Canon Rules the Camera Landscape

[roby17269]

'Twas ever thus - but still rather sad and laughable - when some people hitch their personal hobby horses to broad trends. The presence or absence of third party FF lenses in Canon's lineup (for instance) may rile some people but it is entirely irrelevant to the broad trends of eg the final death of DSLRs or the rise of China (or India or Africa). Canon may have vanished in a few decades, but it won't be because of anything any we forum dwellers care about. And every year Canon continues to manage their position within the market, a new doom-mongering mole pops up to be whacked.

we agree that Canon is successful and that that's regardless of discussion on this (and other) forum sites, since we are a tiny niche of a niche of a niche.
But this is a place for such group to talk about Canon gear, which includes disagreeing with Canon's choices from time to time. I am shooting 2 systems, one of which is a dead one (Hasselblad HC). I care much more about whether Canon releases what I want than I care about Canon's market share.
If it is "sad and laughable", what are you doing here?

 

[CJaurelius]

The question is whether it makes sense commercially for Chinese companies to enter the ILC market given volumes are pretty small overall, Japanese companies have decades of deep experience/R&D/optics. It is probably not a market where it makes sense at a industry segment level for China (as a country) to be dominant ie where subsidies would be used to enter a well-defined segment IMO.

An interesting discussion that DJI could but probably won't enter the FF market at:
https://petapixel.com/2025/07/21/dji-could-but-probably-wont-launch-a-full-frame-mirrorless-camera/

DJI doesn't need to directly enter the ILC market to disrupt. The Pocket 3 is a definitely taking up sales that would've otherwise gone to cameras like the Sony ZV-E10 and Canon R50. Sure those cameras have a better sensor but if you'filming video (main focus of these cameras) and you're not shooting something static then a lot of people are going to have to use some sort of digital stabilization whereas the pocket 3 has the built in gimbal and is still smaller.

And I think that is the biggest difference. The Japanese companies are tied to an old paradigm and slowly adjusting one small increment at a time. The Chinese don't have that legacy but they also aren't held back by it. This is interesting when it appears the future doesn't seem to be focused on higher image quality. Recent cameras (Canon R5MII, Nikon Z6III) are giving up a bit of dynamic range in favor of speed. And considering most people will never tell the difference on the screens they view the content on things like convienence and software (areas where DJI excels) will become more important.

On the lens side I honestly don't see the Japanese are going to compete. Viltox recently put out an 85mm 1.4 that is probably 90% as good as the best that Japanse have to offer and yet it's only $600. They are creating "pro" lines and badging them as such. In a world where image quality isn't really growing by leaps and bounds and Chinses are getting closer and closer its going to be hard to justify the price difference.

So Canon can continue to keep them out, creating an advantage for other brands to have a huge collection of cheaper glass options or let them in where they eat their lunch. No good options here.

 

[David - Sydney]

DJI doesn't need to directly enter the ILC market to disrupt. The Pocket 3 is a definitely taking up sales that would've otherwise gone to cameras like the Sony ZV-E10 and Canon R50. Sure those cameras have a better sensor but if you'filming video (main focus of these cameras) and you're not shooting something static then a lot of people are going to have to use some sort of digital stabilization whereas the pocket 3 has the built in gimbal and is still smaller.

I don't know how the market is going for action cams but DJI is performing much better than GoPro at the moment. We will see if GoPro can match the current Osmo specs on 20-Sept. Digital stabilisation is key for them hence their strange aspect ratio sensor.
And if you add their drones then it shows that they have some major clout.
What isn't clear yet if the pocket is decreasing sales of other segments or able to add to the total volume. Mirrorless volume has stabilised and start to grow slowly. Phone volumes are also stabilising as there is less need to upgrade every 1 or 2 years.
What is also a strange phenomenon is the rise of Instax and P&S cameras and even retro like Zf. There will always be trendy options.

And I think that is the biggest difference. The Japanese companies are tied to an old paradigm and slowly adjusting one small increment at a time. The Chinese don't have that legacy but they also aren't held back by it. This is interesting when it appears the future doesn't seem to be focused on higher image quality.

It could be similar to mp3 vs CD. The flexibility of mp3 players without the size and skips of portable CD players killed that market. A bunch of weird formats from mini disk to Sony's memory stick came and went at the same time.

Recent cameras (Canon R5MII, Nikon Z6III) are giving up a bit of dynamic range in favor of speed. And considering most people will never tell the difference on the screens they view the content on things like convienence and software (areas where DJI excels) will become more important.

There are definitely niches where the A9iii can do things that no other camera can but the niche is tiny. Computational photography is amazing in phones so it is hard to beat even in high contrast or night shooting

On the lens side I honestly don't see the Japanese are going to compete. Viltox recently put out an 85mm 1.4 that is probably 90% as good as the best that Japanse have to offer and yet it's only $600. They are creating "pro" lines and badging them as such. In a world where image quality isn't really growing by leaps and bounds and Chinses are getting closer and closer its going to be hard to justify the price difference.

Auto focus is the clear advantage. Few newbies are going to be happy with manual focus @f1.4
It wasn't too long ago that a lot of images were super soft (including older Canon lenses) compared to today. There is an expectation of good quality but no doubt that the Chinese manufacturers will win the low end of the market. Meike has been going for years but didn't really get anywhere.

So Canon can continue to keep them out, creating an advantage for other brands to have a huge collection of cheaper glass options or let them in where they eat their lunch. No good options here.

Every decade will be a time for people to assess their ecosystem just based on existing technology alone. Sony won some great market share in FF mirrorless but has a lot of competition now. I stayed with Canon when moving to RF mount simply because of my existing EF lenses. I have only a couple of them now so Canon's strategy worked on me.
Could be different in 10 year's time though

 

[justaCanonuser]

Leica S don't really sell, they are usually "rented", offen for free, by Leica subsidised professionals. S lenses are the best you can buy, but they don't sell, being, like the cameras, too expensive for those earning their income with a camera. And there's a lot of excellent, often far more advanced competition in the segment. Fujifilm, finally, was the nail in the Leica S' coffin...

I agree, Fujifilm was the final killer of the S series, their medium format offerings are extremely attractive.

 

[Del Paso]

I agree, Fujifilm was the final killer of the S series, their medium format offerings are extremely attractive.

Very nice cameras indeed, for comparably little money.
I am still tempted, if only I could convince myself I need a Fuji GX camera...