The Canon EOS M50 leads mirrorless camera sales in Japan for March 2019
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
The A7III is also surprising. This is a $2500 pro/prosumer camera in a list of $500-$800 entry-level movers.
It's not that surprising if you've used one
It wouldn't surprise me if it doesn't remain as high on the list, new products usually have a large amount of sales at launch. This camera was heavily marketed towards vloggers, but it's really not a good vlogging camera(lack of IBIS, even though the marketing videos used test footage on a gimbal to make it look silky smooth).
Seven years ago the EOS M launched, was blasted by critics and forum members as ‘unable to compete’. Today, the line is a smashing success. Last year, the EOS R launched, was blasted by critics and forum members as ‘unable to compete’. I wonder where we’ll be in a few years, and if Sony will still be making ILCs then.
M50 is a year old now, and still #1. Interesting.
I’m also impressed at the strong showing of the a73. I wonder what will happen with the RP. Will it cut in to its sales numbers for those who were looking for a FF mirrorless at half the price? Or will the RP take share from things like the m5, m50, A6400
Next months charts are going to be fun.
I’m also impressed at the strong showing of the a73. I wonder what will happen with the RP. Will it cut in to its sales numbers for those who were looking for a FF mirrorless at half the price? Or will the RP take share from things like the m5, m50, A6400
Next months charts are going to be fun.
I’m surprised Olympus sell reasonably well. I’d have though with so many compact APS-C and Full Frame choices available they’d be fading faster. I see OMD 10 ii still on the list . It’s a rather good camera let down by an awful handling set up. I wise they’d bring out a firmware upgrade to get rid of 90% of the options.
I don’t understand the success of the M50 myself. It must meet the needs of a lot of ordinary Japanese casual photographers. It’s a very handy size but seems like a system without a future.
I don’t understand the success of the M50 myself. It must meet the needs of a lot of ordinary Japanese casual photographers. It’s a very handy size but seems like a system without a future.
wow ... Canon 1-st place! ... and?!
Lets see this in another way:
Canon has an amount of 650$ in that list.
Sony has an amount of 4150$ and thats more than 6 times than Canon. But hey, Canon is first, is it?!
For "real" photographers these lists must be the benchmark.
Lets see this in another way:
Canon has an amount of 650$ in that list.
Sony has an amount of 4150$ and thats more than 6 times than Canon. But hey, Canon is first, is it?!
For "real" photographers these lists must be the benchmark.
Actuarilly, my children, & grandchildren will use my 1DX, 5IV, and M6, plus a boatload of L lens as ballast to bury my ashes in the Hudson. In the meantime, Canon is Saturday Night live for me as my skills try to improve, eh?
Yes, this is a great point. Sony has more profit on that list. Canon's profit margin can't be that much on the M50.
But the M50 is selling well- must be that marketing promise of 4K that really pumped those sales through the roof, eh?
You might think that, but you don't know. Higher price doesn't necessarily mean higher profit margin.
I don't know where your amount numbers are coming from and how relevant they are.
Canon has 2 cameras on this list (M50 and M100, with unit price of 629.00 and 449.00, respectively, for total of 1,078.00$).
Sony has 4 cameras on this list (A6400, A6000, A7III and A5100 with unit price of 898.00, 398.00, 1998.00 and 448.00, respectively, for total of 3,742.00$). Price quote from Adorama, as of today.
Canon's top 10 total share is 27% with 2 cameras vs. Sony's 25.3% with 4 cameras.
The data speaks for itself. From this data, one can only conclude that Canon's relatively less expensive cameras are selling better than the other brands.
The data does not indicate anything related to profit margin or total dollar value sold and any conclusion related to them will be purely speculative at best.
What are the profit margins? Specifically. You must know them, to make such a claim. Or is this merely more wisdom from your nether orifice?
These lists are data. Only a fool scoffs at data. But then being foolish is, regrettably, all too common.
Wouldn't surprise me if Sony sells off their camera division. They have a habit of selling off divisions once they become profitable and no longer fit in the long term plan. Their camera division mainly served as a demonstration for their sensors, now that Sony Semiconductor has such a big foothold and so many devices(phones) to fuel their R&D, the camera division isn't needed.
Good analysis. Still, it's just basic math that a $1,998 has a better per-unit margin in dollars than a $629 one, since most manufacturers set margins to be a percentage rather than a number. Even if one averages prices in the roughest way possible, Canon's is $539, whereas Sony's is $935,50, which leads to a considerably higher revenue for the latter.
And then, there's the boatloads of money Sony save with their laser-focused advertising through YT, and body and part recycling - designs like the A6400 and A7M3 were paid off years ago with their predecessors.
If I worked in Canon HQ, I wouldn't be happy - Sony are obviously more competitive in mirrorless than they ever were in DSLRs, and as the global camera market shifts more and more towards the former, Sony will make big inroads in market share.
I think the bigger issue for Sony is their short sighted E mount - 5 years in and they are still just trying to match existing EF lenses. Canon, in just their first year of full frame mirrorless, is showing incredible lens innovation, and much more to come, made possible by their R mount. It is just a matter of time before Ibis and dual cards, then what does Sony have over Canon? Because of this, to me, it is already game over for Sony.