# What Happened to the Photography Industry in 2013?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 6, 2014)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/what-happened-to-the-photography-industry-in-2013/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/03/what-happened-to-the-photography-industry-in-2013/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><a href="http://www.lensvid.com" target="_blank">LensVid</a> has posted an excellent infographic showing how truly bad 2013 was for the camera industry. At its worst, there was a 40% drop in total camera sales between 2012 and 2013. That included a 19% drop in DSLR shipments.</p>
<p>A few points are brought up about why the numbers were less than stellar in 2013. The first being the use of smartphones over compact cameras, we’re beating a dead horse with that one. The second reason being the economic stability of the planet, we’re still not totally out of the woods in a lot of places around the globe. The third, and the most interesting is North America’s aversion to the mirrorless market. Until people in the United States show they’re willing to spend on these systems, I don’t think we’ll see a huge advancement in technology or products. It’s a chicken and the egg thing, people keep saying make something worth buying, but every company is watching their R&D dollar and DSLR’s and lenses are still a safer bet for a return.</p>
<div id="attachment_16001" style="width: 585px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Infographic-1920-1200-01.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-16001" alt="Click for Larger" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Infographic-1920-1200-01-575x359.jpg" width="575" height="359" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Click for Larger</p></div>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://lensvid.com/gear/lensvid-exclusive-what-happened-to-the-photography-industry-in-2013/" target="_blank">LV</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Canon 14-24 (Mar 6, 2014)

I think a good question is what happened to the upper/pro-sumer/pro Canon dSLR & lens market - in which probably the greater population of the site visitors here encompass? There doesn't appear to be any stagnant slowing of product releases from rivals like Nikon/Sony and third party lens like Sigma and Tamron.

One dual pixal innovation on a 70d with a whole collective of marginal "innovations" of rebels, kit lens upgrades (basically slapping the STM label on), and garbage powershots aren't cutting it for this past year+.

If Canon is keeping tight its R&D spending on marginal rebel/kit upgrades why is it blowing $$$ on releasing lenses like the 24-70 f/4 is L, 24 2.8 IS, and 28 2.8 is? I blame part of the drop in those graphs/numbers on failed business decisions from Canon.

Since 2012-today, the only worthwhile "pro-sumer/pro" lenses have been the 24-70 2.8 II and 200-400 f4 1.4x.

One can only hope with Canon these past few years, that they enter the medium format market or do something more dramatic.


----------



## Ellen Schmidtee (Mar 6, 2014)

IMHO, we should also be looking at what happened in the years up to the peak.

In 2000, Canon wasn't selling any DSLRs. In 2010 Canon was selling the 5Dmk2, an FF DSLR that can shoot video at an attractive price point. Point being, people were moving from film to digital, and that helped sales. Now that the market has reached maturity, it's only natural sales would slow down, and smartphones & the economy just help to roll sales down the hill.

My guess is the new non-L 24mm, 28mm, & 35mm IS USM are first signs of Canon realizing it has to tap the lower end DSLR market to make money, as in most rebel owners aren't going to upgrade to FF or buy L lenses.


----------



## traveller (Mar 6, 2014)

Canon 14-24 said:


> I think a good question is what happened to the upper/pro-sumer/pro Canon dSLR & lens market - in which probably the greater population of the site visitors here encompass? There doesn't appear to be any stagnant slowing of product releases from rivals like Nikon/Sony and third party lens like Sigma and Tamron.
> 
> One dual pixal innovation on a 70d with a whole collective of marginal "innovations" of rebels, kit lens upgrades (basically slapping the STM label on), and garbage powershots aren't cutting it for this past year+.
> 
> ...



I don't think that it's just Canon, I would accuse Nikon of doing similar. The only manufacturers that have been churning out the camera and lens releases over the past few have been Sony (E & FE-mount _only_), Fuji and m4/3rds. Of course, these manufacturers have needed to build there systems from scratch, whereas Canon and Nikon have a comprehensive system built up over years. Of course, one could make the "look where it's got them" argument: Sony are in the red, Olympus are all but bankrupt with shareholders demanding divestment of the camera division, and Panasonic stills cameras are effectively in the "last chance saloon" with their new Chief Executive threatening to sell any under-performing business unit. 

I would tend to agree with Thom Hogan that where the "big two" are weak is in their support for their APS-C lines. Unless they are planning to release full frame bodies at "Rebel" prices (which isn't going to happen any time soon, if ever), their EF-S/DX lens line-up is seriously weak at the wide angle end. I can only think that they hope this drives "serious" users to go full frame, but the danger is that they go mirrorless instead; this is especially so because the sort of user that wants fast wide glass (where X-mount and m4/3rds excel), is also the sort of user that can live without phase detect af. 

The other danger is the third party lens makers are starting to encroach upon their turf with higher end enthusiast and professional lenses; these have traditionally been a good profit generator for Canon and Nikon.


----------



## spturtle (Mar 6, 2014)

Everyone is now buying Leica cameras but they're not a member of CIPA so those sales are not counted.


----------



## docsmith (Mar 6, 2014)

dilbert said:


> What happened? Market saturation.



+1....most people that wanted a camera beyond a P&S bought one in 2009-2012. 

But the second point is also well taken....2013 was weak on new releases


----------



## traveller (Mar 6, 2014)

dilbert said:


> What happened? Market saturation.
> 
> Along with those that are already established not seeing anything in new products (from 2012 - 2013) as being worthwhile upgrades.



Quite. 

The camera industry until recently still had a growth mindset. I think that this last year or so has brought it home to them that the good times are over. The global recession has killed growth, but I don't think that we'll see a return to the growth levels of the "noughties" even after full economic recovery. 

I think that we're at the end of the era _after_ the film to digital transition. The new realities are: 

[list type=decimal]
[*]The market is now saturated, many buyers already own a DSLR
[*]CMOS sensor performance seems to have plateaued in that the _rate_ of improvement in sensor performance is _slowing_ down. 
[*]This has forced manufacturers to make improvements to other specifications in order to sell upgrades
[*]DSLR manufacturers are now maxing out on improvements to other "key" specifications
[*]They are now looking for new ways to sell cameras (think small and retro)
[/list]

This is actually starting to look like a return to normality in the camera market, having been in a consumer electronics phase. Maybe the pace of releases will speed up again when the next truly disruptive technology comes along; I'm not sure that mirrorless is that disruption.


----------



## photonius (Mar 6, 2014)

Ellen Schmidtee said:


> IMHO, we should also be looking at what happened in the years up to the peak.
> 
> In 2000, Canon wasn't selling any DSLRs. In 2010 Canon was selling the 5Dmk2, an FF DSLR that can shoot video at an attractive price point. Point being, people were moving from film to digital, and that helped sales. Now that the market has reached maturity, it's only natural sales would slow down, and smartphones & the economy just help to roll sales down the hill.
> 
> My guess is the new non-L 24mm, 28mm, & 35mm IS USM are first signs of Canon realizing it has to tap the lower end DSLR market to make money, as in most rebel owners aren't going to upgrade to FF or buy L lenses.



Exactly, the missing point 4 in the analysis.
THe market is maturing, saturating, and stabilizing. There was a huge transition from film to digital. Now digital is at the point where you don't need to buy a new camera every year.
And at present there is no further revolution in sight, where everybody suddenly thinks they have to go out and buy new gear.

A new stimulus could come from things like 3D imaging,
http://www.pelicanimaging.com/technology/index.html
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/519546/depth-sensing-cameras-head-to-mobile-devices/


----------



## Etienne (Mar 6, 2014)

I agree with many of the comments here. Although I am pretty happy with my 5DIII, I would still like a few upgrades:

Lighter weight
Speedier fps
even better AF, the dual pixel in FF
better video: true HD, 120 fps slow motion, video crop mode, maybe even 4K capability
Focus aids for video, built in intervalometer, etc
How about an XLR device like the optional one on the new panasonic GH4!

I think there's still lots of room for upgrades that I would pay for.


----------



## Coolhandchuck (Mar 6, 2014)

What happened to the Photography Industry? The Economy is what happened to the Photography Industry.


----------



## suburbia (Mar 6, 2014)

I would certainly pay into the true 16bit and then 24bit revolution. Might be a long long way off though! Not sure how that would go down in the consumer market but its an increasing number!


----------



## Corvi (Mar 6, 2014)

Sadly not what i was hoping for. We are still turding around with ancient lens designs but we get a new body to use those ancient lenses on every 3 month. Really ?


----------



## rsdofny (Mar 6, 2014)

Aside from 2012 which set a high water mark, there was growth in the DSLR segment from 2010-2013. For the compact camera segment, smartphones change the way people taking photo as well as the way they consume it, ie Facebook,Instagram. 

I think that the core group of photographers that demand high quality photo will stay with DSLR and grow accordingly. In fact, the adoption of smartphone may generate more interest in photography among the wider user base. A lot of people think that mirrorless camera will take over in this segment, but I disagree. When you add the high quality lens to the kit, the weight and size advantage will diminish unless you are a street photographer that uses fast prime lens. There are features of mirrorless that may be adopted in a DSLR. Photographers can change the exposure based on what is displayed on the back screen. in a DSLR, you cannot see that in the eyepiece. 

If camera manufacturers need to compete in the compact market, they need to produce a sony rx100 that can be retailed at $300 or below. They will need to make it easier for people to use it because the class of people upgrading from smartphone may not want to learn too much. Also, the new camera has to have capability that the smartphone cannot do, for instance, smartphone cannot photograph an indoor scene with vivid outdoor background. Wireless connection is a must too, so that the users can facebook the photo to all their friends.


----------



## Greenmeenie (Mar 6, 2014)

Well, if Canon or Nikon actually came out with a FF mirrorless it would sell. But they haven't, so it doesn't. Meanwhile, Sony has stepped up big time to fill that need, and it's paying off. Canon & Nikon seem too scared to make a move. The demand is there. Just look at Sony's A7. It's selling very well. The demand is high.


----------



## lw (Mar 6, 2014)

Greenmeenie said:


> Just look at Sony's A7. It's selling very well. The demand is high.



But where is the evidence?

Which Canon DSLR(s) is it outselling?


----------



## jprusa (Mar 6, 2014)

looking at the numbers on the Mirrorless market, it is a mystery to me why Canon excluded America and Europe when the M2 was released to the market.


----------



## yeahyoung (Mar 6, 2014)

What happened is that the size/weight issue of DSLRs is overrated. 

Cameras just can't go more portable than cell phones. 

And mirrorless is the wrong solution to the problem of DSLRs being too large and heavy. It turns out that users of DSLRs do not mind DSLRs being large and heavy, as long as there is a mature lens system, and the manufacturer being able to reduce the weight just a little bit.


----------



## hiplnsdrftr (Mar 6, 2014)

Camera manufacturers were spoiled by the boom of consumers entering the digital age of photography.

In the film era, a good film SLR could be 20 years old and still be considered a top of the line camera. 

At least in the current digital age, regular upgrades are inevitable. The manufacturers should be thankful for that.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 6, 2014)

yeahyoung said:


> What happened is that the size/weight issue of DSLRs is overrated.
> 
> Cameras just can't go more portable than cell phones.
> 
> And mirrorless is the wrong solution to the problem of DSLRs being too large and heavy. It turns out that users of DSLRs do not mind DSLRs being large and heavy, as long as there is a mature lens system, and the manufacturer being able to reduce the weight just a little bit.



Not quite true ... a lot of people want smaller and lighter, but they (me included) don't want to give up ergonomics or performance.


----------



## cm71td (Mar 6, 2014)

I see different information in this than what people are talking about.
*DSLRs:* If you look at the growth curve over several years, the DSLR sales continue to grow. 2013 only looks bad if you compare the numbers with 2012. The 2013 numbers are still higher than 2011.

In 2012 many new models DSLR models were released that were significantly upgrades (1DX, 5D III, 6D, D4, D800, D600). By contrast, in 2013 we got the 70D, D610, and Df. I'm amazed the numbers dropped as little as they did from 2012 to 2013.

*Mirrorless:* The 2013 mirrorless numbers are low given the number of great new mirrorless models introduced in 2013. If you listen to the "mirrorless hype", you'd think the growth would be more explosive. I suspect that for now, most mirrorless cameras sales (other than Japan) are second cameras for people who also own a DSLR.

*Compact Cameras:* Are dying as expected. People who don't care about image quality are just using their phones.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 6, 2014)

Greenmeenie said:


> Well, if Canon or Nikon actually came out with a FF mirrorless it would sell.



Based on _your_ opinion? : The APS-C and smaller sensor market is much larger than the FF market, and Canon and Nikon both came out with MILCs in that arena…neither of which have sold very well at all (outside of Japan). If Canon and Nikon thought that a FF mirrorless would sell well, they'd have one on the market already. They don't, so clearly their opinion differs from yours…and I know who's more likely to be correct. 



Greenmeenie said:


> Just look at Sony's A7. It's selling very well. The demand is high.



Based on what evidence?

The a7 is #1,113 on Amazon's Camera & Photo list right now. The a7R is doing better, it's #619. Both of those are really high on the list, right? No, they're not.

The Canon 5DIII is at #269, the 6D is at #191, and the best-selling dSLR, the T3i, is at #7 on that list (behind the GoPro3 and a $60 Canon P&S, the other 4 items are accessories).


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Mar 6, 2014)

IDC is such a joke.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 6, 2014)

Etienne said:


> yeahyoung said:
> 
> 
> > What happened is that the size/weight issue of DSLRs is overrated.
> ...


I have to agree with yeahyoung on this one. I just don't see the "middle size" camera value proposition. It's not (comfortably) pocketable like a phone, and it's generally a compromise in terms of IQ and other factors. I have two cameras in this segment (a Panasonic Lumix LX-5 and a the EOS-M). While both are nice for events and places where I either can't take a DSLR (concerts) or don't want to attract a lot of attention (banquets and other events), they are my least used cameras.

If the camera doesn't fit in my pocket, why compromise? Why not take my DSLR and get awesome photos? It might be heavy and large, but so is anything other than my smartphone. That's my (and apparently most Americans') logic.


----------



## atkinsr (Mar 6, 2014)

To me, this isn't so much about innovation as it is price and company focus.

I am, as I expect most DSLR owners are, a hobbyist. A serious hobbyist, but a hobbyist none-the-less and I'm not rich. I own a Pentax, which I am pretty happy with. I've been wanting to make the switch to Canon FF for about a year for several reasons (resale, used market lens availability, etc.). I have not purchased anything for my current platform since I made this decision. Having watched this site and others, studying every review I can get my hands on, watching sales and Canon's own actions, several things have become abundantly clear to me:

I have to buy a 5DIII, I actually lose functionality over my $450 K-30 by spending $2k on a 6D (to me, the crop sensor 70D is a much better buy than the 6D, even though I don't shoot video).

To do what I need to do, I need a few quality lenses and a flash. Let's price this out (rough estimates):
5DIII: $2800
600EX-RT: $450
Sigma 1.4 EX DG HSM: $500
Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 Di VC: $1300
Tamron SP 70-200 2.8 DI VC $1500

So, for just the basics, we are looking at somewhere around $6600. As a hobbyist, that's a ton of money. That's a used motorcycle, a carefully-budgeted 3-4 week dream vacation around the world, or if invested now, retiring a year early. That's asking a lot from the general (non-money-making) population.

Let's say I'm willing to do it. Should I? Well, to answer that, I look at the company, it's focus, and it's competition:
- On a technical level (dxo mark scores, etc.) Nikon is currently kicking the crap out of Canon. Because some of my "work" is astrophotography and Nikon does some noise reduction (which also wipes faint stars) prior to writing the RAW file, Nikon is not an option for me. I also realize that this is a leapfrog game, with "who's best" changing year-to-year. Canon is behind right now, are they focused on fixing this?
The 5DIII is over 2 years old but their focus has been on everything except FF: Compact updates, mirrorless cameras, and for some reason, updating many of their best/favorite lenses instead of improving the lower end ones. Outside of the Rebel line, the only rumors I've seen of an updated DSLR are for a crop sensor; the 7DII. Those rumors have been going on for at least 5 months with every rumor suggesting a release the following month, and then a delay.

So, it boils down to this:

Am I willing to scrimp, save, and spend the money? Yes, but I think it's way too much money.
But, do I really want to spend the better part of a year's discretionary income on a FF camera body that is nearly outdated for a platform from a company whose focus seems to be everywhere except non-consumer camera bodies?

Not a chance.

-R


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 6, 2014)

It's funny to hear that Sony A7r is selling very well. Very well, compared to what? Full frame mirroless can be the dream of some people in this forum, but this represents a small share of the market. Please, let's stop this idea that mirrorless will kill DSLR because it is small, light, cheap (beached M), and as good as. Being small brings disadvantages of ergonomics and performance that users 7D, 6D, 1D are not willing to accept.

I would like a mirrorless size of SL1 (for travel), but would have to be compatible with EF-S lenses to seduce me. I also like to have a mirrorless size 6D (Studio), but would have to be compatible with EF lenses, otherwise I do not care.


----------



## lloyd709 (Mar 6, 2014)

It wasn't rocket science that the market was going to fall around now. It's due to the fact that there was a massive surge on the back of digital cameras coming out. Most people that wanted one (including all those that just have to have new technology) bought one (or two). Now the market is maturing and new versions of chips aren't game changers anymore it's getting back to the old 'a camera is a camera is a camera'. Combine that with the rapid improvement of mobile phone cameras, bonanza time for the big camera companies is over (me thinks) - just like it will be over shortly for the tablet companies (a tablet is a tablet is a tablet).


----------



## lw (Mar 6, 2014)

jprusa said:


> looking at the numbers on the Mirrorless market, it is a mystery to me why Canon excluded America and Europe when the M2 was released to the market.



Because they have/had vast inventories of M that they want to shift first.
They are only selling them because they have significantly reduced the price and probably making little profit on them.

The M2 isn't a significant enough improvement that the market would be willing to pay a higher price.

Ergo, the US and EU probably calculate they are better off financially focusing on getting rid of their existing Ms first and not introducing the M2 to only have it kill what M sales are left, and to only have to sell the M2 at yet another fire sale price to shift any units.

But I would be surprised that if M inventories do run out they would not put the M2 on sale if the M3 hasn't arrived by then.


----------



## cm71td (Mar 6, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> If the camera doesn't fit in my pocket, why compromise? Why not take my DSLR and get awesome photos? It might be heavy and large, but so is anything other than my smartphone. That's my (and apparently most Americans') logic.



+1 I had two different mirrorless cameras. Although great cameras and smaller than my DSLR, I still used a DSLR when the picture really mattered. If I want to travel light, I take my wife's Sony RX100 which fits in my pocket.


----------



## apmadoc (Mar 6, 2014)

For many consumers, they want a snapshot that is "good enough". The reality is that some of the most recent phones create very good images. If you've seen the documentary "Searching for Sugar Man" the interviews to me seemed very professional. Later I learned that all the interviews were done with an iPhone 4.

To me the part of the business that would be most affected would be the entry level point and shoot cameras.

Some Canon quotes of late makes you wonder if they are going to concede that part of the market. 

If I was in charge at Canon, I'd be questioning the return on R&D dollars spent. If they stop spending $20M on the point and shoot low end cameras, and then move that money into high end point and shoots and DSLR's, would that generate a better return on investment?

Certainly there are a lot of older Canon lenses that could use an update. When you look at the difference between the 24-70 original and the new version, it's strikingly better.

Then there's the camera bodies - rumors of a 50MP sensor, etc.

I've been a photographer for over 40 years. When I'm doing serious work, I have a 5D MIII. When I'm traveling for work and want to travel light I have a G1X. I have an iPhone 5 and yes I do snaps with it at gatherings when I don't have any other camera and yes, it does produce a photo that is "good enough"


----------



## gary (Mar 6, 2014)

Cell phones have already taken the young would be point and shoot photographers and as old people like me get more accustomed to cell phone photography. Point and shoot has all but gone and will be a dead market in 5 years. In my view mirrorless would have been the go too camera but for the cell phone, if I want true portability why bother with mirrorless. 

The cell phone gives the majority of people what they want in a small easily portable multi-functional tool. DSLR is becoming and will ultimately become a niche market for pro's or very serious hobbyists, and companies will restructure their line up accordingly and their R&D budget. For canon that has already started with hi-end step into moving pictures.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 6, 2014)

Im not seeing the CIPA data quite as bad as its being painted. The drop in value terms is much smaller overall between DSLRs and CSCs its down 9.9% with the bigger drop in DSLRs, the CIPA figures also seem to indicate a 16% not 19% drop and there is a difference between manufactured and shipped in the data. GfK in a seperate report highlighted that higher end full-frame DSLRs were actually up 26% and these products even discounted retain a higher profit margin. Its no surprise then that Sony brought out the A7/R, Olympus the OM-D E-M1 or than Fuji brought out X-T1all cameras at the higher end of the market. 
GfK state the average selling price to be $ 2,250 and that these buyers tend to spend more on accessories. It should also be noted 2012 was a Olympic year and as in the case of the Olympics in China sales of cameras spike during these type of larger event years. 
GfK also state that at the height of analogue the peak was 70M cameras and whilst it appears Digital has peaked the figure should include smart cell phones not shown in the CIPA figures to give a balanced view of image taking devices.


----------



## bereninga (Mar 6, 2014)

cm71td said:


> I see different information in this than what people are talking about.
> *DSLRs:* If you look at the growth curve over several years, the DSLR sales continue to grow. 2013 only looks bad if you compare the numbers with 2012. The 2013 numbers are still higher than 2011.
> 
> In 2012 many new models DSLR models were released that were significantly upgrades (1DX, 5D III, 6D, D4, D800, D600). By contrast, in 2013 we got the 70D, D610, and Df. I'm amazed the numbers dropped as little as they did from 2012 to 2013.
> ...



+1

I think Canon needs to really focus (no pun intended) on its lenses. They've acted too slow to compete with Sigma's 35mm and soon-to-come 50mm. The 50mm and 85mm lenses in Canon's lineup are so old and obviously there's a demand for their upgrade.


----------



## distant.star (Mar 6, 2014)

.
Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

I don't own stock in any imaging company, and my only concern is how well they are able to meet my needs as a photographer.

So far, Canon has succeeded. In 2010, I bought their T2i, and it still gives me good results. In 2012, I bought their 5D3, and that does everything the T2i can't. Sigma is supplying fine quality lenses at reasonable (comparatively) prices, and I'm buying them.

All companies and industries have their ups and downs. Apparently, the imaging industry picked up a great wave a few years ago, and now that ride is over. Like good surfers, they'll sit on their boards in the lull and watch for the next big one. Some will get tired of waiting; they'll go home. The serious ones will be there to ride the next big wave. And unfortunately, there will always be the gaggle of gossipers on the beach with nothing better to do than whine about what was or was not or what might have been or could have been or was or will be -- and they'll keep building their sand castles and have the tides relentlessly knock them down.

Meanwhile, I'll go on doing what I'm really interested in -- taking/making pictures. If a company comes up with anything that better satisfies my needs in the future, they'll get my dollars. Beyond that, I really don't care about the whys and wherefores of their sales volumes or units shipped or profitability. There will always be enough of us who care about pictures to support manufacturers that supply what we need.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 6, 2014)

dilbert said:


> What happened? Market saturation.





Coolhandchuck said:


> What happened to the Photography Industry? The Economy is what happened to the Photography Industry.





Ellen Schmidtee said:


> ... people were moving from film to digital, and that helped sales. Now that the market has reached maturity, it's only natural sales would slow down, and smartphones & the economy just help to roll sales down the hill.





yeahyoung said:


> What happened is that the size/weight issue of DSLRs is overrated.
> 
> Cameras just can't go more portable than cell phones.
> 
> And mirrorless is the wrong solution to the problem of DSLRs being too large and heavy.



These quotes sum it all up. 

We are returning to the historic levels of enthusiast and professional camera sales and development. People act like the past decade has been normal, but it hasn't been – far from it. 

Normal was the long period from about 1980 to 2000, when the SLR market saw a similar re-alignment after the boom of the 1960s and 70s when every hobbyist bought a Pentax. Canon and Nikon weathered that long period, they consolidated the market and grew to dominance pushing out or marginalizing Pentax, Mamiya, Konica, and all the others. 

I would suggest that both companies have the experience and wherewithal to survive and prosper as the market slows. I'm not so sure about the others, although Fuji showed remarkable resilience adapting as the market for their core product evaporated.

If we are honest about it, the current Canon and Nikon full frame offerings could easily last another 5-10 years with only minor improvements. APS-C cameras might need another generation before they are in a similar position, but it is definitely coming. (See some of Thom Hogan's excellent columns on the "last camera.")

Only time will tell if mirrorless is the wave of the future but if today's trends are any indication, it's not looking too likely.


----------



## jrbdmb (Mar 6, 2014)

Greenmeenie said:


> Well, if Canon or Nikon actually came out with a FF mirrorless it would sell. But they haven't, so it doesn't. Meanwhile, Sony has stepped up big time to fill that need, and it's paying off. Canon & Nikon seem too scared to make a move. The demand is there. Just look at Sony's A7. It's selling very well. The demand is high.



Sure the A7 / A7R is a popular camera among the photo-geek crowd here, but is it really making inroads into the mainstream? Unless they can price it to compete with Rebels I don't think it will ever catch on.


----------



## JumboShrimp (Mar 6, 2014)

I may be in the minority here, but I am just not interested in mirrorless anything.


----------



## thedman (Mar 6, 2014)

"lenses are still a safer bet for a return", yet I've been waiting for Canon to kick out some high end lenses (100-400 replacement, high-end wide angle, etc) and have gotten nothing. And here we are already in March of what this site dubbed "the year of the lens"... has Canon released a lens yet? Something besides a new kit-level consumer zoom?


----------



## dstppy (Mar 6, 2014)

I agree with the bulk of the comments, but let's not forget something else about the 'plateau':
We're on a plateau of REALLY good cameras.

When canon started adding IS on their PowerShot cameras, that was a leap lightyears ahead. The trickle-down from all of the great high end cameras to consumer grade (or at least consumer priced) bodies/all-in-ones has been consistent.

Anecdotal proof: my grandmother has finally stopped cutting people's heads off when she takes a picture.

The 5DmkII was a rousing success the MK3 was only a shock to sticker and that's coming down . . . seriously, yes, there's market saturation . . . but it's saturation of really good tech.

Okay, feel free to ignore me now


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 6, 2014)

Umm, that "infographic" thing has just a little bit of an agenda.

1. Consider all the cameras that are shipping on cell phones now. Apparently management at Canon perceives this as an overall expansion of the camera industry, that being a good thing and not the end of the world.

2. There seems to be a heavy focus on "mirrorless" systems for some reason. Canon's SLR sales have remained fairly steady. A slight drop last year, but nothing out of the ordinary.



Canon Rumors said:


> Until people in the United States show they’re willing to spend on these systems, I don’t think we’ll see a huge advancement in technology or products.



I see the problem here as Mirrorless manufacturers pricing themselves out of a market. The Fuji X-E2 should be competing with Rebels, not the 6D (ETA: Looks like I was seeing the price of the X-E2 with a $500 kit lens, but I guess that doesn't actually change a whole lot), and the T-1 should compete head to head with the 70D. As-is the value proposition for those cameras is horrible. I like them, but they need a massive price drop. If that's actually not possible then I guess we've found the biggest flaw in Mirrorless system cameras.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 6, 2014)

dstppy said:


> I agree with the bulk of the comments, but let's not forget something else about the 'plateau':
> We're on a plateau of REALLY good cameras...
> 
> ...Okay, feel free to ignore me now



Ignore you? But you are exactly right.


----------



## Sabaki (Mar 6, 2014)

A few years back, a lady colleague asked me advise on which camera she should buy to take to parties and to snap her kids. 

So with her Powershot she took pics that 99.99% of photographers would delete immediately. Yet she got way more comments on FB with her pics than some togs got with their DSLRs. 

This calibre of photographers are today more than happy with their camera phones. They can snap and upload straight to FB without needing a PC or the such. 

In my personal opinion, this segment of photographers are lost to dedicated camera manufacturers as the mobile they can slip into their bags/pocket/bra does everything they need. 

Canon should make entry level DSLRs more attractive to entry level photographers as this is the gateway drug, as it were. 

Strengthen the lens line up by replacing those decades old versions and make sure they out perform 3rd party lenses! Give us a 400 series RT flash and consider price drops on certain peripherals like flash brackets, macro lens adaptors etc

Just my two cents which will mean nothing to Canon's pricing structure or hardware lineup.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 6, 2014)

Not all parts of the photography market are in decline its easy to paint a doom & gloom picture but the fact is we have lived through the last five years of unpresedented sensor development and that development is still relatively young. Canon, Fuji, Panasonic are all working on three layer sensors to mimic film, larger fab wafers from 200mm to 300mm which will improve yeald and more developments in ASICS, FPGAs etc that will allow a greater level of processing & control.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 6, 2014)

GfK report Sept 2013:
Basic compact cameras with little zoom capability, in particular, are facing competition from smartphones with their camera functions. Sales were down 40 percent in the first half of 2013. However, top-quality digital camera sales increased, in part quite substantially, depending on their target group and intended area of application. For example, full-frame single-lens reflex cameras were up 26 percent. With a high average selling price of €2,245, they accounted for 14 percent of all cameras sold in terms of value and had a significantly favorable impact on retail sales. They just about make up for the falling sales of single-lens reflex cameras with smaller sensors [fewer pixels] (-10 percent) and compact mirror-less system cameras (-8 percent). Meanwhile, interchangeable lens system cameras now account for around half of all camera sales.
What happens in single-lens reflex and mirror-less cameras very much affects what happens to sales in the interchangeable lens market. In value terms, they already account for 22 percent of the photo market (cameras and lenses together). That shows how much potential there is for the accessory market as people move increasingly into high-end cameras.


----------



## JimKarczewski (Mar 6, 2014)

There wouldn't be such a drop in lens shipments if some of they lenses didn't cost as much as a car. Sorry, but $12k for the 200-400 is way out of my budget at this time. Same with Canon "adjusting their prices to match the market" So the 400 just became history unless I pick one up used.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 6, 2014)

GfK Photography Summit Dec 2013:
In the best analog times, some 70 million cameras were sold every year worldwide, 10 percent of which were SLR cameras. In 2010, the market grew to its peak of 136 million units. Even though numbers in sub- sequent years fell considerably, the importance of high-value cameras has
actually increased quite considerably, she said. In 2013, for example, SLR and compact system cameras accounted for more than 20 percent of the volume. The most important growth drivers, said Knoche, were innovation and ease of use. At the same time, it was true to say that, for consumers, the possibility of sharing their emotions with other people was now evidently more important than picture quality.
8 billion image-capture devices:
A look at the sales figures underlines the extent of the digital revolution: Arndt Polifke, Global Director Telecom GfK Consumer Choices, estimates the num- ber of smartphones sold worldwide in 2013 at 1.007 billion, which represents an increase of nearly 47 percent com- pared with the previous year. On top of this, there are 725 million feature phones (down 19 percent) and 243 million tablets (up 83 percent). Here, the proportion of inexpensive devices (less than 100 euros) is rising considerably. Other trends with the mobile devices include larger displays, faster proces- sors, 4G connectivity and slimmer bod- ies. Another aspect is the ever improv- ing resolution of the built-in cameras: Two thirds of the smartphones sold have a resolution of 5 MP and more, half of which have more than 8 MP.Against this background, Heribert Tip- penhauer, Global Director Photo Office Stationery Consumer Choices at GfK Retail and Technology, looked at the effects of this development for the cam- era market. Less than 10 percent of the 8 billion image capturing devices sold worldwide in the last five years are cameras.
In a consumer study in which 2,365 smartphone owners in Germany and the UK were questioned, GfK obtained some interesting data on consumer be- havior: While the vast majority of smart- phone owners use a camera when they want to record important memories such as travel trips, family events etc., for spontaneous snapshots they nor- mally turn to their mobile device. In fact, 41 percent of the consumers questioned take at least one photo a day with their
smartphone (UK: 34 percent, Germany: 47 percent). In contrast, only 6 percent said they use their camera every day. A thought-provoking aspect is what the GfK found in its study regarding the photographic knowledge of those questioned. 55 percent said that, for them, the most important quality feature in a camera was the number of pixels, and 16 percent said the zoom factor. The quality of the lens (3 percent) and size of the sensor (2 percent) thus play virtually no role in buying decisions. The intention to buy a digital camera among the smartphone owners ques- tioned in the survey is surprisingly strong: Indeed, 27 percent said they intend to buy a camera within the next twelve months – above all because of the better picture quality. 20 percent said the reason for buying a camerawas to learn more about photography. Among the 16 to 24-year age group, this figure was as high as 35 percent. This begs the question of how this desire for learning could be satisfied. The majority of smartphone owners who do not intend to buy a camera said they were satisfied with their present camera. For half the 16–24- year olds, buying a new camera is quite simply too expensive. With regard
to those contemplating buying a new camera, nearly two thirds of smart- phone owners have their eyes on a system camera, which the GfK sees as good news for the imaging segment. Although Tippenhauer anticipates a total global volume of only 97 million cameras for 2013 (down 16 percent), the figure will include 17 million single-lens reflex models (up 13 percent) and 5 million compact system cameras (up 25
percent). Premium-class compact cam- eras with a large sensor or high zoom factor are also growing, according to GfK‘s statistics: A total of 16 million is expected for 2013 (up 23 percent) and 19 million (up 19 percent) for 2014. Whereas average prices in the grow- ing segments are continuing to rise, the lower compact camera segment of the market with a predicted sales volume of 60 million pieces in 2013 (down 28.5 percent) and 47 million in 2014 (down 22 percent) is fading into insignifi- cance.
he “Apple Effect” showed that it is quite simply more fun to use an iPhone (or another smartphone). “It is not the smartphones that are the monsters; the monster is our relationship to the con- sumer,” said Hilbig. In order to really reach the customers, the industry must opt for emotions instead of technology; ease of operation was more important than complicated patents and exclusive customer loyalty programs. The big trade associations such as CIPA, PMA and the German Photo Industry Asso- ciation must now act to re-kindle con- sumers‘ enthusiasm for taking pictures with cameras, emphasized Hilbig.


----------



## HotPixels (Mar 6, 2014)

One reason for slumping camera sales is that those that Canon/Nikon have created such good dslr's that most people who've bought them these last few years are perfectly happy with them and see no need for replacement.

Remember, in the film era people would own cameras for years. It's only in the digital age that it has become common for camera manufacturers to constantly update their models, usually at least once per year, and to have this pressure upon them to get consumers to always upgrade.

The problem is not the technology; cameras are better than ever. The camera companies need to band together and create a massive marketing campaign to sell people on the idea of having a more serious and separate camera than their smartphone. That would lift all boats.


----------



## thedman (Mar 6, 2014)

JimKarczewski said:


> There wouldn't be such a drop in lens shipments if some of they lenses didn't cost as much as a car. Sorry, but $12k for the 200-400 is way out of my budget at this time. Same with Canon "adjusting their prices to match the market" So the 400 just became history unless I pick one up used.




Exactly. Can we get something that's more than $300 but less than $10,000?


----------



## gmrza (Mar 7, 2014)

dilbert said:


> What happened? Market saturation.
> 
> Along with those that are already established not seeing anything in new products (from 2012 - 2013) as being worthwhile upgrades.



Coupled with maturing technology. Not too long ago, nobody had digital cameras. Somewhere between 2004 and 2009 (give or take a few years) the technology reached the right level of affordability and maturity that:
[list type=decimal]
[*]Just about everyone could afford a digital camera
[*]early adopters were starting to replace cameras less frequently
[/list]

What is now coupled with that is the fact that a lot of low-end users are abandoning P&S cameras in favour of phones.

Add to this the fact that the D800, D4, 1Dx and 5DIII all effectively hit the market in 2012 - making it a bumper year for high-end DSLR sales.

The years from 2009 to 2012 probably should be seen as abnormally good for sales.


----------



## 100 (Mar 7, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> Until people in the United States show they’re willing to spend on these systems, I don’t think we’ll see a huge advancement in technology or products.



The America’s (as in 2 continents) have a combined market share of 29% so the US share will probably be below 20%.
If the other 80+% are willing to spend money on these systems the US share is basically irrelevant for “advancement in technology”. 
Emerging markets like China and India will become far more important if they keep on growing. 
The US population is about 317 million (little over 4% of the world population)
China: 1,360 million (19%)
India: 1,241 million (17%)

It will take a view more years, but to me it seems inevitable that Asia will become the only dominant economic superpower and future advancements in technology and products will be based on the wants and needs of those markets and not on the US or Europe.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 7, 2014)

100 said:


> It will take a few more years, but to me it seems inevitable that Asia will become the only dominant economic superpower and future advancements in technology and products will be based on the wants and needs of those markets and not on the US or Europe.



However, worldwide cultural homogenization means that the distinctive wants and needs of markets will become less and less relevant. Asian consumers may someday dominate the world economy, but if they share the same taste in clothes, movies, songs, food, etc., as their western counterparts, it's not really going to matter all that much.


----------



## Etienne (Mar 7, 2014)

thedman said:


> JimKarczewski said:
> 
> 
> > There wouldn't be such a drop in lens shipments if some of they lenses didn't cost as much as a car. Sorry, but $12k for the 200-400 is way out of my budget at this time. Same with Canon "adjusting their prices to match the market" So the 400 just became history unless I pick one up used.
> ...



I am waiting on a couple too (a better UWA, a new 400 5.6 with IS, a better 50 1.4) but there are lots of good options available now: 24 2.8 IS, 28 2.8 IS, 35 f/2 IS, 100 2.8 macro IS, the 24-70 lenses, 70 - 200 2.8 IS, the Tamron 150 - 600 , etc etc


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 7, 2014)

100 said:


> The America’s (as in 2 continents) have a combined market share of 29% so the US share will probably be below 20%.
> If the other 80+% are willing to spend money on these systems the US share is basically irrelevant for “advancement in technology”.
> Emerging markets like China and India will become far more important if they keep on growing.
> The US population is about 317 million (little over 4% of the world population)
> ...



What are the respective GDPs and per capita incomes of those countries? What does that mean in terms of purchasing power for 'luxury goods'? Population growth isn't everything. Using some of your numbers, 5% of the population is buying 29% of the world's cameras. Also, I would guess the US accounts for ~25% of the market - by stating the US population of 4.44% as a 'little over 4%', your rounding error is almost the population of Canada.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 7, 2014)

We have conducted market research and used recognised market research companies as someone else has pointed out in China, India, Brazil, Russia etc. the public are buying broadly and I use that term losely the same well respected brands and that includes photographic goods. The luxury end of the market in % terms is small the main market for high end cameras is middle class males typically between 35-60 years old. The female market starts younger but is much smaller and outside of the US is gravitating to CSC cameras. Asia as a % of global sales has increased the most since 2007 but thats not just China. 
The sales of the products we make are tied to the fortunes of DSLRs and CSCs and are only a small % of those overall sales i.e. targeted mainly at keen hobby & club photographers as well as professional and this segment "know exactly" what they want. 
The issue longer term is how do manufacturers keep the interest of this group as moores law catches up with improvements that may only be incremental and not enough to spend $ 2245 on a new camera.


----------



## thedman (Mar 7, 2014)

Etienne said:


> thedman said:
> 
> 
> > JimKarczewski said:
> ...



I have the range I want now, I just want better. I've been way patient waiting for long-overdue updates to the not quite spectacular 17-40 and 100-400 lenses. A solid 14-24 would be fantastic.


----------



## sanj (Mar 8, 2014)

dilbert said:


> JumboShrimp said:
> 
> 
> > I may be in the minority here, but I am just not interested in mirrorless anything.
> ...



Why such resistance to mirror-less? Smaller, quieter and EVF. Works wonderfully.


----------



## 100 (Mar 8, 2014)

unfocused said:


> 100 said:
> 
> 
> > It will take a few more years, but to me it seems inevitable that Asia will become the only dominant economic superpower and future advancements in technology and products will be based on the wants and needs of those markets and not on the US or Europe.
> ...



True, but trends have to start somewhere. Today the western world is still dominant but with the shift of economic power that may change as well. Our wants, needs and taste are mostly created by companies these days.


----------



## 100 (Mar 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> 100 said:
> 
> 
> > The America’s (as in 2 continents) have a combined market share of 29% so the US share will probably be below 20%.
> ...



I know population growth isn’t everything, but if you look at the way things have developed over the last decade or so the economic power is shifting from the west to the east and I don’t see that changing much in the next decade. 
The Economist predicts China will overtake the US in 2019
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/11/chinese-and-american-gdp-forecasts



neuroanatomist said:


> Using some of your numbers, 5% of the population is buying 29% of the world's cameras. Also, I would guess the US accounts for ~25% of the market - by stating the US population of 4.44% as a 'little over 4%', your rounding error is almost the population of Canada.



Talking about rounding errors…
The America’s have a combined population of about 954 million. That’s not 5% but 12% so your rounding error is about 14 times the population of Canada, or the combined population of the US and Mexico. 

Anyway, the point I tried to make is that 70%-80% of the market have a bigger influence on product development than 20-30% and that it's kind of arrogant to think that US-buyers will determine the direction of future development of Asian companies like Canon and Nikon.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 8, 2014)

100 said:


> Anyway, the point I tried to make is that 70%-80% of the market have a bigger influence on product development than 20-30% and that it's kind of arrogant to think that US-buyers will determine the direction of future development of Asian companies like Canon and Nikon.



Not necessarily US, but 'Western' comprises the Americas and Europe, a combined market larger than Asia (at least for now). The EOS M2 wasn't released in Europe or the US.


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 8, 2014)

I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 8, 2014)

If Canon has chosen not to launch the EOS M2 outside of the Far East its likely they dont think the outlay in marketing is worth the return in sales there cannot be any other explaination given they have capacity to make them.


----------



## 100 (Mar 8, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> 100 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyway, the point I tried to make is that 70%-80% of the market have a bigger influence on product development than 20-30% and that it's kind of arrogant to think that US-buyers will determine the direction of future development of Asian companies like Canon and Nikon.
> ...



The statement was about US-buyers only though… 

If we expand it to the America’s and Europe we have little over 60% market share (rounded by twice the Canadian population this time, it’s 61% based on Cipa numbers ;-)). That’s a much bigger share so it will have a much bigger effect on development decisions. 

True, the EOS M2 wasn't released in Europe or the US (though it still might be, but for the sake of argument let’s assume it won’t). It was developed anyway and brought to the Asian market. Development on the next model starts before the previous model is shipped, so if the argument is true the M3 will suffer on the development part because of M1 sales figures. Looks like a downward spiral to me. If the mirrorless interchangeable-lens camera market isn’t profitable (enough) for Canon, the logical thing to do is either get out of it, or try to change it to make it profitable (enough). If they choose the latter, (game changing) development seems to be the way to get there.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 8, 2014)

In the last 7 years, I've seen 104 people in my office (out of the 148 total staff) who bought a DSLR ... but only 9 of them are actually doing something with their DSLRs. I have an American colleague who bought my entire kit (DSLR, lenses, tripod, flash etc for $2500) in 2009, but he hardly ever uses any of that gear (I think the last he used was over 2 years ago). I think that does reflect the vast majority of DSLR customers in the past 5 years or so ... a lot of them bought DSLRs thinking that it will somehow magically transform their images, because they see other photographers take great images with DSLRs. But they do not understand the basics of photography (i.e. f/stops, aperture, ISO etc) or have the interest in post processing ... most of them use the auto mode and get frustrated that the flash keeps popping up at the most inappropriate times or their photos, from their very expensive DSLR/lens, don't look any better than their smartphone and not many are willing to carry the weight/bulk that comes with DSLRs ... eventually they give up, some sell it off, other let it collect dust ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading like some of GAS sufferers.

So, now, it the more serious hobbyists / professionals who are buying/upgrading DSLRs and not the vast majority of beginners (who used to buy till a couple of years ago).

Just the day before yesterday, I gave a ride to an English lady during a bird watching trip (organized by a famous birder), and she bought her Nikon D300 + 18-200 lens 5 years ago ... she told me that she shot less than 1000 photos with it, she says that most of her images don't look any better then her iPhone 4S. So she just uses her D300+18-200 once in a great while, when she thinks she might need some reach. So why should people like her, be upgrading to an expensive DSLR/lens ... so they basically stopped buying/upgrading them ... I think that is the biggest factor in the loss of sales, the economic slow down etc are just secondary factors.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 8, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading ...





RLPhoto said:


> I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?



Both of these quotes illustrate the challenge DSLR (and mirrorless interchangeable lens) camera manufacturers face. 

At the low end the market is saturated and the fad is wearing off.

At the high end, the cameras are so good, there isn't much need to upgrade. Like RL, I can't think of what would make me upgrade the 5DIII. Especially because, realistically, there just isn't much headroom left for improvements in actual image quality. 

For crop sensors, there is still a little more room for improvement, but I'm not sure how much is there either. It's possible the 7DII will fall into the same category as the 5DIII -- meeting the current and future needs of most buyers for quite some time. 

Mirrorless may be the next big thing – or it may be a passing fad. I can't shake the feeling that camera manufacturers are simply using mirrorless as a way to try to sell one last camera body to all those folks with DSLRs gathering dust on the shelves that Rienzphotoz refers to.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 8, 2014)

100 said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > 100 said:
> ...



Agreed. Except that I think a lot of our wants, needs and tastes are also being created from the ground up by cultural "hackers" on You Tube, Facebook, etc. 

Historically, the United States is a cultural hodge-podge of people who came here, blended with one another and hacked their old world cultures to create something new. I guess my point is that the whole world seems headed in that direction today, for better or worse.


----------



## dgatwood (Mar 8, 2014)

RLPhoto said:


> I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?



They don't. They convince the people who still have a 5Dmk2 to upgrade. Or they convince 6D owners to upgrade by sticking GPS and Wi-Fi in the 5Dmk4.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 8, 2014)

Was in my local camera store this afternoon with a friend of my daughter and my daughter. Her friend has got into photography because of her iPhone 5 and just purchased an EOS 6d with 24-105mm f4L, 17-40mm f4L and 100mm f2.8 macro. Thats £ 2,983 minus mail-in cash back of £60.00 making £ 2,923 ($ 3,096). Its the smart phone generation that really gets into photography that will keep DSLRs as well as keen / club amateurs going. Were being pessimistic because sales are normalising but the flip side is of that 1 billion smart phones that were bought in 2013 even if a small percentage buy DSLRs that will be a large number.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 8, 2014)

RLPhoto said:


> I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?



i'll answer by 1 upping it ---My guess is the 5 series is tied to the 1 series so they can share R&D cost. So, what are they going to improve in the next 1series? 

And yup, another way to answer it is to guess on what the majority of feedback to canon said. Last time around it was all about AF, give us good AF. Well that's done. and they improved high ISO too. My guess is we'll see a bump in DR, a bump in MP's, duel pixel, and maybe the holy grail of improved low ISO performance. the 5d series is the camera of choice for wedding photographers (well, those that shoot canon), and canon has seen that this is a lucrative market so I am guessing the mp bump will be low (up to like 24/26MP's) because you don't want the resolution to be too huge. AF can stay pretty much the same, just improve the accuracy, integrate that 6d center point. Boom, I take a pre-order for that please!!!!

Does that meet your needs? It depends on what you shoot. It also depends on how many miles you put on your body. For many of us, the upgrade cycle does closely follow the pattern for body replacement for many shooters. In 2 years or so when the 5d4 hits the shelves, i will most likely be about to replace my 5d3 or my 6d. so at that stage my kit may switch to a 5d3 and a 5d4...or a 5d4 and whatever the 6d2 turns out to be. 

If your a studio shooter, or architecture, or something that moves at a slower pace (IE, less shutter clicks per day, per job, per year) then you won't NEED a new body as soon. So the upgrade does have to be more of a wow!

But for a shooter like me, it's like a car. I drive a 2004 rav4. When that car hits the point where repair costs are too great it will be time to replace it. Bells and whistles won't matter, I'm gonna get a new car cause it's needed


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 8, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> In the last 7 years, I've seen 104 people in my office (out of the 148 total staff) who bought a DSLR ... but only 9 of them are actually doing something with their DSLRs. I have an American colleague who bought my entire kit (DSLR, lenses, tripod, flash etc for $2500) in 2009, but he hardly ever uses any of that gear (I think the last he used was over 2 years ago). I think that does reflect the vast majority of DSLR customers in the past 5 years or so ... a lot of them bought DSLRs thinking that it will somehow magically transform their images, because they see other photographers take great images with DSLRs. But they do not understand the basics of photography (i.e. f/stops, aperture, ISO etc) or have the interest in post processing ... most of them use the auto mode and get frustrated that the flash keeps popping up at the most inappropriate times or their photos, from their very expensive DSLR/lens, don't look any better than their smartphone and not many are willing to carry the weight/bulk that comes with DSLRs ... eventually they give up, some sell it off, other let it collect dust ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading like some of GAS sufferers.
> 
> So, now, it the more serious hobbyists / professionals who are buying/upgrading DSLRs and not the vast majority of beginners (who used to buy till a couple of years ago).
> 
> Just the day before yesterday, I gave a ride to an English lady during a bird watching trip (organized by a famous birder), and she bought her Nikon D300 + 18-200 lens 5 years ago ... she told me that she shot less than 1000 photos with it, she says that most of her images don't look any better then her iPhone 4S. So she just uses her D300+18-200 once in a great while, when she thinks she might need some reach. So why should people like her, be upgrading to an expensive DSLR/lens ... so they basically stopped buying/upgrading them ... I think that is the biggest factor in the loss of sales, the economic slow down etc are just secondary factors.



You hit the nail right on the head here! People forget there there is skill involved in photography, many do believe that the final image and how good it is is based solely on the camera, not the eye of the photographer, not the settings chosen by the photographer, and because people are used to their phones the post process choices done by the photog. I get that all the time, people look at my images and say the good old...you must have a really nice camera. these people think, ohhh...if i spend $$$$ i will make better picutres - which is the scenario you paint there perfectly. Oh, you need to learn things about light, oh you need to learn things about post process, and if you don't learn then your not gonna get a much better image than your phone could get.


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 8, 2014)

Rienzphotoz said:


> In the last 7 years, I've seen 104 people in my office (out of the 148 total staff) who bought a DSLR ... but only 9 of them are actually doing something with their DSLRs. I have an American colleague who bought my entire kit (DSLR, lenses, tripod, flash etc for $2500) in 2009, but he hardly ever uses any of that gear (I think the last he used was over 2 years ago). I think that does reflect the vast majority of DSLR customers in the past 5 years or so ... a lot of them bought DSLRs thinking that it will somehow magically transform their images, because they see other photographers take great images with DSLRs. But they do not understand the basics of photography (i.e. f/stops, aperture, ISO etc) or have the interest in post processing ... most of them use the auto mode and get frustrated that the flash keeps popping up at the most inappropriate times or their photos, from their very expensive DSLR/lens, don't look any better than their smartphone and not many are willing to carry the weight/bulk that comes with DSLRs ... eventually they give up, some sell it off, other let it collect dust ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading like some of GAS sufferers.
> 
> So, now, it the more serious hobbyists / professionals who are buying/upgrading DSLRs and not the vast majority of beginners (who used to buy till a couple of years ago).
> 
> Just the day before yesterday, I gave a ride to an English lady during a bird watching trip (organized by a famous birder), and she bought her Nikon D300 + 18-200 lens 5 years ago ... she told me that she shot less than 1000 photos with it, she says that most of her images don't look any better then her iPhone 4S. So she just uses her D300+18-200 once in a great while, when she thinks she might need some reach. So why should people like her, be upgrading to an expensive DSLR/lens ... so they basically stopped buying/upgrading them ... I think that is the biggest factor in the loss of sales, the economic slow down etc are just secondary factors.



I have to wonder what people are doing to mess up a shot with an SLR, when I upgraded from a compact I was satisfied with the results even after forgetting to focus with the first few images. I was shooting from a tripod though, maybe it's just flat out unrealistic to compare the experiences of a fiddly nerd type with the average person.
If you're just looking at images on a low resolution screen and not pixel peeping a decent cellphone camera might seem fairly competitive, at least in good lighting. Chances are most people compare quality on instagram (shudders).
Once we have 4K screens on everything... and upgrade instagram, that should help (make cellphone cameras look bad).



unfocused said:


> Mirrorless may be the next big thing – or it may be a passing fad. I can't shake the feeling that camera manufacturers are simply using mirrorless as a way to try to sell one last camera body to all those folks with DSLRs gathering dust on the shelves that Rienzphotoz refers to.



I really don't see mirrorless entering the equation at all, not in a bad way, just that it's virtually no different in the public eye. Anyone buying one of those would have bought an SLR otherwise.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 8, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> Was in my local camera store this afternoon with a friend of my daughter and my daughter. Her friend has got into photography because of her iPhone 5 and just purchased an EOS 6d with 24-105mm f4L, 17-40mm f4L and 100mm f2.8 macro. Thats £ 2,983 minus mail-in cash back of £60.00 making £ 2,923 ($ 3,096). Its the smart phone generation that really gets into photography that will keep DSLRs as well as keen / club amateurs going. Were being pessimistic because sales are normalising but the flip side is of that 1 billion smart phones that were bought in 2013 even if a small percentage buy DSLRs that will be a large number.



Wow, that's awesome for her. I get calls from my parent friends quite often - the good old my son/daughter is really digging photography and we want to encourage it so what do you recommend. Your friends daughter is quite lucky, most that ask me end up saying their budget is $400-700 - so I point them towards either rebels, or used older models. 

I am betting the #'s on this get wacky though - of the 1 billion cell phones per year, how many will say, i dig photography and want to explore more. 1 out of 1000? 1 out of 10,000? 1 out of 100,000? And how many (especially if you factor in that many are young) stick with it beyond that initial purchase (add a lens, add a flash, add another lens...etc etc.)? Add to this one other point --if we're talking about young people, the fresh batch of news photogs - unless you have parents who are that special mix very generous and moderately well to do (not talking rich, but, if your on the low end of the middle class your desire to foster and be generous is tempered by your budget). your on your own, working part time and saving those pennies for upgrades, which for a 17 year old, that will take a while. 

I'm not saying these are bad shooters at all, just that this age bracket isn't making much money and most likely isn't working professionally so they have much less money to spend than lets say, a hobby shooter who makes 80K a year


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 8, 2014)

Chuck Alaimo said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think I'll buy a 5D4. The 5D3 is so good already. That's the problem, how does one convince me that this camera now isn't worth keeping to make me buy a new camera?
> ...



I'd probably still be shooting my 5Dc if it had great AF.  Idk, the 5D5 is probably where I'd see the upgrade


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Mar 8, 2014)

9VIII said:


> I have to wonder what people are doing to mess up a shot with an SLR, when I upgraded from a compact I was satisfied with the results even after forgetting to focus with the first few images. I was shooting from a tripod though, maybe it's just flat out unrealistic to compare the experiences of a fiddly nerd type with the average person.
> If you're just looking at images on a low resolution screen and not pixel peeping a decent cellphone camera might seem fairly competitive, at least in good lighting. Chances are most people compare quality on instagram



I see this all the time at events and even family gatherings. amny just think that right out of the box the thing will make amazing images. so it's left in auto everything mode and all points focus mode. 

Scenario:

why are my shots out of focus. I take a look...well, you have it on all points, your focus is not locking on what you want it to because the camera is making the call for you. 

Oh, so how do I change that? 

did you read your manual?

no....

if they are on a canon I can help them easily and show them nikon and sony's interface is all wierd --- i tell them they have to just read their manuals...and you'd be surprised how many say they threw that out

from focus points to the good old, how do I stop the flash from popping up to the basics of shutter speed (why is there blur, because your shooting moving things at 1/15th ---- ohhhh, didn't know that...how do I change that)....

It's sad, but it's true. these are the folks that have only snapped 1000 shots in 2 years on their slr, but well over 100,000 on their cell phones...


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 9, 2014)

9VIII said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > In the last 7 years, I've seen 104 people in my office (out of the 148 total staff) who bought a DSLR ... but only 9 of them are actually doing something with their DSLRs. I have an American colleague who bought my entire kit (DSLR, lenses, tripod, flash etc for $2500) in 2009, but he hardly ever uses any of that gear (I think the last he used was over 2 years ago). I think that does reflect the vast majority of DSLR customers in the past 5 years or so ... a lot of them bought DSLRs thinking that it will somehow magically transform their images, because they see other photographers take great images with DSLRs. But they do not understand the basics of photography (i.e. f/stops, aperture, ISO etc) or have the interest in post processing ... most of them use the auto mode and get frustrated that the flash keeps popping up at the most inappropriate times or their photos, from their very expensive DSLR/lens, don't look any better than their smartphone and not many are willing to carry the weight/bulk that comes with DSLRs ... eventually they give up, some sell it off, other let it collect dust ... the DSLR sales "peak" we are referring to accounts for a vast majority of people who have bought them and pretty much never used them after the first few weeks or months ... basically it was the beginners who were caught up in the hype. Lets face it, DSLR photography is an expensive hobby and the upgrades are never ending ... not everyone is willing to keep on upgrading like some of GAS sufferers.
> ...


Like Chuck Alaimo has already mentioned, people use it in auto mode ... the auto mode does a great job in good light or subjects that aren't moving too much, so sometimes they get good images in good light (e.g. outdoor day time ... even then the image requires a computer for resizing and uploading to their facebook/twitter accounts) ... but since the average person generally uses the 18-55 kit lens to take photos of birthdays, parties and other such dimly lit indoor areas or his/her kids running around etc (i.e. fast moving subjects), they soon realize that the photos are coming out all blurry - resulting in missing the "decisive/interesting moment" ... but they see they smartphone has a "Ultra Burst Camera" app that captures 40 frames per second and it only costs a measly few dollars in a device (smartphone) that they are already carrying everywhere they go and it captures the "decisive/interesting" moment and it isn't blurry ... also the average person can instantly upload to their facebook, twitter etc ... he/she would never print an image, so why lug around a hefty DSLR!


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 9, 2014)

jeffa4444 said:


> Was in my local camera store this afternoon with a friend of my daughter and my daughter. Her friend has got into photography because of her iPhone 5 and just purchased an EOS 6d with 24-105mm f4L, 17-40mm f4L and 100mm f2.8 macro. Thats £ 2,983 minus mail-in cash back of £60.00 making £ 2,923 ($ 3,096). Its the smart phone generation that really gets into photography that will keep DSLRs as well as keen / club amateurs going. Were being pessimistic because sales are normalising but the flip side is of that 1 billion smart phones that were bought in 2013 even if a small percentage buy DSLRs that will be a large number.


Excellent point, I am sure there will be many from the "smartphone generation" who will be getting DSLRs/lenses and take photography seriously ... however, I still don't think we will see the same "frenzy" (if I can call it that) for DSLR purchases, we've witnessed in the past 5 years ... and as far as the serious photogs are concerned, I think the DSLR industry has reached a saturation point and the sales figures reflect that.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Mar 9, 2014)

Digitalrev posted the below video on youtube ... and it got me thinking about the amount of DLSRs out there. Ever since the DSLR "revolution" began I've had a total of 11 DSLRs (6 Canon & 5 Nikon) and most of them are obviously sold to upgrade to the next "better" DSLR (and I now have 3, i.e. 2 Canon & 1 Nikon) ... so, just like me there must be tons of people who have bought and sold their used DSLRs ... now if you think of all the millions of DSLRs that have been bought, most of them must have got resold to other beginner photographers or those who can't necessarily afford brand new DSLRs ... obviously there are a lot of used DSLR cameras out there that must be putting pressure on new DSLR sales ... in a way Canon/Nikon are also competing with millions of their own old models.
DSLRs For Under $100


----------

