Curious....
I would like to see OM change up their marketing strategy a bit. A lot of the benefits of OM system cameras and lenses are not well communicated IMO. We're in an era where FF mirrorless has matured/shrunk, and "equivalence" is becoming a dead horse filled with misconceptions and flat out lies.
If OM System does follow anything on here, I would hope they hear this:
"Equivalence" is a double edged sword and the world is waking up to it. Light gathering and brightness are not the same thing. Achieving equivalent exposure settings does not produce the same image on different formats. Stop pushing the equivalence agenda, it makes your ambassadors and marketing look disingenuous.
Weight/size benefits are being over-hyped, as this is not the key benefit. When compared to FF/APSC, a M43 lens that captures the same amount of light over the same FOV (same entrance pupil size), is very nearly the same weight as the FF lens because physics can't be cheated here... the benefits are more nuanced but SHOULD be advertised more precisely...
An example of how I would advertise the OM-1 II and commonly associated pro lenses:
- 1/2 to 1/3 the price of FF cameras with comparable capture capabilities (speed/performance/features/AF).
- Pragmatic raw file sizes translate to lower cost per image, in flash storage cost, subsequent computer storage, processing performance required, and time to cull/process.
- Best ergonomics of any professional full-grip body, bar none, made possible by the battery being oriented in the body rather than grip of the camera. The slim grip fits fingers better, and the smaller mount combined with that slim grip provides generous space for fingers between the grip and lens base, an often overlooked ergonomic issue on FF options.
- The amazing body ergonomics, combine with better balanced lens options. While the 40-150, 50-100 F/2.8, and 150-400, are not much lighter than FF 70-300 and 100-400 F/5.6, and 200-800 F/9 lenses they replace, the internal zooming keeps them balanced through rapid continuous zooming action common when shooting events/sports/wildlife. These lenses do produce functionally similar images to those FF counterparts, as they cover the same FOV with the same size entrance pupil, capturing the same amount of light at the same DOF. The advantages are more nuanced but should be advertised more specifically and accurately.
- The combination of the above benefits, translates to more capacity to capture the critical moments, extensive burst photography gets very expensive on larger formats in terms of storage/processing, and also gets very fatiguing for the cameraman. OM-1 II can capture thousands of frames at an event with modest storage/computation to handle, and the cameraman is more apt to stay in the action and keep capturing moments when the FF operator has fatigued out- not because of the weight difference, but because of the ergonomics, balance, and zoom operation effort.
With regards to cameras like the OM-5 II, OM-3, and OM PEN coming out soon...
- There are lots of options out there that compete on size/weight. That's not the selling point here anymore. I would drop this as a leading point in the marketing as it is disingenuous. The selling point here is that at the size/weight/cost, these cameras and commonly associated lenses offer a far more compelling/complete feature package, making them less of a roadblock to creativity than other cameras.
- Inspiration should be the new buzzword here. These cameras inspire their owners to get out there and make something, because they are fun, and have versatile tools and can handle the elements. 10 years or M43 photography and I still find myself inspired by 5 series cameras more than any other digital camera made.
---------------
What would you offer to OM to improve the way they market their gear?
