2019 global camera market share numbers are out, Canon leads the way

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,594
1,913
Hamburg, Germany
This is nonsense. Even MFT is far beyond smartphone quality. MFT also offers some pretty unique glass.
Just out of curiosity, would you mind naming some of these unique lenses?

For a few years now, this has been the oft-repeated mantra on the internet "MFT is not distinct enough from smartphones." [...] Having owned cameras in MFT, APS-C and FF formats I can say from experience that their is so little difference between these formats, that all the other internet buzz proclaiming that one system is far superior or another system is dead is complete rubbish. [...] So, I'm not trying to pick on you. You are just repeating the same bullcrap that is circulating on the internet. It's so easy to do.
Don't you guys go in a bit too deep here? I did not write that Smartphones produce similar image quality than MFT or that the shortfalls of MFT mean it will go away. Nor am I repeating anyone here.

Read what I said:

"MFT being a format that is not distinct enough from smartphone quality to some may be part of it"

Granted, quality is a bit to vague. I meant the quality of the overall experience, not just specifically image quality.

I mainly meant to point out that there is a large portion of buyers that are content with modern smartphones and that may have something to do with the fate of Olympus. The first part of that sentence is just a fact. The second is speculation on my part, but does not say what you implied I'm saying. You can offer far superior image quality and still have people who don't see sufficient value to go from something that fits into every pocket and is always with you to something that only fits into some pockets and therefore is with you only sometimes. At the end of the day, these devices all take pictures. As the number of overall sales shows, that is all it takes for a large chunk of people. They don't perceive enough value for them personally to justify the cost and carry the gear associated with larger systems.

Once you get into the people who do see this value, they may not care about size and weight all that much. This shrinking of the market affects all systems, but since MFT is explicitly about size and weight, I believe the system is indeed facing a steeper uphill battle as it operates in the narrower realm of customers that care about size and weight, but not so much that they are willing to accept the tradeoffs in image quality, usability and flexibility that using a smartphone would entail.

There are niches in each market. As long as the companies serving them know their customers well and have the means to serve them in a sustainable manner, nobody has to go away. But on the other hand, we see Canon in the offense for a change, rounding out the RF system into all directions. And there are lots of rumors that EF-M will finally see some love as well. I doubt that will leave the market share figures unchanged.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten

Gino_FOTO

Right in the middle of exposure triangle.
Aug 19, 2018
18
17
The suffering of this industry is just like oppressing on board of the sinking Titanic, some passengers hopefully survive, but no one can escape without some sort of trauma.
 
Last edited:

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,842
989
UK
www.flickr.com
What we used to have was a few sources of information, but almost all of them were informed (such as photo magazines or people working in actual camera stores - which at least in my experience, were knowledgeable and experienced.) What we have now is the widest range of mis-information and ill informed opinion that the world has ever seen. Estimates by companies that look into this sort of thing, say that somewhere between 20-40% of reviews on the internet may be fake or compensated. We have seen fairly well organized internet reviews and Sony fanboy campaigns on forums such as this one for years.

My advice would be for anyone interested in photo equipment to stay away from the internet. Unless you have a lot of experience and time spent, you will have no clue who to trust and who is a phony at best and a propogandist at worst.

Determining the reliability of sources of intormation is a critical skill, now more than ever. Eschewing the largest source of knowledge because it can be challenging is hardly a viable approach, and taking advice on trust (simply because it's coming from more traditional sources, like a salesperson in a shop, or a magazine) isn't something I would recommend.
 

Woody

EOS R
Jul 20, 2010
1,157
82
I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji. :cry:
 

jam05

EOS RP
Mar 12, 2019
400
225
I wonder about Fuji. Does their 4.7% cut give their shareholders a sufficient return on their investment to keep them in the game long term?
I don't pretend to know -- maybe the numbers are great. But in comparison, Nikon looks fantastic (based on this single metric.)
Fuji reorganized nearly 10 years ago. Cameras are an afterthought.
 

jam05

EOS RP
Mar 12, 2019
400
225
Canon 45.4% (+ 2.4)
Sony 20.2% (+ 0.9)
Nikon 18.6% (- 1.6)
Fujifilm Holdings 4.7% (- 0.4)
Panasonic 4.7% (0.0 )

Adding these numbers up, the top five have 93.6 percent of the market. The top five grew a total of 1.3 percent. Canon's growth was 0.4 percentage points greater than the losses by Nikon and Fujifilm combined, so it has to have got some numbers from people below the top five.
Canon did not get its gains from others losses but from their non gains. From what they failed to gain. Losses went to smartohone sales.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrFotoFool

geffy

EOS 90D
Jun 24, 2019
110
74
when my donkey died we put a nikon in the coffin, when the duck goes it could well be a canon because that rx10 is going nowhere but in my coffin
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,245
2,117
Canon did not get its gains from others losses but from their non gains. From what they failed to gain. Losses went to smartohone sales.

True, Canon likely lost TOTAL sales.

But you couldn't know that from these numbers which are market share, they are the percentages of the shrinking pie. So Canon has gained market share at the expense of others, including companies not in the top five.
 
  • Like
Reactions: scyrene

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
312
70
I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic.

Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire."

As I've tried to explain before, it's not the reality that matters. It's the perception And, Canon does not want anything that damages their carefully cultivated image. People do buy based on the brand they trust the most, but it is very easy to lose that trust, especially in today's internet age.

We don't know what if any damage the R5's negative publicity has done to Canon. But, we shouldn't just write it off because we don't think it is significant.
Eventually, the bru ha-ha will die down and stop, just like it did with horrible dynamic range and the horrible banding and all the other over hyped so-called "problems" that Canon cameras have supposedly had over the years. For many people the R5 and R6 are the stills cameras they always wanted Canon to make.
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,766
2,291
Alberta, Canada
Interesting perspective. I guess I'm just old and more out of touch than I thought.

If I'm looking for a camera, I come to sites like this and maybe POTN and read, read, and read some more.

Then I go to the library (in this case RB Digital) and read every photography magazine I can find with the subject that I'm researching.

Then I'll go to sites like Jan Wegener and Gordon Laing and see what they have to say. In my opinion they are two 'reviewers' that don't buy into the drama and just give their opinion and review.

Then I'll go to the seller's sites and read reviews and see what people are talking about. In many cases just one sentence or two of a review is enough to let me know if the person has a point or is just more ZOMG! Sometimes you can read ten words and you'll know the person has no idea what they're talking about and that their one-star rating is a result of them just not knowing what they're doing.

I do agree with you. People these days often get their 'news' from the wrong places and listen to a friend of a friend of a friend without doing any homework on their own. One trip to Reddit will quickly show you how bad it is. It's sad, but that's where we are.

I doubt I'll live long enough to do all that!

Jack
 

woodman411

EOS 90D
Aug 1, 2017
150
191
USA
I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji. :cry:

As many have commented on before, the writing was on the wall for Nikon as soon as they ceded their top product sensors to Sony. The 3 foundation legs of a camera company: sensors, lenses, and autofocus; lose one of them, and it's over. This is also the reason why Canon will not lose to Sony, because Sony chose to compromise their e-mount for crop lens compatibility, at the expense of innovation. The game-changing RF lenses, though pricey, show the full potential of a proper mirrorless mount, while Sony will continue to be hobbled with their e-mount decision for years to come.
 
Last edited:

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,909
3,122
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
For many people the R5 and R6 are the stills cameras they always wanted Canon to make.
I agree with that, and may even be in that category myself, although "always wanted" is a bit of a stretch.

Eventually, the bru ha-ha will die down and stop, just like it did with horrible dynamic range and the horrible banding and all the other over hyped so-called "problems" that Canon cameras have supposedly had over the years.

Those died down because Canon significantly improved its sensors on both fronts. They didn't just hunker down and hope the complaints would go away, which is what some people on this forum are advocating, with their "The R5 is perfect for my purposes, so all complaints are ridiculous" attitude.

My point, which several folks on this forum don't seem to get, is that bad publicity can affect more than the sales of a particular model. It contributes to an overall perception of a brand, which is why Canon is very protective of its reputation and ultimately addresses the concerns. The fact that a few sellers on eBay are gouging naive R5 buyers during a global pandemic that has impacted supplies is evidence of nothing except that fools and con men are born every minute.

I am confident that Canon is very aware of the damage that the negative publicity has done to their reputation and if they can make post-production fixes to address some of the overheating issues, they will do that.

The forum experts seem to be of a mind that Canon should just circle the wagons and hope everything goes away. I'm confident that Canon's management is smarter than they are and I'm relieved by that.
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
680
563
www.flickr.com
I know it was a humorous reply but...

No they can't there are printer identifiers on every piece of paper out of a high end printer so investigators know where it came from, and most printing software won't allow you to print copies of paper money anyway.
Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
680
563
www.flickr.com
I'd really like to know who Nikon uses. I worked for a food company here in the US. We got a new CEO and he came from a different food company (Pepsi Co.). Upon arrival, he had all of his former company's products removed from our buildings - No pepsi in the cafeteria, none of their brands of chips in the vending machines, etc. The corporate world can be a petty place.
Kudos for Canon to test Sony CFe cards and approve them for use in 1DXiii and R5
 

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
312
70
I agree with that, and may even be in that category myself, although "always wanted" is a bit of a stretch.



Those died down because Canon significantly improved its sensors on both fronts. They didn't just hunker down and hope the complaints would go away, which is what some people on this forum are advocating, with their "The R5 is perfect for my purposes, so all complaints are ridiculous" attitude.

My point, which several folks on this forum don't seem to get, is that bad publicity can affect more than the sales of a particular model. It contributes to an overall perception of a brand, which is why Canon is very protective of its reputation and ultimately addresses the concerns. The fact that a few sellers on eBay are gouging naive R5 buyers during a global pandemic that has impacted supplies is evidence of nothing except that fools and con men are born every minute.

I am confident that Canon is very aware of the damage that the negative publicity has done to their reputation and if they can make post-production fixes to address some of the overheating issues, they will do that.

The forum experts seem to be of a mind that Canon should just circle the wagons and hope everything goes away. I'm confident that Canon's management is smarter than they are and I'm relieved by that.
Well, I guess Canon had a number of choices here.

1. They could have left out the offending modes and then everyone would been whining about the "Cripple Hammer" saying that they had an 8k capable camera but they crippled the camera, saving that feature for their expensive video line never knowing that there was a good reason that they left those modes out.

2. They Could have put in a fan or some sort of heat-pipe based passive cooling making the camera larger, heavier, with less weather sealing and shorter battery life which would tick off their stills users (like myself) who have no real interest in video.

3. They could take the path that they did and enable all the video possibilities even though they incur some limitations as a result of their efforts to achieve some of the other design goals for the device.

As for me, I would have been pretty happy with #1, but I wouldn't have been too happy paying $3900 for it. As for the "always wanted" part, people in Canon forums have been bellyaching about banding, 1 stop less DR, no IBIS, one card slot and not enough resolution for ages. This thing checks off all those boxes (IMO, anyway). However, the 5D series has always been priced in the $3300 to $3500 range. It looks like they tacked on another $400 for their perception of the value of the HD video (that really doesn't work well). I'll be curious how long the market supports that.
 
<-- start Taboola -->