I'm pretty sure we'll notice a steep incline in mirrorless' sales in March.
Then the E-M5 mark II hit the streets ...
All the best.
These don't do anything for me. The prices aren't crashing.
What's the point of posting this, Jorgen?
200,000 mirrorless cameras per month shared among 7 suppliers (if we include Canon and Nikon) is something like 30,000 cameras per supplier on average. That's not entirely true of course, since Sony and Olympus share around half of the market, but even that is just 50,000 cameras on each of them. Production of electronic components is only profitable when done in large numbers, so the question is: Do they make money on this? Will they ever make money on this? Will some of them give up? For Panasonic, this can't add up at all. Big company with a tiny market share in a sinking market. Samsung likewise, although they seem to be strong on their home ground.
I'm quite sure some will leave. The question is who.
The DSLR segment is completely different. 3 times as many cameras and with Canon and Nikon sharing around 90% of that market with models that are upgraded less frequently or come with small upgrades to existing bodies... hopefully it's possible to make a profit from that. But when the market shrinks more, who knows...
That's the point of posting this.
... and just for reference, Apple has sold more than 500 million iPhones since its introduction 7 years ago. Samsung sells more mobile phones than Apple.
Young people today, those under 30 who are not photo enthusiasts, use mobile phones to take photos. This includes my own children who have all had DSLR or mirrorless cameras that ended in a drawer somewhere. The fact is: for most people, camera phones replace not only P&S cameras. They replace DSLR cameras as well. And mirrorless too.
I'm curious too, but rather detached from it. I do what I do in photography, I like doing what I do, I'm happy with the gear I've come to, and as long as it keeps working or alternatives of comparable nature continue, I'll be fine. What the world does, as important as it sometimes might be, is of very little consequence in this matter.
If all I had was a camera phone, I'd find a way to get what I want from it. I doubt that it will ever devolve to that, at least within my lifetime. After that is not my problem... ;-)
Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream1 Member(s) liked this post
Canikon is simply playing a waiting game. They could own mirrorless like they do DSLR but until mirrorless sales match DSLRs sales they have no incentive. Mirrorless has been essentially flat for two years, other than a 4th qtr burst in '13, despite lots of new products.
As a whole, manufacturers need to bring their products many years up the technology curve, to make them easy to use and fun to use.
Imagine operating a smartphone via any of the manufacturer's menu systems. Its reminiscent of DOS circa 1982.
Canikon are dead.
Well you do see a downward trend in the DSLR charts if you leave some of the holidays out of the chart it still is going down. Mirrorless looks a little flat and given smartphones now your not going to see big upward trends any more. Hell it's not much different than photography jobs they are decreasing because smartphones are rising. That's just a fact we can't ignore. The whole industry is important to me so I do care how this all comes out as OEMS will find no reason to innovate and that's not a good sign for us real shooters that depend on better than smart phone images.
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com2 Member(s) liked this post
If the trend doesn't change, there will be less money for R&D, particularly with companies like Panasonic, Sony and Samsung where camera sales represent a tiny fraction of what they do. They are responsible towards their shareholders, and if they continue to pump money into a division that gives little in return, those in charge will be axed, together with their cameras. For companies like Fuji, Nikon and Olympus, it looks differently, since cameras are, and have always been, their core business. Canon and Ricoh/Pentax is in a different division entirely, since they are optical companies with a big portfolio in office automation and other businesses.
What also puzzles me is what catches on and what doesn't. When Fuji came up with the, in my view great, hybrid viewfinder, I thought "WOW"... this is something that we will see in all cameras soon. But no, it's been introduced to two Fuji bodies so far, and one isn't even a current model. Which forces the question: Are consumers a bit tired of innovation, tired of having to relate to new ways of doing things every few months?
They do buy new mobile phones all the time of course, but in spite of all the hype, they don't really change much. iOS is still iOS and Android is still Android. I don't think it matters much if it's called Banana Split with Crispy Nuts or Angel from a Newborn Star. People's needs don't really change much from one year to another, and I'm quite sure that most use their iPhone 6 more or less the same way as they used their iPhone Neanderthal.
Like me. Apart from shooting some video (but much less than I planned or anticipated) I use the D810 exactly the same way as I used the D80, or the GH3 for that matter. Somebody inserted a "1" between the "8" and the "0", and the image quality has improved somewhat, but I still take the same photos that I would have taken with the older camera.
So maybe I don't worry so much about innovation. If a couple of D80 bodies were all I had to use for the rest of my life, that wouldn't really bother me much, at least if there were no better alternatives around. I did use my OM-1 for 30 years too. What I do find worrying is that some of the large electronics giant might pull out of the camera industry to concentrate on hybrid products, like phones and other consumer products with higher profit margins. That would mean less choice, less exposure to the market and thereby less interest among consumers. I believe there's a real danger that cameras in general will end up where film and vinyl is now, except for professional use. Within ten years possibly.
Does it matter? Probably not, at least not for humanity as a whole, but the broad appeal of photography as a hobby would become extinct. I can already hear the little kids shouting "Look daddy! That man has a black box in front of his face!"
I don't care what gear I have.
Things I sell: http://www.shutterstock.com/sets/413...html?rid=611052 Member(s) liked this post
People upgrade cell phones so quickly is because of 2 reasons.
1) some piece of hardware in many phones fail in less then 2 years forcing customers to "upgrade" to a newer model & entering into a new 2 year agreement with the carrier. I am not very hard on my phones, but most have some issue..buttons not working or the battery fails to recharge somewhere between 1 and 2 years. I believe they do this intentionally.
2) the carriers build in the cost of the phone into the monthly service contract. So they can "give" you a phone for "free" or for very little up front.
I agree with you, the camera manufacturers introduce new models way too frequently. I see very little/ if any reason to upgrade. The last digital camera I purchased was a 7D in 2009. I don't see myself buying another one anytime soon.
Depends on the company. Some introduce new features with new models. Some innovation are evolutionary and some are revolutionary. The key being that I don't mind the faster path of model innovation. It means I don't have to be stuck with annoying features - take for instance the M9. I loved that camera but the display screen had to be from a cellphone circa 2003. I'm sure plenty of owners would've jumped at the chance to upgrade that one annoyance when they did a mid-cycle refresh in the M9-P.
Waiting 3 or 4 years for a new model to introduce incremental features would be more than just a minor annoyance for me personally plus nothing says that I have to buy every refresh every year. Technology is moving too fast to really be on that product cycle for low to mid level products which provide the development test bed for the higher end ones. As for Sony getting out the camera business - I doubt it. It's one of the few divisions other than the Playstation and Cinema subsidies that makes money. Much has to do with sensor sales in some capacity to pretty much everyone that isn't Canon or Samsung (to include cellphone camera sensors)
Priolite Ambassador | Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
If Jorgen is right and there is less development and hence less choice of camera, I will still look and choose when that time comes.
We just adapt to what is on offer from someone who makes something. I'll just buy what's on offer IF I like it. If no one makes it, I won't buy.
As much as my smartphone has a camera I can't use it for anything more than a note taker. The controls, while there are just too slow to utilize for me.
Last edited by Tim; 6th April 2015 at 22:55.
It's all developing into a catch 22 situation.
Camera companies are pumping out more incremental versions and hyping them ... all in an effort to shore up the decline of the camera as we know it. However, that can result in "Buying Fatigue", which can have the opposite effect.
I wonder what makes up the Mirror-Less segment? Is Go-Pro part of it? Some sources claim that Go-Pro is the best selling camera in the world.
How the GoPro Became the Best Selling Camera In the World
If true, that would considerably lessen the actual Mirror-Less sales as we tend to define it (Sony/Fuji/Panasonic,etc) in comparison to DSLRs.
Only exchangeable lens cameras are classified as mirrorless, Marc. I think action cams, like the GoPro, is a separate category.
A rapid pace of change was important to me as the digital era dawned since the balance of features, quality, and price was so skew at the beginning. I bought in about 2002 with my first "real" digital camera (a 5Mpixel Sony), and while I found it compelling, it took several cameras and several generations of development, and upward escalating my purchases into DSLRs at first, to reach the point where I felt satisfied with the cameras the way I had with film cameras by about 1980.
DSLRs, with a couple of exceptions, became stable and satisfactory to me about 2007-2008. More compact cameras a bit later ... the first wave of Micro-FourThirds was nice in 2009, but it's only with the latest 16Mpixel sensors that I am really comfortable with them. The GXR was great in 2011, but still a bit too sluggish to fully do the number.
The M-P I bought recently is The Camera that I'd hoped the M9 would be ... It binds all the things I really value and was looking for together. And to think that it was considered an impossibility a mere 13 years before.
Just like with film cameras, I am now happy here, where things have gotten to. I never bought into the AF SLR universe in film cameras: 1980-1982 manual focus Nikon F3, FM2n, FE2 and Leica M6 were as technologically advanced as I ever needed. Digital cameras need more technology than that, but most of the advances in DSLRs since 2007 don't add so much for me. Now that the M-P, the X, and the E-M1 are here, I need little else for the photography I love to do.
Others have more pressing needs, I guess. I'm fine, now, with a much slower rate of change. I intend to be using these cameras for a good while. The camera companies have achieved my high water mark...
Here is another take on camera sales ...
Is there really anything 'wrong' with digital camera sales volumes ?
Bart ...2 Member(s) liked this post
I'm surprised at exactly where the sharp decline (per annum) lies --IN what I'd think were the BuySomethingPre-Xmas months of Nov/Dec, and maybe any post-holiday splurging later. But, May, summer ... ?
Well, hmmm, for the mirrorless, it IS (er, was) peaking in November.
Santa's lightening his sleigh?
ps: Curiously and coincidentally, I bought used --partly with then need of SOMEthing-- in October, for myself.
Quoted: "The consumer shift to smartphones for casual photo taking has pummelled demand for compact cameras, while the growing popularity of lighter mirrorless cameras has taken away market share from higher margin single-lens reflex cameras."
REFILE-UPDATE 1-Canon Q3 profit slides on weak camera demand but full-year forecast lifted | Reuters
Folks, the ' first world ' is not necessarily now the prime strategic focus of camera
Or other ' disposable income use ' manufacturers.
What seems to be stagnating are sales in certain markets. But there are huge, and I mean huge markets waiting to be tapped.
People who could never think of owning a camera, any camera, now compare the brands available. As living standards and disposable income rise in certain parts of the world, sellers devise, market, and supply the demand.
One sees this in all products...camera stores in luxury malls..and I don't refer to the recognized luxury brand in cameras. China, India, Brazil and the list is increasing. Kazakhstan..yes find it on a map..and the luxury fashion houses are falling over themselves to get in there.
The latest economic reports projected the number of millionaires in SE Asia exceeding the developed world..not the total wealth..just the number.
Europe is plateauing or in a slight depression..Toyota overtakes Volkswagen as the leading supplier of vehicles to the world.
When sales somewhere go down, the marketing teams always dream up novel,
But not revolutionary ways to stop the slump or find new markets.
The markets now are moving east and south. And it becomes increasingly difficult to make gains in an overly marketed, crowded and saturated market.
And there are other festivals, occasions, anniversaries to celebrate for the marketing gurus across the world than just wait for Christmas.