John Matthews

Question: Would you rather have significant, software-based firmware updates to add to existing hardware(option 1) or incremental updates to hardware with fewer software features (option 2)? Of course you want both, but if you were given the choice only. Option 2 will definitely cost more as well. You mention 6 years as being too long. What about 4 years? What is too often?

I'm in the same boat. Not changing. I don't see any reason to. As I said earlier, I believe the release of the G97 basically puts a nail in the coffin of a mid-ranged M43 camera for at least 2 years. They've just spent their time coming out with a G97; they aren't going to get people to buy that only to come out immediately after with an upgrade. I don't think it had in that they've been releasing a GH line camera every 1 to 2 years since 2009, if you count the GH5s as a "real" GH camera. After reading all of what people are complaining about, I guess Panasonic should just focus on hardware, not firmware. Release it and forget it, right (à la Sony)? Rather, Panasonic has made meaningful efforts in firmware fixes. The S5ii when it was released is not the same camera as the current one. Not many of us are talking about that. Really, people have their ass chapped because there's no high-end production camera (something I don't care about). Still, I'd love to know exactly how you think the features will be that much better than the current models for pros. Better build? 12k, 8k? 4k 120fps? 32bit float? Internal RAW? Arri log? Which will most disappoint if it's not there? I get the feeling people just want GH7-level features in a FF body? I think we can agree that Arri-anything won't be in it.

The newly announced G97 could be understood as there will not be another sub $1000 camera for another 2 years. At least, I understand it as that. It sounds just like the G100D, a camera that won't be replaced anytime soon IMO, probably another year, if ever.

Yes. That's right. Announced, not released.

They weren't released at the same time. The S5iiX followed months after.

I heard that was for February.

That would probably be close; however, Panasonic doesn't really have a phone. I got the feeling that Samsung had engineers from the camera department move to the phone department because they figured out that the camera part of the phone is the most important. They dumped the declining, hard-fought camera market for the up-and-rising phone market. Clearly, this paid off for them. Panasonic doesn't have this option. Panasonic is doing what the car industry has been doing for decades- make a chassis and standardise as much as possible to streamline the process and leverage quality, suppliers, and tooling. It must be working because Nikon and others are now doing the same. I feel like Panasonic is trending to be a more amateur brand and other brands like Canon, Nikon, and now Sony are fighting for the professional market. Of course, many pros use Panasonic stuff too. The problem is that if they are viewed "for amateur," they won't get top-dollar prices. Does anyone know if Panasonic is specifically losing money in their camera division? I don't think we do. Consumer electronics is still a big part of their business, but who knows how the world might change over the next 5 years to get out. If they do, I don't really care. Their cameras will still continue to be a reliable way to get beautiful imagery for many years to come. I picked up a Konica F-T3(n) the other day- it still works like a charm after 50 years and I suspect will continue to do so for another 50 years, probably outliving me. It's a very recent thing to have camera release upon camera release. Frankly, it's unnecessary. The only thing I'm seeing is nth degree-type things. To circle back to the car industry, fins and not really meaningful improvements. It's usually AI crap where give up total control on where it focusses (and slow to set up) or 120fps 4k (so now your 1/2 second clip looks so much better versus the 1/2s clip in 1080p?). The audience will no longer enjoy your content if it's not 4k at 120fps? However, the audience will care if your AI messes up focus. I get the feeling it will soon be a "feature" to have a dumber camera... and we come full circle. The 80's brought us AF, but crap, plastic lenses and bodies (on the whole). The 90's just continued the trend (also, they were butt-ugly). The 2000's started to give us digital with the same crappy lenses, with everyone trying to squeak out as much detail as possible. Then, we hit 6MP, the magic number that even Kodak has said to be the turning-point where digital finally had the same detail as film. Then video came to the masses and since then we've been striving for more megapixels and sharper lenses even though no one prints anymore and your grandmother's wrinkles look like crap because there's too much detail. Now, we want our digital to look like film with less resolution. Sorry for the rant- must be a full moon.

I’m trying to find a historical element to compare Panasonic to. I’m struggling because regardless of their non-success in the camera market, we’re still talking about an absolutely massive company bigger than many of the other players that is roughly keeping up with technology. I don’t think there are any. With the right investments and people, they’ll find a way.

It's all a bit unfair. Smartphones get to hide behind the idea of it being "just a phone" and "look at its great video and photos" whereas a camera must be excellent at video and photo. The bar is always so low for a phone, but if we forget the "phone" idea and just say it's a camera; then it needs to compete with similar priced cameras. Unfortunately, there's nothing on the market in the sub 300g weight and size range, which is what I think many people want to start with. It makes more sense to have a $250 phone that does most things and a decent $800 light and nimble camera rather than the $1050 phone that only marginally takes better photos than the cheap phone but comes nowhere close to the $800 camera... if that makes sense.

Many got that F8 joke of a lens for free. Guess what? MBP won't even take it today because that's how undesirable it is. It's more like a wannabe lens cap. The only lens that does the S9 justice (like I want) is the 45mm Sigma. Why? It's a L-mount, full-frame, relatively fast lens (and rather small). The fact is this: Sony, Canon, and Nikon have all come out with pancakes that are relatively fast (F2.8). Panasonic needs a 28mm f2.8 or a 40mm f/2.8 before I'd consider it at its current price. Remember, this is company that gave us the 14mm f/2.5 and 20mm f/1.7; both were decent lenses. These pancakes would actually make the S9 is a serious alternative and would convince others to buy it, even with its shortcomings. If it is a video camera, why is there a PASM dial? If it is a video camera, why all the recording limitations? Many people see it as a photo camera without essential features of a photo camera and a video camera without the essential features of a video camera. Don't get me wrong, I actually will buy it at the right price. If Panasonic or sigma don't come out with a pancake, I might pair it with the Konica 40mm f/1.8 as I think it'll do fine on it.

Putting a cheap, well-designed Sony sensor in a small body with f/2 pancake lenses would be amazing. I would forgive the lack of mechanical shutter and hotshoe in that case. Still, I’d like version 2 of this camera to have a flip-up, brighter screen and at least 1/500 capable shutter.

Yeah, it would need to have a global shutter for real flash photography. However, you could take video lights or reflectors with reasonable results. The fact is there are just so many concessions. Still, as @Andrew Reid said, it's probably a very fun camera. The other problem is that there are so many M43 cameras with all those features (and even smaller and lighter).

I can believe that. I've always loved using small cameras. The GM1 was a little too small for me and my hands. The GX800 was just that much bigger and I liked not having an EVF in that I never had to choose. However, I'd prefer a flip-up screen rather than the flip-out style on the S9. I just find them fiddly and cheap-feeling (like one wrong move will break it). Oddly enough, I actually broke my GX800 screen by dropping it. I just can't swallow the price for the S9, but I secretly want one. You're probably going to love it.

My problem with the S9 is the weight. Once you have the grip, you're saving just over 100g over the S5/S5ii. The list of missing features (especially photography related) are numerous. For me, it's a camera to use as-is, once they have a pancake and once the price is more reasonable for what it is. I'd definitely take the S5 over it for the price they sell at, even used.