Olympus sells Imaging Business

[Super8]

11 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

If MFT is dead, APSC and FF aren't that far behind. Can't really tell the difference, only in size and price. I guess we should all go to Medium Format-? That's the right format to invest in? It's ridiculous. As I see it, not much new has appeared in the past 4-5 years, only prices.

Here's my buying advice in 2020 in a nutshell: look at the images. Do you like it? Look at the portability and feature-set. If it's feels right, can you afford it? If not, look at used. Decide to buy or just use what you have with its limitations.

You can take a good picture with an iPhone.  So that kinda defeats the purpose of your comment.  You might want to compare the MFT images and VIDEO and see where the GH5 lands and everything else that full frame.  Maybe it's anything above 4K that's an issue with MFT but full frame sensor technology has just started to get pushed. MFT on the other hand seems maxed out.  I never said MFT was bad it's just going to get left behind.  If companies don;t make MFT cameras then what's the point of staying with MFT? At some point you won't have cameras to use the MFT glass with.

[anonim]

I see just great chance for Blackmagic to acquire missing parts in production chain and technology. Ibis, lenses/optic, stellar weather sealing, precision quality - next step to bring closer to higher indie market something very similar/parallel  to Arri's offer of quality. They even share some nice ambassador person.

Being marketed as photo oriented camera, today is imho some sot of suicidal decision. Its not about m43 or FF etc. - it's about new 5G world, exclusivity of screen media, and changed field of creativity. Less and less creative people will be interested/occupied with photos, more and more in video/sort-of-movie making. Creative language is (first and secretly) based on distinguishable form of expression: taking photo today is evolved even in kindergarten. Just wealthy retired buyers and specs/GAS fans are primarily interested for sensor size and endless web discussions about it. New buyers, young aspiring artists or travel adventurers will simply ask - what is best/cheaper tool/line for articulation of more sophisticated creative impulses and ambitions. 

(Inside of four East EU country where I have credible info and insight - interest in Panasonic FF is zero. Actually, there where m43 line was always live, FF offer mostly even not exists. You need special order.)

[noone]

18 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Nah! Medium Format is not far behind, they'll die out too. 

Large Format Digital photography is the only path forward now! And you're fools to buy into any other system which isn't large format. 

I will wait until they put that large format sensor into the I-phony 36!

I would love it if Olympus survived as a going progressive photography company.

 

 

[John Matthews]

I love how people seem to always say: "my phone can do this or that". Sure it CAN, but what about the experience and quality of the results? It just takes all the fun out of it. I feel more comfortable shooting on my Canon Point-and-shoot from 2004. 

-"But remember that shot they took in that Hollywood film? It was shot on an iPhone and you didn't even notice!" I don't really care.

There will be new MFT cameras on the market for at least 5 more years, used working cameras for 20-30 years or more. I'll be about 77 years old (if I live that long). But shouldn't I invest in a system that I can keep for life and future generations? That's only true with vintage manual lenses. And anyway, I doubt anyone's grandchildren are going to care or want to use it. Great, now I'm depressed.

 

[anonim]

29 minutes ago, Super8 said:

You can take a good picture with an iPhone.  So that kinda defeats the purpose of your comment.  You might want to compare the MFT images and VIDEO and see where the GH5 lands and everything else that full frame.  Maybe it's anything above 4K that's an issue with MFT but full frame sensor technology has just started to get pushed. MFT on the other hand seems maxed out.  I never said MFT was bad it's just going to get left behind.  If companies don;t make MFT cameras then what's the point of staying with MFT? At some point you won't have cameras to use the MFT glass with.

Live now, express yourself now. What's the point about just evaluating, calculating, being scared of lose or what will be better money future investment, instead of using any of marvelous option and sharing results? We are at the peak of possibility to do it - maybe mostly grateful to m43 offer. At some point we will not have capability or existence to do it - I know we all know it, but just to remind 

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, noone said:

I will wait until they put that large format sensor into the I-phony 36!

The camera sensor and the phone's screen will be the same size!

[IronFilm]

49 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

-"But remember that shot they took in that Hollywood film? It was shot on an iPhone and you didn't even notice!" I don't really care.

People always fail to mention ALL THE OTHER STUFF that got "shot with" other than just the iPhone. 

For instance just with one single crew position: the sound mixer, I know he was using tens and tens and tens of thousands of dollars worth of professional sound gear. 

Ditto all the other departments too I bet. 

[kye]

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

You can take a good picture with an iPhone.  So that kinda defeats the purpose of your comment.  You might want to compare the MFT images and VIDEO and see where the GH5 lands and everything else that full frame.  Maybe it's anything above 4K that's an issue with MFT but full frame sensor technology has just started to get pushed. MFT on the other hand seems maxed out.  I never said MFT was bad it's just going to get left behind.  If companies don;t make MFT cameras then what's the point of staying with MFT? At some point you won't have cameras to use the MFT glass with.

I think your argument is based around the idea that lenses are an investment, but they're not, they're a consumable.

I understand why you might think that, because it's a myth that seems to be on endless repeat in photography circles.

To understand why I don't believe that lenses are an investment, have a look at the Camera-Wiki Lens Mounts page, or the Wikipedia Flange focal distance page, and see how many of the mounts are still in-use on a current model camera.  There are things like PL, and EF (although its days are numbered), but the vast vast majority of them are essentially dead.  Even if you take very good care of them (the best way by never using them!) they will still age and the rubber and lubricants will dry out, with plastics becoming brittle, and coatings changing over time (yellowing, for example).  A second hand market does exist for some of the exotic lenses of yester-year, but unless you're talking about the pinnacle of the range, then they're worth very little.

MFT is a dead mount in the same way that EF is a dead mount - it is supported by current flagship cameras with specs that remain desirable, but is likely to decline in the future.

I would hesitate to call PL mount a dead mount, but anything else probably has the writing on the wall, it's just a matter of time.

I invested in MFT glass considering it a purchase that I would use for a period of time, get value out of, and then at some point it would be worth nothing to me and likely to other people as well.  Just like the shiny new camera bodies that everyone loves to salivate over.  I have some of the most desirable MFT lenses around, but the total cost was still in the same league as buying a single camera body.

In terms of the GH5 having been left behind, do a count of how many current model cameras can match the 4K60, or the 400Mbps All-I 4K 10-bit internal, or the 5K 10-bit open gate h.265.  Odds are whatever it is you're using can't do that.  There are some cameras that can, but odds are that I can't get them into a museum or historical monument without security asking me if I'm a professional, which wouldn't matter because my arm would probably fall off having to carry it around all day.

All technology goes down in value over time.  Relying on the resale value of any piece of equipment to justify its ROI is a recipe for losing your money.

I don't understand why people think of equipment in terms of resale value - it's purpose is to be used, not traded.

[leslie]

7 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Nah! Medium Format is not far behind, they'll die out too. 

Large Format Digital photography is the only path forward now! And you're fools to buy into any other system which isn't large format. 

 dammit, i hate you guys, i just bought a ff lens made in 1971 and im looking at an even older lens..... Anyway i think you people have too much time on your hands  😛

[bjohn]

4 hours ago, kye said:

think your argument is based around the idea that lenses are an investment, but they're not, they're a consumable.

Sure, they're a consumable, but in general the maxim of "date your camera, marry your lenses" still applies. Lenses don't last forever but they almost always outlast cameras. I'm using some 50-year-old Minolta lenses on MFT and E-mount cameras, and could use them on L-mount and Nikon Z-mount among others. Those lenses offer a Leica look for a tiny fraction of the cost and with better lens-to-lens consistency than Leica. PL mount cinema lenses of any vintage can be used on any of these cameras as well with adapters. Camera technologies evolve faster than lens technologies, so you're likely to upgrade your camera much more frequently than your lenses, as long as adapters for your new cameras are available.

[heart0less]

22 minutes ago, bjohn said:

I'm using some 50-year-old Minolta lenses [...] Those lenses offer a Leica look for a tiny fraction of the cost and with better lens-to-lens consistency than Leica.

You piqued my curiosity.. Which Minolta lenses do you refer to?

[bjohn]

16 minutes ago, heart0less said:

You piqued my curiosity.. Which Minolta lenses do you refer to?

The Rokkors. See https://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?92246-Minolta-Rokkor-Survival-Guide

There's some good history and detail there.

There are also reviews of individual lenses here: https://phillipreeve.net/blog/lenses/minolta-mcmd/

In terms of value for money, these are hard to beat. They have all the usual problems of old lenses designed for film when you use them on modern digital cameras, but if you want character and incredible colors, it's worth getting a few. I recently got the 55mm f1.7 Rokkor for about $40 on eBay and it's incredible.

[Video Hummus]

Maybe Elon Musk is an Olympus fanboy and can’t help himself...

The more I read about JIP and the defunct companies it buys almost none of them survive and the ones that do get totally outsourced and lose their soul.

Olympus Imaging’s carcass is about to be fed to the vultures. Damn shame.

And with the bottom falling out of ILC market in general it’s probably very unlikely Panasonic or Sigma will pony up any money for Olympus patents and R&D.  

[rawshooter]

5 hours ago, bjohn said:

Sure, they're a consumable, but in general the maxim of "date your camera, marry your lenses" still applies. Lenses don't last forever but they almost always outlast cameras.

This is unfortunately no longer true for fully electronic mirrorless lenses - which not only depend on system-specific protocols to function at all, but also heavily rely on in-camera digital geometry and vignetting correction. 

When a mirrorless system falters, you can pretty much throw away the lenses. (As it happened before with Nikon 1 and Samsung NX.)

[noone]

1 hour ago, rawshooter said:

This is unfortunately no longer true for fully electronic mirrorless lenses - which not only depend on system-specific protocols to function at all, but also heavily rely on in-camera digital geometry and vignetting correction. 

When a mirrorless system falters, you can pretty much throw away the lenses. (As it happened before with Nikon 1 and Samsung NX.)

So how come you can fully use Sony FE/E made for mirrorless lenses on Nikon mirrorless cameras?

Most of the FF mirrorless systems are too new for adapters but they are coming along fairly rapidly.

It is also still easier to adapt the vast numbers of DSLR lenses too and especially Canon EF to mirrorless (except the short lived Pentax K mount mirrorless of some years ago that used the same long K mount with its long flange).

 

The issue will be as always, those with longer flange distances will be able to adapt to systems with smaller flange distances without using glass in adapters.

The camera makers will not want you adapting other system lenses to their cameras (though Sony seemed to at least for a while with Canon DSLR EF lenses, probably to get people interested and it worked).

[Andrew Reid]

Indeed not all mirrorless lenses are digitally corrected for distortion, vignetting, etc. And I wouldn't want to correct for vignetting anyway, I prefer my lenses to have some graceful fall off in the corners wide open (not a hard vignette you understand, of course)

The Leica Q is an example of a heavily digitally corrected optic. I have found nothing this extreme amongst full frame mirrorless lenses. Simply shoot RAW and open the file in an app that doesn't apply the corrections to find out.

[Super8]

18 hours ago, kye said:

I think your argument is based around the idea that lenses are an investment, but they're not, they're a consumable.

I understand why you might think that, because it's a myth that seems to be on endless repeat in photography circles.

MFT is dead because companies will stop making the bodies and sensors.  I didn't say anything about lenses.  My point should have been clear.

Quote

In terms of the GH5 having been left behind, do a count of how many current model cameras can match the 4K60, or the 400Mbps All-I 4K 10-bit internal, or the 5K 10-bit open gate h.265.  Odds are whatever it is you're using can't do that.  There are some cameras that can, but odds are that I can't get them into a museum or historical monument without security asking me if I'm a professional, which wouldn't matter because my arm would probably fall off having to carry it around all day.

You kinda discredit yourself with this comment.  4K60, or the 400Mbps All-I 4K 10-bit internal, or the 5K 10-bit open gate h.265 on the GH5 is not the same as what's produced with the S1H.  The compressed, sharpened, 10-bit that looks like 8-bit H.265 files from the GH5 just doesn't hold up in any way. 

You have a time where specs don't match the image produced. 

And if the GH5 produced that good of an image then it would be relevant today.

[kye]

12 minutes ago, Super8 said:

MFT is dead because companies will stop making the bodies and sensors.  I didn't say anything about lenses.  My point should have been clear.

You kinda discredit yourself with this comment.  4K60, or the 400Mbps All-I 4K 10-bit internal, or the 5K 10-bit open gate h.265 on the GH5 is not the same as what's produced with the S1H.  The compressed, sharpened, 10-bit that looks like 8-bit H.265 files from the GH5 just doesn't hold up in any way. 

You have a time where specs don't match the image produced. 

And if the GH5 produced that good of an image then it would be relevant today.

Your arguments all appear to be circular, or simply saying that things that are MFT or are old are somehow inferior by default.  I guess the Alexa is screwed then, it's really old, the image is soft as hell and it's not FF either!

The S1H might well make a nicer image than the GH5, I didn't say that no camera produced a nicer image.  In fact the S1H sure better make a nicer image - is it twice or three times the current cost of a GH5?  I haven't kept tabs.  It's also large and heavy in comparison.

You can't say that the GH5 is irrelevant because there's a camera with a nicer image that costs way more and is larger and heavier.  If so, the S1H is irrelevant because the Sony Venice exists.

You may not like it, but the 10-bit is still 10-bit.  I know because I shoot in available light high DR situations and grade heavily, and even after attempts to break the image, it has held up.  Someone even made a comment on these forums in the last month or so lamenting the lack of 4k60 in the current lineup of camera bodies.  You can't really argue that its 60p isn't 60p.

Of course there are cameras that make a nicer image.

It sounds like you're living in the internet / vlog / YT / camera reviewer / forums / photographer-as-videographer bubble and don't really know what is happening in the industry.  The reality of working DOPs is that most of them aren't online talking about their equipment, they're out in the world shooting and their images are only available on Netflix / Amazon / Hulu / etc, or non-camera YT channels.

You have absolutely no idea what most of the content you watch in a given day is shot on.  If a camera produces a good enough image then when it's on TV you'll have no idea you're watching that camera.  The GH5 is out there being used by working pros and it's completely invisible to us.  The entire industry is in upheaval with far less money to go around in some areas, in such times people who are interested in feeding their families will put off upgrades and just keep working.

I'm not saying that the GH5 is the best camera in the world, but you're acting like it's no longer being used by anyone making content, which simply isn't true.

[Super8]

18 minutes ago, kye said:

Your arguments all appear to be circular, or simply saying that things that are MFT or are old are somehow inferior by default. 

No it's simple.  Try and follow.

When NO ONE makes MFT cameras anymore then that format is dead.  It happened to DSLR's.

You could say the PS2 is the greatest gaming system ever or that the Dreamcast rules and you still have one.  (This will be you with MFT gear).

Quote

The reality of working DOPs is that most of them aren't online talking about their equipment, they're out in the world shooting and their images are only available on Netflix / Amazon / Hulu / etc, or non-camera YT channels.

Most of the real world is locked down or coming out of lock down.  I hire people that have worked on Marvel, and Netflix series.

You really don't have a clue at all.  RED owners do hang out on RED forums. EVA owners hand out online also and the list goes on and on.  The EOSHD is not the cine gear hangout is it? That doesn't mean we don't work in the industry or with people in the industry. 

Quote

It sounds like you're living in the internet / vlog / YT / camera reviewer / forums / photographer-as-videographer bubble and don't really know what is happening in the industry. 

I'll always appreciate and love photography.  Looks like you can't see the connection between photography and video.

Wait - You're defending the GH5 / MFT but at the same time you make back handed comments about me not "what is happening in the industry." And then say "The reality of working DOPs is that most of them aren't online".  really? Which one are you?

Quote

The S1H might well make a nicer image than the GH5, I didn't say that no camera produced a nicer image.  In fact the S1H sure better make a nicer image - is it twice or three times the current cost of a GH5?  I haven't kept tabs.  It's also large and heavy in comparison.

I thought you

Quote

 The GH5 is out there being used by working pros and it's completely invisible to us.

It's invisible to use because A) it's not Netflix or Cine approved and would be laughed at if you brought a GH5 on set or used it as part of a pitch on a union gig.  B) it's invisible to use because no one is using the GH5 in cinematography  world. C) Working pro's are not using the GH5 on professional gigs that don't fall under run and gun productions. D) The bigger the budget the better gear you get and the better DP you get.  E) Name that A,B,C or D list working pro that's using the GH5 as it's main camera on all professional gigs.

Quote

You have absolutely no idea what most of the content you watch in a given day is shot on.  If a camera produces a good enough image then when it's on TV you'll have no idea you're watching that camera.  The GH5 is out there being used by working pros and it's completely invisible to us. 

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.  You seem to be hinting the GH5 is being used and seen on tv and it's not.  Everyone has the list of cameras and gear used on everything you see on the broadcast tv.  I'm also not talking about what American Pickers was shot with.

Quote

The entire industry is in upheaval with far less money to go around in some areas, in such times people who are interested in feeding their families will put off upgrades and just keep working.

The upheaval isn't causing people to go out and buy GH5's for their next production.  TV and Netflix haven't lowered it's standards and accepted the GH5

Not sure why you don't see all the signs about MFT's longevity.  It has nothing to do with the quality of MFT and everything to do with what will be produced. 

Bloodlines was shot with the Sony F55 and cinematographer Jaimie Reynoso work is brilliant.

 

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, Super8 said:

It's invisible to use because A) it's not Netflix or Cine approved and would be laughed at if you brought a GH5 on set or used it as part of a pitch on a union gig.  B) it's invisible to use because no one is using the GH5 in cinematography  world. C) Working pro's are not using the GH5 on professional gigs that don't fall under run and gun productions. D) The bigger the budget the better gear you get and the better DP you get. 

Oh man, with all of what you said about the GH5, I hope nobody has ever used something older and worse..... like the GH4!

https://web.archive.org/web/20180907094729/https://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/news-features/better-call-saul-formats-framing-and-film-noir-influences-series-608600

Oops, did a Panasonic GH4 get used heaps on the hit show "Better Call Saul"??

Yes. Yes it did. 

 

1 hour ago, Super8 said:

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.  You seem to be hinting the GH5 is being used and seen on tv and it's not.  Everyone has the list of cameras and gear used on everything you see on the broadcast tv.  I'm also not talking about what American Pickers was shot with.

Is that not screened on Broadcast TV too? Are the people who work on that not professionals?