Canon has exceeded its sales projections for fiscal 2020

[David - Sydney]

Dead cat bounce perhaps. The R5 and R6 were long awaited cameras. I'd say the glory days are over.
Canon will still sell alot of cameras but less and less every year.
Other than unreliability it will be hard to justify replacing them. The margin of improvement is getting thinner and thinner.
More intelligent auto focus perhaps, better battery life, its really hard to improve from now on.
IBIS might prove to be built in obsolescence and speed up the replacement cycle.
The path of improvement since my first digital camera in 2000 has been phenomenal.
I never thought they'd be so good at this point this quickly.
Even the lens have reached near perfection.
It just shows what humans can do when their brainpower is used in a positive manner.

The market is definitely changing. Rebels will migrate to low cost full frame models or be lost to smartphone sales. Vloggers are a relatively new segment and they see smartphone not being able to (in the most part) fulfill their requirements so EF-M currently fits their needs but low cost full frame is an option especially for better isolation/depth of field.

I disagree that the margin of improvement is getting thinner. Yes, we have waited a long time between 5Div/5DRS and R5 but the improvement was massive - at least in the wide range of shooting genres I do. Well worth the bleeding edge cost 6 months ago. It wasn't as big an improvement compared to current Sony models though.

Everyone is now a photographer taking many more shots that before... mostly with phones. When they want shots that they can't do with phones, then there is a market for Canon products. What could be improved dramatically is the interface from camera to phone for upload or editing. Getting better but still not seamless even with the R5

There is a large base of 5Diii and 5Div users out there (and some 5Dii!) waiting for the right moment to start migrating. Second hand 5Diii and 5Div prices are still reasonable which is a testament to their build quality. Migration is an expensive exercise and will take time to completely replace EF with RF lenses... maybe even a decade but will still drive new sales as there are tangible benefits eg weight/size (RF70-200mm, RF100-500mm), eye-AF with RF50/85mm f1.2 for portraits, and innovation (600/800 f11). New lenses and cheaper RF mount bodies will also drive new sales.

IBIS and eye-AF dropping down to cheaper models makes a lot of difference to the keeper rates for users. If users can't get good or consistent shots, they will lose interest.

Battery life is tricky. There hasn't been a technology jump for a long time now for density (size/weight/capacity) with safety. Fab line width improvements are slowing as well so more clever system-on-chip may be the best option for camera life rather than assume Moore's Law continues indefinitely.

We just don't know how good cameras can get. Computational photography is yet to fully impact the segments we operate in. I was surprised by my iphone when switching to raw vs their default mode with how much Apple adds to their raw image.

Canon's announcement in a year where supply chain constraints, event cancellations, shooting opportunities in general and restricted movements is prety remarkable. Opening up of movements, events and easing of supply chain constraints will bring more revenue than 2020.

 

[mikeg50]

I feel like I have done my part in supporting Canon this year. Mostly because they released gear that I swear was targeted at me personally for what and the way I shoot.

I picked up an R5, 800mm f11 + hood, 600mm f11 + hood, RF 2x TC, RF 1.,4X TC, RF 100-500, RF 24-105 f4, RF 85L, RF 50 f1.8, RF Control ring adapter, R5 Battery Grip and an extra LPE-6NH all in the second half of 2020.

I still see a lot of DSLR's out there but I have seen what I would say was a good number of R5's in the wild and so far everyone I have seen with one loves it. As far as I can tell I don't think a single one of those R5's was in the hands of someone who was paying their bills with it. I know some of them are also looking forward to the high megapixel body someday too. Keep up the good work Canon.

Me too. I love your list of acquistions. I've picked up (since October) 2 R5's, RF 24-105 F4L, RF 15-35 F2.8, and I'm in line to acquire a 70-200 F4L when available. Only EF lens left is my 100-400 ver II. Had a hey-day with ebay right before Christmas unloading other gear in order to afford (sort-of) these purchases. It has been exhilarating. The R5 is unbelievable.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

The market is definitely changing. Rebels will migrate to low cost full frame models or be lost to smartphone sales.

People buying Rebels typically either do not know or do not care about full-frame.
Also the difference between a smartphone camera and APS-C is much bigger than the difference between APS-C and full-frame.
I am not sure why people seem to think of full-frame as the holy grail of sensor size.

 

[jayphotoworks]

People buying Rebels typically either do not know or do not care about full-frame.
Also the difference between a smartphone camera and APS-C is much bigger than the difference between APS-C and full-frame.
I am not sure why people seem to think of full-frame as the holy grail of sensor size.

While I believe there is a much more significant jump from a smartphone sensor to aps-c vs aps-c to full frame, the newest smartphones are really making that decision harder. The upcoming Samsung S21 ultra covers 13mm, 24mm, 72mm and 240mm and the UWA now comes with AF and the others with OIS. It is literally a bag full of lenses in a device that fits in your pocket. Computational photography can also to a certain extent also reduce a crop sensor's advantage.

I think manufacturers understand that and are getting rid of their fixed compacts and lower end products while moving to premium FF products. There is a larger margin in this segment and those consumers are usually more discerning and willing to spend. I think the argument to be made is that people buying Rebels do not know or care about full-frame, but they are at the same time wondering whether they even need a Rebel at all or could perhaps spend a bit more for a higher end smartphone.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I think manufacturers understand that and are getting rid of their fixed compacts and lower end products while moving to premium FF products. There is a larger margin in this segment and those consumers are usually more discerning and willing to spend. I think the argument to be made is that people buying Rebels do not know or care about full-frame, but they are at the same time wondering whether they even need a Rebel at all or could perhaps spend a bit more for a higher end smartphone.

Without entry-level cameras, I think enthusiast and professional cameras do not have much of a future.
While there are decent used cameras for under $200 US, beginners might not have enough information to navigate that market.
People might not want to risk more than a few hundred dollars delving into the unknown.
Those who find smartphones good enough have even less reason to shell out for an even bigger sensor.
If only enthusiasts and professional are left to buy cameras then expect Leica prices and volumes for whoever sticks with the camera business.

 

[StoicalEtcher]

Without entry-level cameras, I think enthusiast and professional cameras do not have much of a future.
While there are decent used cameras for under $200 US, beginners might not have enough information to navigate that market.
People might not want to risk more than a few hundred dollars delving into the unknown.

My thoughts exactly too - I think that abandoning the bottom rungs could be a dangerous tactic - people may simply never make it further up the ladder.

 

[David - Sydney]

People buying Rebels typically either do not know or do not care about full-frame.
Also the difference between a smartphone camera and APS-C is much bigger than the difference between APS-C and full-frame.
I am not sure why people seem to think of full-frame as the holy grail of sensor size.

Agreed that Rebel buyers may not know or appreciate the difference in sensor size but there needs to be a differentiator between smartphones and mirrorless and full frame would provide that difference. If the rumors are correct about a sub-RP priced RF mount then the rebels can't compete against that price point and those buyers would buy a kit lens and would be able to upscale their lenses simply. Within that lens ecosystem, upgrading the body over time would also make sense rather than trying to migrate APS-C to full frame.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Agreed that Rebel buyers may not know or appreciate the difference in sensor size but there needs to be a differentiator between smartphones and mirrorless and full frame would provide that difference. If the rumors are correct about a sub-RP priced RF mount then the rebels can't compete against that price point and those buyers would buy a kit lens and would be able to upscale their lenses simply. Within that lens ecosystem, upgrading the body over time would also make sense rather than trying to migrate APS-C to full frame.

The cheapest Rebel is less than $400.
I have seen no plans for any full-frame camera for nearly that cheap

 

[David - Sydney]

The cheapest Rebel is less than $400.
I have seen no plans for any full-frame camera for nearly that cheap

True but that price level of the market is clearly covered by the phone market now

 

[Joules]

The cheapest Rebel is less than $400.
I have seen no plans for any full-frame camera for nearly that cheap

We've seen the RP cost well below 1000 $ already. Less than 400 $ new seems a bit aggressive, but I could see Canon going into that direction with a more stripped down physical build (and potentially no viewfinder).

If that wasn't the plan, we should have seen entry level APS-C bodies and dedicated lenses at least show up in the rumors.

 

[jayphotoworks]

True but that price level of the market is clearly covered by the phone market now

My thoughts exactly too - I think that abandoning the bottom rungs could be a dangerous tactic - people may simply never make it further up the ladder.

I don't think companies are as concerned about people making it further up the ladder since those lower rungs have been "cut-off" for the most part. Canon really capitalized on this segment for so many years and did very well, but with its continued erosion, it probably doesn't make sense to continue flooding the market with Rebels and fixed compacts.

Is this simply an adjustment of this industry? I remember when jumping into photography for the first time, it was expensive and required a dedication of time and effort to master what the camera could not automate for you. Obviously this has changed quite a bit, and led to a massive influx of consumers interested in photography. With those same consumers realizing that a modern smartphone can replace a lower end Rebel or crop-body and even a few lenses now, they may not even consider a lower end body. Those that progress further may aspire for an FF body which has substantially IQ and will probably not be interested in a slower kit lens either. It isn't that FF is a "holy grail" either, but it is at a point where cost rises exponentially with diminishing returns (MF, etc.)

That would also mean those that are aiming to be a enthusiast or pro in some capacity will invest the funds needed to join the game just like the time, cost and skills were a barrier of entry before the uptake of consumer photography exploded. We also have to cognizant that as each year passes, those kids that use to run around in kindergarten are now well into their prime and they don't even have the same mindset as some of us older shooters that grew up in an era that saw a shift from DSLRs to MILCs or stills cameras without video features. They've worked on arms length shooting the minute they got their first smartphone, so have adapted to that way of imaging and an MILC is simply an extension of that.

Canon needs time to work out two fundamentals shifts in their business... one from the decline of the entry-level market and the other decline from the shift to MILCs.