MarcG19
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #8 · How much do the mirrorless systems threaten Canon and Nikon DSLRs? | |
If the question is "do mirrorless cameras meet a number of camera enthusiast's needs better than many low-end DSLRs?", the answer is yes. You've seen a number of replies here. I currently only use an APS-C DSLR for wildlife, pet or sports photography, leaving other categories that I do (street, travel, family, macro landscapes) to my EM-5 and various Oly/Pany lenses. In those latter categories, the EM-5 is at least as good as an APS-C DSLR, perhaps better due to the excellent olympus lenses. It's interface is a bit troublesome, but its size more than makes up for it.
If the question is from a market share/business/industry perspective, we first have to make a few definitions/ground rules. First, a good amount of the relevant data is either in the companies' financial reports or from CIPA. Second, "success" is defined as sales, which is a function of marketing, distribution, and only peripherally about camera capabilities (or what we think of them here on FM).
That being said, IMO the prognosis for the large three mirror-less makers (Sony, Panasonic, and Olympus) is fair within enthusiast realm, and decent-to-poor in the consumer realm. They are competitive in the enthusiast realm, but that's a vary narrow space dominated by many different choices. Canon and Nikon's prospects over the next few years is far better IMO, especially since they've bracketed the mirrorless realm product wise and because I think it's likely they'll introduce mirrorless replacements for their low-end cameras in the next few years. However, I'm fairly sure Sony will stay in the camera market, unsure about the other mirrorless makers.
For all the talk on photo internet boards of full frame cameras, $1000 cameras and interchangeable lenses, this enthusiast part of overall camera sales is not terribly large and is dwarfed by pro sales and especially consumer sales. Full frame cameras I'm told will not account for even 10% of DSLR sales this year; meaning that 90% of 2013 DSLR sales will be APS-C.
- Canikon dominate the pro market - i.e. people who make their full income from photography - generally sports, photojournalism, weddings, events, portrait studios, architecture. Were I to go into almost all these areas, I believe I'd be at a professional disadvantage if I used a mirrorless camera as my primary camera.
- The consumer market - people who buy a camera and according to the CIPA profiles buy 1.5 lenses for that camera - is reaching a point of saturation. However, in the US, Olympus and Panasonic are invisible in the consumer arena, and indeed the only companies with mirrorless offerings in the consumer area are Nikon (J1, seen at Target, Wal-mart and Costco) and Sony (seen at consumer electronic stores as well as their own stores). Still, the amount of space at these places for consumer DSLRs is greater than for mirrorless offerings. The situation in Japan and the rest of Asia is slightly better, but still Canikon are juggernauts in terms of market presence/power.
The CIPA 2012 numbers show that mirrorless sales are roughly 1/2 of DSLR sales, but carving out those numbers shows other things. First, the Nikon J1 is the largest selling camera with over 10% of mirrorless sales (again, showing how well Nikon's done in creating and establishing itself as worldwide still camera marketing juggernaut). Olympus and Sony's flagship cameras rank 3% of sales each, about 50% ahead of the Nikon V1 and Canon EOS-M. (note that the Pentax Q counted for 5.8% of 2012 sales, almost as much as the EM-5 and NEX-7 combined) Even more troubling for Sony/Olympus/Panasonic, most of their best selling cameras were earlier models which were sold at large discounts; beyond the EM-5 and NEX-7 the sales rankings of their current generation cameras were low. (the NEX-5N falls halfway between a current/last generation camera in 2012)
From the corporate statements, still cameras are an infinitesimal portion of Panasonic sales, rather small (10-15% IIRC) at Olympus and about the same proportion at Sony. Sony has signaled quite clearly it is committed to cameras, and claims interchangeable lens sales showed good profits in 2012, one of the few bright spots in its camera/video division. Olympus' camera group has reaffirmed its commitment to higher end cameras, but its camera group is not projected, by themselves, to make a profit for at least the next several years (see, for instance, Thom Hogan's discussion which casts abundant reasonable doubt even about Oly's own projections). At Panasonic, I'm sure kitchen appliances are far more important than all video/still camera sales. Bottom line, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic all showed losses in 2012 in their imaging divisions, have affirmed that they will become profitable again by going up market (targeting enthusiasts and presumably rationalizing their consumer products). This is in a context where Canikon both did well in 2012 sales (Nikon excellently, being profitable even in consumer point and shoots).
- The pressure to perform in the (stable or perhaps even declining) enthusiast market will be enormous this year as everyone believes this will be the way to increase sales or (in the case of Canikon) wear out smaller competitors (bleed Sony, possibly knock out Olympus and Panasonic). In particular, Canikon wants to move enthusiast to full frame, because that's where their profit margins are highest and where I'm sure their marketing folks have found that the people spend the most on higher profit margin lenses. [IMO, this is wrong-headed, and they should keep as many people as happy as possible at all price levels. This has almost certainly been one of the reasons mirrorless cameras have done well in the enthusiast market. ]
- In the consumer market, volume, marketing and distribution will decide. Olympus, Panasonic and Sony have a good rationale for their cameras but I don't know that their game is so good in those three areas to make significant inroads into the cheap/low end DSLR market. Especially since Canikon are defending their turf there very aggressively (reg: Canon's entry level lines for the past few years). Mirrorless cameras for this market are viewed as competitors, bridge cameras and/or women's cameras and this guides the company's market strategies.
Finally, I think a disruptive camera will emerge in the consumer space in next 5 years or so, and probably not from the Japanese camera makers (this is beyond the cell phone eating away the low end). Video is I believe in the early stages of such a transition, and I think it will eventually hit stills. Sony and Samsung will do well by copying whatever this disruptive camera is. Canon is also well positioned, IMO, in the video and stills field to survive, make its own iterations and prosper once that happens. I'm not so sure about Nikon (even though it's big enough to survive quite a while, and its sales are almost all still cameras today), and am decidedly unsure about Oly, Panasonic and Pentax.
So, what's my $0.02 on this?
Sony is committed to imaging both in video and in stills (and really, the difference these days is increasingly interface decisions and firmware), and I think they'll stay, especially if they do well in the enthusiast segment. (I don't see anyone breaking into the pro still photography market, which is dominated by Canikon. FWIW, I believe Canon and Sony dominate the pro video market, another plus for Sony).
Oly and Panasonic's camera ops are net losers in two highly competitive, non growing markets (enthusiast and consumer interchangeable lens cameras) with enormous competition. Again, they're positioned decently in the enthusiast realm, but poorly in the consumer realm as far as I've seen. I would like them to continue, but I wouldn't be surprised if in a few years Sony bought them both out.
I think Canikon - especially Canon - will continue doing well for the foreseable future, holding/increasing their market share in the enthusiast market. When the disruptive camera hits the market, Canon will transition well. I'm not so sure about Nikon, but we'll see.
[I've not mentioned Fujifilm or Leica because they are small scale vendors who march to their own drummers. Indeed, Thom Hogan did the math and showed that even if Fuji sold zero cameras, it still would not significantly affect Fuji's annual profit because the the various cameras are a tiny part of Fujifilm's operations. ]
Sorry for the rant. 
|
