CIPA Camera Sales Data Released, Decline Continues

[Hillsilly]

Do people still buy digital cameras? Every time I look at the most popular cameras on Amazon, all I see is Fuji Instax...

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Camera-Photo/zgbs/electronics/502394/ref=zg_bs_unv_e_2_281052_1

Even my local department stores no longer stock digital cameras. But they have big Instax displays.

If CIPA tracked film camera sales, we'd be celebrating a healthy and prosperous year, and be looking forward, optimistically, to 2017.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

...I never use "connectivity" on my 70D: I don't use WiFi control (might some day), don't upload to FarceBook or SnackChat, don't edit on the teeny screen. I pull the SD card out, insert it into a USB adapter, then copy my photos over. I use my camera as a camera, not as a social media tool...

"I don't need moveable type, this quill works just fine."

"I don't want a gas powered buggy, my horses are just fine."

"What do you need a toilet inside for? The outhouse is just a few steps away."

"My typewriter works fine, why would I want a computer on my desk?"

I get this, but, it's kind of asking too much. My hammer is still a hammer, yes it could also have WiFi but is there a need?

Give a dslr phone capabilities, great, but, it still doesn't compete with cell phones. The mass market for p&s cameras is quite satiated with what their phones can do. So to me at least this argument is a red herring. Like the hammer, does a camera really need to waste trespasses on apps?

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

...I never use "connectivity" on my 70D: I don't use WiFi control (might some day), don't upload to FarceBook or SnackChat, don't edit on the teeny screen. I pull the SD card out, insert it into a USB adapter, then copy my photos over. I use my camera as a camera, not as a social media tool...

"I don't need moveable type, this quill works just fine."

"I don't want a gas powered buggy, my horses are just fine."

"What do you need a toilet inside for? The outhouse is just a few steps away."

"My typewriter works fine, why would I want a computer on my desk?"

Your point is taken, but exaggerated. The fact that I don't use it doesn't mean others won't find it useful, nor that I won't ever. My point was that these features would be well-placed on a P&S, but there's less demand on a DSLR.

In my opinion, connectivity will go the other way: cameras will reduce to lens and sensor, and you'll use your phone/device as the viewfinder and UI. It's already started happening with lens add-ons for smartphones.

Agree... this way a camera can be a camera, user the phone for the other stuff

 

[c.d.embrey]

Personally, I can't wait till one of the big 3 go under so "maybe" the remaining ones will get it through their thick Japanese skulls.

IMHO Nikon will be gone in two years, or so, if they don't get quality control fixed. Read what Nikon maven Thom Hogan wrote today. Nikon's other problem is not listening to their owners—the DX sensor Nikon D500 was several years late, which caused some switching.

Sony menus suck-more than most. That along with several other problems could hurt Sony, if Canon went after them with a 4K bridge camera, a Pro M w/4K, etc, etc.

 

[LDS]

"I don't need moveable type, this quill works just fine."
"I don't want a gas powered buggy, my horses are just fine."
"What do you need a toilet inside for? The outhouse is just a few steps away."
"My typewriter works fine, why would I want a computer on my desk?"

You're just looking at the innovations that worked. But there were, and are, a lots of "good ideas" that turned out not working/being useful at all. For example, I was reading today about the smartwatch sales slump. It looks, after all, people don't need nor like watches with apps. Sometimes all you need a specialized tool that does a single thing, but very, very well.

Wireless connection will become common, but beware also that what can connect to, can be connected to also... while making the UI more complicated with lots of dubious features (which can become obsolete in few years if not months) could - like watches - make people think if they really need them.

 

[Mikehit]

Personally, I can't wait till one of the big 3 go under so "maybe" the remaining ones will get it through their thick Japanese skulls.

If one of the big 3 collapses the others will see less need to give you what you say you want. The competition won't be there to drive them on and people will only be able to buy what is available instead of voting with their wallet.
It seems neither economics nor business realities are not your strong point.

 

[Hillsilly]

I've heard smartwatches have failed because they don't take good photos.

Once they get a decent camera, it will be goodbye to Rolex, Patek Philippe, Seiko and Co.

 

[AvTvM]

Personally, I can't wait till one of the big 3 go under so "maybe" the remaining ones will get it through their thick Japanese skulls.

If one of the big 3 collapses the others will see less need to give you what you say you want. The competition won't be there to drive them on and people will only be able to buy what is available instead of voting with their wallet.
It seems neither economics nor business realities are not your strong point.

When Nikon collapses [I bet it will!], I will just laugh. It will not impact my ability to get good imaging gear at decent prices for as long as I live. If the remaining suppliers do not make the right stuff and/or charge too much, me and millions of other potential non-Pro (!) users will just not buy. Until they are on their knees and have to sell their wares at firesale prices. As happened to Canon with their nerfed and overpriced EOS M not too long ago. ;D

 

[SteveM]

Current cameras are very very good, and if you think about it, your current camera probably gives you all you need really. It would appear they have virtually maxed out current technology, hence the insignificant improvements from one model to the next. Some of the poor quality new lens releases won't help their cause....principally the 24-105 which could have been a massive seller for them. Then of course you have the the 'incredible' release price of a certain camera and some recent high price rises, always blamed on conversion rates.
I would imagine there is some 'executive' scratching his head and wondering why sales aren't skyrocketing in the dslr market with all the fantastic new add ons! I'm not. My current 5D Mklll and 7D mkll are perfectly adequate...more than that they are very good cameras. Until more significant upgrades are produced, at non insulting prices, my 'disposable income' goes into holidays, somewhere I can make the most of the gear I have and have a seriously good time as well.
For what it's worth, I don't want Bluetooth, I don't want wifi, I don't want touchscreens, I don't want 4K, just give me something simple like lower noise at higher ISO, and I don't mean a lousy half a stop increase. I want an improvement I can see on an A3 print, something tangible.

 

[YuengLinger]

Even Starbucks is shifting from catering to the middle-class to targeting customers with more money to spend--as much as $1 per ounce for upscale coffee!

So, for those complaining endlessly about prices and strategies, business school might help you see the world a little differently.

As for mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses, they are absolutely one of the promising class of products for the industry. Baby boomers who have the cash may not have the strength, stamina, or steadiness for 35mm dSLR bodies, but they love, love, love bodies the size of the latest Fuji and Olympus offerings. With Olympus, they don't mind the smaller sensor because they can also use smaller lenses and enjoy in-body IS.

So, yes, there is a big segment of the enthusiast community willing to trade big dSLR's for smaller mirrorless, and Canon has, perhaps, been too slow to respond to this development.

 

[Mikehit]

As for mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses, they are absolutely one of the promising class of products for the industry.

Absolutely. I just don't agree with those who foresee the demise of Canon because they have not got the technology perfected in their products...like...NOW!

Baby boomers who have the cash may not have the strength, stamina, or steadiness for 35mm dSLR bodies, but they love, love, love bodies the size of the latest Fuji and Olympus offerings. With Olympus, they don't mind the smaller sensor because they can also use smaller lenses and enjoy in-body IS.

Which is why I have Olympus MFT and Panaconic MFT. And if it was not for my love of shooting wildlife I may well have got rid of my Canon gear by now.

So, yes, there is a big segment of the enthusiast community willing to trade big dSLR's for smaller mirrorless, and Canon has, perhaps, been too slow to respond to this development.

'Too slow' or 'no need to hurry'? My guess is the latter. And despite the pro/enthusiasts who have shifted totally to mirrorless (and there are a sizeable number of them), Canon's DSLR offerings remain strong while mirrorless have shown little growth.
I have read and heard rumors that the next generation of Canon mirrorless will show significant improvements - probably not approaching the functionality of Sony or Olympus but strong enough in themselves to keep Canon owners interested as a second compatible compact system and interest people new to the market.

 

[rrcphoto]

there is a big segment of the enthusiast community willing to trade big dSLR's for smaller mirrorless, and Canon has, perhaps, been too slow to respond to this development.

actually there doesn't seem to be.

Olympus can only sell 500,000 cameras in a year.

Sony's unit shares have been slipping.

Panasonic who knows.

 

[Loswr]

that's exactly it: we should NOT be concerned with Canon's best. We should FIRMLY DEMAND what is BEST FOR US. On this forum and vis a vis Canon. For example by not buying sub-par gear from them. Or excessively priced stuff. Which is what I do. And not only me.

So what happens when you (and your million fantasy friends) DEMAND the small FF MILC that is BEST FOR YOU, and two others (and their two million fantasy friends) DEMAND the larger, ergonomically balanced dSLR-like FF MILC that is BEST FOR THEM?

What happens is you still don't get what you want...and you still have no clue why.

 

[AvTvM]

there is a big segment of the enthusiast community willing to trade big dSLR's for smaller mirrorless, and Canon has, perhaps, been too slow to respond to this development.

actually there doesn't seem to be.

Olympus can only sell 500,000 cameras in a year.

Sony's unit shares have been slipping.

Panasonic who knows.

If there is nothing *WORTHWHILE to BUY*, nothing will be SOLD. As easy as that. Circular conclusion.

Isn't it obvious?

* Sony sucks, because of lens offering and totally pervert lens prices
* Panasonic sucks because of mFT dwarf-sensor (except for some video-centric people)
* Olympus mFT dwarf. Also, their top-dog mFT camera is as big and expensive as a Sony A7 II FF camera and a lot more expensive than a Canon 6D
* Fuji sucks because of body and lens prices for a crop-only system. Higher prices than 6D and Canon EF lenses.

Would you invest *serious money* in a crop-only system? Not me, and not *millions of others* ... if my kind spends a grand or 2 or 3 a pop, its gotta be the FULL FRAME MONTY ... 36x24mm sensor and matching image circle.

If it has a smaller sensor/image circle, fine we will also accept it, but it better be priced significantly lower ... like Canon EF-S and EF-M glass. As simple as that. I want to give Canon credit - they got THAT ONE right! Smart, Canon!

 

[Mikehit]

If there is nothing *WORTHWHILE to BUY*, nothing will be SOLD. As easy as that. Circular conclusion.

Is that as far as your knowledge of business management goes?

Isn't it obvious?

* Sony sucks, because of lens offering and totally pervert lens prices
* Panasonic sucks because of mFT dwarf-sensor (except for some video-centric people)
* Olympus mFT dwarf. Also, their top-dog mFT camera is as big and expensive as a Sony A7 II FF camera and a lot more expensive than a Canon 6D
* Fuji sucks because of body and lens prices for a crop-only system. Higher prices than 6D and Canon EF lenses.

And yet they all have loyal customers including many, many professionals. Lord alone knows what yo would think of and amateur like Alex Majoli (award-winning |magnum photographer) using Olympus point-and -shoots on assignment.


Of what I have seen on your flickr site, you could use a MFT and not tell the difference in image quality.

 

[AvTvM]

Of what I have seen on your flickr site, you could use a MFT and not tell the difference in image quality.

Don't have a flickr account or photos there. If there is an AvTvM nick there, it is not me.


I agree, some people manage to capture awesome images with very basic gear, including smartphones. If I want, I also manage to drive a screw into a wall with a hammer. Yet, that does not make the hammer an adequate screwdriver.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Sales volume for ILCs was much lower. In June of this year, ILC units shipped surpassed P&S units shipped for the first time, and more ILCs than P&S were shipped July - September. In October, more P&S were shipped, but only ~10K units (i.e. within 1%).

But battery sales per sold ILC must be considerably higher than those per DLSR 8)

 

[justaCanonuser]

YES! Very happy to see that. Despite Canon Defense League claims I seem to have not been the only one who has not bought anything from that industry in all of 2016 ...

But ... Canon knows better, Canon knows best, Canon multimillion bucks market research clearly shows, crippled Powershots and marginally improved iterations of big, fat mirrorslappers are exactly what the market wants. LOL! ;D

As usual, you miss the point. Did I mention...WOOOOSH?

For ILCs, Jan-Oct 2016 shows a significant y/y decline for the industry as a whole. Canon's performance over that period shows quarterly y/y changes of 0%, -1% and +8%, and they predict the year will finish at -1%. A basically flat year during which the ILC market as a whole declines substantially means Canon's market share is growing...substantially. Which means that Canon's ILC market research is quite effective at figuring out what the majority of the reduced overall numbers of buyers want, and offering it to them.

Why on earth is only Sony selling an FF sensored MILC system?

Why is Sony losing market share...to Canon?

This debate is a wonderful example for our post-thruth age. A scientist (I am one, too) tries to argue with facts, but all those little and bigger Donalds out there don't care.

 

[AvTvM]

the facts I care about are my wallet, my money and what I get for it from a given gear supplier. I am neither interested in that suppliers' sales numbers nor in their profits. That's their problem, not mine. All I want is max. bang for my buck Euros.

 

[Mikehit]

You really have lost touch with reality haven't you.

I am neither interested in that suppliers' sales numbers nor in their profits. That's their problem, not mine. All I want is max. bang for my buck Euros.

Without sales, they do not make profit.
Without profit they go bust
Then you have no cameras at all to buy.
So yes, it is your problem.

the facts I care about are my wallet, my money

Look at it this way - if htere are no products you want to buy, you can console your self with the knowledge that the 'new' gear is not significantly better than the gear you won, you therefore have near-top of the range equipment without spending a single cent. You have saved your self thousands and got the best value of all without doing anything.



Except of course, coming on this forum and whining how the manufacturers are not producing equipment no-one else does and how you are not able to find anything to spend your money on. It may be a radical idea but how about taking the money you want to spend on camera gear and spending it instead on going to exotic locations and actually using the gear you've got?