Canon Fiscal Year End 2017, It Was a Good Year

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,653
2,186
Tugela said:
Does not change the fact that the OP was comparing apples to oranges and you know it. Canon's data is a conflation of many market spaces, whereas competitors have more targeted market spaces. Where Canon is positioned in the overall market therefore does not reflect how they are positioned in specific markets. Or is this concept too complex to understand?

No, you're comparing apples to oranges...badly. Canon was talking about fruit.

Incidentally, Sony used to make dSLRs – they abandoned that particular variety of fruit because they couldn't compete effectively.


There are forces at play here that you clearly do not get. While you do not understand, both Canon and Nikon do, which is why both of them are likely to produce some sort of FF/APS-C MILC in the near future even if it is not as good as what companies like Sony and the others are making. There is a reason for them doing that, namely that they understand the market direction even if you do not.

I understand just fine, but that wasn't the subject of the discussion. You stated a speculation that is at odds with the actual evidence, I called you on it, and you change the topic. If you want to move the goalposts back, go ahead...I speculate that you'll still manage to kick the ball sideways, as usual.
 

Woody

EOS R
Jul 20, 2010
1,157
82
Tugela said:
Frankly, I am surprised that the Rebels have not ditched their mirrors years ago. You would think that it is limiting to that line, a MILC would be a more sensible option.

Why?

Here's why:
https://www.bcnretail.com/research/ranking/list/contents_type=41

The top selling ILC cameras in Japan are dominated by Canon DSLRs.

Not Sony MILCs. Not Olympus MILCs. Not Nikon DSLRs.

And this is in Japan alone, where MILCs are supposedly more popular than DSLRs.

Canon clearly knows the market better than you.

That is why Canon is #1 in worldwide MILC market shares for the last decade.

If Canon is run by the likes of you, they will be struggling in this dying market now.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,857
3,005
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Tugela said:
...Canon's data is a conflation of many market spaces, whereas competitors have more targeted market spaces. Where Canon is positioned in the overall market therefore does not reflect how they are positioned in specific markets. Or is this concept too complex to understand?

Apparently, only for you. If you are talking geographic markets, can you please identify a market where Canon is not #1? (Annual data please, not just one month). I'd also be curious as to what percentage of the overall market those smaller markets comprise.

Or are you talking about niche markets. Granted, Fuji is No. 1 in instant cameras, which have been among the best-selling cameras in the world of late. However, that is not a sustainable market, but rather a fad.

I'm curious why you would think that individual niche markets are somehow more significant than the total market.

Tugela said:
If Sony were #2 in FF in the US, where MILCs are less popular, where do you think they ranked in other markets where MILCs are more popular?

If Sony ranked No. 1 in any other market, you can be sure we would be seeing a press release about it.

Tugela said:
DSLR sales are dropping at a steady pace (around 9-10% per year), MILC sales are rising...

The sales figures that have been reported by industry analysts show that the MILC market is largely static.

Tugela said:
There are forces at play here that you clearly do not get. While you do not understand, both Canon and Nikon do, which is why both of them are likely to produce some sort of FF/APS-C MILC in the near future even if it is not as good as what companies like Sony and the others are making. There is a reason for them doing that, namely that they understand the market direction even if you do not.

Possibly, but right now the Canon and Nikon full-frame MILCs are just unicorns. However, I would agree that when and if Nikon and Canon enter the full-frame MILC market, Sony will be hard-pressed to compete.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,653
2,186
Woody said:
Tugela said:
Frankly, I am surprised that the Rebels have not ditched their mirrors years ago. You would think that it is limiting to that line, a MILC would be a more sensible option.

Why?

Here's why:
https://www.bcnretail.com/research/ranking/list/contents_type=41

unfocused said:
Tugela said:
...Canon's data is a conflation of many market spaces, whereas competitors have more targeted market spaces. Where Canon is positioned in the overall market therefore does not reflect how they are positioned in specific markets. Or is this concept too complex to understand?

Apparently, only for you.

Responding with logic and data? The usual expression would be 'falling on deaf ears' but since Internet forums are mainly visual, 'falling on blind eyes' might be more appropriate. Except in this case, I think the underlying problem resulting in a lack of comprehension is neither the ears nor the eyes, but rather what's between and behind them, respectively.
 

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
neuroanatomist said:
Tugela said:
Does not change the fact that the OP was comparing apples to oranges and you know it. Canon's data is a conflation of many market spaces, whereas competitors have more targeted market spaces. Where Canon is positioned in the overall market therefore does not reflect how they are positioned in specific markets. Or is this concept too complex to understand?

No, you're comparing apples to oranges...badly. Canon was talking about fruit.

Incidentally, Sony used to make dSLRs – they abandoned that particular variety of fruit because they couldn't compete effectively.


There are forces at play here that you clearly do not get. While you do not understand, both Canon and Nikon do, which is why both of them are likely to produce some sort of FF/APS-C MILC in the near future even if it is not as good as what companies like Sony and the others are making. There is a reason for them doing that, namely that they understand the market direction even if you do not.

I understand just fine, but that wasn't the subject of the discussion. You stated a speculation that is at odds with the actual evidence, I called you on it, and you change the topic. If you want to move the goalposts back, go ahead...I speculate that you'll still manage to kick the ball sideways, as usual.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-2017_e.pdf

Says it all. The writing is on the wall.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,075
356
Vancouver, BC
neuroanatomist said:
Tugela said:
The writing is on the wall.

Yeah, I saw where you spray-painted, "I refuse to admit that I was wrong."

Neuro, this is like the folks who proclaim the end of the world. When it doesn't come, the goalpost just gets kicked down the can a little bit, because the end of the world is still very close; there was just a minor miscalculation.

For most of them, you won't ever convince them that the world might be come to an end, but that it's unlikely to be any time soon -- because in their core, they want you to make your future decisions on the basis of their beliefs. If the world didn't end, and you sold your house and all your stuff and spent the last year handing out leaflets, well, you're just more prepared for the real date the year and a half later.

If everyone believed that DSLRs were a thing of the past and that nobody would make new DSLRs or lenses or accessories in the next next year or so... they'd go buy MILCs to be prepared for the DSLRpocalypse, and there you would have a self-fullfilling prophecy.
 

jayphotoworks

EOS RP
Aug 11, 2016
249
103
Talys said:
neuroanatomist said:
Tugela said:
The writing is on the wall.

Yeah, I saw where you spray-painted, "I refuse to admit that I was wrong."

Neuro, this is like the folks who proclaim the end of the world. When it doesn't come, the goalpost just gets kicked down the can a little bit, because the end of the world is still very close; there was just a minor miscalculation.

For most of them, you won't ever convince them that the world might be come to an end, but that it's unlikely to be any time soon -- because in their core, they want you to make your future decisions on the basis of their beliefs. If the world didn't end, and you sold your house and all your stuff and spent the last year handing out leaflets, well, you're just more prepared for the real date the year and a half later.

If everyone believed that DSLRs were a thing of the past and that nobody would make new DSLRs or lenses or accessories in the next next year or so... they'd go buy MILCs to be prepared for the DSLRpocalypse, and there you would have a self-fullfilling prophecy.

DSLR advantages have continually become eroded with each mirrorless release cycle but it doesn't really matter if DSLRS are on their way out or not. The real message is to inform people of what mirrorless can do today and what DSLRS cannot, and vice versa. When I still see people mainly complaining that Sony's overheat or have poor battery life, it is doing a real disservice for readers coming to this site to see what the competition has to offer vs Canon. I don't believe many of the naysayers here have even used a Sony or mirrorless camera before. Maybe it is because of their own financial limitations, fanboyism or a fixed mindset, but I feel trying out the alternatives and weighing one's own choices is the best approach. Having the humility to admit where other competitors are strong and also weak is the first step to engaging in a positive dialogue with others who don't share your own opinion. Not just writing about how you feel about it, but actually using the products you are supporting or not supporting.

When certain posters continuously spout market share, financial performance or use grammatical errors as a sledgehammer to reduce a poster's unpopular opinion, its frankly quite tiresome, and draws in more and more posters with limited posting history further trying to antagonize the mainstays here that support Canon. Photography is a creative hobby as much as it is a workhorse profession like a steelworker. People should know that there are other options that are potentially more innovative, exciting or fun that can drive creativity. Just because those competitors are trying to make a mark and don't currently command a leading market share, doesn't mean they offer an inferior product or are moving in the wrong direction. They can't afford to sit back and let their brand name solely drive their low end products en masse because they are not in a position to do so, and thus need to take risks to achieve more.

I commend these companies. Maybe we might all take a step back and look at the bigger picture from time to time.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
jayphotoworks said:
The real message is to inform people of what mirrorless can do today and what DSLRS cannot, and vice versa.

+1. Anyone who says mirrorless is all about being small needs to stop huffing paint fumes.

It's a complicated comparison and it depends heavily on how/what you shoot, but:

  • ...for some folks, mirrorless right now is better than an SLR for their needs. (Landscapers and product folks? Folks who love manual lenses shot handheld in an age where Canon is taking MF screens away?)

  • ...for others (probably most of us), mirrorless vs. SLR is a mixed bag of upsides and downsides. We debate them all the time here.

  • ...for some of us, mirrorless is a clear step behind what an SLR can do and it might be that way for some time (wildlifers, sports folks, etc.).
So we will always debate the inevitability of mirrorless taking over (my vote: a certainty for most market segments) or the imminence of that happening (my vote: it's going to be a while), but let's not lose sight of the fact that mirrorless isn't just a win for size and for manufacturer's costs -- it also takes pictures in a very different way that can help/hinder you depending on what you shoot.

- A
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,075
356
Vancouver, BC
Tugela said:
The writing is on the wall.

Did you see the Lombardi trophy behing presented after the Superbowl? There was a massive gaggle of professional photographers below, just in front of the raised podium. The only mirrorless were massive, broadcast-quality camcorders. There was a sea of identifiable Canon 70-200's and 100-400's, a couple of bigger Cannon big whites and a small number of Nikon DSLRs.

Guess what there weren't? I didn't see any Gmaster 100-400's. No Nikon 200-500's. No Olympus MFT's. The only small cameras were a few people up front with their smartphones.

As long as that's the case, DSLRs will do just fine, and so will Canon. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the choice of gear has nothing to t all to do with (a) weight (b) EVF (c) the last stop or two of DR or (c) cool techno-wiz features like zebras or WYSIWYG.

My thoughts: I suspect that they want to have the same body that they were using super tele's on during the game, for starters. It's a cold night, it might rain or snow, and it's damp, so if you're doing this day in and out, I can't imagine owning gear without real weather sealing. The last thing in the world the probably want to see is a flashing red low-battery light. And their gear will probably take a few good whacks, since they're crammed in there like a Walmart crowd on Black Friday.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Talys said:
Tugela said:
The writing is on the wall.

Did you see the Lombardi trophy behing presented after the Superbowl? There was a massive gaggle of professional photographers below, just in front of the raised podium. The only mirrorless were massive, broadcast-quality camcorders. There was a sea of identifiable Canon 70-200's and 100-400's, a couple of bigger Cannon big whites and a small number of Nikon DSLRs.

Guess what there weren't? I didn't see any Gmaster 100-400's. No Nikon 200-500's. No Olympus MFT's. The only small cameras were a few people up front with their smartphones.

As long as that's the case, DSLRs will do just fine, and so will Canon. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the choice of gear has nothing to t all to do with (a) weight (b) EVF (c) the last stop or two of DR or (c) cool techno-wiz features like zebras or WYSIWYG.

My thoughts: I suspect that they want to have the same body that they were using super tele's on during the game, for starters. It's a cold night, it might rain or snow, and it's damp, so if you're doing this day in and out, I can't imagine owning gear without real weather sealing. The last thing in the world the probably want to see is a flashing red low-battery light. And their gear will probably take a few good whacks, since they're crammed in there like a Walmart crowd on Black Friday.

In fairness to Tugela (yes, I just said that), you've just used what surely will be the absolute last group of photographers to switch to mirrorless staying with SLRs as proof that the mirrorless revolution isn't happening.

(You are correct, of course, in all your assertions about that camp's needs and why a thin mount rig or adapting is of little/no value to them. Sports/wildlife folks need all-battlefield equipment and living in a first party lens + body world is a must.)

But I'm not convinced that if sports/wildlife folks exist, everyone will still have an SLR available at the price point / feature set that they want ad infinitum. It's entirely possible mirrors slowly start disappearing throughout crop, 6D, 5D, etc. and the only folks packing mirrors anymore will be the same 1-series people you just identified.

- A
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,075
356
Vancouver, BC
ahsanford said:
Talys said:
Tugela said:
The writing is on the wall.

Did you see the Lombardi trophy behing presented after the Superbowl? There was a massive gaggle of professional photographers below, just in front of the raised podium. The only mirrorless were massive, broadcast-quality camcorders. There was a sea of identifiable Canon 70-200's and 100-400's, a couple of bigger Cannon big whites and a small number of Nikon DSLRs.

Guess what there weren't? I didn't see any Gmaster 100-400's. No Nikon 200-500's. No Olympus MFT's. The only small cameras were a few people up front with their smartphones.

As long as that's the case, DSLRs will do just fine, and so will Canon. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the choice of gear has nothing to t all to do with (a) weight (b) EVF (c) the last stop or two of DR or (c) cool techno-wiz features like zebras or WYSIWYG.

My thoughts: I suspect that they want to have the same body that they were using super tele's on during the game, for starters. It's a cold night, it might rain or snow, and it's damp, so if you're doing this day in and out, I can't imagine owning gear without real weather sealing. The last thing in the world the probably want to see is a flashing red low-battery light. And their gear will probably take a few good whacks, since they're crammed in there like a Walmart crowd on Black Friday.

In fairness to Tugela (yes, I just said that), you've just used what surely will be the absolute last group of photographers to switch to mirrorless staying with SLRs as proof that the mirrorless revolution isn't happening.

(You are correct, of course, in all your assertions about that camp's needs and why a thin mount rig or adapting is of little/no value to them. Sports/wildlife folks need all-battlefield equipment and living in a first party lens + body world is a must.)

But I'm not convinced that if sports/wildlife folks exist, everyone will still have an SLR available at the price point / feature set that they want ad infinitum. It's entirely possible mirrors slowly start disappearing throughout crop, 6D, 5D, etc. and the only folks packing mirrors anymore will be the same 1-series people you just identified.

- A

You're right, except that this was not the sports event. This was the press gaggle after, and they were only a few meters from the podium.

The lenses you see are 70-200 and 100-400, not the big whites they have from the sidelines, and you see a lot of ungripped cameras. That tells me it is likely the second body - it would be a great place to use mirrorless, if you wanted one.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
Talys said:
You're right, except that this was not the sports event. This was the press gaggle after, and they were only a few meters from the podium.

Excuse me! I thought you meant the press on the playing field after the final whistle. My apologies.

Sure, general reportage is heavily CaNikon. However, I have seen some Washington political reportage folks packing A7 rigs of late at gaggles and congressional hearings. It's surely not anywhere near the majority, but mirrorless is at least making some inroads there.

I still see this as the less highly specific needs you have, the easier it will be to convert to mirrorless. On a market by market basis, Sony can change its sales posture accordingly:

Landscapers, Product photographers: go for the throat --> push IQ and lens adaptability all day; "you don't need to fully convert, just buy a body and an adapter and POW you get the sweet sensor hotness."

Weddings, Portraiture: Talk up silent shutter, talk up eye AF

Photojournos, Travel folks: Talk up smaller footprint in the bag, talk up 4K

Reportage / Sports / Wildlife: Be up front and acknowledge it's not up to part with the D5 / 1DX2, but continue to develop the AF system, physical durability and weather sealing. Continue to publish the upsides of a blackout free VF, higher FPS without mirrorslapping, etc.

I'm not pulling for Sony here by any means, but their current campaign of 'anything your SLR can do, I can do better' resembles Charlie Brown whiffing at the football over and over again. They could focus their script depending on their market a lot better, IMHO.

- A
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,653
2,186
Tugela said:
When talking about the competition you have to bear in mind that the market breaks out into subsectors that are not captured in the overall numbers. Sony (and lately Nikon) claim to be leading or doing very well in the FF subsector. Canon produces a lot of entry level ILCs, whereas other companies do not, instead they tend to sell a combination of ILCs and fixed lens to the purchasing group. Sony does not have an entry level product at all. That creates an artificial sense of where Canon really is at in the premium ILC subsector since their numbers are heavily skewed by low margin products that their primary competitors don't care about. Competition for Canon in the low margin consumer product area instead comes from different competitors, such as Panasonic and Fuji.

Because Canon markets products to all subsectors while their competitors focus on specific subsectors, Canon can lead the overall market share even while being beaten in the subsectors. They are just being beaten by different companies in different places. Which is why it is necessary to be cautious in reading too much into the overall percentages.

If you look at only FF cameras I suspect that you will see market trends that are very different.

We now have the definitive answer, and it's no surprise...you are wrong. As usual.

As you should know (but I've learned never to assume you are aware of basic facts), Canon has been #1 in global ILC sales for 14 years and counting.

You claim that if you look at only at FF cameras, the market trend will be very different because, "Sony (and lately Nikon) claim to be leading or doing very well." But the reality is that for FF ILCs in the US, Canon was #1 in 2017. Just like they were in the broader global ILC market.
 
<-- start Taboola -->