Canon releases financials for the full year 2022

[Michael Clark]

To broaden the base of users, it could be a Vloging based model and an R series M50 replacement down the track which can sit below the R10. All EF-M lenses converted to RF-S especially the EF-M 32mm f/1.4. Also an RP replacement.

Sell the M50 replacement with the 32mm f/1.4 as a kit lens and sell the RP replacement with the RF 50mm f/1.8 as a kit lens, having primes as a kit lens is just my personal wishes and probably won't happen. I think all of this would broaden the user base.

I would be astounded if we ever see a prime lens in a single lens "kit" from any camera manufacturer again. That disappeared thirty years ago in the early 1990s, never to return. People new to dedicated cameras expect a lens to "zoom", and prime lenses are the oddities to most newcomers these days. They buy a 50mm/1.8 and then go to the online forums asking about to get the camera to zoom when using it. It's almost as common as the film newbies that don't understand why they can't open the back of their film cameras after they've shot film (before it has been rewound into the film cartridge) but it has not yet been developed and fixed.

 

[Michael Clark]

It is not a certainty at all.
Third-party lenses have no R & D and production costs.
They would be purely profit for Canon.
Canon will do whatever they think makes sense.

Third party lenses, by necessity, piggyback on the R&D already done by the first party manufacturer. The mount design, communication protocol, etc. is already done for them. Most of the time the optics are also derived from someone else's existing design as well.

 

[Michael Clark]

Sony sells pretty much the same amount of lenses as Canon does and they also get royalties.

Do they, though? Canon has around 45% market share and Sony is at less than 30%...

 

[Michael Clark]

If Canon's margins are significantly larger than, say, Sigma's margins, then it is easy to see that they still may pull off more Canon sales despite their policy for the simple fact that the salesperson in the camera store knows they will make more $$ selling a Canon lens than a Sigma lens.

What percentage of current camera body and lens sales of ILCs are sold via a camera store salesperson on commission? Commissioned salespeople in dedicated camera stores aren't quite as extinct as the dodo bird, but they're not very far behind them.

 

[Michael Clark]

It's also a bit dishonest not to point out that Canon has adapters that allow all EF/EF-S mount lenses from Canon and third-parties to work seamlessly on the R bodies.

Not all third party EF/EF-S mount lenses work seamlessly on RF bodies. Reverse engineering doesn't always account for the "hidden" parts of a lens/camera communication protocol.

This was also the case with newer EF bodies and older third party lenses. I have a Sigma 70-300mm that works fine on my old EOS film cameras, but locks up any of my EOS digital bodies if the camera attempts to stop down the aperture. So I could shoot with it on my early digital bodies only as long as I kept the Av manually set to wide open.

 

[David - Sydney]

Halo products do not broaden the user base (i.e. the number of unique individuals using Canon's products). Entry level products do that. Halo products only create name brand cachet that broadens a user base if the entry level products with the same branding are available.

Catching up Michael?
Halo products do broaden the user base as they entice new users of entry level products with the assumption of trickle down engineering throughout the range. They also entice current users to move up the product portfolio via GAS.
Of course, halo products only work if they have the same brand... that is the point of them.

That said, a number of people would be aware of car brand segmentation where Audi/VW/Skoda brands or Lexus/Toyota etc being the same company but a step up in each case in quality/technology/price. The brand in this case is the halo in this case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect

 

[Michael Clark]

It is actually pretty easy to calculate.
The number of lenses sold on the E mount is reported.
The number of lenses that Sony sells is also reported.

Nah. Not every third party lens sold equals a first party lens sale lost.

Let's say I have $1,200 I can afford or am willing to spend on a lens or lenses. I might buy two third party lenses for that $1,200, or I might decide to buy a single first party lens for $950.

 

[Michael Clark]

Catching up Michael?
Halo products do broaden the user base as they entice new users of entry level products with the assumption of trickle down engineering throughout the range. They also entice current users to move up the product portfolio via GAS.
Of course, halo products only work if they have the same brand... that is the point of them.

That said, a number of people would be aware of car brand segmentation where Audi/VW/Skoda brands or Lexus/Toyota etc being the same company but a step up in each case in quality/technology/price. The brand in this case is the halo in this case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect

Yes, it's the first time I've been on here in a while and was mentioned in a previous comment, even though I had not commented anywhere on this thread.

Again, Halo products only work to bring in new entry level users if entry level products are available. As long as the entire EOS R system requires a $1,000+ expenditure for a single body and a single lens, they will not sell any RF cameras or lenses to those looking to buy a $500-750 camera/lens combo. This statement is almost certainly referencing newer products appearing in the sub-$1,000 space, not the $8,000+ space.

 

[David - Sydney]

Yes, it's the first time I've been on here in a while and was mentioned in a previous comment, even though I had not commented anywhere on this thread.

Again, Halo products only work to bring in new entry level users if entry level products are available. As long as the entire EOS R system requires a $1,000+ expenditure for a single body and a single lens, they will not sell any RF cameras or lenses to those looking to buy a $500-750 camera/lens combo. This statement is almost certainly referencing newer products appearing in the sub-$1,000 space, not the $8,000+ space.

I wasn't mentioning a dollar threshold for what determines an "entry level" expenditure. It would be dramatically different based on the individual's circumstances.
You can look at the overall Canon brand irrespective of mount or just the R mount ecosystem (which includes EF/EF-S lenses) and the same marketing psychology would apply.

 

[koenkooi]

I know not what it is like in other cultures, but in the U.S. interest in still images is pretty much dead among the under 30 crowd. It's all about 15-second Tik-Tok videos. Sure, there are a few hobbyists who like to create still images in the younger demographic, but there are very few interested in consuming (viewing/buying) them.

I keep being surprised at how many people, under 30, I interact with have photography as a hobby. At least 3 people working at the local bakery, which shows in the product shots on social media, 2 of the teachers in the day care, a nurse in the ER, the resident cardiologist. The catering lady in the hospital was over 30 and into Tik-Tok

The above is a combination of anecdotes and confirmation bias and doesn't have a bearing on the ILC market People listing photography as a hobby can and do get excellent results with their phone cameras.

 

[entoman]

I know not what it is like in other cultures, but in the U.S. interest in still images is pretty much dead among the under 30 crowd. It's all about 15-second Tik-Tok videos. Sure, there are a few hobbyists who like to create still images in the younger demographic, but there are very few interested in consuming (viewing/buying) them.

That's probably true also for under 30s in the UK - they seem mainly to be interested in selfies and short video clips for social media, although as an out-of-touch 72 year old I may be wrong.

At local wildlife parks I see a lot of stills photographers, but most are over 50s, using a variety of gear, mostly Canon R series, and a few Nikon and Canon DSLRs.

On safaris in Africa and India almost all of the serious photographers I encounter are shooting on Canon R series, typically with RF100-500mm or adapted EF big primes. Serious birders on these trips seem to mostly use Sony A9 series with 200-600mm, as they believe this is a better set up for their purposes. The "non-serious" photographers were all using bridge cameras. The (extremely good) under 30s guides on my most recent Indian tiger safari were only shooting video for social media.

On my own tours (I operate butterfly photography tours around the world) all of my customers (who are in the over 60's category), shoot only stills, and almost exclusively use Canon R series, although a few use Olympus.

Just personal observations of course.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Do they, though? Canon has around 45% market share and Sony is at less than 30%...

Yes, they both sell pretty much the same amount of lenses.
Canon typically sells a few more but last year was the first year in a long time that Canon was not number 1.
Sony squeaked by in first place.
If I had to guess the reason then I would say that Sony sells a lot more APS-C lenses.
Canon really does not have that many APS-C lenses even though both companies mostly sell APS-C cameras.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Yes, they both sell pretty much the same amount of lenses.
Canon typically sells a few more but last year was the first year in a long time that Canon was not number 1.
Sony squeaked by in first place.

Are you basing that on BCN data? If so, those data apply only to Japan, and are not representative of the global market. Japan accounted for 9% of global lens sales in 2022.

Looking at ILC sales in 2022, 30% globally were DSLR’s, but only 15% in Japan. Since nearly all of those would have been sold with a kit lens, and zero of them were sold by Sony, clearly the global picture for lenses is going to be different than the microcosm of Japan.

 

[Michael Clark]

I keep being surprised at how many people, under 30, I interact with have photography as a hobby. At least 3 people working at the local bakery, which shows in the product shots on social media, 2 of the teachers in the day care, a nurse in the ER, the resident cardiologist. The catering lady in the hospital was over 30 and into Tik-Tok

The above is a combination of anecdotes and confirmation bias and doesn't have a bearing on the ILC market People listing photography as a hobby can and do get excellent results with their phone cameras.

I wasn't aware that the Netherlands is part of the U.S.

Due to my work in scholastic settings I encounter a large number of students. 15 years ago more of them were interested in still photos, both in terms of creating them and consuming them. Now almost none of them are. Their parents, especially the older ones, are still somewhat interested in still images of their children engaged in school activities but even they are fewer in number than was the case about 15 years ago when smart phones first exploded into common usage following the introduction of the first iPhone in 2007.

Yes, one can do some pretty nice photography with smart phones. But the ability to create and view decent quality video using the same devices seems to have vastly superseded interest in still images as the bandwidth available to phones has increased.