# Decline in DSLR sales explained



## old-pr-pix (Feb 16, 2015)

This presentation was made at PMA recently by Heino Hilbig of Mayflower Concepts, a management consulting firm.
http://youtu.be/bfCJDIf-NeA

A complex presentation, it explains that the reason for the rapid decline in camera sales - which is followed by a lag of two years by a decline in ILC's - is not (just) market saturation, nor is it (directly) smartphones... it is more catastrophic than that. It is because the photo industry has failed to embrace the principles of easy, fun use that the smartphone industry has made so commonplace. The photo industry has clung to film-like standards and proprietary approaches that cripple it's attraction to new users. The industry has made communications with other devices difficult and constructed user interfaces that are complex and awkward. He cites simple examples like aspect ratio differences between cameras and printers, various memory cards for different cameras, too many dials/buttons/knobs for new users, etc. The good news is that these are all fixable things.

Watch it and see what you think...


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 16, 2015)

You got me, I won't sit through the whole 50min but I'll free to comment on tidbits people extract 



old-pr-pix said:


> The photo industry has clung to film-like standards and proprietary approaches that cripple it's attraction to new users.



Sure, but at the same time they manage to squeeze a lot of €€€ from old-school users with every new camera body or lens release.



old-pr-pix said:


> The industry has made communications with other devices difficult and constructed user interfaces that are complex and awkward.



Seems like Canon is adapting recently - less crippled Rebel 760d with wifi remote shooting, home dock and whatnot to make the experience easy and seamless?



old-pr-pix said:


> The good news is that these are all fixable things.



You bet - Canon aren't stupid, they just chose to the minimal amount of things to change to maximize profit. If they are cornered, I don't doubt they are able to innovate and "fix" things they have been deliberately delaying. Reminds me of this video, though it has been posted before twice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJBq0z2Vmu4


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2015)

When did he figure that out? Its been pretty well known for a couple of years. People who bought P&S found they could not only get by with a phone, but the integration with social sites became a mandatory feature.

Many who upgraded their P&S to DSLR's found that they did not like the shallow depth of field, and with their phone, the depth of field is tremendous.

As a result of the changes, mostly serious photographers will be buying cameras, and those who don't want to spend the time and effort will stick with a phone, which is easy, works well, and the social site integration is a killer. I have a G1X MK II which will upload to social sites, but putting a note or message with it is very difficult and totally impractical. I must have a Wi-Fi connection as well, where phone coverage is almost universal in high population areas.

Big $$ is being spent trying to improve cameras for phones, and its going to continue. 

IMHO, camera companies need to start concentrating on the photo enthusiasts as well as adding social integration features. Voice clips might be a innovation, and the social websites or intermediate site could convert voice to text.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 16, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Voice clips might be a innovation



... which is included in Magic Lantern for ages . But Canon is adopting some ML features recently like better auto iso, bulb timer, intervalometer, "handheld mlu", maybe spot metering - so we'll see what they'll copy next.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 16, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> You got me, I won't sit through the whole 50min but I'll free to comment on tidbits people extract



No offense intended, because I greatly respect Marsu's opinions, but I don't believe in commenting on links that I don't read or view. So, I listened/watched the presentation (while multi-tasking -- photo editing on my computer, listening, watching on my tablet)

Anyway, I think he makes some valid points that really should come as no surprise to anyone. DSLRs ARE too much work for most people. Some of that is necessary, but much of it is not. Once again, one of the things he references is the lack of touch screen and inter-connectivity which plagues DSLRs. 

Totally ridiculous that Canon (and Nikon) continue to refuse to put touch screens on top of the line DSLRs. I defy anyone who has used a 70D to argue that higher end cameras would not benefit from touch screens. Yet, we have this ridiculous concept that they aren't "professional." 

And, to continue my ongoing and oft-repeated rant: there is absolutely no reason why someone with a smart phone should be able to access photoshop and perform a few edits and then upload that photo to a cloud service, while someone with a $3,000 DSLR cannot do the same. 

This is the irony – most of the technology that would make using DSLRs easier and more enjoyable already exists and has existed for years, yet camera manufacturers continue to drag their feet in routinely incorporating the entire package of inexpensive, user-friendly options across the entire line of cameras. 

His main point, and he is correct about this, is that camera manufacturers have fallen behind because using DSLRs and MILCs is not easy and fun for most people. More people are taking and sharing pictures than ever before in history, yet the best technology for doing that is losing out to inferior technology.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Voice clips might be a innovation
> ...



Thanks for the information, its good to know, but more is needed. A possible way to integrate to a social site is to upload a image and voice clip from camera to facebook or twitter, or any of the other social sites and somewhere along the line convert it to text.

A whole system is needed if a camera is to be integrated into social websites like phone cameras are. I suggested voice clip to text simply because the keypad on a camera is unusable for me, and the Siri Application that Apple uses does a fair to good job.


----------



## jrista (Feb 16, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Totally ridiculous that Canon (and Nikon) continue to refuse to put touch screens on top of the line DSLRs. I defy anyone who has used a 70D to argue that higher end cameras would not benefit from touch screens. Yet, we have this ridiculous concept that they aren't "professional."




I think that's the inverse of the question that needs to be asked. Do professionals WANT that stuff? Personally, I don't really care if Canon puts a touch screen on their xD lines or not...it might be useful in the menus, but the way I actually use the camera for actually doing photography, the LCD is off and black. I use the buttons and dials for everything, frequently without ever removing my eye from the viewfinder. 


Adding more technology is fine, but why expend the resources doing it if the statistics (whatever they may be, just making a case here) show that most of your buyers wouldn't actually care about or use the feature much of the time, if any of the time? In the professional (or semi-pro or avid enthusiast) world, I think a lot of Canon's sales come from return buyers who are looking for something familiar. I also think that most focus more on the traits that actually affect IQ, vs. a new (and certainly potentially useful) way of interacting with certain features of the camera. If someone has all the necessary procedural memory to control Canon DSLRs because Canon has stuck with the same key button layout for each line for a while now, a touch UI suddenly becomes a backburner item. 


I think the consumer grade lines are totally different. The xxD and xxxD/xxxxD Rebel lines are catering to an entirely different audience. Things like touch screens, or LTE and WiFi, internet accessibility, maybe some built-in app features like Instagram or Facebook, etc. are not only useful features, but as the video was getting at, essential features for that segment of the DSLR market to survive. But that's an entirely different market segment, at least the way I look at it. It's the segment that isn't catering to return customers who want familiarity and the ability to instantly access critical functionality at the press of a button, because having that procedural-memory/muscle-memory speed and accuracy when using the device isn't the most critical thing for consumers. The most critical thing for consumers is (apparently, these days) the social aspects of photography.


In that respect...even IF Canon and Nikon and the rest manage to somehow meld smartphone and DSLR into a usable device...are people actually going to give up the convenience of their existing and easily accessible pocket cameras (smartphones) for something larger, bulkier, and still more complex (interchangeable lenses, at the very least)? Smartphones are like the disposable camera of the modern age: Tough to beat for the average consumer.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 16, 2015)

I thought a touch screen would be great on my G1X MK II, but actually trying to use it did not work out, my fingers are too large, and there are other issues.

The one feature that is nice, it the ability to AF on a point you touch, but this is mostly because there is no viewfinder. I'm not sure its worth the hassle on a pro level DSLR.


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 16, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > You got me, I won't sit through the whole 50min but I'll free to comment on tidbits people extract
> ...



Very commendable  but I dare to mention that the whole science works with 3rd party summaries. It's absolutely ok to let someone credible and able get the gist from a source and then comment on these specific bits.

Otherwise, how can you ever write something on a CR article - do you always read the original source, the patent, the japanese original, the press release. And last not least it's a r-u-m-o-r site so I feel free to relax a bit on stringent methods  ... 

... but of course I knew your comment would come, so I made sure I write that I didn't see the whole thing. Heck, on CR usually people don't even read the last few posts before replying 



unfocused said:


> Anyway, I think he Totally ridiculous that Canon (and Nikon) continue to refuse to put touch screens on top of the line DSLRs. I defy anyone who has used a 70D to argue that higher end cameras would not benefit from touch screens. Yet, we have this ridiculous concept that they aren't "professional."



As Vespasian mentioned: _pecunia non olet_. I doesn't matter for a manufacturer if one € earned is from educated customers or people stupid enough to believe any self-created or inherited concept of what's "pro" or not - like touch screen, swivel screen, pop up flash, whatnot.

Actually it's a great thing from Canon's perspective, saves marketing costs - everyone will know that the 5d4 is "pro" if it looks right, no matter what it does and esp. no matter what the competition has.

If people don't have fun shooting with a €2000 crop dslr and come to realize it's basically the same sensor as in a €500 model - so what? They've already bought the thing after all, so let 'em vent their anger on CR. Will it make 7d2 customers go p&s? No? Will it prevent them buying a 7d3? No - unless they buy a 5d4 first :->


----------



## LDS (Feb 16, 2015)

old-pr-pix said:


> more catastrophic than that.



Sure. Too many dumb, clueless and brainless users discovered they can produce an image - often just of themselves. A real catastrophe.



old-pr-pix said:


> a management consulting firm



The apex of people without a clue. Smoke vendors who make you believe they know everything - and who never got one right.

"Those who can, do; those who can't, teach"


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 16, 2015)

old-pr-pix said:


> The industry has made communications with other devices difficult and constructed user interfaces that are complex and awkward.


I don't have time to watch it now, but to me, this is the #1 issue. People, especially younger people want to share their photos right away. As far as I know, there aren't any serious compacts or DSLRs that do what you can do with a smartphone - i.e. snap, process, send/post to social networks & friends. Canon has made some inroad there with in-camera processing (of RAW), support of WiFi cards and now WiFi, but no one has made it simple or fast. Here's what no one has done:

1. Make a compelling upgrade to a smartphone (e.g. EOS M style, with interchangeable lenses)
2. Link photo to camera (once via Bluetooth), link Canon app to social networks/email/SMS 
3. Provide interface to edit and send photos via touchscreen on the back of the camera (no phone interaction needed).

The first camera company to do this and make it simple and fun will have a huge lead over the competition. I believe Joe Morgenstern at the Wall Street Journal wrote something similar about this last year and said that whoever does this first will crush the other camera makers sales.


----------



## brad-man (Feb 16, 2015)

And, to add insult to injury, Canon neglected to include the _print_ button on their flagship crop camera!

I certainly agree with the proposition that long-time DSLR users are much more forgiving of the lack of social media inclusion than the vast majority of new users will be.


----------



## amigo (Feb 16, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> 1. Make a compelling upgrade to a smartphone (e.g. EOS M style, with interchangeable lenses)
> 2. Link photo to camera (once via Bluetooth), link Canon app to social networks/email/SMS
> 3. Provide interface to edit and send photos via touchscreen on the back of the camera (no phone interaction needed).



I totally agree. Users are now demanding modern touch screen user interfaces similar to what they experience with an Android device an iPhone or iPad. 

Even this year's Volkswagen Jettas DVD player/Radio/GPs units run Android.

Canon should replace their proprierary rinky dingy Digic processors with the fastest mobile phone processor they can find, run Android on the camera, and fully embrace people or groups developing apps for the devices. With faster processors comes the ability to perform more advanced noise reduction algorithms, and also the ability to compress to H.265 video, which allows the capture of very high quality 10 bit color 4k video at high isos and at high frame rates for slow motion, and at reasonable file sizes, without the blockiness and ugly moire that's plaguing Canon's DSLRs usinh H.264 compression.

The DSLRS should be able to connect to my mobile phone via Bluetooth thus gaining access to the internet wherever I happen to be.

This is not rocket science, the technology has been there for a while, so please Canon smell the coffee and wake up before it's too late.


----------



## wsheldon (Feb 16, 2015)

amigo said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Make a compelling upgrade to a smartphone (e.g. EOS M style, with interchangeable lenses)
> ...



I agree that simplifying connectivity and access to social media is the key, but why push all the tech onto an already-complex (and harder to update) camera body?!? Anyone who wants to tweak their images and post them right to social media is already accustomed to doing that with their phone, and phone/tablet apps, and will almost certainly have their phone with them when they're out shooting.

What I'd like to see is dead-simple pairing of your phone to your camera, as mackguyver listed as #2, then killer apps that RUN ON THE PHONE for viewing, tweaking, tagging and uploading. As things stand now you practically need an advanced degree to use the 6D/70D WiFi, and good luck if you need to use if for more than one scenario (e.g. EOS Remote and then switch back to phone). My 6D WiFi manual lives in my camera bag. An industry standard quick-connection protocol over Wifi/Bluetooth/NFC for pairing cameras to phones (like wireless zero config for computers) is sorely needed.

As for software, EOS Remote is way too simplistic and lacks social media hooks. Shuttersnitch is much closer, but that's too oriented towards professional workflows and real-time shoot previews for clients.
We badly need software for viewing, rating, tweaking and uploading photos that you just took with your camera (that's sitting in your bag with Wifi/Bluetooth on).

Address those 2 issues and then we can turn the conversation back to image quality over simplicity.


----------



## sanj (Feb 16, 2015)

I agree with the basic thought of this. Simple cameras with high IQ that most can use would be a big hit. I personally know many people who do not pick up a camera as they find it too complex. iPhones and such work perfect for them.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Feb 16, 2015)

Clearly using our gear is a lot more important than discussing what Canon, or others, are doing right or wrong. But, I'm selfish - I want new stuff, I want better stuff. And, I know that current sales fund R&D. While Canon is #1 in market share, they are #1 in a market that has been almost in free-fall for the past couple years. CIPA shows 2014 shipments of DSLR+MILC fell another 19+% and forecasts a further drop in 2015 of 14%. That's not good! P&S shipments are worse, down 35% in 2014 following a 31% decline in 2013.

Sales to consumers are needed to fund development. The enthusiasts and pros can't support it all. I just don't want to go back to the film era conditions where Canon had one pro body and it was upgraded on a ten year cycle. "New" lenses were rare and sometimes consisted of only a coating change from S.C. to S.S.C.

I'm hoping Canon figures this out... soon.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Feb 16, 2015)

Updating the cameras to act like phones without being phones isn't going to help anything. People like the phones because they have "free" cameras that add virtually no weight. 

These are the same masses that were happy with Polaroid photos back in the day. Any current phone takes vastly better photos than Polaroid, so the quality threshold has been surpassed.

I travel the National Parks quite often and see countless people with smart phones. They always ask me to take photos of them with scenery in the background, which I gladly oblige. I have to admit, they take amazing photos! They are fast, and I can figure out how to use one in less than 10 seconds. Find the icon that looks like a camera and then press the capture button. Some of the phones these days can also do great HDR and also do super fast burst speeds. 

Canon doesn't need to fix their DSLR cameras (although touch screens are huge for pinch zooming to check focus and scroll way faster than using the Atari joystick).

Canon needs to be putting their brand reputation into products people want, which are phones. It's like they are missing the ship like Kodak did when everyone went digital. 

We probably won't see much innovation from Canon for a while, since their lower end market no longer bankrolls the R&D funding.


----------



## Hillsilly (Feb 17, 2015)

How have SLRs/DSLRs adavanced in the last fifty years?....ummmmm??...... I can come up with the introduction of autofocus and the convenience of digital image capture. I'm sure there must be others, but its not like the camera companies are really pushing the boundaries of new ideas. The really important question is - do they have to? In my opinion, no. Until five years ago, if you wanted to take high IQ photos, you had one choice - the DSLR. Now, there are several options and the enthusiasts and professionals that are left buying DSLRs are people who are serious and interested in that format. I don't see that as a bad thing.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Feb 17, 2015)

I get your point, but there have certainly been more innovations than you credit since 1965. Reference the Canon FP, a "pro" camera released in Oct. 1964. Note: no light meter built-in, no automatic control of aperture, no program mode, no evaluative metering, 36 shots per roll max., 1/1000 max. shutter speed, no hot-shoe control of electronic flash (but it did have FP sync. to work with flashbulbs), no radio link to slave other flashes, etc.


----------



## noisejammer (Feb 17, 2015)

I think PhotographyFirst nailed it ... phones offer quite acceptable image quality for almost everyone.

Sure, you can offer a dumbed down interface on a DSLR (but the green box is there already.) The truth is that some people - perhaps most people - are unwilling to learn new skills. I know a wildlife photographer who owns a 300/2.8, 600/4 and a couple of 1D3s bodies... and who has no desire to ever take the camera out of P (for "professional") mode. Until I showed her Snapseed, even cropping was too much hassle...

I submit that falling sales are nothing to do with ease of use - potential customers already have a camera that does everything they want... and it came "free" with their phone. They may even have a DSLR that disappointed them because they thought "Better camera = better images," a fiction that every manufacturer lives by. Although their images may improve with effort, this is not disclosed up front. Since they're loathe to blame their own incompetence, they become former customers who view this is misleading advertising.

I'll end with this - 
When I started photography 40-odd years ago, an SLR was a treasured possession - you might expect it to last fifteen years or more. Few people had first class cameras (as a measure, I was the only chap in my army regiment.) That was considered "normal." Is the expectation of market thrashing realistic?


----------



## tculotta (Feb 17, 2015)

I think we are perceiving a problem for people who don't think they have a problem (and they don't). A DSLR or something similar scratches an itch that doesn't exist. Most people are thoroughly satisfied with their smartphone cameras. They don't care to do anything except upload images to social media. Anything more than a smartphone is overkill.


----------



## The _Bowler (Feb 17, 2015)

Hello everyone.

Just joined this forum, but have been coming this this site for a number of years know. Always interesting things to read and see other people's view points.

I have owned Canon 30D , 40D, 7D, currently own the 7D Mark II and 1D Mark IV and the Nikon D800E. I use the tool for the job. The 7D has nice features, but I did like the IQ. The noise at ISO 400 was too much for my liking and the artifacts as well. Only took about 32,000 images with it and bought the 1D Mark IV 2 years later and have taken just shy 150,000 mages with it. The 7D Mark II is a much, much better camera. Sure wish it was a bit better though.

Really hate how 98% of reviews say that no WiFi is a CON. 

Anyways back to this the discussion in this thread. 

For consumer cameras, let them put that dribble in the cameras. Keep that junk out of prosumer and pro cameras. Those that use these cameras, know how to use the camera. I want control. Don't need social media access integrated into it. Do we NFC for our camera? Really!

Many people don't want to think anymore and it is getting worse. I did not spend my hard earned money to buy a camera just to post on it on facebook or something else, smartphones are great for that.

IQ is above all else important to me. I make prints and have my own 17" wide printer. I have several images hanging framed on the wall and 7 large images printed on canvas hanging as well. Not that many really print.

The attitude towards photography has also changed to the it's good enough. In the film days it was from pocket cameras to SLRs for many people and they took photos and it worked. Heck they are people having their wedding photos taken with smartphones, can't be very important event if that is good enough.

What it takes more then just pushing a a single button, that is too much work.

Well that is my point of view and you may agree or disagree with it.
If I start to see social media icons or other useless features, I will take up needlepoint.

Andy


----------



## Sunnystate (Feb 17, 2015)

That video puts in perspective all that bickering over DR or high ISO performance and the importance of the "SYSTEM". Canon made serious mistake when decided to listen to wedding photographers as the primary source of sales, alienating hobbyists and enthusiasts with pricing and architecture of futures available in particular price levels. If Canon's marketing department has the same attitude as the most prominent posters here that you all know who i am referring tom (same people that destroyed karma, the only form of protest or critique without being retaliated verbally for) than Canon is not even close to find solution to the crises, not with the big mugs with 50Mp printed on them anyway. I really hope somebody will learn the lessons here...


----------



## Marsu42 (Feb 17, 2015)

noisejammer said:


> I think PhotographyFirst nailed it ... phones offer quite acceptable image quality for almost everyone.




And herein lies the problem - most people's definition of acceptable is what I'd call "horrible".

Sometimes when I'm outdoors shooting horsies, people volunteer to take some shots of me when I'm working with the animals, and I usually ask if they can send me some - so I've got a wide selection of i-something and p&s. The iq of what people hope to be "nice pictures" is stunningly bad, out of focus, shake, composition, everything, it defies a description.

BUT: These acquaintances do indeed send 'em directly from their phone! Just got a couple from a lady in her 30s-40s. I don't know if younger people have more understanding what makes a quality photos, but I doubt it - they'd rather take selfies everywhere. Going by that standard, the doom of dslrs (and pro photography) is a certainty :-o


----------



## AvTvM (Feb 17, 2015)

It is totally ridiculous, that any digital image captured with a new, big and expensive camera can only be transferred to any other device and towards any viewing audience by either connecting a cable to the camera or by opening it and taking out a memory card, putting it into another specialized device (CF card reader) which in turn needs to be connected to yet another device (PC, notebook, tablet). In 2015!

Until Canon and Nikon refuse to change photography to "100% digital" they are *******. Rightfully so.

Jettison those "analogue workflow artefacts". Jettison mechanical components inside cameras. Make them smaller, more powerful but easier to use (eg using touchscreens AND electronic viewfinders with Eye Control Autofocus v2.0), make them wirelessly connected, make them solid state, vibration-free, make them more fun to use. 

Make the entire camera + lens system far cheaper to customers by creating "industry standard, universal lens mounts"! One universal lens mount for 1" sensors, one universal mount for APS-C (crop 1.5x) and one for 135 format (FF). Similar to what was attempted with mFT, but this time for the most wide-spread sensor formats and on a much grander scale - including all players in the industry.

A lot more pain nerds to be inflicted on canon and nikon. But in the end they will have to budge and yield to us: their 21st century customers!


----------



## sanj (Feb 17, 2015)

tculotta said:


> I think we are perceiving a problem for people who don't think they have a problem (and they don't). A DSLR or something similar scratches an itch that doesn't exist. Most people are thoroughly satisfied with their smartphone cameras. They don't care to do anything except upload images to social media. Anything more than a smartphone is overkill.



This is indeed the reality.


----------



## scotia (Feb 17, 2015)

sanj said:


> tculotta said:
> 
> 
> > I think we are perceiving a problem for people who don't think they have a problem (and they don't). A DSLR or something similar scratches an itch that doesn't exist. Most people are thoroughly satisfied with their smartphone cameras. They don't care to do anything except upload images to social media. Anything more than a smartphone is overkill.
> ...



I agree. Far from expanding ranges and adding new features I think that big camera manufacturers are likely to accept that in the not too distant future SLRs will be a niche market. Manufactures will to start looking at exit strategies from - if we are lucky - all but these niche markets. The worst case scenario for photographers (as distinct from people who take photographs) is that no company will want to serve the niche. I have no need to upload things quickly to social media (and am often photographing in places where the infrastructure is not available to do so even if I wanted to), so I see little benefit to built-in features, but I am not representative of most of the market. And most of the market don't want to be lugging around an SLR when a phone camera is so much more convenient, so there will be little benefit to being in the consumer SLR market; I have a couple of relatives who bought SLRs thinking they would like to take "better" photographs, but I cannot remember the last time I saw either of them use anything other than a phone camera. For the same reason mirrorless cameras are not the solution for many: they are not as convenient and ever-present as the phone. 

I don't know who makes the cameras that go into phones, but that is where the greatest market share will be (is): while some may regard the quality of many phone images as "horrible", for the majority of people they are good enough, and likely much better than they were achieving with a low end camera that was not part of their phone. I have seen excellent images taken on iPhones by pro-photographers, who know the limitations of the tool but whose skill is such that they can make the most of the medium. I have seen terrible images taken on high-end DSLRs. Of course phone cameras are not suited to some applications, but those are not the areas that the mass market are choosing to photograph. The Commonwealth Games in Glasgow in 2014 were labelled the "selfie" games because people were shooting images of themselves at the events and uploading them to Facebook or Twitter - they were not photographing the sport and did not care whether the athletes were in focus or not; they wanted an image that showed they were there, and their phones gave them those images. 

For those of us who like SLRs I foresee a slowdown in the rate of release of new models (bodies and lenses) because there will no longer be large R and D budgets. The move will be to miniaturise (anyone remember the Sony Walkman?) to make things more portable (though it is interesting that phones are now getting bigger again as they become the computers in our pockets - the human hand is not getting smaller and eyesight is not improving, meaning screens have to be big enough to take a keyboard and to read).


----------



## Efka76 (Feb 17, 2015)

I watched this presentation from the beginning to the end and can make very few very strong statements:

1) Presentation was absolute bullshit;
2) Presenter was making wrong assumptions and wrong conclusions. 

My reasoning for such conclusions is the following:

1) At first you do not need to prove obvious things (e.g. there is a snow in winter, water is liquid and etc.). Presenter wanted to prove that photo market is declining. This is obvious fact, which does not require to be proved.
2) Presenter put a lot of not necessary bullshit in presentation (on Bruce Willis, impala population, correlation trends and correlation formula). The problem with statistics is that if you apply wrong assumptions and make correct statistical calculations you will get wrong results, which contradict to common logic. Accordingly, presenter conclusion that smartphone introduction is NOT killing compact camera market is wrong.
3) All discussions about market saturation (when we speak about compact cameras) is wrong is due to CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY. Cameras in smartphones are sufficiently good to fully replace compact cameras. The same could be applied to PDAs and MP3 players. Talks about market saturation in compact cameras would make sense if there is no such shift in technology.
4) Accordingly, presenter was wrong regarding market saturation related to DSLRs. Peak was in 2012 when Canon / Nikon introduced 5DMark III, D800 series cameras. AT that year technology was at peak, which drove consumers to buy DSLRs, however, the last few years were really in "milking the cow" stage. There were no new major technology breaktroughs, which would drive consumers to buy new cameras. Another fact is that such highly advanced cameras are really expensive. e.g. You are not buying a new car every year, yo replace it when it becomes really obsolete (physically and morally). Accordingly, it is normal to consumers to replace such cameras every 2-5 years.

Presenter was also wrong in arguments, which were trying to show why photo camera sales are declining:

1) Different aspect ratios in photo cameras and printers. This is not a limiting factor as most of consumers do not print photos but store them in digital format. Other part of consumers do not face issues as they send jpegs to photo labs and get prints. Process is extremely simple.
2) Photo books argument - maybe presenter had in mind CAMERA MANUALS?  Because all photo books explain principles of photography and usually are not written to specific camera or manufacturer. Principles of photography are the same for all cameras.
3) RAW and Adobe. This argument is absolute bullshit as there are more RAW converters and consumer do not need to stick to Adobe only. Also, ordinary consumers can shoot in JPEG mode and they do not need any editing software.

Presenter said incorrect statement: meeting consumers wishes is not equal to technology we offer. Ordinary consumers are not buying compact cameras as smartphones are really sufficient. Compact camera market is dead. That is a fact. However, more advanced consumers want really better technology (e.g. better dynamic range, better high ISO capabilities, faster FPS, etc.). During the last few years there were no such breakthroughs. I am sure that if Canon put Exxmor sensor in Canon Mark 5dMkIV such camera sales would be really significant.

Some words on SOLUTIONS that presenter presented:

1) More fun but not technology - in other words he could say "better marketing is required", however in such specialized industry as photography you need to have at least basic knowledge about light, ISO Av TV dependence and etc. If you want very simple approach you can make photos with smartphones or in AUTO regime in DSLRs.
2) He proposes to abolish scene modes in cameras. This is wrong as ordinary users (who do not have knowledge on photography) use them. In such case you would loos quite a big part of ordinary hobbyists who buy expensive DSLRs.
3) Simplifying photo eco system, abolish patents, open secrets  Whout would be Canon advantage if it openly announce protocols related to AF, Sony abolishes Exxmor sensor patents, all manufacturers use unified lens mount???? In such case all photo maufacturers should consolidate and that will never happen. Stupid idea which is impossible to implement.
4) Harmonising and unifying hardqare and software. Stupid argument as well. Hardware harmonisation would be killing lens and camera sales. Software is already harmonised - Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom are industry standards.

It was funny to watch how presenter gave ideas how to improve photo workflow from taking picture to printing it. This process is ALREADY IMPLEMENTED. 

In summary, presentation included a lot of bullshit, wrong assumptions and conclusions, as well as outdated ideas. Other trends which drive young generation (e.g. making selfies) were not discussed at all. That's because presenter still lives in XX century and do not have any new ideas. I am very surprised that he was invited to CES.


----------



## LDS (Feb 17, 2015)

Efka76 said:


> 1) More fun but not technology - in other words he could say "better marketing is required",



There's a good chance those "consulting firms" are really pursuing some of their "customers" agenda. For example, "social" companies. These companies need a continuos stream of contents from their products users. Otherwise they can't survive. Unlike companies selling you products - be it hardware (cameras, lenses. PCs), or software, they sell your contents, and need new ones. Thereby they employ a lot of PR - often hidden - to make you believe you can't live without uploading your contents to them.
The last thing I wish is a camera which embeds uploads to some proprietary systems and which doesn't let me choose where I really want to upload *my* contents. Also, different geographical areas have different dominating "social" companies. And maybe, the last thing I want in a trip to China is a camera trying to upload almost automatically contents to some destination forbidden....


----------



## dolina (Feb 17, 2015)

All the camera makers should make smartphones. ;D

The video presents a very good argument for consumers not to buy anything but a smartphone.

If you want something more then get a fixed lens compact with a large sensor & WiFi/NFC.

Need flexibility get a MILC.

Need better AF for moving subjects then get a DSLR.

Need pixels and money's no object then go medium format.


----------

