Why does Canon release 17 new powershot cameras per YEAR?

[Radiating]

Seriously, nobody needs that many low quality PS cameras that make no changes to image quality at all. Their pro cameras get 2 body releases per year, and their amateur DSLR gets a yearly refresh.

Can anyone explain this? Is it just a to trick consumers into thinking a largleystagnant technology is improving with more bloated features that do nothing?

Feel free to discuss.

 

[scrup]

It's all marketing and the fact that canon is prolonging the life of its technology they have.

Compacts are still selling and no one wants to buy an older model when the competitors are releasing new features. For the average Jane, they are not going into detail about the technical features. They will read a few reviews, see how many stars and ask a few friends who swear by Canon gear.

New models also mean Canon can charge higher prices. Compacts will rise and fall like the ipod.

 

[deleteme]

Seriously, nobody needs that many low quality PS cameras that make no changes to image quality at all. Their pro cameras get 2 body releases per year, and their amateur DSLR gets a yearly refresh.

We tend to get lost in our own little worlds where our interests seem to be the only ones that count.
Canon sells boatloads of cameras to millions of people who could not care less about what a photo enthusiast feels is important.
The most important thing to us about those sales is that it helps create a company with enough size to actually fund an R&D program that can give us products like a 1DX that can actually be purchased at a believable price due to the economies of scale.

I am sure Phase One would love to have the volumes and cash flow that Canon has to fund R&D that is not dependent on companies that may or may not be in business in the near future.

 

[HawkeyeOC]

Seriously, nobody needs that many low quality PS cameras that make no changes to image quality at all. Their pro cameras get 2 body releases per year, and their amateur DSLR gets a yearly refresh.

We tend to get lost in our own little worlds where our interests seem to be the only ones that count.
Canon sells boatloads of cameras to millions of people who could not care less about what a photo enthusiast feels is important.
The most important thing to us about those sales is that it helps create a company with enough size to actually fund an R&D program that can give us products like a 1DX that can actually be purchased at a believable price due to the economies of scale.

I am sure Phase One would love to have the volumes and cash flow that Canon has to fund R&D that is not dependent on companies that may or may not be in business in the near future.

This is very true. I think we are very fortunate that Canon has something for everyone in its lineup. Not everyone is a professional (me) and a 1DX or even a 5D3 would be completely overkill for a great many people.
There is an entire generation getting hooked on smartphone cameras (not me) that probably thinks the exact opposite of the original poster. Why spend thousands on pro equipment when I get decent pictures from my iPhone for what I need?
Go into the iPhone forums and read about it. There are people writing this stuff
The low end P&S market is actually shrinking, but its going to sell the most. Whats the most popular Canon DSLR? The Rebel series right? A camera and lense system worth thousands will probably be bought by the minority that make a living off of it or know how to use it properly.

 

[Quasimodo]

Seriously, nobody needs that many low quality PS cameras that make no changes to image quality at all. Their pro cameras get 2 body releases per year, and their amateur DSLR gets a yearly refresh.

We tend to get lost in our own little worlds where our interests seem to be the only ones that count.
Canon sells boatloads of cameras to millions of people who could not care less about what a photo enthusiast feels is important.
The most important thing to us about those sales is that it helps create a company with enough size to actually fund an R&D program that can give us products like a 1DX that can actually be purchased at a believable price due to the economies of scale.

I am sure Phase One would love to have the volumes and cash flow that Canon has to fund R&D that is not dependent on companies that may or may not be in business in the near future.

This is very true. I think we are very fortunate that Canon has something for everyone in its lineup. Not everyone is a professional (me) and a 1DX or even a 5D3 would be completely overkill for a great many people.
There is an entire generation getting hooked on smartphone cameras (not me) that probably thinks the exact opposite of the original poster. Why spend thousands on pro equipment when I get decent pictures from my iPhone for what I need?
Go into the iPhone forums and read about it. There are people writing this stuff
The low end P&S market is actually shrinking, but its going to sell the most. Whats the most popular Canon DSLR? The Rebel series right? A camera and lense system worth thousands will probably be bought by the minority that make a living off of it or know how to use it properly.

I think you both make a fair and important point!

My professional background is marketing, and my thoughts here may be tainted by that fact.

Compactcameras is a product category that is in decline and have been so for several years. They face immense competition by alternatives like smartphones, ipads with photocapabilities and others. The powershot S 110 with their ability to post online directly is a small step in a direction of meeting the new digital social media needs. However, this poses an internal challenges to Canon, as one of their other big areas are print. (the three big business areas are Camera CIG, Print, and Medical imaging equipment and telescope imaging), as fewer people on, what we in here call, the lower end tend to print pictures anymore, and instead post them directly on the web.

As far as you question goes, I believe that the reasoning lies much more in internal logic than a logic geared towards consumers. I think that they produce so many lines, not as a evolutionary result based on the demand by their consumers, but more like an answer to different large outlet chains. There is an increasing demand (and this goes for print too) by the chains, like Best Buy, Staples, Mediamarkt and others for their exclusive versions of the different camerabrands. Thus, Best Buy can be the only one that offers a spesific Canon camera, while Mediamarkt runs another camera version from Canon that they sell exclusively. In my inept roundabout way, I am trying to say that I believe that this (to your question) has less to do about consumers, but more to do about making it attractive for the large and powerful chains to sell Canon gear.

G.

 

[MrFotoFool]

While I see the need for compact cameras, it does seem like there are way too many models. Canon is guilty of this but so are other brands. Perhaps Quasimodo is correct, the high number is to appease different sellers.

I also think - no I KNOW - they have way too many features/settings. I teach beginning digital camera classes at a photo lab and no one I have met in seven years of classes will ever need or want to use all those features. Almost every class I teach, someone has a new scene mode I have not seen before. I honestly think if someone made a true point-and-shoot with high quality and NO menu options, NO video, just a shutter button and flash on/off and playback button, they would sell boatloads. If it had an optical viewfinder, I would probably use it myself.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

They sell far more power shot cameras as DSLR's. That might be the reason. Dollar wise, they GET more dollars from DSLR's, but they sell far more Power shots.
Its also a matter of hogging shelf space in the big box stores. When a company that makes fewer models,their cameras tend to get lost among the many Canon models, buyers are then much more likely to buy Canon.
Why do bread companies make hundreds of different brands with the same bread inside ... same reason, marketing! And... It works!!

 

[Meh]

They sell far more power shot cameras as DSLR's. That might be the reason. Dollar wise, they GET more dollars from DSLR's, but they sell far more Power shots.
Its also a matter of hogging shelf space in the big box stores. When a company that makes fewer models,their cameras tend to get lost among the many Canon models, buyers are then much more likely to buy Canon.
Why do bread companies make hundreds of different brands with the same bread inside ... same reason, marketing! And... It works!!

Yep, it does! Additionally in the P&S market they are selling to a very broad range of consumers who have varied tastes and budgets. Some want a simple camera, some want features. Some want the ones designed to look a bit like DSLRs, others like the thin models. Some want pink. None of them know how big the sensor is.

 

[distant.star]

.
Mostly, as already noted, for essential market coverage. Fundamentally for two reasons, I believe:

1. Because they just can.

2. Because they have to.

They both can and have to because they develop technology that gets put into their high end equipment. Some of what is in the 1Dx today will eventually trickle down and be in a $100 P&S in a few years (if the market holds together that long). Last month I bought a clearance P&S (A1200) from the refurb shop for $35. It has a Digic 4 processor, good metering and reasonable AF. And, for the poster who said he'd buy one with an optical VF, this one has it. The VF is tiny and unsophisticated, but it's a great option to have in some situations. They can do it, so they do.

Now, imagine (difficult as it may be for some of the affluent posters here) that you have a severely limited budget and you're really interested in photography. You'd love a 1Dx, but the $200 you have won't even get you into down payment land (if you could even get credit!). Say you're 18 and in college and working a PT job and know that phone cameras don't really cut it. Canon has this whole vast array of cameras that get you immersed in "shopping." You're learning features, comparing capabilities, etc. You find a lot of these cameras can do what you want -- the stuff the phone cameras can't do.

Here's an example of a woman I know in a situation where she can only afford that A1200 I mentioned. This is the kind of work she can turn out with it because she is interested in photography and has great inherent ability:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/vintagevix/8427228784/#in/pool-1671753@N24

Frankly, I'd be proud to call that my picture with my whole 5D3 and RAW and LR, etc. She can do it with a minimally manipulated JPG out of camera -- probably Canon's cheapest P&S.

This woman aspires to better equipment to fulfill her vision -- and Canon has a lineup to take her as far as her money can ever take her. Maybe, if Canon's cheapest was $200, she may not have been able to afford to see how good she can be. There has to be a $100 camera. And there has to be a $150 camera. And there has to be a $200 camera. And some have to have long zooms and some have to have short zooms and some need to be "ruggedized," and some have to be.... This is why they must do it.

So, Canon develops leading edge technologies they can sell at a premium to demanding professionals (who can afford it). And eventually, some of this tech trickles down to lower levels where it can provide funding for development of more leading edge technologies. This is why the can do it.

Anyway, I think that's a piece of it.

 

[Meh]

Now, imagine (difficult as it may be for some of the affluent posters here) that you have a severely limited budget

Hey, who you callin' affluent... take that back!

 

[Hillsilly]

While hogging shelf space (as mentioned above) is probably the driving motive, as long as they are adding new features and capabilities, I say good on them. For example, the new-ish SX50 HS looks quite interesting. I'm tempted to pick one up myself.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

While hogging shelf space (as mentioned above) is probably the driving motive, as long as they are adding new features and capabilities, I say good on them. For example, the new-ish SX50 HS looks quite interesting. I'm tempted to pick one up myself.

Ditto...

 

[Marsu42]

Can anyone explain this? Is it just a to trick consumers into thinking a largleystagnant technology is improving with more bloated features that do nothing?

Afaik: Yes, as simple as that, the human psyche is derived from apes living on trees.

Consumers in this budget segment when not spending perceived "lots" of money either will show strong reactions to either signs "special offer"/"sale" (I'm getting part of it for free") or "new" ("It's much better now, so I'm getting better value for free"). And medical research shows that "free" creates a neural response just like a small dose of opium, so "shopping addict" means exactly that. It's just like discovering a large ripe fruit up on the trees

 

[alan_k]

I don't know the details of this, but there are psychological studies showing the benefits of offering multiple items at different price points. You need at least 3- a low end option, something in the middle, and a most expensive option. Consumers like to go for the middle option- by rejecting the most expensive option, they can justify passing up the cheapest option for the middle option even if the cheapest option is objectively the best deal.

Obviously this doesn't explain the full proliferation of Canon P&S, I think the points about competing for shelf space make a lot of sense. It's kind of like political ads- sure most are superfluous, but you can't know which ones, and you can't risk not putting them out there.

 

[Don Haines]

Seriously, nobody needs that many low quality PS cameras that make no changes to image quality at all. Their pro cameras get 2 body releases per year, and their amateur DSLR gets a yearly refresh.

Yes, but next year they are releasing the 5D4, through to the 5D20...

 

[Canon-F1]

Because Canon can....

And when you look at other P&S manufacturer.. it´s not different there.

Or look at Mobile Phones.
98% don´t really need the latest features but everyone wants them.

 

[paul13walnut5]

Some of the models are the actually the same camera, but sold via different retailers, ixus 125 vs ixus 127 for example? The shops that stock the 'exclusive' model with free case.

My Powershot SX was the exact same as the model up but without GPS. It lives in my glovebox. I'm probably going to buy a very cheap original rebel for my holidays this year, as the compacts just don't cut it. Don't want to take anything worth more than £250 as thats my upper holiday insurance limit.

 

[Sella174]

Another reason might be that P&S cameras are single production runs only, with many parts outsourced.

 

[Dylan777]

Canon's philosophy " if you build it, they buy it".

I'm glad EOS-M didn't do well. Let see what Canon can do with their next mirrorless cameras.

 

[hamada]

Canon's philosophy " if you build it, they buy it".

I'm glad EOS-M didn't do well. Let see what Canon can do with their next mirrorless cameras.

what does "not well" means?

when canons masaya maeda says a camera does not sell well (or as expected) then pentax or ricoh would still be very happy with the sales numbers.

i read that at least in japan the EOS M was for some time in the top 5 of the most sold mirrorless cameras. BNC ranking = 9.2% market share.

to know what "well" really means we need some hard numbers.