Do new cameras need more imaginative names to merit their price?

So we all know and like the Olympus OMD E-M1 and we are not utopian in our desires. I shoot as comfortably with a

measly discontinued Panasonic GX 7. Though lately I like the feel and heft of a grip on my camera and a battery

grip and the overall design is comfortable for my hands. The JPEGS are fine and I have been lucky that there are

no design glitches like lugs that pull out or EVF screens that show alien images from Mars... But I do not see pitchforks over any of this by most owners who have been around the block with cameras, do you?

and a general good vibe about the camera. So in about three years this Fotokina Olympus says we have listened to

the customers who want our best model- the one with the admiral's flag on the hoist- and we have added a lot of improvements to every dimension. More shots per

battery, a better design for two cards, a deeper grip, a swivel LCD to accomodate video lovers and a higher res..

and still keep it brick like and water resistant for heavy duty field use. Take it to Antarctica or Finland, no

problem. Yet the price is now three hundred dollars over what the earlier model cost. And the yelps are legion

on DPR. Of course I will eventually upgrade. That is what we do with the digital revolution. Buy a MAC and two

years down the road we buy one with a super duper processor and Retina Plus screen and one to use latest software ( Aside: Since cameras are now software or firmware driven, we should expect faster silicon gizmos inside and the all cost more, Moores Law or no)

packages. So here is my take, see what you think. Camera models by Oly should not be sold as Mark II models.

Call them by names, Camry, Lexus, Apollo, Mercury, Jupiter, Augustus, give them" pizzaz." Look at the car ads. All

the latest models by VW and Mercedes look like they can fly off the pavement and have designer names too. OMD E M mark II is blah blah homey/hamisch. We

have a set price for an increment. Make everything sound like a leap into the unknown. Relentless Persuit of

Perfection. Perfection does not come in increments. It leaps. It bounds. It steeplechases. For a steeplechaser

what is a measly three bills. What is your take...unless you are unmoved by the latest and greatest. Come on tell

the truth...if you dare. I mean even FDR had a stamp collection of 1500 volumes. No slouch he.

<p>Olympus MCM Centennial Micro Four Thirds<br>

Nikon XKE Road Warrior Full Frame<br>

Leica 24K Eldorado Rangefinder</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I suppose who spends on the better ones read a few reviews etc. to know why they are desiring those cameras.<br>

A Mk. # naming scheme offers the advantage of easiest product positioning. That way an announcement of a new camera might wake up it's intended target market.</p>

 

I think there are a lot of Olympus naysayers and grumblers that never really will accept that the micro four thirds sensor size as aa professional competitor. And Olympus was late to the party. But so was Sony and they move fast in the U.S. Same with Fuji.. So that the 'flagship' of Olympus is still a Chevy Malibu and never a pretend Cadillac nor a Buick. Fact is that micro four thirds is indeed a contender to those who use the beasts.Be nice if Best Buy and our military retail stores carried a few Olympus and Panasonic models on shelf along with Canon 5D III. Maybe a road show with some professionals handing them around as when E-1 was launched. Panasonic has a marketing apparatus. Yet they seem to have dropped out of high end TVs. Interesting. What gives?

<p>I guess, and would hope, this was a joke post. Cameras have occasionally had names but model numbers make more sense. It is after all a tool, and I wouldn't be more inclined to buy a hammer if it was called "Thunderer". <br>

Although, I still have an Exakta Varex and that name never seemed tacky. Oh well.</p>

Yes, Brian I was attempting some low humor. I guess I had just read some outrage, - real outrage- at the cost of the successor model of the wonderful OMD E-M 1. Somehow it still surprises me that people are still offended by the cost of digital cameras. And digital lenses. Now it is true that I bought a Canon F-1 and a 50mm FD lens for just $250.00 in 1971 on Guam. I earned a lot less in my paycheck too. Have cameras exceeded inflation, yes. I paid 2100 for my VW Beetle too in 1962. Cars are so much better. Cameras of the top drawer are so much better. I guess noone here spends much time on DPR micro four thirds. Just as well. Lots of trivial gripes. From people who no doubt go for the LX models of cars with running lights and leather. I may even stretch late next year and buy the next model. Or not. Discounts are usually late in fall I think.

<p>-is always was a bit higher than "property were coffee cultivated " - unless unleveled get other demands at present </p>

<p>Since I still shoot Pen F (the real Pen F that uses film). I did not like it when they called one of their digital cameras 'Pen F'. Now a search brings up a lot of digital stuff even when I include the world 'film' in the search.</p>