Should Olympus Produce a FF Camera Line?

[traveler_101]

Picking up from an earlier thread:

. . . Olympus chose a smaller sensor, knowing it would have a less capable sensor, but the benefit of a lighter over-all system (which, going back to the PEN in the 60s and OM in the 70s has been Olympus' calling card). It's proven to have some other advantages (lighter sensors makes IBIS easier, and the current 5-axis really does a good job, helping take back some of the low light capability that the smaller sensor gives up).

Olympus's lenses simply don't cast light on a big enough area to make use of a FF sensor. So going FF would mean whole new lens line. They did that once (with the introduction of 4/3), and are slowly doing it agian with the PRO m4/3 line.. . . Why should they build up yet another product line for a bigger sensor only to be competing toe-to-toe with the two 800 pound gorillas and Sony (now their partner)? . . .

i am in substantial agreement with this, in two senses. In terms of the market, it is very difficult to achieve market differentiation today, but Olympus has managed to do it with m43. The earlier attempt to compete directly with Canikon with Olympus's standard 43 cameras was a disaster: why buy a second grade DSLR? Would an Olympus full frame fare any better against SONY and Canon? M43 was a big gamble with the company's future, but now it is paying off.

The second point is that except for very specific uses, the trend in photography going back to film is toward smaller and smaller surfaces for capture. The 35mm convention, now called "full frame" in the digital world, was established by Leica and the called "miniature." Its advantage was creating a compact system camera that was copied all over the world eventually. M43 is another downturn in size, showing that the assumed advantages of the larger sensor are not so great after all, while the advantages of the smaller sensor are numerous in terms of creating a new camera system.

 

[Range-rover]

It's only going to get better and better in time, I remember when they first came out
they said it's the first digital system built from the ground up lenses and all, they'll most
likely stay with it, but never say never.

 

[mervynyan]

don't trust Olympus. I got a whole new e-1 with all pro line lenses. great performance but over time they dropped everything to m43. I lastly sold e-1, 14-54, fl36 and all accessories for $300 this year. there is no continuity I am afraid, rather spend more money on FF brands.

 

[mh2000]

As hard as it is for 4/3 users to give up what was a good and promising system, m43 just made more sense and I think Oly did the right thing in shifting everything into m43. I know those that got burned are going to be as unhappy as old Canon FD shooters (some of whom are still furious!), but Oly was just finding its way into the digital market. I think it is remarkable that they have actually made it as well as they did. If you remember, they started out so far behind Canon and Nikon and their initial offering was really expensive!

Anyway, I can't see any way that Oly can compete in the FF arena, so better to just stick with m43. It's a great creative system, even if not really "pro."

don't trust Olympus. I got a whole new e-1 with all pro line lenses. great performance but over time they dropped everything to m43. I lastly sold e-1, 14-54, fl36 and all accessories for $300 this year. there is no continuity I am afraid, rather spend more money on FF brands.

 

[Chris101]

It would be a huge risk for a camera manufacturer that is barely hanging on. Their digital Pen line is doing well, and they should concentrate on keeping it popular and state of the art. However, if they did, AND used it to make a real digital OM, I would have to look very closely at it. Nikon's Df is the model for this type of camera, but it would need to use a mount that would be compatible with OM-Zuiko lenses. While the Df is priced beyond what I would pay for it, I would pay that much for a digital OM.

ps, OM-D EM-5 or whatever need not apply.

pps,

... I know those that got burned are going to be as unhappy as old Canon FD shooters (some of whom are still furious!) ...

AAargggg! You HAD to bring that up didn't you! (I one of the group you mention.)

 

[aizan]

i wish those "super 4/3" rumors were true, because i'd prefer a full frame mirrorless camera with a 4:3 sensor over any full frame camera, slr or mirrorless, that had a 2:3 sensor.

on the other hand, i wish m43's sensor was 2:3.

 

[semilog]

No.

Next question?

 

[semilog]

don't trust Olympus. I got a whole new e-1 with all pro line lenses. great performance but over time they dropped everything to m43. I lastly sold e-1, 14-54, fl36 and all accessories for $300 this year. there is no continuity I am afraid, rather spend more money on FF brands.

Oh, please. You might as well say "don't trust Canon" because the FD mount was abandoned along with 134 Canon lenses and scores of third party lenses for the mount. To say nothing of the orphaned Leica R system.

Both Panasonic and Olympus support this mount, and Pana supports it for pro video as well as still cameras. µ4/3 is a good deal safer than, say, the Sony FF mount.

 

[Chris101]

Oh, please. You might as well say "don't trust Canon" because the FD mount was abandoned.

Rub it in ... 😕🙁😡

 

[ruby.monkey]

don't trust Olympus. I got a whole new e-1 with all pro line lenses. great performance but over time they dropped everything to m43. I lastly sold e-1, 14-54, fl36 and all accessories for $300 this year. there is no continuity I am afraid, rather spend more money on FF brands.

Couldn't you have upgraded to an E-M1 and still used your then-current lenses effectively? Sounds like continuity to me.

 

[gavinlg]

Hell yes they should. FF cameras can be made small. See A7. Lenses will need some trick engineering though.

 

[NazgulKing]

No matter what they say, they will always hit the headroom on performance with a small sensor much more quickly than with a larger sensor. Sure it is easier to design a good lens with a long focal length but narrow field of view, but you ain't going to get any better than that. As it is, many m43 lenses are hitting their diffraction limits pretty fast and quick and won't get any better if sensor resolution cannot get better or if they cannot mount a fast enough lens. And since lens size scales with the f-stop, you are going to return to the age old size problem.

 

[Keith]

When you have a cupboard full of Zuiko lenses a full frame Oly is a tantalising prospect and the path that Nikon have taken with the DF could be the way to go.

But with less pork of course!

 

[jarski]

It would be a huge risk for a camera manufacturer that is barely hanging on. ...

this+++

I think they should concentrate to keep appealing masses for now (FB connectivity, better software etc.), to keep company afloat.

 

[jsrockit]

The E-M1 appears to be doing well no?

 

[defconfunk]

When I first saw this thread I though "Oh no, this again". But since you're starting with my point, I really do't have to restate it - thanks traveler! 🙂

For the people who feel burned by Oly dropping support for the 43 system - I have to say you just didn't wait long enough. I'm using my 43 lenses with the E-M1 and am very happy (anyone wanting to sell 43 glass for next to nothing, please PM me 😉 ). And for the people wanting to use OM glass on the system - Yes, it crops, and that changes the personality of the lens, but the images are still very sharp and they have the wonderful contrast and earth-tone rendering that the OM glass has when shooting full frame.

I'm with Semilog on the idea of Sony FF Nex lenses. Sony has never been good at supporting technologies. The fear that Sony will just walk away from an unprofitable system kept me away from the NEX cameras, and now they are splitting that line into two, one of which for a much smaller market. I love what I've seen of the A7, and I really want them to succeed. But I'm not putting my money behind that.

If either Panasonic or Olympus go under, the m43 format lives on. With BlackMagic involved its getting a nice foot hold in the documentary film business (basically the people who used to use 16mm film). There is talk of Sigma putting out a m43 body. And of course there are the less-than-stellar Kodak and Polaroid branded m43 cameras. It's growing into a full eco-system.

If Olympus was in top financial shape and juggernaut who could afford to blows tens of millions on a vanity project, I'd love to see them do a larger than full frame system (ala Leica S).

 

[maitani]

oly is late to the party, even the 6 years advance were not enough to understand people want fullframe.
sony runs away with the gold medal, leaving dust and and paralized competitors behind.

 

[Godfrey]

My ten year old E-1 is still working beautifully. And my FT lenses are still working nicely on the latest E-M1 body.

I don't feel abandoned at all ... the E-M1 body a superior performer compared to the E-1, and the E-3 and E-5 bodies I had in the past.

Olympus is making what I consider to be the most compelling system on the market, designed for digital from the ground up. Everyone else is compromising around their lens line.

G

 

[jsrockit]

Everyone else is compromising around their lens line.

Fujifilm??

 

[Noll]

Unless it's a digital OM-1 (or OM-4Ti) designed to work with OM glass, no. If they're making any money on m4/3 now (are they?), I'd rather have Olympus stick around as a camera maker than to see them go bust on an albatross of a new system.