Are high end DSLRs officially dead now?

[Loswr]

You are abusing math to support your conclusions.

Nothing unusual there...some people on this forum will abuse math, logic, common sense, and facts to support their personal opinion. They usually just end up looking foolish, but obviously that’s not a deterrent.

 

[takesome1]

People are going to continue to use DSLR's because of all the interchangeable-lenses that remain. The DSLR market is going to get smaller and smaller but it is not yet dead.

Ignore the half baked math and read what Canon is telling us:

for interchangeable-lens cameras we saw rapid contraction of the DSLR market due to the rise of smartphones, and the overall market shrank as sales of mirrorless cameras could not cover this drop

As for Imaging System, the contraction of the market for interchangeable-lens cameras, mainly for DSLRs, continued in step with the proliferation of smartphones, resulting in a significant decline in sales and profits

In the first quarter, sales of interchangeable-lens cameras were down 19% to 850 thousand units. This reflects the combined impact of accelerated market contraction for DSLRs,

As a result, the market for entry-level DSLRs is contracting at a pace that exceeds the outlook we had at the beginning of the year.

That said, we expect the user base of professionals and advanced-amateur, people who value the image quality and expressive possibilities afforded by cameras with large sensors and an abundance of interchangeable-lenses to remain. For the market overall, however, we expect the trend of market contraction to continue for some time.

Mirrorless cameras, known for being small and lightweight, are increasing their presence in the market. Amid this situation, we will steadily shift our focus from DSLR to mirrorless cameras with the aim of maintaining our overwhelming competitiveness, which we have built upon DSLRs.

 

[YuengLinger]

The proper analogy for MILC vs. modern DSLRs would be "all-electric" vs. "hybrids".

Good point. It's true that at this point internal-combustion accounts for 98.5% of all vehicle sales in the USA. Mirrorless and dSLR are nowhere near that disparity.

 

[Don Haines]

Good point. It's true that at this point internal-combustion accounts for 98.5% of all vehicle sales in the USA. Mirrorless and dSLR are nowhere near that disparity.

Yes!

Gasoline/diesel, hybrid, electric
Phone, DSLR, Mirrorless

 

[Durf]

Yes!

Gasoline/diesel, hybrid, electric
Phone, DSLR, Mirrorless

Even if they stopped making DSLR's today most of the one's now in circulation will still be around many years from now; I have an almost 12 year old 5D Mark ii I still use often, it still works great. In 12 more years from now my other newer DSLR's (80D and 6D2) and likely even my old 5D Mark ii will still be around working great, these camera's will probably out live me....

Sure Mirrorless will have a stronger foothold in the years to come but those today saying the DSLR is dead an won't exist in a few years are simply just wrong in my opinion.

I've even got 2 old Pentax film camera's that are over 40 years old that still work well, one of them even has a roll of film in it right now....

 

[Tugela]

You are abusing math to support your conclusions.



No, that simply means that the average per unit cost of DSLRs is lower than the average per unit cost of MILCs. You don't know the actual value of the units being sold... the actual numbers of units sold...the price difference between units...etc. You simply don't have sufficient information to draw your conclusion.

You are the one who has an issue with numbers.

It has nothing to do with unit cost, the values are a direct comparison of the previous years numbers. MILCs have nothing to do with it. The value of DSLRs being moved is dramatically lower than the corresponding number for units being moved. That means that the high end of the DSLR market is tanking. The prices of cameras are not going down by corresponding amounts, and manufacturing costs certainly would not be coming down either, so the only way to account for the disproportionate decrease in value is that the high value units are not moving.

 

[privatebydesign]

You are the one who has an issue with numbers.

It has nothing to do with unit cost, the values are a direct comparison of the previous years numbers. MILCs have nothing to do with it. The value of DSLRs being moved is dramatically lower than the corresponding number for units being moved. That means that the high end of the DSLR market is tanking. The prices of cameras are not going down by corresponding amounts, and manufacturing costs certainly would not be coming down either, so the only way to account for the disproportionate decrease in value is that the high value units are not moving.

High end camera sales are cyclical, not annual.

One year a manufacturer will bring out a new high end model and another manufacturers high end model will be nearing the end of its life, you can't draw a relevant comparison from such short term figures.

Manufacturing costs per unit in real terms do come down. It is something Canon have stated making very aggressive inroads into and they are famous for their cost management, they invent the robotic machines that can make ever higher quality lenses with almost no human workforce.