Firmware Update for the AF100

Barry- do you think a slower slowest shutter speed, and an additional Interval Rec rate (or two) are changes that could be implemented through firmware?
(Yeah, I'm a time lapse nut). This would have to be done between rounds of tiddlywinks, of course. ;^)

How was the frame rate hack achieved on the HVX200?
 
Barry_Green said:
Here is how it's been done: you buy a product that does what you want. You don't buy a product that doesn't do what you want, hoping that someday in the future the manufacturer will change that product, for free, to become what you wish it was.

Evaluate the product for what it is. If it does what you want, at a price point that you find acceptable, then buy it. If it doesn't do what you want... don't buy it.

You have all the power in this relationship. Just don't buy what doesn't do what you need.

At least, that's the way it's always been -- and that's the only thing that makes rational sense to me. They do not owe you updates, and risking/banking your business on the hope and prayer that the company will, for no discernable reason, improve your product for free -- I just don't go along with that. That seems like extreme silliness. And it's one of the reasons I didn't stick with the Red One. It was unusable as I got it, and while over the course of three years they did sort out most of the issues, I'm not gonna wait three years and go through numerous updates and revisions and whatever. No thanks, period.
Click to expand...

Barry, as you said, that's the way it's been. But that's the past, and in the rest of your post you mentioned that things are different today, and they are. In the past it wasn't as easy to update the firmware on electronics. It frequently required sending the electronics to a service center to be updated, and thus it didn't occur to many companies to consider adding new features to cameras as that would normally be for fixes. Times have changed though, and with a lot more competition in the market Panasonic would do themselves well to listen to their customers and add new features and changes to the camera that make sense and aren't unreasonable. The AF100 is a good camera, but it can be even better if Panasonic would just take the time and effort. If the past is any indication, we won't see a successor to the AF100 for a year a half or so. Between now and then I think they could certainly add some features and fix issues that owners are having with the camera, and that could result in more sales for them and a lot more happy customers that will take an even more serious consideration to other current and future Panasonic products.
 
Barry said: Evaluate the product for what it is. If it does what you want, at a price point that you find acceptable, then buy it. If it doesn't do what you want... don't buy it.
IMO it is not as simple as that. What about influences from the market i..e. owners, resellers, advertisement, companny funded evaluators?
They can make you buy or not and when you did, you might get a second opinion on the way using the camera.
My advise to Pana is: Do what you wanna do, but investment in owners satisfaction will payout in the end more than just listening and not doing...All the money you spent on advertisement will be waisted if the owners of your products are not satisfied. In the matter of the AF100, you can persist in saying we are satisfied, but reading all these comments, make me think different. Me for one, Iam and iam not. Why? Because Iam not rich and cannot buy what I really want in technical sense. The price of the AF100 is just what I really can affort so I have to live with the few technical incompleteness of the camera unless Pana can change and will change that.
 
Kenny_G said:
Barry said: Evaluate the product for what it is. If it does what you want, at a price point that you find acceptable, then buy it. If it doesn't do what you want... don't buy it.
Click to expand...

Of course, this goes without saying. We can all be passive customers that take or not take what is offered on the market. We can also push our vendors to improve their business model to our advantage. If you like what you have, and don't want any changes to your AF10x, ok. Some of us would like some little tweeks. We are satisfied with the camera. But it would be just that much better with some tweeks.

Profitability is number 1 at any company. Period. How a vendor achieves it is a combination that includes customer satisfaction; loyalty, knowing that the product they buy is and will be the best on the market.

There are no major complaints, there are no major defects, the executives may or may not be happy with sales. This unit is pretty much done and now they sit tight to be sure there are no latent defects and move on to the next project. Ok, but I still would like some tweeks to the AF100. That would build brand loyalty for me. Knowing that the vendor is willing to tweek a product after production would be a big plus.
 
Paul F said:
Of course, this goes without saying. We can all be passive customers that take or not take what is offered on the market. We can also push our vendors to improve their business model to our advantage. If you like what you have, and don't want any changes to your AF10x, ok. Some of us would like some little tweeks. We are satisfied with the camera. But it would be just that much better with some tweeks.

Profitability is number 1 at any company. Period. How a vendor achieves it is a combination that includes customer satisfaction; loyalty,
knowing that the product they buy is and will be the best on the market.

There are no major complaints, there are no major defects, the executives may or may not be happy with sales. This unit is pretty much done and now they sit tight to be sure there are no latent defects and move on to the next project. Ok, but I still would like some tweeks to
the AF100. That would build brand loyalty for me. Knowing that the vendor is willing to tweek a product after production would be a big plus.
Click to expand...
its a big plus for me as well
 
Steve R said:
I think (would hope) they would have no different a business model or resource planning than the companies that supply the dozen or so other products I own that:

1) Develop and release a brand new product every year or two...

2) While at the same time releasing value-added firmware updates to the existing model.
Click to expand...
Well, there's a phrase that says "There's the way things are, and the way things ought to be." Those aren't the same thing.

They don't develop and release a brand new product every year or two, they develop and release usually three or four brand new products every year. This 12-month span alone will see the introduction of at least the AF100, HPX250, AC130, AC160, 3DP1, HPX3100, and I think there's another unit that's been hinted at that hasn't been formally announced. That's a whole lot more than one product every other year, and basically it keeps them pretty busy. I've been to the factory, I've taken the tour, I've met the teams.

And besides that, you can't escape the simple fact that to do what you're asking would involve hiring a whole lot more people. Which would be reflected in prices. I'm sure they could do it; if they doubled their engineering staff they could hire a team to do the original development and a second team to add freebie enhancements. But who's going to pay for that second team? (as in all economics, the answer should be obvious: the end customer).

Maybe when they start selling 14 million units of each model, like the sales figures for graphics cards and wii's and whatever other freebie firmware update products you have, then maybe it'll be infinitely more practical to expect them to devote those resources. But in the professional video market sales are counted in thousands, not in millions. And thousands, not tens of thousands. A super-hyper-successful product like the HVX200 sold 100,000 units over the course of its five and a half year lifespan. That's as good as it gets. Many/most models don't do a quarter of that.

Again, like I say -- I'd love for them to do it, but the business hasn't worked that way in the past and I don't see that changing, so isn't it better to just evaluate the product based on what it does and buy it if it does what you need, instead of pining for something that just isn't gonna happen?
 
groveChuck said:
Barry- do you think a slower slowest shutter speed, and an additional Interval Rec rate (or two) are changes that could be implemented through firmware?
(Yeah, I'm a time lapse nut). This would have to be done between rounds of tiddlywinks, of course. ;^)
Click to expand...
I'm sure they're things that COULD be implemented through firmware.

But they're not going to be, if history is any judge.

How was the frame rate hack achieved on the HVX200?
Click to expand...
Speaking as an ex-programmer I can guess, but cannot tell you definitively. It is my guess that the frame rates were always possible and the potential slots were pre-coded in there, but the decision was made at the top levels to support a subset of the frame rates for purposes of reliability and testing and overall simplicity. So the coders put in the list that was agreed upon. Then, a user here by the name of chakamonkey noticed that when saving the scene files, the frame rate section had "gaps" in it, so he tried changing the numbers and ... voila, the frame rates represented by those gaps turned out to work too.

So while it was called a "hack" it was really just enabling existing capability that had never been tested or certified by the company. Pretty much exactly the same thing as the Premiere CS5 graphics card "hack" where you can get CS5 to work with unsupported cards just by editing a certain text file. It's not that it won't work, it's that Adobe hasn't tested and certified those cards so they won't put their reputation behind it. But you can enable it if you take the risk upon yourself, and that's what I've done and many of us have done.
 
Mike@AF said:
Barry, as you said, that's the way it's been. But that's the past, and in the rest of your post you mentioned that things are different today, and they are. In the past it wasn't as easy to update the firmware on electronics. It frequently required sending the electronics to a service center to be updated, and thus it didn't occur to many companies to consider adding new features to cameras as that would normally be for fixes. Times have changed though, and with a lot more competition in the market Panasonic would do themselves well to listen to their customers and add new features and changes to the camera that make sense and aren't unreasonable. The AF100 is a good camera, but it can be even better if Panasonic would just take the time and effort. If the past is any indication, we won't see a successor to the AF100 for a year a half or so. Between now and then I think they could certainly add some features and fix issues that owners are having with the camera, and that could result in more sales for them and a lot more happy customers that will take an even more serious consideration to other current and future Panasonic products.
Click to expand...
I totally agree.

I think that would be delightful.

Only thing I'm trying to do is point out the difference between people's expectations. What you're describing is not the way things have been done, and there has been no evidence to suggest that things are going to change. So I think people should evaluate the product based on what it IS, not on what they speculate that it might someday become. Just like when a woman is choosing a man -- don't look at him based on what you think you can turn him into, because ... he ain't gonna change. "What's that saying about relationships -- a man chooses a woman hoping she will never change, but she always does. And a woman chooses a man hoping that he'll change... but he never does."

I'd love to see a new policy in place... who wouldn't want constant free updates? I sure would. But there's a difference between wishing and getting, and history has shown us that in this industry, a product is sold as-is.
 
Barry, you've hammered the horse to death and then some... figuratively speaking, that is. If some do not have a clear understanding of the situation by now, they never will.
 
Here's the biggest firmware shortfall for me with the AF100, Lens Compatibility - AG-AF100 series:

http://pro-av.panasonic.net/en/af100/lens_compatibility.html

Now compare that sparse list of partial Micro/Four Thirds lens compatibility with the testing that was conducted for the Panasonic GH2:

http://panasonic.jp/support/global/cs/dsc/connect/gh2.html

At this point, should we assume there will be no further testing and certification of AF100 Micro/Four Thirds lens compatibility beyond Panasonic's initial pre-release tests from 2010? If not, then I'd have to conclude that the functional updates that will make this video camera pay off as a long-term investment will come not from Panasonic, but from Birger, Redrock, and Zeiss.
 
Barry, you've hammered the horse to death and then some...
Click to expand...
Thing is, I agree with the sentiment... I'm just trying to elucidate the way things are, that's all.

Where's that dead horse smiley?
479.png
 
I don't think anyone on either side of this argument is "beating a dead horse"; that kind of comment is just deflection (or lack of the ability to present any real argument that holds water).

What I object to is, every time someone suggests a small way that the camera could be better - a minor thing that could be implemented in firmware, would make the camera better, and would build brand loyalty - people who DON'T KNOW FOR SURE smugly say things like "Why are you bothering to suggest this. It'll NEVER happen".

Sony is currently doing it (and I bet we'll see them do it again soon) - whether you want to kid yourself about that or not.

It WOULD go a long way toward building future brand loyalty.

The industry is changing, and everything is becoming more firmware-updatable every year.

It COULD be done - and IS being done within other companies who produce iterative releases of electronic products (whether once a year, or 4 times a year, or whatever). Those companies manage to fit firmware updates of current products in with the design / development / release cycle of new products - and they don't have idle resources, nor do they compromise product releases, nor do they have to hire tons of additional resources. I'm close to this, because I was C.E.O. of a company that did this just fine for 6 years.

I don't object to anyone saying "This is my gut feel and opinion about what might or might not happen w.r.t. firmware updates for the AF100 based on observation or experience".

What I object to is someone saying (or implying) "This WON'T happen, and I know for sure, and you're a fool to suggest it, and any discussion of new features is futile".

Because the true bottom line is YOU DON'T KNOW - and many of the opinions and arguments presented as to why it might actually happen really do hold a helluva lot of water.

So, may I respectfully ask that we are able to talk about minor convenience features that could be added in future firmware updates to the AF100 - and not continually be met with troll-like comments along the lines of "Why are you dummies still talking about this? It'll NEVER happen!"

Please?
 
Wow. Sorry for being "smug". Just trying to share some (I thought) relevant history and insight into what actually does and doesn't happen.
 
Wasn't talking about you, Barry; to me, you fit in the bucket of "This is my gut feel and opinion about what might or might not happen w.r.t. firmware updates for the AF100 based on observation or experience".

I thought your posts (esp. recent ones) were more along the lines of "Hey, I admit I don't know for sure, but I'm just going by my experience" - but weren't attempting to clobber the discussion.

I just want us to be able to openly talk about things we'd like to see in future updates without constantly having to deal with the same "It'll never happen!" issue over and over...
 
If anyone wants to hope that the AF100 might see feature enhancements besides bug fixes in future firmware releases, knock yourselves out. However, to be fair, please also disclaim such remarks so that less experienced AF100 users do not imply they might. I think this is what Barry and others attempted to do: manage expectations, not shoot down suggestions. Please do not take it the wrong way!
 
Last edited:
We've always talked about what we would love to see in the future. And Panasonic has frequently taken our lists and given them serious consideration and implemented as many of our suggestions as were practical. The HPX170 was a prime example. They are listening to us, they do give us what we want. But the wishlists have always been in accordance with the next model, not the current model.

The only part I'm saying where people's expectations are perhaps out of line with reality, is when it comes to those who expect that the current model will be changed. All I've tried to point out is that (IMO) that is quite unlikely, since (based on my observation of past business practices) that type of thing simply isn't done.

People can ask for whatever they want (heck, we have official wishlists here for people to relay their wishes to the company!) I just think it crosses the line to unfair when people start saying things like "why did we bother?" and "this company doesn't listen to us" and stuff, because they most demonstrably do. They do what they do, and it's pretty easy to figure out what they're going to do by looking at what they've always done.

Wouldn't it be great if they did this? Sure it would. And you can bet your bottom dollar that I've proposed exactly that to them, in detail, with specific plans on how I'd like to see it happen. But, simultaneously, the simple "ground truth" is that you've got to work with stuff the way it is, because there is not only no guarantee that it will ever change, but the overwhelming preponderance of evidence would say that it is definitely not going to change. So I reiterate: make your buying decision on the product as-is, because that's what you'd be buying and that's what you'd be using. If it doesn't do what you want, simply don't buy it.
 
Last edited:
maxusa said:
If anyone wants to hope that the AF100 might see feature enhancements besides bug fixes in future firmware releases, knock yourselves out. However, to be fair, please also disclaim such remarks so that less experienced AF100 users do not imply they might. I think this is what Barry and others attempted to do: manage expectations, not shoot down suggestions. Please do not take it the wrong way!
Click to expand...

Well, I'm happy to include a disclaimer in any firmware discussion so the new users aren't led astray - but I also think your very strong "Ain't never ever gonna happen!"-type comments equally need a disclaimer along the lines of (**I don't actually know this for sure).

And I'm sorry - but to be frank, this new reason of "not misleading less-experienced users" seems to have now suddenly popped out of the woodwork - when up until now it SURE seemed like "Ain't gonna happen" and "You're wasting your time".

But I'm on board with the disclaimer idea......So - to any new users or potential buyers reading this thread: Let me make it perfectly clear that what is happening here, and what many of us are saying is:

1) We HOPE Panasonic will follow Sony's and others' lead and update the AF100 in future firmware revisions with not just bug fixes, but some minor features and tweaks that will make the camera even better (e.g. White Balance value displayed, simultaneous card record, better clip naming, and thumbwheel control of ISO). These are not "make-or-break" features that substantially change the camera or should affect a buying decision today, but rather "nice-to-haves" for those of us who already purchased the AF100 and, through experience, have found these tweaks would help their process and workflow.

2) There is no guarantee Panasonic will ever do so. They haven't done it much in the past, so don't get your hopes up.

3) We ARE, however, still ENCOURAGING them to do so.

4) This would go a long way toward building our loyalty toward the Panasonic brand, and make us more likely to buy another camera in the future.

5) The world is changing, technology is changing, business is changing - and other manufacturers with competing cameras are doing the same sort of thing for their user base as we are asking for. So there is a possibility it could happen. Someone may have the OPINION that this possibility is remote - but they don't know for sure (so newbies please also take those kind of extreme comments with an equal grain of salt).

So, in closing - there's nothing wrong with us talking about firmware tweaks we'd like to see - nothing wrong with us encouraging Panasonic to give us these refinements - no guarantee it will happen - but nothing official yet from Panasonic (the only one who can speak to this) guaranteeing it WON'T.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top