[beholder3]

It could well be a simple FUD way to get rid of mFT competition; spread by a marketing/propaganda expert.

The numbers are bad everywhere.

They all struggle badly and might go down in the next few years. Maybe some of them are so desperate that they want to appear as the safe haven by making others (here Olympus) look unsafe.

[Mistral75]

It could well be a simple FUD way to get rid of mFT competition; spread by a marketing/propaganda expert.

(...)

Vitaliy Kiselev, the administrator of Personal View and the original source of the rumour, is the author of the Panasonic video tools which many µ4/3 videographers enjoy with their Panasonic cameras.

He is also the one who disclosed the Sigma 35 mm f/1,2 DG DN | Art and a first set of specifications almost three weeks ahead of the lens's announcement.

I would say that it's likely he has access to quite a few sources.

[B](...)

The numbers are bad everywhere.

They all struggle badly and might go down in the next few years. Maybe some of them are so desperate that they want to appear as the safe haven by making others (here Olympus) look unsafe.

If so and considering Vitaliy Kiselev's connexions, it's Panasonic that would like to make Olympus look unsafe. Quite odd an outlook, don't you think?

[zapp]

How to generate confidence in any camera brand these days? Why invest in Pentax, why Olympus, why f-mount, why ef-mount... This list actually covers all DSLRs! They still make money with cameras, just less than before. Things are getting slower, Pentax is well adjusted (=very slow). That is actually a positive statement in the long run.

[Mistral75]

(...) They still make money with cameras, just less than before. (...)

Olympus Imaging have made losses for the last ten years and Nikon Imaging Products forecast a loss for the current fiscal year.

[Rondec]

How to generate confidence in any camera brand these days? Why invest in Pentax, why Olympus, why f-mount, why ef-mount... This list actually covers all DSLRs! They still make money with cameras, just less than before. Things are getting slower, Pentax is well adjusted (=very slow). That is actually a positive statement in the long run.

I think the issue is that they aren't making money with cameras, just with the medical line of things. And this is after they went after photographers in a big way with the OMD EMX1. The question is really whether the board will tolerate Olympus having a division that loses money year after year.

I don't think anyone wants to see Olympus shutter their imaging side of things, but cameras are tough all around and have little signs of looking up any time soon. Micro four thirds is OK, but fairly stagnant and even Panasonic is looking at different mounts as the way forward.

[beholder3]

Vitaliy Kiselev, the administrator of Personal View and the original source of the rumour, is the author of the Panasonic video tools which many µ4/3 videographers enjoy with their Panasonic cameras. ... I would say that it's likely he has access to quite a few sources. If so and considering Vitaliy Kiselev's connexions, it's Panasonic that would like to make Olympus look unsafe. Quite odd an outlook, don't you think?

Not, really.

I followed Vitaliy_Kiselev since back in the GH1 and GH2 "hack" days.
Even then he was very anti-Olympus. I am not sure why since he is a big supporter of Panasonic.
For years he has "predicted" the end of Olympus.
But in the case he never said Olympus was closing down. He said "I can see" it happening. Of course HE can. He ALWAYS could see it. He has no evidence but has always wanted it to happen.

Olympus issues statement disputing rumors its imaging division will shut down within a year: Digital Photography Review


Then also this:

“The image business has always been the driving force of technology, including imaging technology and mass production technology, for medical and The science field has made tremendous contributions. As stated in the new business strategy, since the imaging business and the scientific business are important businesses supporting the company, we will continue to work on the improvement of profitability and efficiency in these two business areas.”

https://www.43rumors.com/official-olympus-statement-we-will-continue-to-work...ging-business/

[fsge]

I think the issue is that they aren't making money with cameras, just with the medical line of things. And this is after they went after photographers in a big way with the OMD EMX1. The question is really whether the board will tolerate Olympus having a division that loses money year after year.

I don't think anyone wants to see Olympus shutter their imaging side of things, but cameras are tough all around and have little signs of looking up any time soon. Micro four thirds is OK, but fairly stagnant and even Panasonic is looking at different mounts as the way forward.

It is not always a black and white story as I am sure imaging division and medical division must have some shared topics and R&D.

I remember a time when HP CEO Carly florina had in mind to dump the PC business just because it was not making enough margin in comparison with integration and software. Hopefully that never happened as HP reputation comes from its laptop and desktop, not integration teams...

[Mistral75]

It's a bit different with Olympus: they are very well known and renown as endoscope maker -they are the world leader- independently from their reputation as camera and lens maker.

[Rondec]

It is not always a black and white story as I am sure imaging division and medical division must have some shared topics and R&D.

I remember a time when HP CEO Carly florina had in mind to dump the PC business just because it was not making enough margin in comparison with integration and software. Hopefully that never happened as HP reputation comes from its laptop and desktop, not integration teams...

You may be right, but I wonder how much Pentax's ability to create endoscopes has declined since Hoya sold off the imaging division. My guess is that the separate arms of the companies actually have minimal contact and there is little overlap between a current generation colonoscope or EGD scope and the Olympus OMD EM1X.

One thing I know for sure is don't one anyone trying to stick an EM1X up my butt...

[RGlasel]

I remember a time when HP CEO Carly florina had in mind to dump the PC business just because it was not making enough margin in comparison with integration and software. Hopefully that never happened as HP reputation comes from its laptop and desktop, not integration teams...

Not everything that has gone wrong at HP can be blamed on Ms. Fiorina, but it is fair to say that the end result of her efforts to give HP a makeover isn't close to expectations when she was hired to be CEO in 1999. In some ways, she is the poster child for the dot.com crash and money-losing mergers.

Actually, it is hard to find truly successful examples of internal technology transfer, I'm not sure if that is because the companies where this occurs don't like to advertise the benefits they obtain from it, or because there aren't very many benefits to be found. I can think of examples where companies are successful in selling the technology they developed for their own use, for instance the French aircraft manufacturer, Dassault, developed a CADAM progrom for building fighter jets that is used by Boeing, General Dynamics, vehicle manufacturers, tire manufacturers, etc. If a manufacturer can source components from other divisions, the benefits are easier to see (not just access to components that aren't available to competitors, it also helps with logistical issues and controlling costs), but I'm not so sure that applies to camera manufacturers who also manufacture medical equipment (even medical equipment that does digital imaging).

What does seem to make a difference is expertise in manufacturing or the corporate culture that allows a manufacturer to produce superiour products without a technological advantage. I doubt if that expertise within Olympus is dependent on having a camera manufacturing division, so as long as Olympus retains access to Zuiko lenses, I don't see a downside to selling off the camera division.

[troenaas]

blahblahblah. Everybody is doomed blahblahblahblah

Sooner or later, that is the case. Nothing lasts forever.

[lesmore49]

.... and this can be any camera division in any company.... I take no pleasure from this or any other rumour.

One thing is for sure that the camera business is at a major crossroads. When the dust settles it will look different from how we know now.

Same thing happening to all our high streets.

Times....they are a changing

I agree.