Canon USA: The R3 line will continue

[scyrene]

Because the resolution came out around that many years ago. We know how old the mustang body style is because we know when it was first introduced. Typically new equipment takes advantage of new and often faster technology. How many new computers come out using processors from a decade ago? How many phone, tablets, etc. do the same? Why should we not expect new cameras to follow these same technological patterns?

Because resolution isn't akin to processing speed, maybe? My eyes can only discern so much detail from a given distance. Displays haven't increased in resolution at the same rate either.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

How so? You can go on YouTube and watch these young people with tons of camera equipment.

He's probably saying that because you said it is probably the largest section of the market, you'd need a lot more data to actually say that. Just playing devil's advocate here. I've run into this in my PhD courses and had to collect more info to say something.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

Because resolution isn't akin to processing speed, maybe? My eyes can only discern so much detail from a given distance. Displays haven't increased in resolution at the same rate either.

Yet. And then there is the cropability factor that needs to be considered as well. I prefer to shoot tight on the subject when possible, but shoot wide and crop if action is erratic. Low MP prevents the latter in many situations and always comes at a cost to overall picture quality.

 

[SilverBox]

This is the point that I've been trying to highlight. It is my opinion that the market is moving toward video content creators that most people here wouldn't consider "pros".

One of the things recently I've been wondering is how many pro sports photographers are running out and buying these $6k flagships cameras vs how many wealthy hobbyists are buying these.

I get that the pro sports photographers might tell Canon that 24 MP and 40 fps are enough, but given the ever shrinking budgets of news agencies, I wonder how big that market is nowadays.

Meanwhile, I think market of wealthy amateurs who "want the best camera that shoots everything" is not currently being tapped by Canon right now.

This reminds me of that petapixel article that was published after the R1 announcement about the flagship as a sort of ambasidor to the whole brand, and the excitement it generates therein: https://petapixel.com/2024/07/24/ca...ships-but-the-flagships-sell-everything-else/

In the 20 odd years I have been in this business, Canon has always moved rather ponderously, making very conservative choices, and they have been the dominant player in the industry since before picked up my first Rebel. They always had the best technology, imo, and when they didn't they had the best service. When Sony entered the market by buying Minolta's entire portfolio, I thought to myself "this should be interesting" because they were the only corporation with enough resources to compete with Canon's sheer size, and iirc the only other camera company making chips in house.

Now I was never a fan of Sony cameras for the same old reason that I don't like their color, and I don't like their raw files. It was always my opinion that for pros, if not Canon, Nikon. But Sony was great at figuring out the holes in the market, and they threw enormous resources in their attempt to dethrone Canon for the number 1 spot. It is a real testament to Nikon that they have managed to weather this storm while being significantly smaller than both Canon and Sony, and after some initial missteps, the Z8 and Z9 are really very nice cameras and I love the color out of them, and frankly I would much rather see Nikon than Sony cameras when I am working as a digital tech.

All that to say, is Canon still exciting? They never really were able to follow up on the huge impact that was the release of the 5Dii, it even took them by surprise. Sony swooped in there, and they have been beating Canon on the AF and technology front for some time, although I would still make the tired argument that their color is not as good as Canon or Nikon, especially above 400 iso.

One last thought before I finish up this rambling mess is that what is happening with Canon right now reminds me what Profoto has been doing for a while , which is go after the mass market and wedding photographers chasing revenue while more or less abandoning the pro studio and catalog market. B1s, B10s, and A1s abound, whereas they have discontinued the B4 packs, the only real upgrade in the Pro11 from the Pro10 pack was TTL and they still upped the price to $18k, and how long can that last with Godox shipping nearly identical products at a fraction of the price? I am in Profoto not because it is the best product (that would be Broncolor) but because it is ubiquitous. But it seems that Sony has done a better job of being everywhere, and if Canon isn't exciting anymore, I wonder what that means for the future of the market? But that is the cycle isn't it? When Canon introduced the EOS mount so many of the big press agencies ditched Nikon, so the smaller markets bought those used, then recently they all switched to Sony, and there are tons of 5Diiis and ivs around, so who knows what's next. Now put that 24mp sensor in a compact neoretro Canonet and I will be happy for a few more years.

 

[neuroanatomist]

He's probably saying that because you said it is probably the largest section of the market, you'd need a lot more data to actually say that. Just playing devil's advocate here. I've run into this in my PhD courses and had to collect more info to say something.

Wow, it’s almost like you’re suggesting that one shouldn’t draw conclusions about a market by extrapolating from a highly non-representative sample of less than 1% of that market, while stating that very <1% composes the majority of that market.

Honestly, I’m not sure why anyone with a modicum of common sense would make such statements, but that’s the type of armchair expert we see here a lot.

Is trolling a field of expertise? Perhaps an independent studies PhD program? Seminars could cover such topics as, “How to invent facts,” and “How to misinterpret data and still sound plausible.”

 

[koenkooi]

And what, exactly, does that have to do with your original erroneous statement. Quite ducking and weaving and own up to your errors.

I think you’re mixing up @CJaurelius and @EOS 4 Life

 

[frankchn]

Sony swooped in there, and they have been beating Canon on the AF and technology front for some time, although I would still make the tired argument that their color is not as good as Canon or Nikon, especially above 400 iso.

I think AF wise the big three are probably fairly similar nowadays -- without using cameras from all 3 brands in a head to head it will be hard to tell, and even then each AF system will have its specific quirks. I expect I'll get better AF performance out of my R3 than an A1 or a Z9, and that might well be because I am used to how the R3's AF system behaves.

Regarding sensors, I basically decided for some specific types of photography (e.g. landscapes), the right way to go is to get a camera with a Sony sensor and someone else's color science. I really like the colors out of my Hasselblad X2D, and that is a Sony IMX461 sensor with Hasselblad's color filter array and color science on top.

 

[Dragon]

I'm in agreement will all here that Canon chose the 45MP as this was the minimum MP needed to get 8k video in mulitple formats.

This only highlights my viewpoint. Canon Produces primarily 24MP full frame sensors as this is current minimum standard for quality. The only full frame sensor (that I'm aware of) is the R5 line which is higher so they can do 8k video. People here see that as a possitive and I see that as a negative.

I would rather have the choice of different MP options for different people situations. Why not offer a 60MP+ sensor for the people who want to crop. Why not offer a 30-35MP camera for people in the middle that want to crop a little bit and then could have downsampled 7k for a slightly sharper picture with a moderate sensor readout speed. Why not offer a SUB 24MP option so that you can get a relative fast readout speed at a low cost for people who don't need more than 4k?

The argument here seems to be Papa Canon knows better and whatever they give us is all that we need.

Canon is building for the pros they know, and for a volume market. The more of one model they make, the cheaper they can make them. Six different resolutions meads 6 different camera bodies and less volume in each. In a price war (which seems to have already started, BTW) Canon will win hands down.

 

[scyrene]

My suspicion is Canon went to their "pros" and listened to them but did not consider a larger market that could/would buy this camera if it had higher resolution because it is "the way they have always done it", another term that I have heard so many times as a justification it sickens me.

Why do you suspect that though?

 

[Dragon]

How many times have I posted here that the R5mii is an amazing camera? Its the people here that pick out the negative side of my opinion and ingore the positive.

My OPINION is that from what I SEE the lower end of the market is going away for ALL CAMERA COMPANIES. Therefore the camera COMPANIES that focuse on high end/niche cameras will be better suited for success in the future when these lower end camera sales are gone.

CIPA camera sales numbers:

	2020	%	2021	%	2022	%	2023	%
MIrrorless	2,933,080	33%	3,106,499	37%	4,073,511	51%	4,832,813	63%
DSLR	2,374,569	27%	2,241,772	27%	1,853,222	23%	1,166,100	15%
Fixed Lens	3,578,643	40%	3,013,250	36%	2,084,865	26%	1,721,592	22%
Total	8,886,292	100%	8,361,521	100%	8,011,598	100%	7,720,505	100%

In a span of just 4 years the market has gone from 33% mirrorless to 63% mirrorless. DSLR's and Fixed Lens cameras are primarily comprised of the lower end of the market. DSLR's are mostly lower end to mid range. As the years go on and no new technology is introduced they will become dominately lower end as they phase out. It's already droped from 27% to 15%. It's looking like its going to drop to below 1M this year. At this rate they will be gone in 5 years.

Fixed lens cameras include point and shoots that are at the absolute bottom. This includes cameras that are $99. This market has also drop considerable from 40% to 22%. There may be some resurgence in this category this year but that is primarily due to the Fuji X100VI which is a $1,600 camera and technically a mirrorless. So this market will also be almost gone soon and what will remain will be higher end mirrorless cameras with fixed lenses. Neither Canon, Sony or Nikon will want to participate in this markate as they aren't really interested in making fixed lens mirrorless cameras. This will more than likely be a niche market with Leica, Fuji, Ricoh, etc.

Volume of total camera sales will likely pick up a pit but by and large are flat. No one can see the future but from the numbers it appears as were moving to a world where we sell 8M cameras and 75% - 8% of them will be mirrorless. So how will camera companies increase profits in that landscape? It seems likely they will have to shift higher end units with higher profit margins.

Can the market turn around and young kids fall love with $300 point and shoot cameras so Camera companies make a profit off of selling tens of millions of them like in the past? Sure that is possible. But the current trends don't show that.

You are missing the fact that CIPA is a Japanese trade organization. You are also missing the fact that P&S cameras didn't go away, but rather they went to China. Just look at best sellers in the broad category of digital cameras on Amazon. The best sellers are all Chinese P&S cameras with well known names like Kodak and Minolta plus a lot of happy faced Chinese names. These are likely mostly cameras that people are buying for their kids. Eventually, the kids that get serious will want a better camera and if the next step is $1000, it is a put off, but an R100 just might be on the buy list and then that kid is now a Canon user. Corporate strategy is a lot more complicated than reading industry stats from one country. Quit trying to convince us of what Canon should do (unless, of course, you are trolling for Sony). We are in no better position to change Canon's strategy than you are, so pick up the phone an call Canon if you don't like their choices.

 

[CJaurelius]

He's probably saying that because you said it is probably the largest section of the market, you'd need a lot more data to actually say that. Just playing devil's advocate here. I've run into this in my PhD courses and had to collect more info to say something.

I'm on a forum expressing my opinion about things we don't have concrete numbers for. In the real world when I have these discussion with people they simply give their opinion and the reasons for it. We either agree or disagree but usually learn something new. Seem on the internet things are taken a lot more personal and literal.

With that said DPReview put out an update to their "State of the Camera Industry" where they recap their discussions with industry executives:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6377501292/the-state-of-the-camera-industry-2024-edition

First the market seems to be stabilizing. There could be some minor growth but probably not much. And their is still the potential for futher contraction.

The consensus is that the camera market continues to stabilize after years of contraction. Most companies expect sales to remain stable, with potential for some growth in the coming years.

However, caution is still in the air. Sigma CEO Kazuto Yamaki observed, "For the time being, many photographers are now switching from DSLR to mirrorless, which will sustain the market. However, after they switch to mirrorless cameras, I worry that the market could shrink in the coming years."

Video is driving the growth which is mostly the young creator crowd.

Video remains a significant growth driver, with demand increasing even among still photographers, and manufacturers see video as essential for attracting and retaining customers. The coveted 'creator' market, comprised of (mostly) younger users who have yet to establish brand loyalties, is also seen as a crucial demographic for growth.

Consumer expectations for video quality have surged, influenced by the high-quality content they see around them. Yusuke Adachi of Nikon's Imaging Business Unit noted, "Customers have become very discerning thanks to video streaming platforms such as Netflix or Amazon Prime, where they see beautiful content and want to live up to that high level of expectation." In response, manufacturers have raced to boost video specifications in recent years, with nearly all enthusiast or professional cameras now capable of capturing high-quality video.

Manufacturers are now more aggressively working to provide video-specific tools and workflows to address the needs of video shooters. Features like video waveforms and dedicated video menus are becoming more common, and connectivity options like Frame.io, which allows real-time upload to the cloud and multi-user collaboration, are finding their way into more cameras. Companies also told us that video requirements are increasingly influencing lens design.

So if the market is largly flat and could possibly fall a bit once all the DSLR people convert to mirrorless AND the growth is coming from the younger content creator video crowd then that would likely mean a decrease in the older photography centric crowd.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

Why do you suspect that though?

Because I've seen things like this in my almost 30 years of work in various industries and have seen others do the same. I've worked for a manufacturer in the distant past that made parts for farm equipment, they would go to the large farms for input and ignore the others that had different ideas. Granted there is a big difference in the two industries but operational decision-making is the same. Not all of us shoot for the tabloids and have different needs but it seems they did not consider that. Realistically it is most likely to not impact the r5m2 numbers as would likely happen if the sensor was a higher resolution.

 

[OldDudePhotog]

Is trolling a field of expertise? Perhaps an independent studies PhD program? Seminars could cover such topics as, “How to invent facts,” and “How to misinterpret data and still sound plausible.”

That already exists, it's called statistics.

 

[scyrene]

I think the market share "dominace" holds weight with the older crowd like some here. But younger people don't really see it that way and aren't trying to identify with the lower end cameras sold at Walmart. To an analogy earlier Porshe may have models that compete with Toyota but they aren't trying to make $25k cars and compete on volume.

You're the voice of youth now, huh?

 

[scyrene]

I don' think its going to convince anyone who wasn't already a Canon shooter to switch.

It's probably not aimed at that, to any substantial extent.

 

[CJaurelius]

You are missing the fact that CIPA is a Japanese trade organization. You are also missing the fact that P&S cameras didn't go away, but rather they went to China. Just look at best sellers in the broad category of digital cameras on Amazon. The best sellers are all Chinese P&S cameras with well known names like Kodak and Minolta plus a lot of happy faced Chinese names.

We agree here. Canon's point and shoot market is going away to the Chinese. This works to put Canon on a more level playing field with Nikon and Sony as they don't have that market to lose.

I made a similar comment to this before. Sony's lower end model Vlogger camera the ZV-E10 got a lot of competition from the DJI Osmo Pocket 3. I don't think SONY CAN COMPETE WITH DJI at the lower end. Sony is essentially abandoning the lower end cameras in this range and constantly moving up stream.

I've made the same comment about lenses. Viltrox, Laowa, etc. have now gotten leaps and bounds better at making lenses. Before long they will be up to the quality of Sigma at even lower prices. If Sony wants to keep selling lenses the only path for them is to go upscale. They have a new 85mm f/1.4 and a 24-70 f/2.0 on the way. Canon is protecting their full frame lenses but that comes at a price as well.

These are likely mostly cameras that people are buying for their kids. Eventually, the kids that get serious will want a better camera and if the next step is $1000, it is a put off, but an R100 just might be on the buy list and then that kid is now a Canon user.

I completly understand this logic but this seems like an outdated strategy. For most people the R100 with a kit lens wont be discernable from their smartphone which is already in their pocket and way less hassle. Your viewpoint is coming from someone who grew up in a world where cameras where needed for photography. In this new world everyone has a camera in their pocket and needs something substantially better to justify the downsides of a stand alone camera.

Corporate strategy is a lot more complicated than reading industry stats from one country. Quit trying to convince us of what Canon should do (unless, of course, you are trolling for Sony). We are in no better position to change Canon's strategy than you are, so pick up the phone an call Canon if you don't like their choices.

I can't let my MBA go to waste But seriously I agree. Its fun to make predictions and see how it pans out. Its a forum where people express their opinion. I'm not tellilng you to quit trying to convice me that that Canon is following the right strategy. I simply disagree and maybe note a few points that I do agree with.

Furthermore I believe Canon is already moving in the direction I'm suggesting. The V10 is an attempt at this market. The main improvements to the R5mii were on the video side. Last year I was saying they should get rid of the M-line and focus resources on the RF mount and that is exactly what they did contrary to the people here that said the M line was great and profitable.

From my post in September 2023:

Canon hasn't really written off production capacity, and it's currently spreading R&D over three mounts and four lines of products in pursuit of their "dominate via market share" strategy......but Canon really needs to go all in with RF (both stills and cinema), and they need to concentrate 100% of their energy in US$1000+ cameras now.

Later in October 2023 Canon announced that they were discontinuing the M line. I was called a troll then but seemed to be in line with what happened.

My OPINION is that Canon is moving in this direction but they have some limitations in sensor tech and the expectations of an existing older userbase. The R5mii is for the newer crowd and the R1 is for the older crowd. If they could've delivered the R5mii sensor at 50MP and 4ms readout they probably would have. And if they would've been able to deliver that for $4,300 I would've been gearing up to bash Sony if they weren't able to respond.

 

[Dragon]

We agree here. Canon's point and shoot market is going away to the Chinese. This works to put Canon on a more level playing field with Nikon and Sony as they don't have that market to lose.

I made a similar comment to this before. Sony's lower end model Vlogger camera the ZV-E10 got a lot of competition from the DJI Osmo Pocket 3. I don't think SONY CAN COMPETE WITH DJI at the lower end. Sony is essentially abandoning the lower end cameras in this range and constantly moving up stream.

I've made the same comment about lenses. Viltrox, Laowa, etc. have now gotten leaps and bounds better at making lenses. Before long they will be up to the quality of Sigma at even lower prices. If Sony wants to keep selling lenses the only path for them is to go upscale. They have a new 85mm f/1.4 and a 24-70 f/2.0 on the way. Canon is protecting their full frame lenses but that comes at a price as well.


I completly understand this logic but this seems like an outdated strategy. For most people the R100 with a kit lens wont be discernable from their smartphone which is already in their pocket and way less hassle. Your viewpoint is coming from someone who grew up in a world where cameras where needed for photography. In this new world everyone has a camera in their pocket and needs something substantially better to justify the downsides of a stand alone camera.


I can't let my MBA go to waste But seriously I agree. Its fun to make predictions and see how it pans out. Its a forum where people express their opinion. I'm not tellilng you to quit trying to convice me that that Canon is following the right strategy. I simply disagree and maybe note a few points that I do agree with.

Furthermore I believe Canon is already moving in the direction I'm suggesting. The V10 is an attempt at this market. The main improvements to the R5mii were on the video side. Last year I was saying they should get rid of the M-line and focus resources on the RF mount and that is exactly what they did contrary to the people here that said the M line was great and profitable.

From my post in September 2023:

Later in October 2023 Canon announced that they were discontinuing the M line. I was called a troll then but seemed to be in line with what happened.

My OPINION is that Canon is moving in this direction but they have some limitations in sensor tech and the expectations of an existing older userbase. The R5mii is for the newer crowd and the R1 is for the older crowd. If they could've delivered the R5mii sensor at 50MP and 4ms readout they probably would have. And if they would've been able to deliver that for $4,300 I would've been gearing up to bash Sony if they weren't able to respond.

Yes, it is becoming quite clear that you adore seeing your own opinion in print (even if the print is only electronic).

 

[CJaurelius]

You're the voice of youth now, huh?

I don't know about voice The circles I run in are all younger shooters. I clearly don't know about wildlife photography shown by my ignorance here. But when the wildlife shooters here tell me about what they see in and what's important to them I simply take note. Are they the "voice" of wildlife shooters?

There are a lot of things that the younger generation is doing with respective to the field that I don't agree with. A lot of the growth in the field today is driven by superficial content. I absolutely can't stand TikTok. Funny thing is to them I'm the old guy and I'm constantly debating with them about not going down this path. But my personal feelings aside I'm formulating my opinion of what I expect to happen in reality due to the overwhelming majority of the people I interact with focusing on these things.

Like 80% of the young people that I work with want to essentially work from home and make "content". It's a lifestyle they've been flooded with on social media. Going to work in an office to them is for suckers. They all want to essentially travel and make content for a living.

There are literally studys/polls showing that one of the most desired jobs among the youth is to be a YouTuber. I thing that terrible for our country but I can't deny that it is true.

 

[CJaurelius]

Yes, it is becoming quite clear that you adore seeing your own opinion in print (even if the print is only electronic).

I notice people like to go with the ad hominem arguments here. It's a bit rich to have people who post a lot more than me criticize me for posting. In a day or two this thread will die down and I will disappear until the next round of new cameras or market data is realeased.

 

[Dragon]

I notice people like to go with the ad hominem arguments here. It's a bit rich to have people who post a lot more than me criticize me for posting. In a day or two this thread will die down and I will disappear until the next round of new cameras or market data is realeased.

Not ad hominem. Just an observation that you continue to repeat your opinion even when it clearly gets shot down.