Canon lays out their corporate strategy

[neuroanatomist]

So, you're silly enough to believe that Sony doesn't care about profits?

Wait, are you suggesting that these companies making the camera gear we buy are not philanthropic organizations? How dare they place profits above making us, their customers, happy by giving us everything we ask for and charging pennies for it? I'm shocked, I tell you...shocked!

Of course, the other thing to keep in mind is the audience, and the audience for financial reporting is primarily market analysts.

 

[AlanF]

I'm selling our studio's 6 R5 cameras, and starting to sell all our Canon glass (most of which is EF).

Who will want to buy them after your post?

 

[SteveC]

S*ny lenses may be cheaper--monetarily--in some countries but the penalty is you have to use their cameras.

 

[dolina]

S*ny lenses may be cheaper--monetarily--in some countries but the penalty is you have to use their cameras.

Sony lenses are cheap because nearly 50 of them are pre-2018 SKUs.

In the same way saying EF lenses are cheaper than Sony lenses as a lot them were released from 1987-2010.

Like all the complaints about the RF lenses being expensive. All of them were released less than 5 years. Almost all of them are RF L lenses because it has the highest demand and the best margins. As we enter the back 5 years I'd expect more RF consumer lenses at consumer friendly price points.

To put things into perspective Canon is the #1 digital camera brand at 48% global market share in terms of units shipped even when they're that expensive.

 

[John Wilde]

I'm selling our studio's 6 R5 cameras, and starting to sell all our Canon glass (most of which is EF).

And how much money will you lose by selling used Canon and buying new Sony?

 

[entoman]

S*ny lenses may be cheaper--monetarily--in some countries but the penalty is you have to use their cameras.

Heaven forbid that I should defend Sony on a Canon user's website, but I know people, mostly birders, who genuinely love using their Sony cameras. They're not as bad, ergonomically, as people make out - but just like any time that we switch brands, it takes a while to adapt and get used to new controls and a new way of working.

By way of example, when I started *digital* photography, I switched from a Nikon D50 to a Sony a700. It took a few weeks, but after that I found the Sony very easy and enjoyable to use. When the a700 had been out for 3 years with no sign of an upgrade coming, I decided to switch to a Canon 50D. At first I found the Canon controls to be weird and a bit awkward, but I've been using Canon gear for 12 years now, and now it's Sony, Nikon and Panasonic that feel awkward...

People will always feel most comfortable with something that is familiar. If folk that find a particular brand or model awkward, they just haven't allowed enough time to adjust.

 

[Del Paso]

So, you're silly enough to believe that Sony doesn't care about profits?

No, we all know that Sony is The welfare company , only interested in producing the world best products while entirely neglecting those disgusting profits.
Every ship-jumper knows it!

 

[neuroanatomist]

So, you're silly enough to believe that Sony doesn't care about profits?

Sony obviously cares about profits, but as far as cameras go they're much less rosy about the situation than Canon. Sony's current IR info (3Q22) for the ET&S segment that includes digital cameras talks about, "...no noticeable negative impact from the economic slowdown so far, and sales are relatively stable," and, "...top priorities being prevention of any negative impact from being carried over into next fiscal year." At least they can be happy about the PS5...

 

[Czardoom]

Heaven forbid that I should defend Sony on a Canon user's website, but I know people, mostly birders, who genuinely love using their Sony cameras. They're not as bad, ergonomically, as people make out - but just like any time that we switch brands, it takes a while to adapt and get used to new controls and a new way of working.
...

Check out Duane Paton's videos on YouTube. He recently started using Sony along with Canon...and loves many of the features, including their admittedly excellent AF...but has a huge bruise on his hand after shooting Sony for a couple hours. It's not just familiarity with buttons and controls or menus - Sony FF cameras have been ergonomically awful since day one, and quite literally painful to hold. Alas, since ergonomics are not a measurable spec - or a "hot button" marketing item, it's seems unlikely to change.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Check out Duane Paton's videos on YouTube. … has a huge bruise on his hand after shooting Sony for a couple hours.

Maybe he should try Sony’s professional mirrorless camera with the integrated grip, that would probably be much more comfortable to hold.

Oh, wait…

 

[entoman]

Check out Duane Paton's videos on YouTube. He recently started using Sony along with Canon...and loves many of the features, including their admittedly excellent AF...but has a huge bruise on his hand after shooting Sony for a couple hours. It's not just familiarity with buttons and controls or menus - Sony FF cameras have been ergonomically awful since day one, and quite literally painful to hold. Alas, since ergonomics are not a measurable spec - or a "hot button" marketing item, it's seems unlikely to change.

I don't know about Duane Paton, but I personally know several birders who use a9ii and a1 bodies with the Sony 200-600mm, and use them for hours at a time without any issues. I also have a pal who uses both a Canon R6 and a Sony a7Riv, so has no axe to grind, and tells me they are both equally easy and comfortable to use.

Another pal of mine bought a secondhand 1Dx, having convinced himself that it was perfect for his needs. He's a big strong lad, but 6 months later he sold it and said it was too heavy to use for more than half an hour. I borrowed his camera a couple of times and found it extremely comfortable for the first few minutes, due to the big grip and wide control placement, but ridiculously heavy, and too cumbersome for regular use.

Personally, I found all my own Canon DSLRs comfortable (50D, 40D, 7D, 7DMkii, 6D, 5DMkiii, 5DSR, 5DMkiv), and I'm extremely pleased with my R5. On the other hand I borrowed an RP from another friend, and found it fiddly and uncomfortable to use with anything bigger than a kit zoom. I also borrowed the original R, and strongly disliked the swipe bar, and found it too easy to nudge accidentally. That swipe bar was almost universally condemned by reviewers and users.

It isn't as back and white as saying brand A has good ergonomics and brand B has bad ergonomics.

It all boils down to individual preferences, which are largely based on how much extended use a person has had with a particular brand or model. Any modern MILC from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic or OM Systems is capable of stunning photos, and after a short period of adaptation, any photographer should be able to use them intuitively and without discomfort.

Brand loyalty and internet warfare have led to a lot of people "taking sides" and condemning other people's choices, without any experience of the gear they are condemning. A lot of it is stirred up by internet influencers and by people desperate to defend their own purchasing decisions.

 

[David - Sydney]

To me, the clearest part of the PR was: PROFIT. We want to maintain the super profit margins we've created with R series products, and hunt for other just as profitable opportunities if we can find them.

Why won't they allow AF 3rd party lenses- profit. You wouldn't be forced to buy their over priced, wildly profitable, R series lenses.

Some Sony lenses out perform their R equivalent, and many others equal them, at 2/3rds the cost. Heck, even Sigma with their new HLA AF system is now essentially as fast as Canon & Sony in focus speed, and they are producing some outstanding optics at 1/3 the cost of Canon's. Now that their AF will be in the same ball park with new releases, many people will care a lot less about them being less robust, seeing the cost of an Art is often 1/3 of an R series Canon L.

PROFIT.

I haven't switched brands for 25 years, but it looks like now is going to be the time. When you can buy 5 very nice Sony GM lenses for the cost of 3 new R 'L' lenses, something's very wrong. The price difference for a pro editorial +portrait kit (ie the 3 f2.8 zooms + 4-5 essential primes), between platforms is now just completely absurd.

Sure, the R mount is expensive... but they are selling everything they can make so there must be some value for buyers in it.

 

[Jonathan Thill]

Serious? I'm in Australia.
R24-70 =A$4000 vs Sony 24-70vII A$2700 (just as sharp, lighter, lightning AF, less flare)
R135 =A$4000 vs Sony A$2500 (which lacks IS but is sharper)
The list goes on...

Funny how so many Aussie's seem to forget that they also get 5 years of Canon factory warranty, 3 more years then the Sony glass in Australia.

Are the 3 years of extra coverage worth the price difference? Hard to say really but 5 years vs 2 years really does expose Canon to some pretty high risk.

BTW that 5 years of warranty is 4 more years then we get here in Canada and the US.

 

[David - Sydney]

I'm selling our studio's 6 R5 cameras, and starting to sell all our Canon glass (most of which is EF).

Given that Digidirect has current R5 pricing <AUD5k and 15% off a number of lenses, perhaps it is just a matter of waiting for the right price. There is also the 5 year local Canon warranty. Pricing has been pretty variable though.

 

[dolina]

Funny how so many Aussie's seem to forget that they also get 5 years of Canon factory warranty, 3 more years then the Sony glass in Australia.

Are the 3 years of extra coverage worth the price difference? Hard to say really but 5 years vs 2 years really does expose Canon to some pretty high risk.

BTW that 5 years of warranty is 4 more years then we get here in Canada and the US.

Unless RF system was designed for diminished build quality and durability then the 5 years warranty is more a marketing tool than anything else.

Are Canon AU prices higher than US? There is a cost associated with extended warranties.

 

[entoman]

Funny how so many Aussie's seem to forget that they also get 5 years of Canon factory warranty, 3 more years then the Sony glass in Australia.

Are the 3 years of extra coverage worth the price difference? Hard to say really but 5 years vs 2 years really does expose Canon to some pretty high risk.

BTW that 5 years of warranty is 4 more years then we get here in Canada and the US.

Cameras are usually either dead-on-arrival or they last forever, so the value of long warranties is debatable. The only item likely to wear out and fail is the shutter, and most cameras these days have a minimum (mechanical) shutter life expectancy of at least 100,000 actuations. That's 33,333 and a bit actuations per year over 3 years, or 20,000 actuations over 5 years. So if you shoot a bucketload of high speed bursts every day, and you use mechanical shutter, a long warranty might have some value. Otherwise, probably not.

 

[John Wilde]

To me, this story is a bit like Kodak, who invented the digital camera.

"In 2022, our [interchangeable lens camera ]sales were up by 120 thousand units to 2.86 million units" for an ILC market share of (2.86/5.85) 49%.
- Canon financial document

(sarcasm) Canon's Imaging division is obviously in serious, serious, trouble.

 

[dolina]

"In 2022, our [interchangeable lens camera ]sales were up by 120 thousand units to 2.86 million units" for an ILC market share of (2.86/5.85) 49%.
- Canon financial document

(sarcasm) Canon's Imaging division is obviously in serious, serious, trouble.

So long as Canon maintains their worldwide shipping numbers despite of the whole ILC market further shrinkage at other brands' expense then Canon users will be alright.

If that means no 3rd party mirrorless lenses until around year 2028 or later then that's fine by me.

I would not be surprised that other non-Canon/Sony/Nikon brands will be bought out or shutdown over time.

Based on 2.86 million ILC bodies

- under 900 thousand are DSLR bodies that are mostly Rebels
- under 1 million are R50 mirrorless bodies
- over 1 million other RF bodies

Nearly 1 out of 2 ILC bodies are Canon RF or EF.

3 of 10 Canon bodies are EF mount
7 of 10 Canon bodies are RF mount

 

[AlanF]

Cameras are usually either dead-on-arrival or they last forever, so the value of long warranties is debatable. The only item likely to wear out and fail is the shutter, and most cameras these days have a minimum (mechanical) shutter life expectancy of at least 100,000 actuations. That's 33,333 and a bit actuations per year over 3 years, or 20,000 actuations over 5 years. So if you shoot a bucketload of high speed bursts every day, and you use mechanical shutter, a long warranty might have some value. Otherwise, probably not.

Your R5 shutter is rated at 500,000 actuations. That's an awfully large number of butterflies before it needs replacing.

 

[neuroanatomist]

"In 2022, our [interchangeable lens camera ]sales were up by 120 thousand units to 2.86 million units" for an ILC market share of (2.86/5.85) 49%.
- Canon financial document

(sarcasm) Canon's Imaging division is obviously in serious, serious, trouble.

You need to read more carefully. He invoked Kodak!! That implies Nokia!! Two failures among thousands of successful companies.

Probably @Profit007 owned a Kodak Brownie and a Nokia 1100 but decided he didn’t like them so he sold them. Then those companies collapsed. Now, he’s selling his Canon gear. The dots are all there to be connected.