Canon’s global mirrorless market share sits at 41%, with Sony as their “biggest competitor”

Sort by date Sort by votes
#203
Canon management seems to be the problem. Too late and bad decisions. No doubt, the R1 is an excellent camera but in the feeling and the position it is a R3II. The D1 series has been divided initial in the D and the DS with more resolution. Maybe one of the Canon managers is remembering that and it will again come a R1s?! They do not see, that today's market is another one and the R1 is a flop. Wonderful marketing. Canon's diversification will avoid a financial disaster but the looser image is borne. After years they came up finally with a flop. I own a R3 and I am happy with my lenses, so thanks to the management I can save my money.
 
Upvote 0
#204
Happily preordered the R1 at the announce.

To my view this is a failure of canon marketing, not a canon product. The R1 is more or less exactly what it should be, do i care about AI upscaling or denoise? Nope, but this is exactly what the canon 1 series has always been. The 5Dmk4 was 30mp to the 1dXmk2's 20, the 1dxIII stayed at the same 20.

Sony and Nikon choosing to make their most expensive cameras high resolution, and Canon accepting the premise of what a "Flagship" should be when the reality is they were staying the course with their product lines is what the issue really seems to be. This kind of thing is extremely common in the PC space where things like commercial workstations or ECC memory are significantly more expensive than even high level gaming PCs despite being objectively less capable in a number of ways.

In that space it's to be celebrated when something like the R5mk2 exists where the more generally desirable set of specifications geared towards the more mass market is the significantly cheaper option. Most tech companies would crank the price on both of these systems and just shrug their shoulders when people commented that they are out of reach.

Is the R1 a worthy upgrade to the R3? Maybe, maybe not. We are in a pretty awesome space now where most camera upgrades are going to be pretty marginal kind of no matter what. Image quality is fantastic all the way around, auto focus is going to get better but its still fantastic all around, and there is extremely healthy competition across the entire space which is exactly what you want. I guess when we see the A1 mk2 or the Z9mk2 we can start to see what the other companies consider worthy upgrades, I suspect they will be similar in their scope(which just means you don't need to upgrade if you don't want to!)

For me canon is the easy choice until sony or nikon start coming out with the same kinds of glass that Canon has been putting out(even if you're not buying it, the availability of rentals make it usable for just about any situation) That is the primary difference in the systems at this point, and while all the systems have fantastic glass that will cover all the bases only Canon has the stuff that is the best in any given situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
#205
miraculum magnum said:
Canon's diversification will avoid a financial disaster but the looser image is borne.
Click to expand...
In their last financial documents, Canon forecast that they will sell 2.80 million interchangeable lens cameras this year for a market share of (2.80/5.75) 49%. They also forecast getting 564.2 billion yen in camera-only revenue. Canon Imaging is obviously in serious, serious, trouble. :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#206
I agree glass is something different, I did not spoke about. It is a marketing problem. If Sony and Nikon have set a different kind of camera as the best of all like Z9 or A1 I do need to give an answer, were is my R1 positioned. As I said not a bad camera but with a silent Canon company it looks like "we cannot compare". That's bad marketing
 
Upvote 0
#207
Vilacom said:
Happily preordered the R1 at the announce.

To my view this is a failure of canon marketing, not a canon product. The R1 is more or less exactly what it should be, do i care about AI upscaling or denoise? Nope, but this is exactly what the canon 1 series has always been. The 5Dmk4 was 30mp to the 1dXmk2's 20, the 1dxIII stayed at the same 20.

Sony and Nikon choosing to make their most expensive cameras high resolution, and Canon accepting the premise of what a "Flagship" should be when the reality is they were staying the course with their product lines is what the issue really seems to be. This kind of thing is extremely common in the PC space where things like commercial workstations or ECC memory are significantly more expensive than even high level gaming PCs despite being objectively less capable in a number of ways.

In that space it's to be celebrated when something like the R5mk2 exists where the more generally desirable set of specifications geared towards the more mass market is the significantly cheaper option. Most tech companies would crank the price on both of these systems and just shrug their shoulders when people commented that they are out of reach.

Is the R1 a worthy upgrade to the R3? Maybe, maybe not. We are in a pretty awesome space now where most camera upgrades are going to be pretty marginal kind of no matter what. Image quality is fantastic all the way around, auto focus is going to get better but its still fantastic all around, and there is extremely healthy competition across the entire space which is exactly what you want. I guess when we see the A1 mk2 or the Z9mk2 we can start to see what the other companies consider worthy upgrades, I suspect they will be similar in their scope(which just means you don't need to upgrade if you don't want to!)

For me canon is the easy choice until sony or nikon start coming out with the same kinds of glass that Canon has been putting out(even if you're not buying it, the availability of rentals make it usable for just about any situation) That is the primary difference in the systems at this point, and while all the systems have fantastic glass that will cover all the bases only Canon has the stuff that is the best in any given situation.
Click to expand...
It is kind of funny that people are complaining that the specs they want are in the cheaper of the 2 new cameras. Again showing how stupid social media and internet shouters and complainers are.

Not to mention that people can't seem to wrap their heads around the idea that Canon is keeping the 1 series as a lower MP camera and the 5 series as the higher MP series, just as they were in the last DSLR generations.

And the R1 does not have to be an upgrade to the R3. It is an upgrade the the last 1 series DSLR camera. All so clear and logical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Upvote 0
#210
neuroanatomist said:
Despite the significant transition in the industry, Canon’s market share has remained constant. You seem to think DSLRs dropped precipitously, but if you look at CIPA data the decline has been pretty linear. What that means is that Canon’s sales of mirrorless cameras have increased to maintain their market share as compact and DLSR sales dropped steadily over the past 10 years.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is part of what I see from CIPA numbers:
2020202120222023
Mirrorless 2,933,080 33%3,106,49937%4,073,51151%4,832,81363%
DSLR2,374,56927%2,241,77227%1,853,22223%1,166,10015%
Built In Lens3,578,64340%3,013,25036%2,084,86526%1,721,59122%
Total8,886,2928,361,5218,011,5987,720,505

2023 saw a 40% drop in DSLR's. Camera sales have picked up slight this year so I doubt we'll see the samedrop in 2024. But none the less I think DSLR's are about gone in 5 years. I'm guessing maybe 1M DSLR's in 2024 with a gradual decrease. However what the numbers don't show is the value of those units sold.

"with mirrorless cameras now making up 83.75% of ILC shipments by volume, and 92.9% by value. "
Click to expand...

So DSLR's currently are just 7% of the ILC market from a value perspective. Those units may help to boost market share from units perspective but the writing is on the wall. Chasing market share for a segment that is decreasing in value doesn't produce the most profit.

https://dclife.jp/camera_news/article/etc/2023/0905_01.html

Mirrorless camera global market share 2022 (unit basis)
  1. Canon: 1.54 million units
  2. Sony: 1.25 million units
  3. Nikon: 530,000 units
  4. Fujifilm: 360,000 units
  5. OM Digital … 140,000 units
  6. Panasonic: 140,000 units
Click to expand...

This means that Canon was roughly 38% (1.54/4)of the mirrorless market in 2022 and grew to 41% of the market in 2023. Sony was 31% of the market in 2022 and grew to 32% in 2023.

However:
Digital camera global market share 2022 (value basis: sales)
  1. Sony: 565 billion yen
  2. Canon: 509.7 billion yen
  3. Fujifilm: 410.3 billion yen
  4. Nikon … 227.1 billion yen
Click to expand...
From the recent Nikkei article:
"Smartphones continue to squeeze the market for cameras designed for mass consumption. Because of those dynamics, Sony has concentrated resources developing mid-end and high-end cameras. "
Click to expand...

Canon strategy has been to remain the market leader, while Sony's strategy is sell more profitable cameras. The recent release of the R1 may help Canon as it fills out the upper end of its lineup. But look at the R6mii. The Respective Sony and Nikon cameras are $2,500 and Canon responded by reducing the price to $2,000. They R8 is their entry level full frame an its $1,300. If you're talking about newer full frames then Sony's cheapest is the A7CII which is $2,200. You have to go to the the OLD A7C which came out 4 years ago and still sells for $1,600.

The increase in cameras this year is also telling. For example we will like see an increase in fixed lens cameras. This segment has been dying as it is comprised of mostly cheap cameras. However:

"Similarly, the value of fixed-lens camera sales surged by 34.7% to ¥37.6 billion ($233 million), indicating that some of the growth in the compact market is driven by desirable high-value cameras like Fujifilm's X100VI."
Click to expand...
Again, one of the brands is finding away to sell high end cameras vs more cameras. If you look back to the numbers above Fuji dropped from 9% of the mirrorless market share to 8% leading to Canon's increase in mirrorless market share but Fuji will make more money selling a $1,600 fixed lens camera. Fuji could've easily sold more units at a lower price but they realilze quantity isn't the game anymore.

The bottom of the market where Canon crushes it in market share is evaporating. Sony sees this and is looking beyond cameras. Cameras are a small portion of their larger CMOS market that they lead. They are perfectly happy to sell high end cameras to professionals and "prosumers" as the smartphone markets eats away traditional cameras sales.

To Canon's credit, they have a very loyal fanbase. I think this is a gift and a curse. That fanbase appears to be older. I think Canon will not be forced to change witht the times as Youtube, TIkTok and creating "content" becomes a larger part of the market. As the old guard dies out there wont be enough people to replace them.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#211
CJaurelius said:
But none the less I think DSLR's are about gone in 5 years. I'm guessing maybe 1M DSLR's in 2024 with a gradual decrease. However what the numbers don't show is the value of those units sold.
So DSLR's currently are just 7% of the ILC market from a value perspective. Those units may help to boost market share from units perspective but the writing is on the wall. Chasing market share for a segment that is decreasing in value doesn't produce the most profit.
Click to expand...
Canon has stated that they will still keep producing DLSRs as long as people want them (and they are profitable)

The market share has dipped hugely but you have to remember that there are users in countries that are extremely price sensitive and for the moment, those lower specced models are still much cheaper than similar mirrorless models. The tipping point may change in the future but until then many sales will happen in that segment.
We have discussed this in the forum many times and although phone cameras are amazing, wedding photographers using them aren't seen as "professional" if they are using the same model as what the couple have in their hands irrespective of their skills.

Canon might not release a new DLSR but all the development costs are full amortised so as long as the parts are still available they will be profitable.
There will also be rusted-on 5Div and 1DXiii users that want to continue to use a new one once their aging ones die. The 8 year 5Div is still on sale new. Maybe it is just remaining stock but new batches can be made if there is demand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#212
CJaurelius said:
Canon strategy has been to remain the market leader, while Sony's strategy is sell more profitable cameras. The recent release of the R1 may help Canon as it fills out the upper end of its lineup.
Click to expand...
Everyone is chasing the most profitable segments. Bleeding edge components with exponentially higher prices aren't used eg CFe v4 slots.
Canon released their updated 1 series camera every 4 years (on time). Should not be a surprise to anyone.

For all the crying about RF lenses being too expensive, the bodies are pretty well priced and cover USD480(with lens!)-USD6300.
Glass lasts and bodies get replaced.

Sony has the disadvantage of competing with 3rd parties for lenses so they have to focus more on bodies. They had to choice but to open up their mount as they had no lenses. Their initial sensor advantages were offset by dodgey adaptors (hello metabones) to make them work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#213
I'm not going to respond point by point (you make several good ones, balanced by some poor ones), but I will suggest that you avoid unwarranted assumptions.
CJaurelius said:
Canon strategy has been to remain the market leader, while Sony's strategy is sell more profitable cameras.
Click to expand...
How do you know Sony's cameras are more profitable? You show data on revenue, I trust you understand that higher revenue does not necessarily mean higher profit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#214
CJaurelius said:
The bottom of the market where Canon crushes it in market share is evaporating. Sony sees this and is looking beyond cameras. Cameras are a small portion of their larger CMOS market that they lead. They are perfectly happy to sell high end cameras to professionals and "prosumers" as the smartphone markets eats away traditional cameras sales.
Click to expand...
You say this as if it is new!
Canon have been navigating the changes markedly well for a decade or more since phone cameras decimated the compact camera market
Canon dominates the entire ILC market and are still profitable despite immense R&D costs for the last 6-8 years.
In a new year with dramatic changes in the product mix, they are still roughly half the market share

CJaurelius said:
To Canon's credit, they have a very loyal fanbase. I think this is a gift and a curse. That fanbase appears to be older.
Click to expand...
source = ?
If you want to look at loyal fanbases then the Sony zealots are remarkable. Sony has done a great marketing job here.
Canon products have been highly (and in a lot of cases unfairly) criticised. Market leaders always gets a lot of pain that way.
Even now, the initial reviews are looking at very small differences between "peers" to generate clicks by rating Sony vs Nikon vs Canon.
Expressing disappointment at Canon is a global sport.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
#215
CJaurelius said:
I think Canon will not be forced to change witht the times as Youtube, TIkTok and creating "content" becomes a larger part of the market. As the old guard dies out there wont be enough people to replace them.
Click to expand...
Canon's video implementation improvements in their hybrid cameras have dominated the spec sheets. From the 5Dii to the R8's first 8k raw offering. Even dual still/cinema menus on the R5c and releasing VR lenses.

Canon isn't afraid the release quirky or niche products targeting the video space eg the Powershot V10 VLOG and Apple vision pro support

I get that you are trying to generate debate and argument but I don't think that you are looking at the overall picture clearly
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#216
David - Sydney said:
You say this as if it is new!
Canon have been navigating the changes markedly well for a decade or more since phone cameras decimated the compact camera market
Canon dominates the entire ILC market and are still profitable despite immense R&D costs for the last 6-8 years.
In a new year with dramatic changes in the product mix, they are still roughly half the market share
Click to expand...
Yes, but don't you see? Canon is going to fail. I mean, some people have been predicting that for well over a decade. They have to be right someday, don't they?

CB.gif
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#217
miraculum magnum said:
Canon management seems to be the problem. Too late and bad decisions. No doubt, the R1 is an excellent camera but in the feeling and the position it is a R3II.
Click to expand...
and so what if you feel it is? does it change the camera any?

it's still the top camera that canon has to serve a segment of the professional market that is very important to Canon.

If you aren't part of that segment, Canon may be disappointed in not getting the sale - but you probably aren't the one Canon is setting their sights at.

What else could Canon have done?
1) increased MP - increases your pixel noise, lowers the camera speed - makes it FAR harder for Mind Control AF™ to function. Also makes the split between R5 and R1 complicated.
2) global shutter - and have an IQ disaster that Sony has with the A9 III? Yeah, canon wouldn't take a step back like that. Sony will come out fairly quickly with an A9 IV with an improved sensor and oh well if you bought a lemon.

Canon talks to the group of professionals this camera is focused in on. It's their input. This is what they wanted. It may not satisfy EVERYONE, but it will certainly be a very popular camera that you'll see everywhere at the Olympics.

Is the R3 capable? Certainly, but the R1 is better in every way. when it comes down to it, the number on the camera doesn't really matter - the camera does. If people want a status symbol they can get a Leica.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#218
CJaurelius said:
The bottom of the market where Canon crushes it in market share is evaporating. Sony sees this and is looking beyond cameras. Cameras are a small portion of their larger CMOS market that they lead. They are perfectly happy to sell high end cameras to professionals and "prosumers" as the smartphone markets eats away traditional cameras sales.
Click to expand...

This is nonsense. Every camera company (sans Nikon it seems) has been moving away from Cameras.

Canon has been moving from being a camera and printer company for the last 2 decades. Net sales are forecasted as 564 million yen in sales out of 4350 million yen of overall sales for the company. Cameras, only makes up 13% of Canon's portfolio. There was a time that was closer to 25% (2005 - net sales 3754 million yen, 879 million yen in cameras)

Sony is moving away from cameras because they could never compete head-on.

Also, your theory that Sony is doing the right idea - is wrong, and I've written about this so many times that I'm not going to get into here. but continuing to push only the upper tier assures that sooner or later your only users stop upgrading, and your user sales plummet. I've written about it. Thom Hogan has written about it. Maybe your YouTubers haven't but the subject is probably too complicated for them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu