Panasonic changed the camera world in 2008 with the Lumix G1, the first mirrorless and the first Micro Four Thirds body. For years, Panasonic and the MFT ecosystem set the pace that others followed. Yet recent shipment data out of Japan puts Panasonic at roughly 3.4% market share across both L‑Mount full frame and MFT. That implies an even smaller slice for Micro Four Thirds specifically—and a sharp fall from earlier highs.
But a series of decisions let rivals overtake them. Robin Wong listed the five missteps that, together, blunted Panasonic’s momentum—and what could help turn it around.
1) Late to in‑body image stabilization (IBIS)
For years Panasonic leaned on optical stabilization in select lenses while Olympus shipped IBIS in every body from day one. Panasonic didn’t add IBIS until the GX7 in 2013, and that was only 2‑axis. Five‑axis arrived later (GX8 in 2015) and reached true parity in models like the G9. IBIS alone didn’t decide the market, but for travel, handheld video, and low‑light shooting—especially in compact or entry cameras—it’s a must. The hesitation cost them sales and mindshare.
2) Late to reliable subject/face‑tracking autofocus
This one stings because Panasonic smartly pushed video features early with the GH line. But as Sony and Canon put fast, sticky, subject‑tracking autofocus into the hands of everyday shooters, Panasonic’s approach lagged. Solo creators and YouTubers often can’t pull focus manually; they need dependable AF that locks, tracks, and stays quiet. Panasonic’s move to modern phase‑detect subject tracking in recent bodies like the G9 II was welcome—but it arrived years after competitors normalized it across lineups.
3) Intentionally limiting lower‑tier cameras
Panasonic marketed entry models like the GF series and G100 to vloggers and new creators, yet held back critical features such as robust IBIS and dependable subject/face tracking. The result: cameras that looked the part but weren’t as usable for run‑and‑gun shooting. While segmentation is normal, the broader market increasingly expects trustworthy AF and some stabilization—even at the entry level. That’s where volume lives.
4) Bodies that grew too large and heavy
Micro Four Thirds’ founding promise is a small, lightweight system that still delivers professional results. Recent flagships like the G9 II and GH7 are superb performers—but their size and weight now rival, or even exceed, some full‑frame bodies from Canon, Nikon, and Sony. If a camera is as big and heavy as full frame, many buyers will simply choose full frame. MFT should lean into portability, not drift away from it.
5) A confusing pivot to full frame
Brands can and should explore new formats—but Panasonic’s push into full frame via L‑Mount sent mixed signals about its long‑term commitment to MFT. For users heavily invested in Micro Four Thirds, the move raised doubts: is MFT still a priority? Will R&D split dilute progress? Meanwhile, L‑Mount hasn’t exploded in volume to offset those concerns. The perception hit to MFT confidence matters, especially when buyers are weighing a system investment.
What Panasonic can do now according to Robin Wong:
- Put best‑in‑class AF and IBIS everywhere, including entry models. Don’t gate core usability.
- Re‑embrace compactness. Make a modern, pocketable GX/GM‑style body that pairs perfectly with small primes.
- Clarify the roadmap. Publicly commit to MFT long term with lenses and bodies that make the format’s advantages obvious.
- Ship creator‑first features by default: clean, reliable tracking AF; strong IBIS or lens+body stabilization; good audio; simple streaming; heat‑management that just works.
- Celebrate the lens ecosystem. Few systems match MFT for breadth of fast, tiny primes—lean into that as a unique advantage.
Do you agree? What did he miss? Drop your thoughts!