Personal View site logo
"Professional" Firmware for G/GH series idea
  • neokooneokoo

    We know G/GH series hardware is generally capable of more than what official firmwares provide. Default firmwares leave much to be desired in enthusiast and professional use. These firmwares still appear to be designed mostly for consumers.

    Could Panasonic solve this problem by selling official "Professional Firmware for G/GH series" aimed at professional and enthusiast users? Such firmware could add higher video quality options, ability to adjust gamma curves, ability to record ProRes or raw format video files, high quality HDMI output, and so on, as requested by users.

    This would allow Panasonic to continue selling G/GH series in consumer market, but bring in extra revenue from customers willing to pay for professional firmware. Also, it might bring extra revenue from a portion of second-hand sales of existing cameras, as professional users buy them and upgrade firmware to their needs.

    What do you think? Is there any point in asking Panasonic to do something like this?

  • 8 Replies sorted by
  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    What do you think? Is there any point in asking Panasonic to do something like this?

    Is there any point to ask capitalists to build communism for the rest of us? How do you think?

  • neokooneokoo

    Not sure that's the right comparison. It seems like there are some people at Panasonic who'd happily sell us full-featured cameras or firmware updates with maxed-out settings. How else can it be explained that some features in new models seem like they're against previous market positioning? Like manual video and focus peaking on G6. Those features mean little to "iA button consumers", only pros and enthusiasts really need them.

    According to some news Panasonic seem to be taking G series to pro market more seriously. Starting to sell some kind of Professional Firmware would be good for that, from purely capitalist perspective. Could make good profit with right price. For example, some $$$ for ProRes support on GH3 would be instant bargain for many pros. Would probably sell few truckloads of GH3s the day news would hit the web and generate huge amount of publicity in pro world… that and get GH3 whitelisted on broadcast industry lists, taking some of Canon's share.

    Thing is, how does one reach the people who make these decisions at Panasonic? Basic support and feedback tend to result in "sorry no comments" type responses. Feels like even this forum is better way of reaching Panasonic decision makers.

  • smsjrsmsjr

    I think Panasonic's next move should be two digital cinema cameras that utilize their new organic CMOS they have been working with Fuji on.

    The first model would be a fully featured D-Cinema camera, perhaps in the price range of a C500.

    Next would be a less featured D-Cinema camera that is in the BMCC market but still employs the organic CMOS technology, just less bells and whistles.

    And another market that could use some additional options is the high end documentary market. I think there is room for a camera that has been designed specifically for documentary filmmakers in terms of ergonomics, sensor size, audio feature set, etc. Aaton's new camera may fit that description. Panasonic could come up with something there as well.

    The G series is great but it has limitations that make it it difficult to use as an A-cam on professional sets.

  • andyharrisandyharris

    @Vitaliy_Kiselev Actually I reckon that Panasonic would give you a reasonable reception.

    For them, there will be all sorts of issues about reliability and guarantees. Other than that, the people I've met at shows know what you've achieved and know that the market for both GH2 and GH2 accessories has been considerably lifted by your efforts.

    Where I think that you are right, is that it might not go anywhere!

  • perderperder

    I'd imagine anyone you get in touch with would be positive and smiling, but when it comes down to it, big companies like this have a well thought out roadmap for the next few years, designed for maximum profitability. Making each camera as powerful and feature-rich as possible would steal away several years worth of incremental updates and slow milking of the cash cow that is us, the consumer.

    Of course this is all speculation from my part. Maybe they just forgot..

  • smsjrsmsjr

    From the business end, it makes sense to not completely let all of the horses out of the gate at once. At least, on paper that is the case. It can be argued that Red kind of blew that business model up by forcing the big players to up their game. However, I don't feel companies like Panasonic should hold back. Just price things where it results in sustainable revenue and keep investing in R&D to continue to innovate. The DVX100 is still in use today which is quite amazing. I still see it being rented out which blows my mind. Come out with great products and they will sustain. Short change a well educated consumer base and they'll call you out. Panasonic should have a stronger horse in this race. They have the resources. They can make great images. Proven by cameras like GH2. Just need to get it into a great camera body that people fall in love with.

  • neokooneokoo

    @perder That has crossed my mind as well. But even from profitability point of view I don't really understand what sense does it make to release many half-featured models instead of few models with best possible features. Making product as full-featured as possible each time would bring the company good reputation and brand loyalty in the long run, as well as potentially make the company a market leader.

    The only sensible reasons I can think of are legal and bureaucratic, for example taxes that would increase the price of the product if it has certain features. The limitation of 29 minute recording time in EU versions would be one example of effect of such taxation. Maybe these kind of things are the reason they would be reluctant to offer official "professional firmware" either, for example if EU would charge taxes for every camera unit compatible with "pro firmware" sold, instead of actual number of such firmwares sold. But then again, perhaps they could cover that by higher price for hypothetical "pro firmware"?

    But overall, I think product differentiation and release cycles should be based on real limits of technology anyway. If not, competitor with access to similar technologies will make a better product and take the lead.

    I wonder what kind of effect the release of BMPCC is having on Panasonic roadmaps, seeing as that camera is aimed at almost the same segment as GH3.

  • Sph1nxsterSph1nxster

    Not sure if I agree with that last statement. GH3 and the BMPCC do have some crossover market but IMO the vast majority of people going for the GH3 do not want the hassle of a RAW workflow, or having to work with very large file sizes.

    The GH3 is also vastly supperior on the ergonomics front, so anyone putting this characteristic before image quality is going to go for the GH3 over the BMPCC.

    Having said that though, I would love to see Panasonic open up the firmware for the GH3 to allow it do RAW or at least some improved codec with higher bitrates. Focus peaking for sure, I would pay for that!

Add a Comment