Panasonic Pulls Head From Ass

In a recent interview, a Panasonic rep has said that the company will be refocusing on the higher-end. The reason they gave is that the margins are higher. Good course, stupid reason. I'm embedding their press conference, even though it's painfully bad.



I love when companies admit that the past three years have been a disaster, but do it in terms like "well, we could have continued on as before if we wanted to, but it's just so dreary!" No, Panasonic. I don't buy it. You weren't catering to the amateur market, you were catering to the "soccer mom" crowd. There's a big difference. Your margins didn't suck, they didn't exist at all. No one was buying your cameras.

Regardless, I guess, Panasonic is making the right choice. The only people interested in ILC systems are pro-thusiasts. That's why Sony served them their own ass on a platter. Sony delivered compact, mirrorless cameras with exceptional image quality, and control schemes and designs loaded with pro-thusiast touches, all at a low price. That's why the NEX 5 and 5n were huge hits. Neither Panasonic nor Olympus had anything like that. They had crap for cheap, or decent stuff for high prices. Or as with Oly, crap for high prices.

Then, Olympus releases something like Sony (and partially made by Sony), the E-M5, and it's a gigantic hit! Shocker! Only I... and four million other photography enthusiasts knew that would happen. Somehow, the actual camera companies were some of the few who didn't understand that.

The prices of the new X lenses indicate that Panasonic has gotten greedy. Granted, the company has a history of doing this. They think that they will simply be able to start selling in this market and command the massive premiums that other systems have. Sorry guys, you won't. The GH3 is going to be a huge hit. The lenses, I'm not so sure. Especially now with focus peaking, I suspect that many pro-thusiasts will choose other lenses.

This level of stupid arrogance is beginning to drive me insane. It's like cell phone companies producing a flagship, and then pricing it high and expecting to sell iPhone levels (actually, Panasonic did precisely this with the Eluga). No. That doesn't happen. You need legacy, history, and loyalty.

It's the kind of blind greed and abject idiocy that drove Sigma to price their SD1 at over $9,000 at launch. Sigma won't admit anything, but considering that every, single dealer I know, and every dealer network with which I have contact, not a single SD1 was sold leads me to believe that global sales in the first few months were measured in the single digits. The SD1 still doesn't have any reviews on Amazon.

As I said, unless these new X zooms have fantastic video characteristics, I suspect that Panny will be highly disappointed with the sales. The 12-35mm is overpriced, the 35-100mm is very overpriced. Panasonic needs to take a page from Olympus's 75mm playbook and release world-class glass for less than the competition.

Welcome Back, Me!

I'm glad to be back!

Blogger has been dead for days! Apparently, the GoDaddy outage caused a major issue at Blogger, and I was unlucky enough to try buying a new domain right as the issue presented itself. I'm very angry. Blogger was aware of the issue and continued to let people buy new domains. Lord knows how many pages views I'm going to lose going into the future after being dead for a week.

Canon Reminds Us That They Suck With The 6D

As everyone else was announcing kick-ass stuff, Canon released the successor(?) to the 7D: the 6D. I argued that Canon should move their high-end DSLR camera range into the APS-H sensor design, for which they already have production lines and engineers from their work with the EOS 1D. Instead, Canon has released the 6D and gone full-frame to compete with the cheaper FF SLR that Sony will announce in the future and the current FF SLR price king, the Nikone D600.

I won't go into details, because the camera really doesn't deserve much coverage. Not because it's bad, but because it's boring as hell. What is bad is the mind-blowing arrogance that is evinced by the camera's existence. Even DPReview looked down upon it. And remember, DPReview is owned by Amazon, which means that it is in their best interests to never talk bad about any camera... which is the reason they so rarely do. From DPReview's preview of the 6D, emphasis mine:

Overall, though, it's difficult to shake the feeling that the EOS 6D simply lacks the 'wow' factor of its main rival. Whereas Nikon seems to have taken the approach of taking away as little as possible from D800 when creating the D600, Canon appears almost to have gone the other way, removing as much as it thinks it can get away with at the price. The result is the kind of conservative, slightly unimaginative design that's become the company's hallmark. It's still bound to be a very good camera, of course; just perhaps not quite as good as it could be.

In DPReview's world, that's the equivalent of saying that Canon's mother wears army boots. That is a profound statement. It illustrates how far Canon has fallen.

What's even more striking is how expensive the 6D still is. $2,100 for a stripped down economy camera with a big sensor. If the only thing you care about is the sensor, than perhaps this camera is for you. But even then, this is really damned pricey.

In fact, who the hell is Canon selling this camera to? If you already have a 7D, you will also have an APS-C lens set, meaning that to move up to this will require new lenses. If you're going to enter a new system, anyone in this price range will choose the D600.

Perhaps Canon's 7D market is already filled with FF lens owners who simply attach them to the 7D. But this also sounds unlikely, since anyone with the budget to buy a bunch of $1,000+ lenses won't just have a 7D; they already have a 5D Mark II or III. And even if they didn't, one would imagine working pros really missing all of the pro-level stuff that they paid extra for when they bought the 7D instead of Canon's cheaper APS-C cameras. If they really wanted FF that badly, they would have stumped up the extra cash for the 5D Mark II.

A cheap camera like this is generally used to lure people into a system, and it loses to Nikon and Sony pretty badly. It simply doesn't compete. And if the 5D Mark III's sensor performance is any indication, even the large sensor won't be very good. This camera needs to be a lot cheaper than it is, and it's not because Canon is arrogant.

Panasonic GH3 And Lenses Announced

Lookin' good.

We now have all possible information on the new GH3, and it is everything we thought it would be.

I'm still upset by the 1/160th flash-sync and the max 1/4000th shutter speed, but I'll move on. Afterall, this is a hybrid camera, and by that they mean that video features are really the focus. And as I mentioned in my earlier post, this camera doesn't get any better for video. Well, I mean it could get better, but not by much.

It still includes a pop-up flash, because camera companies think we're all masochists. But other than that, the ergonomics are a massive upgrade. It puts it in the same size range as small SLR cameras, but that's like comparing and armor-clad Ford Focus to a minivan. Yeah, they're similar in size. My only real significant disappointment in the design is the lack of a second SD-Card slot.

The 71.something megabit video codec is exciting for two reasons. First, out of the box, this camera will be capable of broadcast-quality work. Second, the camera will of course be hacked not long after release, meaning that sky-high bit rates are not far off. And considering that the stock GH2 was able to handle some pretty crazy bit rates in stock form, I shudder to think what the GH3 will be able to do.

Sadly, we will have to wait to see what the sensor is capable of in photography. We're not completely without information, though. First, we know that the sensor is not a multi-aspect sensor. I suspect that this was because of the significant vignetting caused by using m4/3 lenses with anamorphic adapters on the GH2's 1.86x crop sensor. By switching to a standard 4/3 sensor size, anamorphic work will be much easier.

Second, with the official announcement now behind us, Phillip Blooms Genesis promo video has been made available for download, so we can see the full bit-rate version. The version embedded is the Vimeo stream, which is running at something like 8Mb. Head over. Download. Enjoy.


Panasonic GH3 launch film: Genesis from Philip Bloom on Vimeo.

So what can we glean from the video? One, the video is noticeably superior to any other SLR-styled camera that I've seen. The 5D Mark III is the only other camera that support bit-rates as high as the GH3, and it's video quality lags the GH3 by a wide margin. There's good gradation in the shadows and sky, but not mind-blowing. Dynamic range does indeed appear to be much improved over the GH2, which gives me hope for the photographic tests and the inevitable comparison to the E-M5. Detail is fantastic. Unfortunately, the codec is blocking out some of what will be apparent in final photographs. So in the end, the video tells us more about the codec than about the camera. What it says, though, is promising.

In addition to the camera, Panasonic also dropped two new lenses, and both of them are absolutely drool-inducing. A 42.5mm f/1.2 prime, and a 150mm f/2.8(!) prime. These are both exciting and infuriating. They won't hit the market for eighteen months, and even then, if Panasonic's past is any indication, they won't be readily available because Panny will manufacture five of them. It also pisses me off because this stupid-early announcement is meant to do one thing: beg people to not drop Panasonic in favor of Sony.

Panny knows full well that Sony has kicked them in the proverbial balls over the course of the past year. One would also hope that Panasonic is aware that they borked the hell out of the significant lead they had in the mirrorless market. Sony has dominated the market, the conversation, and the innovation for twelve, solid months. Simply promising lenses nearly two years into the future is fucking pathetic. If the GH3 hadn't been a home run, I would have jumped over to Sony just to spite Panasonic. At least it's not as bad as what Canon released.

The one lens that Panasonic actually announced is the 35-100mm. It's price is even higher than the 12-35mm, at an eyebrow-raising $1,500. I was disappointed with the performance of the 12-35mm, and thought that it's actual price shouldn't have been over $1,000. At $1,500, this lens better be one hell of a performer. These prices also don't bode well for the eventual prices on the 150mm and the 42.5mm. Panasonic is getting greedy, with no reason whatsoever to do so. Still, they are at least not as bad as Sigma with the SD1.

Getting back to the GH3, was it worth the wait? I'd say yes. Assuming that the sensor is solid, it is the best m4/3 camera on the market. In most features, the E-M5 is much less compelling. That said, the E-M5 is much smaller. I see the E-M5 as the true successor to my beloved GF1 and the GH3 is the successor to... the GH1. If I was to choose one, I'd pick the GH3 any day of the week. It's larger and heavier, but it's a tool and was designed as such. The E-M5 was designed with size and style considerations. There's nothing wrong with that, but since I can't afford both cameras, I'm buying the GH3.

Obviously, I'm going to wait for the sensor tests, but if early impressions are correct, I think congratulations are in order to m4/3. I'm staying put.

More Panasonic GH3 Details Leak

A few more deets on the GH3 have dropped and they reveal some things of interest. Most importantly, of course, is the price. It's higher than I would have hoped, but considering the numerous body enhancements, it's not unreasonable. Body-only is $1,299, a not-insignificant $400 more than the GH2 at launch.

Well, what do we get for that extra $400? We get a new sensor, but that's never worth an increase in price. The market is much more competitive than it was when the GH2 released, meaning that for the GH3's value equation to remain the same, it needs to actually be cheaper.

But back to the sensor; it appears to be another multi-aspect sensor as with the GH2, with 17.2Mp resulting in 16.05Mp images. I'm hoping that the sensor at least matches the new Olympus E-M5. It was the first sensor to make m4/3 a legitimate competitor to APS-C and if the GH2 doesn't do the same, it kills itself as a photographic tool. It may still be very useful as a video tool, but it will be camera non grata for those wanting to freeze moments. Regardless of what PR reps and arrogant, online photographers trying to justify their love of Leica say, the sensor matters a lot. If it's not up to snuff, the camera is crap, no matter how good other elements may be.

From the photos, it's obvious that the tactile interface of the camera has received a major overhaul. At the risk of sounding overly effusive, the camera looks fantastic. Everything about it exudes an aura of pro. I'm especially excited about the mechanical scroll wheel on the back of the camera. I'm glad that this feature appears to be picking up steam in the camera world.

The body is beefy as hell; much better than the plastic body of the GH2. This is a significant and welcomed upgrade. It's unfortunate that the camera isn't be called weather sealed. They say it is "dust and splash resistant," whatever the hell that means. Again, comparing it to the E-M5, it had better be the same level of sealing.

Contained within that body is the single most exciting element of the camera: a cooling system. Frequently, that's the biggest reason the frames for holding video hardware are so large; they must accommodate the heat sinks and sometimes even liquid cooling required of high-output digital sensors. I've seen people dismantle cameras to attach heat plates to draw away heat and allow for extended shoots.

The camera is going to have extensive tethering support for everything from laptops to cell phones. Could this camera get any better? Oh? It can? How? A 71-freaking-megabit codec, that's how! We'll have to wait and see how this plays out, but the few tid-bits available from those who have handled the camera are already lavishing it with praise. This is from a pure video perspective, mind you, and it's the photographic elements that are of slightly greater interest to me.

Here, there are a couple of disappointing elements to the design. First, the max shutter speed of 1/4000 is annoying, as is the flash sync of only 1/160th. Again, the smaller sensor allows everything associated with the sensor to be cheaper/easier to make. The sensor only drops down to ISO 200, an infuriating practice that seems to be growing more common. I suspect companies are doing this because it allows them to "trick" the sensor into doing something it otherwise wouldn't be able to do. I'm not sure how, but Olympus' wild mis-calibration of the E-M5, with ISO 200 being more like ISO 130, makes me confident that this is on purpose.

All things considered, the GH3 is shaping up to be a fantastic camera. It all hinges on that sensor. If it can match the E-M5's chip, the GH3 will be the m4/3 camera to buy, and will immediately become the video tool of choice for anything below the Blackmagic Cinema Camera. I think I know what I'm asking for from Santa.

Good Morning Glory

Olympus Goes Back To Disappointing Me

Huh?

Olympus will be releasing a few new lenses. The first, a 15mm f/8.0 is one of the weirdest lenses ever released by a major company. It costs $79, which may seem cheap, but when you look at Canon's $100 50mm f/1.8, it's downright expensive. I have no idea for whom this lens is intended. Nor do I understand why Olympus would release something so weird while their proper lens collection remains pitiful and of low quality.

The second is the long-awaited macro lens for m4/3. Is it the same as the stellar 50mm f/2.0. No! Of course not. That would be smart. Instead, it is a 60mm f/2.8. 10mm more length, plus a full stop less light, for more money! What a great idea!

The third lens is almost as big a disappointment. It is the 12mm f/2.0, just black instead of silver. It comes with the hood, but costs $100 more than the silver lens. Gee. How generous of you, Oly. Seriously, did the department that produced the 75mm lens get disbanded or something? Or was that lens a fluke that slipped out by accident?

Why can't Olympus get it, now, and stop fucking around. No one cares about the E-5 and 4/3. Ditch the goddamn system, focus on m4/3, and start converting your optical designs over the new flange distance. Are you out of your fucking minds? Do it now! I don't mind the 50-200mm, but autofocus is shower than shit. I want native lenses, as do almost EVERYONE that bought the E-M5. Because to whom do you think the E-M5 is selling? Pro-thusiasts! Almost exclusively, I'd wager.

And while we're on the subject of lenses, Panasonic's new wunderlens, the X 12-35mm, has finally gotten a charted review. Some early comparisons with other lenses in a similar price range were very disappointing, with both resolution and contrast in the edges being noticeably behind Canon and Nikon's lenses. Photozone's review confirms everything that we all suspected from the test shots, both good and bad.

At 12mm, distortion is unacceptably severe: 5.8%. Both of Panasonic's other zooms, the 14-42mm and the 14-45mm had similar levels of distortion on the wide end, but those lenses were nearly one-quarter the cost. For prices that low, we'll accept some a concession or two. At $1,200, though, the lens better perform, and this lens doesn't.

Granted, the Olympus 12mm had a high distortion rate of 5.4%, and it's not even a zoom lens. And that's precisely why I never even considered buying the 12mm. It was overpriced and disappointing. But even it was four-hundred dollars cheaper.

The Panasonic is a mega-disappointment also because of Panasonic's other, wide-angle lens, the 7-14mm. At its widest, it is only 5.2%. Still pretty bad, but it's a 14mm equivalent! For an angle that wide, again, we are willing to make concessions.

The lens is tack-sharp in the center at all lengths, but wildly disappointing in the corners at all but the longest end. Considering the exceptional lenses made by the competition at these focal lengths and for prices that are sometimes lower, Panasonic should be very disappointed in this. Unless it has special, video-oriented features (like no focus-breathing and whatnot), this lens is absolutely not worth the price. When it drops down into the $800 range, we'll talk. But until then, I'll stick with the 7-14mm, 14-45mm, and 20mm that I bought for as much as this one lens.

And a point missed sometimes is that the 4/3 sensor is significantly smaller than both APS-C and full-frame. Lenses for this format are always going to be cheaper and smaller, and dollar-for-dollar, higher quality. If they are not, it's the fault of the company. Either their engineering department failed, or the company is greedy. Panasonic can take its pick as to which one is true.

I'm beginning to understand why so many photogs like Leica. It costs a fortune, but there is no fucking around. It seems like that's all the other companies want to do. Actually, that's a great idea for an article: Which Company Is Fucking Around The Least?