Beautiful images. Goes to show the limitations are largely our own capabilities rather than our gear.
Free trial online pdf flip book
Use our free, 14-day online flipbook trial to test Paperturn's flipbook software! No credit card required and no strings attached. Start using Paperturn now!www.paperturn-view.com
First OM-Digital magazine. Enjoy.
Future of Olympus
- Thread starter Pitachu
- Start date
Very good magazine to promote one's brand.
The wrong way is to rely on dubious in-house survey where frightened staff tell the boss what he demands to hear.
Then the silly boss puts out an advertisement proclaiming they are #1 in Japan - based on the "in-house survey".
Olympus should not have relied upon paid "ambassadors & visionaries" to sing praises on Olympus MFT products.
Paid flatterers will never tell the truth to the Olympus management.
The wrong way is to rely on dubious in-house survey where frightened staff tell the boss what he demands to hear.
Then the silly boss puts out an advertisement proclaiming they are #1 in Japan - based on the "in-house survey".
Olympus should not have relied upon paid "ambassadors & visionaries" to sing praises on Olympus MFT products.
Paid flatterers will never tell the truth to the Olympus management.
Since they made the same claim in 2020 about their 2019 results, did they also sell a bunch of lenses B2B to OM Digital then too? You're just making stuff up as you go to support your narrative.
It is a marketing piece, that all PR departments put out. Of course the devil is in the detail and the detail here is by lens mount and m43 is a collective lens mount so eg. for Canon you'd have to count EF, EF-S, RF separately as they are different lens mounts although by the same manufacturer. It wasn't too long ago another piece by another company's PR team stated no.1 in FF. Then you read the fine print, which states mirrorless only, for the US market in a one month span. But the claim remains true for the conditions they set out.
It happens all the time.
JW73
Senior Member
Hahah..Please..Getting paid and getting the great photos are not related. If one can get this type of good result they had ,why condemn the system? Are you meaning that the photos they shot are actually bad but because they are paid so they have no choice but to sing praise? Pls verify.
Photographers are not shareholders of the companies. What matters is whether the system works for them. If not , change system. Simple as that.
Last edited:
You really think that Canon, Sony, Fujifilm will not dispute the claim if it is not true?
Paid Ambassadors or staff can only choose to highlight all the good points and not talk about the bad points.
You cannot claim the number 1 spot with 21.7% market share if it is only 2.1% market share.
Anyway, paid ambassadors also need to protect their reputation. They will quickly lose their fans and viewership
if they keep promoting falsehoods. Audience are not dumb!
As an audience, I have disputed an Ang Mo reviewer criticism on M43 on his youtube channel because what he said is not true. He admitted his oversight, corrected his point and I respect him for that.
Paid Ambassadors or staff can only choose to highlight all the good points and not talk about the bad points.
You cannot claim the number 1 spot with 21.7% market share if it is only 2.1% market share.
Anyway, paid ambassadors also need to protect their reputation. They will quickly lose their fans and viewership
if they keep promoting falsehoods. Audience are not dumb!
As an audience, I have disputed an Ang Mo reviewer criticism on M43 on his youtube channel because what he said is not true. He admitted his oversight, corrected his point and I respect him for that.
Have watched some YouTube Videos after the divestment to JIP.
At least 2 former Olympus "visionaries or ambassadors" have uploaded videos, in which they pleaded to be re-contracted to be an ambassador or visionary.
Presumably the contract PAYS very well $$$$$$$$$. Ka-Chink.
When the candidate is practically begging for the re-appointment, you cannot expect him to criticize the company or point out what is wrong with MFT.
However, if singing praises of Olympus or MFT can motivate consumers to buy cameras and lenses, then it would not be necessary to sell the company.
This tactic is old hat and is generally cast aside by consumers who dismiss the over-the-top flattery in the YouTube videos.
About this claim to be #1 in Japan. Perhaps a hard sell marketing effort when JIP is scouring the chances to snag a corporate buyer for OM Digital Solutions.
At least 2 former Olympus "visionaries or ambassadors" have uploaded videos, in which they pleaded to be re-contracted to be an ambassador or visionary.
Presumably the contract PAYS very well $$$$$$$$$. Ka-Chink.
When the candidate is practically begging for the re-appointment, you cannot expect him to criticize the company or point out what is wrong with MFT.
However, if singing praises of Olympus or MFT can motivate consumers to buy cameras and lenses, then it would not be necessary to sell the company.
This tactic is old hat and is generally cast aside by consumers who dismiss the over-the-top flattery in the YouTube videos.
About this claim to be #1 in Japan. Perhaps a hard sell marketing effort when JIP is scouring the chances to snag a corporate buyer for OM Digital Solutions.
Please provide the links to the videos. I am just curious which reviewer pleaded to be re-contracted.
To what I know, it DOES NOT pay that well, only a small token sum to cover expenses and some intangible benefits eg. loan of latest equipment. (according to a few photographers who told me) Anyway that is in line with what most manufacturers are offering reviewers. Don't believe me, try asking a manufacturer, eg. Sony or even ex Olympus staff who offers such package.
So why do the reviewers do it? Because if they can get a huge audience, they will earn much more from YouTube.
If you don't believe me, you can check out where is the main source of income of the YouTube reviewers It is usually
their YouTube income.
So Ricohflex, please don't super interpolate again things like "Presumably the contract PAYS very well $$$$$$$$$."
Also, don't be so naive to think that a Corporate Buyer will dump in millions to buy up a company based on some hard-selling.
Normally a Due Diligence Audit is done first to verify all the facts before they would pay millions or tens of millions for a
company.
To what I know, it DOES NOT pay that well, only a small token sum to cover expenses and some intangible benefits eg. loan of latest equipment. (according to a few photographers who told me) Anyway that is in line with what most manufacturers are offering reviewers. Don't believe me, try asking a manufacturer, eg. Sony or even ex Olympus staff who offers such package.
So why do the reviewers do it? Because if they can get a huge audience, they will earn much more from YouTube.
If you don't believe me, you can check out where is the main source of income of the YouTube reviewers It is usually
their YouTube income.
So Ricohflex, please don't super interpolate again things like "Presumably the contract PAYS very well $$$$$$$$$."
Also, don't be so naive to think that a Corporate Buyer will dump in millions to buy up a company based on some hard-selling.
Normally a Due Diligence Audit is done first to verify all the facts before they would pay millions or tens of millions for a
company.
one eye jack
Senior Member
@ Pitachu,
Youtube is not a charity but a business. One youtuber who refuses to bow down but does not condemn others from doing what youtube dictate to them. In youtube everything works on an algorithm or AI that will put someone's video at the top of the list.
1. You should put out videos twice a week.
2. Your video should be at least 8 minutes long so they can insert ads.
3. Use click baits like catchy words or something that implies the opposite..like
One who said he sold off all his nikon gear or M43 is dead! Or why I am not this and that.
4. Youtubers get their income from having " affliate links" that is photographic businesses that give them a small commission the buyers click and buy from such links.
5. They also get income if their video's or channel viewership hits a certain target set by the algorithm.
6. Youtubers can be very influencial if they have a large following or subscriber base and this is a metric youtube or any potential advertiser care about.
7. Because of this metric every youtuber wishes you to subscribe or at least like their video or post a comment.It does not have to be positive or negative. This show youtube that their video attracts viewers.
8. Because of covid the jobs that these photographers had have practically gone to zero forcing them to ask for donations or "coffee" if people like their content and people are generally sympathetic and support these photographers.Worst case they will need to find other jobs like us.
9. The fact that gear reviews attract the most viewers that it is the sure way to boost viewership and that's why they all jump on the bandwagon. Photographic topics like how to improve your photography gets little attention but is needed nevertheless...it's what draw people in the first place but it has become a concentration on gear alone driving photography making people believe that gear matters although to a certain extent like sports and wildlife genres.
10. This leads to a lot of me too videos. Similar reviews of cameras and lenses all competing for viewership which benefit Youtube as a business but make it a battleground for content providers. There is also a personality "cult" purposely developed by each youtuber especially westerners compared to asian counterparts highlighting the individualism popular in the culture.
There you have it, 10 facts about youtube you did not know. If you like my post please give it a like or let me know what other opinions you have. ( Same vein humour there..haha).
Youtube is not a charity but a business. One youtuber who refuses to bow down but does not condemn others from doing what youtube dictate to them. In youtube everything works on an algorithm or AI that will put someone's video at the top of the list.
1. You should put out videos twice a week.
2. Your video should be at least 8 minutes long so they can insert ads.
3. Use click baits like catchy words or something that implies the opposite..like
One who said he sold off all his nikon gear or M43 is dead! Or why I am not this and that.
4. Youtubers get their income from having " affliate links" that is photographic businesses that give them a small commission the buyers click and buy from such links.
5. They also get income if their video's or channel viewership hits a certain target set by the algorithm.
6. Youtubers can be very influencial if they have a large following or subscriber base and this is a metric youtube or any potential advertiser care about.
7. Because of this metric every youtuber wishes you to subscribe or at least like their video or post a comment.It does not have to be positive or negative. This show youtube that their video attracts viewers.
8. Because of covid the jobs that these photographers had have practically gone to zero forcing them to ask for donations or "coffee" if people like their content and people are generally sympathetic and support these photographers.Worst case they will need to find other jobs like us.
9. The fact that gear reviews attract the most viewers that it is the sure way to boost viewership and that's why they all jump on the bandwagon. Photographic topics like how to improve your photography gets little attention but is needed nevertheless...it's what draw people in the first place but it has become a concentration on gear alone driving photography making people believe that gear matters although to a certain extent like sports and wildlife genres.
10. This leads to a lot of me too videos. Similar reviews of cameras and lenses all competing for viewership which benefit Youtube as a business but make it a battleground for content providers. There is also a personality "cult" purposely developed by each youtuber especially westerners compared to asian counterparts highlighting the individualism popular in the culture.
There you have it, 10 facts about youtube you did not know. If you like my post please give it a like or let me know what other opinions you have. ( Same vein humour there..haha).
Thanks for the sharing.
It shows that reviewers, whether they say good things about Olympus, Sony, Nikon or any other brand, their main source of income is from YouTube. Manufacturers knew that and they do not have to pay reviewers a lot. Manufacturers always aim to maximize their marketing dollars. They can easily find reviewers by loaning them the latest equipment and giving a small token fee.
However, do note that reviewers usually do not say a lot of bad things about a product as they could face the wrath of fans of the brand eg. Olympus fans and risk being unsubscribed! Hence, most of them aim to gain subscribers by providing some info or their own test comparison results not available elsewhere on the internet.
It shows that reviewers, whether they say good things about Olympus, Sony, Nikon or any other brand, their main source of income is from YouTube. Manufacturers knew that and they do not have to pay reviewers a lot. Manufacturers always aim to maximize their marketing dollars. They can easily find reviewers by loaning them the latest equipment and giving a small token fee.
However, do note that reviewers usually do not say a lot of bad things about a product as they could face the wrath of fans of the brand eg. Olympus fans and risk being unsubscribed! Hence, most of them aim to gain subscribers by providing some info or their own test comparison results not available elsewhere on the internet.
The problem with internet is not lack of information.
The problem with internet, is that there is too much information - of every kind.
One can always find a review or YouTube video to support or go against any particular point of view.
Echo chambers are the result.
Thus there is occasionally a press report that so & so was radicalised by social media/internet.
I think that actually the person is already in a particular frame of mind - before he goes on the internet looking for like minded websites.
He is not looking for information.
He is looking for affirmation of his already preconceived views.
In the field of photography and marketing of cameras and lenses, it works the same way.
But YouTube is not entirely a one way street.
Ambassadors and visionaries may say a lot of things about cameras or lenses.
Different viewers of their videos will react differently.
The problem with internet, is that there is too much information - of every kind.
One can always find a review or YouTube video to support or go against any particular point of view.
Echo chambers are the result.
Thus there is occasionally a press report that so & so was radicalised by social media/internet.
I think that actually the person is already in a particular frame of mind - before he goes on the internet looking for like minded websites.
He is not looking for information.
He is looking for affirmation of his already preconceived views.
In the field of photography and marketing of cameras and lenses, it works the same way.
But YouTube is not entirely a one way street.
Ambassadors and visionaries may say a lot of things about cameras or lenses.
Different viewers of their videos will react differently.
Oh, the irony!
Aye, indeed... Hmm... that one will need a mirror
In 2007 Kodak made a splash with a marketing video to trumpet that “Kodak is back “.
A few years later Kodak filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January 2012.
In January 2021, OM Digital says MFT lens mount is number 1 in Japan for the year 2020.
Blind optimism and generating dubious 'good news" cannot save the 2nd sinking ship.
Technically the 1st ship has already sunk - that's why the divestment to JIP.
A few years later Kodak filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in January 2012.
In January 2021, OM Digital says MFT lens mount is number 1 in Japan for the year 2020.
Blind optimism and generating dubious 'good news" cannot save the 2nd sinking ship.
Technically the 1st ship has already sunk - that's why the divestment to JIP.
JW73
Senior Member
Yah.. naughty naughty Olympus.. got your point. U been repeating these “facts’ for so many times. lol
Ricohflex, you need to get your facts right instead of just pulling pieces of information to super interpolate your point.
I used to work with a company who is a Kodak Prolab. Kodak senior management did visited us to explain the situation.
Basically, because of their pension scheme, they have to keep selling their businesses to finance the pension scheme they
have promised. In UK alone, it is about 3 Billion. It has nothing to do with splash marketing or whatever. Kodak went down
because they were saddled with a huge pension liability and not blind optimism.
www.usatoday.com
I used to work with a company who is a Kodak Prolab. Kodak senior management did visited us to explain the situation.
Basically, because of their pension scheme, they have to keep selling their businesses to finance the pension scheme they
have promised. In UK alone, it is about 3 Billion. It has nothing to do with splash marketing or whatever. Kodak went down
because they were saddled with a huge pension liability and not blind optimism.
Kodak selling two businesses to pension plan
Nearly $3 billion deal will address final issues in the imaging company's bankruptcy.
www.usatoday.com
New products keep coming out for M43.
Last year, when Olympus Imaging Division was being sold, one of the replies (I think it is from Ricohflex) is that these were products planned earlier in the pipeline. Now it is almost 1 year later, and yet various manufacturers continue to come on board to release new products.
This only reinforces the point that M43 is the number 1 in number of units sold in Japan and there is an opportunity for manufacturers like Tokina.
I am quite sure these manufacturers also did their market research to confirm there will be sufficient demand before committing millions to a new product.
The 400mm F8 lenses is a something for beginners to test out telephotos at only US$249.
The latest Canon 800mm F11 is US$1299 (almost 6 times the price) and slower.
Maybe better in terms of quality but don't think it can be 5 times better image quality.
It is definitely for more advanced photographers with a much larger wallet.
But all in all, and think the future of Olympus and M43 looks bright for the next few years.
Last year, when Olympus Imaging Division was being sold, one of the replies (I think it is from Ricohflex) is that these were products planned earlier in the pipeline. Now it is almost 1 year later, and yet various manufacturers continue to come on board to release new products.
This only reinforces the point that M43 is the number 1 in number of units sold in Japan and there is an opportunity for manufacturers like Tokina.
I am quite sure these manufacturers also did their market research to confirm there will be sufficient demand before committing millions to a new product.
The 400mm F8 lenses is a something for beginners to test out telephotos at only US$249.
The latest Canon 800mm F11 is US$1299 (almost 6 times the price) and slower.
Maybe better in terms of quality but don't think it can be 5 times better image quality.
It is definitely for more advanced photographers with a much larger wallet.
But all in all, and think the future of Olympus and M43 looks bright for the next few years.
Quote from article by TechRadar
Credit : https://www.techradar.com/sg/news/o...is-possible-according-to-om-digital-solutions
[ But how exactly will OM Digital Solutions give Olympus cameras a new lease of life in such difficult circumstances? Aside from reducing the number of employees "by about a half compared to the previous imaging division", the key is apparently to avoid treading water by developing "new products" – including new lenses and even the odd camera body. ]
UnQuote
Although tough to do, but perhaps it was necessary to sack HALF of the previous Olympus Camera Division work force.
Otherwise with very high labour costs, how to survive.
OM Digital Solutions promised to be profitable within 1 year.
Credit : https://www.techradar.com/sg/news/o...is-possible-according-to-om-digital-solutions
[ But how exactly will OM Digital Solutions give Olympus cameras a new lease of life in such difficult circumstances? Aside from reducing the number of employees "by about a half compared to the previous imaging division", the key is apparently to avoid treading water by developing "new products" – including new lenses and even the odd camera body. ]
UnQuote
Although tough to do, but perhaps it was necessary to sack HALF of the previous Olympus Camera Division work force.
Otherwise with very high labour costs, how to survive.
OM Digital Solutions promised to be profitable within 1 year.
Overemployment may indeed be Olympus' largest issue before their divestment.
My personal guess is a combination of the fallout from the financial scandal a decade ago and over-building production capabilities during the bubble years led Olympus to the predicament they were in where despite some fairly solid sales (at least in their home market), they weren't able to turn a profit in imaging.
Of course part of the reason was that the bulk of their sales in Japan were also the EP-L series and EM-10 models that have thin profit margins.
Given Japan's strict employment laws, divestment may have been Olympus' only way of getting rid of a bloated redundant workforce that they've built up over the years.
Can a company reduce half their workforce and still operate competitively. That's the crux of the issue for OM Digital. If the answer is yes, you have to wonder what the other half of the workforce were doing all those years and whether my hypothesis is correct.
My personal guess is a combination of the fallout from the financial scandal a decade ago and over-building production capabilities during the bubble years led Olympus to the predicament they were in where despite some fairly solid sales (at least in their home market), they weren't able to turn a profit in imaging.
Of course part of the reason was that the bulk of their sales in Japan were also the EP-L series and EM-10 models that have thin profit margins.
Given Japan's strict employment laws, divestment may have been Olympus' only way of getting rid of a bloated redundant workforce that they've built up over the years.
Can a company reduce half their workforce and still operate competitively. That's the crux of the issue for OM Digital. If the answer is yes, you have to wonder what the other half of the workforce were doing all those years and whether my hypothesis is correct.
one eye jack
Senior Member
@ Pitachu
Regarding Tokina SZX 400 mirror reflex lens. While it is an improvement of a 200yrs. old design for fullframe provided you are an expert or skilled photographer like this reviewer, for an average photographer it's a no go proposition simply because the current tele zooms for m43 olympus/ Panasonic with autofocus and IBIS is more practical and produces good sharp image with less effort in my opinion.
Mirror lenses are not new in fact Samyang and chinese makers have them in their catalogue. I noticed most people buy the 500mm f8 hoping to do birding or wildlife but with manual focusing the keeper rate will be low and lets not talk about sports action. Buyers usually resell them some without even using them. Less sharp and medium contrast helped by using polarising filter which already reduce f8 to 1.5 to 2 stops down and post processing is too much work for average photographer when you can get good usable image straight out of the camera with the telezooms. For fullrame users it might be a new toy for creative purposes.
Talking about m43 moving forward I think they could do well concentrating on improving portrait lenses and perhaps designing a perspective control lens for professional architecture. I know one can correct straight lines in post but still pros appreciate a similar pc lens offering like canon and nikon. Also rethinking not just making super sharp lenses but more thought on the artistic rendering of the image which will gain more following or buyers as such lenses are expensive think Leica, some voigtlander lenses.
Photographers have little choices in this regard.
www.christopheanagno.com
Regarding Tokina SZX 400 mirror reflex lens. While it is an improvement of a 200yrs. old design for fullframe provided you are an expert or skilled photographer like this reviewer, for an average photographer it's a no go proposition simply because the current tele zooms for m43 olympus/ Panasonic with autofocus and IBIS is more practical and produces good sharp image with less effort in my opinion.
Mirror lenses are not new in fact Samyang and chinese makers have them in their catalogue. I noticed most people buy the 500mm f8 hoping to do birding or wildlife but with manual focusing the keeper rate will be low and lets not talk about sports action. Buyers usually resell them some without even using them. Less sharp and medium contrast helped by using polarising filter which already reduce f8 to 1.5 to 2 stops down and post processing is too much work for average photographer when you can get good usable image straight out of the camera with the telezooms. For fullrame users it might be a new toy for creative purposes.
Talking about m43 moving forward I think they could do well concentrating on improving portrait lenses and perhaps designing a perspective control lens for professional architecture. I know one can correct straight lines in post but still pros appreciate a similar pc lens offering like canon and nikon. Also rethinking not just making super sharp lenses but more thought on the artistic rendering of the image which will gain more following or buyers as such lenses are expensive think Leica, some voigtlander lenses.
Photographers have little choices in this regard.
Tokina SZX 400mm F8 Reflex MF Lens Review - Christophe Anagnostopoulos
Review of the new Tokina SZX 400mm F8 Reflex lens by Christophe Anagnostopoulos. Tests based on Nikon Z6 and Sony A7mkII cameras.
Similar threads
