# Canon wants a 50% marketshare



## canonnews (Mar 13, 2018)

```
Canon recently did their annual corporate strategy conference and there’s a pretty surprising statement from Canon in the middle of their speech summary.  They were extremely bullish when it came to the camera side of the company as they dropped the gauntlet when it comes to mirrorless and their overall marketshare stating;</p>
<blockquote><p>.. in our core camera business, in addition to our overwhelming share of the DSLR market, we will go on the offensive and work to expand our sales in the mirrorless camera market, which is exhibiting remarkable growth.  This will allow us to reach our goal of 50% marketshare of the entire interchangeable lens camera market.</p></blockquote>
<p>Now keep in mind, that Canon has been pretty strong on it’s mirrorless message for a while now, this is not Canon suddenly waking up and smelling the coffee ;)</p>
<p>A good example of this was the second quarter results from 2017;</p>
<blockquote><p>In this quarter as well, sales remained strong, particularly for mirrorless cameras. Within this trend, we grew sales of the EOS M6, a new mirrorless camera that has been highly rated not only for its high image quality, but also for its compact and lightweight form factor. This camera was designed to capture demand from people who, for example, are considering a step up to a camera with more features and better performance. Including this factor, first half unit sales of mirrorless camera grew more than 70% compared to the same period last year, leading to overall sales growth for interchangeable-lens cameras.</p></blockquote>
<p>Canon has also continued it’s message of increasing it’s automation of both Camera and Lens assembly, also leading into more of the mirrorless message simply because there’s less human work required to manufacturer a mirrorless camera than the more delicate alignment of a DSLR.</p>
<p>My own outlook on all this, since I’m allowed for one more day here, taken from CanonNews;</p>
<blockquote><p>Some caution is needed when interpreting Canon Inc’s message to the world. This doesn’t mean that Canon is going embark on a major plan to do anything much different than what they are doing now.  As we know from CIPA data, the vast majority of mirrorless cameras ship to asia, and north america has different ideas on what sells with respects to mirrorless.  Will they expand mirrorless and add more capability? Yes of course, the new entry level M50 shows that.  Will they launch a massive development campaign and replicate the entire Fuji lineup of primes? Probably not.</p>
<p>Development also has to be balanced with profitability and the majority of the world probably doesn’t even need that.  What we don’t have as far as a message is; are they going to compete in the north america mirrorless market? That requires the heavier investment, the more innovative camera systems, and the higher upscale cameras then what they have been currently doing.  The M5 was a good first try – one of the more ergonomic mirrorless cameras being built today, however, it’s just a small start in the right direction if they are planning inroads into the highly competitive north american market.</p></blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://global.canon/en/ir/conference/pdf/housin2018ceo-e.pdf">Canon Corporate Strategy Conference 2018 presentation</a></p>
<p><a href="http://global.canon/en/ir/conference/pdf/housin2018ceo-e-note.pdf">Canon Corporate Strategy Confernce 2018 speaker notes</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## transpo1 (Mar 13, 2018)

Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market. They may sell the most mirrorless cameras, but the ones they sell are mostly downmarket. 

_What we don’t have as far as a message is; are they going to compete in the north america mirrorless market? That requires the heavier investment, the more innovative camera systems, and the higher upscale cameras then what they have been currently doing. The M5 was a good first try – one of the more ergonomic mirrorless cameras being built today, however, it’s just a small start in the right direction if they are planning inroads into the highly competitive north american market._


----------



## canonnews (Mar 13, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market.



is it worth it though? the NA mirrorless market is a 15-20% segment of the mirrorless market globally and even only around 20% for value.


----------



## CanoKnight (Mar 13, 2018)

The A73 has sent shockwaves through Canon and here is more evidence of it.


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market. They may sell the most mirrorless cameras, but the ones they sell are mostly downmarket.



What you're actually trying to say is that Canon requires a Full Frame mirrorless if they want to compete against Sony in the Full Frame mirrorless market -- because Sony's basically the only game in town in that respect, and Canon APSC is doing just fine against Olympus MFT, and Panasonic and Fuji aren't very competitive in terms of marketshare.

Where it comes to mirrorless, Canon has a huge advantage with Dual Pixel. The autofocus experience is so much better than the competition, not only in terms of speed, but the smoothness of how the camera goes from defocused to focused without any jitter or hunting.

Each brand has its own advantages and disadvantages. I'm sure at some point I'll buy a full frame Canon mirrorless camera; but the 3 things I don't care about are:

1. Video, because I won't ever record one.
2. Dynamic Range, because even after using an A7R3, I can't appreciate the extra DR for anything I do.
3. Tiny Size, because I find anything that is smaller than a Rebel to be an ergonomic handicap.

That's not to say that other people will have different priorities than me, of course.



CanoKnight said:


> The A73 has sent shockwaves through Canon and here is more evidence of it.



I don't see how. It's still a terrible device for the things that the A7R3 is a terrible device for, like low light flash photography or sports/action. It's a great device for the things that A7R3 are great for, like candids and landscapes.

The device that the A7iii will steal the most sales from are.... A7Riii. Though frankly, if you're making the investment, I'd say, go all the way and spend the extra thousand bucks, because overall it makes no difference to the total camera system spend: _if you're not spending thousands of dollars on Sony lenses, you're wasting your money on the Sony body anyways_.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 13, 2018)

CanoKnight said:


> The A73 has sent shockwaves through Canon and here is more evidence of it.



yawn.

It hasn't. apparently you didn't read the article too carefully.


----------



## pj1974 (Mar 13, 2018)

Promising words from the Canon CEO. This is exciting.

I love my Canon M5, and look forward to bigger and better mirrorless offerings in the future (including a more comprehensive EF-M / mirrorless set of lenses).

The M5 is a very user friendly camera, and produces great images. I expect the future to be bright with Canon! 8)


----------



## Etienne (Mar 13, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market. They may sell the most mirrorless cameras, but the ones they sell are mostly downmarket.



The "downmarket" cameras are most at risk from Smartphone camera improvements.
Smartphone are nowhere near replacing high end cameras, so maybe Sony's strategy with the A7 series is sound.

I have the M3 and the M6, and I previously owned the original M. But I doubt that I'll buy anymore of these cameras because they are too sluggish and finicky for serious use, and the results are only a little better than the new Smartphones. Whereas just about every full frame camera is fast and intuitive, and the results blow away Smartphones. So while Canon's M-series can easily be replaced by a Smartphone, Sony's A7 III cannot.


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market. They may sell the most mirrorless cameras, but the ones they sell are mostly downmarket.
> ...



No, the M3 and M6 cannot be replaced by smartphones at all, unless all you want to photograph are wide-ish candids at all the same aperture.

And in that case, why would you ever want an A7 III, or any interchangeable lens camera?


----------



## Etienne (Mar 13, 2018)

Talys said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...



Some smartphones already have a portrait mode, including background blur. Even on full frame most, but not all, of my shots are wide angle. The M series is mostly for casual use, and a smartphone will usually do.

As for mirrorless FF, Canon will get there eventually, but they will lag behind Sony for quite a few years. This comment is important:

"Just look at our technologies, like eye focus. All of that data comes from the imaging sensor. In DSLRs, the data comes from separate sensors. The main imaging sensor is blanked out, 90% of the time by the mirror. The sensor is turned off. But the imaging sensor is very important. So if cameras are going to develop, and be more able to capture the moment, manufacturers have to develop mirrorless technologies. "

The future is mirrorless ... and Canon is behind.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/6893376112/sony-executive-predicts-nikon-and-canon-will-go-full-frame-mirrorless-within-a-year


----------



## Etienne (Mar 13, 2018)

PS ...
... Canon is behind in mirrorless today in the same way that Nikon was behind in autofocus 20 years ago.

The Canon I remember was ahead of the curve. They took the risk, and investment, of switching to AF in the lens, orphaning their entire lens lineup, because it was the best technological way forward. Nikon stubbornly stuck with camera body AF and fell way behind Canon.

Today Canon is reluctant to go all in with mirrorless even though it is obvious to most people that mirrorless offers some huge advantages. Now Canon will have to play catch up in that market, rather than lead.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> So while Canon's M-series can easily be replaced by a Smartphone, Sony's A7 III cannot.



Sure, whatever you say.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> PS ...
> ... Canon is behind in mirrorless today in the same way that Nikon was behind in autofocus 20 years ago.



not really.

DPAF is still pretty class leading. People switch BACK to Canon after using Sony, Pansonic,etc simply for DPAF.

No one else has a sensor with over 20 million phase detect points on an ILC.

No one else is CLOSE to having a good level of performance AF'ing with that many points.

the 5D Mark IV sans EVF is a mirrorless camera if you flip up a mirror and has closed any IQ gap considerably to any other sensor.

the M5 is one of the most ergonomic mirrorless cameras out there.

the M50 explores removing alot of the problems associated with what people perceive as far as canon mirrorless and we have no idea what DIGIC 8 is capable of in a higher end model.

the ONLY area they are lacking is video, which has little to do with this narrative, and IBIS which they have little interest it seems in exploring.

Just because they haven't built a camera you particularly want doesn't mean they are behind in technology.



Etienne said:


> Today Canon is reluctant to go all in with mirrorless even though it is obvious to most people that mirrorless offers some huge advantages. Now Canon will have to play catch up in that market, rather than lead.



news flash.

even though Mirrorless is expanding, the Canon EF mount is still gaining FAR more mount marketshare than all mirrorless put together. So most people are still quite content with purchasing DSLR's.

why on earth would they "go all in" which would also mean they ignore the EF mount and DSLR's in a similar way to what Sony did with the A mount.

In 2008 and 2014, Sony had a 13% overall marketshare. In 2017 they have a 14% marketshare. It's not exactly working for Sony.

Have more coffee, write less hyperbole


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > PS ...
> ...



Let's be clear about what a lot of people gripe about:

Canon has not invested in the technology of making a full frame camera body the size of a point and shoot. 

It doesn't matter that nearly the entire professional lens portfolio of Sony or Canon or Nikon are ergonomically ridiculous on such a camera, because the logic goes something like this:

1. My full frame camera can be tiny if I want it to be tiny.
2. It doesn't matter that in tiny mode that the lens isn't the best lens in the world, because it's still way, way better than my smartphone!
3. If I want it to be pro, I could buy pro glass. But I won't, because I want a tiny camera.
4. If I want it to not be ergonomically uncomfortable, I could buy a grip. But I won't because then it won't be a tiny camera.
5. It doesn't matter if an APSC would serve me better, because I want a camera that could take pro shots if I wanted to, even though I despise big, bulky lenses.

See where I'm going with this?  

People also conflate an excuse to buy something new with "innovation".



Etienne said:


> Today Canon is reluctant to go all in with mirrorless even though it is obvious to most people that mirrorless offers some huge advantages. Now Canon will have to play catch up in that market, rather than lead.



Anyone who doesn't see that mirrorless offers some significant advantages is wearing blinders. At the same time, anyone who doesn't see that mirrorless doesn't pose some significant disadvantages is wearing blinders, too.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 13, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > PS ...
> ...



Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
Sony is committed to mirrorless, Canon has not demonstrated near that commitment.
Neither brand will stand still, but Sony has quite a headstart in mirrorless.


----------



## KirkD (Mar 13, 2018)

From my perspective, if Canon wants to achieve its goals they need to up their game in two areas:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Increase the rate of release of high end glass but at a price that will compete with Sigma
[*]Avoid disappointing new versions like the 6D II by offering something that will get us excited enough to want to buy in to the latest version/camera
[/list]


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
> Sony is committed to mirrorless, Canon has not demonstrated near that commitment.


So? on what planet would it make sense for canon to dump DSLR's even now?

it sounds like you took a wrong turn and ended up in AvTV's alternate universe.



Etienne said:


> Neither brand will stand still, but Sony has quite a headstart in mirrorless.


Canon now has demonstrated eye tracking AF. and it's completely unknown to what DIGIC 8 can do in a higher end model.

with DPAF as processing power increases, so it will it's capabilities, PDAF points on the sensor can have artifacts, as well as a finite limit to how much of the sensor you mask that way.

and it's always easier for a company to catch up to someone that has pulled ahead versus the company with the headstart to continue at that pace.

Canon also has a far more interactive UI, far more ergonomics AF joystick pad, and with the M5 simply a more ergonomic experience in a small camera. Something Sony has seemed to care little about.


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
> ...



Having used Eye AF now, my opinion of it is that it is fantastic for available light candids - _just like everything else for the Sony camera_. It makes no appreciable difference in studio portraiture, though, because usually we're at huge depth of field apertures like f/11 anyways. I mean, seriously, for anyone who does studio photography, when was the last time you took a shot in the studio where the photo was discarded because an eye wasn't in focus? 

I do look forward to Pupil AF or whatever it's called in the M50, and hopefully, this feature makes its way to DSLRs, too.



KirkD said:


> From my perspective, if Canon wants to achieve its goals they need to up their game in two areas:
> [list type=decimal]
> [*]Increase the rate of release of high end glass but at a price that will compete with Sigma
> [/list]



How about, "If Sony wants to achieve its goals they need to increase the rate of high end glass at a price that will compete with Sigma."

See how ridiculous both sound?  You may want that, heck, I'd love it. But it ain't gonna happen. Pigs will fly to the moon first.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> Sony is committed to mirrorless, Canon has not demonstrated near that commitment.



Why is Sony fully committed to mirrorless? Because they couldn't compete with Canon (and Nikon) in the dSLR segment. What do you supply will happen with Sony — acompany with a long and inglorious history of bailing out where they can't compete — if/when Canon does go 'all in' on mirrorless?


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 13, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
> ...



All Canon needs to be a big hit with a FF mirrorless (or EF-S crop) is a decent EVF, like in the M50.... If only they could design one, like in the M50.....


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

neuroanatomist said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Sony is committed to mirrorless, Canon has not demonstrated near that commitment.
> ...



This, actually, would be my #1 reason to NOT invest heavily in Sony camera gear. Even putting aside other markets -- like PCs -- all you have to do is look as far back as their DSLRs. Great support for those now, right?

It's not that I would never buy a Sony, or Sony products. It's just that I'd definitely think twice, and I would be more reluctant to invest heavily in the system, since they're obviously not afraid to drop support of existing product in the name of innovation.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 13, 2018)

Talys said:


> But it ain't gonna happen. Pigs will fly to the moon first.



sorry..... I could not resist


----------



## Talys (Mar 13, 2018)

Don Haines said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > But it ain't gonna happen. Pigs will fly to the moon first.
> ...



LOL

+1


----------



## ashmadux (Mar 13, 2018)

They want marketshare, but unwilling to not gimp their products even when the competition is stomping them in innovation.

RIIIIIIIGHT, SUUUUUREEEEEEEEE

They know they market-share can come from flooding the low end with models at every price point imaginable, which none of the competition can compete with. Canon's hardcore belief that get them early and they will want top buy a 3k+ 5d series is misguided to say the least.

Add more full frame options, for the love of all that's holy.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 13, 2018)

canonnews said:


> This will allow us to reach our goal of 50% marketshare of the entire interchangeable lens camera market.



You know, exec's tend not to say too many things like this unless there is already a plan in place. Especially considering manufacturing lead times. They do not want anything that could be construed as misleading to investors and what, it is about 18 months from deciding on a camera to rolling it out? Anything to be released in 2018 is already in production, and if they are making claims like this, I would expect that the M50 is not the last M release in 2018.


----------



## Woody (Mar 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.



Seriously?

See this:

"Sony has various autofocus tracking modes too; face recognition tracking, continuous eye autofocus tracking, center lock autofocus, etc. But none of them are as easy to enable as Canon’s focus tracking. *Sony also uses a combination of phase detection autofocus (PDAF) and contrast detection autofocus (CDAF), which works well, but does not seem to be able to match Canon’s Dual Pixel Autofocus when it comes to accuracy in situations of low light, or when shooting subjects that have limited contrast.*"

- https://petapixel.com/2018/03/10/5-reasons-switched-back-canon-sony/


----------



## RayValdez360 (Mar 13, 2018)

Cellphones and  the new mirrorless 3rd generation from Sony def got Canon shook. A lot of the m50 advertisement is to sway people from using cellphones for photos. the addition of eye af is def a shot at sony.


----------



## PavelR (Mar 13, 2018)

Woody said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
> ...


It is comparison only for video and with old APS-C camera: A6300.

If I compare Sony A9 vs 1ds3/1d4 - stills - hit rate for moving subjects towards the camera with 70-200mm @ 2.8 is better on Sony (first person experience).


----------



## criscokkat (Mar 13, 2018)

Now that they've had time to see how well Sony's small size and slightly smaller lens size has worked, or not worked, I think they've had time to see that the drawbacks for pros in going to a new system leaves too much of an opportunity for people invested in EF lenses to jump ship. Even keeping the same size registration distance there are still opportunities to make a smaller camera. 

The biggest indicator to me that they are not going to come out with new lenses and/or registration distance is the fact that we have not seen any newer patents on any of this. Canon is one of the most prolific patent producing companies out there and you can almost always see the direction of things from those patents. 

Once you see the M lenses start coming out with lenses in the 1-2k range, you might see some pro style M bodies. Until then whatever new full frame mirrorless is most likely going to be the same size, just without a mirror and as many moving parts. The biggest hurdle for Canon will be designing chips that can handle the raw throughput needed to match sony and still keep the much better dpaf and color that canon offers. 

I have a feeling once this camera is announced you are going to see this camera sold out for months and months after release.


----------



## Tugela (Mar 13, 2018)

canonnews said:


> transpo1 said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting. Canon requires more innovation if they are to compete in the upscale NA mirrorless market.
> ...



I suspect that is going to change in 2018. The NA market may have resisted MILCs up till now, but there are some really compelling products on the market now. The best MILCs are as good as the best DSLRs at this point, and some are arguably better.


----------



## Tugela (Mar 13, 2018)

rrcphoto said:


> Etienne said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's DPAF is good, but Sony's Eye focus and tracking ability blows it out of the water.
> ...



The digic 8 will do on a higher end model what it can do on a lower end model. The limitations on using PDAF when shooting 4K in the M50 are a clear indication that the processor is operating at the very limit of it's capabilities. Going to a larger body is not going to change that.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 13, 2018)

Tugela said:


> canonnews said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...


In NA market, DSLR's are very cheap. Canon and Nikon sells their bottom level latest/last year DSLR model with kit lens for $300. What is the cheapest mirrorless setup available in NA market? Canon M100 is the cheaperst mirrorless offering which is still way more expensive than cheaper DSLR's in the market. There are some m4/3 offerings though. May be once Canon starts pumping out mirrorless cameras with $300 - $400 price point, we can see things changing. Sony abandoned their lower end market after their successful NEX line up.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 13, 2018)

Tugela said:


> The digic 8 will do on a higher end model what it can do on a lower end model. The limitations on using PDAF when shooting 4K in the M50 are a clear indication that the processor is operating at the very limit of it's capabilities. Going to a larger body is not going to change that.



I'm curious how you know that canon didn't purposely gimp the 4K for heat or battery life considerations considering it has the smallest capacity battery in all of canon's cameras.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 13, 2018)

Tugela said:


> rrcphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...


They have 4k and PDAF with 5d4 and 1dx2 with their older processor. If you go by specs, 1dx2 is the only camera with 4k 60p on the market. Latest Sony is yet to have this on their spec sheet. 1dx2 is almost 2 years old Camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 13, 2018)

Tugela said:


> he digic 8 will do on a higher end model what it can do on a lower end model. The limitations on using PDAF when shooting 4K in the M50 are a clear indication that the processor is operating at the very limit of it's capabilities. Going to a larger body is not going to change that.



Well, after all, you're the expert on Digic processors and their capabilities. You expertly stated that all cameras with Digic 7 would shoot 4K video, for an expertish example of your expertly expert expertise.


----------



## lexaclarke (Mar 13, 2018)

Don't all companies want a bigger marketshare? That's kinda their whole deal.

And I thought many countries have monopoly laws against one company taking up half a market.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 13, 2018)

Tugela said:


> The digic 8 will do on a higher end model what it can do on a lower end model. The limitations on using PDAF when shooting 4K in the M50 are a clear indication that the processor is operating at the very limit of it's capabilities. Going to a larger body is not going to change that.



That would be true if raw processor speed was the limiting factor, but is it?

Perhaps the problem is the ability to read the sensor fast enough.....
Perhaps the problem is thermal management, where a larger body has more heat sinking ability and can run faster....

anyway, it does not matter because there is undoubtedly a digic8+ or a digic9 in the works.....


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 13, 2018)

The attached charts from CIPA 2018 market study show the penetration mirrorless have vs. dSLR. On global basis ML has gone from 9% to 28% (by value) of all digital cameras shipped. Absolute growth of ML has been slow as the overall market has shrunk dramatically. (Total Jan 2018 shipments were down 28% Y on Y. The bigger hit was to built-in lens (-35%), ILC was -20%.) However, Canon's support of ML reflects their sense the market has finally reached a tipping point.

In the Americas the ML penetration lags the rest of the world by 4-5 years. In terms of units shipped ML is still only 10% of total. It appears the US (& Canada) still loves dSLR's!


----------



## Jaysheldon (Mar 13, 2018)

I'm just about to plunk down over $1K for a used 400MM f5.6, so I'll be real unhappy if in the near future Canon announces the end of the EF mount -- and the availability of an adapter won't cheer me up.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 13, 2018)

Jaysheldon said:


> I'm just about to plunk down over $1K for a used 400MM f5.6, so I'll be real unhappy if in the near future Canon announces the end of the EF mount -- and the availability of an adapter won't cheer me up.


If you are in the US, make sure you check Canon Price Watch: https://www.cpricewatch.com/street-prices/ and for refurbs.: https://www.cpricewatch.com/canon-refurb-stock-tracker/ It looks like 400mm 5.6 goes for $1120 new. If refurb. model is in stock it should be less than $1K and would have full Canon one year warranty.


----------



## scyrene (Mar 14, 2018)

A huge, financially successful company that has been the market leader for ages and has improved its position year on year states it wants to reach another (not too fantastical) goal and people crawl out of the woodwork claiming they can't, they must change XYZ, they have the wrong attitude... Are we living on the same planet? They're ALREADY doing this. They're ALREADY massively succesful, and it's fair to infer from that that they know what they are doing, on the whole. But sure, all these armchair experts definitely know the winning strategy, while Canon does not :


----------



## Woody (Mar 14, 2018)

old-pr-pix said:


> It appears the US (& Canada) still loves dSLR's!



I don't live in N. America. I happen to own a DSLR and a MILC.

For serious photography, I still carry my DSLR instead of MILC because composing through OVF is a lot more fun and satisfying than looking through an EVF.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 14, 2018)

scyrene said:


> A huge, financially successful company that has been the market leader for ages and has improved its position year on year states it wants to reach another (not too fantastical) goal and people crawl out of the woodwork claiming they can't, they must change XYZ, they have the wrong attitude... Are we living on the same planet? They're ALREADY doing this. They're ALREADY massively succesful, and it's fair to infer from that that they know what they are doing, on the whole. But sure, all these armchair experts definitely know the winning strategy, while Canon does not :



LOL gold.


----------



## Woody (Mar 14, 2018)

scyrene said:


> A huge, financially successful company that has been the market leader for ages and has improved its position year on year states it wants to reach another (not too fantastical) goal and people crawl out of the woodwork claiming they can't, they must change XYZ, they have the wrong attitude... Are we living on the same planet? They're ALREADY doing this. They're ALREADY massively succesful, and it's fair to infer from that that they know what they are doing, on the whole. But sure, all these armchair experts definitely know the winning strategy, while Canon does not :



Well said.


----------



## Nelu (Mar 14, 2018)

PavelR said:


> Woody said:
> 
> 
> > Etienne said:
> ...


Suuuure, right! Apples to apples! Your personal experience is extremely valuable and relevant...

Sony A9 release date:April 19, 2017
Canon 1Ds3 release date: August 2007
Canon 1D4 release date: October 2009


----------



## Talys (Mar 14, 2018)

Tugela said:


> canonnews said:
> 
> 
> > transpo1 said:
> ...



In North America, we tend to like Big Things. Europeans at always surprised at the popularity of the size of our automobiles and the portions served for meals, for example (compare a typical steak dinner in Dallas versus Paris). 

There are some practical reasons for this -- homes are often much larger (square footage) due to population density in many urban and rural settings, so storage is less of an issue, whether it's gadgetry or automobiles. Generalizing, Americans and Canadians have a habit of buying things that are bigger than they need (but not bigger than what they want)  Just look at the sizes of American/Canadian market SUVs and pickups compared to, well, the entire rest of the world.

Ironically, if you take an A7 or A9 body and add a grip and a pro lens (I think if you really shoot a lot, you really need a grip), it is slightly taller than a DSLR without a grip, a little narrower, and roughly the same length and width. Because of the narrower body, there is also a slight penalty on finger space, which impacts some peole but not others. Now, I say, ironically, because in some markets/to some people, a larger camera will sell better than a smaller one (and vice versa).

I think that it is absolutely arguable that MILC's are better _at some things_. But there quite a bit worse at some other things. Sometimes, I really wonder why there's such a large number of wedding photographers on forums  I'd argue that for a lot of weddings (particularly in the daytime, and especially where you don't need or want a flash), MILCs really shine. 

On the other hand, I think there are many types of situations where MILCs, or at least Sony MILCs, are far inferior to DSLRs.

By chance, I happen to be one of the people for whom DSLRs are just a better tool, because almost everything I photograph is either with a 400mm+ lens, or with flashes or equivalents (like strobes). I don't photograph events, and I don't really do candids. 

But still, I have enjoyed my MILC experience, and I can see myself owning one for the things that they're good at, or at least the things that I feel that they do a better job of, for me. I don't foresee when I'll be MILC exclusive, if that ends up being the industry direction. 

Personally, Canon will have a much better chance of selling me a $3,000 MILC if it happens to be compatible with my existing EF glass.


----------



## goldenhusky (Mar 14, 2018)

I guess achieving 50% market share globally in the ILC market share is no biggie for Canon. It is actually a piece of cake with the amount of crappy low level DSLRs (2000d, 4000d? Can't even keep track of these shitty cameras anymore) and sub par mirror less cameras Canon is coming up with. They will sell boat load because they are really cheap but at the end of the day it is only good for Canon not the consumer. Pretty much inline with Canon's milking the cow attitude.


----------



## Talys (Mar 14, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> I guess achieving 50% market share globally in the ILC market share is no biggie for Canon. It is actually a piece of cake with the amount of crappy low level DSLRs (2000d, 4000d? Can't even keep track of these shitty cameras anymore) and sub par mirror less cameras Canon is coming up with. They will sell boat load because they are really cheap but at the end of the day it is only good for Canon not the consumer. Pretty much inline with Canon's milking the cow attitude.




As has been stated for pages and pages on the thread regarding 4000d -- this is a very legitimate camera that serves an important purpose, especially in markets where a few hudnred dollars is as much as someone can aspire to pay for an ILC. Not everyone lives in a country where a $1,000 - $10,000 camera is possible for most people. 

Also, the 4000d is more than capable of producing amazing photography. If you're not able to take great photographs with one, the problem is on the end looking down the viewfinder. We want amazing cameras, because we like, appreciate, and can afford (or at least aspire to purchase) this amazing technology -- not because these cameras are a necessary ingredient to award-winning photography.

Second, Canon's MILCs are neither cheap nor sub par. Even the M100 is a $550 camera. And, an M6 has superior autofocus than an A7R3 in many situations. Don't believe me? Point a f/5.6 lens at something lit in a room lit with a 60W bulb on one, and then try it with an M6. One's very certain, and the other hunts and jitters. DPAF is that good.


----------



## hachu21 (Mar 14, 2018)

Soooo... Now we can be pretty sure that the whole Canon FF mirorless strategy in on track, with the first bodies alredy defined or in the testing phase...
The release period are planned, and could be within one year from now.

THIS could be the real reason behind the mild upgrade of the 5D4 and especially 6D2. I suspect that the first FF ML body from Canon will compete directly with 6D bodies.

From this point of view, it makes a lot of sense.


----------



## goldenhusky (Mar 14, 2018)

> As has been stated for pages and pages on the thread regarding 4000d -- this is a very legitimate camera that serves an important purpose, especially in markets where a few hudnred dollars is as much as someone can aspire to pay for an ILC. Not everyone lives in a country where a $1,000 - $10,000 camera is possible for most people.



That's why there is the used camera market. World imaging leader do not have to rush to the bottom of the stack to address that issue. Don't you think a used 70d or a 60d is superior to this 4000d?



> Second, Canon's MILCs are neither cheap nor sub par. Even the M100 is a $550 camera. And, an M6 has superior autofocus than an A7R3 in many situations. Don't believe me? Point a f/5.6 lens at something lit in a room lit with a 60W bulb on one, and then try it with an M6. One's very certain, and the other hunts and jitters. DPAF is that good.



I have tried that with a slightly different set up with my A9 and M5 the result is both failed in low light. Unless M6 has so much superior auto focus than M5 (I am almost certain there is no difference in auto focus between M5 and M6) no mirror less can win that race till this date. My 5D4 and 80d were able to focus but none of the mirroless. So I give no credibility to your statement. Have you ever used an a7r3? I bet you have not. I am not saying a7r3 will focus. I am saying when it comes to low light auto focus DSLRs still outshines the best of the best mirrorless cameras. After using A9 I believe canon dual pixel auto focus has only one advantage that is smooth focus transition besides that Sony's auto focus is way ahead of any Canon mirror less auto focusing system so far. Needless to say I got rid of M5 in less than a month.

I am not in the crowd asking for all the 1dx2 and A9 features combined at the price of M50. What I am looking for is a kick ass hybrid camera that matches the features of Sony A7r3 or even A7iii. I am willing to pay even $4000 or even $4500 for it. To me the math is simple I do not have to run two systems in parallel. I can completely get rid of my Sonys and stick with one system. I have been waiting for years like many other hybrid shooters but Canon keep on disappointing and lately the race to the bottom is really disgusting. As usual Canon defense forces on the forums repeat the same non sense saying look at the data Canon is the global leader. I give no dam shit about Canon being #1 or not.I need a tool that serves my purpose.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 14, 2018)

In my mind, there is no doubt that a line of pro level mirrorless cameras is coming. The only question is the lens. Canon has already patented a adaptor for a new lens mount to EF, and has a large number of patents that improve dual pixel technology some obviously have short back focus designs in mind.

I'm not sure that Canon has actually made up their mind yet, they are said to be testing prototypes.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 14, 2018)

Talys said:


> goldenhusky said:
> 
> 
> > I guess achieving 50% market share globally in the ILC market share is no biggie for Canon. It is actually a piece of cake with the amount of crappy low level DSLRs (2000d, 4000d? Can't even keep track of these shitty cameras anymore) and sub par mirror less cameras Canon is coming up with. They will sell boat load because they are really cheap but at the end of the day it is only good for Canon not the consumer. Pretty much inline with Canon's milking the cow attitude.
> ...



Sometimes people are blind to the needs of emerging markets. Canon didn't get to be so dominant by producing trash.

Gear snobbery is just weird.

I started my DSLR journey with an XSi (Fall of 2008). At the price point I paid new, I thought it was an incredible value and leaps and bounds above the point and shoot I had at the time. Guess what? It was a good deal for both Canon AND myself. My wife still uses and loves the camera. We even had the shutter replaced once.

The used market: As far as I know there are not boatloads of 70Ds being shipped to the emerging markets for millions of people to buy, and sometimes people just want new. On top of that, the used cameras don't have a warranty... something a person without much money would be well served by.

Huskey, you may not care about Canon's market share. Probably not many of us do. The article is about what Canon wants to achieve and not what you care about. It ain't about you. It will never be about you. You are not the market. You never will be a market influencer. 

Any good business milks the cow until it no longer produces a profit.

It is very mysterious as to why Canon deciding to produce an inexpensive new model is such a sore point to some. I would imagine the same people would complain about anything Canon does. See it here all the time.


----------



## dak723 (Mar 14, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> I guess achieving 50% market share globally in the ILC market share is no biggie for Canon. It is actually a piece of cake with the amount of crappy low level DSLRs (2000d, 4000d? Can't even keep track of these shitty cameras anymore) and sub par mirror less cameras Canon is coming up with. They will sell boat load because they are really cheap but at the end of the day it is only good for Canon not the consumer. Pretty much inline with Canon's milking the cow attitude.



Maybe they have 50% market share because they are smarter than trolls like you. Maybe smart people care about reliability. Maybe smart people care about lenses. Maybe smart people understand that an 18mp camera like the inexpensive 400D will take great pics. Maybe smart people look at pics from Canon cameras and think, "those pics look better than other pics from different camera makers." Because they do if you care about color and contrast. Having bought mirrorless cameras from Olympus, Sony and Canon, my favorite among them is the Canon M5. So, they are sub-par only if you don't care about what your pics look like and how easy the camera is to use. If you dislike Canon so much, get a Sony and leave us alone and let us enjoy our cameras. We are tired of all the troll BS.


----------



## dak723 (Mar 14, 2018)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > goldenhusky said:
> ...



Trolls will be trolls. Spoil sports will be spoil sports. It's not the camera I want (in other words, a Sony) so I will whine and complain and make moronic statements. Welcome to the internet where A&&holes ruin everything. If this forum had any guts, they would kick out theses trolls so that people interested in photography and Canon cameras can discuss things, ask questions, share knowledge and experiences without all the bullcrap.


----------



## Talys (Mar 15, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> That's why there is the used camera market. World imaging leader do not have to rush to the bottom of the stack to address that issue. Don't you think a used 70d or a 60d is superior to this 4000d?



You should participate on the thread about the 4000d. As stated by a few people there, owning something new is special for a variety of reasons.

By your logic, nobody should buy three quarters of the new cameras out there, because you can get something superior in the used market at that price. But for a variety of reasons, many people want a new device, especially when it's a major purchase. 

In addition, also stated in that thread, getting good used parts in some places in the world just isn't like it is in developed countries. There's no eBay or craigslist. 



goldenhusky said:


> I have tried that with a slightly different set up with my A9 and M5 the result is both failed in low light. Unless M6 has so much superior auto focus than M5 (I am almost certain there is no difference in auto focus between M5 and M6) no mirror less can win that race till this date. My 5D4 and 80d were able to focus but none of the mirroless.



I couldn't agree more that a 5D4 or 80D are a zillion times better at focusing in low light than any mirrorless, and I have stated so many times. In addition, they have access to AF illuminators, which work reliably and amazingly well.

That said I was specifically comparing M6 to A7R3. DPAF is simply superior to Sony's Hybrid Phase Detect + Contrast Detect Autofocus. I did not say a room with very little light (like a concert), did I? I said, compare them in a room lit with a 60W bulb. That's not outrageous -- there's lots of times when you might want to autofocus in this situation. Like a photo of your family or your pets at home, in the evening. You might have a flash, _but you still need to autofocus_.

While I agree that DSLRs are _better_ for autofocus in this situation, it's still important to assess which mirrorless is superior, because, hey, some people might own a mirrorless (and no DSLR) and want to take a photo with less available light. Unless you're saying everyone should own both a mirrorless and DSLR.

Finally, I'm not saying that M6 is ALWAYS better at autofocus than A7R3. Obviously, A7R3 has some very advanced AF options, like subject tracing, Eye AF, expanding focus points, and all the goodies that you would expect from a camera priced to compete with a 5D4. But most of those features work poorly, if at all, in lower light (not really _low_ light). Of course DPAF is affected too, but less so.



goldenhusky said:


> So I give no credibility to your statement. Have you ever used an a7r3? I bet you have not. I am not saying a7r3 will focus. I am saying when it comes to low light auto focus DSLRs still outshines the best of the best mirrorless cameras. After using A9 I believe canon dual pixel auto focus has only one advantage that is smooth focus transition besides that Sony's auto focus is way ahead of any Canon mirror less auto focusing system so far. Needless to say I got rid of M5 in less than a month.



I would take that wager and double it (since I know that I would win). I refer you to this thread, which I speak at length as to my pain points on the A7R3:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34654.0

I think you are in the minority of objective users if you believe that dual pixel is not superior to Sony's Hybrid AF. I mean, it's just provably better in every situation I've encountered, whether it's bright light or dim light. Again, I'm not talking about fancy autofocus features which the M6 can't compete against the A7R3 with, but just plain, give-me-focus-here.

Since you have an 80D, mount an 18-135 nano usm to it, put it in live view, and see how quickly and assuredly it autofocuses. Now show me a Sony that can do that. Sony AF, even when it works well, often hunts just a little (goes too far, then backs up). Dual pixel doesn't do that, pretty much _ever_, unless it can't find something to focus on. That makes it not only faster, but it provides a superior and more enjoyable shooting experience.



goldenhusky said:


> I am not in the crowd asking for all the 1dx2 and A9 features combined at the price of M50. What I am looking for is a kick ass hybrid camera that matches the features of Sony A7r3 or even A7iii. I am willing to pay even $4000 or even $4500 for it. To me the math is simple I do not have to run two systems in parallel. I can completely get rid of my Sonys and stick with one system. I have been waiting for years like many other hybrid shooters but Canon keep on disappointing and lately the race to the bottom is really disgusting. As usual Canon defense forces on the forums repeat the same non sense saying look at the data Canon is the global leader. I give no dam S____ about Canon being #1 or not.I need a tool that serves my purpose.



So, to you, what's the deficiency in a 5D4, or 1DXII? 

I mean, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass. Is it the EVF that you want? Or the smaller size? Or the techno gizmo features?

Personally, the only feature of the EVF that is of value to me is focus magnification. I don't really care about zebras and focus peaking and all that jazz. Or, even in-viewfinder image review. I thought it would be cool, but in fact, I barely use it. WYSIWYG is a potentially useful, but I think it's more useful for people with less experience. 

The two greatest pain points for me on A7R3 are: no mechanical manual focus ring (I take affront to focus by wire on a $2000+ lens, plus, I don't even like Sony's focus by wire system); and no AF illuminator support (the type that just flashes a pattern and allows PDAF to lock.

Again, personally, for me, there is ZERO size or weight savings. Adding a grip + any pro lens, and you're at the size and weight of a DSLR. And without a grip large enough for 4 fingers of an average-sized hand to wrap around and a pro lens, one should not bother with a $3,000 camera.


----------



## rrcphoto (Mar 15, 2018)

goldenhusky said:


> That's why there is the used camera market. World imaging leader do not have to rush to the bottom of the stack to address that issue. Don't you think a used 70d or a 60d is superior to this 4000d?



sure and many parts of the world don't have a good used market, they can't use ebay,etc because mail service is fraught with fraud and theft and all they can do is buy new from the retailer after paying huge import taxes.

a 60D is both much larger and also much heavier, and that wouldn't' exactly fit in the use case either.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Mar 15, 2018)

50% of what market is the fundamental question? I'd suggest that members of this forum have a rather rigorous view of what photography involves and what gear will better support achieving the 'best' photographic images. Yet, many in generations X, Y, and Z have a significantly different perspective of what constitutes good photography. They expect to overlay weird filters, cute graphics or slick animations (as in Snapchat) on photos & videos that they can then instantly send to friends and the world. They care less about dynamic range, depth of field (other than as a software filter), etc. Their images have a half-life of seconds - they don't strive for 'wall worthy' images. Their satisfaction comes from a 'how cute' instant response. Their photographic skill is measured by how many apps they can effectively use. For them, no P&S or even dSLR is a step-up because those platforms eliminate the features that make photography fun and rewarding.

Real photographers will thumb their noses at such gimmicks much like real artists snubbed early efforts at photography. But the market will move with the masses. P&S's will continue their death spiral while dSLR's and MILC's will remain the domain of true enthusiasts and working pros. If this is the market where Canon seeks 50% share, it will be a much smaller market than what we see today.


----------

