Is GH1 with firmware 1.3 hackable?

[S38]

I just purchased a GH1, made in August, and although I don't shoot video I heard that the hacked video is a lot better.

Btw, why would Panasonic put a lock on something that makes their product better...

Cheers!

 

[panystac]

I just purchased a GH1, made in August, and although I don't shoot video I heard that the hacked video is a lot better.

Btw, why would Panasonic put a lock on something that makes their product better...

Cheers!

There is Ver 1.32, which is hackable, but 1.34 which is not.

May 2010 is Ver 1.32, while July 2010 and later is 1.34

June has both Ver 1.32 & 1.34, so you can't tell by date.

So your GH1 has a serial number like xx0Gxxxxxx ? (August 2010)

Your's is NOT hackable.

 

[S38]

There is Ver 1.32, which is hackable, but 1.34 which is not.

May 2010 is Ver 1.32, while July 2010 and later is 1.34

June has both Ver 1.32 & 1.34, so you can't tell by date.

So your GH1 has a serial number like xx0Gxxxxxx ? (August 2010)

Your's is NOT hackable.

Thanks!

I hope that at some point down the road Panasonic will provide us with a firmware that unlocks the potential of the camera. It just doesn't make sense to me that Panasonic will cripple their own product.

 

[photoSmart42]

Thanks!

I hope that at some point down the road Panasonic will provide us with a firmware that unlocks the potential of the camera. It just doesn't make sense to me that Panasonic will cripple their own product.

Why would they have any interest in allowing people to hack their products in the first place? Their interest lies in maintaining complete control over the brand and over their products, not in allowing others to make up their own modifications to those products.

 

[S38]

Why would they have any interest in allowing people to hack their products in the first place? Their interest lies in maintaining complete control over the brand and over their products, not in allowing others to make up their own modifications to those products.

Greedy bastards!


Panasonic purposely dumbed down the video on GH1 so they can sell the upcoming GH2 and video cams.

It is like selling a car that can go 200 miles per hour but the factory put a speed governor that limits the speed to 80 m/h, and selling the same car two years later without the speed limiter...plus few upgrades.

 

[tamoio]

Why would they have any interest in allowing people to hack their products in the first place? Their interest lies in maintaining complete control over the brand and over their products, not in allowing others to make up their own modifications to those products.

"their products" are no longer their products after we purchase them. Manufacturers locking their products in any way from their owners is wrong except when safety is an issue.

 

[photoSmart42]

"their products" are no longer their products after we purchase them. Manufacturers locking their products in any way from their owners is wrong except when safety is an issue.

It's not wrong, it's a business decision. There are no ethical issues with that business decision. If a company wants to maintain control over their brand and marketing message, then they won't allow any modifications to it. Lots of companies do that, including the likes of Apple. Other companies thrive on open standards that invite tinkering. Neither is right or wrong, it just is.

 

[tamoio]

It's not wrong, it's a business decision. There are no ethical issues with that business decision.

I think that most people including myself would disagree. All business decisions have ethical ramifications, increasingly in a world where so many aspects of everyone's lives are affected by corporate conduct.

If a company wants to maintain control over their brand and marketing message, then they won't allow any modifications to it. Lots of companies do that, including the likes of Apple.

which is one of the reasons why there is not a single Apple product in my home or business (A fact a make a point of mentioning at every public opportunity).

Other companies thrive on open standards that invite tinkering.

This isn't about "tinkering". As much as I appreciate Panasonic products, I don't appreciate the 18-24 month new product cycle. Most intelligent observers understand that there is very little in the GH2 release that could not have been addressed in a firmware revision. . .one that will probably happen after the GH2 has been on the market for a sufficient (from the standpoint of marketing division) amount of time.

Neither is right or wrong, it just is.

 

[photoSmart42]

I think that most people including myself would disagree. All business decisions have ethical ramifications, increasingly in a world where so many aspects of everyone's lives are affected by corporate conduct.

Well, whatever. I guess vilifying corporations for having a profit motive while at the same using their products makes sense to you. It doesn't to me. Seems obviously hypocritical somehow IMO. Cheers!

 

[Wasabi Bob]

I think this is more about liability

I think the issue goes far beyond the points mentioned. I know of at least two cases where the "Venus" engine was damaged after the hack, resulting in a very expensive repair.

In one case they did repair the camera under warranty. However, I know of at least one unit that was not covered. The repair was almost $700 U.S. - ouch! Disabling the "hack" is probably a lot easier for Panasonic than telling a customer, you broke it - you pay for it.

The GH2's sampling rate was increased, so in part they have listened to those people who wanted more performance. The GH2 also uses a different Venus engine with additional processing power, so the increase will not jeopardize the reliability.

 

[ajm80031]

Think of it from the manufacturer's point of view for a moment. They sold you a device that had a given set of features that they'd advertised, and presumably the consumer decided they were satisfied with the performance & features of the device or else they would have returned it soon after purchasing it. The manufacturer needs to support the device if it fails due to defects, but that's where their obligation ends.

I can certainly see why they're wary of allowing third-party firmware modifications. The firmware controls all sorts of aspects of the camera, and poorly implemented firmware mods could have all sorts of undesirable effects. Depending on just how much control the firmware has over the hardware, it's possible that bad firmware could physically damage the camera (e.g. by bypassing built-in safeguards against overheating). So a manufacturer isn't going to be keen on making such things possible.

There's also not a lot of incentive for them to provide free upgrades via firmware. They'd much rather sell you a new camera body with better performance than make your old camera perform better.

So while many of us are happy that the older GH1's have hackable firmware that can improve the performance (at the risk of the occasional lock-up or other issue) it could be a major headache for the manufacturer if it was widespread, so they've taken steps to prevent it.

 

[dvest]

There's also not a lot of incentive for them to provide free upgrades via firmware.

Except in this case they are not providing a free upgrade. They are preventing those who have paid for their camera the option of upgrading it with firmware modifications provided by someone else.

 

[Wasabi Bob]

But consider...

Firmware is considered intelectual property and is protected under the same guidelines as their patented design is. Since using modified firmware has proven that damage can result, it is in their best interest to protect their reputation through their design. They have not charged for any updates that improved the performance within the designed guidelines and constraints of the GH1's original design.

The new GH2 did increase the sampling rate by using a new processor that coud handle the extra duty cycle, in addition to adding a third processor.

Immediate gratification without long term reliability is a receipe for disaster.

 

[FULLhdFILM]

Originally Posted by ajm80031

So while many of us are happy that the older GH1's have hackable firmware that can improve the performance (at the risk of the occasional lock-up or other issue) it could be a major headache for the manufacturer if it was widespread, so they've taken steps to prevent it.

I have order the AF100 and pick up the world 1st dumbdown camera (GH1 with FW1.34)
if panasonic is worry about customer lock-up their camera or other warranty issue.
I am happy to void my warranty and let them scatch my serial off to TRADE for a downgrade firmware to 1.32 or older