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

[CJaurelius]

All well and good. But what makes you think Canon is unaware of any of this? The objective reality is that the market has changed dramatically over the past decade, and that Canon has maintained their market dominance throughout those changes.

I don't think that Canon is unaware. I think it's a combination of their history and their customer base. The existing customer don't want change. It's why Canon customers see the R1 and think awewome, but people on the outside scratch their head.

Only time will tell. But having been on this forum for 14 years, I've seen many (many!) predictions of doom for Canon. YAPODFC. In spite of the many 'experts' predicting said doom, Canon's market share and dominance have continued. Those predicting doom somehow think they know the camera market better than Canon, and that's just unrealistic. It doesn't help when morons who have no understanding of how to interpret data wade in with fatally flawed analyses, followed by people believing that false information and repeating it (to be clear, not aimed at you and thanks again for your acknowledgement; but the information seems to be propagating nicely, no doubt because it makes good clickbait and that is more important to those posting it than being accurate or honest)..

I don't think Canon is doomed. You are a fan of Canon and I'm a fan of tech. I could care less where the tech comes from. Both Canon and Sony make some awesome tech. You're view of dominance is a bit different than mine. You see market share as the end all be all. In the 14 years that you have been on this Forum Sony has gone from a nobody in the space to making more revenue than Canon. So which company is better. I personally don't care. Which company is going to adapt to the future landscape put out the best tech in that environemnt is more interesting to me.

So the R1 is a great camera. As noted by people here it is their flagship "sports" camera. I'm more interested in a flagship where they throw all the latest tech into one camera even if it cost more.

The takeaway is this...Canon appears to be doing just fine. They are at a 48% ILC market share, and even as DSLR sales continue to fall they predict they'll have a 49% market share this year. So feel free to continue predicting their doom. If they fall to #2 in the ILC market, feel free to shout I TOLD YOU SO from the forum rooftop. Until then, your YAPODFC is just more hot air.

They all appear to be doing fine. Fujifilm isn't even one of the big three but is definitely killing it. This is the innovation I'm looking for. In a market where fixed lens cameras sales were dropping they were able to put out something really great and expand the market. Moves like this are the future.

 

[CJaurelius]

So, you think that first-time camera buyers are going to spend thousands of dollars on a high end camera? I don't. Entry-level cameras create new customers who may upgrade to higher-end cameras in the future.

We disagree but will be fun to see the outcome. As smartphone camera technology increases it raises the floor for entry into the market. If you already have the equivalent of a $300 digital camera on your phone then not many people are going to buy a $300 stand alone camera. Fast forward and if you have the equvalent of a $700 digital camrea on your phone then not many people are going to buy a $700 digital camera. The data shows this:

"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."

What's considered entry level will go up over time. Sony just released their brand new entry level "creator" camera the ZV-E10II. It's an apsc camera where they stripped down the features and it's $1,000 for the body only. The previous model was $700. Just like the A7III was released at $2,000 but the A7IV was released at $2,500.

The bottom of the market has to increase to seperate itself from smartphones, which is also increasing.

 

[CJaurelius]

Overall, about high end cameras, the way I'd' sum it up may be :
- the "1" mark was a first for Sony alpha line and is not the same kind of "flagship" we knew <=> the target is not as clear as it was for DSLRs, sounding like just having the biggest specs sheet for the highest price because, you know, 'I dreamed of it, etc..'
- At Nikon, they have also made it another way => top multi purpose pro hybrid camera as Z9 with a Z8 that is just a "baby Z9", sounding like they're just trying their best for a smaller company and to my sense, it's quite OK
- Canon seems to be still more on the line of what the "1" mark means back in the days of DSLRs, maybe partly to maintain some kind of history/identity , partly to keep it their own way against competitors... and also probably for some other reasons they may know better than us including things like budget, planification etc... .

I think this is a great synopsis.

 

[Kit.]

I think most people here would agree that image quality is great accross the board. The nuances between these cameras at this point is minor.

I wouldn't. Unless by "image quality" you specifically mean the quality of the images of test charts taken from a tripod.

 

[Kit.]

In the 14 years that you have been on this Forum Sony has gone from a nobody in the space

Not true. 14 years ago Sony (former Minolta) had already gained back its status of the 3rd largest SLR manufacturer in the world.

 

[neuroanatomist]

14 years ago Sony (former Minolta) had already gained back its status of the 3rd largest SLR manufacturer in the world.

True. But sadly, it’s also true that some people refuse to let facts influence their opinions.

In 2010, ILC market share was Canon at 44.5%, Nikon at 29.8% and Sony at 11.9%. Sony has basically swapped places with Nikon over that 14 years. So by @CJaurelius' logic, that means Nikon is a nobody in the space today. No doubt he’ll claim that’s not what he meant, though it’s effectively just what he stated.

It would be nice if people bothered to check their facts before posting fallacious drivel, but that’s too much to hope for, especially these days.

 

[David - Sydney]

But you can only sell so many cameras to wedding photographers. Plus add in the fact that the technology advancements are slowing down meaning they won't need to upgrade as fast. If Canon sells a high end camera to a wedding photographer in 2024 that person most likely wont need an upgrade for a decade plus.

Not sure where you get your data from but to suggest that a reasonably successful wedding photographer shooting a couple of thousand shots on most weekends would only "need" to replace the body every 10 years seems a stretch.
but...
Previous AF updates for eye-AF would have been a big upgrade for their use case.
New updates like eye controlled AF with AI priority subjects could be another jump in efficiency
=> these are big technological advancements in AF in just 5 years!

In any case, the wedding photographers I mention are specific to developing countries where there are huge numbers of weddings with (comparably) significant spend.
The top 10 countries by population have 9 developing countries (China/ India/ Indonesia/ Pakistan etc) accounting for roughly 40% of the world's 8.1B people. Some big numbers there.

Not to get to deep but most populations are leveling off. So who are they going to sell all these cameras to in the future? Heck with AI we may not even have traditional "wedding photographers" in 10 years.

I am not sure which country you live in but I think that you are only referring to developed countries for low population growth. World population is still growing and mostly in less developed countries.. you know - the ones with cost conscious buyers who still want to look professional for weddings.
People are still spending big on wedding photographers. AI will change things but the human condition still yearns for connection, family and significant events and recording them for prosperity (even if only on FB)
Even China's single child policy has come to an end after having parents and grandparents funneling into all cash into their little emperor's wedding.

 

[David - Sydney]

DSLR's will most likely drop to around 1M this year. With a 100k - 200k decrease per year they will be all but gone in 5 years. I mean will there still be a few people using them? Sure. There are people still shooting film today, but film camears are not a significant part of the business.

Who said anything about a significant business. DLSR will be a market segment for some time to come as long as people buy them and they are profitable. It won't be a linear decline as you suggest.

 

[David - Sydney]

But every years that passes the tech gets older and older. No one is going to be making new batches of 10 year old cameras. The old mirrorless cameras will be a better value propisition.

People like retro. Maybe not a huge number but vinyl, valve amplifiers and non-ergonomic retro style cameras are having moments. Nostalgia and feelings still matter to certain groups.

The main reason that you are getting a lot of feedback is your language... By having definitive statements, you open yourself to prove it with data or retract when proven incorrect. Alternatively, maybe you are learning a lot by being argumentative but it is hard to tell.

 

[David - Sydney]

I don't think that Canon is unaware. I think it's a combination of their history and their customer base. The existing customer don't want change. It's why Canon customers see the R1 and think awewome, but people on the outside scratch their head.

Moving from my 5Div (and 5Diii and 7D previously) to R5 was a massive improvement. The R wasn't a significant change for me so waiting 2 years made all the difference. I am happy with change where it is warranted and put my money into it. The R5ii looks great but I don't have the cash to buy it and a new housing for it so maybe the R5iii would make more financial sense.

I am not the user for a new R1 but there has been a lot of current 1DXiii users that have been waiting for a replacement for a number of years. Some jumped to R3 but others will happily jump to the R1.
If you own a Z9 or A1 then of course you may scratch your head but you wouldn't be the market for a R1 either.

I don't think Canon is doomed. You are a fan of Canon and I'm a fan of tech.

I have a financially vested interest in Canon equipment and I like tech as well where I can afford it and it makes sense for my use case.

Which company is going to adapt to the future landscape put out the best tech in that environemnt is more interesting to me.

I get that you don't think that Canon fits that description so perhaps this isn't the forum for you as we are giving you examples but you don't seem to hear them.

 

[David - Sydney]

So the R1 is a great camera. As noted by people here it is their flagship "sports" camera. I'm more interested in a flagship where they throw all the latest tech into one camera even if it cost more.

The R1 criticism seems to come down to:
- A1/Z9 have speed** and high mp
- A9iii has higher fps/high flash sync but lower mp
=> eshutter and global shutter have issues and some prefer integrated grip.
R1 unique points are AF (eye controlled, priority AI subjects and predictive moments eg balls movement)

There isn't a camera that meets all these criteria so which of today's flagships would you choose?

They all appear to be doing fine. Fujifilm isn't even one of the big three but is definitely killing it. This is the innovation I'm looking for. In a market where fixed lens cameras sales were dropping they were able to put out something really great and expand the market. Moves like this are the future.

Killing what exactly?
They have been successful in moving the medium format price point down which is great but volume is low.
Their retro models are popular but is it innovation or nostalgia?

 

[John Wilde]

Fujifilm isn't even one of the big three but is definitely killing it. This is the innovation I'm looking for.

Nothing says "killing it" quite like mediocre autofocus.

DPR on Fujifilm X-S20: "Autofocus trails competitors"

DPR on Fujifilm X100VI: "the X100VI's heavy, unit-focus lens can't move quickly enough to sensibly maintain focus on moving targets."

How "innovative".

 

[P-visie]

Nothing says "killing it" quite like mediocre autofocus.

DPR on Fujifilm X-S20: "Autofocus trails competitors"

DPR on Fujifilm X100VI: "the X100VI's heavy, unit-focus lens can't move quickly enough to sensibly maintain focus on moving targets."

How "innovative".

Yes, unsharp pictures to go with the retro style .

 

[nhandumuc]

Nothing says "killing it" quite like mediocre autofocus.

DPR on Fujifilm X-S20: "Autofocus trails competitors"

DPR on Fujifilm X100VI: "the X100VI's heavy, unit-focus lens can't move quickly enough to sensibly maintain focus on moving targets."

How "innovative".

That’s how we return to the root of photography! The blurry pics accompanied by tons of text to show how artsy said pics are could only be captured by Retro Fuji!

 

[P-visie]

Another doom and gloom story from Photorumors: “Canon sales are tanking”.
See: https://photorumors.com/2024/07/24/canon-sales-are-tanking/#more-183899

The original publication in DCLife just states the facts (Google translated link).

 

[nhandumuc]

Another doom and gloom story from Photorumors: “Canon sales are tanking”.
See: https://photorumors.com/2024/07/24/canon-sales-are-tanking/#more-183899

The original publication in DCLife just states the facts (Google translated link).

You ain’t seen nothing yet, behold!

Canon departure thoughts - Canon-mount SLRs - Photography - FM Forums

Join the Canon-mount SLRs photography discussion: As a long-time bird photographer and professional birding guide, I think the R1 announcement is likely to end my tenure as a Canon shooter (13 years). Sure, the

www.fredmiranda.com

 

[BrightTiger]

Personally I would not call 32.1% close at all. Especially since Sony basically had over five year head start on Canon in the mirrorless segment. For Canon to walk Sony down in that segment and put them in their rear view mirror is a testament to Sony's executive turn over and Canon's expertise in the markets.

Factually false and by a lot. The EOS M1 was released in 2H2012 and the excellent M5 in Nov 2015. I owned the M3 and M5. Canon absolutely had the market in their hands with the M5 - a mirrorless 80D (also had that) in a portable body. They absolutely neutered the line after that because they were afriad of cannabalizing their DSLRs (see Steve Jobs) and didnt see the future. Rest is history. The company deserves to rot for what they did to the EOS M - and squandering a huge lead.

 

[BrightTiger]

> Personally I would not call 32.1% close at all.
Sony was at 13% 10 years ago and that was still 2 years before the A7III rocked the world. Care to count their E-mount lens catalog then? Now? Seen Canon woeful catalog? Sony has halved the gap and has the momentum. Canon is stagnated around the 40% mark and Nikon is at 13%, trying to fend off #4 Fuji. Canon has banked (literally and figuratively) on its DSLR laurels. Those days are ending.

 

[dougsv]

Why is it so difficult for some to understand that there are 2 very different data here? i) TOTAL digital cameras market share; ii) ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market

In TOTAL digital cameras market shares, Canon has been around 50% for years, Sony has been going up and took second place from Nikon. In this data, Canon is around 46% currently and Sony 26%.

In ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market shares, Sony was leading for years due to early adoption, but recently Canon took first place and is now at 41% with Sony at 32%.

Canon is not in any negative trend in either of them. They are stable in TOTAL digital cameras, and trending up in ONLY MIRRORLESS, which is expected because they started taking mirrorless more seriously later than Sony.

Unfortunately I cant find any year by year graph of either data, but checking data from 2019, Sony used to have 42% in ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market shares, against 24% for Canon. So you can say that in these past 5 years, Sony fell 16% and Canon got 18%. Doing the same for the TOTAL digital cameras market, Canon had 45% in 2019 and Sony 20%, meaning that Canon has been stable while Sony got 6% in these past 5 years.

PS.: from the level of arguments here, this information might be needed: for these who don't know, roughly we have 3 types of digital cameras: i) fixed lens; ii) DSLRs; iii) Mirrorless. When you talk about TOTAL digital cameras market, you talk about the sum of all the 3 types. When you talk about ONLY MIRRORLESS, you include only the mirrorless market.

 

[P-visie]

Why is it so difficult for some to understand that there are 2 very different data here? i) TOTAL digital cameras market share; ii) ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market

In TOTAL digital cameras market shares, Canon has been around 50% for years, Sony has been going up and took second place from Nikon. In this data, Canon is around 46% currently and Sony 26%.

In ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market shares, Sony was leading for years due to early adoption, but recently Canon took first place and is now at 41% with Sony at 32%.

Canon is not in any negative trend in either of them. They are stable in TOTAL digital cameras, and trending up in ONLY MIRRORLESS, which is expected because they started taking mirrorless more seriously later than Sony.

Unfortunately I cant find any year by year graph of either data, but checking data from 2019, Sony used to have 42% in ONLY MIRRORLESS digital cameras market shares, against 24% for Canon. So you can say that in these past 5 years, Sony fell 16% and Canon got 18%. Doing the same for the TOTAL digital cameras market, Canon had 45% in 2019 and Sony 20%, meaning that Canon has been stable while Sony got 6% in these past 5 years.

PS.: from the level of arguments here, this information might be needed: for these who don't know, roughly we have 3 types of digital cameras: i) fixed lens; ii) DSLRs; iii) Mirrorless. When you talk about TOTAL digital cameras market, you talk about the sum of all the 3 types. When you talk about ONLY MIRRORLESS, you include only the mirrorless market.

A stab at an explanation:

1. Canon gets a lot of attention because Canon is the market leader. Making sensational headlines about the market leader generates a lot more clicks and views than making posts or video’s about number 4 or 5 in the market.

2. Some people value their opinions more than facts and data.

3. A lot of editors / posters have not paid attention during Physics 101, or have (conveniently) forgotten, when their physics teacher explained that a number without the corresponding unit was not a correct answer. I.e. one should always pay attention to the unit when making calculations and comparisons.