Nikon financials out: "DSLR market shrinks significantly due to expansion of ML cameras"

[ahsanford]

Nikon numbers here:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=27344

"While the DSLR market shrinks significantly due to expansion of ML cameras, the D850 is still highly evaluated even after a year from its launch: exceeding the sales forecast in all regions and the product mix has been improved."

- A

 

[Aglet]

They could probably sell a few more d850s if they could supply more d850s...
But this ML announcement is likely gonna put the brakes on everything across the board for a while until we can see what the hype really turns out to be. (I'm still really curious about the 2019 Olympus teaser)

 

[ahsanford]

I'm waiting for the Z mount to just turn out to be the FE mount.

- A

 

[Mikehit]

Nikon numbers here:
exceeding the sales forecast in all regions and the product mix has been improved."

- A

All that means is that they go their forecats wrong, not that it is a high seller.

 

[ahsanford]

Personally, though the financials matter of course, I think Nikon's trajectory here is the most important:

​

​

This is where things stand. For Nikon to change those numbers dramatically, they need one of the following to occur:

• A competitor royally drops the ball with a product (poor offering, quality issue, recall, etc.) and Nikon's sales/marketing folks seize a transient business opportunity
  
  
• Nikon deeply discounts its hardware to get unit sales up. Not a long term strategy (and it is fiscally nuts), but it is possible to game market share through pricing
  
  
• Nikon executes better in the markets they already serve
  
  
• Nikon acquires or develops something unique that gives them an inherent competitive advantage
  
  
• Nikon makes a successful big bet that Sony and Canon opt out of making -- medium format, a cell phone co-development or Nikon-branded cell phone add-on come to mind.

...but I think Nikon continues to feel the pain from the Nikon 1 being such an mitigated disaster. If they had simply made the call to be APS-C (or even m43) with that platform, I don't think their financial situation would be remotely so dire.

- A

 

[Aglet]

Personally, though the financials matter of course, I think Nikon's trajectory here is the most important:

​

This is where things stand. For Nikon to change those numbers dramatically, they need one of the following to occur:

• A competitor royally drops the ball with a product (poor offering, quality issue, recall, etc.) and Nikon's sales/marketing folks seize a transient business opportunity
  
  
• Nikon deeply discounts its hardware to get unit sales up. Not a long term strategy (and it is fiscally nuts), but it is possible to game market share through pricing
  
  
• Nikon executes better in the markets they already serve
  
  
• Nikon acquires or develops something unique that gives them an inherent competitive advantage
  
• Nikon makes a successful big bet that Sony and Canon opt out of making -- medium format, a cell phone co-development or Nikon-branded cell phone add-on come to mind.

...but I think Nikon continues to feel the pain from the Nikon 1 being such an mitigated disaster. If they had simply made the call to be APS-C (or even m43) with that platform, I don't think their financial situation would be remotely so dire.

- A

We're hoping for something in those last 2 options.

Altho they didn't sell well the 1 series were quite capable, especially the top line 1 v3 with the added EVF. The limited glass was decent, (10-30 & 30-110mm kits lenses performed OK) the AF was fast. IQ decent in good light, high frame rate.... just a tad too small a sensor for the price when you could get a compact MFT body like the Panasonic GM5 for less (with less features too) but it boasted a bigger sensor (~ 2x area) and a growing lens selection.

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GM5-vs-Nikon-1-V3

https://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/nikon/v3/vs/panasonic/gm5/

if someone were offering me either system as a gift at the time... Nikon 1v3 please. (with the EVF of course)

I think you're right, if they'd have got on board the MFT bandwagon they'd likely have a very viable product line now.

oh, let there be a MF sensor option coming soon with that new mount... and cheaper than Fuji's.

 

[ahsanford]

I keep hearing 'man it would be awesome if it was medium format' and though it would be interesting I'm not sure it will sell well.

Do folks just think the entire photography market will continue it's 'cell phone flight' away from smaller sensors to larger ones as the gap between casual photography tech and professional tech diminishes? (Or is it just the enthusiasts that lust for a yet bigger sensor?)

I'm not so sure. I appreciate that the price for previously astronomically priced medium format tech is coming down to earth, but the size of the gear (other than for the MF mirror removal) isn't getting much smaller. And MF is not decisively better than FF when you consider lens selection, AF performance, burst shooting, etc. Further, MF sensors and leaf shutter lenses are great, but are they so great they are worth 3-5x for everything and leaving the creature comforts of the biggest technology tent in photography?

I think MF has potential, but its potential to take all my money and frustrate me is far greater than its potential to make my images that much better. I could be wrong.

- A

 

[Aglet]

My enthusiasm for the new ML Nikon having MF ability is mostly for the ability, the option for those who'll want it.
I would like one if it were say... 50+MP and $5kus or preferably cheaper. (I have MF glass I could adapt)
But, overall, I'd rather have the greater versatility and nearly comparable IQ of standard FF and the wider selection of fast affordable glass that goes with it; smaller faster glass so comparable DOF to MF for less $ and I really can't think of anywhere MF is a big enough advantage over FF to justify using it.
I passed on Fuji GFX for a number of reasons, that's just one. I'm trying to convince a friend he'd be better off with a good FF rig for his work than going MF as well. But MF becomes something of an emotional want rather than any logical need.
MF (44x33mm or 48x32mm) is only about 1 stop better than FF in metrics but the glass is a few stops more expensive to be comparable.

 

[Woody]

Nikon numbers here:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=27344
"While the DSLR market shrinks significantly due to expansion of ML cameras, the D850 is still highly evaluated even after a year from its launch: exceeding the sales forecast in all regions and the product mix has been improved."
- A

Nikon's explanation for their poor showing (fewer DSLR sales) is not accurate. The truth is their market share for DSLRs dropped significantly.

We can get some hints from BCNRanking (Japan market) numbers:
2011 DSLR market shares - Canon 46.3%, Nikon 39.2% (ratio 1.18:1)
2017 DSLR market shares - Canon 61.1%, Nikon 34.4% (ratio 1.78:1)
It's obvious that Nikon DSLR market shares dropped significantly.

Also, as pointed out by Thom Hogan:
"In Japan so far this calendar year, both volume and value of mirrorless shipped into the country exceeds DSLRs by a bit. The Americas are the opposite, while Europe is closer to the US trend and Asia closer to the Japanese trend.
Looked at over time, there's little doubt that there's been a slow and steady shift towards mirrorless. As I've noted many times, this was inevitable, as from both a cost and manufacturing standpoint, mirrorless has benefits to the camera makers that DSLRs don't. I predicted that we'd see mirrorless equal DSLR volume probably in 2020, and nothing has changed in my assessment. Maybe we get there a few months earlier, maybe a few months later. But that's equal volume, not death of DSLRs."
- https://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/is-the-dslr-dead.html
The DSLR market did NOT shrink significantly due to growing expansion of MILCs; rather it's a slow contraction.

 

[fullstop]

LOL. Mirrorslappers whistling in the dark wood.

DSLR is dead. No matter what Thom or others write. Up to now there was simply a massive supply side problem: not enough mirrorfree products. Nothing from Nikon, only crop-sensor from Canon and Fuji (not counting "Pseudo MF") plus the 7 dwarfs with their dwarf sensors. Only Sony, which is not attractive enough to switch systems for many due to various reasons.

As soon as mirrorfree supply side is fixed, and decent offerings from all 3 big players are available, DSLRs sales will plummet like a stone.

 

[neuroanatomist]

 

[Aglet]

LOL. Mirrorslappers whistling in the dark wood.

DSLR is dead. No matter what Thom or others write. Up to now there was simply a massive supply side problem: not enough mirrorfree products. Nothing from Nikon, only crop-sensor from Canon and Fuji (not counting "Pseudo MF") plus the 7 dwarfs with their dwarf sensors. Only Sony, which is not attractive enough to switch systems for many due to various reasons.

As soon as mirrorfree supply side is fixed, and decent offerings from all 3 big players are available, DSLRs sales will plummet like a stone.

I don't know if "plummet" is quite the right word to predict the transition from DSLR to ML sales volume but I think there will certainly be a transition to where most consumer and midrange-unthusiast users will buy a ML system over the next 5 years and ML will become the bulk of the sales.
I can't really think of a niche where mirror-slappers will retain a large market segment because the pure electronics advances with fewer mechanical requirements of ML will allow ML to exceed slapper-specs in the near term. ML already have taken some of the high-ground technologically.