Canon Inc. releases Q1 2019 financial results

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,379
1,732
adjusted strategy so timely, decisively and successfully ... that in "camera" they now are -47% vs. their own projection for 2019 and expect -14.5% revenues FY 2019 vs. previous year. Not to mention effects this will have on profitabilty.

Additional hint: potential market for ever more expensive FF cameras, lenses and "premium" G-compacts is limited. Very limited. Most potential buyers are more budget-limited and budget-minded, luckily. And intelligent enough to also not waste money on junk like EOS 4000 or Rebel/Kiss DSLRs any longer, when they can get better functionality in smaller packages as well.

SMART, Canon!
The market is contracting, and global economies are hard to predict. I suspect you’ll see the same pattern in IR releases from other ILC manufacturers

Hint: Come back when Canon has lost market share.
 

jeffa4444

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 28, 2013
1,425
81
65
Canon death is exaggerated. As is the death of photography to cell phones. Serious photographers will always want the best images they can get regardless of how they are shown, stored or commercially used.
I took some shots with an iPhone X at my last portrait shoot using continuous lights instead of strobes and my trusty 5DS at its 100 ISO setting using a EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM and a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II. Its not until you pull shots into Lightroom or Photoshop and then start working on them you realise just how limited an iPhone X file is. They are fine straight off of the cell phone and loaded to Facebook or Instagram but take a file through the same process as a 5DS file in Lightroom and then Photoshop and things fall apart quickly. Compositionally your compromised whilst shooting with the device and whilst they don't do a half bad job in colour balance you dont get the flexibility from a 5DS raw file.

Same is true for landscape or in my opinion any other form of photography. The advantages are always having a camera and instant upload to social media but in every other respect they are not a replacement for DSLRs or mirrorless full frame cameras.
 

xeppelin

I'm New Here
Apr 22, 2019
20
9
The market is contracting, and global economies are hard to predict. I suspect you’ll see the same pattern in IR releases from other ILC manufacturers
Hint: Come back when Canon has lost market share.
Yes, also looking forward to seeing Nikon's numbers. If Canon's camera business is already down like this, Nikon must be truly and well-deservedly suffering, thanks to clinging even more to marginally iterated DSLRs and not offering any crop-sensor mirrorless system at all. oO

Meanwhile Canon's often-ridiculed EOS M line has definitely helped them noticeably - especially for units sold. ALso deservedly so, since EOS M - especially with M50 and today's lens lineup, now, many years after its start - offers precisely what vast majority of crop-system users are looking for:
  1. best price/value, a.k.a. "most bang for limited bucks" - compared to FF gear and to competition (Sony, Fuji - haha)
  2. less bulk
  3. decent enough IQ
  4. good functionality and usability
Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs.

And had Canon launched their EOS RP at the time of and instead of the 6D MK. II and a sensibly-priced EOS R with sensor and performance like a 5D Mk. V along with a set of affordable and smallish RF lenses (e.g. 24-70/f/4 IS, plus a few f/1.8-2.0 primes] they would be in even better shape today.

But - apparently their multi-million market research was not as SMART as some simple COMMON SENSE. :)
 
Last edited:

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,107
524
Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs.

And had Canon launched their EOS RP at the time of and instead of the 6D MK. II and a sensibly-priced EOS R with sensor and performance like a 5D Mk. V along with a set of affordable and smallish RF lenses (e.g. 24-70/f/4 IS, plus a few f/1.8-2.0 primes] they would be in even better shape today.

But - apparently their multi-million market research was not as SMART as some simple COMMON SENSE. :)
I don't think it's called "common sense". I think it's called "wishful thinking".
 

xeppelin

I'm New Here
Apr 22, 2019
20
9
I don't think it's called "common sense". I think it's called "wishful thinking".
nope. It was plain to see even years ago for anybody with common sense. All of the options I posted above would have been fully possible for Canon. Technically and financially. No major issues at all. Sony had already demonstrated well before, how to do it.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
387
250
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Exactly. And that's one of the reasons why it's pointless to compete with smartphones in the 'connectivity' field. Connectivity and instant upload may help sports/photojournalists.
But with cameras like 5DIV or 5DS, people mostly shoot raw for further postprocessing. And connectivity doesn't help much here. Although I'd be happy if I could upload actual full sized raws to my phone and edit them in LR mobile. But I highly doubt such a feature will help the decline of ILCs.

Canon death is exaggerated. As is the death of photography to cell phones. Serious photographers will always want the best images they can get regardless of how they are shown, stored or commercially used.
I took some shots with an iPhone X at my last portrait shoot using continuous lights instead of strobes and my trusty 5DS at its 100 ISO setting using a EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM and a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II. Its not until you pull shots into Lightroom or Photoshop and then start working on them you realise just how limited an iPhone X file is. They are fine straight off of the cell phone and loaded to Facebook or Instagram but take a file through the same process as a 5DS file in Lightroom and then Photoshop and things fall apart quickly. Compositionally your compromised whilst shooting with the device and whilst they don't do a half bad job in colour balance you dont get the flexibility from a 5DS raw file.

Same is true for landscape or in my opinion any other form of photography. The advantages are always having a camera and instant upload to social media but in every other respect they are not a replacement for DSLRs or mirrorless full frame cameras.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,107
524
nope. It was plain to see even years ago for anybody with common sense.
Actually, anybody with common sense should be skeptical about it right now.

All of the options I posted above would have been fully possible for Canon. Technically and financially.
That wasn't your claim. Your claim was "they would be in even better shape today". Which is wishful thinking.

No major issues at all.
You are not doing any business that involves shipping physical objects, aren't you?
 

preppyak

EOS 6D MK II
Oct 18, 2011
977
50
Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs.
The problem with this theory is that EF-M isnt compatible with RF. So, an M50 user who wants to upgrade is suddenly trapped with equipment whose value has dropped significantly since purchasing (down >20% since launch 1 year ago), and whose pathway to full-frame is actually cheaper to go to Sony if they want native lenses.

Sticking to their DSLR lineup is what kept a lot of users in the EF mount business, which kept their user base high enough to hope people transition to the R or RP. Its a declining market from there, but at least people see a cheaper upgrade path to an RP right now than an A7III.
 

xeppelin

I'm New Here
Apr 22, 2019
20
9
So, an M50 user who wants to upgrade is suddenly trapped with equipment whose value has dropped significantly since purchasing (down >20% since launch 1 year ago),
People with sufficient disposable income to realistically think about "upgrading to FF" can easily handle a "dramatic" loss of 20% on a "total investment" of 600 - 1000 USD [M50 + 1 or 2 lenses]. Total non issue in real life. When those folks "go FF", they just keep their EOS M system as small/light secondary system or they sell it or give it to their kids/friends. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,368
625
I always find it interesting to read comments from users telling a large company how to run their business. They may be right, but why aren't they billionaires with their own companies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee and ethanz

xeppelin

I'm New Here
Apr 22, 2019
20
9
You are not doing any business that involves shipping physical objects, aren't you?
nope. And if I did on a global scale, then - unlike SMART Canon - I would not use 3 different sub-brands/product designators for the same physical product [eg Rebel/Kiss/xxxD]. And I would put all communication functionality on modules that can be slotted into an industry standard card slot. Just those 2 simple, common sense measures would dramatically reduce number of SKUs, significantly reduce marketing expense, strengthen (sub-) brand recognition and value, make product & FCC certifications for different markets/regulations much simpler and faster and also make physical distribution, warehousing and any other logistics processes a lot easier and less costly.

But, SMART Canon knows better. Right?
 

xeppelin

I'm New Here
Apr 22, 2019
20
9
I always find it interesting to read comments from users telling a large company how to run their business. They may be right, but why aren't they billionaires with their own companies?
Maybe because there are significant entry barriers to start-up a "REALLY RIGHT" imaging products company. Or because they are billionaires already, who knows? :)

Or, more generically: you don't have to be a (good) cook youself to recognize whether a meal is good or not. :)
 

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
424
235
Frankfurt, Germany
Canon is relying more heavily on the enthusiast market to maintain market sales as compact DSLRs (Rebels) and point and shoots decline in sales. However, it's the lower end of the product line (RP) that is making the money. No surprises here, just confirmation of what most of us already knew.
I think we are returning to times like those back when SLRs and ILC rangefinders defined a nuch smaller enthusiast's & pro market. It had grown unusually big with digital compacts and low level DSLRs when everybody went digital 10-15 years back. The classic point- and shoot-market has now turned into the smartphone market. Btw high-end smartphones deliver so good images that it's really getting harder to compete for the classic camera industry. I expect that we are going to see some more company fusions like the takeover of the Pentax camera division by Ricoh back in 2011.
 

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
424
235
Frankfurt, Germany
Don't expect a lot of APS-C DSLR's, they are not selling. That is probably why there will be no 7D MK III, it would lose a ton of money. Canon is pushing Mirrorless, and Full Frame.
Not sure about that, since the 7D is a high-end APS-C line and addresses enthusiasts anyway. I agree regarding the Rebel sort of mainstream market. Looking at those sales figures I expect Canon to replace cheap DSLRs by mirrorless cameras now very quickly. It is also a logical development from on the production side, since ML cameras can be made mechanically less complex than mirror slappers. In particular when electronic global shutters are good enough ML cameras can be quite simple: sensor, electronics, EVF and a body with all interfaces needed, no mirror, no mechanical shutter. Instead of including an electromechanical IBIS Canon could go for electronic IS like in better smartphones. Electronics is much cheaper to implement in a production line than high precision mechanical parts.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
424
235
Frankfurt, Germany
My impression is that the Canon management acts with a wise mix of caution and risk in times of a shrinking camera market. The looming success of the RP, if it develops further like that, seems to indicate that they understand the market quite well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,107
524
It shows:

And if I did on a global scale, then - unlike SMART Canon - I would not use 3 different sub-brands/product designators for the same physical product [eg Rebel/Kiss/xxxD]. And I would put all communication functionality on modules that can be slotted into an industry standard card slot. Just those 2 simple, common sense measures would dramatically reduce number of SKUs, significantly reduce marketing expense, strengthen (sub-) brand recognition and value, make product & FCC certifications for different markets/regulations much simpler and faster and also make physical distribution, warehousing and any other logistics processes a lot easier and less costly.

But, SMART Canon knows better. Right?
Right.
 

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
424
235
Frankfurt, Germany
Agree, hopefully Canon can maintain the physics advantage with their larger sensors, but maybe they'll have to eventually partner with a mobile maker to increase their computational photography abilities - Samsung or Huawei come to mind, someone big enough to really help.
That's not so easy. Samsung has its own camera section which is declining and doesn't seem to profit from their Galaxy smartphones. Smartphone cameras are technically a very different thing. In fact, Leica now co-operates with Huawei, but I guess it is more a sort of allowing Huawei to use Leica as a luxury brand. The designs and the materials used for those small smartphone camera lenses is a completely different world than a classic Summilux or Noctilux lens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDS

justaCanonuser

Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Feb 12, 2014
424
235
Frankfurt, Germany
My 50c on APS-C: I think the market of 4000D, 2000D, 250D, 800D, 80D and 7D2 is too segmented and now outdated. When I started, the entry solution was the 350D. Back to the past:
MILC world: APSC and FF is the future, all segment, all models
DSLR:
APS-C: 3 models like 850D, 90D and 7D3.
Full frame: I imagine 5D5 and 1dx3, no others.
Maybe we will not see any 850D since the M50 seems to sell quite well, but otherwise I agree with your list. There is another hint that APS-C DSLRs are the first ones to fade away: the recent posts by CR about new lens patents filed by Canon does not show any new EF-S lenses (if I didn't miss one), only EF and of course RF lenses.
 

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Why do people think that the addition of one format (EOS-R) automatically requires that another format must be phased out? A key fact highlighted at the beginning of this thread is that Canon currently hold 50% of the interchangeable lens camera market. As the overall market shrinks, there will likely be companies that drop out or consolidate their lines. That seems like an opportunity for the dominant player in the market to scoop up even more market share.

Only Canon knows how many units they need to sell be keep a line profitable, but I suspect it is fewer than most people here think. APS-C and full frame DSLRs, Mirrorless APS-C and Full Frame -- four formats -- it's entirely possible Canon will keep all four going while they strive for 80-90% of the market.