[Mistral75]

We already knew that Olympus Imaging's cumulative operating losses during the last twelve years totalled ¥103bn. That's $1.2bn.

Olympus published today their consolidated financial results for the second quarter of FY2021, that is July - September 2020.

Fiscal Year Ending Mar. 31, 2021 : Financial Results : OLYMPUS

Included in this reporting is the forecast of the FY2021 loss from the soon to be divested Imaging business, now considered as 'discontinued operation': ¥53bn. That's an additional $500m.

A few months ago, before the divestiture was announced, I wrote here on Pentax Forums that the Imaging business was sort of a kept woman for Olympus.
Now that the accounts have been drawn up and nothing, or at least not much, should remain hidden in Imaging's closets we know how high-maintenance that kept woman has been: $1.7bn for a 13-year enjoyment.

There are other interesting bits concerning the Imaging business in Olympus's financial reporting.

• Olympus have begun to severely downsize their Imaging business:
  -
  • Imaging's headcount fell by nearly 30% between 31 March 2020 (4,270) and 30 September 2020 (3,031). In Japan, Imaging now has less than 400 employees.
    -
  • Between April - September 2019 and April - September 2020, Imaging's capital expenditures fell by half (-51.6%) and R&D expenditures by 30%.
  -
• Consequently, they expect the revenue of the Imaging business to decline significantly over October - December 2020 compared to July - September whereas October - December is usually the strongest quarter of the year. Last year for instance October - December revenue was 121% of July - September revenue. This year the forecast ratio is 78%.

[shyrsio]

I am so sorry to see Olympus this bad. I often go to a camerastore and compare the early flagships. The Nikon FM2, Canon A-1, Pentax MX and the outstanding OM-1. it really stands out. The free market really is cruel.

[RobA_Oz]

I am so sorry to see Olympus this bad. I often go to a camerastore and compare the early flagships. The Nikon FM2, Canon A-1, Pentax MX and the outstanding OM-1. it really stands out. The free market really is cruel.

The poor decision-making on the part of their senior management is to blame, rather than the market. They chased the advantages of the MFT system so far down the rabbit-hole that they couldn’t see the opposition.

[lytrytyr]

I am so sorry to see Olympus this bad. I often go to a camerastore and compare the early flagships. The Nikon FM2, Canon A-1, Pentax MX and the outstanding OM-1.

Of these, only the OM-1 was a real flagship. The others were what we would now call enthusiast cameras.

[automorphism]

I actually really liked Olympus, and I like the micro 4/3rds format. I really hope Panasonic keeps it going. It is a nice format, and I wish other camera manufacturers also just agreed on one mount per sensor size.

[DWS1]

The poor decision-making on the part of their senior management is to blame, rather than the market. They chased the advantages of the MFT system so far down the rabbit-hole that they couldn’t see the opposition.

I agree with this. Same sort of thing happen with Kodak.

[Lord Lucan]

compare the early flagships. The Nikon FM2, Canon A-1, Pentax MX and the outstanding OM-1

Of these, only the OM-1 was a real flagship. The others were what we would now call enthusiast cameras.

I would not agree that the MX was only an enthusiast camera. It had an extensive professional grade system associated with it including a high speed motor drive, data back, bulk film back, and interchangeable focusing screens. It was very much, deliberately, the equivalent of the OM-1, a small manual-only camera of high quality; in fact it was Pentax's response to the OM-1 and in some ways superior, for example in viewfinder information.

Both the OM-1 and MX were aimed at professionals and serious enthusiasts at a time when any automation (even as an option) was still regarded by many pros (my father was one) as amateurish. But times were changing and very soon the pro market was wanting an auto exposure option, hence the K2-DMD, LX, OM-2 and Nikon F3 (all flagship models with an integrated auto exposure option). came soon after the OM-1 and MX. The Nikon FM2 was an equivalent to the OM-1 and MX but cannot be called the Nikon flagship because the F, F2, F3 etc were that.

But the OM-1, MX and FM2 continued to attract some pros, often as second bodies, and enthusiasts up to the present day of course. The Canon A-1 was a different animal entirely, and was never Canon's flagship, the F-1 was.

[Rondec]

The poor decision-making on the part of their senior management is to blame, rather than the market. They chased the advantages of the MFT system so far down the rabbit-hole that they couldn’t see the opposition.

I think it is a challenge. Even Fuji, for all their attachment to APS-C realized that long term they needed something else and release some medium format gear.

I would say that the micro four thirds mount is a big issue. It just isn't big enough to accommodate a larger sensor size and so even if Olympus decided to go APS-C or full frame, they would have had to come up with a new mount (as Panasonic did with the L mount) and none of the four thirds lenses would mount on it. I'm sure this looked pretty daunting to them and an even bigger investment of money without guaranteed return and so they decided not to do it.

Most of the other brands -- Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax -- had mounts that could squeeze a full frame sensor into them without too much issue and so that transition was quite a bit smoother.

[zapp]

Establishing a new sensor format is very difficult. 35mm rules even in the digital age - add apsc since often the same mount is used. Kodak learned this the hard way as did Olympus and all (m)ft manufacturers. Panasonic is not doing well, Cosina and Sigma... will not develop new glass.
Don’t get me wrong, the system was good, maybe it would have been the better choice for many (of us). Thanks for trying Olympus.

[Mistral75]

Establishing a new sensor format is very difficult. 35mm rules even in the digital age - add apsc since often the same mount is used. Kodak learned this the hard way as did Olympus and all (m)ft manufacturers. Panasonic is not doing well, Cosina and Sigma... will not develop new glass.
(...).

Won't they?

フォクトレンダーのマイクロフォーサーズ用レンズ「SUPER NOKTON 29ｍｍ F0.8 Aspherical」が近日中に発表されるらしい。

Twitter

来週中には予約開始されるフォクトレンダー「SUPER NOKTON 29ｍｍ F0.8 Aspherical」の量販店価格は税込228,000円らしい。発売予定日は2020年12月10日。

Twitter

The new Voigtlander SUPER NOKTON 29mm f/0.8 Aspherical lens for Micro Four Thirds will be announced next week - Photo Rumors

[Pål Jensen]

Establishing a new sensor format is very difficult. 35mm rules even in the digital age - add apsc since often the same mount is used. .

Isn't it APS that rules? Unless something dramatic has happened the last few months....

[ChristianRock]

I am so sorry to see Olympus this bad. I often go to a camerastore and compare the early flagships. The Nikon FM2, Canon A-1, Pentax MX and the outstanding OM-1. it really stands out. The free market really is cruel.

If it wasn't for the free market we wouldn't have awesome cameras.... we'd probably be shooting things that looked like Zenith, with black and white film, even today...

[RobA_Oz]

If it wasn't for the free market we wouldn't have awesome cameras.... we'd probably be shooting things that looked like Zenith, with black and white film, even today...

The market is looking increasingly less “free”, as the technological and financial barriers to entry rise. As Rondec points out, above, those barriers may be internal as well, contributing to holding back Olympus from changing their lens mount to one that would allow a larger sensor.

Despite that, your point is well-made, historically. Time will tell where and by whom the next major advance is made, but Sony’s example shows us that a disruptor has to be highly cashed-up and prepared to stay the course. Sony’s and Olympus’s recent histories would be making anyone nervous, who was thinking about becoming the next big thing in photography.

[surfar]

Another thing that didnt help Olympus was the 4/3 to M4/3 switch.

They made out all was good with the old mount then went a different direction.AND,yes there were adapters but i read plenty of negatives about the abandoning of the users,so to speak.

[Breakfastographer]

I have to say, I deeply respect the Olympus employees for managing to finish so many key projects before the big uncertainty came in. I imagine many of them had been anticipating that things were going to get worse or even shuttered like Samsung's equivalent operation.

In the worst case, the new company could continue offering the current and already-announced range of products comfortably for the next two years before the age of the technology used would become a bigger issue.

I really hope they make it. I think the industry needs that company more than some others.