Panasonic: A "Fly By Night" Camera Company?

[Howard]

While this thread took an interesting turn, I would like to address what I thought was the original question regarding high Panasonic pricing limiting market penetration. I will reaffirm what someone else indicated, Panasonic has kept the prices high on their products by limiting supply which they have been able to do because of limited market alternatives. My personal preference has been Panasonic rather than Olympus because of quicker AF, built in EVF and articulating LCD. Further, Olympus has not offered any EVIL cameras that compete with their DSLR's or with the G1, G2, GH1, G10.

Panasonic may squander its EVIL lead in two ways: not improving the ISO quality of its sensors (as I understand it there was no sensor improvement from the G1 to the G2); and not competing effectively when Sony releases its rumored NX 7 and NX9. Sony has the marketing power and financial strength to flood the market and at lower prices than the current EVIL prices. At this time Sony's NX3 and NX5 market focus seems to be P&S users that want a small camera with better IQ. The NX7 and NX9, however, may offer features comparable to the GF1, G2, G10, and GH1.

While Ricoh and Samsung has offered competing cameras, they seem to be minor players and at this time I do not perceive their products have gotten much traction in the marketplace. Sony, on the other hand, has shelf place in camera stores, discount stores, and great name recognition. I believe they are a formidable competitor.

I think competition is great and in the future Panasonic will have to improve their products, offer more lenses, and moderate their pricing structure or risk becoming a minor player in the EVIL market that they pioneered.

Howard

 

[clay stewart]

I think Panasonic just wanted to jump into the game without paying any dues, like the rest of the major camera makers did in the twentieth century.

They jumped onto the fancy shirt tail of Leica and thought they would catch a ride to easy street and be able to sell a few cameras at a huge profit and by pass all the tedious selling at volume, to make a profit, that Nikon, Canon, Olympus etc had to do.

I don't know if that was such a viable plan, as Leica, even after three generations in the digital foray, still doesn't seem to have figured it out, as far as moire goes anyway. http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16638

Panasonic has the AG-AF 100 camcorder coming out soon, so maybe that will keep M43 alive with lenses, since I think it uses the M4/3 mount. They've been at video for a long time.

On the other hand, maybe they will jump ship again, go to a larger sensor and leave all it's customers twisting in the wind again. The fact that they don't have a complete set of primes in the M43 mount, leads me to believe they are still not committed to the system, as does trying to sell a 2.8 macro lens in very small quantities, for nine hundred bucks.

 

[photoSmart42]

I think Panasonic just wanted to jump into the game without paying any dues, like the rest of the major camera makers did in the twentieth century.

They jumped onto the fancy shirt tail of Leica and thought they would catch a ride to easy street and be able to sell a few cameras at a huge profit and by pass all the tedious selling at volume, to make a profit, that Nikon, Canon, Olympus etc had to do.

I don't know if that was such a viable plan, as Leica, even after three generations in the digital foray, still doesn't seem to have figured it out, as far as moire goes anyway. http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16638

That's a perfectly viable business strategy for introducing new products to the market, and there's nothing about it that smacks of 'not paying their dues'. Companies partner with established quality leaders all the time in order to give more weight to their products. Panasonic isn't buying Leica technology as much as they're buying the Leica name for marketing purposes. The moire issue is not an issue to Panasonic.

Panasonic has been selling P&S cameras and camcorders for a LONG time, so that certainly falls under the category of 'paying their dues.' Much like any other growing technology company, you start small with the technology you know, and grow by a combination of organic technology advancements, partnerships with established industry players, or technology acquisition.

Panasonic's strength was small sensors, so it was natural that they'd jump into the market by taking their existing small sensors and making them larger using their image processing technology. Clearly that gave them some disadvantages, but they seem to be working on ironing those out. It's a natural progression of the business and of the technology.

On the other hand, maybe they will jump ship and go to a larger sensor. The fact that they don't have a complete set of primes in the M43 mount, leads me to believe they are still not committed to the system, as does trying to sell a 2.8 macro lens in very small quantities, for nine hundred bucks.

Just because they haven't launched 50 lenses right off the bat doesn't mean they're not committed to the format. No sane business model would recommend taking such a HUGE gamble as to release that many system lenses all at once. Even Canon and Nikon didn't do that, and instead built on their existing lenses they've amassed over the decades they've been at the camera business.

It's perfectly reasonable to introduce 2-3 new lenses every year for a new system, and the pricing is simply a reflection of the demand for those products. Why would Panasonic give away their hard-earned products if they can charge a premium for them? Just because you can't afford their lenses doesn't mean others can't. You can always grab some MF legacy lenses to make do until you can get the system lenses, which is the genius of this format.

The beauty of being first to market is that while the competition ramps up to catch up, you have first dibs at making the big profits your investors expect from the funds sunk into the R&D effort to bring those products to market. So, like Vivek pointed out, it's not Panasonic's fault for having high prices, it's the other camera makers' fault for not having introduced some viable competition to force those prices to be competitive. Once that happens, pricing will normalize.

 

[Riley]

well when I said 'pretty much, camera companies are clueless' this is why
Someone just funded the idea that this is a business and its risky well, they would ahve researched this thing this way thataway and t'other way before they made a move, and quite frankly anticipating the lens suite required is about half that job.

So in their collective wisdom, Panasonic & Olympus virtually duplicate each others lenses instead of providing for a handful of primes and 3 zooms which would have give it a real kickstart

this stuff isnt rocket science, yet these people repeatedly fail to get it all together in a coherent fashion that helps people like us, and themselves at the same time

 

[photoSmart42]

this stuff isnt rocket science, yet these people repeatedly fail to get it all together in a coherent fashion that helps people like us, and themselves at the same time

When you consider that Panasonic and Olympus sell products globally to a wide range of consumer preferences, this stuff IS rocket science, and involves very complex marketing strategies and implementation. What makes sense for you or for the US audience might make absolutely no sense for the Japan market.

As a strategy for migrating advanced P&S users into the interchangeable lens cameras, coming out with a range of zoom lenses initially was perfect. Most common users of DSLRs end up keeping their kit lens on regardless of the options they have for adding more lenses. They basically treat their DSLRs as large, expensive P&S cameras. They take photos of family and events in their everyday lives, and don't go into photography as an art.

 

[Vivek]

I think Panasonic just wanted to jump into the game without paying any dues, like the rest of the major camera makers did in the twentieth century.

Clay, Your point about the Panaleica is valid and I appreciate that. You may be right about Pana not wanting to pay their "dues".

They did something impressive with the G1. That makes them a player.

Liveview and mirrorless cam technology is theirs and they are the best at the moment.

As Riley pointed out (not in these words), what has stopped Olympus from bringing out decent (not "high quality") lenses- primes or zooms?

I look forward to the Pana 14/2.5 and the 8mm fisheye. I know they will do very well at least for IR.

 

[clay stewart]

Who said anything about 50 lenses, there Dragos, I was talking about two primes - a wide angle and a portrait prime, to go along with the 20 1.7. And yes it does mean, to me anyway, that they are not committed to the format. I'm not going to buy any of their high priced specialty lenses, if I don't know if there will even be a new body for it in a year or two, when my current ones stop working.

I find it really funny to hear people that are in the marketing business try to explain why large corporations are doing the right thing, because that was what they leaned in school. All the marketing savvy in the world isn't going to help you sell a product to a consumer that doesn't trust you.

 

[photoSmart42]

Who said anything about 50 lenses, there Dragos, I was talking about two primes - a wide angle and a portrait prime, to go along with the 20 1.7. And yes it does mean, to me anyway, that they are not committed to the format. I'm not going to buy any of their high priced specialty lenses, if I don't know if there will even be a new body for it in a year or two, when my current ones stop working.

I find it really funny to hear people that are in the marketing business try to explain why large corporations are doing the right thing, because that was what they leaned in school. All the marketing savvy in the world isn't going to help you sell a product to a consumer that doesn't trust you.

So based on the simple fact that Panasonic hasn't released TWO lenses that you think they should have (what's wrong with the 7-14 for wide angle and the 45 for portrait?), you don't trust them as a company, and you question their commitment to the format? That actually sounds crazier than thinking that because they didn't come out with the 50 system lenses I mentioned .

Don't get me wrong - I'm not judging your lack of trust of Panasonic. That's your right of course. I'm simply wondering if your lack of trust is truly warranted given that Panasonic looks very much like they're spending time and resources on this format while sacrificing their 4/3 camera system. That sound like commitment to me. In time they will release some other primes to satisfy users like you, and some of those primes are on their lens development map.

 

[Terry]

Who said anything about 50 lenses, there Dragos, I was talking about two primes - a wide angle and a portrait prime, to go along with the 20 1.7. And yes it does mean, to me anyway, that they are not committed to the format. I'm not going to buy any of their high priced specialty lenses, if I don't know if there will even be a new body for it in a year or two, when my current ones stop working.

I find it really funny to hear people that are in the marketing business try to explain why large corporations are doing the right thing, because that was what they leaned in school. All the marketing savvy in the world isn't going to help you sell a product to a consumer that doesn't trust you.

I know "you" want two specific primes and so do many others. However since September 2008 we've gotten

14-45
45-200
14-140
7-14
20
45
14-42

There will soon be
fisheye (not sure why)
100-300
14

Perhaps not the lenses that you wanted but certainly a lot more lenses in a short period of time than any other manufacturer around.

Can always fill in a focal length you need with just about any lens ever made.

This not meant to be a defense of Panasonic but I guess I'm missing your point.

 

[Audii-Dudii]

As a point of reference about pricing, I bought my DMC-L1 kit brand new in November 2006 for $1399, which seemed a fair enough price to me at the time. And I bought my DMC-G1 kit brand new for $549 in November 2008, which also seemed a fair enough price. Of course, I paid $899 for my GF1/20mm combo, which I thought was a bit high, but I paid it anyway because by then I had several 4/3 lenses to use with it, so the cost of buying into any other camera system would have been quite a bit higher still...

 

[clay stewart]

What's my point?
1. I don't want to use manual focus lenses, to make up for the shortcomings of Oly and Pany. I like AF, that's why I bought an AF camera.

2. Since I've been dancing around on this planet, camera makers have always had somewhat fast wide, normal, and short tele primes. (not counting macros and fisheyes)

3. Since the beginning of regular 4/3 neither Oly or Pany has accomplished that standard prime line up. Panasonic bailed out of regular 4/3 and I bet Olympus will follow soon, both without the standard prime lineup. This could be read as " why bother making wide angle and portrait primes, if we are just going to ditch the system anyway. No need to waste R&D funds."

4. I don't want to pay nine hundred bucks for a macro lens that's maybe worth five hundred bucks, so I can have a slow portrait length lens. This leads me to suspect that they don't want to waste R&D funds again, on a portrait prime, for some silly reason.

5. Kit zooms are not fast primes and they do not make up for them. Saying that Panasonic has 10 kit zooms doesn't make me feel like they are addressing the issue, just that they are skirting it.

6. If Panasonic wants to charge big boy prices, then maybe they should offer what the big boys offer, like a complete set of primes. Even their Jedi Master, Leica, does that.

In a nutshell, I don't really trust anyone that does a half *** job and still wants top pay. Makes me think they are getting ready to quit. Not making a complete set of primes like the film equiv. to 28, 50, and 85 mm, is a half *** job.

 

[Terry]

Ask a Nikon person how many primes need a serious update. ask a Nikon D40/D60 user how many primes they have available?

The 50 macro for 4/3 will AF on the G2/G10. The 25 lux will AF on all m4/3 cameras.

 

[Jonas]

What's my point?
1. I don't want to use manual focus lenses, to make up for the shortcomings of Oly and Pany. I like AF, that's why I bought an AF camera.

I bought an AF camera because there is frankly no MF camera available.

2. Since I've been dancing around on this planet, camera makers have always had somewhat fast wide, normal, and short tele primes. (not counting macros and fisheyes)

And why is it you bought into the only system not having these lenses?

(...)

I understand your frustration. I understand it, up to a certain point. But there is too much of those *** signs in here, and if I have to guess what your point is...

In a nutshell, I don't really trust anyone that does a half *** job and still wants top pay. Makes me think they are getting ready to quit. Not making a complete set of primes like the film equiv. to 28, 50, and 85 mm, is a half *** job.

...it is not that Olympus and Panasonic hasn't released those lenses yet, but that you bought into the system as it is and now regret your move. You trusted the companies to fulfill your personal dreams, also if they weren't mentioned on their lens roadmaps. That make your whole thread a half ***job.

Now, I'll certainly ditch my Panasonic gear as soon as there is a FF LIVE camera available. But, that's an entirely other story.

 

[clay stewart]

Ask a Nikon person how many primes need a serious update. ask a Nikon D40/D60 user how many primes they have available?.

The 50 macro for 4/3 will AF on the G2/G10. The 25 lux will AF on all m4/3 cameras.

Yup, I know, I've been there, thank god for the D90 and d700

I don't have a G2 or a G10 and after using the adapter with my 11-22 and 25 2.8, I don't really feel like the adapter is keeping to the M4/3 philosophy of smaller and I didn't like it. Sounds like you are happy with everything, Terry, so I'm happy for you.

 

[clay stewart]

I bought an AF camera because there is frankly no MF camera available.



And why is it you bought into the only system not having these lenses?

(...)

I understand your frustration. I understand it, up to a certain point. But there is too much of those *** signs in here, and if I have to guess what your point is...



...it is not that Olympus and Panasonic hasn't released those lenses yet, but that you bought into the system as it is and now regret your move. You trusted the companies to fulfill your personal dreams, also if they weren't mentioned on their lens roadmaps. That make your whole thread a half ***job.

Now, I'll certainly ditch my Panasonic gear as soon as there is a FF LIVE camera available. But, that's an entirely other story.

Man, I asked for this. I should have known better than to speak my mind on the Internet. :deadhorse:

Jonas I bought into 4/3 for the small size of the 420 and the 25 pancake, thinking they would make more primes. I bought into M4/3 for the small size, live view and the 20 pancake, thinking they would make more primes.

I see now with 4/3 that there wasn't ever a plan for more primes, at least from Panasonic and maybe not from Olympus as well. Now a couple years into M4/3 and still not much in the way of primes and it does make me wonder if I may have made a mistake again, which is sort of the point of this thread. Though I'm thinking this thread may have been and even bigger mistake.:ROTFL:

By the way Leica makes a manual focus digital camera.

 

[Howard]

Clay,

I sure hope that Panasonic introduces additional fast primes. Until they are introduced I assumed they don't exist. I waited and waited for Kyocera to introduce a digital back for the Contax G2. That never happened; worse they discontinued producing the Contax brand. As for me, I have to accept what they produce and put pressure on Panasonic to produce what you want. The success of 20mm f1.7 at $399 indicates that very good fast primes sell. I do not know the sales of the 7-14mm, but I have not seen any price drop which leads me to believe that supply is restricted. If the price dropped, I might buy the 7-14mm but at $1,000+ I am not a buyer. Maybe there are many Panasonic owners like me that are price sensitive. Same for the 45mm macro, at $900, I'll use my adapter, manual focus my Canon FD50mm f3.5 macro. As for a portrait lens, I'll manual focus my Contax 45mm f2 lens and save the $900 for the 45mm macro.

If Panasonic produced other very good, fast AF primes like the 20mm at a similar price point, I would be a buyer and might retire my legacy lenses. Until then, I'll use and enjoy my Panasonic lenses and fill in the gaps with legacy lenses.

One additional point, I believe that most of the Panasonic G line up has been been a success. I think that Panasonic may have been surprised the success of their G cameras. I guess, but have no factual basis for it, the best seller in the G line up of cameras is the GF1. I think that the G series was marketed as a step up camera from point and shoot. What may have surprised Panasonic, is that they got many sales from DLSR users that either wanted a lighter setup or a light back up. Panasonic may still be trying to figure out how to satisfy the demand from both market segments. My guess is P&S step up people represent the larger market share and these people want zooms (and pancakes) and probably do not care for very good, fast primes.

Howard

 

[Terry]

Yup, I know, I've been there, thank god for the D90 and d700

I don't have a G2 or a G10 and after using the adapter with my 11-22 and 25 2.8, I don't really feel like the adapter is keeping to the M4/3 philosophy of smaller and I didn't like it. Sounds like you are happy with everything, Terry, so I'm happy for you.

Never mentioned once that I was happy with everything. However I went into it with an open mind that it was a brand new system. At the same time I feel like I have a pretty full set of lenses.

My M4/3 kit includes:
Panny
7-14, 14-45, 45-200, 14-140, 20, 45
Oly
14-42, 17

4/3 Lenses with AF
14-150, 25

Manual Lenses
Leica M
50 f1.4, 75 f2
Leica R
180 f2.8
Konica/Hexanon
40 f1.8
Voigtlander - have but don't really use.

 

[Jonas]

Man, I asked for this. I should have known better than to speak my mind on the Internet. :deadhorse:

Well, you clearly asked for it. Maybe we can put that aside.

Jonas I bought into 4/3 for the small size of the 420 and the 25 pancake, thinking they would make more primes. I bought into M4/3 for the small size, live view and the 20 pancake, thinking they would make more primes.

I bought into µ4/3 for the LIve View, the viewfinder (G1) and the lens mount. Like you I'm disappointed, but for another reason. I was pretty sure there would be no problem finding a fast, manual and very good normal lens for the G1, at least an f/1.4 and about 25mm. I was wrong there.

Like many other "advanced amateurs" or at least "experienced enthusiasts" I sometimes think Panasonic and Olympus don't understand what they created. If you ask me what it is holding them back from making a series of premium prime lenses and a couple of semi-pro bodies, well, I have no idea.

I see now with 4/3 that there wasn't ever a plan for more primes, at least from Panasonic and maybe not from Olympus as well. Now a couple years into M4/3 and still not much in the way of primes and it does make me wonder if I may have made a mistake again, which is sort of the point of this thread.(...)

A year and a half... well, I wonder as well.
I sure wish they had made a super 45/1.2 lens instead of all those kit lenses.
I sure wish they made a 12/2.0 instead of that 14mm.
At the same time I don't see the point in whining and cursing. Maybe the companies respond better to well thought out wish lists.

By the way Leica makes a manual focus digital camera.

Got me.

/Jonas

 

[Godfrey]

@ clay:

Eh. So what?

Getting all hyped up on what some multinational mega corporation "ought to do" is mostly a waste of time and energy.

Panasonic's made some very good still cameras, same for lenses: all of the ones I've owned have been very good performers for their cost and class. And they've been consistent and reliable. All of them have earned me good money. All of them have made excellent photos for me and my clients. I hope Panasonic keeps doing that.

But if they don't, someone else will ... And what I have now will continue to do the job anyway until I need something else. I could care less what name is on the camera. I care what the camera does.

Why sweat the "woulda/shoulda" rumination?

..."Equipment often gets in the way of Photography." ...

 

[Brian Mosley]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Godfrey/Vivek here, what's all the fuss? as soon as there's a credible alternative go with that.

I'm very happy with every Panasonic body / lens I've ever bought... nothing has ever felt like a let down - we're in the realm of throwaway technology these days anyhow - it's not like you're getting married to the brand!

Cheers

Brian