The way ahead for Panasonic ? 2020 and beyond

It’s the silly season  so maybe readers will forgive me the occasional  post expressing what I would like a camera maker to do in the year(s) ahead.

This time I lay out what I would like Panasonic’s camera division to do over the next year or so. Well, maybe it could take a bit longer……….

I have great sympathy for product development people at any corporate enterprise which makes stuff  for consumers who can be notoriously fickle and unpredictable.

Ask 100 consumers what they want and you will get 257 different answers.

I guess the product development people just have to take what’s available by way of technology, match that to what kinds of products they think consumers will like and hope they mostly get it right.

In a sinking market with tough competition that must be very difficult.

Sony is faring best because they have some good technology, they market vigorously and they made some good product development decisions. It was not ever thus, they made some really bad moves in the past. 

So for Panasonic I think that across the whole range:

1. They need to reduce the number of models in every category. They need to let go models which might have done well in the past but do not lead the way forward. They need to reduce product clutter. They need to streamline all product ranges to reduce R&D, manufacturing and marketing costs.

They need to make it clear to prospective buyers how the product lines relate to each other and to consumers requirements.

2. Each of the reduced number of models needs to be very carefully developed so it has all the ingredients to satisfy a demanding enthusiast user.

3. They need to merge the video and stills lines right across the range. So the top stills model will also be the top video model.

The only exception to this might be movie grade professional models like the S1H with a built in cooling fan and other professional refinements not feasible on a consumer enthusiast product.

4. They need to improve their continuous autofocus for stills and video. Panasonic has good single AF but has fallen behind all the others for Continuous AF. 

Now for the categories:

Full frame mirrorless interchangeable lens system   (FF MILC)

I think the line up which makes most sense to me would have three bodies: entry, professional and sport.

1. Entry. Every FF MILC system needs an entry, a doorway if you like into the system. It must provide a genuinely appealing user experience at an attractive price point.

Panasonic has no entry to full frame by way of APS-C.  Sony, Leica and Nikon do have APS-C models and full frame models which use the same lens mount.  The product development people at Canon appear to have taken leave of their corporate senses and have somehow boxed themselves into having a lens mount for the APSC (M) system which is different from that used in the full frame R system.

MFT provides no entry to full frame, it is an entirely separate system.

Panasonic has gone into full frame with two big, heavy, expensive, pro style models with big, heavy, expensive pro style lenses to match.  I cannot see how this could entice new buyers into Lumix camera world.

I think the entry model could be like a full frame version of the G95 and have about 24 Mpx. It would come with a 24-105mm f3.5-5.6 kit lens of good quality but moderate cost  like a full frame version of the 12-60mm f3.5-5.6 zoom for MFT.

2.Professional. The S1R fits this category decently well as does the S1H. Yes that’s two models in this category but the logic is there.

3. Sport. If  Panasonic cannot break into the full frame pro sport photography market they will always be at best a minor player.

They need to make dramatic improvements to continuous AF and no-black-out viewfinder technology before attempting this.

The history of photography through the 20^th and 21^st Centuries shows that the most successful players have been those which established a strong presence in the pro sport market.

For many years that was just  Canon and Nikon.  Ordinary consumers would see professionals using a Nikon or Canon at sporting events and buy a much less expensive model of the same brand.

In 2017 Sony introduced the A9 and in 2019 a Mk2 version with autofocus and performance good enough for professional sport.

So now there are three.

I think the likelihood of success for Panasonic in the pro sport market is  low.

This is just a guess on my part but I think the only way they might do it is if Canon and Nikon make big mistakes with their transition to the pro sport mirrorless sector. They must make this transition some time soon  to streamline their product catalogue to an all mirrorless platform.

My thesis is that any camera maker which cannot gain a decent slice of the pro sport market is forever relegated to a minor role in the industry or goes out of business.

This has been the case so far. Minolta is gone, Pentax is on life support and Olympus is struggling.

I also think that Panasonic is unlikely to settle for being a minor player in any endeavour which it chooses to undertake.

So I will not be surprised if Panasonic does a Samsung some day and exits the consumer camera business (business-to-customer) in favour of  supplying imaging solutions to other businesses (business-to-business).

Panasonic currently has a large catalogue of product lines but probably lacks the sales volume to support the numbers.

They are exacerbating this problem with the move to full frame which requires a completely new line of lenses.

They might be able to contain the pain by concentrating on 8 essential zooms and letting Sigma fill in the gaps with primes which they think will appeal to buyers.

The zooms could be:

Wide-ultrawide, consumer kit standard (f3.5-5.6), enthusiast standard (f4), pro standard (f2.8), enthusiast utility tele zoom (70-200f4), pro utility zoom (70-200f2.8), pro ultrazoom (100-400mm), enthusiast ultrazoom (200-600mm).

The primes might include compact 28mm, 35mm and 50mm f2 models.

Panasonic and Olympus joined forces to introduce the completely new MFT system in 2008.

This was a big departure from all other interchangeable lens camera systems at the time and a very big risk for Panasonic and Olympus..

The MFT project has had some success over the last 11 years but has gained only a small percentage of the total camera market.

Panasonic has accumulated over the years a muddled mix of flat tops, hump tops, models with and without a viewfinder, video centric and stills centric models. This is confusing for prospective buyers and presumably debilitating for the maker and vendors who have to produce, market and maintain so many different models.

I would like to see Panasonic do the same thing for MFT as I have suggested for their full frame line-up, namely a three model spread covering entry, enthusiast and professional with video and stills models merged. The only exception to this might be an upper high end pro video model for commercial output.

1. Entry. This would be a compact, flat top, “rangefinder” style like the GX9, with a built in EVF top left, small handle and  articulated monitor.

2. Enthusiast. This would be an evolution of the existing G90/95 hump top style. A fully featured all rounder.

3. Professional. This would merge the functions of the GH5 and G9 types into one highly  capable unit.

Over the years MFT lenses from Panasonic, Olympus and third party providers have accumulated to the extent that there are far more lenses available for MFT than for any other mirrorless ILC system.

This has benefits but also downsides. For the consumer it could easily mean overchoice with a bewildering number of  similar models. For the makers and vendors there are problems with maintaining such an extensive number of different products.

The lack of fully effective co-operation between Panasonic and Olympus can also present consumers with the problem of compromised compatibility when the lens of one brand is mounted on a body of the other brand.

So my prescription for the Panasonic MFT lens catalogue is similar to that for Full frame, namely cover the main bases and let slow sellers and redundant models go.

For instance why is Panasonic offering two ultra wide zooms, the PL 8-18mm and the Lumix 7-14mm ?  I don’t really see the point particularly as Olympus also has two UWA zooms and third party makers like Laowa offer very good UWA primes.

Anyway you get the idea. I think they need to do some vigorous pruning.

In the old days the bridge camera was seen as some kind of transitional in the move from a compact to an interchangeable lens system.

But modern bridge cams are not a waystation on a voyage from anywhere to anywhere else.

The best of them are highly capable devices in their own right capable of replacing a whole bag of ILC bodies and lenses.

In my view the bridge camera is the type most likely to meet the majority of  requirements of enthusiast photographers in the years ahead.

Unfortunately the bridge camera genre has been grievously neglected in the rush upmarket to full frame exotica by most manufacturers and other kinds of expensive baubles for those not going full frame.  For instance the Olympus OM-D-E-M1X and Fujifilm GFX100.

The situation is so dire that there are currently only 2.5 bridge cameras which I can recommend. 

These are the Sony RX10.4, Lumix FZ1000.2 plus a half vote for the Lumix FZ300 on the basis if its great value for money.  Although superseded, the original FZ1000 is also good value for money if available.

I would like Panasonic to re-engage energetically with the process of bridge camera development and produce two models.

1. A genuine competitor for the Sony RX10.4. A no holds barred full house do everything model. This would replace the FZ1000, FZ1000.2 and  FZ2500.

Right now the RX10.4 has no direct competitor and therefore there is no pressure on Sony to fix the numerous ergonomic and user interface issues with this camera.

2. A consumer model.    This would replace the current FZ300 and FZ80. As envisaged by me it would be an evolution of the FZ300 with a focal length range of 24-800mm equivalent and a much higher level of lens quality, stabiliser and processor.

In my view cheap junk models like the FZ80 merely serve to damage the reputation of the Lumix brand.

I have put forward my ideas about the advanced compactcamera here and shown pictures of a mockup which embodies those ideas.

I would very much like one of the manufacturers  to deliver this camera. Any of them could do it if they wanted.

Panasonic could evolve the LX100 into something similar with a complete re-design inside and out.

Leica with the Q/Q2 and Fuji with the X100 series have shown that there is a viable market for  high end compacts.

I would like Panasonic to drop bad designs like the LX10/15 which just cause reputational damage.

Panasonic more or less invented the travel zoom idea so I guess they should keep one of these in the catalogue.

But just one.

Not a junk cam like the TZ/ZS series with the 7.67mm diameter sensor but a proper camera with a larger sensor, built in EVF of good quality  and decent picture quality and a proper lens which makes consistently sharp pictures. And give it the same name everywhere.

This would replace the existing clutter of half baked models including TZ100, TZ200, TZ90/95/ZS80 and variants with different names in every part of the globe causing consumers complete and total confusion.

I think Panasonic has bitten off more than it can chew, metaphorically speaking. I think they need to engage in a planned exercise to prune and rationalise their catalogue.

Can they do it ?   Of course they can.

Will they do it ?   I suspect it is a case of do or die.

We have seen in recent times various talking heads on Youtube  prognosticating about the imminent death of Nikon’s camera business and  the closure or sale of Olympus’ consumer imaging business.

But I think the one at greatest risk of leaving the consumer camera market is Panasonic.

We shall see.