Canon Profits Drop 16% in Second Quarter

[Maiaibing]

+1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.

The 6D is currently Canon's best value offer - I just got one for 1.150 USD as a backup/replacement and it takes excellent pictures - but even that camera does not match what Nikon has on the table.

So why did you buy it?

Nikon was not an option due to my large investment in Canon lenses. So the 6D was the obvious choice.

I'm actually going dual system with the new SONY to see how it works in real life and if dual system is worth the cost and compromises. When the 5DIV comes out I will decide on my system future.

In addition, as long as I have Canon lenses I will always want to have a Canon body at hand. There will be times I will not want to allow for any compromises using a SONY body/Canon lens combo. And any dual system setup will involve compromises.

 

[dak723]

Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.

My new SONY is shipping Tuesday next week (may take a while before I have it my hands though).

Had hoped so much for the 5DIV to be my next DSLR - but it was not to be.

When the 5DIV arrives I will decide if there is any reason to continue with Canon. Meanwhile, I have started selling some of my Canon gear.

You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.

 

[Maiaibing]

You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.

I agree that a cautious approach is recommended until we see how it works out in real life. So far I'm just selling some older Canon bodies and a few lenses and accessories that I am not using much anyway to avoid having a large sell off all at once should I decide to shift system.

 

[JohanCruyff]

Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-books-highest-q1-profit-since-2007-also-forecasts-it-will-sell-more-cameras-than-expected/

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/library/er.html

Dramatic fall in unit sold in the quarter and forecasted (Q1: from 2.2 to 1.7 millions; Year on Year: from 8.5 to 5.9 millions), more than offset by the improved mix (more hig_margin_full_frame_bodies).
Just to spread some of my culture, I'll let you fellow friends from Canonrumors know that it can be more useful to exclude some extraordinary items (source:
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/15q1_sony.pdf)

​

Operating income in the current quarter includes a 151 million U.S. dollar (18.1 billion yen) gain on the remeasurement to fair value of Sony Music Entertainment (“SME”)’s 51% equity interest in Orchard Media, Inc. (“The Orchard”), which had previously been accounted for under the equity method, as a result of SME increasing its ownership interest to 100%, in the Music Segment, as well as a gain of 12.3 billion yen (101 million U.S. dollars) from the sale of a part of the logistics business, in connection with the formation of a logistics joint venture, recorded in Corporate and elimination. Operating income in the same quarter of the previous fiscal year included a gain of 14.8 billion yen recognized on the sale of certain buildings and premises at the Gotenyama Technology Center in Japan, recorded in Corporate and elimination.​

​

Here's my reconciliation:
a) Apparent increase in Operating Income: +38.8 Billions
b) Items to be excluded for comparability purposes: Q1 2015 "SME" 18.1 Billions
c) Sales of part of the investments Logistics business: Q1 2015: 12.3 Billions
d) Q1 2014 Sales of Buildings and premises: 14.8 Billions
e) "Normalized" increase in Operating Income (a-b-c+d) = +23.2 Billions
[Investor Relators tend to focus on "results excluding non recurring items", i.e. "normalized" results only when the non recurring gains exceed the non recurring losses]

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007

For the Imaging Products & Solutions segment, which includes digital cameras:

Sales: +3.5% (FX impact: +8%).

So, if you don't consider the effect of currency exchange rates, it's a loss.

JohanCruyff's point is also relevant – companies generally exclude 'one-time charges' (losses) from summary figures, but don't always do so for one-time gains.

Sony's best Q1 in years is a 200% y/y gain, and net income was 80 B¥. Canon's net income after a 16% y/y loss was 68 B¥. From an investor perspective and overall corporate health, Canon's dividend yield is 4.5%. Sony's dividend yield is...zip – they canceled their dividend last year (for the first time in corporate history) and have not reinstated it.

 

[msm]

Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007

For the Imaging Products & Solutions segment, which includes digital cameras:

Sales: +3.5% (FX impact: +8%).

So, if you don't consider the effect of currency exchange rates, it's a loss.

Edit: Nm that, I see that you speak of sales but dilbert spoke of profits which confused me.

I have to wonder tho, the reuters article speaks of Canon inc as a whole as far as I can see dropping 16% profits, then what is the result for Canons imaging division? While the Sony imaging division is doing well on fewer units sold which could indicate that the A7 series is fairly successful and likely taking some of that profit from Canon.

 

[msm]

Within the Imaging System Business Unit, although sales volume of interchangeable-lens digital cameras
declined due to market shrinkage, the U.S. market showed signs of recovery with sales volume increasing
from the same period of the previous year. Solid demand for advanced-amateur models, such as the EOS 7D
Mark II, contributed to an improvement in the gross profit ratio. As for digital compact cameras, although
sales volume for low-end models declined due to the ongoing contraction of the market in all regions from the
previous year, sales volume for high-added-value models, featuring high image quality and
high-magnification zoom capabilities, increased from the same period of the previous year. As for inkjet
printers, although sales volume in the U.S. increased from the same period of the previous year thanks to sales
promotions for new products featuring enhanced mobile-device compatibility for which demand is increasing
and MAXIFY business-model inkjet printers, total sales volume declined slightly due to economic stagnation
in emerging countries and the previous year’s rush in demand in Japan leading up to the hike in the country’s
consumption tax. As a result, sales for the business unit decreased by 10.3% to ¥262.7 billion year on year,
while operating profit totaled ¥29.1 billion, a decline of 30.7%.

Find it a bit interesting that the Sony imaging & Solution segment generates more than 70% of the profit and 2/3rds of the sales of the Canons Imaging System Business Unit which apparantly includers printers. I would have expected Canon's camera business to be much larger compared to Sony.

 

[that1guyy]

Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.

My new SONY is shipping Tuesday next week (may take a while before I have it my hands though).

Had hoped so much for the 5DIV to be my next DSLR - but it was not to be.

When the 5DIV arrives I will decide if there is any reason to continue with Canon. Meanwhile, I have started selling some of my Canon gear.

You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.

So you bought the old version in the hopes it would better than your 6D when the newer mark ii version wasn't? Good logical skills there.

 

[dak723]

Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.

My new SONY is shipping Tuesday next week (may take a while before I have it my hands though).

Had hoped so much for the 5DIV to be my next DSLR - but it was not to be.

When the 5DIV arrives I will decide if there is any reason to continue with Canon. Meanwhile, I have started selling some of my Canon gear.

You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.

So you bought the old version in the hopes it would better than your 6D when the newer mark ii version wasn't? Good logical skills there.

If that is what you took away from my comments then you have neither logic skills or intelligence skills. If you did even a few minutes of research you would know that the difference in the A7 and the A7 II are almost all ergonomic. I bought the A7 II first and was disappointed in the fact that it underexposed almost everything by more than one stop. It also had a very mediocre kit lens. When I decided to give Sony another look, I chose the original A7 because it was considerably cheaper. The image quality, based on all the information, was essentially identical.

Of course, the point of my post was that the person I responded to might want to wait until he sold all of his Canon lenses because he might find that the Sony was not as good as advertised. I hope you get the point this time.

 

[fragilesi]

+1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.

The 6D is currently Canon's best value offer - I just got one for 1.150 USD as a backup/replacement and it takes excellent pictures - but even that camera does not match what Nikon has on the table.

So why did you buy it?

Nikon was not an option due to my large investment in Canon lenses. So the 6D was the obvious choice.

I'm actually going dual system with the new SONY to see how it works in real life and if dual system is worth the cost and compromises. When the 5DIV comes out I will decide on my system future.

In addition, as long as I have Canon lenses I will always want to have a Canon body at hand. There will be times I will not want to allow for any compromises using a SONY body/Canon lens combo. And any dual system setup will involve compromises.

Okay so, you thought Nikon had a better camera but bought the 6D because of your lens collection.

Now you think Sony has a better camera but presumably like most don't rate their lens range so you are going with Sony + 3rd party adaptor + Canon lens which you view as a compromise and the Canon body + lens is your best option given your lens investment.

Sounds to me like you recognise than Canon still offers a pretty strong overall proposition which is kind of out of tune with your original comment.

 

[Maiaibing]

+1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.

The 6D is currently Canon's best value offer - I just got one for 1.150 USD as a backup/replacement and it takes excellent pictures - but even that camera does not match what Nikon has on the table.

So why did you buy it?

Nikon was not an option due to my large investment in Canon lenses. So the 6D was the obvious choice.

I'm actually going dual system with the new SONY to see how it works in real life and if dual system is worth the cost and compromises. When the 5DIV comes out I will decide on my system future.

In addition, as long as I have Canon lenses I will always want to have a Canon body at hand. There will be times I will not want to allow for any compromises using a SONY body/Canon lens combo. And any dual system setup will involve compromises.

Sounds to me like you recognize than Canon still offers a pretty strong overall proposition which is kind of out of tune with your original comment.

Sounds to me you choose to meet the world with your eyes shut.

My original comment was that Canon is offering less and asking more for their cameras. What I observe is that Nikon's discount model D750 beats Canon's "Pro" 5DIII on almost every count - and costs less. I also observe that as cheap as my new 6D was for a few hundred dollars more I could have gotten a D750 - a far superior camera.

Canon clearly lags behind when it comes to their bodies. To some better high iso, better AF, faster fps, more megapix does not matter. Good for them. To me its a frustration almost every time I go out to shot.

 

[neuroanatomist]

To some better high iso, better AF, faster fps, more megapix does not matter. Good for them. To me its a frustration almost every time I go out to shot.

Yes, not having the better high ISO, better AF, faster fps, and better lenses that my Canon system delivers would certainly frustrate me.

 

[fragilesi]

+1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.

The 6D is currently Canon's best value offer - I just got one for 1.150 USD as a backup/replacement and it takes excellent pictures - but even that camera does not match what Nikon has on the table.

So why did you buy it?

Nikon was not an option due to my large investment in Canon lenses. So the 6D was the obvious choice.

I'm actually going dual system with the new SONY to see how it works in real life and if dual system is worth the cost and compromises. When the 5DIV comes out I will decide on my system future.

In addition, as long as I have Canon lenses I will always want to have a Canon body at hand. There will be times I will not want to allow for any compromises using a SONY body/Canon lens combo. And any dual system setup will involve compromises.

Sounds to me like you recognize than Canon still offers a pretty strong overall proposition which is kind of out of tune with your original comment.

Sounds to me you choose to meet the world with your eyes shut.

My original comment was that Canon is offering less and asking more for their cameras. What I observe is that Nikon's discount model D750 beats Canon's "Pro" 5DIII on almost every count - and costs less. I also observe that as cheap as my new 6D was for a few hundred dollars more I could have gotten a D750 - a far superior camera.

Canon clearly lags behind when it comes to their bodies. To some better high iso, better AF, faster fps, more megapix does not matter. Good for them. To me its a frustration almost every time I go out to shot.

Well ignoring your rudeness let's continue.

You have this opinion that the Nikon is vastly superior which is far from universally shared. You still chose the Canon citing your investment in their lenses. You are now going to try a trial system with the Sony rather than the Nikon using a third party adaptor with those Canon lenses. Presumably that's for the same reason while recognising it's a compromise and that for important work you'd stick with the Canon. Yet despite the fact it takes "excellent" pictures you find it a frustration "every time" you use it.

Still sounds like muddled thinking to me.

You said Canon offers less and asks for more, and now you've qualified that as relating to just bodies. Even if we did accept your opinions about the relative merits of the bodies it seems that as an overall system Canon still has a very competitive offer. Here the D750 costs approx 40% more than the 6d by the way, hardly insignificant. I would expect the D750 to have a significant edge for that kind of premium.

Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it. The 5DIV is not going to be an inexpensive camera.

 

[Maiaibing]

Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it.

Tuesday my new SONY ships. ;D

 

[neuroanatomist]

Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it.

Tuesday my new SONY ships. ;D

Presumably with several new lenses, too. Or do you not understand the phrase 'switch systems'?

 

[AvTvM]

Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it.

Tuesday my new SONY ships. ;D

Presumably with several new lenses, too. Or do you not understand the phrase 'switch systems'?

Well, moving from Canon to Sony makes 'switching system' a lot easier. For a nice start all it takes is a new Sony camera plus some old Canon lenses and a simple metabones adapter. ;D

Everything else can be done at leisure and in good time. Keep good/unique Canon glass via adapter, sell some lenses, buy some new native Sony/Zeiss glass. And by the time Canon has managed to finally round out their RT flash system, Sony may have an even better radio wireless system available.

 

[AvTvM]

To throw it out there, if Nikon introduced a variant of the D810 but in a mirrorless (A7RII) form factor, I'd dump Sony in a heartbeat for that (lossless raw files, good resolution, IQ, etc) if there was a metabones adapter for it.

Nikon is way too scared about the future of their established mirrorslapper-lens mount (F-mount) than Canon is about the future of EF. Both companies know perfectly well, that a really winning FF-sensored mirrorles camera absolutely REQUIRES a new native, short flange-back mount. They also should know, that a simple native adapter would easily bridge the gap to their old lens mount, to make the transition easier for their customers. But, they figure, that would cost them a lot more in sales of F / EF lenses. Therefore Nikon - and a good portion of their very conservative mirrorslapper user base (even more so than Canon users!) - can only imagine FF mirrorless cameras with a full-size legacy F-mount up front. Of course this will result in a yellow Nikon camera as attractive as the infamous Pentax K-01 -> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxk01 ;D

Not surprisingly, CaNikon's overall strategy driven by their old-fart ultra-conservative japanese beancounter managements companies is simply trying to delay the total system switch to mirrorless systems for as long as they possibly can, with not much of a plan, what to do once it becomes "inevitable".

Given this mindset I do not expect Canon or Nikon to bring FF mirrorless competitors to the Sony A7 II / A7R II and their native FE lens set in the foreseeable future. And even then it will likely have a lot of artificial "product differentiation" built in, to make it less capable a camera than their top-tier DSLRs. Good thing is, that might give Sony (and Samsung) just enough time to finish off Nikon (and make the Canon camera business a loss leader). That is pure speculation of course, but I'd love to see it happen, simply because it would be a corporate fate so well deserved. ;D

 

[dak723]

To throw it out there, if Nikon introduced a variant of the D810 but in a mirrorless (A7RII) form factor, I'd dump Sony in a heartbeat for that (lossless raw files, good resolution, IQ, etc) if there was a metabones adapter for it.

Nikon is way too scared about the future of their established mirrorslapper-lens mount (F-mount) than Canon is about the future of EF. Both companies know perfectly well, that a really winning FF-sensored mirrorles camera absolutely REQUIRES a new native, short flange-back mount. They also should know, that a simple native adapter would easily bridge the gap to their old lens mount, to make the transition easier for their customers. But, they figure, that would cost them a lot more in sales of F / EF lenses. Therefore Nikon - and a good portion of their very conservative mirrorslapper user base (even more so than Canon users!) - can only imagine FF mirrorless cameras with a full-size legacy F-mount up front. Of course this will result in a yellow Nikon camera as attractive as the infamous Pentax K-01 -> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxk01 ;D

Not surprisingly, CaNikon's overall strategy driven by their old-fart ultra-conservative japanese beancounter managements companies is simply trying to delay the total system switch to mirrorless systems for as long as they possibly can, with not much of a plan, what to do once it becomes "inevitable".

Given this mindset I do not expect Canon or Nikon to bring FF mirrorless competitors to the Sony A7 II / A7R II and their native FE lens set in the foreseeable future. And even then it will likely have a lot of artificial "product differentiation" built in, to make it less capable a camera than their top-tier DSLRs. Good thing is, that might give Sony (and Samsung) just enough time to finish off Nikon (and make the Canon camera business a loss leader). That is pure speculation of course, but I'd love to see it happen, simply because it would be a corporate fate so well deserved. ;D

Alas, your obvious hatred of Canon and your desire to see them go under influences all your arguments and makes them rather useless. You don't like mirrorslappers - but aside from the larger size I see no valid arguments for their inferiority. And many photographers are perfectly happy with a larger camera. And even more so, many photographers prefer the optical viewfinder. The rather inferior viewfinder of the Sony A7 II was one of the major reasons I returned it and kept my 6D mirrorslapper.

If you prefer mirrorless, you now have some excellent choices, so there is no reason to complain. You can get the Sony and use your Canon lenses. I would think this should make you happy. It shouldn't matter to you at all what Canon does.

Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?

 

[AvTvM]

Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?

1. While I do not really "like" any large corporation, I have no "hatred" against Canon. I'm just watching their stills imaging product strategy strictly from a customer's perspective and taking some educated guesses where that might lead them.

2. I don't want to see those mirrorslappers disappear overnight. They will disappear soon enough, but its going to take some time. Everybody can buy and use whatever type of camera they want. But it needs to be avaliable for purchase! All I want from Canon is a kick-ass FF mirrorless system. If they would also continue to churn out minor iterations of their old mirrorslappers again and again, no problem with me. All I want is the choice - mechanical mirror slapping in the lightpath ... or rather not.

3. I would like to BUY a Canon mirrorless FF camera that is fully competitive with or bests either the Sony A7 II or the A7R II. I would also like to BUY a few new native Canon lenses along with it - nicely balancing size/weight, performance and price.

4. I do dislike Sony as a company [way more than Canon] and more importantly, I really prefer the Canon user interface. Also, I don't like the idea of a reverse-engineered third party lens adapter to use my existing EF glass on a Sony body. Just as on my EOS M, I would like to buy prefer a reasonably priced, native Canon adapter to mount existing EF glass on a not-yet existing Canon FF mirrorless camera.

 

[unfocused]

Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?

1. While I do not really "like" any large corporation, I have no "hatred" against Canon. I'm just watching their stills imaging product strategy strictly from a customer's perspective and taking some educated guesses where that might lead them.

2. I don't want to see those mirrorslappers disappear overnight. They will disappear soon enough, but its going to take some time. Everybody can buy and use whatever type of camera they want. But it needs to be avaliable for purchase! All I want from Canon is a kick-ass FF mirrorless system. If they would also continue to churn out minor iterations of their old mirrorslappers again and again, no problem with me. All I want is the choice - mechanical mirror slapping in the lightpath ... or rather not.

3. I would like to BUY a Canon mirrorless FF camera that is fully competitive with or bests either the Sony A7 II or the A7R II. I would also like to BUY a few new native Canon lenses along with it - nicely balancing size/weight, performance and price.

4. I do dislike Sony as a company [way more than Canon] and more importantly, I really prefer the Canon user interface. Also, I don't like the idea of a reverse-engineered third party lens adapter to use my existing EF glass on a Sony body. Just as on my EOS M, I would like to buy prefer a reasonably priced, native Canon adapter to mount existing EF glass on a not-yet existing Canon FF mirrorless camera.

Those "wants" seem reasonable, but when they become the topic of repeated posts on multiple threads, it begins to look a lot like obsession. Especially, when there seems to be an undertone that Canon is somehow deliberately denying you the camera you want.

Let's face it. When, and if, it makes economic sense for Canon (or Nikon) to produce a full-frame mirrorless camera they will do so. Companies are in the business of making money and that means they are interested in making products that their research shows will sell in sufficient quantities to offset development costs and make a profit.

For a different take on the mirrorless debate, I'd suggest reading the interview with a Fuji executive that was referenced in a recent Photo Rumors post. The shortened version is that Fuji looked at both APS-C and Full Frame and concluded that APS-C was the best format for mirrorless. I'm not saying they are right and Sony is wrong, but their reasoning seems sound to me – the size advantages of mirrorless essentially disappear once you start developing full frame bodies and lenses and the difference in quality between APS-C and Full Frame is not that great.

Frankly, as companies go, I have a great deal of admiration for Fuji, since they were able to reinvent themselves when their core business (film) disappeared, while Kodak allowed itself to go extinct.

There is nothing wrong with wanting "a kick-ass FF mirrorless system" from Canon, but it is wrong to: a) assume that you know their business better then they do and we can somehow be certain that such a camera would be profitable and b) that there is some hidden agenda that keeps them from offering you the camera you specifically want.

Finally there is this: constantly posting the same complaint on a camera forum is not going to make your wishes come true, but it does make you appear obsessive and makes it all that much easier for people to dismiss your point of view.