Canon Cuts Full-Year Forecast as Camera Users Switch to Phones

[Loswr]

understanding or not, there is no Canon lenses in the top along with 5dmk3

well... but if you look at what the 5D MK3 actually can achive with it´s 22 MP... it doesn´t look that bad uh?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-and-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR-lens-reviews-legendary-performers-in-the-range/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-500mm-f-4G-ED-VR-fights-off-both-Canon-and-Sony

29Mp resolution from d800 with a good lens is around 10 Mp better compared to 5dmk3..

Ahhhh, so Nikon's 500mm f/4 VR isn't a good lens. :

 

[Ivar]

I might be in complete minority, but personally I find/found the Canon recent offers so uninspiring that I switched.
That said I miss some Canon qualities like the handling feel and the lenses, though in overall I'm at the time being more happy with what I have now. Still open to any future propositions, I have a feeling for some great announcements happening at Photokina next year, from all the makers.

 

[sanj]

I have been trying to gift my daughter the 1000D camera for a while now. She outright shows disinterest. She says she is very happy with her old point shoot camera and even the camera on her ipad. She is 16. She takes photos all the time and posts in face book, instagram etc.
She sees me buying top cameras all the time...

I am sure there are lots other like her.

 

[J.R.]

I have been trying to gift my daughter the 1000D camera for a while now. She outright shows disinterest. She says she is very happy with her old point shoot camera and even the camera on her ipad. She is 16. She takes photos all the time and posts in face book, instagram etc.
She sees me buying top cameras all the time...

I am sure there are lots other like her.

That is exactly what is happening. More and more photos are being pushed online and on FB people are getting less and less concerned about the IQ. The photos have turned into record shots to be shared with everyone.

For any special occasion you will be invited with a caveat - "make sure to bring your camera along"

 

[J.R.]

understanding or not, there is no Canon lenses in the top along with 5dmk3

well... but if you look at what the 5D MK3 actually can achive with it´s 22 MP... it doesn´t look that bad uh?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-and-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR-lens-reviews-legendary-performers-in-the-range/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-500mm-f-4G-ED-VR-fights-off-both-Canon-and-Sony

29Mp resolution from d800 with a good lens is around 10 Mp better compared to 5dmk3..

Ahhhh, so Nikon's 500mm f/4 VR isn't a good lens. :

Nikon and Canon 500mm are so similar they could be regarding a real MTF test . The distance that DXO uses when they measuring up cameras and lenses plays an important role when these lenses are optimized at a certain distance.

why haven't you sold all your Canon gear and moved over to Nikon?

 

[Grumbaki]

I have been trying to gift my daughter the 1000D camera for a while now. She outright shows disinterest. She says she is very happy with her old point shoot camera and even the camera on her ipad. She is 16. She takes photos all the time and posts in face book, instagram etc.
She sees me buying top cameras all the time...

I am sure there are lots other like her.

That is exactly what is happening. More and more photos are being pushed online and on FB people are getting less and less concerned about the IQ. The photos have turned into record shots to be shared with everyone.

For any special occasion you will be invited with a caveat - "make sure to bring your camera along"

Disregard for quality will bite them back in the ass. In a few years (display upgrades), it will bite them back in the ass like knock off polaroid film made some family memories disapear.

Their loss. (as long as it doesn't bankrupt or misguide Canon).

 

[J.R.]

I have been trying to gift my daughter the 1000D camera for a while now. She outright shows disinterest. She says she is very happy with her old point shoot camera and even the camera on her ipad. She is 16. She takes photos all the time and posts in face book, instagram etc.
She sees me buying top cameras all the time...

I am sure there are lots other like her.

That is exactly what is happening. More and more photos are being pushed online and on FB people are getting less and less concerned about the IQ. The photos have turned into record shots to be shared with everyone.

For any special occasion you will be invited with a caveat - "make sure to bring your camera along"

Disregard for quality will bite them back in the ass. In a few years (display upgrades), it will bite them back in the ass like knock off polaroid film made some family memories disapear.

Their loss. (as long as it doesn't bankrupt or misguide Canon).

I'm somehow convinced that the general public couldn't care less for image quality insofar as FB photos is concerned. I've seen (and I guess you must have too) mug-shots getting over 400 yikes likes.

Most people who have been shooting with a phone / compact keep all their photos on a single laptop which goes bust once in three to four years resulting in zero photographic memories. Regardless, they never learn!

 

[Loswr]

Nikon and Canon 500mm are so similar they could be regarding a real MTF test . The distance that DXO uses when they measuring up cameras and lenses plays an important role when these lenses are optimized at a certain distance.

I see. Can you point me to some data showing that Nikon and Canon 500mm f/4 lenses are optimized for different distances, or that DxO tested them at different distances? Or perhaps some other explanation for why the Nikon lens shows a disproportionally much greater IQ decrement compared to the Canon lens?

I stand by my earlier statement - the increased MP count of the D800 over the 5DIII does not offer a benefit commensurate with what the numbers would suggest. To realize something close to that full benefit, you must:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Pick the right lens. Note that the correct choices don't include such lenses as the 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8 (popular pro/wedding lens), or the supertele lenses.
[*]Use a tripod and MLU (always fun with Nikon's poor implementation of Live View), or have enough light for at least ~1/(~4 x focal length) shutter speed without needing to raise the ISO too high (or kiss the DR benefit goodbye)
[*]Apparently (according to your post), know the subject distance for which your lens is optimized, and shoot only at that distance (if you know it - where is that specified, exactly?)
[/list]

Choosing wrong on #1 means you might just end up with lower resolution than with a 5DIII and comparable Canon lens. Failing to apply #2 will give you motion-blurred toss-away images (Canon users who upgraded from the 40D to the 7D learned that lesson the hard way, many thought their old 40D was sharper). I'm still not sure that #3 can even be met, it's hard to always shoot at the optimal distance for your lens without knowing that distance.

It's amusing when people take some aspects of DxOMark's information at face value, but come up with complex, often undocumented reasons to explain how the information that doesn't fit their expectations isn't applicable; or when people link to Scores that don't mean what the poster thinks they mean, and ignore being called on it.

 

[Lichtgestalt]

understanding or not, there is no Canon lenses in the top along with 5dmk3

well... but if you look at what the 5D MK3 actually can achive with it´s 22 MP... it doesn´t look that bad uh?

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Nikon-AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-and-600mm-f-4G-ED-VR-lens-reviews-legendary-performers-in-the-range/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-500mm-f-4G-ED-VR-fights-off-both-Canon-and-Sony

29Mp resolution from d800 with a good lens is around 10 Mp better compared to 5dmk3..

Ahhhh, so Nikon's 500mm f/4 VR isn't a good lens. :

Nikon and Canon 500mm are so similar they could be regarding a real MTF test . The distance that DXO uses when they measuring up cameras and lenses plays an important role when these lenses are optimized at a certain distance.

yeah whatever it is that makes you sleep well at night.

ignore the test you don´t like... but keep on posting the test you don´t understand. :

 

[Vagabondman]

Cameras in smartphones have all but replaced point & shoots. Canon & other camera makers will have to really entice the average consumer now to get them to buy a DSLR.

 

[Vagabondman]

Not releasing anything interesting except the 70D could have something to do with it.

Yep. When your competitors are experimenting with new models and new lines, and all you're doing is giving minor updates to your existing stuff, you lose market share. Ask Apple.

Did you not read what neuroanatomist said above? Canon's competitors, who supposedly have superiorproducts, are having a worse time of it!

NOT true! Many many avid DSLR shooters have opted for their iphone. Its a GREAT street photography camera, and an awesome travel camera. In fact, many professionals are using them more and more. Will it replace the DSLR for everything? No of course not. But to just say all serious photogs use DSLRs is definitely not true.

 

[Tristan944]

If Canon would make reasonably priced gear, more people would buy.

 

[photonius]

I just want to bang my head against the wall and scream when I read comments following stories like this. It's as if only Neuro, Chuck and a handful of others actually read the stories.

Photonius had a decent analysis but then pulled a conclusion out of thin air that I'm still scratching my head over.

So, the only way to get a lot of people to buy new cameras is with a substantial innovation in sensor technology.

Was that intended as sarcasm or a joke?

no, just some unfinished thought left standing. I meant if you want to get existing owners to upgrade (and thus create a new purchase cycle, ( like in the past from 4 to 10 MPs or whatever), you really need some mouthwatering new features, e.g. a new sensor that is a serious jump over all current products, or some other neat feature that's not just a gimmick. Live view was a pretty neat feature when it came.
Of course sensors are very mature at this point, so it's difficult to see how that could improve a lot, but the dual pixels of the sensor in the 70D could be a precursor to a whole bunch of things.

Ha! Now I understand.

I was confused because your post was so thoughtful and rational and then all of a sudden it seemed like you took a peculiar turn. I certainly agree with the basic premise. Just his week I succumbed to a 5DIII. I hesitate to say an "upgrade" from the 7D, because I still love the 7D and intend to keep using it.

I debated long and hard between a 6D, waiting for the 7DII and pulling out, what for me was, all the stops and going for a 5DIII. Part of my justification was that it is so good I think it will satisfy me for years to come. I think a challenge facing all camera makers, but especially Canon and Nikon, is that their products are now so good that there is little reason for buyers to jump to the next generation.

So, I guess I agree with the premise that it will take some "mouth watering" new features to get many current owners to upgrade. Personally, I'm not sure that for full frame sensors there is much that can be done to entice current owners. I'm amazed at how well the 5DIII sells (check out Amazon's best selling DSLRs). It's incredible to me that a $3,000 camera is selling as well as $500 cameras. I've got to think that many of those buyers are like me – rationalizing it as a camera that will satisfy them for the next 10 years or so.

With APS-C I think there is still sufficient room for improvement to entice current owners to upgrade. If the 7DII makes some significant improvements in the sensor, I'll have a hard time resisting. But, I'll also want 5D quality autofocus and a few other goodies.

Frankly, I think another challenge all manufacturers face is not only that the technology has matured, but the customer base is aging out. I think it is going to be very hard for Canon and Nikon to attract younger buyers and I think some of the their recent models show they are pretty desperately trying anything they can think of, but don't seem to be having much success.

The best hope for Canon and Nikon (at least temporarily) may be an expanding world economy. If the economies in the currently underdeveloped world improve, they may get a temporary boost, as they have with China. Other than that, I'm guessing all manufacturers will have to learn to live with a market that is growing at a much slower pace than in the past several years.

Canon and Nikon may actually be the best positioned to adapt to the changing market, because until the explosion of digital technology, I'm pretty sure the growth in the film and SLR market was pretty modest.

customer base is aging out.
Yes, that's what I sort of was thinking of also with my point 3 - no newcomers. Older people grew up in an age without digital devices. Snapshots where taken with polariod, or Instamatics, later P&S cameras. A bit more serious users would have had to get an SLR. But the sensor was exchangeable (film - no upgrade incentive for the body), and once you had a decent body, it could last a long time. AF was a technological breakthrough, leading to be an upgrade cycle. So, the old-time SLR customer base is certainly one that can be catered to with dSLRs.
However, young people of the P&S variety (what would have been a polaroid/instamatic customer base etc. in the past) are satisfied with their smart phones now. I don't think most of these would ever have been customers of SLRs in the past either. The customer segment that sticks with smart phones nowadays might perhaps be larger than the comparable instamatic customer segment of the past, because of the following points:
The display devices and the internet. In the past, for high quality stuff, people would often use slides, to be projected and viewed, perhaps with friends. This is now superseded by monitors and TVs, which presently deliver much less resolution than what cameras deliver. Further, images are quickly spread via internet. So, on the one hand you don't need supergreat resolution, because most display devices don't handle it. Second, you can look now at so many good pictures on the internet, we are virtually flooded by it.
So, a newcomer might think "Do I really need a dSLR" to take yet another picture of a duck or the New York skyline - I'll never compete with what's out there, so I shoot mostly for memories, and the phone will do. So, overall, the incentive to step from a "good enough" to dSLR might be less than in the past, because of all the new technologies.

Seriously, for all the ones clamoring for a D800. How many high-tech landscape images do we need? 99.9 % of people view on monitors or tv, so 36 MPs is mostly overkill. Large prints? How many are really printed big and hung on the limited wall space there is? So, the final market for the full capabilities of a D800 is actually rather limited.


Expanding world economy.
Yes, this is a classic practice for hundreds of years, if your home market is saturated, expand. That's why there was this push for the global economy, to expand markets, to keep the growth model. Alas, who are you going to sell to next? The martians? So, an alternative (taken by e.g. Apple) is innovation - but there is only such much innovation until some technical limitation hits (e.g. how much can you still improve an iphone, it's a similar problem to dSLRs), which requires then a breakthrough again. For many portable devices a real bottleneck is the battery that is limiting, because that limits how much processing power you can stick into the device. Even in a dSLR, if you had more processing power, you could probably jack up many things, providing more precessing power for various features, including imaging processing, i.e. frame rate, automatic lens correction, diffraction reduction, noise reduction, etc.

again, great points. I don't think it's as bleak and growth starved as you though - for instance, following your model - boy meets girl, boy and girl go out, now during the day time that cell phone gets you great shots, but once the sun goes down, all those shots are blurry (one day that will even change as they push to make smaller sensors take in more light). Girl gets frustrated. Boy buys girl a nice camera (a dslr).

I know your not saying the dslr market is dead, but, yeah, it is narrowing down to mostly the upgrading crowd, but there are still going to be newcomers - just not as many as in the past decade.

I think cell phones also face the same issue as slr's - just like lots of websites, the drive to innovate a product that's already innovated leads to a lot of marginal upgrades, or upgrades that just don't make sense, or upgrades that do make sense but not with the general consumer client. Take that d800, it's a monster on paper, but, unless you need that kind of power are you taking the leap? Of course, some will buy it because it's a monster on paper, and rarely use it, kind of like the good old i need a nicer car than the neighbors idea, its a status symbol. Either way, cell phones face the same issue, what else do you do that isn't a marginal upgrade? Of course, it's harder to say no to cell upgrades because they aren't really designed to last for more than a year and a half - and thats one thing i am glad for --- even rebels have a decent shelf life. It is one of the things that surprise me about the cell phone market actually, how easily we are all duped into buying these things that break so easily (it's cheap if you can make your phone last that 2 years...heehaw...cheap upgrade ---but if it dies in a year...your coughing up close to an slr's $$$ on a phone!!!)

Either way, there is still a market for slr's. I said it before - we're between product cycles on upper end models. And the entry level bodies, those are the ones people are stepping into less and less due to cell phone silliness. It should be interesting to see what these #'s do in 2014 - with Canon putting the 7d2 on the market, and maybe the big mp beast, and whatever nikon has on the release table. If these models do kick ass, then canon will have a turn around in 2014, then a slow 2015 as they ramp up for the 5d4 and the 1dx2

"Boy buys girl a nice camera (a dslr)" & the facebook (smartphone) crowd...
Well, maybe we will soon see the Rebels that will come with a Facebook (mind you, configurable to twitter, etc. via the menu) button (maybe instead of the "print" button). It might work to capture a bit of the new crowd, but it won't overcome the fundamental obstacle that a dSLR is big and clunky compared to a smartphone. The big sensor just has no workaround for that. An EOS M with a 22mm lens is not bad though.

 

[Lichtgestalt]

If Canon would make reasonably priced gear, more people would buy.

wow.. that´s genius.... they should give it away for free then. :

break even point.. all that economic nonsense they teach on universities around the globe.... useless... just make it cheaper so people buy more and your company will blossom.

of course keep the quality up while you make it cheaper.
please someone tell leica and hasselblad!!!

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

If Canon would make reasonably priced gear, more people would buy.

Maybe canon and nikon should do what cell phone companies do --- go with the contract system and give people ridiculously cheap upgrades every 2 years, but then jack up the price as a standalone device. Cell phones aren't exactly cheap anymore. People tend to forget that if they are buying one outside of the upgrade period, it's $500-700....

Also, I guess nikon is so much cheaper because it's only canon that needs to make more reasonably priced gear.... (sarcasm)

 

[Lichtgestalt]

Also, I guess nikon is so much cheaper because it's only canon that needs to make more reasonably priced gear.... (sarcasm)

or 1100 euro for a m43 camera with a mediocre kit lens.

 

[CarlTN]

I have been trying to gift my daughter the 1000D camera for a while now. She outright shows disinterest. She says she is very happy with her old point shoot camera and even the camera on her ipad. She is 16. She takes photos all the time and posts in face book, instagram etc.
She sees me buying top cameras all the time...

I am sure there are lots other like her.

At the risk of being attacked, I feel I have to state the obvious. It might just be partially a female thing. Women are generally not very fascinated with machines of any kind. This is true often of pro female photographers using pro DSLR's. I know because this is what I gather from their attitude when I talk to them. They immediately gloss over or brush aside even the most simplistic technical aspects, and attempt to focus on the end results...and that they like them...and don't care how they got them.

When you combine the above with the age of 16...well surely you can see what's happening. A 16 year old female, does not see the world as you do. Things that are trivial and silly to you, are the most important things ever, to her. She takes the technical side for granted, and only focuses on end results...It's also possible her interest in taking pictures will die away as she grows up, so be prepared for that. Literally every teenager of either gender, takes pictures and posts online daily (or even hourly) for their friends to see. This does not make them photographers. It makes them children who are obsessed with trivial, shallow things, that even they themselves will be embarrassed about in a decade or less from now (even at that time when they are still very young adults with very similar attitudes to teens. It's a scientific fact that the brain does not fully develop until the age of 27 or 28).

 

[CarlTN]

Nikon and Canon 500mm are so similar they could be regarding a real MTF test . The distance that DXO uses when they measuring up cameras and lenses plays an important role when these lenses are optimized at a certain distance.

I see. Can you point me to some data showing that Nikon and Canon 500mm f/4 lenses are optimized for different distances, or that DxO tested them at different distances? Or perhaps some other explanation for why the Nikon lens shows a disproportionally much greater IQ decrement compared to the Canon lens?

I stand by my earlier statement - the increased MP count of the D800 over the 5DIII does not offer a benefit commensurate with what the numbers would suggest. To realize something close to that full benefit, you must:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Pick the right lens. Note that the correct choices don't include such lenses as the 14-24/2.8, 24-70/2.8 (popular pro/wedding lens), or the supertele lenses.
[*]Use a tripod and MLU (always fun with Nikon's poor implementation of Live View), or have enough light for at least ~1/(~4 x focal length) shutter speed without needing to raise the ISO too high (or kiss the DR benefit goodbye)
[*]Apparently (according to your post), know the subject distance for which your lens is optimized, and shoot only at that distance (if you know it - where is that specified, exactly?)
[/list]

Choosing wrong on #1 means you might just end up with lower resolution than with a 5DIII and comparable Canon lens. Failing to apply #2 will give you motion-blurred toss-away images (Canon users who upgraded from the 40D to the 7D learned that lesson the hard way, many thought their old 40D was sharper). I'm still not sure that #3 can even be met, it's hard to always shoot at the optimal distance for your lens without knowing that distance.

It's amusing when people take some aspects of DxOMark's information at face value, but come up with complex, often undocumented reasons to explain how the information that doesn't fit their expectations isn't applicable; or when people link to Scores that don't mean what the poster thinks they mean, and ignore being called on it.

Am I to assume that you feel DXO's tests are fair and accurate? Because if you think they are, that would amuse me.

 

[Loswr]

Am I to assume that you feel DXO's tests are fair and accurate? Because if you think they are, that would amuse me.

DxO's Measurements are fair, useful, and usually accurate (with a few noteable exceptions, such as their initial testing of the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II...data which were subsequently and silently replaced). As I've said before, their Biased Scores are a useless, steaming pile of...well, you get the idea....and anyway, real BS is good fertilizer, making it more useful than DxOMark's Scores.

 

[CarlTN]

Am I to assume that you feel DXO's tests are fair and accurate? Because if you think they are, that would amuse me.

DxO's Measurements are fair, useful, and usually accurate (with a few noteable exceptions, such as their initial testing of the Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II...data which were subsequently and silently replaced). As I've said before, their Biased Scores are a useless, steaming pile of...well, you get the idea....and anyway, real BS is good fertilizer, making it more useful than DxOMark's Scores.

Why can't someone with the means and the time, make their own website that tests equipment, especially Canon equipment, fairly?