gdanmitchell
When in doubt, doubt.
At some point we need to retire the term “mirrorless cameras.” Pretty much no one is making cameras with mirrors any more! What remains are… cameras.
Upvote
0
Canon’s global mirrorless market share sits at 41%, with Sony as their “biggest competitor”
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
This should also be very telling on how much budget can be allocated to a camera like this. I would be curious what the production of the R3 has been.
Upvote
0
Of the 6 million ILCs shipped last year, 1 million (16.7%) of them were DSLRs.
So by your logic only Canon, Sony and Nikon make cameras and we need retire the terms Fuji, Ricoh, and Leica because together those and other non-Big 3 brands make fewer cameras than DSLRs.
Since Sony doesn’t make DLSRs anymore, the article was in a way being friendly to Sony…they’re still well behind Canon now in mirrorless sales, but if the pie being presented was ILCs, Canon’s slice would be even bigger and Sony’s slice would be even smaller.
Upvote
0
Can't second that, and there are the PTZ cameras as well, which are raking in quite well.
Cinema EOS is very widely used in commercial production and in VFX asset acquisition, backplates and stuff.
You are probably just looking at the wrong statistics.....
Upvote
0
Canon is doomed. Over in the sony forums they're all saying canon should buy sensors from sony.
Upvote
0
There are sensible people posting in here!? I can't believe it, I thought it was 100% fanboys
Upvote
0
The difference was only two years, with Nex 3 being released in 2010 and the First EOS M in 2012. Arguably many of Canons sold were M mount cameras such as the M50, all contributing to the 41% mirrorless marketshare.
Upvote
0
Nikon has apparently become highly limited producer focusing primarily on high-end, high-profit full-frame cameras and lenses. Their crop-sensor bodies are abysmal and lenses virtually non-existent. Whereas the Z9 and pf lenses (at least the 800mm and the non-pf 400mm f/4.5 prime) were "aggressively" priced, there is no doubts that the margins on these products were/are comfortably high. Thus, it appears that Nikon has ceded competing toe-to-toe with Canon and Sony in every market segment instead choosing to compete (quite well) in highly profitable full-frame and niche segments. It seems to be working for Nikon, which is quite profitable.
While this focus works for me since my segment is one Nikon targets (wildlife and sports shooters), there is a lot of frustration from long-time Nikon shooters who are unhappy that Nikon has abandoned product categories that they prefer (eg., photojournalists who cringe at having to deal with 45MP files).
While this focus works for me since my segment is one Nikon targets (wildlife and sports shooters), there is a lot of frustration from long-time Nikon shooters who are unhappy that Nikon has abandoned product categories that they prefer (eg., photojournalists who cringe at having to deal with 45MP files).
Upvote
0
The data are from 2023, IIRC all M-series bodies except the M50 II had been discontinued by then, and that last model was discontinued partway through the year.
Evidently Canon did a masterful job of winding down the very popular EOS M line while gaining mirrorless market share with the R series.
Upvote
0
That seems to be correct. Although R APSC was never for me.
As a former M user I am still upset that Canon killed off that line. The 32 1.4 is my favorite Canon lens to date. I still have it, it's pretty much glued to my M5. The rest I sold off with no problem, but I don't think I can ever let the M5 + 32mm combo go.
Upvote
0
They actually report it in the appendix to their main report. They combine it with their video camera division. Their sensor division is a different group (Imaging & Sensing Solutions).
Revenues, including their video camera divisions where applicable, for the full year ending March 31st 2024 for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm in billions of yen.
This is assuming half of the revenues in the "Other Cameras" division are video cameras in the Canon report, which is likely an overestimate.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I consider myself a current M user. I have the M6II and a full-spectrum converted M6. This is with the latter and the M18-150 in the Swiss Alps, from a few weeks ago.
Upvote
0
Interesting. For the prior year (2022), Sony was ahead on revenue while Canon was far ahead on units sales. Looks like Canon is now leading both, if barely in terms of revenue.
Upvote
0
I would guess that the content creator/influencer boom is a massive part of this gradual shift—especially because most content anymore is video, and people really respect Sony's FX line. Canon is definitely pricing their products more aggressively to compete with Sony, which they absolutely need to do (still can't believe the C400 is $8K) — but Sony has really done a great job penetrating that ever-growing market segment. It's hard to compete with a camera like the FX3, which is not only the perfect camera for the majority of video content you'll see on social media, but also a camera quite capable of being built out and seamlessly integrating on larger sets.
And I would argue that Canon's entries into that market (such as the R5 C and R6 II, and presumably the R5 Mark II) have been excellent, and typically equal or superior to Sony in many (but certainly not all) regards, but Canon's name just doesn't have the same reverence in that particular market segment. Move into the pro photography and documentary market, and it becomes a totally different story. Canon just needs to find a way to win content creators/influencers and budding filmmakers over if they want to continue to dominate, because that market will only continue to grow.
They are on the right track pushing truly hybridized video features in the R5 Mark II, but I think they need to offer a true cinema camera in the $4000 range that is modular (NOT a stills-inspired body), powerful, very small, and equipped with minimal but meaningful I/O options such as SDI, TC, etc. Something to generate a big headline, like Blackmagic is so good at repeatedly doing, would really help Cinema EOS.
And I would argue that Canon's entries into that market (such as the R5 C and R6 II, and presumably the R5 Mark II) have been excellent, and typically equal or superior to Sony in many (but certainly not all) regards, but Canon's name just doesn't have the same reverence in that particular market segment. Move into the pro photography and documentary market, and it becomes a totally different story. Canon just needs to find a way to win content creators/influencers and budding filmmakers over if they want to continue to dominate, because that market will only continue to grow.
They are on the right track pushing truly hybridized video features in the R5 Mark II, but I think they need to offer a true cinema camera in the $4000 range that is modular (NOT a stills-inspired body), powerful, very small, and equipped with minimal but meaningful I/O options such as SDI, TC, etc. Something to generate a big headline, like Blackmagic is so good at repeatedly doing, would really help Cinema EOS.
Upvote
0
I think Canon has been ahead on revenue for both years too.
Q1 2024 has actually been a down quarter for Canon compared to a year ago, and I expect Q2 to be as well (no new product shipping for reportable revenue except the 35L, and the promotions they are running will compress margins). Things should look better for them in Q3 and 4.
Upvote
0
I am curious why the EOS Cinema line is not more successful. I don't know much about the needs of the professional video market but the Canon cinema cameras seem pretty nice. Can someone explain it?
Upvote
0
Cameras are currently in Sony's "Entertainment, Technology & Services" division. In their financial documents, Sony never reports unit sales of cameras, not even once a year.
Upvote
0