Olympus sells Imaging Business

[anonim]

Blackmagic EM1 4k/6k with IBIS and Braw would be something! Of course, with BM 12-100mm parfocal cine lens as Fincher-kit. It's important that all technology s here - and now, as it seems, open to be united. I bet that art-for-all visionary impulse in Grant Petty is seriously challenged.

BTW, Imo both argumentation - @Super 8 and @kye are super correct and nice for reading, but from different approaching angle. Those who are primarily afraid for future proof investment, logically have to least believe in longevity of m43. Who's oriented to spend least money and create artistic content now, will at highest degree enjoy incredible offer of so mature and more and more evolving and affordable highend lens ecosystem of m43 (cine zoom, anamorphic, tiltshift lenses. (Actually, I think that Olympus codec/non video restrictions constrained further development of m43 format and stopped best usage of their technology.)

[noone]

Maybe ALL of the major old style imaging companies are in danger of disappearing (especially if they just have gentle udates).

I have just purchased a five year old Sony Rx100 iv for very cheap.

I will get it in a week or two but just comparing its sensor on DXO against many of the other cameras I have had, it is only the FF Sony's that have had much better sensors ...all the others have been pretty much around the same or worse (APSC DSLRs from Canon, Pentax and Nikon, 4/3 DSLR from Olympus, M43 mirrorless from Panasonic and Olympus and a Pentax Q as well as a Canon G10 high end P&S from my late Dad...A five year old camera with a one inch sensor as good as some not THAT much older much larger sensors.   

 Imagine what high end phones will be like in five more years!

Only reasons for my A7s will be really low light, my tilt shift, 1:1 macro and really isolating a subject  but for most normal shooting the little Rx100 will do for stills and same with video (i also have an old superzoom when i want THAT....I am getting old and a 300 2.8 is starting to be a pain to carry on a walk).

 

Olympus may well not be the only one  (I stil llike to think there is hope for them).

M43 will survive for quite a while yet even without Oly in part because video is not necessarily what many users want and a LOT of older photographers want to carry smaller lighter gear while still having a choice of lenses.

[kye]

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

No it's simple.  Try and follow.

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

I'm following along quite nicely, thank you for your screaming condescension, it is really helping this conversation along!  (Although it's not doing much to make me think that you're a serious working professional who can be trusted to make balanced judgments about an entire industry, but you know, you do you.)

I agree that when no-one makes MFT cameras any more then the format will be dead.  The issue here is that people still are making MFT cameras.

The P4K is an MFT camera that pushed what was possible at a given price point when it was released.  The Z CAM E2-M4 was only announced a few months ago (?) and is a MFT cine camera.  The GH5 is still a current model and although it is overdue for a refresh, it's not that much overdue, and there hasn't been any confirmation from Panasonic (that I know of anyway) that their FF line replaces the GH line.

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

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.

Ok, so assuming you're telling the truth, your experience might be in the part of the industry that is too high-end.  Anyone who has worked on a Marvel production or on the Netflix approved sets that you reference probably hasn't worked in a low budget indy or web production since before the GH5 was released (or the GH4 for that matter!).

Everyone has blind spots in their experience.  One of my blind spots is the entire non-english-speaking world for example.  I'm a knowledgable guy, but not about much of what's going on in Turkmenistan.  Blind spots are inevitable, I fear that you're confusing your (probably large amount of) knowledge with the idea that you have a good overview of the entire camera-buying market.

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

You really don't have a clue at all.

Thanks - I was beginning to think I knew everything and was becoming omnipotent, but your timely reminder has staved off a bout of madness.

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

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. 

I am familiar with the RED forums, I'm registered there. I'm also familiar with CML, and have registered there too.  I haven't sought out EVA owners, but there's a few on here.

I have sought out GH5 users though, and I didn't find any significant concentrations of them, except here.  Which might be why so many people are disagreeing with you and down voting your posts.

But back to you telling me I don't know anything....

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

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

They're both done with cameras right?

2 hours ago, Super8 said:

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?

It's great that we've finally gotten to the point in the conversation where you ask about my background.

I'm a guy who makes home videos.  I shoot, edit, colour grade, and then publish my own work.  You might then conclude that I wouldn't have the faintest idea about anything, but this would be untrue, because you see, I have been teaching myself to do everything, including colour grade, which leads me to why I might think I know something about this.

You see, I hang out on the colour grading forums with professional colourists.  So while you might be off making things and only being exposed to one tier of the industry, colourists (who aren't in the upper echelons of feature films) are seeing a wide spectrum of professional work done.  and when I got my GH5 and started speaking to them about how to colour grade it, I learned they regularly see footage from cameras like the GH5 on the low-budget productions that can only just afford a colourist.

You reference American Pickers, but that's precisely the kind of production that might use a GH5.  That and documentaries where owning the camera would be an advantage instead of having to rent an Alexa or C300 on and off over months, maybe with short notice if events unfold and they need to get to location ASAP.

2 hours 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.  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.

I guess this is where we start to question what your definition of a professional DP is, and if it includes professional indy film-makers or you tubers or vloggers, but it actually doesn't matter.

We're not talking about if the GH5 is currently a major force in blockbuster Hollywood productions.  We're not even talking about if MFT has ever put an image on Netflix.  We're talking about if MFT is dead, and to talk about that we only have to talk about who is buying it.

This means that we're talking about customers.

Which means that it does include all the professional indy film-makers and you tubers and vloggers and even little old me shooting little Suzy blowing out the candles on her 3rd birthday cake.

MFT was never sold as a high-end cine system.  Even when it came out it was for the size of production that couldn't afford to rent equipment or didn't suit the type of shooting schedule involved.

3 hours ago, Super8 said:

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. 

This is where you've gotten me wrong.  I do see the signs.  MFT is a terrible investment.  So is EF.  If someone was asking on here if they should buy into the MFT system I would tell them to carefully evaluate their options.

My take on the industry is that:

• Photography always had a FF superiority complex and smaller sensors are basically being eaten by smartphones, and now a Medium Format fetish is starting to emerge
• Cinematography had standardised on S35 but has recently started shifting to larger sensors
• The industry is in decline due to smartphones and less players means there will be attrition (which this thread is about) and considering the above going S35 or FF might be the 'safer' option
• MFT might be a good recommendation if the person asking had a specific requirement, such as a size/weight limitation, a cost limitation, or some combination of things (the way I do)

I would also suggest that cameras and lenses are an investment, but you pay for them in $$$ and you get a return in images, not resale value.

This seems to me like a relatively balanced and nuanced view.  Indicative of pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses, and context playing an important part in any decision.

On the other hand, there's you saying things like "MFT is dead because companies will stop making the bodies and sensors."  Not particularly nuanced.

[bjohn]

3 hours ago, Super8 said:

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

Technically it's true, but nobody's stopping you from continuing to use the enormous range of good cameras and lenses still available (even if only secondhand) for dead formats.

Minidisc has been dead for a long time, but I still have a minidisc recorder that I bought in 1996, along with a lifetime supply of minidiscs (one minidisc can be re-recorded thousands of times and I have about 20 of them). I still use it occasionally for some recording situations and the sound quality is excellent. I recorded an interview on minidisc as part of a documentary I'm working on and the sound quality is indistinguishable from that of other interviews recorded on a Sound Devices MixPre 6 with a Sennheiser MKH 8060.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, noone said:

Maybe ALL of the major old style imaging companies are in danger of disappearing (especially if they just have gentle udates).

I have just purchased a five year old Sony Rx100 iv for very cheap.

I will get it in a week or two but just comparing its sensor on DXO against many of the other cameras I have had, it is only the FF Sony's that have had much better sensors ...all the others have been pretty much around the same or worse (APSC DSLRs from Canon, Pentax and Nikon, 4/3 DSLR from Olympus, M43 mirrorless from Panasonic and Olympus and a Pentax Q as well as a Canon G10 high end P&S from my late Dad...A five year old camera with a one inch sensor as good as some not THAT much older much larger sensors.   

Yeah, my super old and dirt cheap Nikon D5200 still has a close to identical performance as the best Nikon DX cameras in terms of pure image quality from the sensor itself. 

This is why I tell people to not bother too much about looking at the photo capabilities of cameras, they've basically stalled out in terms of progress, but the video tech they can record with is still improving. (but that is slowing down too I feel....)

  

1 hour ago, kye said:

Ok, so assuming you're telling the truth, your experience might be in the part of the industry that is too high-end.  Anyone who has worked on a Marvel production or on the Netflix approved sets that you reference probably hasn't worked in a low budget indy or web production since before the GH5 was released (or the GH4 for that matter!).

Everyone has blind spots in their experience.  One of my blind spots is the entire non-english-speaking world for example.  I'm a knowledgable guy, but not about much of what's going on in Turkmenistan.  Blind spots are inevitable, I fear that you're confusing your (probably large amount of) knowledge with the idea that you have a good overview of the entire camera-buying market.

THIS! x10000

People sometimes only see their own little world. We're all guilty of that. 

Although I haven't worked on a Marvel set, I have worked on the Avatar set, and on Netflix shows too. However, the vast bulk of my experience is on Indie Film Sets or Corporate Shoots or Doco/Reality TV, so I definitely have a strong bias in that direction. 

 

  

1 hour ago, kye said:

I guess this is where we start to question what your definition of a professional DP is, and if it includes professional indy film-makers or you tubers or vloggers, but it actually doesn't matter.

If a person earns a living income from filmmaking, and gets regular credits as "DoP" then I'm happy to call them a "professional DoP".

 

1 hour ago, kye said:

MFT was never sold as a high-end cine system.  Even when it came out it was for the size of production that couldn't afford to rent equipment or didn't suit the type of shooting schedule involved.

Am super disappointed Panasonic never ever made an AF100 mk2!
Or released the DVX200 with a MFT mount. 
Or the EVA1 with a MFT mount. 

Or Blackmagic with an URSA Mini 4K MFT!

 

  

1 hour ago, kye said:

• Photography always had a FF superiority complex and smaller sensors are basically being eaten by smartphones, and now a Medium Format fetish is starting to emerge

Wonder if 20yrs from now we'll be talking about FF (folks "looking down at it") like we do now with MFT? Because MF Mirrorless has become "mainstream" and cheap. 

 

  

1 hour ago, kye said:

• Cinematography had standardised on S35 but has recently started shifting to larger sensors

I'd hold off and saying they've started to shift over!
Maybe not just yet. 
I'd say people are more dabbling/experimenting with larger sensor cinema cameras. 

S35 still reigns strong as #1 by a very very very large margin. 

[Cas1]

My 72 year old dad carries a point and shoot small Samsung on his vacations, used to shoot Pentax 35mm and super 8, he does not recognise or see value in better image quality. I think the same goes for average Joe and Jane. They're already saturated with images through social media, and have no more appetite.

Further more I think companies are not listening enough to end users' needs and desires. Often I think it's sheer unwillingness or laziness, as annoyances appear to be just a software setting away.
Sometimes I think consumers are just an afterthought, and the real money is made else where like in medical or surveillance or military tech.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

Regarding to Olympus: the best end (with 0% chance of happening) would be Sony buying Olympus.

They could pull a Panasonic and drop the APS-C line (which never got so much love from Sony after their FF move - the A6xxx is almost the same since 2014). They could port to Olympus their AF tech, better codecs, and finally release a newer m43 sensor with all bells and whistles
 (BSI, stacked, all the tech), like a 24mp unit with Fuji low light performance. An OM-D with good low light, good AF, 4k60p, 10 bit output, with Olympus colors and ergonomics, anyone?

And Sony could use Olympus knowledge to improve their IBIS and color science, Zuiko expertise in great compact lenses and optics. Or maybe a FF OM-D with E-mount.

But will not happen. In fact, Sony looks somewhat quiet in these days...
 

[MrSMW]

If only Olympus had joined the L Mount alliance...

Slightly smaller but even better ergos than the S1, never mind the SL/2...

Full frame Zuiko lenses...

Oh the glory that could have been...

Could still be...?

Maybe Sony could buy them and become a real camera company

[Super8]

 

Quote

We're not talking about if the GH5 is currently a major force in blockbuster Hollywood productions.  We're not even talking about if MFT has ever put an image on Netflix.  We're talking about if MFT is dead, and to talk about that we only have to talk about who is buying it.

Your last post and this one are all over the place and your tone is aggressive. 

Quote

Photography always had a FF superiority complex and smaller sensors are basically being eaten by smartphones, and now a Medium Format fetish is starting to emerge

Photography is it's own deal.  Medium format is great but just because you are influenced by You Tube videos doesn't mean that industry has a medium format fetish.  Technology moves forward and medium format is great showcase for this. If you understood photography and the needs of photographers you would know what medium format is not an option for professionals.

Quote

I would also suggest that cameras and lenses are an investment, but you pay for them in $$$ and you get a return in images, not resale value.

You actually get to earn an income for your investment in your camera gear.

Quote

Cinematography had standardised on S35 but has recently started shifting to larger sensors

And this is why the shift upward is away from MFT.

Quote

MFT might be a good recommendation if the person asking had a specific requirement, such as a size/weight limitation, a cost limitation, or some combination of things (the way I do)

Sorry but the size weight argument is a cop out and weak if that's the main selling point for MFT.  I know your a fan boy of the GH5 and you are emotionally attached but size/weight and even cost is not a selling point like it was 3 years ago. 

Quote

On the other hand, there's you saying things like "MFT is dead because companies will stop making the bodies and sensors."  Not particularly nuanced.

Take a look back at the electronic industry.  Many many examples of technology moving forward and leaving the original hardware behind. 

Remember today's cameras are small computers.  Today's mirrorless sensors and processor technology will passed by and left behind.

 

Quote

You see, I hang out on the color grading forums with professional colorists.  So while you might be off making things and only being exposed to one tier of the industry, colorists (who aren't in the upper echelons of feature films) are seeing a wide spectrum of professional work done.  and when I got my GH5 and started speaking to them about how to color grade it, I learned they regularly see footage from cameras like the GH5 on the low-budget productions that can only just afford a colorist.

If you weren't so blinded and emotional about the GH5 you would realize why professional colorist see a lot of GH5 footage. 

A) A lot of GH5's were sold

B) Based on GH5 specs the uneducated user thought it could be passed on as "professional looking" footage

C) Color grading often comes in to save the day

D) Ask your color grading buddies the top 3 issues with GH5 footage and if they can spot GH5 footage by "it's native look".

See below:  Using the GH5 on productions cause issues with post production cost.  Having to color grade GH5 footage to the extent that it's tv ready is an issue. Do you know how much a colorist day rate is?

Quote

You reference American Pickers, but that's precisely the kind of production that might use a GH5.  That and documentaries where owning the camera would be an advantage instead of having to rent an Alexa or C300 on and off over months, maybe with short notice if events unfold and they need to get to location ASAP.

You might want to stop trying to pretend how American Pickers or any other reality tv production works.  The production crew they hired will be charging the day rate rental cost back to the network.  The network does not but gears and hand it out on set to save rental cost.   Industry standard is to line item everything as a rental fee rate if it's used on set or in production.  You bring a 3 ton lighting truck to a shoot and you're charged for anything that comes off that truck.  In summery the production (American Pickers) is paying gear rental fees regardless.  The hired production company can save money by buying GH5's but you better believe someone is paying to have that GH5 color corrected.  So in the end the production cost is higher than if they used better cameras that need very little color grading.

You might want to compare the Z Cam E2 to the GH5 and see how far back the GH5's image quality really is. At the end of the day you hit record once and you capture. Going back and trying to fix footage from cheap cameras has it's limitations. At some point it's ok to be a image snob or perfectionist.  Who want to look back and say "oh, yeah that was shot on the GH5 because we were fan boys and bought into the system".

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Super8]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

 

Quote

This is why I tell people to not bother too much about looking at the photo capabilities of cameras, they've basically stalled out in terms of progress, but the video tech they can record with is still improving. (but that is slowing down too I feel....)

No this is 100% wrong.

Canon, Nikon and Sony have improved the photo capabilities in the mirrorless video cameras.  The R5 should ba a monster for photo's also.

 

Quote

People sometimes only see their own little world. We're all guilty of that. 

Although I haven't worked on a Marvel set, I have worked on the Avatar set, and on Netflix shows too. However, the vast bulk of my experience is on Indie Film Sets or Corporate Shoots or Doco/Reality TV, so I definitely have a strong bias in that direction. 

I've never worked on a Marvel or Netflix set. I never said I did.  I said I hired guys that have.

 

Quote

If a person earns a living income from filmmaking, and gets regular credits as "DoP" then I'm happy to call them a "professional DoP".

Sure.

 

Quote

Wonder if 20yrs from now we'll be talking about FF (folks "looking down at it") like we do now with MFT? Because MF Mirrorless has become "mainstream" and cheap. 

Medium format for photography will never be fast enough to replace full frame cameras.

 

MFT can produce a cine quality image for sure.  Look at the Z Cam.

 

[newfoundmass]

The truth is people that can't see beyond sensor size have been claiming M43 is a dying system pretty much from the start. This Olympus news certainly isn't a positive for the system as a whole, but I don't know how much Panasonic depended on Olympus, or how much they factored into the viability of the system in Panasonic's eyes. Panasonic really focused on hybrid and video, while Olympus largely focused on photography. There wasn't a ton of overlap between the two. 

I've largely stuck with Panasonic lenses, and most others I know did the same. The only Olympus lens I own is the lovely 7-14mm f2.8. I don't know how much cross over there was between the two user bases; I know some that used Olympus primes on Panasonic bodies, but hardly any of the Olympus users I've seen in the Micro Four Thirds groups I'm in use Panny lenses. 

M43 will always be the superior system for me and my uses. I think a lot of people feel the same way. And I think that as long as Panasonic is able to continue innovating at a faster pace than the others, there will be a market. They'll have to adjust, just like everyone else, to the overall market shrinking, but if they can regain the spirit they had in 2014-2017, I think they can make it. We'll see though. 

Regardless, I'm pretty sure I could go another 5 years with a GH5 and still get lovely images, worse case scenario. 🤣

[noone]

8 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yeah, my super old and dirt cheap Nikon D5200 still has a close to identical performance as the best Nikon DX cameras in terms of pure image quality from the sensor itself. 

This is why I tell people to not bother too much about looking at the photo capabilities of cameras, they've basically stalled out in terms of progress, but the video tech they can record with is still improving. (but that is slowing down too I feel....)

  

 

I would not say stalled but not huge improvements just in image quality terms (other things sure but not IQ).

Just looking at DXO (not to be taken as gospel but seems reasonably right to me as a guide having used quite a few cameras they list), older cameras of particular sensor size do score slightly lower than newer ones generally though it also depends on the companies sometimes recycling older sensors in newer but often lower sensors.  

Older larger sensor cameras still have better IQ than the better newer smaller sensor cameras to a point too.

The top ten cameras on DXO are all MF or FF and came out 2014 (2) , 2015 (2). 2016 (1 but the highest overall scoring), 2017 (2), 2018 (1) and 2019 (2).....Numbers one and two are MF from 2016 and 2014....

The Canon R sits at 34, just behind a MF camera from 2008 (yes 2008).

The highest scoring APSC camera is the Nikon D7200 from 2015 and sits ahead of some older FF and MF cameras.

Your D5200 (2012) still rates very highly and a head of some older MF and even some FF cameras from the same year.

What i like about the little RX100 iv i am getting is that its image quality matches the Panasonic  GX7 I had (if you stick a good lens on the GX7) and I LIKED the GX7 for good light IQ, it is AHEAD of the Canon 7D I had and within a couple of points  behind the Sony Nex 3n I had and cameras like the first gen Oly EM1 (i want) and Pentax KX I used a lot and it leaves some others i have had for dead.

Phone technology is advancing MUCH faster than normal camera tech so five years in phone terms is probably more like ten in camera terms  which is why ALL the camera makers are doomed unless they switch to "phones with cameras" Funnily enough Olympus HAD a mobile phone division but sold it off years ago and sold it to the same company now going to buy Olympus camera division....i guess that says it all really).

[bjohn]

14 minutes ago, noone said:

Phone technology is advancing MUCH faster than normal camera tech so five years in phone terms is probably more like ten in camera terms  which is why ALL the camera makers are doomed unless they switch to "phones with cameras"

Well, that might be going a little far; it's like saying CDs are dead but in fact there's still a thriving market for CDs in some niche markets (classical music, traditional music, for example), and setting aside the fashion/fad for vinyl. Clearly phone cameras have destroyed the point-and-shoot camera market, but the "enthusiast" and "professional" markets are still driving camera sales and development. Whether it's sustainable remains to be seen. I actually bought my first smartphone a few years back (Google Pixel 2) as a camera only, and didn't even put a SIM card into it for a year. Of all the photos I have on Flickr, the only one that received a favorite was one taken with that phone, which is kind of depressing. I recently downgraded to an iPhone but am keeping the Pixel2 as a travel camera because its photos look so much better...still not as good as those from my "real" camera though.

[noone]

2 minutes ago, bjohn said:

Well, that might be going a little far; it's like saying CDs are dead but in fact there's still a thriving market for CDs in some niche markets (classical music, traditional music, for example), and setting aside the fashion/fad for vinyl. Clearly phone cameras have destroyed the point-and-shoot camera market, but the "enthusiast" and "professional" markets are still driving camera sales and development. Whether it's sustainable remains to be seen. I actually bought my first smartphone a few years back (Google Pixel 2) as a camera only, and didn't even put a SIM card into it for a year. Of all the photos I have on Flickr, the only one that received a favorite was one taken with that phone, which is kind of depressing. I recently downgraded to an iPhone but am keeping the Pixel2 as a travel camera because its photos look so much better...still not as good as those from my "real" camera though.

I kind of do agree but put it this way.....Look at where phone cameras were five years ago and where they are now and do the same for real cameras...Now project five years from now!

Sure there will be a place for pro and serious amateur cameras for some time yet but the market will get smaller and smaller (and more expensive too).

Used to be an award winning professional photographer who used medium format and had a main street studio here...last i saw him he had sold up and retired after not being able to sell his studio as a going concern and was using a tiny sensor camera and very happy with the results though his pro work was fantastic.

Me, I hardly ever use my (very cheap) phone as a PHONE and never use its "camera" but I know that good phone cameras take better photos than the small old P&S cameras i have....I have a lovely little Panasonic point and shoot that has tons of control and is fantastic in every way except one ...I hate the photos it takes!     I think phones do better than first generation APSC DSLRs and the 12mp M43 cameras  and in five years who knows! 

 

 

[Super8]

25 minutes ago, noone said:

 

Sure there will be a place for pro and serious amateur cameras for some time yet but the market will get smaller and smaller (and more expensive too).

 

 

 

No not more expensive at all.  The GH5 was $2,000 when it came out.  For $2,000 you'll get more camera and better quality.  Camera makers do not try and make the same product for less money or charge more for a slightly better model.  We've seen this over the last 4 years. 

You will still have the prices set by business models that are 30 years old.  Do some home work and see what price trends have been set over the years.

You'll still have cameras at $300-500-800-1200-1500-2000-3000-3500-4000-$6500 and up.

Why do cine cameras cost so much?   How much does a Arri cost to produce? Parts only?  This is why BM has been able to sell the BMP6K for that low price.  In fact this camera disproves your comment that cameras will be more expensive as the market shrinks. 

In 2020 the call out is for more content that's delivered online.  The camera / cine market will be just fine for long term.

 

[noone]

19 minutes ago, Super8 said:

No not more expensive at all.  The GH5 was $2,000 when it came out.  For $2,000 you'll get more camera and better quality.  Camera makers do not try and make the same product for less money or charge more for a slightly better model.  We've seen this over the last 4 years. 

 

 

When the market shrinks to one tenth its current size, yes, more expensive because the cost per unit to make anything will be dearer and in order to make a profit it will just have to be.      While there is lower stuff to sell in volume they can make higher end stuff a bit cheaper than it otherwise would be but once that lower stuff is swallowed up by phones ...well look at Leica....otherwise it will be cheap rubbish.

 Makers will also take longer to put out new stuff at the lower end to keep it cheaper or have to put up prices  and either way, phones (or devices that have both a phone and camera in them more like) which will just be on an even faster track comparatively.

[Super8]

2 hours ago, noone said:

When the market shrinks to one tenth its current size, yes, more expensive because the cost per unit to make anything will be dearer and in order to make a profit it will just have to be.      While there is lower stuff to sell in volume they can make higher end stuff a bit cheaper than it otherwise would be but once that lower stuff is swallowed up by phones ...well look at Leica....otherwise it will be cheap rubbish.

 Makers will also take longer to put out new stuff at the lower end to keep it cheaper or have to put up prices  and either way, phones (or devices that have both a phone and camera in them more like) which will just be on an even faster track comparatively.

No.  What case study have you seen that proves your fear mongering?  

The market will not shrink to one tenth of it's current size.  The adjustments now are trimming the fat and companies that weren't profitable.   The industry is not going anywhere and current companies will take up sales between them. 

All it does is put money into the remaining companies.

 

[rawshooter]

The G100 is a pretty clear indicator that Panasonic is putting no more significant development into MFT. It's just recycling old components, including the PCB - the camera still has USB 2.0...

I wouldn't expect the GH6 to get more than a CPU upgrade (with the same current-generation ASICs developed for the full frame cameras), but otherwise the same electronics and maybe even the same sensor.

[rawshooter]

3 minutes ago, Super8 said:

No.  What case study have you seen that proves your fear mongering?  

The market will not shrink to one tenth of it's current size. 

 

It already did:

https://www.statista.com/chart/5782/digital-camera-shipments/

 

But one shouldn't even reply to you since you're bullshitting this list.

[Super8]

4 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

The truth is people that can't see beyond sensor size have been claiming M43 is a dying system pretty much from the start. This Olympus news certainly isn't a positive for the system as a whole, but I don't know how much Panasonic depended on Olympus, or how much they factored into the viability of the system in Panasonic's eyes. Panasonic really focused on hybrid and video, while Olympus largely focused on photography. There wasn't a ton of overlap between the two. 

I've largely stuck with Panasonic lenses, and most others I know did the same. The only Olympus lens I own is the lovely 7-14mm f2.8. I don't know how much cross over there was between the two user bases; I know some that used Olympus primes on Panasonic bodies, but hardly any of the Olympus users I've seen in the Micro Four Thirds groups I'm in use Panny lenses. 

M43 will always be the superior system for me and my uses. I think a lot of people feel the same way. And I think that as long as Panasonic is able to continue innovating at a faster pace than the others, there will be a market. They'll have to adjust, just like everyone else, to the overall market shrinking, but if they can regain the spirit they had in 2014-2017, I think they can make it. We'll see though. 

Regardless, I'm pretty sure I could go another 5 years with a GH5 and still get lovely images, worse case scenario. 🤣

The GH5 has color and bad codec issues. This is why the Z Cam E2 blows away the GH5 and why Panasonic hasn't released the GH6.  It's clear the GH6 is not coming out. 

The one issue I have with Panasonic is they played the spec game with people and they sold a lot of GH5's based on specs only.  Yes the GH5 was spec filled with great IBIS.  But the GH5's image quality at 10bit never held up, ever.

I've worked on a lot of GH5 footage that just falls apart in color grading.   Colorist around the world know this to be true.