Canon releases financials for the full year 2022
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Canon has no recent data to "think differently" since this is a recent move on their part. There is no 'sturdy' limb to go out on. The reality is that word is spreading that you cannot get those nice 3rd party lenses for Canon, but you can for Sony. So for entry-level buyers, as the word gets out, it is a no-brainer decision. For me, I'm heavily invested in Canon so I won't be bailing any time soon. But it is a cold, hard fact that when Canon made their announcement, I quit recommending Canon to new photographers and I told them why, pointing them to Sony/Sigma instead. Same with the organization I work with, who start complaining if I and all the other photographers (around a dozen) try to reimburse too many Canon L-lenses but would be more generous with cheaper Sigma reimbursements. So the company has also started migrating away from Canon to Sony. But this is a slow process that we'll see signs of in the 2023 sales, and even more so in the 2024 sales ... unless Canon reverses its policy.
Upvote
0
Canon has years of data on their own sales of EF lenses and competitive data on sales of 3rd party lenses for the EF mount. Years of data on which owners of what bodies bought which Canon lenses and which 3rd party lenses. They can estimate quite well the revenue effects of 3rd party lens availability. With those data in hand, they decided to block 3rd parties from making AF lenses for the RF mount.
The 'sturdy limb' I went out on was stating that Canon knows more about making and selling lenses than you do. Are you going to claim that you know more about the ILC market than the company that has led it for two decades? Lol.
...that you are one individual predicting d00m for Canon over one specific issue that you don't like. Dynamic range, overheating, AF tracking, were all areas where Canon would supposedly pay the consequences in market share. They didn't. Your arguments are just a rehash ("I've stopped recommending Canon because their low ISO DR is horrible, everyone I know has stopped recommending Canon because their low ISO DR is so terrible, Canon is d00med,"...sound familiar?). Blocking 3rd party lenses hurting Canon is just the latest in a long line of baseless predictions by forum dwellers of impending dOOm for Canon. Somehow, the hammer never falls. But no doubt you'll be the one who is right this time.
...or not.
Upvote
0
I expect that Canon will stay in the top two positions, but one fact I am certain of is that I no longer recommend Canon to anyone entering the field of photography, and for exactly the 3rd Party Reason. I also know for a fact that in my immediate circle of photographers, both amateur and professional, none of the Canon users are recommending Canon to those entering the field for exactly that reason. Those are cold, hard facts. One more fact-this is a recent move by Canon, so they simply do not have the data (irrelevant data you cited aside) as to how this specific policy will affect camera sales in 2023-2026. We can safely say that they will sell fewer cameras than they otherwise would have. Whether that balances off with selling more RF lenses than they otherwise would have remains to be seen. 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. That is data I do not have and it could tip the scales in favour of Canon despite their policy.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
This seems to me to be very bad advice and something I personally would not do. I don't get asked a lot about cameras, but if I do, I tell them why I chose Canon, but also let them know that both Sony and Nikon are good brands as well. In my experience, most new buyers are driven by price, so the best advice I can give is to explain what they get for spending extra money on different levels of bodies. Of course, with fewer Canon R bodies than DSLRs, it's much easier to differentiate than it used to be with the myriad of Rebel bodies. If asked about Nikon or Sony I simply say they are good cameras as well, but that I'm not familiar with what they offer, but they should look for the same kinds of features in those bodies as well.
Telling someone to buy a particular brand because of the availability of cheaper third-party lenses seems like just letting personal bias color your advice. If the person ever gets serious about photography, they are likely to want to buy original manufacturers' lenses so pitching the availability of third party lenses as a deciding factor is kind of a disservice. 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. But then, maybe you conceal that information because it doesn't fit with your narrative about Canon.
How can we safely say that? I doubt you have any data to back up that statement.
Assuming, of course, that the person shops in a camera store. Which is almost impossible to do in the U.S. unless you live in a very large city. Also, the camera store clerk only benefits in your scenario if they work on commission, rather than being an hourly employee. On top of that, the store clerk may recommend the manufacturer's brand for other reasons, such as reliability and customer satisfaction.
Frankly I'm getting a bit tired of all the whining about third-party access. Two facts the whiners ignore:
1) For decades, third-party manufacturers produced lenses without licensing agreements and without violating patents. Nothing stopping them from still doing that.
2) If Canon finds that they are losing sales because they don't offer licensing agreements, they will reverse course and offer those agreements.
Upvote
0
Lol. I personally know three people who have bought Canon ILCs this year, and one person who bought a Sony ILC. Those are also cold, hard facts that have just as much relevance as yours to global market share, i.e., absolutely none.
No, we can’t. After all the forum DRoning about poor DR, Canon gained market share. After all the forum AFfectation about poor AF tracking, Canon gained market share. After the forums burned up over the R5 overheating, Canon gained market share. But you think this ‘issue’ is different?
Actually, 2021 was the first year in many that Canon lost global market share. They dropped 2.1%, while Sony gained 4.9%. Of course, that leaves Canon with 46% of the market and Sony with 27%, a very large gap in a market that really doesn’t change that fast. It’s also worth noting that while we don’t have global data for 2022, we do have data from Japan showing that last year was the first year Canon beat out Sony for MILC sales. That ‘cold, hard fact’ actually is relevant, and combined with the release of the R10 and R7 last year suggests that Sony’s gain relative to Canon in 2021 is not the start of a trend. Regardless, the 2021 global data precede the 3rd party lockout. OTOH, that ‘news’ broke in 3Q of the year Canon overtook Sony for MILC sales in Japan.
Although you avoided answering my direct question, “Are you going to claim that you know more about the ILC market than the company that has led it for two decades?,” it’s obvious from your continued baseless arguments that you believe you do. Your suggestion that what you and ‘your inner circle’ say or do matters at all to global camera sales is silly. Even if you give your advice to everyone you know, and they’re all gullible enough to unquestioningly follow it, that number is meaningless compared to the millions of cameras Canon sells each year. But the belief that you understand the ILC market better than the multibillion-dollar global company that dominates that market goes way beyond silly, it’s asinine to the point of mental deficiency.
TL;DR – YAPODFC.
Upvote
0
Interesting: total ILC market sales were 5.85 million units in 2022. Sounds like a lot, but to put it into a perspective: in 2022 were about 1.21 billion smartphones shipped, according to https://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS50146623 - and this was a bad year for the industry. This relation shows how small the enthusiast's and pro market for digital cameras actually is (world population of our species is now about 8 billion people).
Upvote
0
To tweak an old Queen song: we always need somebody to
Just a joke, I recommend to relax a bit. If you aren't happy with Canon, just sell your gear and go for another brand like Nikon or Sony. The good thing for us users is that we still find alternatives in the market to chose.
Upvote
0
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.
Upvote
0
You think lens prices are too high. Fine, why not just say that?
Total lens shipments for 2022 were essentially equivalent to those in 2021 (up, but only by 2%). Why do you believe demand has slowed down?
The number that did change meaningfully from 2021 to 2022 was the value of those lens shipments, which actually did go to 11 (% increase), likely due to those higher retail prices.
If manufacturers can keep prices high and not lose sales, why wouldn’t they?
As always, you are welcome to share your opinions. When those opinions are contradicted by readily available facts (lens shipment data from CIPA, in this case), it makes you look foolish. I’d have thought looking foolish would be a reasonable motivation to stop so many forum members from posting such easily refuted statements intended to support their opinions, or at least induce them to check relevant facts before they post. Clearly, that’s not the case.
Upvote
0
For small displays of smartphones and even tablets, the quality of today's smartphone cameras + the massive algorithms used to make those videos and stills looking better is more than sufficient. Only if one wants to make bigger, detailed prints, better ILC with good lenses start to shine.
Upvote
0
Well, in a lost world of photography, more than 70 years back, this was exactly Canon's business model: they made cameras with Leica screw mount, and Nikon - besides Leitz (Leica), of course, and Soviet manufacturers like Jupiter - made lenses for the old M39 mount.
Today it makes economical sense for Canon to not open their system for 3rd party manufacturers. As long as Canon lenses will have an advantage e.g. in fast & reliable focusing and best performing combined in-lens/sensor IS in Canon's ecosystem, many users will finally decide to go for Canon lenses. Otherwise Canon would only lose sales, but gain not much - they would need to make royalties so expensive that 3rd party manufacturers would prefer not to pay them and rely on reverse engineering like the do nowadays.
Upvote
0
Why though? If I were asked for a recommendation it would depend on what the person wanted to achieve. Most people never buy a second lens, which means most people never buy a third party lens; and plenty of niches are covered by native RF glass (not even mentioning the vast number of EF lenses including third party ones). If, for instance, someone was interested in budget bird photography, Canon would be just as good a choice as any other brand, maybe better - the various telephoto zooms and primes make the third party equivalents obsolete imo.
I thought your original post was satire but it seems you're serious.
Upvote
0
So I guess the royalities from licensing are a myth, always learn something new from these forums. Also its not just Canon but everyone is ******* this economic year, with hubris regarding prices(motherboard and GPU makers are in much worse place than camera makers) coming back to bite everyone in backside royally. Also with the sheer number of layoff happening right now are bad for non essential industries.
Edit: here is forecast for drop in demand of new servers as well(high margin segment) along how Samsung has also had massive drop in profits.
Projected YoY Growth Rate of Global Server Shipments for 2023 Has Been Lowered to 1.87% Due to North American Cloud Service Providers Cutting Demand
Facing global economic headwinds, the four major North American cloud service providers (CSPs) have scaled back their server procurement quantities for 2023 and could make further downward corrections in the future. Meta is the leader among the four in terms of server demand reduction, followed...www.techpowerup.com
Samsung Electronics Announces Fourth Quarter and FY 2022 Results, Profits at an 8-year Low
Samsung Electronics today reported financial results for the fourth quarter and the fiscal year 2022. The Company posted KRW 70.46 trillion in consolidated revenue and KRW 4.31 trillion in operating profit in the quarter ended December 31, 2022. For the full year, it reported 302.23 trillion in...
Do people just like to make things up? Sony does not collect royalties on third-party lenses. Third-party lenses are produced by companies other than Sony and do not use any proprietary technology owned by Sony, so Sony does not have a claim to any royalties on their sales.
Yes, third-party lens companies may have to pay Sony for certification of their lenses for use with Sony cameras. This certification process ensures that the third-party lenses meet certain standards set by Sony and are compatible with their camera systems. The fees for certification can vary, but it is typically a one-time cost for the company.
Upvote
0
We all know that those were aimed at people who just wanted small, relatively inexpensive cameras and lenses. They did very well, something I’ve said here several times in the past, but were considered to be an oddball, something that Canon would have to ditch, and yes, it looks as though that’s now happening.
Dan Wells, who writes for The Luminous Landscape, just wrote a first part article about 2023. In that article he states that Canon needs to ditch the M lenses altogether. Yep. It’s a dead end, and have not much to do with mainstream APS-C.
Upvote
0
The point is: the EOS M line was launched in 2012, they are mirrorless ILCs, they are made by Canon, and by four years ago Canon had launched 8 lenses for the line. So when you stated:
…you were full of sh!t. We all know that, too.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
You were wrong, and refused to admit it. Is that really so hard? It's sad that being corrected upsets you so deeply that you have to resort to personal insults.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)