Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              6       7       end
  

Archive 2015 · Samsung exit?

  
 
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Samsung exit?


sflxn wrote:
"mass-adoption" is where I believe you are wrong. Photo enthusiasts need to give up on the idea that cameras are going to keep spreading out in adoption. That's not what's happening. Quite the contrary, it's retracting. It very much parallels the PC market. Why buy a new computer if all you're doing is surfing the web on your phone? Why buy a new camera if all you're doing is posting phone images on instagram?

FF will always have a market among enthusiasts and pros. That market might shrink, but will do so more slowly, and if prices fall, it may actually
...Show more

It sounds like you are making up a lot of "facts" to support an argument about m43. Based upon what I have read, these opinions of yours do not seem to be grounded in reality.

Here is what Olympus has to say:

"Olympus’ camera division amassed an operating profit of 1.1 billion yen (approximately US$8.8 million) this past quarter, a massive improvement considering a year ago the numbers showed a 1.9 billion yen (approximately US$15.2 million) loss."

"This impressive profit is helped thanks to a 26% increase in mirrorless camera sales year-over-year. Compact camera sales have dropped 11%, but sales revenue has remained the same thanks to consumers opting for the company’s more high-end compact camera models."

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/08/06/olympus-quarterly-numbers-show-profits-boosted-by-e-m5-ii-and-high-end-comp

Sony released this:

"Sales increased 3.5% year-on-year (a 5% decrease on a constant currency basis) to 170.4 billion yen (1,396 million U.S. dollars), primarily due to the impact of foreign exchange rates and an improvement in the product mix of digital cameras reflecting a shift to high value-added models, partially offset by a decrease in unit sales of digital cameras reflecting a contraction of the market."

Most camera makers are all saying the same thing. Consumer interest is in the higher end models. That is FF, APS-C or m43. Oly pro lenses, which have been selling well, are at the $1000 mark.

In this thread (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1387780/3) I posted a graph from CIPA numbers which shows that ~ 25% of all digital cameras shipped world-wide are mirrorless.

Let's review things you have said:

"Sub FF buyers are cheap"--->manufactures say the trend is for higher end equipment and that is for all sensor sizes.

"m43 is interesting to standalone alt FM camera buyers"--->Olympus seem to be seeing some growth in m43, in addition, 1/4 of all cameras shipped are mirrorless. Granted that 1/4 is not all m43 but it is surely larger than "FM alt camera buyers". Moreover, in my local camera store, there are a lot of m43 models for sale. Even from a going-to-the-store-and-looking-around common sense stand point, this statement does not make any sense.

"The only segment that doesn't complain about prices and seems stable are FF and bigger"--->.I have not seen any data to support this.

Overall, I think you are constructing an artificial argument. Current trends in cameras are not based on senor size, alone rather they are based on a general decline (affecting all cameras) as more people switch to the cell phone for their photos. FF cameras are also suffering because of this. Now, overlapping this general decline we have other dynamics happening as well. For example, mirrorless vs. DSLR, and the general switch to higher end equipment. This is not a FF vs. m43 or APS-C sensor size contest. It is much more complicated than that, and within this multivariate environment, Olympus has reported good results for the first time in years. It would be a hard sell that this observation supports the impending demise of m43.



Oct 25, 2015 at 10:51 AM
bjornthun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Samsung exit?


Maybe we can even assume that the choice of sensor sizes between m43. APS-C and 35mm format actually grows the mirrorless segment compared to what would be the case, if only one of these formats existed in the mirrorless marketplace.


Oct 25, 2015 at 11:00 AM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Samsung exit?


Yes, I think that is very likely. But, to be honest, it is very hard to figure out what is going on when the overall trend is for lower camera sales.


Oct 25, 2015 at 11:10 AM
mawz
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Samsung exit?


bjornthun wrote:
Maybe we can even assume that the choice of sensor sizes between m43. APS-C and 35mm format actually grows the mirrorless segment compared to what would be the case, if only one of these formats existed in the mirrorless marketplace.


Frankly, I don't think most of the market differentiates between m43 and APS-C, but rather between the offerings in each as if they were pretty much the same format. There's so little performance difference between the two (m43 continues to provide IQ comparable to Canon's APS-C bodies in all but high ISO performance) and crop factor only matters for adapting, which only a fairly small subset of the market does.

You pretty much have 2 formats in the market, 35mm FF at the high end (in mirrorless that's Sony and Leica), and sub-35mm (Oly, Panasonic, Samsung & Fuji for the high end of that market, Sony, Samsung & Oly for the low end since Fuji's low-end bodies are mostly AWOL and Panny's abandoned their low-end GF line and Sony lacks any high-end APS-C options).

1" might as well not exist for anything other than the P&S market (where it's very successful). Neither 1" format ILC seems to be doing well at all.



Oct 25, 2015 at 12:29 PM
bjornthun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Samsung exit?


The m43 prime lenses are quite a bit smaller than many corresponding APS-C lenses, so that is a differentiator between the two formats. The question may be if the potential buyers appreciate this difference before making a purchase decision.

Except for one lens none of the Nikon 1 lenses actually have a focusing ring. The one with a focusing ring is a 32mm f/1.2. I was a bit shocked when I learnt that, and to me the lack of a focusing ring turns the Nikon 1 into an interchangeable lens P&S camera.



Oct 25, 2015 at 01:08 PM
rattymouse
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Samsung exit?


galenapass wrote:
Yes, I think that is very likely. But, to be honest, it is very hard to figure out what is going on when the overall trend is for lower camera sales.


Very true.....especially when you consider that the market is collapsing not just shrinking.



Oct 25, 2015 at 01:29 PM
sflxn
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Samsung exit?


galenapass wrote:
It sounds like you are making up a lot of "facts" to support an argument about m43. Based upon what I have read, these opinions of yours do not seem to be grounded in reality.

Here is what Olympus has to say:

"Olympus’ camera division amassed an operating profit of 1.1 billion yen (approximately US$8.8 million) this past quarter, a massive improvement considering a year ago the numbers showed a 1.9 billion yen (approximately US$15.2 million) loss."

"This impressive profit is helped thanks to a 26% increase in mirrorless camera sales year-over-year. Compact camera sales have dropped 11%, but sales revenue has
...Show more

I'm basing all of this on history. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. It's been written before. As Ratty said, this market is collapsing. There may be short periods of upward blips, but the trajectory is through the floor. History shows anytime major technological or social changes occurs, the old platforms disappear faster than they appear. History rhymes or echoes. Medium format, tube TV, compact disc, vinyl, mini computers, flip phones, Walkman, iPods, digital cameras. They take a long time to build up, but then they disappear a lot faster. Blu-ray disappeared almost overnight.

I don't need to resort to day to day, month to month, year to year data. One thing is ingrained in human nature, we repeat over and over. The implosion in standalone digital FF and lower cannot be stopped, just like medium format or film before it. My thesis that FF will be the only 35mm category size sensor standing is based on what happened in medium format. That market is on life support, selling only a few thousand units a year. There are now just 4 medium format makers, and that's probably too many. They survive on outrageous priced $40k backs and $5-10k lenses because the volume are so low. I don't think the A7RII price getting bumped up above the A7R was just due to cost R&D. Some of it is probably due to positioning. Getting ready for when all photo equipment prices must go up due to shrinking volume.

I'm basing my prediction for m43 and APS-C on my belief that history is experiencing another echo. Can m43 and APS-C survive the day when prices skyrocket due to lower volume? Based on that market's complaint about the high prices of Sony gear, I don't think it can. You can take a wait and see approach if you want, but I don't think this is the one example where humans don't repeat history. There's nothing special about the standalone camera market that makes me think it's immune. There is no scenario where this ends well for any of the players involved. Even Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Leica will also feel the pain.



Oct 25, 2015 at 04:22 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Samsung exit?


I beg to differ, sflxn, but I can see at least one scenario where this ends well for camera manufacturers. They need to do their job well in delivering what the customer wants. In terms of practicality, cameras improve at a snail's pace, Vs the rapid pace of smartphones. There is no excuse for that and, if reversed, customers would listen IMHO.


Oct 25, 2015 at 05:05 PM
sflxn
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Samsung exit?


philber wrote:
I beg to differ, sflxn, but I can see at least one scenario where this ends well for camera manufacturers. They need to do their job well in delivering what the customer wants. In terms of practicality, cameras improve at a snail's pace, Vs the rapid pace of smartphones. There is no excuse for that and, if reversed, customers would listen IMHO.


Anything is possible, but even Sony's hyper aggressive approach at innovation isn't fast enough. Then you gotta look at the consumers. What you're mostly seeing on forums are those that want solid, stable systems now. They almost don't want to see rapid changes. Years of evolution has honed these cameras to be what the existing customers want. How do you disrupt this market to attract new buyers and not be so disruptive that older customers get chased away? Sony and Samsung were the disruptors, but they haven't been welcomed enough.

Perhaps they weren't disruptive enough. Where are the programmable mirrorless or the fully modular mirrorless? Look what DJI is doing with drone cameras and repurposing those for the cinema market. That's really outside the box thinking. Where were these guys when the drone and action camera market was created? They were all focused on making another DSLR or DSLR-like mirrorless because that's what their older, more traditional customers wanted. There are so many things these camera makers should be doing to get ahead of the curve, but none are doing them. Why can't I backup my images on tablets, edit them, and share them? Their mindset isn't focus on making that leap. They are still focused on small evolutions. Look at this Leica SL and the upcoming Pentax FF DSLR. Talk about trying to address markets from the past. Sure, there are a few who will geek out over new options, but most of us look at those and ask why? Just two more DSLR-like me too's.



Oct 25, 2015 at 06:27 PM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Samsung exit?


sflxn wrote:
I'm basing all of this on history. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. It's been written before. As Ratty said, this market is collapsing. There may be short periods of upward blips, but the trajectory is through the floor. History shows anytime major technological or social changes occurs, the old platforms disappear faster than they appear. History rhymes or echoes. Medium format, tube TV, compact disc, vinyl, mini computers, flip phones, Walkman, iPods, digital cameras. They take a long time to build up, but then they disappear a lot faster. Blu-ray disappeared almost overnight.

I don't need to
...Show more

You just made a case for the exact opposite scenario - m43 may survive much better than FF. Assuming that there is an increase in manufacturing cost as the market contracts, m43 will have a nice advantage. First, the construction of a mirrorless camera is much simpler than a DSLR. Many FF cameras are still DSLR and a less are mirrorless. The vast majority of m43 are mirrorless. I hesitate to say all m43 are mirrorless but I can't think of a single example of a m43 DSLR. Second, a wafer can hold more m43 sensors (relative to FF), and if a few are defective it’s not a big deal. The same wafer can certainly hold fewer full-frame 35mm sensors. Fewer sensors = increased costs, and an unavoidable defect or two contributes to making costs even higher, because of the lower yield per centimeter of wafer real-estate. APS-C and Micro Four Thirds (MFT) sensors are certainly in the lower cost range. So if there is an impending rise in manufacturing costs because of a shrinking market, I think you have made a good case for SURVIVAL of smaller sensors.



Oct 25, 2015 at 08:45 PM
bjornthun
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Samsung exit?


If we consider lenses like the Otus 55/1.4, Sigma Art 50/1.4, Milvus 50/1.4 and the upcoming Leica SL 50/1.4, we see that the fast f/1.4 normal lenses need to be bigger and thus heavier to perform really well on digital full frame, than the 50/1.4 lenses from the film days. This may trend may actually make the smaller sensor formats like m43 more popular. These big normal lenses are as big as, if not bigger, than medium format normal lenses used to be.

A side note: I'm very happy that Sony chose to let the Sony Zeiss 55/1.8 FE, be just an f/1.8 lens. The high ISO capabilities of modern sensors make a brightestvaperture of f/1.8 more than sufficient for me. IBIS contributes further to this. I wouldn't have wanted Sony, if I had had to carry a two pound heavy FE normal lens.



Oct 25, 2015 at 09:19 PM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Samsung exit?




sflxn wrote:
Anything is possible, but even Sony's hyper aggressive approach at innovation isn't fast enough. Then you gotta look at the consumers. What you're mostly seeing on forums are those that want solid, stable systems now. They almost don't want to see rapid changes. Years of evolution has honed these cameras to be what the existing customers want. How do you disrupt this market to attract new buyers and not be so disruptive that older customers get chased away? Sony and Samsung were the disruptors, but they haven't been welcomed enough.

Perhaps they weren't disruptive enough. Where are the programmable mirrorless or
...Show more

Agree. +1



Oct 25, 2015 at 10:26 PM
Big Cheese
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Samsung exit?


Many posts in this thread seem to assume every maker needs scale to survive. In contrast most businesses survive by fulfilling a niche. Canon and Nikon get economies of scale by producing mass market systems. But others can survive by operating in niches where they don't.

Leica has survived for years not by seeking to dominate the market but rather just focusing on delivering a premium product to those that are not price sensitive. M4/3 appeals to those who want a full system but don't want the huge size and weight that it entails. Medium Format has survived by appealing to those who are prepared to pay 400-1000 per cent more for a marginal increase in image quality.

Of course it is true that only a few manufacturers can succeed in by being high volumes, low cost offerings, but many can succeed by offering something different and desirable to those prepared to pay for it.

I could have got the same IQ as M4/3 much cheaper by buying an entry level rebel twin lens kit. But I can't get a small pro spec body like the EM-1 from Nikon or Canon, so I went the M4/3 route. Price/IQ alone doesn't drive the market, it is offering something different that at least some people want.

Perhaps Samsung's failing was not working out where its niche was.



Oct 25, 2015 at 10:29 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Samsung exit?


galenapass wrote:
You just made a case for the exact opposite scenario - m43 may survive much better than FF. Assuming that there is an increase in manufacturing cost as the market contracts, m43 will have a nice advantage. First, the construction of a mirrorless camera is much simpler than a DSLR. Many FF cameras are still DSLR and a less are mirrorless. The vast majority of m43 are mirrorless. I hesitate to say all m43 are mirrorless but I can't think of a single example of a m43 DSLR. Second, a wafer can hold more m43 sensors (relative to FF), and
...Show more

It'll all depend on what becomes the dominant niche camera platform after everything plays itself out. Your argument about cost savings of smaller sensors is correct but only pans out if the demand for the m43 is there - in other words, it doesn't matter how cost effective the product is if the demand isn't there to support the market. The mirrorless vs DSLR is IMO only a temporary dichotomy - Canikon's switch to mirrorless is inevitable both for cost and technology reasons. It'll be interesting to see how many different sensor-size platforms the market will support.



Oct 25, 2015 at 10:30 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Samsung exit?


Big Cheese wrote:
Many posts in this thread seem to assume every maker needs scale to survive. In contrast most businesses survive by fulfilling a niche. Canon and Nikon get economies of scale by producing mass market systems. But others can survive by operating in niches where they don't.

Leica has survived for years not by seeking to dominate the market but rather just focusing on delivering a premium product to those that are not price sensitive. M4/3 appeals to those who want a full system but don't want the huge size and weight that it entails. Medium Format has survived by appealing
...Show more

The problem with technology niches in cameras is that R&D and admin costs are expensive so for the niche to work it either has to have higher prices or enough volume - to amortize the expenses and produce a reasonable margin/ROI.



Oct 25, 2015 at 10:34 PM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Samsung exit?


snapsy wrote:
The problem with technology niches in cameras is that R&D and admin costs are expensive so for the niche to work it either has to have higher prices or enough volume - to amortize the expenses and produce a reasonable margin/ROI.


Sigma produces foveon cameras but the consumer costs are not exorbitantly high. These are certainly niche cameras?

Edited on Oct 25, 2015 at 11:17 PM · View previous versions



Oct 25, 2015 at 11:06 PM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Samsung exit?




snapsy wrote:
It'll all depend on what becomes the dominant niche camera platform after everything plays itself out. Your argument about cost savings of smaller sensors is correct but only pans out if the demand for the m43 is there - in other words, it doesn't matter how cost effective the product is if the demand isn't there to support the market. The mirrorless vs DSLR is IMO only a temporary dichotomy - Canikon's switch to mirrorless is inevitable both for cost and technology reasons. It'll be interesting to see how many different sensor-size platforms the market will support.


Cell phones use very small sensors but evey iteration seems like better IQ is achieved. Hard to tell what will happen. Agree that it will be interesting.



Oct 25, 2015 at 11:16 PM
kwalsh
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Samsung exit?


galenapass wrote:
Sigma produces foveon cameras but the consumer costs are not exorbitantly high.


Yes, but that is a very special case. No one ever made any money on a Sigma camera - neither Sigma nor Foveon. Sigma is privately owned, family owned in fact, and the cameras are a pet project that never have to make a profit. Worse still Foveon had over $140M of VC money in it and as they collapsed Sigma bought them for about $15M. So there was around $125M of VC money lost in doing the R&D for the Sigma cameras that no consumer ever paid and neither did Sigma. A bunch of VC firms in the valley paid for all that and they never got anything for it.

So it still stands, to do sensor R&D in any profitable sense takes very large economies of scale to work...



Oct 25, 2015 at 11:24 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Samsung exit?


galenapass wrote:
Cell phones use very small sensors but evey iteration seems like better IQ is achieved. Hard to tell what will happen. Agree that it will be interesting.


I don't think it'll be a matter of technology or IQ - it'll simply be how many platforms the market will support. Smartphones will be the gorilla of the market - they've replaced P&S as the volume drivers that support the R&D, fabs, and sensor improvements that make larger-sensor formats like m43, APS-C and FF even remotely feasible on an amortized cost-basis. This btw puts Canon in a curious position because they vertically integrated to support the large volumes of P&S and that has gone away, which means once they've squeezed the last useful products out of their fabs they'll have no choice but to go fabless - the economics just don't support continued sensor investment on their part unless they plan to compete against Sony for Smartphone CMOS sensors. Interesting indeed



Oct 25, 2015 at 11:44 PM
miguel_13
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Samsung exit?


I love the term "price sensitive"

There is an argument that Samsung already sells more cameras than Canon, Nikon or Sony and makes more money at it, in that respect making a camera that isn't built into a phone doesn't make much business sense.



Oct 26, 2015 at 12:21 AM
1       2      
3
       4              6       7       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2      
3
       4              6       7       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.