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

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
309
67
$3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars

$3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.

The average of the two is $3,863 which is $36 less than the introductory price of the R5.

Tell me again how the price went up $400 when adjusted for inflation?
Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.
 

Colorado

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 16, 2013
53
152
Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.
Sensor? What are the R/D costs on a new 45MP sensor with higher DR compared to reusing the existing 1DX3 sensor? (I don't know, just asking.)
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,145
2,029
The R5 advanced user guide (page 904) states what Vxx speed is needed for different video formats. 10 bit 8K IPB needs V90 for instance (minimum 90MB/s) with the USH-II half duplex max speed of ~300MB/s
The strange part of all this is that the UHS-II spec was released in 2011, 2016 was UHS-III(~600MB/s) and SD express in 2017 covering gigabit speeds and 2020 now up to 4GB/s. UHS-II cards are pretty new in the market. Who knows when SD Express might turn up in a local store near you.

I recall reading somewhere that 340MBps were needed for some of the modes. That's way above the minimum possible meaning of V90.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,145
2,029
The numbers from Nikkei don't add up, see Thom Hogans post

He says that two categories were reported in 2018, but only one combined one in 2019. He then "puts the two numbers together" to get what he thinks are equivalent (to 2019 methodology) numbers.

But how did he put them together? He doesn't say, so I have no way of knowing if he did it right. If Xenon cameras (to make up a fictitious example to illustrate) had 3 percent of the market share in ILC and 9 percent in compact, you can't just simply average them and say Xenon did 6 percent in 2018; perhaps compact is 90 percent of the combined market and you should get 8.4% (9 x .9 + 3 x .1) as your answer, or maybe it's the other way around and your answer should be 9 x .1 + 3 x .9 = 3.6%.

So since I don't know how HE put the numbers together, and I don't know how Nikkei did it, I can't evaluate his claim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simeyesky

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
704
461
Thom ?Hogan, today, on his site, makes a point these numbers make no sense. I tend to agree. Canon’s share was 51% last year, and now it’s in the mid 40s, after having gone up? Somehow, the numbers are being counted differently than before, which means we can’t trust what they mean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andreasb

landon

EOS 90D
Jul 26, 2020
122
160
Sorry Off Topic. Anyone here has got Photoshop?
Can you do me favour? Test this out for me.

- Open any image in Photoshop
- Draw any shape -- BUT leave it blank. No line, No border.
- Exit and Save.
- Open the .psd file.

Do you get an error that you can't open the file? (I've never had this happen to me before. Thanks)
 

Attachments

  • PhotoshopTrialing.jpg
    PhotoshopTrialing.jpg
    53.3 KB · Views: 115
  • PhotoshopTriala.jpg
    PhotoshopTriala.jpg
    15.8 KB · Views: 113

AEWest

EOS RP
Jan 30, 2020
249
311
This is nonsense. Even MFT is far beyond smartphone quality. MFT also offers some pretty unique glass. The Olympus camera division is going under because they put all of their eggs in the MFT basket in a market that says "FF is better no matter what", which is also more nonsense. The OM-D E-M1 Mark III, for example, is one of the best camera bodies on the market. It has better weather sealing and IBIS than any other manufacturer at a fraction of the weight. If I was shooting in harsh conditions I'd pick that body over any FF. In short, Olympus lost the marketing war. It wouldn't have hurt to put out an APS-C body or two either.
Olympus is the very best camera that nobody buys.
 

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
309
67
Sensor? What are the R/D costs on a new 45MP sensor with higher DR compared to reusing the existing 1DX3 sensor? (I don't know, just asking.)
That depends on how they cost it. I suspect that the cost is about the same for the R5 sensor as it is for the R6. I think that they are the same generation, same fab line etc.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,145
2,029
That depends on how they cost it. I suspect that the cost is about the same for the R5 sensor as it is for the R6. I think that they are the same generation, same fab line etc.

The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond its true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.

But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the most significant and most costly difference between the two models.
 
Last edited:

Colorado

EOS M6 Mark II
Dec 16, 2013
53
152
The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond it's true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.

But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the most significant and most costly difference between the two models.
I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,376
1,246
I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.
That’s factually incorrect sorry. The US$3750-4000 Price range was ”predicted” by a large number of forum members who understood the market dynamics at the time. myself included @ $3,750 :)
 

privatebydesign

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,711
4,282
I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.

That’s factually incorrect sorry. The US$3750-4000 Price range was ”predicted” by a large number of forum members who understood the market dynamics at the time. myself included @ $3,750 :)
Yes I had posted my guess at $3,995 a while ago.
 

Eclipsed

EOS R5, "Hefty Fifty" and more.
Apr 30, 2020
143
147
Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.

Then there’s the 900 megapixels per second of the R5...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

simeyesky

A grain of salt in the dessert
Feb 2, 2016
3
0
He says that two categories were reported in 2018, but only one combined one in 2019. He then "puts the two numbers together" to get what he thinks are equivalent (to 2019 methodology) numbers.

But how did he put them together? He doesn't say, so I have no way of knowing if he did it right. If Xenon cameras (to make up a fictitious example to illustrate) had 3 percent of the market share in ILC and 9 percent in compact, you can't just simply average them and say Xenon did 6 percent in 2018; perhaps compact is 90 percent of the combined market and you should get 8.4% (9 x .9 + 3 x .1) as your answer, or maybe it's the other way around and your answer should be 9 x .1 + 3 x .9 = 3.6%.

So since I don't know how HE put the numbers together, and I don't know how Nikkei did it, I can't evaluate his claim.

What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
704
461
What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%
I’m not so sure. We do know that the numbers this year are being calculated differently, so they bear little relation to last year’s. Thom is correct. He’s just using the numbers presented to everybody. He isn’t using his own, as you seem to be saying, for some reason.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,145
2,029
What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%

So it would seem that the prior numbers were of the market share among the top three, whereas this year's numbers pull in additional manufactures (including some below the top five that are listed).

That could explain a lot of discrepancies right there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

David Hull

EOS RP
Jun 28, 2012
309
67
The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond its true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.

But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the most significant and most costly difference between the two models.
OK, how is the sensor cost different? The die for each is the same size, I am assuming that they are both made on the same fab line, in the same process node, etc. In which the cost won't be much different. Semiconductor cost is determined by the finished cost of the wafer divided by how many chips you get off of it (with adders for packaging, test etc.). So, if the finished cost of a wafer is $2500 and the yield is 25 chips then the cost per chip is $100 whether is has 25 MP or 50 MP. What you charge for it is a different story.

I still maintain that an EOS R6 and an EOS R5 are almost identical with a few differences (some of which I listed). I don't think there is a $1000 difference. That doesn't stop them from pricing it that way -- assuming that the customers will pay it and the competition doesn't come along offering something as good for a lower price. This appears to be what happened to the EOS R. I am guessing that there is room to move in the R6 as well.

Here are a couple different questions: Would they have priced it higher if the higher definition video modes actually worked well? Also, what is the use case for the video as it is? If you can only shoot for 20 minutes (and even that is qualified), after which you have to power the thing down and let it cool for 2 hours (?), in what situation is that actually usable? Can you still shoot stills if it has overheated like that?
 
<-- start Taboola -->