CP+ 2013: Panasonic interview

 Panasonic's Michiharu Uematsu and Yoshiyuki Inoue

CP+ 2013: Panasonic is considering which cameras it needs to appeal to the different demands for Micro Four Thirds in different countries. We spoke to Michiharu Uematsu, Special Adviser, Imaging Business Group and Yoshiyuki Inoue, Senior Engineering Planner, Marketing Team, Imaging Business Group. They explain the challenges of making and marketing a high image quality compact and suggest the GH3 won't get focus peaking.

Uematsu spoke about how the market has reacted to the company's products: 'GH3 has been well recieved, especially for motion pictures. As you know we interviewed many people in the industry in Europe and North America, so it would offer what they needed - broadcasters needed bitrates above 50Mbps so we offer 50 and 72Mbps. In Europe they needed 25p, not 50i. And they're using GH3 - it's much smaller and lighter than a professional camcorder and doesn't need several people to operate it.'

However, he says, there is still one feature they're calling for. 'Focus peaking and zebra pattern. More than 90% of the requests we're getting are for these features. We haven't been able to offer it - because of the limits of resources and of the Venus Engine processor. Because it is not included in the Venus Engine, focus peaking is very hard to introduce - anything we added in software would be very different.'

Reconsidering the lineup

The story for the rest of the G lineup is less clear because different countries have embraced different models, he says: 'In Japan and Asia, the GF series is very strong but European countries it's very different. GH is well accepted everywhere - including America and Asia. In Japan the GF is our best seller but we have competition from Olympus, Sony, Canon and Nikon. We have to think about what to do next with the GF and G series - some people still require the viewfinder of the G series but it's difficult to know what we should offer in the middle of the range for customers in Europe and America.

Meanwhile, he says, the success of the GX1 means there shouldn't be the same wait that enthusiasts experienced after the GF1. 'We are considering the next GX, that's all I can say. It's been better received than the GF series in European countries. Our first thought was that the people who would want our cameras were step-up users from compact cameras. Outside of Japan this hasn't been true and some high-end amateurs have accepted the cameras. Some people still like bigness, so we have to change our thinking. We have to explain that it's not just a case that a bigger sensor is better - you also need to consider size and lens quality - that's a very difficult message.'

And this split in users has made lens planning difficult, he says: 'we have 18 lenses in production and we have professional and high-end amateur photographers requesting fast prime lenses. But we also sell many camera bodies to step-up users and they don't buy other lenses. We have to also appeal to those users, we have to educate step-up users to buy lenses.'

And, when asked what effect the arrival to JK Imaging (which will sell Micro Four Thirds cameras under the Kodak name), Uematsu seems positive, especially if it helps to increase Micro Four Thirds sales in countries such as China. 'It's not bad news for us.'

Challenge of smartphones

'It's a very difficult situation - almost every one has a smartphone. We have our LX, TZ, FZ and FT series that do things that smartphones can't. Maybe we should have a premium model, maybe with  bigger sensor. However, that takes engineering resources and you have to worry about price and the extra quality it will offer people - if we can sell 100,000 or 200,000, we will make it,' says Uematsu.

Inoue explains that making a good camera isn't enough: 'Marketing is also very difficult - selling image quality to users is complicated. Maybe 4K2K televisions, which are very useful devices to display image quality, would help, but we have to consider how to market image quality. Other people can say "we have a bigger sensor," but a combination of a not-so-big sensor and a brighter lens can be maybe better, but you have to explain F-number - it's very difficult.'

Uematsu explains the company's options: 'There are three solutions, I think: we can make a camera with a small sensor and a bright lens - like the LX7 or we could use a bigger sensor but with a slower zoom lens. Finally we could build a camera with a bigger sensor and a bright fixed focal length lens. This last option would give the best image quality - maybe better than a DSLR or mirrorless camera because you don't have mechanical tolerances of the lens mount. But that would be for a very different market - professionals and high-end amateurs. For everyone else, it's hard to explain. For normal people, you have to wonder by what percentage the image quality is going to get better - maybe the best answer is a small sensor and bright lens.' 

Comments

Total comments: 202
12
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 4, 2013)

For video shooters using a GH3 in a production environment, most HDMI field monitors have focus peaking and zebra stripes so as a feature it is only something a run-and-gunner with a lightweight, camera & rig kit might desire.

For photography, focus peaking is a nice feature, but with focus-by-wire AF lenses, the absence of peaking no big deal as MF is just not that great to begin with. For non-native or MF lenses like the Voigtlanders clearly peaking would be nice but I don't think the lack of this one feature detracts too much at all from the GH3, just as it didn't with the GH2.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
migus
By migus (Feb 4, 2013)

Refreshingly candid, thank you!
Indeed, selling IQ to consumers who never print big and have low res 2k / low quality (non-AdobeRGB) screens is tough. The 4K AMOLEDs and PJs are not even near the 1K$ threshold to make a difference yet. However, people notice the noise in low light shots and don't like it...

P.S. Please kindly use standard batteries and also allow cheap 3rd parties in your ecosystem. This, not the sensor size, is the #1 ethical reason why i still refuse to buy your otherwise attractive cameras.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Feb 4, 2013)

Take a shot at ISO 12800 with any small-sensor camera and it is clearly bad even for a postage stamp, no need to print big. :(

0 upvotes
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Feb 5, 2013)

Great, ISO 12800. Wow. I'm excited.
Now I'm wondering why MF cameras don't go beyond 6400. Is it because the sensor is too small...?

0 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (Feb 5, 2013)

MF cams don't go to high ISO because ALL of their sensors are woefully inefficient. The best sensor technology resides in the land of small sensors (35mm and smaller). MF is like a big lorry relying on it's sheer bulk to carry more goods whilst having an inefficient fuel guzzling and environment polluting engine.

Check this out: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/dxomark_sensor_for_benchmarking_cameras2.shtml

0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Feb 5, 2013)

that part about the batteries is so true. having two AA batteries on my old p&s panasonic cameras is one of the main things that drew me to them in the first place.

or how about this: make the batteries slightly larger and create some sort of adapter for AA or AAA. this may not work for every type of camera, but it will offer the option of an emergency power source.

1 upvote
ManuelVilardeMacedo
By ManuelVilardeMacedo (Feb 5, 2013)

Yes, plevyadophy. Now you need to tell that to ALL relevant studios because they still use those Chevrolet El Camiños of cameras such as Phase One and Hasselblad.

0 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (Feb 5, 2013)

@ManuelVilardeMacedo
They wouldn't listen partly because, like a lot of things in photography, they have got addicted to a myth and will refuse to accept otherwise; partly because in certain sectors (i am thinking mainly of fashion) MF cams are the thing to be seen using (irrespective of the fact that 90% of the images made by those MF cams won't get printed bigger than a single page in mag like Vogue); and partly because if you really do need a zillion mega pixels then MF is where it's at.

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Feb 4, 2013)

What about a camera with fixed zoom (like Canon G1X) but smaller,
24-72mm, f2.8-4.0? The only reason I didn't buy it is because I consider it still "fat". Anyone interested in a camera like this?

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
1 upvote
migus
By migus (Feb 4, 2013)

+1, but w/ a faster lens

1 upvote
John Miles
By John Miles (Feb 4, 2013)

So now I have faces to the people not producing an upgrade to the FZ50. Gentlemen. Make the upgrade to the FZ50.

4 upvotes
John Miles
By John Miles (Feb 5, 2013)

And Non Extending

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (Feb 4, 2013)

We need 120fps video, or better yet 240fps, to make it smooth for the eye.

That will also make it easier to automatically take several pictures and combine them for better quality.

Small package FF prime 50mm f1.2 with silent digital zoom (crop) and fast panorama function (possibly by moving lens and sensor internally like in surveillance cameras).

You could also swing the sensor back and forth for composite layered focus.

The static lens with internal filters would allow good weather sealing.
The polarisation filter would kick in optionally to create stunning pictures.

Plastic edges for camera protection could extend to small flexible and gripping tripod or sun shade for display.

Removable gorilla glass lens cover in filter thread for easy cleaning and replacement.

Optionally record audio during shooting and offer open source software for speech recognition integrating the text into Exif and image name.

Interactive manual with bookmarking viewable in camera changing settings.

0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Feb 4, 2013)

Will 240fps video look any smoother if shot hand-held? If your big HDTV has a 60hz scan rate, or a 120fps scan rate, won't that trump the video's supposed "native" frame rate?

What bitrate would it take to support "true" 240fps video, as opposed to 30fps? What is the point if YouTube streams at only 5mbps and if Blu-ray is only 60i or 24p? If low light requires a slower shutter speed, what would a high frame rate provide at all?

As for the other features you request, why not build them into a phone and reap far greater sales, than if put in a camera?

1 upvote
littlebitstrouds
By littlebitstrouds (Feb 4, 2013)

240fps isn't a feature we want so we can display native 240fps content. It's a feature we want so we can slow down the footage 10x.

You always want your source, before compression, to be as clean as possible. Many things are lost in compression, but before it's compressed, many things can be gained with certain tools. Dynamic range to boost shadows. Extra resolution for re-framing in post. Extra frames to slow down and emphasize moments in otherwise uninteresting footage.

Low light doesn't intrinsically require a slower shutter speed. lowering your shutter speed is just one way to compensate for low light. There are other ways to compensate without adjusting your shutter speed: using faster lens, adjusting your iso or using a larger sensor camera.

Not all features possible in a dslr or compact are adaptable to phones... yet.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (Feb 4, 2013)

It's indeed interesting to see Bluray was digging its own grave right from the start by defining an oppressive standard: it's becoming obsolete before being adopted by the masses.

There is a reason good displays have 400-800Hz (fps) rates.
300 FPS, interpolated 300 FPS along with other high frame rates, have been tested by BBC Research for use in sports broadcasts. And of course the Japanese are far ahead here too.

0 upvotes
graybalanced
By graybalanced (Feb 5, 2013)

Wow, some people ask for a lot.

I have 120fps now. It's in the Panasonic LX7.

I'm sure the rest of your list could be achieved...technically. Now for the real world. For the target market that would buy it, Panasonic would sell about 50. Each camera would cost $20,000.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (Feb 5, 2013)

There is nothing especially expensive in what I propose, and most of it is available since years in different mass market packages. It has similarities with old 35mm film cameras and the RX1 of course, but also with the PureView Nokia 808 and standard CCTVs.

Of course I want a lot, who would want to stay stuck with gear from the technical middle ages ? :-)
Cameras are flying already, I didn't even mention 3D or holographic imaging picturing moving objects from all angles.

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

The GH3 has in camera RAW stacking. Something that is basically the holy grail for Astro Photographers. Yet they have never said a word about it.

If they want to do cheap marketing they should just get on the message boards and explain these features there. Those people will understand them and want them.

Then they don't have to try to explain these features to the entire world.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Feb 4, 2013)

> If they want to do cheap marketing they should just get on the message boards and explain these features there...

Right on. That's how marketing works these days. I hope these CEOs get it.

2 upvotes
tgutgu
By tgutgu (Feb 4, 2013)

What a clueless company!

They still don't what Europeans and Americans demand!

While the competition has focus peaking for more than a year, they offer lame excuses for not implementing it.

It looks that the GH3 was prematurely released, probably due to the success of the E-M5: lousy EVF and no resources, i.e. time for developing an image processor, which is able to support focus peaking.

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (Feb 4, 2013)

I don't demand focus peaking and I am an American. I demand good AF so I don't need focus peaking.

1 upvote
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Feb 4, 2013)

Doesn't the Lumix G5 already have focus peaking and 60p FHD video? I guess that was a different department.

0 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Feb 4, 2013)

Who needs focus peaking when Micro Four-Thirds has the best mirrorless lens line-up?

"We have to explain that it's not just a case that a bigger sensor is better - you also need to consider size and lens quality - that's a very difficult message.'"

The M43 primes are no joke, the native 12, 25, 17, 45 and 75 are all top quality. I'd still go DSLR for heavy duty pro-use, but the M43 line-up is more than enough to satisfy high end amateurs or pros who want to go light.

3 upvotes
duartix
By duartix (Feb 4, 2013)

Hardcore videographers need focus peaking. Why? Because PRO's DO IT manually.
Hardcore photograph enthusiasts need focus peaking. Why? Because they use a lot of exquisite glass that doesn't support AF.

3 upvotes
stevens37y
By stevens37y (Feb 4, 2013)

If you make video you need often MF. Sorry.

0 upvotes
Vitruvius
By Vitruvius (Feb 4, 2013)

"No focus peaking because it was not included with the Venus Engine" .... So you build the hardware and software from the Sony CLM-V55 external monitor into a vertical grip accessory (minus the screen) and loop the HDMI signal through the grip and back to the GH3 screen. Bob's your uncle. Or you just offer a new version of the GH3 with a new Venus Engine. How hard is that? "More than 90% request this". So why wouldn't it be included?

2 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

Why would you ever come out and say "Focus peaking and zebra pattern. More than 90% of the requests we're getting are for these features." and admit that the "the GH3 won't get focus peaking."

That statement doesn't help Panasonic one bit. They would be much better off just not talking about it at all. Everyone knows the camera doesn't come with the feature. Why even mention that you cannot add that feature?

3 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Feb 4, 2013)

Odd that a consumer would complain about a company being transparent. Of course if you're a shareholder, please continue.

6 upvotes
steve_hoge
By steve_hoge (Feb 5, 2013)

Personally, I was impressed by their candor.

2 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (Feb 4, 2013)

These are admirably honest statements, in stark contrast to the self-serving nonsense spouted by other companies recently.

Still, I can’t help but laugh at how many times something was described as ‘difficult’ or ‘very difficult’. Poor Panny! They’re stuck and they know it. They’ve been making great cameras for years now, and that’s still not widely known. In part that’s because their marketing has been so bad: they’ve made cameras with strengths that are almost impossible to explain (e.g. the oversized sensor that allows the use of the full image circle diameter of the lens at all aspect ratios) and their advertising is the worst in the industry.

Their cameras are typically excellent, in my experience.

16 upvotes
karinangelika
By karinangelika (Feb 4, 2013)

Excellent cameras, bad marketing... so very true!

2 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Feb 4, 2013)

Olympus recent m43 advertising from online and local camera stores has been very good at explaining the benefits of a larger sensor with small body. Panasonic should study how Olympus is doing it, and try learning effective marketing. Nikon can sell a lot of system 1 cameras when first introduced (maybe harder now) as they have great advertising ideas and make their cameras sound cool with Ashton K.

0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Feb 5, 2013)

what's so hard about saying "16 MP regardless of the aspect ratio"? if that doesn't work, stick a Leica red dot on it, bump the price by 80% and market it with pictures of the original Leica staff. that will surely draw the hipster's attention.

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (Feb 5, 2013)

That would be easy to say, agentul, but it would be wrong.

The fact that even you – a DPReview commentator – don’t fully understand this feature proves my point that it’s hard to market.

0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Feb 5, 2013)

my commenting here is not really a proof of photographing equipment knowledge - there are a lot of obvious trolls that attest to this.

as far as i'm concerned i only need to read reviews and see the technical specs to form an opinion. i've actually never seen any advertising for panasonic cameras, and i don't really trust advertising campaigns. a quality product speaks for itself (when it can be heard over the background noise of fanboys).

0 upvotes
WhyNot
By WhyNot (Feb 4, 2013)

Interesting and somewhat discouraging... My understanding of what they are saying is that Panasonic is market driven – they don't want to introduce a product that isn't guaranteed sales of 100K units; the camera market is complex and they don't fully understand it; they have problems communicating the benefits of their product in some markets. ….... Now, I do own some of their products and while I like most conceptually sometimes using them can be trying. … My take is that Panasonic, Sony and Samsung are all very innovative electronics companies trying to act like Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Olympus in the still camera business – it's going to take time and persistence and some mistakes. .... Personally I'm trying hard to like mFT but may still migrate back to Canikon.

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (Feb 5, 2013)

All commercial companies are market driven; they aren't doing charity work. The difference between companies is in their analysis of the market, and what they think will sell.

0 upvotes
Vlad S
By Vlad S (Feb 4, 2013)

This just doesn't make sense. In the US Panasonic does not even market their micro 4/3 cameras, AND despite that they still can't satisfy the demand. How can they say that marketing is difficult when they don't even try?

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
12 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (Feb 4, 2013)

Based on the last paragraph, I have mixed comments. My LX5 while good in moderate light, in very dim light, there is plenty of noise from starting at ISO400 and higher. For m43 the noise is very minimal at 800 and 1600 iso in todays m43. A fast lens helps with smaller sensor of LX series, but m43 wins out in most cases at pixel level. For cost and sales to general consumer, market a relatively low cost m43 like EPM2 with kit lens which I would take over a LX7. Panasonic can sell the low cost GF series and let the consumer add a fast lens later, or else bundle the fast lens with body on initial sales. A fixed lens not removable like Fuji mirrorless X100, which is prime lens, mainly only appeals to semi / pros, or advanced amateurs not vast consumers who want zoom. I kind of like my LX5 but mainly in good light outdoors. M43 is so much better in most light so I see sales of m43 go up naturally worldwide as expected. I do not agree with his last sentence, best answer for new sales is m43.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Nikolaï
By Nikolaï (Feb 4, 2013)

Its easy for us to say we want this we want that, but people don't understand that the high end cameras don't sell as much as the lower end therefore it is a always a risk to develop them. Look at the OMD, nobody knew they were going to sell as much not even olympus.

And i think the fact that the markets are different in japan -china vs europe-america just shows how difficult it is to predict what the market wants.

What good is cohesion if you don't sell the products and bankrupt the business

1 upvote
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

Olympus's camera business will never bankrupt the overall business. It is an almost insignificant portion of their overall business. I suspect Panasonic is the same way.

4 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

Companies should really stop trying to stop the bleeding with Public statements like this. It didn't work out so well for Canon and it won't help Panasonic.

1 upvote
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

Just the way they are holding those cameras tells you they are stuck back in the manual focus days.

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Feb 4, 2013)

No, that's the 100% correct way to hold any SLR type camera. You cradle the lens with your left hand so you can zoom, focus, and support the weight of the camera. It has nothing to do with MF and being stuck anywhere. That's the textbook way to hold this type of camera.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
plevyadophy
By plevyadophy (Feb 5, 2013)

@marike6

Yeah, I agree with you 100%.

But it's just a pity that companies like Nikon stupidly put a zillion trilion buttons and dials down the left hand side of the camera thus forcing you to move your left hand from where it shoud be (supporting the lens) to f* about with buttons and dials that should never be on that side of the camera.

It is one of my pet hates, and the main reason why I don't use Nikon gear even though I love their flash system. Panasonic, Pentax, Sony and to a lesser extent Leica with their S system actually get it; they don't require you to move your left hand much to operate the camera. Canon 1D series cams can be operated one-handed if you choose to use the Quick Control menus system; if you don't then the cams are ergonomically quite irritating.

0 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Feb 4, 2013)

Wow, I can't believe the number of manufactures willing to issue statements like this lately. He sounds almost scatterbrained. Like they don't have a clue what we want.

I will tell him what we want. We want 1 small Jacket pocket-able camera with a built-in rangefinder style EVF. It should have all of the internals of the Olympus OMD EM5 including their excellent image stabilization. If Panasonic won't make this camera then Olympus will.

Next we want the GH3 with focus peaking and an EVF that doesn't ghost. We also want an upper and lower shutter speed limit for Auto ISO and Auto ISO should work in manual mode as well. It is as simple as that.

If they produce those two cameras then they will absolutely corner the market. From the sounds of the article I don't think either one of those cameras will come from Panasonic this year.

Check out this video for more information on the GH3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIMdxoGbNXU

GH3 EVF issue
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqteueoRRf4

5 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Feb 4, 2013)

Give him a break. He's only saying that they are trying to fulfil a wide range of sometimes contradictory requirements. And it's interesting to hear his thoughts.
As for what 'we' want, well I don't want what you think I want. A creative tool not weighed down by endless 'features' (to use a polite word) would be my choice - a digital Nikon FM.

9 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Feb 4, 2013)

You are dreaming. Nobody makes you the perfect camera.

And CEOs are presenters. How they look and hold the cameras is without relevance. The camera is deciding. And I think their products are above average. And I also use their outstanding video cameras. Very good price/performance ratio.

Business is not easy - but Panasonic has a strategy. Can you tell me a road map of Olympus, just for the records in FT/MFT markets?

4 upvotes
SHood
By SHood (Feb 4, 2013)

I'll take the shutter limit for Aperture mode please. This is the easiest thing to implement and #1 on my list.

3 upvotes
whoodle
By whoodle (Feb 4, 2013)

"What we want..."

[chuckle]

Yeah....another $800 fixed-lens compact is EXACTLY what the market's clamoring for right now!!

You're right...they'll absolutely corner the market....all 453 of you!

2 upvotes
migus
By migus (Feb 4, 2013)

Actually i must agree w/ the OP: Lots of my friends (non-photogs) want precisely that <200gr high IQ P&S!
Personally i want Fuji's OVF, bt w/o the size and price tag of a niche product :-).

0 upvotes
ThomasSwitzerland
By ThomasSwitzerland (Feb 4, 2013)

Great if Panasonic moves to the high-end. They have great products and lenses.

I use their G3 as second body. Very good pictures, perfect handling. But just not the IQ as APS-C. But, the difference is small. They can bridge it. Panasonic has the right drive and realizes visions.

That’s why I left Olympus in the FT/MFT field to my regret. I will further strongly support Panasonic.

4 upvotes
dmanthree
By dmanthree (Feb 4, 2013)

Actually, this is very telling. The schizophrenic nature of their product line is pretty well reflected in their comments, which are all over the map. I'd like a little more cohesion in the m4/3 lineup, but I don't think it's going to happen based on what I'm reading here.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (Feb 4, 2013)

As they say their high-end range is selling well everywhere, GF range is selling well in Asia and the GX is selling well in Europe. How would having /less/ models help them sell more?

1 upvote
photo perzon
By photo perzon (Feb 4, 2013)

lenses twice the volume as olympus
jpegs with skin tones not as good as olympus
inability to put IS inside camera as Olympus

2 upvotes
bluevellet
By bluevellet (Feb 4, 2013)

I like the Panasonic pancake lenses. They're better than Olympus' sole pancake on m43
I'm pretty sure the no IBIS on Panasonic cameras (in favor of OIS) is purely a design/markleting choice, just like Sony with NEX (Sony has IBIS but for their Alpha line of DSLRs)
Panasonic has no excuses for their jpegs though

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
paul cool
By paul cool (Feb 4, 2013)

You can please some of the people some of the time all of the people some of the time some of the people all of the time but you can never please all of the people all of the time.

0 upvotes
LarryK
By LarryK (Feb 4, 2013)

Nope, wrong answer.

1 upvote
Total comments: 202
12