Firmware updates could become subscription model?

[Andrew Reid]

There’s talk in the camera industry of introducing a subscription model for firmware updates, with Sony being one of the companies believed to be considering this as an option for larger updates in the future. Currently, Sony is planning an A7S III update in the coming weeks with DCI 4K and content authenticity ID, but major updates have been few and far between for a camera released nearly 4 years ago.

https://www.eoshd.com/news/firmware-updates-could-become-subscription-model-under-new-plans/

[MrSMW]

No thank you.

I have very few subs to anything and even for my Adobe suite, massive annual discount because of someone I know, (sorry, cannot pass you their details!) and if I did not have that discount, would be using something else.

I recently cancelled my annual Musicbed sub and switched to Audio as it’s about 10x cheaper and for the types of tracks I use, a no-brainer.

Otherwise Netflix and AppleTV but that’s it for monthly or annual subs.

Re. some stuff, if I am not buying it outright, I expect to pay a sub such as Netflix, but having to pay for firmware often with stated or unstated bug fixes? More than a bit unethical and grasping IMO.

[Andrew Reid]

Indeed, no thanks!

(Although I don't mind paying a small one off fee for big updates that really add something special)

[KnightsFan]

I totally understand paying for different software features, like separate purchases for raw recording, or log recording, or higher frame rates

Subscriptions with monthly payments, on the other hand... how does that even work? Are there enough theoretical updates to warrant paying each month? I can't think of more than 1-2 software items I'd want updated on any camera I've owned. What can they do month after month? They can't increase dynamic range.

So if the only updates are little things I either never use or work around easily, then I'd just unsubscribe. Not sure why I would pay for a subscription and not get functional updates that I care about. Unless the manufacturer shuts the camera off remotely if I don't pay monthly, which would of course be hideous, and I would never buy into that system.

However... if the subscription model was like a constant rental, where you pay $x/month and you not only get software, but also hardware upgrades as they arrive, that might be a neat pricing model. When I buy a camera for X, sell it Y months later for Z, I always calculate my cost to own over that time period. If a manufacturer cuts out the buying and selling part, I see it as a win. For example, I could conceivably pay some fixed price per month to always have the latest Fuji XHx model--with some kind of future reporting on when new models will arrive and what they will have, of course. This is a very unlikely model for any company to move to, I'm just writing it out as something that would be interesting and actually pretty acceptable to me.

[Gesmi]

I have mixed feelings about this matter.

I don't like this update policy. However, iI wouldn't mind paying for an upgrade for my GX85. If the camera can handle it and the upgrade is worth it, i'd rather pay €/$100 than €/$1000 on a new body. But whether the updates are worth it or not, that depends on each user.

For example. Sometimes, with CinelikeD and CinelikeV activated at the same time (saved in C modes), one of these modes freezes in all photography modes.

To solve this, i had to connect the camera to the HTML we all know and disable CineD and CineV. Next, I activate CineD again and save it to C1. For some reason, I can't have both profiles saved, because the camera will lock on one of them in any of the photography modes.

An update that officially activates both hidden profiles would be very nice. Other things would be good too, such as:

• All regional framerates. That is, i have the european model (GX80), which prevents me from having 30 and 60 fps. There is a way to activate it, but it's a little tricky and i don't want to mess up the camera. I'm assuming the camera can't offer 4K recording at 50/60fps, but I would like a higher bitrate at 1080p.
• I wouldn't mind also having 10 bit 422 150 Mbit. Although I think the GX85 couldn't handle it, or it would heat up quickly if it could (although this is my imagination).
• If the camera software can be improved to have faster focusing in 4K, it would be appreciated as well.

I think I'm too optimistic, at least when we speak about the GX85. However, it doesn't seem crazy to me on high-end bodies and/or more recent bodies.

[Gesmi]

5 minutes ago, Gesmi said:

I don't like this update policy. However, iI wouldn't mind paying for an upgrade for my GX85. If the camera can handle it and the upgrade is worth it, i'd rather pay €/$100 than €/$1000 on a new body. But whether the updates are worth it or not, that depends on each user.

I made a mistake and I can't edit anymore. Actually, I wanted to say the following:

I don't like this update policy. However, i wouldn't mind paying for an upgrade to my GX85. If the camera can handle it and the upgrade is worth it, i'd rather pay €/$100 than €/$1000 for a new body. But whether the updates are worth it or not, that depends on each user. Of course, i accept payment for specific updates that are worthwhile, but i do not accept monthly subscriptions at all.

[kye]

I recently bought a new treadmill and was amazed that the high-end ones required a subscription model.

I wouldn't be averse to buying a GX85 updated firmware, but to buy and re-buy the damned thing over and over again is ridiculous.

Yet another reason to snap out of the specifications trance that everyone seems to be in and focus on making better videos, rather than making the same videos with better spec'd equipment.

[MurtlandPhoto]

I legitimately think that the consumers will eventually abandon any manufacturer that tries this. And, if they all try it together, I see a mass revolt against new models and perhaps even a movement to “older” cameras. 

[Eric Calabros]

I really want to "own nothing and be happy" but I'm not sure about the second half of that sentence. 

[eatstoomuchjam]

In some ways, this already exists - Atomos are charging to upgrade to AtomOS 11 on older devices.  Some vendors have also included paid firmware features (Panasonic with V-log on the GH5 or ProRes on the S5 II).  In an ideal world, paid firmware upgrades would incentivize manufacturers to actually invest in them, especially for somewhat older but still popular cameras.
In the real world, they would also do it for cameras that are still on the market and try to extract money from existing users even though new users would just get it as part of their purchase (even if the camera ships with older firmware on it (since no stores gonna open all the boxes to update firmware), they usually need to grant the new firmware to prevent RMA count from increasing as people send back devices with outdated firmware).

Anyway.  I don't like it, but it's where the world is going these days, sadly.

[MurtlandPhoto]

59 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

In some ways, this already exists - Atomos are charging to upgrade to AtomOS 11 on older devices.  Some vendors have also included paid firmware features (Panasonic with V-log on the GH5 or ProRes on the S5 II). 

Kinda, sorta, but not really. Those are examples of one-off costs to unlock features permanently within the product, whether it stays with the original owner is sold off. Imagine having to pay monthly to have V-log in your GH5. Or pay Sony monthly to have shutter angle in your FX3. I'm actually OK sometimes paying for a firmware update past a certain point in the development cycle. It's logically how some manufacturers can recoup development costs on older tech they've moved on from. But, a subscription??? No way for me.

[Al Dolega]

Yea a recurring subscription to keep something I already have is BS. A one-time fee to add new features, I guess, maybe, although Sony wanting to charge $149 for some crop marks/guidelines doesn't inspire faith that more involved/worthwhile upgrades would be reasonably priced. Panasonic's $200 upgrade felt fine though, for most cameras that took it you were getting V-Log and a bunch of other features, so it felt worthwhile. The process for applying it was more annoying than how much it cost.

I think reception will all come down to if the price is reasonable and it doesn't feel like they're holding back features on release so they can charge for them later.

[MurtlandPhoto]

2 hours ago, Al Dolega said:

I think reception will all come down to if the price is reasonable and it doesn't feel like they're holding back features on release so they can charge for them later.

100% agree. And, this is further makes a subscription model unlikely IMO. How could they possibly hold back enough features to make a subscription worthwhile, but also not piss of the users? No wayyyyy. 

[kye]

This reminds me of when I did a Cisco training course and the instructor was giving us the background on who Cisco are and what they do etc. (For those unaware, Cisco make networking equipment)

He went through the number of models, then the number of different variations that each one could have, and the end result was that they offered millions/billions of different "products".  This is in much the same way that Ford has billions of different variations of the Transit van.

Anyway, his point was that for these to all be completely stable and reliable, Cisco had to be flawlessly organised and have incredible systems for everything, and was really a software company that happened to also make its own hardware rather than a hardware company.

6 hours ago, Al Dolega said:

Yea a recurring subscription to keep something I already have is BS.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here.  If you have to pay a monthly fee to use the camera then it's not something you "already have".  It's something you have licensed..  it's equipment that you rent.

[Ty Harper]

If we are to believe that AI will potentially disrupt the way creators think about storytelling, then it seems clear that cameras will factor much less into the capture workflow. I'm sure these companies know this and are beginning to tighten their sh*t up, and that will mean strategies like this as and other approaches as the market continues to shrink. 

[Ty Harper]

As a hobbyist whose day job intersects with the film world, I can say that there is no way I would ever buy into a subscription system - and I can say that because the two R5Cs with their current features are literally all I need for any and all present and future projects. I'll maybe get an R7/R6 MKII/R5 to fly on my RS3 Pro (bcuz the R5C cannot be used wirelessly with that gimbal) - and maaaybe a C70. But honestly I'm at the end of the road for camera purchases. But also I think the current cam selection is so amazing nowadays that a move to a subscription-based model will likely push even more people to the used market - and aside from storage media, every piece of gear (cam, lights, etc) I've ever bought in my hobbyist career (10+ years at this point) has been from the used market.

[MrSMW]

13 hours ago, Al Dolega said:

I think reception will all come down to if the price is reasonable and it doesn't feel like they're holding back features on release so they can charge for them later.

Agreed as in a ‘one off’ a year or so down the line when such a thing was not available at launch rather than withheld.

I am all for upgrading older tech and expanding both it’s capability and longevity.

Another reason I’d like to see manufacturers move towards modular with plug n’ play tech.

[Al Dolega]

What if a camera company started doing a final "go, run, be free" firmware on older models, that opened the firmware for open-source modifications? Like basically, once a camera is outdated, they issue an update that leaves that camera wide open for Magic Lantern-style fiddling.

No API or SDK needed, just something simple to allow the geeks past the encryption; they'll take it from there. Issue a disclaimer that loading this firmware voids any remaining warranty. Then reap the benefits of people discussing your brand constantly, and wanting to stay in your lens ecosystem. For instance if Panasonic did this with the GH5 now, or the S5/S1 next year, after their replacements are out and established, I think it could really draw a lot of people into m4/3 and L.

Then, move the best mods/hacks up into the new cameras via (reasonably priced) firmware updates. Maybe share some percentage of the proceeds with the developers of those mods/hacks, or gift them the new gear or a sponsorship or something.

[Happy Daze]

Genius! Potentially, sell you a camera with faults or intentional omissions in firmware and then sell you a subscription to fix it, why didn't I think of that?

[kye]

10 hours ago, Al Dolega said:

What if a camera company started doing a final "go, run, be free" firmware on older models, that opened the firmware for open-source modifications? Like basically, once a camera is outdated, they issue an update that leaves that camera wide open for Magic Lantern-style fiddling.

No API or SDK needed, just something simple to allow the geeks past the encryption; they'll take it from there. Issue a disclaimer that loading this firmware voids any remaining warranty. Then reap the benefits of people discussing your brand constantly, and wanting to stay in your lens ecosystem. For instance if Panasonic did this with the GH5 now, or the S5/S1 next year, after their replacements are out and established, I think it could really draw a lot of people into m4/3 and L.

Then, move the best mods/hacks up into the new cameras via (reasonably priced) firmware updates. Maybe share some percentage of the proceeds with the developers of those mods/hacks, or gift them the new gear or a sponsorship or something.

I think it would backfire, because the better the modified firmware got the more that people would become critical of the manufacturer for "crippling" their cameras when they were current models.

You have to remember, human beings are wired to prioritise negative information over positive information - this is why newspapers are always talking doom and gloom but never reporting on the progress of eliminating polio or working towards global literacy and numeracy, etc.