 |  |  |  |  |
| Easternmenue by chrisdo from Beer or Soda Bottles (2021 version) | Red necked grebe consuming a fish by kk2011 from A Big Year - Birds 2021 | Alone. by themountainphotographer from Gloomy | Chou Romanesco by AM91210 from Repetition - Macro Challenge | Flying Low by OSP2017 from Sunny Sixteen |
Verto: If this is all true and performs as they say the iPhone 12 PRO MAX model really makes all low end and mid range cameras obsolete. Even if it's bought at as a Camera with 3 lenses at $1,100 with all the tech and raw support. APS-C sensor cameras will have a hard time keeping up, especially in video. I'll wait for some real samples but I expect camera's like the Ricoh GRIII and others to die.
https://youtu.be/yZqUyXRvMMU
The thing is the minute your not on that 6 inch screen you can see the difference even with a 10 yr old m43 camera!
jackdanielsandcoke: The Raw thing is just allows you to undo whatever processing they decided to do right? I think it's a clever way to do it but won't necessarily get you a better image overall if you know what you're doing with Lightroom. Unless there are things that Apple are doing on the fly (light sensing of a room etc..) that you couldn't do yourself. I suppose anything that gets rid of the terrible over sharpening / HDR stuff.
The thing that is most interesting to me is the IBIS thing and the increased light. I think this maybe a game changer really. When iPhones have good light they look pretty decent. This is going push that even further. I can see why all the camera companies are just going to stick with high end now. I'm not even sure any sub £1000 camera is going to practically beat the iPhone for vlogging and general photography on the go.
Still prefer actual camera's, but things are changing fast!
yeah it allows you to keep it. But was it good anyway? Some of it is good and some bad (like the HDR stuff and over sharpening). I suppose the aim is to provide a better starting point for editing because so much of a basic iPhone photo is faked that the RAW would be pretty underwhelming (which is why they never provided it before I imagine).
I suppose the idea of being able to use capture one's sharpening rather than apple's one is a draw maybe. Things like that.
I just wonder will it take a better picture than my 10 megapixel GF-1 from 10 yrs ago in RAW?? I suppose if all you do is look at it on the iPhone then maybe it does.
The Raw thing is just allows you to undo whatever processing they decided to do right? I think it's a clever way to do it but won't necessarily get you a better image overall if you know what you're doing with Lightroom. Unless there are things that Apple are doing on the fly (light sensing of a room etc..) that you couldn't do yourself. I suppose anything that gets rid of the terrible over sharpening / HDR stuff.
The thing that is most interesting to me is the IBIS thing and the increased light. I think this maybe a game changer really. When iPhones have good light they look pretty decent. This is going push that even further. I can see why all the camera companies are just going to stick with high end now. I'm not even sure any sub £1000 camera is going to practically beat the iPhone for vlogging and general photography on the go.
Still prefer actual camera's, but things are changing fast!
jackdanielsandcoke: I’m curious... does any serious film maker rely on autofocus?
Panasonic focus woes seems like a problem for vloggers really. And how many vloggers are using full frame 2 grand plus cameras?
No one who’s doing an independent film project is really ever going to use autofocus. They need to set up their shot for consistency.
For indie film makers isn’t this camera pretty good value for money? The downside to this camera is something that only vloggers are ever going to have a problem with right?
The canon r5 and a7s3 are ridiculously expensive and the Sony can’t match the stills picture that the s5 can do. As long as there is a decent EF adapter I think this is going to sell a lot of units. What is better for the price?
It’s a shame really. The people with the most influence in the game get to complain about things that a whole gang of users would never have a problem with. And people who would benefit from this camera end up picking up something else that just isn’t as good.
The funny thing is the most successful vloggers seem to be using those little canon g7x’s. They’re not running around town with giant full frame cameras. It’s not exactly convenient.
I’m curious... does any serious film maker rely on autofocus?
Panasonic focus woes seems like a problem for vloggers really. And how many vloggers are using full frame 2 grand plus cameras?
No one who’s doing an independent film project is really ever going to use autofocus. They need to set up their shot for consistency.
For indie film makers isn’t this camera pretty good value for money? The downside to this camera is something that only vloggers are ever going to have a problem with right?
The canon r5 and a7s3 are ridiculously expensive and the Sony can’t match the stills picture that the s5 can do. As long as there is a decent EF adapter I think this is going to sell a lot of units. What is better for the price?
I dont think canon are mad enough to deliberately cripple their cameras in this way. It’s a flag ship model and it’s not like there’s a better camera in their lineup that does the same things without problems.
I think this is just developers using a hack to get around a problem. They probably know that if you consistently push this camera one of the chips is going to die. They probably just don’t know exactly when and what component will die. And they were told to design it with small form factor for a particular price with no fan by some high up exec. Finally they were told to have it ready by the Tokyo Olympics.
So they did what every good dev does with a gun to your head and a deadline, they guessed! They probably can’t get an accurate temp reading that they can rely on so they just guessed roughly what would protect the camera in ALL conditions, I.e. 35C and 5C etc.. and just bought themselves some time.
Either that or have tons of dead cameras sent back for repair.
sportyaccordy: Everything retro is spiraling out of control price wise
Someone just paid $250K for a 1989ish BMW M3 for example. The low interest rate environment has turned any and everything into a speculative investment vehicle.
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head there.
Japanese companies have a problem because they mainly make products to keep their factories busy rather than because they need to make a new product. So you used to see tons of camera releases that did slightly different things to the last one but by not much.
All that does is increase marginal cost of production on each unit. And then you buy parts in bulk to try and keep costs down and. then you cant innovate either. Its a mess.
What u see now is Panny not releasing a flagship for 2/3 yrs instead of every year. Canon are doing the same with r5/r6 and Sony has been doing it too. Slow the release cycle and get marginal cost down (and profits up) by keeping a model alive for years and releasing fewer of them.
The money is in the lenses and accessories. Tie services to the camera and make money that way. Less cameras, more services. Unfortunately the factory stuff has to reduce.
They sell millions of these consoles and maybe tens of thousands of $2000 dollar cameras. I hardly think chip shortage could even factor in the equation. Is this article serious?
It’s always been political for them. If it was up to Facebook their would be no native apps anywhere. They don’t believe in them. They think it’s restricts their business activities.
Making sure the web versions exist of all their apps and pushing those is a philosophical and business protection thing. There is no real business case for the iPad version in their eyes. (Notice that their is no iPad version of WhatsApp either).
I’m sure they think the iPad FB is a misstep and they would retire it if they could get away with it.
Horshack: "It fluctuates month by month, but in the $3,000 / €3,000 price range, we have gained roughly a 10% market share, globally."
Unless he's including other solar systems I think that 10% global market share figure is a bit optimistic, and I'm an S1/S1R owner :) Or perhaps his 10% figure is not weighted in unit volumes but instead by aggregate market share percentage independent of market size. For example 3% in the USA and 17% in a small European country, which averages to 10% market share but not by units.
I see what you mean. I just think that if you gear your company to the high end instead of fighting canon and Sony in the sub 1000 dollar range it’s easier to survive because margins are higher.
I can’t see a future camera industry where any of the main players of today (canon, Nikon etc.. ) will be selling many sub 1000 dollar cameras. There will only be high end. So I feel that Panasonic are starting there and that makes more sense for them since they don’t have a huge sub 1000 market to protect like the others do.
I suppose we will see how it all works out.
Horshack: "It fluctuates month by month, but in the $3,000 / €3,000 price range, we have gained roughly a 10% market share, globally."
Unless he's including other solar systems I think that 10% global market share figure is a bit optimistic, and I'm an S1/S1R owner :) Or perhaps his 10% figure is not weighted in unit volumes but instead by aggregate market share percentage independent of market size. For example 3% in the USA and 17% in a small European country, which averages to 10% market share but not by units.
Of course there are fixed costs but at some point in the production cycle the bulk of production costs get less (design, tooling etc..) and it’s cheaper to produce the 1000th camera than it is to produce the 1st one.
Panasonic are a huge company. “Survival” means something different when you’re talking about a company of their size. There just as big as canon as a company.. 25-30bn usd market cap.
Producing technology is their business, whether high or low margin. It’s not some sideline.
Horshack: "It fluctuates month by month, but in the $3,000 / €3,000 price range, we have gained roughly a 10% market share, globally."
Unless he's including other solar systems I think that 10% global market share figure is a bit optimistic, and I'm an S1/S1R owner :) Or perhaps his 10% figure is not weighted in unit volumes but instead by aggregate market share percentage independent of market size. For example 3% in the USA and 17% in a small European country, which averages to 10% market share but not by units.
People forget the margins on 3k cameras and the fact those buyers will buy multiple expensive lenses. Sony may sell 10 a73’s but a lot of them will be using adapted canon on cheaper sigma lenses. Sony make 500 quid or so.
Panasonic sell 1 s1r and make 1500 quid plus profits from 2 lenses.
It can still be a very profitable business at that level.
Do Fuji sell more GFX products than Panasonic sell s1’s? No one says Fuji should stop with medium format.
Ultimately business becomes about “margin” not market share or units sold. Market share is just a means of creating a greater margin. You can sell 10 cameras at 500 quid and make 100 pounds a camera when or you can sell 1 at 3000 and make 1500?
The money is now in the high end and accessories to go with them (I.e. lenses). Buyers of 3 grand cameras are more likely to buy multiple lenses and expensive lenses at that. There is also more room for discounting over time with a higher priced camera than there is at the lower end. Plus, higher priced cameras need to be updated less so marginal returns kick in.
Unless your into video, the sub 1000 category can be replaced with a phone for many people. So cameras are going to be niche. Fuji are all on the retro thing with the dials and how it looks, something smartphones will never do. Panasonic have had to double down on video to keep their niche as well. All makes sense really. What else are they going to do?
There used to be this thing about marketing to US customers. It’s a big country with lots of space and they just expect everything to be “big”. If something wasn’t big it couldn’t be good.
So when Japanese companies would make a games console for the US market they would just pad the boxes out. That’s why the NES in America was a big beige box compared to the small famicom in japan. Same thing with the double size Turbo Grafx 16 vs it’s Japanese PC engine version.
I feel like that happens with photographers right now. Something the size of an iPhone can’t possibly compete with my canon xxD etc.. the lenses have to be huge etc. It’s probably why micro four thirds has such a hard time in the USA too. ).
If the iPhone was a huge box with RED written over it I wonder what people would say?
Doesn't the lack of IBIS negate the quality of the video for anyone that doesn't want to carry a tripod or a gimbal everywhere?
Especially as the FUJI doesn't have many (any?) stabilised Prime lenses. I just cant see the point of all that shaky video that is hard if not impossible to fix.
Thats what has put me off the FUJI vs say a Panasonic Gx9 which is far cheaper.
Even the low light photo's you can get with the combined IBIS/OIS on the penny's can really look good. (as long as there is no movement in your image).
Am I worrying too much about the IBIS video? Seems like a deal breaker to me.
Isn't this camera about realising that there is more to gain from the computational aspects of photography than the "physics" based solutions we are all used to?
The iPhone / pixel are moving leaps and bounds using this approach. It feels like Olympus are hoping to do specific things no one else can here. My bet is when people actually use it instead of reading a spec chart they be impressed.
Handheld shots with resolution of a medium format camera? Also, the stabilization will mean even less need for gimbals and tripods. Put a speed booster on it and you probably have the best camera in the world at that price point right?
I think we will also start to loose the near simultaneous release of products like cameras and stuff. It’s like going back to the 80’s!
If you have to perform tests / regulations for electronic equipment in the EU market and then for the UK separately, which region will you target first?
I suppose the uk will try to wave through eu regulated goods. Maybe that will help. But how long will that last? At some point rules will diverge (or what was the point of the whole leave thing anyway? If not to make your own rules right?).
I'm not a big camera head but I do own a M43 camera (GX7) with a few lenses.
I wonder why people think (Tony Northrup etc..) Panasonic will abandon M43?
Canon sold FF along side APS-C for years at varying price points. I'm look at a FF camera now (Sony A73 etc..) and they are all around 2k for the body alone. And the price of the Sony lenses are crazy.
I cant imagine the full frame business is more than 20% of the total camera business? Am I wrong? I cant see how machines that start above £1500 are anything but PRO machines. And Pro machines in any industry are always a fraction of the pro-super/consumer sales.
M43's like the GM1/GX series or the EOS M.. are they not selling anymore because everyone wants FF? The difference in money is massive. I just dont get it .