Industry News

Canon releases their full 2020 financials, beat expectations

This site contains affiliate links to products and services. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.

Canon Inc. has released its financials for 2020 and it looks like they exceeded expectations, even if only slightly. Canon’s imaging segment saw a 49% rise in its operating income over 2019. What’s more impressive that sales in the segment were down 25% year-over-year, likely due to the pandemic and manufacturing challenges.

Canon is quite confident about 2021 and the RF system, both for camera bodies and RF lenses. They project a 5% growth in imaging systems in 2021.

The demand for the Canon EOS R5 and Canon EOS R6 really drove sales for Canon in the 2nd half of 2020, both of which greatly exceeded Canon’s sales projections. Both cameras will likely continue to be hot sellers in 2021.

There is more EOS R goodness coming in 2021 that will further strengthen Canon’s market share in the full-frame mirrorless space.

Canon’s 2021 outlook for imaging systems:

In 2020, the inkjet printer market grew, driven by working and learning from home in regions and countries such as Europe, the United States and China. In line with this trend, our sales increased as well, thanks to sales growth of both hardware and consumables.

As for the market in 2021, we expect demand resulting from working and learning from home to continue, particularly in developed countries. Furthermore, thanks to growth in refillable ink tank models in emerging markets, we expect overall sales to be solid in 2021.

Under these conditions, we will leverage our strength of having a balanced lineup that includes both cartridge and refillable ink tank models, as we work to capture printing demand from the home to office in both developed countries and emerging markets.

Especially for refillable ink tank models where we took steps to further strengthen competitiveness, in the new products that we launched in the fourth quarter of last year, we improved print speed and lowered running cost. On top of this, we made it possible for users to independently replace some parts that wear out. By deploying products that raise the convenience of users in this way, we are strengthening our lineup and will aim to achieve our second consecutive year of sales growth by growing unit sales.

You can download the full financial report at the Canon Investor relations site here.

John Wilde

EOS M6 Mark II
Jan 2, 2021
59
124
Yes Maps, the below Canon text leaves M out in the cold: :-(

"Under these conditions, we will work to further strengthen our lineup of EOS R cameras and RF lenses to facilitate our aim of expanding our market share among professional and advanced amateur users where demand is solid." - Canon
 

Maps

EOS M7 (please)
Jan 10, 2021
46
91
Yes Maps, the below Canon text leaves M out in the cold: :-(

"Under these conditions, we will work to further strengthen our lineup of EOS R cameras and RF lenses to facilitate our aim of expanding our market share among professional and advanced amateur users where demand is solid." - Canon

I've never "liked" a post that I've liked so little, but you're absolutely right.
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
734
484
I wonder how this outlook will be affected by the new Sony A1? Assuming that Canon will have the “R1” out later this year, with the expected rise in sales from that, they will have a real competitor to it with reviews out, and if they’re really good, that could suppress sales of Canon’s new camera.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,249
2,120
Yes Maps, the below Canon text leaves M out in the cold: :-(

"Under these conditions, we will work to further strengthen our lineup of EOS R cameras and RF lenses to facilitate our aim of expanding our market share among professional and advanced amateur users where demand is solid." - Canon

I'm a fan of the M series myself, and I'm not too concerned as long as they don't discontinue production on all of the M bodies. To be sure, there's no sign of them developing new lenses for it, but I have to ask this because I honestly don't know: What more can they do without busting their 61mm max outside diameter rule? (I wish they WOULD bust it for a "higher" series of M lenses, to be honest.)
 

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,598
1,924
Hamburg, Germany
What more can they do without busting their 61mm max outside diameter rule? (I wish they WOULD bust it for a "higher" series of M lenses, to be honest.)
Very little is the answer, I think. I still find it funny what a wild limitation that is. While it is really neat that the system is so explicitly about small and light that that's not just an upper limit, but a hard design requirement - I've never seen them advertise it. It's just there.

But I don't think there that much to read into here. I would have thought the RF line up gets the spotlight in their financial report because it is their new and shiny line that they have been pitching as the way forward for profitability. The EF-M system could still remain as the dominant low end option that it is.

But I was very quickly convinced that the 7 series was 'the best' ( :p ) when the rumors of its demise started. So I don't know if resisting the thought of the EF-M line sharing that fate is all that rational.
 
I wonder how this outlook will be affected by the new Sony A1? Assuming that Canon will have the “R1” out later this year, with the expected rise in sales from that, they will have a real competitor to it with reviews out, and if they’re really good, that could suppress sales of Canon’s new camera.

I don't think the A1 will affect the sales of the R5 and R6 very much at all. First, the differences in the cameras (R5 and A1) specs are really very small. One can easily argue, for instance, that the R5's video specs are actually better than those of the A1. 4:2:2, full DCI resolution and format, about the same heat limits or maybe even better, higher resolution 4k HQ and HQ out to external recorders, upcoming firmware bringing out Cinema Raw Light and many other aspects of video performance are better. The 30FPS for stills of the A1 come with picture quality losses compared to Canon's 20 FPS performances, and when the quality of the Sony is at the same level as the R5, the max frame rate for the A1 is also 20 FPS. The extra 5 MP of the Sony is insignificant, and the ergos of the R5 and flip screen are better, and the headline RF lenses are so far unmatched.

The only potential advantages for the A1 that I can see right now are a more detailed viewfinder at a higher frame rate, which may be significant in use, faster synch speed for flash in electronic or mechanical shutter, the pixel shift high res stills function (can be implemented in future firmware in the R5), and a faster electronic shutter actuation in general, which may aid in reducing image distortion in video mode and in panning action in stills photography - the extent to which is currently not precisely known. Considering that the A1 costs $6500.00 and the R5 costs $3800.00, the R5 looks like a near match or better, with some advantages going to the R5 and most of the advantages for the A1 being quite minor, while the price for the R5 makes it look like the bargain of the year compared to the Sony.

Overall, when the smoke of the Sony promo fever and its advocates clears, my estimation is that Sony's new camera will be a wonderful but extremely expensive option for existing Sony customers already invested in their lenses, but a quite meek and underwhelming response to the R5 that will hardly effect the popularity of the R5 among current Canon users and users of other brands considering switching to Canon for the R5.
 

Maps

EOS M7 (please)
Jan 10, 2021
46
91
I'm a fan of the M series myself, and I'm not too concerned as long as they don't discontinue production on all of the M bodies. To be sure, there's no sign of them developing new lenses for it, but I have to ask this because I honestly don't know: What more can they do without busting their 61mm max outside diameter rule? (I wish they WOULD bust it for a "higher" series of M lenses, to be honest.)

I have no complaints about the lenses after the Sigma trio got ported over. I’m happy to adapt what doesn’t exist. I actually really liked the idea of a limited set of glass, assuming that consolidating the lens lineup could keep costs of the system down.

I think at the end of the day, what really irks me is that a product that delivered a lot of value to a ton of people ended up (presumably?) being such an albatross from Canon’s perspective. I get that the world has changed and markets have evolved a lot; I begrudgingly agree with the strategy of abandoning the low-margin low end to pursue the high-margin high end. It’s the right move, but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth all the same.
 

woodman411

EOS 90D
Aug 1, 2017
150
191
USA
I wonder how this outlook will be affected by the new Sony A1? Assuming that Canon will have the “R1” out later this year, with the expected rise in sales from that, they will have a real competitor to it with reviews out, and if they’re really good, that could suppress sales of Canon’s new camera.

I'm still not clear who the A1 is for. For professional sports, the ergonomics are still terrible for big glass, and who wants to process 30fps at 50MP? That actually seems like a liability unless there's a way to get mraw or sraw (I am wondering whether we've reached the point of diminishing return on fps). For the enthusiast/hobbyist, why would they realistically need more than 20fps? Going from 10 to 20 fps I understand, but going from 20 to 30 and paying $2500 more for that over the R5, I just don't see the value, but maybe I'm missing something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frjmacias and Chig

john1970

EOS R5
CR Pro
Dec 27, 2015
181
201
Northeastern US
I agree with the previous post that we are approaching the point of diminshing return in terms of fps. Seven years ago when I started wildlife photography the differences between cameras was typically 4 fps (Nikon D800) vs. 11 fps (Nikon D4s) with the D4s having almost three times the burst rate. Now we have a R5 @ 20 fps vs. A1 @ 30 fps with the difference being a 50% increase. Frankly, I find the 20 fps almost too much and a lot of times I use the mechanical shutter which is still excellent at 12 fps. With that said, I am still interested in seeing Canon's answer to the R1.
 

reef58

EOS RP
CR Pro
Apr 16, 2016
362
299
North Carolina
youtu.be
I wonder how this outlook will be affected by the new Sony A1? Assuming that Canon will have the “R1” out later this year, with the expected rise in sales from that, they will have a real competitor to it with reviews out, and if they’re really good, that could suppress sales of Canon’s new camera.

I am certainly no camera industry insider, but I think the A-1 means a lot to people already in the Sony eco system. It is a cool camera for sure, but doesn't offer anything game changing to drive people from the R lineup to Sony. There have been a few cameras of late which are non Canon that have my interest, but the A1 isn't one of the. The Fuji medium format, still want one of those, but don't want the hassle of new lenses, batteries, ect when at the end of the day the photos will look virtually the same as my R5 and 1dx3.

I suspect the R1, R5s, and R7 will offer plenty to folks in the Canon universe.
 
Oct 30, 2020
4
3
I sure hope the R1 isn't a "50 MP 8K MONSTER" like the A1.. that would be a terrible misstep from canon in my opinion.

Global shutter, ~30 MP.. 20 fps.. (I don't know if that's possible with global shutter tech)
That would set the market afire
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB and Surab

Surab

Olympus OM-D E-M5II
Aug 22, 2020
45
57
People seem to not realize that the A1 allows flash sync with the electronic shutter. That is big and no one else has that. It also pret much ties the R5 on everything else, so Sony users won’t feel the need to switch.

I do think however that the R1, based on the rumors, will be having an electronic shutter as good if not better than the A1.
 

marathonman

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Aug 29, 2016
149
723
Yes, yes, yes..... all very well and interesting. But the only thing that really matters is what percentage of the float is short?
 
  • Like
Reactions: FramerMCB

Traveler

EOS R
Oct 6, 2019
90
116
I'm still not clear who the A1 is for. For professional sports, the ergonomics are still terrible for big glass, and who wants ...
Unlike Canon, Sony realizes that most people don’t buy what they need but what they want. I’m sure they’ll sell a lot of A1. Like with the A7C. I thought it’s an overpriced nonsense but they sell a lot.
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
734
484
I don't think the A1 will affect the sales of the R5 and R6 very much at all. First, the differences in the cameras (R5 and A1) specs are really very small. One can easily argue, for instance, that the R5's video specs are actually better than those of the A1. 4:2:2, full DCI resolution and format, about the same heat limits or maybe even better, higher resolution 4k HQ and HQ out to external recorders, upcoming firmware bringing out Cinema Raw Light and many other aspects of video performance are better. The 30FPS for stills of the A1 come with picture quality losses compared to Canon's 20 FPS performances, and when the quality of the Sony is at the same level as the R5, the max frame rate for the A1 is also 20 FPS. The extra 5 MP of the Sony is insignificant, and the ergos of the R5 and flip screen are better, and the headline RF lenses are so far unmatched.

The only potential advantages for the A1 that I can see right now are a more detailed viewfinder at a higher frame rate, which may be significant in use, faster synch speed for flash in electronic or mechanical shutter, the pixel shift high res stills function (can be implemented in future firmware in the R5), and a faster electronic shutter actuation in general, which may aid in reducing image distortion in video mode and in panning action in stills photography - the extent to which is currently not precisely known. Considering that the A1 costs $6500.00 and the R5 costs $3800.00, the R5 looks like a near match or better, with some advantages going to the R5 and most of the advantages for the A1 being quite minor, while the price for the R5 makes it look like the bargain of the year compared to the Sony.

Overall, when the smoke of the Sony promo fever and its advocates clears, my estimation is that Sony's new camera will be a wonderful but extremely expensive option for existing Sony customers already invested in their lenses, but a quite meek and underwhelming response to the R5 that will hardly effect the popularity of the R5 among current Canon users and users of other brands considering switching to Canon for the R5.
I wasn’t talking about the R5 and 6. I was talking about the upcoming R1, or whatever it will be called. I thought I made that clear.
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
734
484
I'm still not clear who the A1 is for. For professional sports, the ergonomics are still terrible for big glass, and who wants to process 30fps at 50MP? That actually seems like a liability unless there's a way to get mraw or sraw (I am wondering whether we've reached the point of diminishing return on fps). For the enthusiast/hobbyist, why would they realistically need more than 20fps? Going from 10 to 20 fps I understand, but going from 20 to 30 and paying $2500 more for that over the R5, I just don't see the value, but maybe I'm missing something.
When I started out in fashion, back in 1969, when I was 19, we used, for some work, the Nikon F with Marty’s motor drive, that shot at an amazing 3 FPS. Who could possibly need more?
you won’t have to shoot at 30fps. It’s more than likely that you can shoot at a lower rez, though I’ve been too lazy to look. But it’s more than that. Let’s not try to pretend that this isn’t a great camera, because it is.
remember that Canon has a $6500 camera as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMC11