BCN Rankings Are Out, Canon Continues to Dominate DSLRs, Further Growth in Mirrorless

[ahsanford]

And I'm also curious, how many people shooting EOS M and asking for faster lenses also own an FF rig with fast glass?

I'm not implying the need for speed in crop is not warranted or anything, but it's possible a good chunk of people asking for it (myself included) are simply moonlighting in crop because FF mirrorless doesn't exist for us yet.

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

Personally, if I were to get an M camera, it would be for the small size and my likelihood of getting large lenses would be very small.....

That's why I got an EOS M (then an M2, then an M6). It helps if you already have those large lenses, at least philosophically...I only use EF-M lenses on my M's, but the idea that I have a small backup camera at the minimal impact of bringing the mount adapter on a trip is comforting.

Canon has done surveys and they have access to marketing data that we forum users do not. They undoubtedly have a much better picture of the market than we do...

Lies. Lies and fanboi propaganda. Canon needs to make the specific products I demand in my forum posts, or they're doomed. After all, there are millions of people out there who want exactly what I want. Maybe even billions.
—CameraDialGuy

 

[KeithBreazeal]

And I'm also curious, how many people shooting EOS M and asking for faster lenses also own an FF rig with fast glass?

I'm not implying the need for speed in crop is not warranted or anything, but it's possible a good chunk of people asking for it (myself included) are simply moonlighting in crop because FF mirrorless doesn't exist for us yet.

- A

I bought the M5 and really enjoy using it. I bought a few M lenses and the EF adapter. I would jump on a FF mirrorless in a heartbeat. Something along the 5D mark IV body would be nice.
I have some fast glass hanging around. The Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art is the speed winner so far.

Camera back pack Nov 2017 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

Canon EOS M5 Canon 300L f2.8 Canon 2X Converter © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

 

[AvTvM]

Canon did get a few things right with their initial mirrorless offering:
APS-C for starters [not Nikon 1 dwarf sensor, not 4/3 mini sensor]

and all Canon EOS-M/EF-M gear is
1. affordable ... bodies below 1k or even "outright cheap" (lenses)
2. all EOS M / EF-M products are "light and compact" to "ultra-light and -compact"
3. IQ is decent to excellent, performance, user interface and build quality are "good enough"
4. lens selection is smart and perfectly tailored to intended market ... people who don't want to lug around heavy gear, don't want to spend a fortune but still want decent IQ, performance and handling. Lenses cover entire frequently used focal range and anything that can be built small, light, decent IQ and affordable. f/1.2 clunkers .. not needed outside this forum.

Canon is still stupid, because they waited so long ... they would have made even more of a killing had they launched EOS-M lineup with decent camera bodies from very start (instead of lame and overpriced original EOS M). They would have annihilated competition from start - Oly, Fuji, Sony. And they could have stopped production of those awful mirrorflicking Rebels 2 years ago already. Actually any APS-C DSLR except maybe 7D II.

It is blind luck for Canon's that competitors were/are also acting "rather stupid":

* Fuji has an [arguably] slightly better APS-C mirrorless product line - cameras and especially lenses, BUT clunkier than EOS M, ugly retro design does not appeal to majority of today's buyers, and most importantly, most of the stuff is just way too costly to capture mass market. f/1.2 lenses, ha! Wonder how many they sold ...

* Sony had/has no attractive and priceworthy offering of (APS-C) E-mount lenses and their A5.... / A6.... user interface plain sucks compared to Canon. And in addition Sony has raised prices well above Canon EOS-M / EF-M levels

It is Canon's good luck, that Nikon also held on to mirrorslappers forever and Sony took a while to get product really right [A7 / II / III ] and then simply priced and sized themselves right out of the market. Gmaster monsta lenses at pricepoints well beyond Canon L territory ... a poor joke! tiny minority program. Maybe still profitable for Sony, but definitely not good for their overall market share.

Mirrorless FF .. .similar story. Had Canon come out at the same time as Sony A7 with an attractive and well-priced FF mirrorless lineup, Sony would be even less anywhere than where they are now.

And FF mirrorless will hinge on same success factors as mirrorless APS-C: small SIZE and small PRICE .... new short FFD mount ftw ... 8)

 

[rrcphoto]

And I'm also curious, how many people shooting EOS M and asking for faster lenses also own an FF rig with fast glass?

I'm not implying the need for speed in crop is not warranted or anything, but it's possible a good chunk of people asking for it (myself included) are simply moonlighting in crop because FF mirrorless doesn't exist for us yet.

- A

I'm perfectly happy with a 11-22, 18-150 travel combo with an M5. anything else is clutter. toss both lenses' RAW's into DLO and it's as good as it gets.

I have a samyang 12/2 for astro / low light landscape, and really I can't see me really desiring much else.

 

[Hflm]

I expect this thread and these numbers to be referenced about 1 million times in response to any negative statement about Canon....especially Canon's mirrorless system....

Probably what shocks me the most is Sony. Even in compact sales...where is the RX100???? Casio beat them???

Sony is lost in the land of over-pricing out of the market.

No, certainly not.
M5 is more expensive where I live than the A6000, with kit lens I get an A6300 with 4k for a similar price; 5div was 4100Euros (A7riii 3500 Euros) when introduced. A9 is 5300 Euros compared to 7000Euros for a D5, for example. So no, in general I think your claim to be wrong.

 

[Hflm]

Several good points have been made, but one that seems to get lost is how insignificant full-frame sales are.

Canon has slid into the No. 2 spot without a full-frame offering. The No. 1 spot is held by Olympus with the 4/3rds sensor.

That's actually not reading the data correctly. In mirrorless, Canon didn't make top 3 in 2014.

In 2015, at 11.9% it made #3, edging out Panasonic, and with Sony owning more than twice as much market share.

In 2016, Canon about doubled its mirrorless sales, overtaking Sony for the #2 spot and stealing marketshare from both Olympus and Sony

In 2017, Sony and Canon grew their marketshare about equally, at the expense of non-top-3 brands. Olympus sales didn't change much.

The easiest way to visualize it is the chart on page 1 -
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34268.msg702925#msg702925

We are talking about Japan only, right? I get the impression people think of world wide numbers, here.

 

[Aglet]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

 

[Hflm]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

Disagree. In Germany all the stores I go to have prominent Sony sections by now. Even Media Markt and Saturn (comparable to Best Buy) prominently display Sony. This is only a more recent thing, however. Just a few years back, it was all Canon and Nikon, with a bit of Olympus. Sony began to become more prominently displayed after that over the last say 3 years.
All clerks I talked to say Sony sales are strongly on the rise now, with more and more pros switching or adding A7riiii or A9, for example (pro stores like Calument, Foto Gregor, Lambertin, Koch, Sauter etc.). I can't talk of all stores, of course, just wanted to add a further data point.
All Canon needs to do is keeping up the momentum. They have the brand name and esp. accessories. It will nevertheless be interesting how an introduction of a Canon/Nikon FF mirrorless will change the perception of DSLRs and how much cannibalisation is happening.

 

[okaro]

...and I think that really says it all. Canon has zoomed in on the target demo for crop cameras, and "want it not EF big" and "but it had better be fast"* is not populated by enough people, or we'd have seen a 17-55 2.8 IS USM refresh, a 10-22 USM refresh, a 15-85 refresh USM, etc. by now.

*Fuji, on the other hand, absolutely lives in this space, and look where it got them -- see how they did in the rankings above.

- A

There are two (with huge simplification) two kinds of EF-S users. Those who use entry level cameras and more advanced ones. The entry level users seldom buy lenses and if they do they want cheap ones. That means it makes no sense to create expensive top quality lenses for them. The advanced users are wiling to use more money. They would benefit from top quality EF-S lenses but that creates a problem for Canon. Canon does not want to lock those people to EF-S bodies. Canon wants them to move to FF bodies. For this reason Canon does not create top quality EF-S lenses. It may be that since Sigma has created them Canon has to respond in the future.

With EF-M there is a different matters. I think the size is there a major factor. People choose mirrorless cameras for their size. Also people might not want to carry several lenses. Therefore all EF-M lenses released so far with the exception of the 55-200 mm are general purpose lenses that you can use as general walk around lens.

 

[BillB]

Are these numbers unit sales or sales revenue? If by unit sales, the number can be biased by lower end camera. I just can't imagine why Canon is above Sony in the mirrorless market.

why not? the M5 and M6 are all very credible cameras that can be used in a variety of ways for the general public. ergonomically the M5 is certainly superior to Sony's A6xxx and A5100 bodies.

Are the M's the only Canon cameras included in the Mirrorless category, or are there any fixed lens mirrorless?

 

[BillB]

Several good points have been made, but one that seems to get lost is how insignificant full-frame sales are.

Thom Hogan has estimated that Nikon DX:FX ratio of 5:1, or 16.7% of Nikon sales were FX (2012-2015). Granted, he was arguing that the lack of D500 helped FX sales, but let's just use those numbers. Using those numbers and illustrating the impact of the massive price differences (taken from Amazon today), if all Nikon sold were the D3300 at $400 with lens and the D750 for $1,800 without lens at the 5:1 ratio Nikon's revenue would be 52.5% DX to 47.5% FX. Or, if I were to guess, if Canon's avg APS-C body was $600 and avg FF body was $3,000 and say canon is 10% FF that would still be 64% APS-C vs 36% FF from a revenue perspective. Still pretty significant.

But, also not yet mentioned, both Sigma and Tamron sell more lenses than Nikon (yikes) and are within 5% of Canon. I am definitely surprised by that.

Re-Nikon....yikes.

The top 3 in lens sales account for just over 50% of total sales, so the difference between 3rd place and the next places is likely pretty small. Also, Sigma and Tamron sell a lot more Canon mount lenses than Nikon does. Canon's share of lens sales is a lot smaller than its share of DSLR sales. This is also be true of Nikon as well. More competition for lens sales, thanks to Sigma and Tamron. I wonder how things look in the North American market.

 

[BillB]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

Another point is that satisfied customers lead to new customers. Some people talk to their friends and relatives before they buy a new camera, probably more than read spec sheets or hit Internet forums (or listen to Best Buy salesmen, for that matter). From Canon sales, it doesn't look like there are that many people bad mouthing Canon out in the real world.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Are the M's the only Canon cameras included in the Mirrorless category, or are there any fixed lens mirrorless?

The category is mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras, for Canon that's only the M series.

 

[Orangutan]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

If it were so simple, Sony, Nikon and the rest would do the same. How is Canon able to do this when those others are not? To this point, you have not provided good evidence that Canon's dominance is purely due to sales tactics.

 

[docsmith]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

Disagree. In Germany all the stores I go to have prominent Sony sections by now. Even Media Markt and Saturn (comparable to Best Buy) prominently display Sony. This is only a more recent thing, however. Just a few years back, it was all Canon and Nikon, with a bit of Olympus. Sony began to become more prominently displayed after that over the last say 3 years.
All clerks I talked to say Sony sales are strongly on the rise now, with more and more pros switching or adding A7riiii or A9, for example (pro stores like Calument, Foto Gregor, Lambertin, Koch, Sauter etc.). I can't talk of all stores, of course, just wanted to add a further data point.
All Canon needs to do is keeping up the momentum. They have the brand name and esp. accessories. It will nevertheless be interesting how an introduction of a Canon/Nikon FF mirrorless will change the perception of DSLRs and how much cannibalisation is happening.

I am a bit curious about this in the USA as well. I had a heckuva time even finding a store with the G7X II to test out when I was buying one. Best Buy seems to be favoring Sony. Each sales person I spoke with raved about Sony to the point I suspect it was orchestrated. Every store had Sony cameras usually displayed on endcaps (premium location usually paid for). While each store had a small set of Canon cameras, I had to track down the select stores that had the G7X II and M5. I tried other stores as well, but most just had lower end P&Ss if they had cameras at all.

"Camera stores," the few that still exist, still have Nikon/Canon, but Sony seems to be having equivalent foothold in the few I've been in recently. The Camera Store TV certainly pushes Nikon/Sony.

So I am sure Canon has a great distribution network, but, at least what I've seen recently, Sony has tapped into some pretty major networks themselves.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

If it were so simple, Sony, Nikon and the rest would do the same. How is Canon able to do this when those others are not? To this point, you have not provided good evidence that Canon's dominance is purely due to sales tactics.

Well, you see...Aglet doesn't like Canon. And he thinks he's a smart guy. Therefore, anyone who buys Canon is part of the herd of consumer sheep that have been duped by the Canon marketing machine's propaganda. It couldn't possibly be that Canon's products actually meet people's needs, oh no, they don't meet his needs, and his needs are representative of most of the world. Therefore, Canon's dominance is just a contrived sham.

 

[rrcphoto]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

Disagree. In Germany all the stores I go to have prominent Sony sections by now.

Germany has always had a strong sony presence for a while now. maybe due to their connection with Zeiss.

it's kind of a outlier, not to mention it's a small part of the european market. Asia specifically Japan is a bigger per capita market, not to mention the rest of Asia seems to follow the Japan lead when you break down what's been shipping and where.

Asia in total, is around 60% of the entire mirrorless market.

 

[rrcphoto]

There is nothing on DPR. It is a bad news for Sony.

funny thing, I sent dpr an email with the links to everything yesterday at around 9am est and even got a reply that they would look at it asap. apparently it's not newsworthy.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon has a sales network that allows them to put any new camera they introduce in front of more buyers than any other brand, so instant success is almost guaranteed for a major new model. Nikon is slipping in that area, but also strong. I think that some retailers resent Sony's super strict price control policies that keep sales numbers down. They seem to be getting good exposure, but are not displayed in the most prominent locations at the pro level stores near me.

All of that is related to sales figures, its impossible to tell which came first, but as long as Canon does not introduce a lemon and keeps their reputation for customer service, they are going to be on top.

Those factors are more important than the technical differences that generally affect only 0.1% of the photographers.

That's it in a clamshell.
Make it "good enough" and keep it in their face often enough so that when they do think of buying something, that's what they remember and where they start looking.

If it were so simple, Sony, Nikon and the rest would do the same. How is Canon able to do this when those others are not? To this point, you have not provided good evidence that Canon's dominance is purely due to sales tactics.

Building up a distribution network world wide with stock, warehouses, repair facilities, customer service reps, salesmen is a gigantic investment. The smaller companies can't just drop a billion into all this and hope it works, they have to climb inch by inch. The last time I went into our small local pro camera store, they did not stock Sony, and said that Nikon was really difficult to work with and they make a profit of 5%. They do order Nikon high end products for you and have them in 3 days.

Obviously, big consumer stores like Best Buy sell lots of Sony. I don't recall ever seeing a Sony high end, or any for that matter, in Costco, thats because they do not allow discounts. Costco and Sams club sell zillions of cameras, so Sony is really missing out there. Its their sales policy rooted in the ancient past that is to blame.

Nikon and Canon offer a special package for Costco and Sams club that typically have some extras like dual lenses or a camera bag to differentiate it from the retail packages.