Is This the End of Micro Four Thirds?

Is This the End of Micro Four Thirds?

Olympus recently announced the sale of their camera division, bringing an end to the storied company's history, at least in the iteration that we know. Does that mean the end of micro four thirds along with it?

Do you remember much about computers in 2008? Back then, Sony Vaios were some of the coolest laptops and desktops out there. They were absolutely beautiful and often innovative, though admittedly expensive. Still, though, they were experimental, they pushed boundaries, and they made many geeks (myself included) often drool over them. In fact, if you are not familiar with the old Vaio line, you should check out this photo essay, as you might be surprised by just how neat those computers were. 

Unfortunately, a product being innovative and desirable does not always translate to sales. In 2014, Sony sold the Vaio line to Japan Industrial Partners (the same company that is set to acquire Olympus' camera division), and six years later, only one model remains, the SX14. It is a shame — not that JIP had any obligation to continue the Vaio line's past history. In fact, that would probably be a bad idea, given that they acquired the line due to its lack of success in the first place. 

Micro Four Thirds

Back in 2008, when the micro four thirds system was released by Olympus and Panasonic, the camera world was a different place. You could generally draw a straight line from point and shoot through to digital medium format, one without many gaps and with a roughly direct correspondence between price and sensor size: small sensors, micro four thirds, APS-C, full frame, medium format. However, something else was on the horizon that would drastically alter the camera industry and break that chain of continuous correspondence.

Just the year before, the first iPhone had been released, and the seeds of the smartphone camera revolution were planted. Digital camera sales would peak over the next couple of years before beginning a precipitous drop over the next decade, dropping almost 90% by the end of the decade. That left the industry in a very different place. The main victim of the smartphone revolution was the point and shoot, which was replaced by the smartphone, as most casual consumers simply wanted a device for capturing memories, and the convenience, simplicity, and connectivity of smartphones outweighed whatever image quality gains could be had by moving up to a point and shoot, and indeed, today, many smartphones meet or even exceed lower-level point and shoots. 

This left the world of dedicated cameras for enthusiasts and professionals, who have different needs and desires than the casual consumer. This separated the various sensor sizes into different purposes and groups: medium format for upper-end studio photographers, full frame as the standard for most professionals and dedicated enthusiasts, APS-C as an alternative for professionals and a popular choice for enthusiasts, and micro four thirds for a wide range of enthusiasts and a few professionals, especially a portion of video shooters. 

In recent years, APS-C has been making huge strides, spurred on by Fuji's highly popular and respected X Series of cameras. APS-C's role in the industry has expanded in both directions: as quality lens offerings have expanded, sensor performance has improved notably, and bodies have gained professional features, more and more photographers have embraced the format's size and cost as a fantastic alternative to full frame. On the other end, budget offerings have continued to expand and have often encroached on the price territory of micro four thirds. The other draw was that there was often some degree of cross-compatibility with a company's full frame mount, giving users an upgrade route if they so desired. 

Panasonic

In the meantime, Panasonic has pushed into the full frame mirrorless market and joined the L-Mount Alliance with Leica and Sigma. And they wasted no time getting serious about it with the S1 and S1R. And the great video capabilities of those cameras left a question lingering: what was Panasonic planning to do with their micro four thirds cameras, which are mostly known for their usage in videography? And then came the S1H, which now offers 6K raw video, making it one of the leading consumer-level video-oriented cameras. Its arrival only underscored that aforementioned question all the more. Maintaining two lens mounts simultaneously is not a cheap proposition, and in an industry continually feeling the pressure of shrinking demand, they might decide it is more prudent for them to focus their attention on a single mount, and given their recent entrance into L-Mount Alliance and fast development of their full frame system, the likely winner of such a head-to-head matchup would be full frame.

Olympus

What does Japan Industrial Partners plan to do with Olympus? They may have a strong transition services agreement in place with Olympus if they intend to continue business as usual. In a statement on the events, Olympus said:

JIP is a strong investment fund with a track record of success and has maximized the growth of many brands. JIP will use the innovative technologies and solid brand position of Olympus within the market, while also improving the profit structure of Olympus’s imaging business.

Of course, that could mean a wide range of things. "Improving the profit structure" can mean drastically shrinking development and offerings, or it could mean revamping the lineup, or it could mean selling off the company's assets and intellectual property. It remains to be seen. However, after the imaging division reported losses of almost $100 million during the fiscal year ending in March of this year, it's clear that it is going to take drastic action of some sort to right the ship. 

Conclusion

It certainly seems that the micro four thirds system is at a bit of a crossroads, with one company in the system focusing on the development and deployment of their own full frame system in tandem with two other companies and the other being sold, all against the backdrop of an industry moving increasingly toward a niche status for enthusiasts and professionals. If nothing else, I certainly hope that we will see Olympus' innovation make it into other cameras in the future if the company and micro four thirds don't survive. 

Where do you see micro four thirds going? 

Alex Cooke's picture

Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based portrait, events, and landscape photographer. He holds an M.S. in Applied Mathematics and a doctorate in Music Composition. He is also an avid equestrian.

Log in or register to post comments
71 Comments
Previous comments

No it isn't.

So far JIP has had a good track record . Buying the VAIO division seemed like a not so good move . Now , VAIO notebooks are made in Japan . Come Covid-19 and the urge in the Japanese workforce for Teleworking . This year has seen a surge in the sale of PCs because of the EOL of Windows 7 and Covid-19 . It might seem like if allowed by Japanese Companies , lots of Office Workers at Japanese Companies would rather work from home . So far , JIP acquisitions have been focused on the Japanese Market . Take a look at this BCN report from June 17th . It's all in Japanese , but you'll be able to recognize the main 3 top positions on POS data from major bricks and mortar and online retailers in the Japanese Market . https://www.bcnretail.com/research/detail/20200617_178065.html
There might be some hope that Olympus will be able to have 8K capable M 4/3 cameras , as I've read news about Endoscopes capable of 8K imagery in the Japanese media . https://www.jiji.com/jc/article?k=2020062000349&g=pol

The lead image of this article says it all. The OM-D pictured doesn't look that much smaller and lighter than the Fuji X-T2 I use. So, what's the point for using M4/3 instead of APS-C as a still camera? On the other hand, M4/3 does make sense for use in a video camera when the form factor of a video camera is taken into account. M4/3 is dead for still camera use, but will continue as an appropriate sensor size for video.

Olympus has made their choice and I think Panasonic will soon follow.

I use MFT as a still camera for 10 years now. I never saw a point in switching to Fuji. Seems like different people have different taste.

I should have been more clear. If Olympus disappears, then effectively, there is no other M4/3 player besides Panasonic offering that sensor for the still camera form factor. In my opinion, that's game over for M4/3 still cameras unless JIP manages the situation outstandingly. I have nothing against M4/3. But I think it will become a video only sensor format given the current vendor situation.

Panasonic makes MFT still cameras. With excellent video capabilities. What you are saying is that a system is game over with just 1 body manufacturer. Like all other mounts...

Not when you consider the Sony, Fuji, and Nikon video features are better and cleaner at higher ISOs.

1st of all, please be correct in what you write: You wrote that Olympus "announced the sale of their camera division." No, they announced the intent to do so, they negotiate with JIP. We do not even know what would be the part of the "NewCo", not even its name. Maybe "Olympus Camera"? The point is, with 300k sold units last year, its maybe just 150k this year due to Covid, they do not want to have the money bleeding division on their balance sheet.
One success story about a "camera division sold off" is... Minolta, what is these days the highly celebrated Sony Camera. And Minolta, as sad as it is to lose the legendary brand, is doing well in their business.
Either way, this has nothing to do with m4/3 as such.

To sum up this article’s answer to the question: A long historical excursion, concluding in “maybe this will happen, maybe that will happen, who knows?“

Honestly I was always hoping for a m4/3 that could replace my compact camera as a "take it anywhere" camera but instead of making them smaller (the Panasonic GM1 would have been good but it's old and I can't find one anywhere) they made them bigger! But why whould I buy a m4/3 camera that it's just a little bit smaller than a APSC camera but has way worse batterylife?!

It's a marketing issue. Uninitiated people see it as the bigger sensor the better. They go: "I can get X-T3 at almost the same price now, why should I settle for an MFT?". It's like 300hp in your car that you rarely make use of, but have to endure low MPG for the privilege of carrying around. The fact is, all you give up for MFT is 1 or 2 stops in low light that you shoot maybe 1% of the time. In return, you get a bunch of advantages that will take you across many kinds of photography from portraits to wildlife rather effortlessly. And even that 1 or 2 stop disadvantage can be overcome by slapping on a faster lens or speed booster when necessary. MFT is an optimization for 99% of the time with a solution for the remainder of 1%.

That said, Panasonic do have a marketing issue on hand. the horsepower, I mean the sensor size, is irresistible argument and they will have a hard time selling 150hp multi-purpose vehicle that gets 40MPG at the same price as Mustang GT.

Wouldn't it be disruptive is Samsung bought Olympus from JIP.

Samsung's previous venture into cameras was disruptive - great.

As they are now proposing massive resolution on their small smartphone sensors, imagine what they could do with a M4/3 sensor!

Plus it could be powered by Android, immediate connection to Instagram, etc...

Some organisation needs to be disruptive and give creatives a different future.

So your idea for creatives to have a different future is to give them cheesy Instagram filtered photos straight out of the camera?

I think Olympus made two major mistakes. First is neglecting video. The smaller sensor actually has some advantages for video. It can be stabilized more effectively, has way faster scan speeds, and does not require so much processing power, which allows micro4/3 cameras from years back to have 4k/60, that even the mighty and praised S1H cannot support in full frame mode. But Olympus did not pay any attention to video, up to 2019 I would say. Even in their very last top tier model, the M1III, one does not have basic things like using Auto ISO in manual mode or having separate setting for stills and video. Especially with the raising popularity of YouTube and other platforms like that, they could have scored big. The second big mistake is chasing waterfalls with expensive pro models. One of the big strengths of micro4/3 is the size and weight advantage. Look at the M5III. This thing is absolutely as capable as the M1 series, but tiny. Now pair it with the small lenses, like 12/2, 17/1.8, 25/1.8, 45/1,8 and 75/1.8. They should have explored this direction. Basically, they needed 2 models only - a E-PL form one and a M10 form one. Pack them with latest tech, develop 2nd generation of the previously mentioned small lenses, give them the weather resistance like you know how - boom! You have something, that no one else provides.... And if I had to answer the title of the article - probably it is. When I look at the mockery Panasonic released this week in G100, I'm afraid they are ditching the system too.

Good reply Momchil. Thank you.
In your reply you expose the other big challenger to nice cameras (after smart phones)— video. Too many cameras try to cater to both stills and video shooters. In the end few are satisfied. Worse, recently, some stills cameras are moving to vlogging usage.
Example: the X100 line is an excellent stills product yet the new V model offers vlogging functions! (I haven’t touched the camera) do these functions take away from stills functionality or pleasure? Who outside of a stills street photography vlogger wants their excellent stills street camera contaminated for vlogging?

Maybe in a few years they will be asking “is still photography dead?!”
(...to incite discussion on their websites.)

Yep, it’s over. It would have been nice to see somebody like Sigma or Tamron buy them for the underlying technology and then transition the line to APS-C or even start the path back to 35mm.

I loved the E-M5, but they lost their way when they started pricing the better aspects the same as Full Frame 35mm bodies with similar capabilities.

Yes I think this is end of 4/3 but in about 3 years. Of course that is dependent on L mount line FF taking off with reasonable prices. If Sony releases its next version of A7S, presumably upgraded, even Panasonic 4/3 maybe under some threat. L mount line need to reduce their prices dramatically.

When I read the news, immediately all my Olympus gear stopped working.

Film cameras are a dead end, but a lot of people still enjoying using them ...and often with excellent results.
GM’s Pontiac division is a dead end but a GTO is still a ball to drive.

Anyone thinking m43 gear is toast should send me a message; because I’m buying. I’ll buy your dead end GTO as well.

Yes.

Last summer I rented Fuji gear and compared it head to head with my 16mp em1 mki. The sensor had about a 2/3 stop advantage in noise, but overall the IQ was worse because my Oly lenses were significantly sharper. I bought a mkii in the fall and the 20mp sensor is about a half a stop behind in noise. So much for sensors

Meantime what we forget is that the overall weight of the camera PLUS lenses is much less than any APSC system of equivalent quality lenses. That is what keeps me in mft.

In my opinion, Olympus failed in marketing. They never could get the message out about smaller, lighter, more innovative, tele and macro capabilities and close to the same IQ as APSC. Instead they hawked their pro line of lenses and never made the direct comparison to the size and weight of the competitions’ equivalents in a way that anyone but aficionados got it.

Is it dead? Time will tell but I sure hope not. If we get the announced 100-400mm non-pro lens I’ll buy it, and if not I’ll pick up a panny 100-400 and my gear may just last me for the rest of my natural life.

Panasonic 100-400 is a great and probably the lightest 100-400 lens out there -