Reading mode: Light Dark

NEW firmware upgrades for Panasonic cameras

Go to last post
You know and most of us know that 3rd party batteries generally work as well as Panny' overpriced batteries. And you know, that we know, that you know this to be true... I cannot foresee a single legal issue here. Like Sony, this is a flat out money grab and based on the pricing you are smart enough to know that...

FWIW, after 7 years of generally great camera's from Panny, I am now done with them. There are far to many great cameras out there to be stuck with Sony and now sadly Panasonic.

But, I still respect thee....

Larry

Olympus E-510 DSLR with 14-42 mm & 40-150 mm Lens

Lumix FZ 50, FZ 20, TZ5, TZ3, FX 07, TCON 17, MCON 35, RDS, Sunpak 383.

Fuji F-20.
 
I bought some 3rd-parties for my FZ18, and they worked as advertised. In all other cases, and there were many tries for various cameras, the cheapy replacements fell far short of the OEM battery for lifetime and number of recharge cycles. I spent $70 for the G1 spare, way less than 10% of my system cost.
--
Just cruisin' ...



GeeOne, EffZeeEighteen, TeeZeeThree
 
Guy Parsons said:
Villebon said:
I'll bet the're working on it! They just need to come up with some
screwball security angle.
Click to expand...
Well, the slightly idiotic Olympus mob makes their small cameras use
only xD cards, which must be the most expensive, the slowest and most
unreliable cards I've ever had the pleasure of using.

Plus they load some special header into their own brand xD cards that
allows you to access the Panorama feature in the camera. A foreign xD
card won't allow that Panorama feature.

That's the reason I won't ever touch any Olympus digicam ever again
(unless they finally see sense and go SDHC). Their DSLRs come with CF
+ xD slots, so there is relief there.

If the Olympus Micro 4/3 line comes with xD only then bye bye to
photography for me, it's all at a dead end as far as I'm concerned if
the makers insist on this stupid behaviour. I might even go back to
Nikon, but I bet they are also cooking up some dumb scheme to make
life awkward for all.

Already Panasonic has done me a favour so I can now cross the TZ7/ZS3
off my list for my wife before our next trip. Makes the choices
simpler.

Regards............ Guy
Click to expand...
I respect your posts and advice Guy. So what would you look at now to replace the TZ7? Good macro & zoom is important to me. I'll be keeping the LX3. At least with Ricoh firmware ugrades were like hens teeth!
Barrie
Barrie
 
I wonder why they didn't add this 'feature' to the LX3 firmware update released two weeks ago....surely it would make sense for them to have offered a couple of 'improvements' to sweeten this pill so they'd get more takers.
 
bminney said:
I respect your posts and advice Guy. So what would you look at now to
replace the TZ7? Good macro & zoom is important to me. I'll be
keeping the LX3. At least with Ricoh firmware ugrades were like hens
teeth!
Click to expand...
TZ7 now out of the way due to Panasonic stupidity...

My wife was happy with the 28-200mm zoom of her Ricoh R3 but the low light performance was disappointing at times. If the Ricoh CX1 improves on that low light performance then that's a natural choice. By the time we have to make the choice (next year northern hemisphere spring), the CX2 should be available.

Also lurking is the new Casio H10 with its 24-240 lens, that is also worth a try, Casio do some very clever things and are nice cameras to use. We have two of their V8 cameras, flat front, non-protruding 38-266 lens, excellent PASM ability performer, stereo sound 848x480 video etc etc but obviously too complex and too expensive to make so that line died. My wife found the 38-266 lens OK at home but not good enough (wide enough) for travel shots.

By next year a few more possibles may be available so there's no rush. But if all the makers go "my own battery only" then life just stays where it is until our current cameras die.

At the moment I like the idea of the Ricoh CX1 most as they have that excellent macro ability at all focal lengths, plus are a joy to use. Soon a major photo trade show is on in Sydney so I can get to go play with all of these cameras and take a few (indoors only) shots to see what happens.

Meanwhile all my current cameras still work, so why do I worry? We'd happily go away with just the old 5 megapixel Ricoh R3. The images from that still look better than from more modern cameras.

Regards........... Guy
 
Rob S said:
I wonder why they didn't add this 'feature' to the LX3 firmware
update released two weeks ago....surely it would make sense for them
to have offered a couple of 'improvements' to sweeten this pill so
they'd get more takers.
Click to expand...
Lol, I know! I don't want one now...I feel unsafe using such a device...
 
Panasonic has been a fine company, in my experience. Panasonic makes the cameras I want, and I currently own three of them. I buy other Panasonic equipment too.

But ... I really have a problem with this approach by Panasonic

Their batteries are too dearly priced, always have been, no matter, it seems, the device it fits.

Are there difficulties with third-party batteries for Panasonic devices? Not in my experience.

I do not like being forced to do something that I think is not right for me, nor do I like being cheated and lied to. For instance, since Sony invaded my privacy by placing a secret rootkit on my computer and then denied it before being forced to confess, I have not bought another Sony product. I just don't want to support a company that would do such a thing.

Panasonic hasn't lied; its firmware update site plainly states that the latest update makes use of third-party batteries impossible. It remains to be seen if further updates will include this "feature" without specifying it, though.

As it stands, I won't buy a Panasonic product that prohibits use of third-party batteries, and I would support a lawsuit that accuses Panasonic of restraint of trade and monopolistic practices.

--
I appreciate this forum.
Say Hey
 
--

This is a practice that will drive me away from Panasonic. The markup on official batteries is disgusting.
 
--
I agree.

With proof of purchase of a Panasonic camera the buyer upon registering the product should then be allowed to buy replacement batteries ( from Panasonic ) at a fair/cheap price.

Time to call Panasonic's bluff: if this ISN'T about money and greed then sell us the batteries at the lowest cost possible.

If this foolishness/greed keeps up I will support a boycott.
 
wasabi_bob said:
I think many are over reacting without looking at the facts.
Click to expand...
The reason many are reacting so vehemently towards chipping is because of the price gouging Panasonic wants to charge for it's batteries. If the price of Panasonic's accessories were in line with similar OEM's... there would not be this outcry. I would much rather have an OEM battery for my camera provided that I didn't feel like I was being taken advantage.

Chipping isn't the problem... Price gouging is the real issue.

--



Regards,
Kirwin
http://timebandit.smugmug.com
 
Robiro said:
Meaning that if they improve on white balance you'll be prevented
from updating because of the battery issue.
Click to expand...
WB? time to start to look into RAW format... ;)

but anyway, cloning the chip output (or whatever hell is there) from battery is not that hard task to be not accomplished by 3'd parties.
 
Panasonic, like many companies are struggling finacially. I watched their share price tumble a few weeks back - they are closing factories. They want to survive and know that there will be no govt bailout for them.

I don't agree with their philosophy on this one though. My only other experience with generic batteries has been with canon and the generic ones are 1/3 the price so not only panny are expensive.
I use a generic on my TZ5 for a year now - no problems.
--
Cheers Brett



http://bretthayvice.zenfolio.com
 
battery people will find a way around this. They always do. You will see on ebay new batteries that will state "will work with firmware xxx" Then this will all be forgotten.

The sky is falling and everyone selling all their cameras is getting carried away. Besides taking enough photos in one day to run your battery out, is way too many photos. Take less and take better..heheh. Too many people are teaching new users the best way for photography is to just hold the shutter down and hope you can get one good photo out of 50.

Also if anyone 'jumps ship' over this battery thing, 1 will get you 10 that whatever you switch to will do something that you don't like anyway...heheh. Sooner or later you will run out of brands to buy. All companies and brands do something like this to everyone everyday. Don't sweat the small stuff and it's all small stuff.
Russ
--



http://www.flickr.com/photos/quietrvr/
Gear=A camera with a lens.
 
KonstantinosTheGreat said:
I have an LX3 and updated to v1.3 firmware. My Lenmar DLP005 battery
works just fine.
Click to expand...
My Ricoh R3 and R4 batteries plus a couple of third party brand ones (at about 1/7 the price of Panasonic) work fine in my LX3 at v1.3. I suspect that this is an old design battery that maybe precedes any chipping nonsense. It has been used for some time in many Fuji, Ricoh and Panasonic cameras.

Regards........... Guy
 
In other words, LX3 battery is too old design and wasn't chipped.

However Pana still can recall all their old original batteries and send you one for free in order to push us into that upgrade..
 
OK – After taking overnight to think about this... Here’s my 2 cents...

What Panasonic did...
A) Openly disclosed they used chipped batteries in various cameras
B) http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/zs3_tz7/optional_accessories.html

C) From above link... The DMC-ZS3(TZ7) comes with a function to check whether the battery and unit can be safely used together. •Batteries made by other companies which have been certified by Panasonic may be used with these units, but we offer no guarantee as to the quality, performance or safety of such batteries. D) HOWEVER, No info regarding 3rd party certified batteries was listed then or now. E) Web page NOW contains link to CIPA with info on fake batteries... http://www.cipa.jp/battery/index_e.html

What Consumers should have done...?
A) Call Panasonic and ask... Will battery xyz work in my Lumix camera...?
B) I did, and was told... YES (which apparently is no longer the case)

What Panasonic should have done...?
A) Listed licensed 3rd party battery suppliers on web (they didn’t)
B) Implemented battery check firmware from day one (they didn’t)

C) Ensure there was adequate supply of OEM & 3rd party Licensed batteries in the market place, so consumers could buy a 2nd battery (they didn’t)

What should Panasonic do now...? IMOH

A) Place link on firmware upgrade site to above links (help with understanding the issue).
B) Provide list of licensed 3rd party battery suppliers.

C) If you purchased a counterfeit battery (made to look identical to OEM) – You knew what you were doing, and as they say... buyer beware...

D) However, if you purchased a 3rd party equivalent battery, clearly marked as such, you had reasonable expectations that it was a 3rd party licensed battery.

E) In such cases, I think Panasonic should provide a nominal credit (say $10-$15 equiv) when you send in your qualified 3rd party battery and purchase a genuine OEM battery.

F) 3rd party licensed by Panasonic battery suppliers should do the same for customers who purchased their product.

BOTTOM LINE – Panasonic was largely responsible for creating a problem they could have prevented by licensing 3rd parties to make batteries, implementing battery check firmware from the start, and ensuring adequate supplies of OEM and 3rd party licensed batteries were available at the time cameras were released.

HELLO PANASONIC – Its time for you to do the right thing for your customers...!!!

--

~ RD ~ On a good day.. RD is short for Robert David, other wise it stands for... Really Dumb
L u m i x - Z S 3 ~ P o w e r S h o t - S D 8 5 0 I S
 
I've bought 2 Panasonic cameras in succession, and (qiute a lot) Pana-products through the years. I am truly disappointed with Panasonic "messing up" with proprietary batterys. Most old ghosts comes without any smell, not so with protectionism, both the look and feel is UGLY !

I remember reading something about a law "beeing in the pipeline" by the European Union, demanding that coding of batterys SHALL BE OPEN SOURCE. If anyone has links to share on this, we (the forum) want to know .....

Environmental:
--------------------

By increasing the market-share of "proprietary" batterys, the use of both material and economical resources unevitably will INCREASE, compared to a high degree of standardization. "Lesson learned" a century ago.
Imagine most wristwatch models using proprietary battery, what a mess ? ...!

Now Panasonic and other manufacturers should re-focus their bright minds on making IMPROVEMENTS utilizing standards (=profits in the long run, always).

Yes, the need for new battery models will emerge, but NOT for almost every single new compact digicam model. NOT even in the vincinity of that number.

Panasonic (and maybe other digicam manufacturers) seems to be taking the OPPOSITE direction of "the rest of the world ", here. Better soon, to find the right direction, Pana !
 
Greetings Rob...I definitely agree with what you have said here. Even though I don't use 3rd party batteries, I don't like the 'strong-arm' approach to enforcing OEM-only batteries, especially after-the-fact. One can only wonder if maybe they felt by implementing the chip first-hand, not as many people would have bought the ZS3/TZ7 because of it.

Gary
Rob Steinle said:
OK – After taking overnight to think about this... Here’s my 2
cents...

What Panasonic did...
A) Openly disclosed they used chipped batteries in various cameras
B)
http://panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/zs3_tz7/optional_accessories.html

C) From above link... The DMC-ZS3(TZ7) comes with a function to
check whether the battery and unit can be safely used together.
•Batteries made by other companies which have been certified by
Panasonic may be used with these units, but we offer no guarantee as
to the quality, performance or safety of such batteries. D) HOWEVER,
No info regarding 3rd party certified batteries was listed then or
now. E) Web page NOW contains link to CIPA with info on fake
batteries... http://www.cipa.jp/battery/index_e.html

What Consumers should have done...?
A) Call Panasonic and ask... Will battery xyz work in my Lumix
camera...?
B) I did, and was told... YES (which apparently is no longer the case)

What Panasonic should have done...?
A) Listed licensed 3rd party battery suppliers on web (they didn’t)
B) Implemented battery check firmware from day one (they didn’t)
C) Ensure there was adequate supply of OEM & 3rd party Licensed
batteries in the market place, so consumers could buy a 2nd battery
(they didn’t)

What should Panasonic do now...? IMOH
A) Place link on firmware upgrade site to above links (help with
understanding the issue).
B) Provide list of licensed 3rd party battery suppliers.

C) If you purchased a counterfeit battery (made to look identical to
OEM) – You knew what you were doing, and as they say... buyer
beware...
D) However, if you purchased a 3rd party equivalent battery, clearly
marked as such, you had reasonable expectations that it was a 3rd
party licensed battery.
E) In such cases, I think Panasonic should provide a nominal credit
(say $10-$15 equiv) when you send in your qualified 3rd party
battery and purchase a genuine OEM battery.
F) 3rd party licensed by Panasonic battery suppliers should do the
same for customers who purchased their product.

BOTTOM LINE – Panasonic was largely responsible for creating a
problem they could have prevented by licensing 3rd parties to make
batteries, implementing battery check firmware from the start, and
ensuring adequate supplies of OEM and 3rd party licensed batteries
were available at the time cameras were released.

HELLO PANASONIC – Its time for you to do the right thing for your
customers...!!!

--

~ RD ~ On a good day.. RD is short for Robert David, other wise it stands for... Really Dumb
L u m i x - Z S 3 ~ P o w e r S h o t - S D 8 5 0 I S
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BobKo
Firmware updates for Panasonic LUMIX GH7 and G9m2
Replies
10
Views
1K
Hexlord79
Hexlord79
Tyrbiter
May 2025 Panasonic FF lens firmware updates
Replies
2
Views
72
Tyrbiter
Tyrbiter
I
G9.2 firmware update v2.4
2
Replies
23
Views
31
jrsforums
J
I
S1(R).2 Firmware 1.2 released
Replies
6
Views
247
ikolbyi
I
BobKo
Firmware updates for the Panasonic GH7 and G9m2
Replies
5
Views
174
1000DTL
1

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top