p.6 #1 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
jctriguy wrote:
Thanks buddy. What does 'free fall' mean? Why don't you support Sony branching into the larger part of the DSLR market with different camera models? You seem to think it is good for them to stay in only one area. Here you seem to be advocating that canon and Nikon need to push for 100% market share. Not sure I'm following your thinking here.
And you still haven't demonstrated how Sony has taken 25% revenue out of canon/Nikon bank account.
JC, if you can't see mirrorless sales eating into DSLR sales, then I'm done with this discussion. For every person that purchases a mirrorless camera, that potential revenue walks away from Canikon. This potential revenue that has been going to mirrorless has contributed to the revenue declines in Canikon.
For every person that buys a Ford...it's a lost revenue potential for Chevy. Same holds true for Canikon and mirrorless.
p.6 #2 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
All those numbers show me is that mirrorless is on its way to becoming a sustainable sub-market and that the sub-market for traditional DSLR's is shrinking. You can't draw any correlation between the two without a lot more information on the overall market conditions, just the kind of information large corporations pay market research firms to generate so they can make educated guesses on where they should invest their R&D.
Also, you can't dismiss the Nikon 1. It may not be a particularly popular system on these boards, but it has a share of the market none the less. It's a fairly well supported system with some unique aspects, like the return of the ILC dive camera with two available AW lenses and use of the nine or so other lenses. Nikon's exploiting aspects of mirrorless that would be too costly on an SLR-based model or things other makers seem to have forgotten, like keeping things mostly pocketable. You can doubt it's future, but I don't doubt there's a market for the 1, or that Nikon isn't committed to making it successful.
p.6 #3 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
Is there something between Sony and Nikon to prevent a Nikon FF MILC? Nikon has one distinct advantage over Canon IMO and that is they never ceased production of manual focus lenses. They could parlay that into a great mirrorless system.
p.6 #4 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
For every person that buys a Ford...it's a lost revenue potential for Chevy. Same holds true for Canikon and mirrorless.
That would be true if Ford and Chevy had to compete with hundreds of other products in vastly different markets that also happened to be automobiles.
A better comparison would be sub-market to sub-market, like electric-verus-hybrid-versus-gas, but trying to understand that market using nothing but straight manufacturing and sales numbers is still too broad to be meaningful.
p.6 #5 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
freaklikeme wrote:
That would be true if Ford and Chevy had to compete with hundreds of other products in vastly different markets that also happened to be automobiles.
A better comparison would be sub-market to sub-market, like electric-verus-hybrid-versus-gas, but trying to understand that market using nothing but straight manufacturing and sales numbers is still to broad to be meaningful.
The market I'm talking about is photography. I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos.
If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
p.6 #6 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
The market I'm talking about is photography. I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos.
If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
This is the big assumption that I disagree with, you are viewing interchangeable lens cameras as all the same thing. In your opinion, every sale to Sony is a lost sale for Canon/Nikon. You try to show that with numbers, but you are making big leaps without any evidence. Maybe we can agree to disagree.
p.6 #7 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
jctriguy wrote:
This is the big assumption that I disagree with, you are viewing interchangeable lens cameras as all the same thing. In your opinion, every sale to Sony is a lost sale for Canon/Nikon. You try to show that with numbers, but you are making big leaps without any evidence. Maybe we can agree to disagree.
Why do you view the mirrorless camera customer being different than the DSLR customer.. Surely it ain't on camera price as both a very expensive. How do you differentiate these potential customers.
I see both being customers that want more than their iPhones can provide.
p.6 #8 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
The market I'm talking about is photography. I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos.
If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
Even on this board which is very far toward the serious photography end of the spectrum you hear tons of people complaining that mirrorless cameras are still too big and heavy. I think 23-24 out of 25 of those people buying mirrorless would choose "stick with my iPhone" rather than "buy a huge DSLR" if mirrorless ceased to exist.
The point is not that Nikon and Canon are losing a share of the market. The point is that the margins on their share of the market aren't that great anymore. Look at the teardowns. Sony probably makes so much more money on an A6000 sale than Nikon does on an D5300 sale it's embarrassing. At a time when Nikon and Canon are constantly raising their prices and complaining about shrinking margins, they need to stop being afraid of change and start weaning their customers off of hand-assembled Rube Goldberg machines.
p.6 #9 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
The market I'm talking about is photography. I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos.
If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
Your argument might hold some weight if this were the mid-to-late twentieth century and the bulk of consumers still made purchasing decisions by walking into stores, but it's not. Nor is the whole of the photography market DSLRs and mirrorless. It's a very narrow view that suits your interpretation of some very broad data, but it's no more accurate than anyone else's guess.
p.6 #10 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
Like I said in a previous post, mirrorless has taken away 25% of sales from canon/Nikon which is very substantial. If you are running a business and something came in and took 25% of your sales one year, you had better pay attention to it.
You are assuming that all mirrorless camera owners do not own a DSLR. Just from reading FM one can see that your assumptions are not true.
p.6 #11 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
I've got my stats from. CIPA which has the stats for worldwide sales. Before you go and call someone out, you should do your own homework or you just look foolish.
You didnt answer his question. Can we conclude that instead of a derivation you are simply assuming your conclusion?
p.6 #12 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
The bottom line is Canikon are both losing potential revenue by not having a viable mirrorless offering. I haven't checked the exact $$$, but it is not chump change. Especially in a time of declining revenues for Canikon.
As of today, out of the interchangeable lens camera market, Canikon is losing out 25% of that share to mirrorless. This is at a time when they lost their P&S market to cellphones.
Canon's EOS M system, upon release, went #1 in Japan, blowing the likes of Fujifilm out of the water there.
Your feckless thinking that somehow Canon is not part of the mirrorless world is inexplicable.
p.6 #14 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
rattymouse wrote:
Mirrorless vs DSLR's.....rearranging the chairs on the titanic. The ship is sinking and mirrorless is doing nothing to change that.
Quit sugar-coating the situation!!
chez wrote:
I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos...If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
Certainly not true in my case. Full Frame DSLRs are so friggin huge. I was around them for years as I made many wedding movies at one time. I wanted one like Barnack wanted a Speed Graphic.
EVIL grows the market, while of course the iPhone has shrunk it.
A FF Barnack is the unmade success story waiting for an author. Fixed lens we are already there with the RX1 and Q.
p.6 #15 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
Paul Mo wrote:
Is there something between Sony and Nikon to prevent a Nikon FF MILC? Nikon has one distinct advantage over Canon IMO and that is they never ceased production of manual focus lenses. They could parlay that into a great mirrorless system.
What do manual focus lenses have to do with building a great mirrorless camera?
I highly doubt there is any agreement for Nikon to stay out of FF mirrorless. I think Sony likely makes enough on sensors to be willing to sell them to anyone. The sold the rx100 sensor to canon for a directly competing product.
p.6 #16 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
chez wrote:
Why do you view the mirrorless camera customer being different than the DSLR customer.. Surely it ain't on camera price as both a very expensive. How do you differentiate these potential customers.
I see both being customers that want more than their iPhones can provide.
Hyundai doesn't likely view corvette and Porsche sales as lost revenue, they know that buyer wasn't in the market for a Hyundai.
Sep 20, 2015 at 06:05 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.6 #17 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
rattymouse wrote:
Mirrorless vs DSLR's.....rearranging the chairs on the titanic. The ship is sinking and mirrorless is doing nothing to change that.
I don't think it is that simple. It is true that smart phones have totally crushed the point and shoot market. It is much less clear that the ship is sinking for higher end cameras. Certainly that market has been shrinking rather than growing for the last three years, but does that mean digital ILCs are going to go the way of cassette recordings and CD players?
I don't think so. Instead, I think the ILC market expanded from about 2008 to 2012 to include a bunch of people who bought DSLRs, but who didn't really need them or learned how to use them. For these people their DSLR was just a fancy point and shoot that they used on automatic mode almost exclusively. For these people giving up their DSLR for a cell phone is basically the same decision as someone with a point and shoot giving up their point and shoot for a cell phone.
As these people leave the market, I think the ILC market with stabilize to be about the size of the 2008 market. That is not good news for ILC manufacturers, but it is not the ship sinking either. There will be a good size and healthy market that will want an ILC camera or two and a few lenses. Can manufacturers cope with a market that is not growing? Ratty, perhaps you think they cannot. Certainly some think that a market has to be growing and often growing fast to be viable. My own view is that fast growing industry are always a bit risky and stable sized market add stability to a company. Ideally, IMO, a company has a mixture of products in both fast growing markets and stable markets. Just as an investor wants a diversified portfolio with stable and safe investments and risky but high profitable investments. I think a company wants a mixture of reasonably safe solid returns in stable markets with potential for growth in fast expanding markets.
So, in my view, ILCs have changed what they represent for companies. They no longer are a fast moving market with tons of potential for growth. Rather they are moving toward a stable market with opportunities for solid and stable returns. I don't think mirrorless cameras change that much. They offer some of the smaller companies an opportunity to take away some of that stable market from Canikon, but I don't see them growing the market. To grow the market more people are going to have to appreciate what ILCs bring that other types of devices do not. I think that education could make that happen, but I don't see anyone advocating that type of education.
p.6 #18 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
I agree with this 100%. The people who buy mirrorless ... or know what a "mirrorless" camera is would have been a DSLR shooter or potential DSLR shooter i.e. someone who is looking for more than just a simple P&S camera. So for every MILC sold, it's one DSLR not sold that would have been sold if MILC never existed. Yes, I understand that many are still DSLR shooters trying out MILC - so they have gone dual-platform, but sooner or later they will be a full MILC convert and will give up their antiquated DSLR.
chez wrote:
The market I'm talking about is photography. I don't view mirrorless and DSLR as different sub markets...it's still the consumer walking into the camera shop with a fist full of money wanting to buy a camera to take photos.
If mirrorless did not exist, chances are that consumer would have bought a DSLR. But with mirrorless as an option, we are seeing 25% of those consumer dollars being drawn away from DSLR's towards mirrorless.
p.6 #19 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
retrofocus wrote:
Other than looking at the charts of mirrorless sales, it would be quite interesting to see how others likely profit from the mirrorless market. I think on Cosina for example which manufactures smaller sized M-mount MF lenses which can be used on mirrorless systems. Before mirrorless took off, they could only get those lenses sold to Leica M camera users. That Cosina updates more of their M mount lenses already speaks for itself that a trend is definitely there.
Zeiss might have some interesting story to tell, too - I am sure they make good money from being part of the FE lens designs and with the new Batis plus Loxia lenses. That Tamron announced just a few days ago that they consider making lenses for the E-mount, is also a another sign for the mirrorless trend.
When somebody gains more market share, someone else loses. No surprise that we see since a while continuous rebates for Canon EF lenses for example. ...Show more →
I think what you described is the relatively tiny size of the Leica market. A new body comes along from Sony and that makes a substantial increase in the market for m mount lenses. I highly doubt that increase is meaningful on the global scale that we are discussing with canon/Nikon. Canon has sold over 100million EF lenses, has Leica sold 100,000 or 1 million?
I also don't see this wholesale dumping of new or used canon lenses. I certainly haven't noticed any substantial trend in reduced value of EF lenses. They still release lenses at high prices and people still buy them before the prices drop, as has always been the case.
p.6 #20 · CaNikon will have to enter the mirrorless market.....
bobbytan wrote:
I agree with this 100%. The people who buy mirrorless ... or know what a "mirrorless" camera is would have been a DSLR shooter or potential DSLR shooter i.e. someone who is looking for more than just a simple P&S camera. So for every MILC sold, it's one DSLR not sold that would have been sold if MILC never existed. Yes, I understand that many are still DSLR shooters trying out MILC - so they have gone dual-platform, but sooner or later they will be a full MILC convert and will give up their antiquated DSLR.
I certainly disagree with you and chez making a direct one to one cause and effect relationship. I think we should consider the larger market of 'advanced' camera buyers. I suspect that just as many mirrorless buyers would either buy nothing/get an advanced P&S as would buy a DSLR if mirrorless didn't exist. I don't think everyone going for a mirrorless is focused on interchangeable lenses, I think they are going for size and better quality compared to their current cell phone or P&S. Most are still getting smaller sensors, not FF like most on FM, so it isn't a stretch to think that many people would likely be happy with an rx100 or g7x instead of a mirrorless option.
