Canon Sells More DSLRs Than Anyone Else in 2012

[Woody]

I would love to see a further breakdown on that, including a graph of 5D2/5D3 sales over the course of CY2012.

BCNRanking does not provide graph but says in the Japanese DSLR sector:

Canon 5D2 - Rank 12 - 2.1% market share
Canon 5D3 - Rank 15 - 1.8% market share
Nikon D800 - Rank 16 - 1.6% market share
Nikon D600 - Rank 20 - 0.7% market share

Canon 6D was available for sale only in December.

[Woody]

Example: Sony didn't lose the lead in the TV market over one day or one year. It happened little by little that the general opinion of who produced the best TVs was not Sony any more.

Actually, the Japanese companies (Sharp, Sony, Panasonic) lost the entire TV market almost instantly because Samsung offered better technology at a lower price almost 'instantly' (within ~ 2 years).

[Woody]

In other words, it's more reason to pay attention to trends in sales figures and changes in the competitive landscape as opposed to the current market snapshot.

Up to end of 2011, Canon hardly lost any market shares worldwide.

2010: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-15/sony-nikon-narrow-gap-to-canon-with-new-digital-camera-models.html.
"In the market for cameras with interchangeable lens, or single lens reflex cameras, Canon controlled 44.5 percent of the market, followed by Nikon with 29.8 percent"

2011: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/30/us-canon-results-idUSTRE80T09Q20120130.
Thom Hogan (bythom.com) translated Nikon's sale of 4.7 million interchangeable lens cameras in 2011 as 31% market share. This means Canon's sale of 7.2 million interchangeable lens cameras has a market share of 47.5%. So, little changed from 2010 to 2011.

We'll see what happens in 2012.

We should keep in mind having the latest and best technology does not EQUATE to survival. Olympus, Panasonic and Sony are all bleeding very badly... not in the photographic business, but when overall financials are considered. Currently, Canon's only worthy competitor is Nikon.

[Woody]

Carl Zeiss, Nikon, Leitz, Sneider,   some Sigma, Tamron
there are fantastic primes out there.
Happy new year

I am longing for Nikon's f/1.8 trinity: 28 f/1.8, 50 f/1.8 and 85 f/1.8... awesome performance at affordable prices

[neuroanatomist]

In other words, it's more reason to pay attention to trends in sales figures and changes in the competitive landscape as opposed to the current market snapshot.

Makes sense.  Outside of Japan, we don't have figures for 2012.  From 2007 to 2011, the consistent trend was Canon gaining market share, and Nikon losing it (during the same period when 'Canon's sensor tech was stagnating,' although my 1D X sensor delivers much better performance than my 5DII sensor, so I don't buy 'stagnating' at all). 

So, by your logic (which, as I stated, does make sense), if Nikon gained market share and Canon lost it in 2012, that tells us nothing, it's just a current market snapshot set against a multi-year trend of Canon gains.  Or if Nikon shows a single year gain, do we throw logic out the window and cry doom for Canon?

[wellfedCanuck]

?

[RLPhoto]

There is nothing like canon primes. Fantastic.

Carl Zeiss, Nikon, Leitz, Sneider,   some Sigma, Tamron
there are fantastic primes out there and the smallest problem I have is to argue for or against the Canon because I have several tools to choose.
Happy new year

I will admit, if zeiss made AF lenses for canon, I wouldn't own any canon lenses.

But since they don't, canon is my choice for uber primes.

[Albi86]

Example: Sony didn't lose the lead in the TV market over one day or one year. It happened little by little that the general opinion of who produced the best TVs was not Sony any more.

Actually, the Japanese companies (Sharp, Sony, Panasonic) lost the entire TV market almost instantly because Samsung offered better technology at a lower price almost 'instantly' (within ~ 2 years).

Partly touché

Please let's consider though that 2 years in the TV world are a much longer time than in the camera world (i.e. we don't consider a 2yo lens to be old).

Also, TVs are a much more fast-paced segment than cameras (i.e. we don't get a new tech generation every year or every 6 months).

But I agree with your explanation: offering more for less eventually let you conquer the market. For slower markets it just takes more time.

[Frage]

But.....but.....Nikon is "better," isn't it?  DxOMark says so, it must be true.  What am I missing?!?  Oh, wait, I know....REALITY.

 

DxOMark is about sensors and the Sony sensors are the most sold.

[elflord]

In other words, it's more reason to pay attention to trends in sales figures and changes in the competitive landscape as opposed to the current market snapshot.

Makes sense.  Outside of Japan, we don't have figures for 2012.  From 2007 to 2011, the consistent trend was Canon gaining market share, and Nikon losing it (during the same period when 'Canon's sensor tech was stagnating,' although my 1D X sensor delivers much better performance than my 5DII sensor, so I don't buy 'stagnating' at all). 

So, by your logic (which, as I stated, does make sense), if Nikon gained market share and Canon lost it in 2012, that tells us nothing, it's just a current market snapshot set against a multi-year trend of Canon gains.  Or if Nikon shows a single year gain, do we throw logic out the window and cry doom for Canon?

Nikon don't have much cause for complacency either. They are dependent on Sony for sensors. Canon have a better selection of glass and kept delivering in 2012 (super teles, and the new IS primes). Like Canon, they completely botched their too-little-too-late entry into mirrorless. They are behind the curve on video. The other competitors in the market place are also not without their problems. Olympus, one of the top names on the list, had an accounting scandal that made Enron look like Eagle scouts. They are like Nikon dependent on Sony for sensors. Sony innovate like crazy but they lack the pedigree of Canon/Nikon and haven't developed decent glass for their mirrorless cameras. They also  seem unwilling or unable to stay on task with the A-mount system (do they still have an SLR full frame camera ?)

A multi year trend of gains in market share is obviously a positive for Canon. However, it would be a huge mistake for them to become complacent or unconcerned about their decline as a leader in sensor technology or their general inability or unwillingness to innovate.

[David Hull]

I kind of hoped Canon would lose market share. That might actually motivate them to make something decent for a change.

Really...?  The fact that they haven't lost market share would tend to indicate that an awful lot of buyers think they are making something decent.  I just bought a 5DIII (replacing a 5DII) which I think is nothing short of phenomenal.
This would also seem to indicate that Canon knows something more about their market than the armchair pundits that hang out in these forums do – it would seem (to steal a line from Mark Twain) that the predictions of the imminent demise of Canon (promulgated by some) have been greatly exaggerated.

[neuroanatomist]

Ford Focus is top selling car globally

I do not drive Ford and  If this were an argument for the best car I've missed something significant

Neither do I.  The vehicle I'm buying in early 2013 needs space for three carseats, and I prefer 4-wheel drive for the New England winters, so a Ford Focus isn't the best car for me.  Do you have the same needs as me?  If not, the best car for you will likely be different than for me.  So, who's 'best' is really the best?  I trust you're intelligent enough to see the problem - 'best' is subjective.  No one has yet proposed any objective measure of 'best' camera.  Do you have one? 

Regardless of what you or I think is the best car or camera, a majority of car buyers in the world think the Ford Focus is the best for them, and a majority of dSLR buyers think Canon is the best for them. That's an objective, measurable fact.  Obviously, everyone will determine 'best' for themselves, personally. But absent a bona fide definition of 'best' based on features/performance and applicable to everyone's needs, the aggregated buying decisions of the masses seem to be the only objective measure available. 

[dilbert]

I suspect that the figures are more representative of vendor-lock-in through lenses than anything else (note that 3rd party lenses doesn't change this.) If swapping vendor was a $5 or $10 per lens penalty, things would be different.

Your 'vendor lock-in' applies to Nikon users as well. If swapping vendor was a $5 or $10 lens penalty, things would be different - for sure Nikon users will be switching to Canon just as easily.

Ah, you've not understood what I'm saying, obviously.

Let me put it another way...

People buy or have bought Canon for the lenses.

People buy or have bought Nikon for the bodies.

A lesser product, E.G. NIKON, doesn't necessarily result in it being returned and for those that buy over the Internet, the hurdle is rather high so the product needs to be obviously bad rather than just "not as good."

So what's your point?
[/quote]

Err, "A lesser product, E.G. 5D Mark III".

[ScottyP]

Hmmm...  I see a lot of complaicency here. 

Would not want to see Canon sit back on its laurels from overconficence, nor steam full speed into the ice field (pick your own metaphor here). 

First of all, McDonalds (I think) sells more hamburgers than any other hamburger-selling outfit, yet the quality is not generally considered to be that great. 

Second, Canon's lead is narrowing and the others are gaining unless I am confused by some detail here, or by the definition of "camera" being used in this statistic or something.  I recall market share numbers in the high 40% range a couple of years ago, not the high 20% range.

[dilbert]

Oh yeah, the sensor thing. When was the last time big name pro photogs complained about Canon's sensor tech? Wait, I think it's because Canon actually listens to what most people want in their cameras, not just the pixel-peeping minority who have nothing better to do than read DxO charts and zoom in 100% crops instead of actually shooting photos.

They don't complain, they just vote with their wallets. Those that want the best in IQ from a 35mm DSLR are now shooting Nikon.

Until some printer manufacturer creates a printer that can output 16 billion colors and a paper manufacturer creates media that can display 14 stops of DR on print, I'm perfectly happy with my inferior Canon sensor.

Ok, so you don't understand why it is useful to have 14 stops of DR recorded by the sensor. Please refrain from requiring others to agree with your ignorance.