two years before either of those cameras. You've told me how little you know about the advancements of camera tech at that time. A closer comparison of those two would be the E-M1 mark one, which came less than a year after those two cameras....furthering Olympus paving the way to mirrorless as both Nikon and Canon continued to issue dinosaur crap to consumers and pros alike, who both gladly ate up their crap at the time that said mirrorless was both stupid and irrelevant. Gosh!
The only problem I had with Olympus is the price of their lenses. I realize that good optics cost money, but affordable high quality lenses would sell more cameras.
I was previously a Nikon user for about 10 years but because of the weight I wanted something smaller. So I sold my D610 and the 24-70 f/2.8G and bought the EM1 with the 12-24 f/2.8 lens. Initially I was happy but the camera kept back-focusing, even on still subjects. It became such a huge issue that I almost gave up on my Olympus setup but I decided to give it another chance (mainly due to getting used to IBIS and the weight) and bought the EM1 II. That camera was a big improvement.
My focusing problem disappeared and the camera worked magnificently. As time went on I wanted to buy more lenses, mainly wide angle. I kept waiting for a 10mm or something like that that wasn't fisheye but it never came. The lens selection itself I felt was very limited for my needs. It seemed to me that either I had to pay 1000+ dollars for either a good wide angle or a good telephoto zoom lens, or pay little for low quality glass. Previously I had bought lenses from Sigma and Tamron for my old Nikon camera, but they didn't come out with anything (except for Sigma coming out with something that very quickly became discontinued.) There didn't seem to be any confidence in the system from any other brand than Olympus and Panasonic.
And when I read that Olympus was getting out and sold its camera division I decided to stop looking for new glass because of lack of confidence in the future of M43. A while afterwards I read that Nikon had released an update on its Z6, so I decided to switch back to Nikon and bought the Z6 II with a 24-70 f/4, and I haven't regretted it. The EVF is much better, it has IBIS, great autofocus system and great low light performance. It is heavier compared to my M43 setup but the full frame mirrorless system has significantly lower weight compared to the DSLR.
It was really unfortunate for the M43 system because I had confidence in it when I first bought the EM1 I.
Being an AMATEUR Pentax shooter, I feel they are in the same boat as Olympus.
I think they catter to a niche like myself, who either doesn't care that much about video (I seriously don't give a crap about making video, I only want stills... and I wish I could buy a camera for cheaper that was void of any video option, but focus only on still photography) or those who simply have gotten used to a system and really REALLY love it.
I can't tell you how much I feel at home with a Pentax, from button layout, to knowing exactly what kind of picture and colours to expect. I like getting my hands on all brands.. and no, Pentax isn't "better".. but to me, they FEEL better (in my hands, for my own taste and feel). It's the only system I feel extremely at home with button layout, menu system and just the way options are set.
I really like Olympus too, I hope the new head company treats them well. Ricoh seems to respect Pentax, so there is that.
Aside from mistakes in the imaging business wasn’t the parent company embroiled in some accounting scandal….personally speaking I thought that had more impact than any mistakes made at Olympus Cameras.
Not true. The cameras were still flying off the shelves when the scandal happened
@@robinwong True, but the cost of the scandal to the parent group was high. Selling the imaging business may have been the best way to quickly plug the hole. (Purely speculation, they haven't shown me their accounts! :-) And if JIP could see the same issues you are talking about they thought they were fixable - and so far seem to be moving that way. At least they have identified a clear target market(sports/wildlife) and tried to build a great camera for those communities. Can they do the same for other communities? The next 1-2 years will see them thrive or die.
Thanks for sharing - Interesting opinion.
As I'm not too video at all on my olympus I actually don't care about vlogging capabilities.
For me size, weight and weather sealing is why I use my OMD.
I still use my EM5MII as secondary body and can't tell whether the photo is from it or my EM1MIII - not because of the missing quality increase but because image quality was already good enough for me.
For me the sensor could have improved more towards low light performance rather than more frames per second.
The price however - yes the OM1 is too expensive for what it's offering compared to the EM1MIII.
Hope they will still be around for long time.
Sadly, once upon a time, the situation was opposite. When I purchased EPL3, some 12 years ago, I was excited to learn that is has an excellent video capabilities (continuous light measurement and stabilization during the exposure in 1080p) and a two-channel audio, although through the built-in mic. It was, and still is, quite a good travel "companion", both as a photo camera and a video cam...
My main problem with Olympus was too many cameras, some at very high price. There was more order in 4/3 camp. Jems were lost in bunch of mediocre cameras. Efforts should have been towards design of lenses at better price. 4/3 had entry-mid level-top for both lenses and bodies. That was much easier to navigate.
A few thoughts: 1. Olympus has never been as popular as Canon or Nikon. 2. The body does not take photos by itself. The kit is a body and a lens. Then the m43 still has the advantage when traveling or in rough terrain, for example. 3. Nikon was on the brink of bankruptcy not so long ago. He survived thanks to big financial help from Fuji. 4. I am not defending Olympus here. Perhaps the brand will not survive. If this happens, it will be a big loss for the photographic market.
I agree with your points. Olympus was never the top player, and does have some advantages over other cameras. But they also need to quickly adapt to current market demands. Because if they don't people can just buy other options, which we are not lacking of.
Fascinating. My father was quite loyal to Olympus cameras up through their early digital offerings (before M4/3), and I always quite liked their offerings when I borrowed them, so I've wondered how they ended up where they are.
consumer market shrunk and m43 is just not good enough for professionals considering the price. there's simply no reason to choose m43 when you can get full frame for almost the same price (keep in mind you need some fast primes on m43 to keep up with full frame in terms of image quality)
@@sergeyzakharov7326 You haven't experienced the OM-1 yet, have you?
@@jmicah76 even the e1mx, mine gave my sony a9 a run for it's money. I actually traded all my sony ff stuff in and moved to olympus with the m43 mount.
I bought the OM-1 for birding and it works very well, but if I need low light performance, I have a Full Frame Nikon Z6ii.
Awesome
Hi, Robin. I am Finn Wang (strangely not asian). I have followed you closely, have been inspired by your presentations and enthusiasm. I know what it feels like to be betrayed by someone you have given your best. I invite you to experience Norway and the exceptional nature this country has offer. You have to pay your own airline tickets, but after that the fair is covered. I switched from Nikon to Olympus when they launched the OMD EM1 and have never regretted the decision.
It is now up to you. I can promise you a lifetime experience.
Kind regards,
Finn
I’m shooting with 3 Olympus bodies regularly right now; the EM5MkIII, EM1MkIII and a PEN-F along with an array of m4/3 and older (but still fantastic) 4/3 lenses.
While I agree that Olympus has been slow to improve on the present sensor, I kind of like that all 3 cameras give me similar quality in the final image. That way I’m ready to go with a different lens on each body at a moment’s notice and don’t ever feel like I’m compromising.
All that said, if OM Solutions does come up with an upgraded m4/3 sensor, I’ll probably jump on it!
Yeah I wish it is F2.5 or brighter
Hi Robin.
Technology Connections just released a video on the Olympus Pen EES-2, a camera released in 1961. An interesting peculiarity is that this camera shot half-frame, doubling your exposures per roll of film. It also features automatic exposure settings (well, namely just the aperture), and doesn’t require a battery. It’s an interesting piece I think you’d enjoy.
Wishing you the best from California, US.
Mr. Wong, I really like how you are not an Olympus ambassador anymore. That way you can really talk about the pros and cons of the Olympus camera ecosystem. I feel like alot of Olympus ambassadors are biased when it comes to their review, etc. Thank you for your honest opinions and reviews now
I think one glaring mistake is Olympus abandoned the FF market. Although M43 does have inherent advantages - particularly smaller, lighter lenses with 2x crop factor (great for macro, birding and wildlife!) - many photographers want that larger FF sensor for less noise, greater DR, and shallower DOF (when desired). They could have made a FF line of Zuiko branded lenses which have become world renowned, that could be easily interchanged between FF and M43 bodies, as well as create the M43 line of lenses (just as Nikon has FX and DX compact lenses). They should have designed the OM-D mount larger, large enough for a medium format sensor. I think if Maitani were still alive, things would have been a lot different at Olympus. I look at my OM-2n, 2S and 4T film bodies (fantastic cameras!) and often wonder why they just did not put a digital framework around that body design, with a FF sensor. Oh yes and I agree with everything you said too - particularly about video and pricing.
And also not taking care of customers. In Spain the customer service is horrible. They don’t fulfill the promise of their promotions and do not send the lens that has been on promotion with the purchase of the camera…!!! These are the details that should be of paramount importance for the brand, in order to obtain customer loyalty..!!!
Oh dear that sounds bad
The camera division was spun off not because it wasn't successful, but because the direction and "politics" in Olympus changed. In fact, the investors who forced that spin-off divested from Olympus (sold their investment shared and left) within a few months of forcing the sale/spin-off. The financial scandal(s) were a burden for the company in general. That Olympus did not have particularly good marketing people was a HUGE issue. Consumers had all kinds of misconceptions about M43 in general, and they did nothing to remedy that or educate. OMDS is a bit better in marketing, apparently realizing that was a problem. Lastly....your keep mentioning "content creation" as if video is the only content worth creating. Before the video trend of the last few years, photos were absolutely the content many were creating and what was widely popular. Olympus did not see the trend in video, but neither did Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Pentax for that matter. While Sony gave it some attention, but really only launched well into that relatively recently....and they certainly have been more nimble about responding to that market. Your whole video smacks of someone who doesn't know how the industry works, and conveniently ignores major points of tech history.
Olympus got rid of camera department because they were constantly losing money, NOT politics.
@@bbasleigh6149 I don't think so. With the poor brand image, poor performance, overpriced and poor quality, they will last for max. 5 years.
so,, Olympus OM10 mark lll is a good choice for me now ?
Hi Robin, I always enjoy your channel. I just thought it is a bit harsh to say that Olympus has had a Downfall. They are still trying hard to cope with the challenges all camera manufacturers are struggling with. I agree with all your statements, especially about their pricing. However, on the second-hand market, you can now buy Olympus cameras with features that are far superior to other cameras of the same price. I have an Olympus OM DE M5 mII a s well as a full-frame Sony. For some reason, that I do not understand myself, the Olympus is still my go-to camera when I am travelling. Best wishes from Scotland. Louis
The truth is the truth. Olympus decided to close down their imaging business and sell it off. If that is not a definition of downfall, I don't know what is. If they were successful, if the company was making healthy profit, why did they give up on the business?
@@robinwong "Having had several conversations with Olympus reps at NECCC this year, they (and OM Solutions) are a much better company following the acquisition. The reps are MUCH happier employees because the company is lean and flexible and able to focus on the core products as opposed to previous when they had to bend to the (parent company) Olympus bureaucracy, share in the Olympus mistakes, and the lack of focus on the imaging division (and their core products). I would think that the unmitigated success of the OM-1 proves them right.
Regardless of the past, I would also think that the success of the new company would make it a tasteful property if OJ Holdings ever decides to sell it off." (CSARmedic from 43rumors). And it''s not the only person who said that. The employees are happier and free to be more flexible.
The fact that Olympus cameras are great second hand buys tells you a number of important things. Firstly it indicates as robin says, they are over priced new. It also tells you the cost of ownership if you buy new is big. If you sell your camera to upgrade, you don't get much back. Finally it also tells you about the slow innovation. The fact that old cameras are 90% of the quality and features of the current flagship is really going to hurt second hand prices of newer models.
I saw an om-d e-m1 ii in very good used condition in my local camera shop for £375. The om-1 is £1999 new. Given that for most shots you'd not be able to tell which camera it was taken on,the older camera looks the best bet.
Hello please I need your contact I want you to my mentor in photography please
Hi,
You are fully right, I never stopped to think this points before.
I owned a ranged 35LC as a companion for my travels ( excelent definition for slides) an E-500, an EPL-1, EM5, and a EM1 MkII.
Using flaship camera sensor in cheaper models could be a reason to sell them, but the opposite for pro models. The same image quality of EM1 Mark III is a good argument to sell EM10 Mark IV.
Around 2006 or 2007 I asked Olympus why not a rangefinder or similar, by removing the mirror, the lens could be closer to the sensor. So lens construction could be simpler, more efficient, easier and compact. DSLR capabilities built into a tiny package.
I never got a response.
EP1 was launched in 2009.
Pretty good list of reasons as to why Olympus has such a big downfall with their camera business. I think it's fair to say that pretty bad mismanagment across the board led them to having to sell their camera business.
What one likes in a camera is very much a personal thing based on what one uses it for. I, for instance, take almost exclusively stills and mostly travel and outdoor events shots. For me the EM5 II is perfect for this. I have SONY APS-C cameras as well which I use in some circumstances but there is no equivalent as yet in SONY APS-C to the weather resistant, magnesium alloy, superb IBIS, ergonomic, stylish EM5 ii body and the weather and dust resistant lens lineup that Olympus offers. With SONY, one would have to go full frame to get similar features at much greater cost, size and weight when one includes the lenses. Yes, APS-C and Full frame are superior in low light and provide greater resolution if one does extensive cropping but for "tourist" use I love Olympus gear. What I find is missing is a rangefinder style equivalent to the EM5 with an EVF. Something like the PEN F but weather sealed. I would even be happy with a weather sealed version of the EPL-10 if it had a good viewfinder.
Fair criticism of past mistakes. Companies need to hear and improve where they can.
Camera marketing is beyond me. I spend a lot of time researching other camera gear. Yet Olympus products are still the best fit for me, a travel-centric hobby photographer, no video. While I enjoy Robin's videos, his camera priorities do not match mine. In fact no UA-cam photography channel aligns with my camera priorities. I want simple to use, relatively rugged, compact gear. I do not care about shallow depth of field. For travel and landscape photos backgrounds in focus is desirable. My new high-end cell phone takes nice photos but my Olympus gear (EM-5 MKIII, EM-1 MKII) is still much better, meaning it easily produces photos that please me.
Agree. I am just considering now upgrading from EM10.2 to EM1.3 just because of the landscape/travel photography and the high res shots using my pro lenses.
I think one of the biggest flaws was the AF that was not really good for birdwatching. Having long lenses with the 2x crop factor.
Now the OM-1 have a much better AF but in the meanwhile other brands like Sony produced more reliable AF.
Olympus was also pretty slow on developing new lenses.
It took years to have a 100-400. And before the 300/4 there were no solutions longer than the 40-150 + mc14.
Other brands could had benefits of the various sigma and Tamron 150-600.
Without the rhetoric, the sensor in the latest Olympus cameras work fine . So how do you intend to improve them ? What size images do you work with .
I understand that past employees must be disappointed but that is a side issue to the actual cameras.
We have mentioned cameras , but the lenses are really -out there.
I shoot on the E-M1 mk ii and absolutely love the thing. I primarily shoot wildlife and landscapes while hiking in the mountains around my home in British Columbia. The system is ideal because of it's compact size and weatherproofing, and is what drew me to m43 in the first place. I don't film video so those limitations do not affect me at all. Olympus is the camera company that I identify with the most at this point, and I hope that OM finds a way to continue that legacy for the many people like me that exist.
1. Weak video functions. 2. High price. 3. Too many model lines. Thanks for video, Robin.
Here's a HUGE example of the problem: Look at pricing on B&H Photo. An OM1 body & 300mm f4 PRO lens costs $4,800 right now. A Sony A7 IV & Sony 200-600 zoom costs $4,396!!! $404 LESS!!! And Sony offers: better image quality, better AF, more control of DOF, better ISO performance, better dynamic range, and maybe most importantly - the future of Sony cameras does not seem to be on shaky ground. I have been fully invested in Olympus since I left full frame Canon years ago. It has really served me well and I have been happy with it. But, the things you mention are driving me away from staying within OM System going forward.
i have an e-510 and i love it
Bought my Olympus OM-1 in 1973. Very happy with my Olympus. Works still today like when new. Technology has sadly left it behind. However,
I have kept it for occasional use. I can not duplicate yet digitally everything I can do with my set of lenses and my OM-1!
Should I sell my OMD EM1 MII ?
I sold my full frame gear (Sony a73) this year and invested in Olympus; am I crazy? Well, I needed some of the features Olympus had that Sony didn't. Really only thing the a73 was far superior in is low light. Can't really say anything else that I miss. But the advantages I get with my Oly, it was worth it. All that matters is if it matches your needs...if I needed low light a lot, would have kept my Sony 😉
My MkII is still great and I still love it. And I also have a Mk3 and an OM-1. All of them are great. If you are still happy with your Mk II, I would keep it
Thinking about this a couple of years later, and looking at the industry, I think that OM should bring out a new larger sensor camera and _maybe,_ a new mount. The only thing I question is whether they should approach another company and see if they could license a mount. The mount I would think would go well is the Nikon Z mount. It has potential, and despite the fact that Nikon is currently doing fairly well with it, they are not even close to a "strong" position. Two good brands making use of the mount would be good. If not that, then they should talk to Ricoh/Pentax about a new mount for the two companies.
Most of the points you made fall into the category of failure to continue investment in R&D. And, like the other camera manufacturers, Olympus failed to anticipate the impact of the iPhone camera. For my photography, a PEN-F, an E-M1 III and a mix of excellent MFT prime and zoom lenses will continue to serve well.
I need olympus/om to make a tiny camera for VLOGGING such EPL-10 or EP-7 but the big problem is LCD screen flips down and there are no MIC and 3.5mm(headphone) input. For HDMI/small HDMI I don't care because it is useless for travel VLOGGING. I like EPL-10 and EP-7 in IBIS with small form factor that Panasonic G100 can't give me like EPL10 or EP-7.
03:22 but the audio should be recorded seperatly, from another aspect i also prefer a mic input in my Olympus e-m10m3
Will the OM-5 be up to par? I'm impatient waiting for the release.
As a wedding and corporate photographer and videographer, I'm happy with my Nikon z9s and may end up leaving micro four thirds. I haven't sold my Panasonics but was very disappointed by the gh6.
If you love something, you are almost in need to criticize it when needed, so I understand this completely. At some point they just lost touch.
Another point I would add is THE NAMING, oh gosh, who decided to keep OM-D on the names. It's a pain to search for Olympus stuff online, not to mention the complete nonsense OM-1 which in most cases brings up the old one first because the switch from Olympus to OM-System or systems is so weird.
At some point I was considering EM-1 III or OM-1, but at the, honestly, ridiculous price point, it really doesn't make sense anymore, when one can get APS-C or even FF cameras with much better features at the same price. Let's hope the OM-2(Please don't name it OM-Systems OM-1 Mark II) learns from some mistakes, it is very close!
Thank you for your passion!
The opposition camera manufacturers plus mobile phones with Canara capabilities is making the market for everyone involved a difficult market to continue to do well in.
do you think it is worthy for me to upgrade from omd-m10 to omd-m1 markii for $640 at this time? thanks!
Your points are somewhat valid. However, most people don‘t have the time and knowledge to learn/operate a “tradition” camera. The popularity of the cell phone and its capablity to produce acceptable images is the key! Look around all the major camera brands, all of them are slowing down producing new models comapred to years ago…
Robin,
I totally endorse your observations. I'll also add that Olympus, like so many other technology companies, failed to recognise that it's pointless investing money into developing innovative new features - such as their world-beating IBIS Image Stabilisation - unless you also invest money into educators who will explain how to use and get the best from your innovations.
I make these comments as someone whose main career is now helping technology companies to educate buyers in how to get the best from their investment, as well as being a degree qualified professional photographer.
It wasn't good enough that one of our ancestors invented the wheel. He/She also had to get people to understand what it's for. Which is why we (and Olympus / OMD Solutions) need educators like yourself and Rob Trek.
Rick
Thank you Robin ... you speak the truth...I shoot with Olympus and Sony...coming from a Canon background. They all have their plus and minuses. It still boils down to the right camera for you. What is the tool that best helps you fulfill your vision? That can be the million dollar question.
Latest full frame cameras are for prestige at family weddings perhaps . Commercial photos being capable on MFT.
I am a Pentax user, and wanted to try an Olympus especially their old CCD models. Both Pentax and Olympus are deeply rooted in photography like the Nikon, Canon, Fujifilm...etc. Especially Pentax is a super late comer to the video arena and many people gave up on it, but I don't think either Pentax or Olympus "failed", it was those videocentric shooter looking at the wrong place ! I find it silly shooting video with a DSLR/MLLC that was not designed to handle like that, you need to spend a lot to gear it up to make it easy to use, so why not invest on a real video camera, like the Canon XC15 and the like that also shoot stills ! video is not everything like photoshop is not a must have, as long as you are a real and experienced photographer you will be able to produce good result with the right tools.
I think you hit most of the major reasons Olympus failed. Smart phones were also a big factor. As you mention, the lagging video capabilities, for amateurs, this is huge and when your smart phone does better than your DSLR, there is a problem. Adding to this, for many amateurs, sensor size is a factor, not that they need it but larger seems better. Not leading with pro level products hurt and gave an opening for manufacturers to define the product as inferior based on sensor size alone. As for the OM-1, I bought one, but I returned it. Not enough feature/image improvements to entice me to give up the E-M1 mk3 and ergonomic choices that I really hated (embedding the too stiff dials for one).
Couldn't agree more! My E-M1 Mark II is still my favourite camera, BUT better resolution and better ISO performance means I now use a Nikon Z7. Is it technically possible to produce a four thirds sensor that produces better resolution and higher ISO performance??? If Digital Solutions came out with such a camera, I would be first to buy. OM 1 doesn't seem to be a 'remarkable' improvement hence never bought it.
Robin, you make some really valid points. I think another pricing issue that really hurt them was the price of some of their lenses. The 12mm prime was ridiculously priced and they are way over charging for the pro lenses too. When you look at the cost of the pro lenses vs great FF alternatives or Fuji it makes you very strongly consider switching because the price does not justify the cost. I know they are great quality but like you said so is everyone else.
My first digital camera was Olympus C-730. Now I am using EN-1ii after I sold my Olympus epl-3. I am also a number 1 supporter of Olympus.
If they would only listen to these valid criticism! Good job Robin, laying out the areas needing improvements.
My pet beef about the smaller cameras was their ridiculously high battery consumption when using the zoom. I needed spare batteries just on a day trip. Why couldn’t they have a manual zoom?
So Robin what would be a good portable travel size that is good for bloggers? With weather seal, fully articulating screen, mic input and good AF ?
I must say when I started having interest in DSLRs and when on a research spree I'd say that the gear reviewers (DPreview) are to blame too. Because in every article the reviewers would say 4/3 sensor (before M4/3) is good but not better than APSC in the high ISO ranges. Back then I was very interested in night photography and for that I wanted a mid-range DSLR that would make super nice photos in the evening and night. So with that in mind I bought a camera that had an APSC sensor. If I didn't get influenced by those articles back then I'd probably had a Oly e-420/450.
Hi Robin, your videos are so clear and crisp that i could actually see each spray when you speak, no offense, it's just super sharp and clear 😃such as on 1:13 of video clip and other parts. i truly enjoy watching your videos because of your happy personality. Have a good day.
A lot of good points. The new OM camera for example is more expensive than a host of other full frame cameras that do it's job or better, so that was a huge misstep. In terms of video, I agree they could have syphoned off a lot of Panasonic buyers by simply upping their video specs in the short term.
Thanks. It is difficult to recommend micro four thirds now there are so many options at same, or cheaper price from full frame!
You say that but the om1 is moving ALOT of units
So, I don't think Robin's wrong here, but I have a different take on why Olympus failed (it boils down to being greedy trying to push their lenses and high-end bodies). Here's my list of five mistakes:
1) PDAF. Olympus kept phase-detect autofocus out of the hands of their enthusiast-level customers for SIX YEARS. It was first introduced with the E-M1 in 2013, and didn't make it into the E-M5 line-up until the Mk III in 2019. PDAF should have been included with the E-M5 Mk II ('15) and then with the E-M10 Mk III ('17), and there was no excuse for leaving it off the PEN-F, given that it's priced basically the same as the E-M5 III.
2) MSC. Olympus made it nigh-impossible to use non-Olympus lenses with C-AF through an adapter (e.g., Metabones, Viltrox)---and only paid lip-service to Panasonic M4/3 lenses in terms of video AF performance---, making it really hard to transition to Olympus bodies from literally any other system.
3) Cheap, fast, AF lenses. Olympus Pro lenses are really something to behold. But a lot of people---especially on a 2x crop sensor---are more than willing to sacrifice image quality for a shallower depth-of-field, and Olympus has absolutely no answer for this. I suspect it's partly because CDAF suffers a lot with softer lenses, to which I would say, "see item (1)."
4) Focus-by-wire. I'm understanding of the fact that a clutch mechanism will add weight (and possibly bulk) to lenses, and that Olympus is targeting compactness, but focus-by-wire---not just Oly's, but in general---is... bad. Olympus knows it, too, or they wouldn't have included a clutch in all their higher-end lens offerings.
5) Kit lenses. The Olympus 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6, 12-50mm f/3.5-5.6, and 14-150mm f/4-5.6 shouldn't exist, in my opinion. It's disappointing for inexperienced camera buyers to pay a lot of money for an ILC only to get the same depth-of-field as a high-end compact (e.g., Canon's G7 X, Sony's RX100), which is precisely what these lenses offer. The 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 is especially egregious, given that a major selling point of M4/3 is compactness and that Olympus makes the far more pocket-friendly 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 EZ pancake lens to boot. Olympus had an opportunity to break the mold and offer, for example, kits of either the 17mm f/1.8 or 25mm f/1.8 plus the 40-150mm f/4-5.6 II R, and that they didn't probably left a lot of people wondering why they didn't just buy a better cell phone.
they always tout the MFT as having faster readout speed, i expected them to already release a global shutter sensor right about now, i wouldn't mind having a 20MP sensor as long as it has global shutter, but they just kept improving incrementally
In 2011, I used SEMA-1for connecting an external microphone to my Olympus XZ-1. However, a few years ago, I chose Canon EOS M50 for my wife's UA-cam channel because M50 looks like Olympus E420, while Olympus E-M10 mark ___ looked more complicated, and you are right; I didn't see how to connect SEMA-1. If I had to buy a new one now, I'd buy Panasonic Lumix G100.
I like the TG-870. It has a lot of features that cameras from other companies do not have. I bought the TG-870, and I also bought the TG-830 years before. I watched your whole video all the way through, but you never talked about the "Tough" series. Maybe this type of rugged camera has been replaced by GoPro models, although I think the TG-870 has a lot of interesting features that GoPro cameras do not have.
Fantastic Robin Wong thank you for your inputs.
Looks chill to wear plus reminds of the Kiss band's song called "God of Thunder."
Intriguing, and I am no Olympus expert. I have shot mostly Pentax and Nikon. I’ve found Pentax to be more focused on photography than vloging. I somewhat disagree with the video in that I don’t think a camera needs to do “everything”. I love that my Pentax are great at photography and only okay at video. That’s because I’m a photographer. I loves still image through real glass with a real viewfinder through the lens. I also like shooting something that is unique and funky. The little bit I used Olympus as a photographer, I enjoyed. I’m sad to see the brand fade.
All fair points Robin even on the OMD EM5 mkiii people compared that to the EM1 Mk II and chose the older camera even if it was 2nd hand as it was cheaper. So I think that shows that they also mis-managed their processor and indeed software dev. Even if the sensor is the same better UI, faster performance even untaxing software features like vertical video or separate photo/video custom modes can sway someone to upgrade or stay in a system. Sony is a good example of that, the sensor in the A6000 is the same as the A6600 but incremental developments to processors, software and hardware saw a progression which kept customers engaged…though they may have squeezed that 24mp sensor dry now I think 🤓
Back in the DSLR days the sensor quality was just too noisy to have JUST 4/3. They should have had a full-frame (or AT LEAST a DX) camera to bring out along side of the E-3 to E-5 to satisfy the pros while the sensors were being developed. (They had the full-frame lens tooling from the 35mm days... they should never have gotten rid of that back then.) Investing in 4/3 and micro4/3 ONLY was the biggest mistake. Pros would have stayed with them if they had both.
u are right~ Olympus cameras are really expensive and have no price advantage over other brands. Fortunately, the olympus and panasonic lens sets are reasonably priced
The digital age started so optimistically for Olympus, they made a number of innovations and the quality of their lenses was always excellent; but were also taking a risk in building a digital system from the ground up that wouldn't be backwards compatible and I think also pinning a lot of hope on the 4/3 system being so widely adopted that the idea of lenses that only fit one camera make would be consigned to history.
A used EP1 was my first mirrorless camera. It was fun to play around with old rangefinder lenses, but I was never super happy with the results. A few years ago I gave it to a family friend's kid who was showing interest in photography.
I didn't fall in love with mirrorless cameras until I tried Fuji. I've been a Fuji-boy for the past 5-ish years now and I doubt I'll ever go back to anything else.
I agree. I was using E520 as my first DSLR. And then bought EP1. The small EP1 is gorgeous with champagne gold metal body. I still keep it today. I think nothing wrong as the first generation of the new format at that time. And I think they are not putting enough effort in marketing. They literally give the whole retro camera market to Fujifilm.
I don't mind lack of or no video functions, I would much prefer a photo oriented camera any day with a higher 30MP MFT sensor. I did fget a £400 discount on from Olympus UK this xmas though on a Em1 3 for macro photography, so I can't complain on the price. I also have FF and APSC. I enjoy all of them.
I was seriously looking forward to the E-M5 III when it was coming out, but the build of the camera was a serious disappointment. Replacing a great metal body with a brittle plastic one? And with micro-USB, several years after USB-C had become the standard? On top of that, it was quite a bit more expensive than the similarly specced Panasonic Lumix G90 and Fuji X-T30, and in many cases dangerously close to the far more capable G9, X-T3 and for that matter E-M II. I'm still waiting for that compact, affordable, well built and flexible MFT camera, but I'm losing faith in Panasonic, and if the rumoured OM-5 is either hobbled or overpriced, I'll probably start the transition to another system.
I'm so glad you made this video. Thanks Robin 👍
Glad I can share
Great video, i was wondering why my oly has no mic in? 99$ noname 4k cam from aliexpress has it!
Biggest threat to compact cameras are mobile phone cameras . Not greater mega pixels . Full frame cameras are massive , which is why the quality OM brand should flourish.
Sometimes I personally have the impression, that modern photography has a lot to do with GAS. You hav many videos about "older" cameras and show how useful they still are. Does new requipment make you a better photographer? Do all those new capabilities improve what you do? How many photographers use full auto for reasons of convenience but can say, hey I am using an EM 1 MK whatever?
I üersonally used Canon for many many years and have several lenses. My last was an 800D and I like that camera. My other APS-C is a Nikon D5200 and I like both of them. Several years ago I decided to try out Olympus and Panasonic. My first was the EM10 Mk3 and this really impressed me. This advanced to an M5 Mk3 and an E-PL9 with fixed focus and some pro lenses. Really love those cameras. Video has never really interested me and perhaps Olympus generally had someone like me in mind. Still photography and money to spare.
So really I love your expression of "shutter therapy". Photographers have lots of technology to choose from and can take along what they need. I love traveliung with a Sony RX10 Mk IV (which I bought used), the E-PL9 to take along virtually everywhere and the M5 Mk3 for "serious" shots. What would be my ideal? A Lumix G 9 Body (love the grip and usability) with Olympus technology like the M5 Mk3 for example.
Anyhow, love your video and the many herlpful insights and knowledge. Above all, you are a great inspiration and your enthusiastic "Let's do this" gives me a huge smile every time. Take care Robin.
I'm guessing they lost a big chunk of their casual consumers due to the rapid advancements of the smart phone yearly. And then a lot of their pro consumers didn't stay on (except the most adamant of course) and moved on to due to advancements on their big sensor rivals and competitive pricing? while Olympus was stuck in place for a bit?
Robin what camera is better as a travel / compact solution..between the EM 5 Mark II and the EM 5 Mark III and why?? Thanks sooo much for all of your thoughts and opinions in this new video.
Interesting that you never mentioned the word Panasonic - maybe you think they made some of the same mistakes as Olympus? (former EM1 owner, now shooting w / Panasonic G9 - which continues to add features several years after introduction)
The topic covers "Why Olympus Failed", not why Panasonic failed. They are two different companies. If I started talking about other companies, next you will hear Kodak, Pentax, and the video will be 1 hour long, which I think defeats the purpose of the discussion in the first place.