GH3 Panasonic's financial blunder - GH4?

-Tom-

-Tom-

Active member
Reading up on these news today...

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...port/articleshow/17532152.cms?intenttarget=no

This doesn't look good at all...I'm not saying the name will disappear...but some pathetic merger may happen. It's a sad world. I used to joke about these things but it really seems that this world is going to be left with 1 brand that will produce everything.

This reminds me of hard-drive market 10 years ago and today, when we have 2 brands that supply the world (lol). If Panasonic slides off further down due to these economic times, could that mean that the Lumix brand will be neglected?

I wouldn't be surprised (in that scenario) if Lumix turns to compact, pocket point and shoots for tourists. I could be wrong here, I'm just speculating off the fact that the company got into this situation.
 
Panasonic's Financial state has very little to do with the GH3. The GH3 will sell very well. Panasonic's losses stem mostly from its consumer electronics divisions and the increased competition from cheap Chinese electronics.
 
-Tom- said:
I wouldn't be surprised (in that scenario) if Lumix turns to compact, pocket point and shoots for tourists. I could be wrong here, I'm just speculating off the fact that the company got into this situation.
Click to expand...

The professional market makes more profit per unit, so I think the opposite will be true. There was a job advert posted on 43 Rumors I think, it was clear Panasonic was moving towards building the management team to enable them to create a support team for the professional market along the lines of Canon’s CPS model.

Panasonic’s losses were in the TV market so if push comes to shove hopefully they’ll just sell off or merge the loss making divisions alone.

I’m very impressed with the GH3, I actually sold my Canon XF300 given the confidence I have in the camera. At last I can photo in the rain with only the worry of my hair getting wet, unlike with the GH2 where I was nervous of damaging it.
 
Panny invested heavily in 3-D technology, both cameras and TVs. The general public's absolute disinterest in it, other then for a few big budget movies, has hurt them badly.

Don't know if the GH3 will sell like gangbusters - the hacked GH2 seems to offer almost the same performance (maybe better in some ways) at less then half the price, and true video cameras like the BMC (if it ever comes out in numbers) would seem to be cutting into the prime reason to get the GH3, namely resolution.

Of course, none of the Japanese tech companies seem to be very healthy right now.
 
jdv said:
Panny invested heavily in 3-D technology, both cameras and TVs. The general public's absolute disinterest in it, other then for a few big budget movies, has hurt them badly.

Don't know if the GH3 will sell like gangbusters - the hacked GH2 seems to offer almost the same performance (maybe better in some ways) at less then half the price, and true video cameras like the BMC (if it ever comes out in numbers) would seem to be cutting into the prime reason to get the GH3, namely resolution.

Of course, none of the Japanese tech companies seem to be very healthy right now.
Click to expand...
What makes you think they are going to continue manufacturing the Gh2? ANd why would the BMC cut into the Gh3 sales? One is a stills camera with video mode and one is a Cinema video cam. One is shipping in hordes and one isn't shipping at all. One is a consumer product and the other is a entry level cinema cam. One costs basically nothing to operate and edit and the other requires another $6,000 just to have a BASIC system. ANd like I said, one is shipping the other is VERY VERY LATE.
 
Personally I feel the world is starting to hit a quality peak. First we saw it with big screen TV's. The jump from old CRT TV's and digital TV's got everybody excited and wanted to buy the new cool thing. It was a pretty huge jump in terms of quality. Now what is so exciting to make somebody upgrade from a 42" LCD TV to another 42" LCD TV? 3D? 120hz? These are mostly marketing gimmicks and electronic companies no longer have that desired quality jump consumers would like to see from an upgrade. I'm not saying all 42" TVs are equal but that it is harder for a average consumer to tell the difference. Honestly with the way Best Buy hooks up their TV's I'm shocked anybody would walk out of that store with a new TV.

Cameras are sort of the same situation. We started off the digital age with DV cameras which was exciting. Then we took a massive jump up to HDV which was equally exciting. Next we had the DSLR revolution which was another massive jump in the kind of productions we could shoot. What is that next step? A little bit more detail or dynamic range? These are very incremental updates now and I doubt anybody is going to rush out and replace their cameras for an incremental upgrade. Some of us will but not everybody will.

It really makes sense why electronic companies are struggling. They had a massive boost with the birth of the digital age but now that they saturated the market they no longer have that wow factor. 3D was supposed to be it but it is going to be hard to replicate the expansion of switching from an analog world to a digital world. Even 4k would have a ehhhh effect on most consumers. Perhaps companies should have eased people into this technology slower. Then maybe they could have sustained their sales a bit better and longer.
 
The article said Panny might sell one building. Nothing about mergers or buyouts. A building.

Not a big deal, I think.
 
Thomas Smet said:
...What is that next step? A little bit more detail or dynamic range? These are very incremental updates now and I doubt anybody is going to rush out and replace their cameras for an incremental upgrade. Some of us will but not everybody will.
Click to expand...

While I agree with the general premise of your post, I take exception with this oft repeated comment. I don't have a GH3 yet, but I will and for numerous reasons that don't have everything to do with IQ, although the apparent increase is welcome. The camera AS A WHOLE is not a mere incremental update. It is a major improvements all around with the better IQ being icing on the cake (and of course a necessary consideration).

Now, whether those functional and construction improvements are important to some I can't tell. If IQ is the only consideration, then perhaps not. But the GH3 is not an incremental update.
 
stoneinapond said:
Now, whether those functional and construction improvements are important to some I can't tell. If IQ is the only consideration, then perhaps not. But the GH3 is not an incremental update.
Click to expand...
Hallelujah at last, someone that sees the light!

I've got the GH2 (which I've kept) and the GH3. The GH3 in my mind is worth every penny more than the GH2 (admittedly I don't think people in the UK should pay more than other countries). Immediately just holding it, it's clearly a more professional, better built camera, with the battery grip, I can record longer events, the electronic shutter when activated means it can be used in situations where the GH2 couldn't (for example taking stills on a live set or live event when a spokes person is being recorded). The tactile feel, plus point, better touch screen a plus point, the image quality to me looks better than my hacked GH2 in low light (and I know it's not going to crash unlike some hacks).

I've not even got around to using the timelapse feature, before I had to have an external controller to do that. It opens up new creative opportunities without needing workarounds. Also it helps with work flow, I can now stop using the far too slow eye-fi cards when I want to wirelessly sync.

The GH2 is now my backup camera, the GH3 is most definitely the daddy.

The BMC is aimed at a different market.

Spot the daddy...
daddy.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thomas Smet said:
What is that next step? A little bit more detail or dynamic range? These are very incremental updates now and I doubt anybody is going to rush out and replace their cameras for an incremental upgrade. Some of us will but not everybody will.
Click to expand...

I agree in principle, but I think we're still a ways off. First and foremost, I'd like to see the features that already exist, actually be implemented in ONE camera at a reasonable cost - the problem is that every camera has only a selection of features, and if it is feature-complete, it is extremely expensive. So, yes, I'd like to see more DR, better and cleaner low-light performance, fully wi-fi aware (so you can monitor footage off-camera in real time and control the cam) and so on - but not at a cost of an Alexa. I have no doubt that one day you'll have the capabilities of an Alexa in a small GH3 size package $1K and below - it's just a matter of time.

But there is still a ton of progress to be made that's less to do with camera bodies specifically, but with other things like lenses. Wouldn't it be great if you could have ONE lens that can go from 5mm to 500mm at f/0.95 or better with no chromatic aberrations and distortions, and yet be small in size? It's not something that defies the laws of physics - you could do that with a small digitally controlled fluid bubble that could drastically alter shape just using a magnetic field. It's possible, but far away as yet. Another thing: energy consumption and battery life - we're making steady progress, but one day cams will use 5% of the energy and the batteries will last 100 times longer, so win-win all around.

In other words, even without any further new features being developed, current features can stand to be improved massively - while bringing the costs down. We still have a very, very long way to go.

But on the other hand it's been true for at least 20 years - you can make films and do work with current tools and don't have to be a millionaire. Once upon a time you needed Howard Hughes type money to make a motion picture. No longer, and it's getting cheaper and cheaper all the time. You can do it with a GH3 - and you could have done it with a GH2, or GH1 for that matter. I'm sure the successor to the GH3 - GH(4)5 will be better yet, but the GH3 is good enough, just as the GH2 was.
 
stoneinapond said:
While I agree with the general premise of your post, I take exception with this oft repeated comment. I don't have a GH3 yet, but I will and for numerous reasons that don't have everything to do with IQ, although the apparent increase is welcome. The camera AS A WHOLE is not a mere incremental update. It is a major improvements all around with the better IQ being icing on the cake (and of course a necessary consideration).

Now, whether those functional and construction improvements are important to some I can't tell. If IQ is the only consideration, then perhaps not. But the GH3 is not an incremental update.
Click to expand...

Wasn't meant as a knock on the GH3 which I consider to be a great camera. Plan on upgrading myself soon. It was meant more of a general statement that the market is saturated with products that work very well for most consumers. Once every Tom, Dick and Harry has a digital everything what do they buy next?

We also need to remember the GH cameras are consumer products and not in the pro division. These cameras do get used by the consumer market and while our rag tag group of misfits on here seem like large numbers we really are not.
 
-Tom- said:
I wouldn't be surprised (in that scenario) if Lumix turns to compact, pocket point and shoots for tourists. I could be wrong here, I'm just speculating...
Click to expand...

Canon entered the Cinema market in direct response to cell phone cameras devastating the Point 'n Shoot market.

The race is not to the bottom, but the top.
 
stoneinapond said:
But the GH3 is not an incremental update.
Click to expand...

Exactly right.
For instance, we were never interested in having GH2s in our kit because of a number of unacceptable compromises of the less than professional build, ergonomics and controls - despite the nice detailed image it could produce.

Almost all of those issues were addressed in the GH3 making it both a nice image and a workable professional tool in the kit.

That said, I loved some of the work I saw coming out of well set up GH2s...it's why we got the GH3s.
 
Consumer flat screen TV's have become so commoditized and cheap that none of the big manufacturers are making any profits from them. They are all posting heavy losses.

Sharp, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung. Only LG is posting profits.
 
well thats the problem with big corporations. they have trouble adapting to change. I dont blame them, its hard to look down when you're up high

what they need to do right now is change culture. streamline. sony atleast is tryign to get there.
 
Bern Caughey said:
Canon entered the Cinema market in direct response to cell phone cameras devastating the Point 'n Shoot market.

The race is not to the bottom, but the top.
Click to expand...

Yep, the point and shoot is basically dead. Nikon is trying hard to keep it alive, but they will fail. Pretty soon it will be Cell phones and high end prosumer cameras with nothing in between.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top