Nikon drops sales forecast as high-end camera market stalls

[Lichtgestalt]

By the numbers:

• Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
• Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon. Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Actually, according to this article, the situation is a bit different:

Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

I would argue that a year-to-year comparison is more reliable than a quarter-to-quarter one.

The quote you excerpted refers to "cameras" which includes both dSLRs and P&S units. I'll grant that it's a bit ambiguous in the linked article, and that's either bad writing or quite possibly intentional. I was referring to dSLRs only, using data from Canon's and Nikon's own quarterly financial presentations.

Also, I compared a 6-month block of time with the same 6-month block from the previous year (which is what y/y means - year-to-year). I doubt looking at a full year would have made a difference in the trend, and doing so is more difficult because Canon and Nikon use offset fiscal years. If you'd like to comb through their Investor Relations pages and present full year data for dSLRs, I'd be interested in your findings.

Yes, I agree that it's ambiguous. The point of the article, however, seems to me that it's the steep decline in interchangeable-lens cameras, as opposed to a well known decline of P&S and the likes.

The problem with comparing semesters is that the data can be confused by recent product releases, holidays, festivities, etc. This is why I find more reliable to do such calculations based on a whole year.

then do it for the whole year and show us the results.
as neuro said it´s not as easy as looking at the 6 month report numbers.

posting a link to overall camera sales when we talk about DSLR sales is of not much help.... so much is certain.

 

[Albi86]

By the numbers:

• Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
• Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon. Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Actually, according to this article, the situation is a bit different:

Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

I would argue that a year-to-year comparison is more reliable than a quarter-to-quarter one.

The quote you excerpted refers to "cameras" which includes both dSLRs and P&S units. I'll grant that it's a bit ambiguous in the linked article, and that's either bad writing or quite possibly intentional. I was referring to dSLRs only, using data from Canon's and Nikon's own quarterly financial presentations.

Also, I compared a 6-month block of time with the same 6-month block from the previous year (which is what y/y means - year-to-year). I doubt looking at a full year would have made a difference in the trend, and doing so is more difficult because Canon and Nikon use offset fiscal years. If you'd like to comb through their Investor Relations pages and present full year data for dSLRs, I'd be interested in your findings.

Yes, I agree that it's ambiguous. The point of the article, however, seems to me that it's the steep decline in interchangeable-lens cameras, as opposed to a well known decline of P&S and the likes.

The problem with comparing semesters is that the data can be confused by recent product releases, holidays, festivities, etc. This is why I find more reliable to do such calculations based on a whole year.

then do it for the whole year and show us the results.
as neuro said it´s not as easy as looking at the 6 month report numbers.

posting a link to overall camera sales when we talk about DSLR sales is of not much help.... so much is certain.

As it seems you haven't grasped the sense of the lines you quoted, the point is in fact that the article is about DSLR sale decline, though it's not clear if the figures refer to that or to camera sales in total.

Something being easy doesn't make it correct, by the way.

 

[Loswr]

As it seems you haven't grasped the sense of the lines you quoted, the point is in fact that the article is about DSLR sale decline, though it's not clear if the figures refer to that or to camera sales in total.

dSLR sales are currently dropping, no one is arguing that point. Given that Canon is predicting their first drop in annual dSLR sales (predicting, as in when their fiscal year ends, which hasn't happened yet), I'd argue that looking at the prior 12 months from now would not be as useful as looking at the past six (unless you'd prefer to paint a rosier picture).

But I posted data showing that Nikon sales of dSLRs are dropping much faster than Canon's, and you replied with a quote you seemed to think says the opposite, but doesn't.

Now, let's look again at your 'evidence' but in context:

According to Mr. Chute’s research, the rate of market decline is accelerating each quarter — with global shipments of all digital cameras falling 36.2% to 19.2 million units in the second quarter alone, and interchangeable lens cameras, which include DSLRs, falling 10.9% to just 4 million units shipped. Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

First off, re-reading the whole paragraph, it's obvious the '23% less cameras than a year ago' refers to all cameras, not just dSLRs. Second, the quarterly drop is for all ILCs, which includes dSLRs and mirrorless. While Canon doesn't have much of a stake in the mirrorless market, Nikon, Sony and Fuji do...Nikon has stated their mirrorless sales have taken a big hit. Finally, I'm referencing the companies' own data, and you're quoting a blog piece that quotes a someone from a market research firm. I hope you know that such firms are not unbiased, but rather publish information that attempts to direct investors in a direction desired by those who sponsor the market research firm.

Something being easy doesn't make it correct, by the way.

By the way, 'something easy' is what you did - take an excerpt from someone else's writing, and copy-paste....and you're right, that doesn't make it correct (or even applicable, in this case).

 

[Woody]

As it seems you haven't grasped the sense of the lines you quoted, the point is in fact that the article is about DSLR sale decline, though it's not clear if the figures refer to that or to camera sales in total.

Something being easy doesn't make it correct, by the way.

Here are some definite numbers to work with:

a) From the latest CIPA numbers (till Sep 2013) and Nikon's Nov 2013 financial report, 7,481,644 DSLRs were shipped in the period Mar-Sep 2013, of which 2,980,000 (39.8%) came from Nikon. Most of the remaining 60.2% of shipped DSLRs probably came from Canon since we do not expect Pentax and Sony to sell many DSLRs. That gives us a hint of Canon's market shares in the DSLR arena for the period Mar-Sep 2013.

b) In the period of Jan-Sep 2013, for every MILC shipped worldwide, 4.66 DSLRs were shipped.

c) Thom Hogan just posted his latest analysis/prediction of the market here based on Nikon's financial report. He translated Nikon's forecast of 6.2 mil interchangeable lens cameras (DSLR + MILC) into 33.1% market shares.Canon expects to sell 8 mil interchangeable lens cameras which is equivalent to 42.7% market shares based on Thom Hogan's analysis. Total Canikon market shares add up to 75.8%, consistent with 2010, 2011 and 2012 numbers.

 

[AvTvM]

Unfortunately, exact numbers are either not broken down in enough detail and/or all over the place, since press realeases and articles alike are obsure and/or poorly written.

The big picture is clear:

* consumers
not buying much. Money is tight, they got smartüphones and most of the households got comapct cameras and often a low-end DSLR as well. Most consumers have smartened up sufficently to realize their DSLR+kit lens sit in the closet most of the time and their smartphones deliver good enough IQ. Market saturated - not only compacts, but also more-of the-same-and-only-marginally-better, iterative low-end DLSRs. All manufacturers similarly affected. Except for a few moving up into enthusiast segment, will generally not return to buy another dwarf-sensor compact or DSLRs in the future.

* prosumer/enthusiast
smartened up and come to realize those boxy-clunky mirrorslappers are nearing end of shelf live. Waiting for "the right"mirrorless camera at affordable price without having to sacrifice much in speed/performance (AF) and ergonomics (esp. OVF vs. EVF) compared to their current DSLRs. Ideally coming from their current manufacturer to increase chances, some lenses will continue to work quite well (via adapter) and not having to learn a new user interface. They are sitting on the fence and also don't buy as many lenses since future of systems is open.
Sony's A7/R are just about "attractive enough" to capture some in that group. Or may settle for mfT or Fuji X camera. Will start buying FF mirrorless, once really good sub USD/€ 2000 offerings come. And then also replace their lens parks over time to native mirrorless lenses with shorter flange distance. Whoever of the 3 - Canon, Nikon, Sony gets there first, will take market leadership.

* pro
economy is tight. Minimize capex. Overall very conservative market segment. Will buy what is absolutely needed from CaNikon. Old farts and those shooting long lenses / fast action will stick with DSLRs for at least 2 more rounds [5D Mk. V and Nikon D6 likely to be "final models"]. Will eventually also move to mirrorless, but over a longer period of time ... 5 years+


Canon and Nikon are looking at a quickly closing "launch window" for mirrorless FF. If they don't get it done in 2014, they'll be really really hard hit. Nikon will go under first. But Canon is not safe either, if they bungle it.

 

[Woody]

Waiting for "the right"mirrorless camera at affordable price without having to sacrifice much in speed/performance (AF) and ergonomics (esp. OVF vs. EVF) compared to their current DSLRs...

Sony's A7/R are just about "attractive enough" to capture some in that group. Or may settle for mfT or Fuji X camera. Will start buying FF mirrorless, once really good sub USD/€ 2000 offerings come. And then also replace their lens parks over time to native mirrorless lenses with shorter flange distance. Whoever of the 3 - Canon, Nikon, Sony gets there first, will take market leadership.

Here we go again, folks who predict the demise of DSLRs and the triumph of MILCs. People have been saying this for years since the appearance of the first MILC... Yet, this has not been borne out by actual shipment numbers. In N. America and Europe, for every MILC sold in 2013, 9 to 10 DSLRs are sold. Yes, that is how poorly received MILCs are.

 

[Sporgon]

The big picture is clear:

Given your précis of the camera Market I think you missed off two words:

'as mud'

"All hail the mirrorless !". Going to change the world.



Not.

 

[WPJ]

By the numbers:

• Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop of y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
• Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops of y/y unit dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon. Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Which is interesting, considering that, by the specs, they released the two more interesting DSLRs of the last year (D800 with big MP, and D600 for cheap). Seems like innovating on the camera body side of things isnt enough to get people to buy.

or people are clever enough to realize that for 13x18cm prints or flickr/facebook uploads a 36 MP camera is just overkill.
it only slows down your editing process and you need lot of harddisk space.

let´s be honest, most people do 10x15cm or 13x18cm prints 98% of the time.
even with a lot of cropping you don´t need 36 MP for that.

the "oil of nikon" D600 has kind of a bad reputation.

prints most,of the time? Who prints....i have not been shown a print from someone in years, its all on a phone or tablet.... In fact the only prints I have seen in the last 3 years has been my kids school/soccer pics and the few,books my wife has printed.

 

[David Hull]

not to worry, the Df will turn that all around for them

sarcasm?

But the bad news doesn’t stop there, it continues to roll with rumors of lackluster Df pre-sales published by Nikon Rumors. NR claims that unofficial info from several retailers has Df demand “not even close” to what D800 demand was when it came out.

To substantiate that claim, NR points out that the Df isn’t even in the top 20 best-selling DSLRs on Amazon, while the D610 (not exactly the most popular release Nikon has ever had, given all of the pissed off D600 users) is up at number 14.
.

http://petapixel.com/2013/11/08/nikon-cuts-sales-forecast-yet-dslr-sales-stall-df-preorders-come-subpar/

This is not surprising IMO. The D800 satisfied a pent up demand for a High MP camera among Nikonians who had been riding the low res train for a long time. I think a lot of them would have been happier with something a bit lower like 25MP, but just the same it got them way past 12 MP. What "problem" does the Df solve?

 

[David Hull]

First, it is tough times for any expensive luxury item, so everyone is hurting on sales. Its sad to see Nikon hurting so much, they seem a bit dysfunctional and keep casting around seemingly at random looking for a winner.

I have a theory about the Df, and its based on Nikon having to commit to a certain volume of sensors purchased from Sony. In short, Nikon needed to turn their surplus of expensive sensors into cash, and a niche camera that was a high profit item designed for those with plenty of cash and willing to spend it for such a product. I don't think they ever expected it to be a big seller, just a way to use up extra sensors and make a few bucks doing it.

The Nikon situation only points up Canon's very conservative philosophy of mass production at a low cost, so that they not only make more profit per unit, but when times are tough, they can cut the price drastically to grab market share and still show a respectable profit. You do not do this by spending truck loads of money developing, tooling, stocking, and advertising niche models.

Canon is hanging on to their cash and cutting prices to increase sales of existing products and only turning out new or updated products to meet some specific internally defined goals. That's why we see the big profit difference. It has little to do with a product being the best of the best and everything to do with giving priority to designing products that can be made and sold for a profit even if the price must be cut way back. Its not something that happens overnight, Canon has done this for the last 60 years. Every cent that goes into a product is questioned and squeezed out if it is not deemed to be worth much more than a penny in ROI.

You may be on to something here.

 

[WPJ]

i saw tons of people buy DSLR in the last few years.
Most used as overpriced P&S because they did not know what SLR's are capable or did not have interest in learning or did not have time.
Given that many P&S and smartphone cameras have "effects"to get the desired effect they realized that they do not need no longer needed a DSLR to shoot, download and edit.

i have a friend who bought a 600D because he liked my pictures.

now he is complaining that everything is "so unsharp" with his DSLR when he takes pictures for his ebay auctions.

i (tried to) teach him about aperture but he still doesn´t really gets why, with his 190 euro P&S everything was sharp and now his pictures are "unsharp".

"there must be a way this DSLR makes sharp photos from back to front without all this raising ISO because of smaller aperture stuff ... or buying a speedlight??"

DOF is some strange concept for people who only shoot with a P&S before.

he also complains that his images don´t show as much details as mine. "you are sure this camera is not broken? your camera makes much better images".
his problem is, when he does portraits the head only occupies 1/6 of the frame and then he crops like mad. told him a few times to get closer... he makes the same errors again and again.

some people really don´t need a DSLR.
he likes my macro and portrait shots but even after 16 month he still takes pictures in P mode.
and he wonders that with the "expensive" DSLR his images doesn´t look much better then with his 190 euro P&S. for him light is light..... you only need enough.

i still try to teach him a bit.... but it´s hard work.

as I see your explanation your trying to do good and tech him how to use it but he doesn't care, just tell him to out it on the green square and I bet he will be happier

 

[AvTvM]

Here we go again, folks who predict the demise of DSLRs and the triumph of MILCs. People have been saying this for years since the appearance of the first MILC... Yet, this has not been borne out by actual shipment numbers. In N. America and Europe, for every MILC sold in 2013, 9 to 10 DSLRs are sold. Yes, that is how poorly received MILCs are.

Of course not many wanted to buy yesterdays shitty mirrorless. Dwarf-sensored nikon 1? Slow as molasses eos-m? Retro styled fujis? mft-sensored stuff? Poor EVFs? Give me a break!

It will change as soon as really good ff mirrorless arrives. Sony A7/R are the first inkling. Even better stuff will follow. Dslrs will be gone. Like all those german rangefinders went out the door in the 70s when good SLRs became available from the japanese. This time round it might be korea and taiwan doing it to the japanese. Hehe!

 

[Loswr]

It will change as soon as really good ff mirrorless arrives. Sony A7/R are the first inkling. Even better stuff will follow. Dslrs will be gone. Like all those german rangefinders went out the door in the 70s when good SLRs became available from the japanese.

You might be half right. 'Good' won't cut it...what's needed is good and cheap. That's what was behind the success of SLRs - getting them into the hands of 'the masses'. Those folks are buying entry level dSLRs, and until mirrorless offers similar performance in a similar price range (<$800), mirrorless will remain a niche market.

 

[David Hull]

By the numbers:

• Nikon reported a 1H-FY13 (Mar-Aug, 2013) drop in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓28.5%
• Canon reported a 2Q13 and 3Q13 (Apr-Sep, 2013) drops in y/y unit sales of dSLRs of ↓4% and ↓3%, respectively

So for a similar 6-month period, Nikon had an 8-fold greater drop in unit sales compared to Canon. Nikon's already-lower dSLR market share is dropping fast...

Actually, according to this article, the situation is a bit different:

Canon has sold 23% less cameras than a year earlier, Nikon is down 18.2%, and Sony and Fujifilm are each off about 35%.

I would argue that a year-to-year comparison is more reliable than a quarter-to-quarter one.

The quote you excerpted refers to "cameras" which includes both dSLRs and P&S units. I'll grant that it's a bit ambiguous in the linked article, and that's either bad writing or quite possibly intentional. I was referring to dSLRs only, using data from Canon's and Nikon's own quarterly financial presentations.

Also, I compared a 6-month block of time with the same 6-month block from the previous year (which is what y/y means - year-to-year). I doubt looking at a full year would have made a difference in the trend, and doing so is more difficult because Canon and Nikon use offset fiscal years. If you'd like to comb through their Investor Relations pages and present full year data for dSLRs, I'd be interested in your findings.

Yes, I agree that it's ambiguous. The point of the article, however, seems to me that it's the steep decline in interchangeable-lens cameras, as opposed to a well known decline of P&S and the likes.

The problem with comparing semesters is that the data can be confused by recent product releases, holidays, festivities, etc. This is why I find more reliable to do such calculations based on a whole year.

I think that the sales of DSLR's has been a bit of a bubble. The world went digital and sales have tracked the trend of better, faster, cheaper (in some cases) with a lot of people moving into digital. Now though, the equipment has become "good enough" and the market has become saturated. Everyone who wants one has one of some sort and now all the manufacturers are doing is servicing a saturated market. There is nothing that I am really dissatisfied about with my 5DIII and the lenses I have. I can’t really think of a really compelling feature that they could build into a 5DIV that would make me want to immediately run out and upgrade. I think there is a lot of that sentiment out there.

 

[AvTvM]

You might be half right. 'Good' won't cut it...what's needed is good and cheap. That's what was behind the success of SLRs - getting them into the hands of 'the masses'. Those folks are buying entry level dSLRs, and until mirrorless offers similar performance in a similar price range (<$800), mirrorless will remain a niche market.

absolutely. Remember 2003? Canon? "Digital Rebel" @ USD/€ 999,- ? First "good enough" and truly affordable DSLR. Huge success, DSLRs became ubiquituos.

10 yeras later. 2013. Time for a FF mirrorless "digital rebel". Although, even then the rush will not be as big this time. In 2003 those smartphones did not take very good stills. Not to mention halfway-decent video. In one small package. ;-)

 

[aznable]

Of course not many wanted to buy yesterdays shitty mirrorless. Dwarf-sensored nikon 1? Slow as molasses eos-m? Retro styled fujis? mft-sensored stuff? Poor EVFs? Give me a break!

It will change as soon as really good ff mirrorless arrives. Sony A7/R are the first inkling. Even better stuff will follow. Dslrs will be gone. Like all those german rangefinders went out the door in the 70s when good SLRs became available from the japanese. This time round it might be korea and taiwan doing it to the japanese. Hehe!

and in the meanwhile nikon may die and you will be here bashing canon and supporting who... sony, pentax, Samsung? lol

 

[AvTvM]

and in the meanwhile nikon may die and you will be here bashing canon and supporting who... sony, pentax, Samsung? lol

I am just observing the market. And looking out for my next camera after my 7d. I still like it. And it'll soon have been my last DSLR. Bye bye mirror slap.

 

[Woody]

I am just observing the market. And looking out for my next camera after my 7d. I still like it. And it'll soon have been my last DSLR. Bye bye mirror slap.

I tried to leave the mirror slap 1.5 years ago. Got myself an OMD EM5. Used it for a year. Took it for a trip but hated the shooting experience so much the camera stayed in my bag most of the time even though it was always with me. Hated the EVF. Hated the ergonomics. Sold the camera and plunged headlog back into the world of DSLRs.

 

[AvTvM]

I tried to leave the mirror slap 1.5 years ago. Got myself an OMD EM5. Used it for a year. Took it for a trip but hated the shooting experience so much the camera stayed in my bag most of the time even though it was always with me. Hated the EVF. Hated the ergonomics. Sold the camera and plunged headlog back into the world of DSLRs.

I hear you. We are almost there. One more push ... Better EVF, better AF. Soon.

 

[Bennymiata]

I think mirrorless is just a flash in the pan.

Why would you pay twice the price for a mirrorless camera than an equivalent DSLR?
I think a lot of people like the idea of a smaller camera, but when it comes to shelling out YOUR money, they look like a bad and overpriced piece of dead technology.
Why are mirrorless cameras so expensive in comparison to DSLR's?
They should be half the price, especially considering their poor viewfinders (if they have one at all), poor ergonomics (it's hard to keep a camera still when it's being held at arm's length) and expensive lenses.

I think Canon got it right with the SL1 (100D). As soon as the price comes down, it will mean a big hit to the sales of EVF cameras.