# Canon Inc. releases Q1 2019 financial results



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 24, 2019)

> Canon Inc. has released its 2019 Q1 financial results.
> *Canon presentation summary of the imaging division:*
> In the first quarter, sales of interchangeable-lens cameras were down 19% to 850 thousand units. This reflects the combined impact of accelerated market contraction for DSLRs, in particular, entry-level models, and economic slowdown in China, which is a sizeable market for interchangeable-lens cameras.
> The habit of capturing images with smartphones with improved cameras has become a part of the daily lives of consumers. As a result, the market for entry-level DSLRs is contracting at a pace that exceeds the outlook we had at the beginning of the year. That said, we expect the user base of professionals and advanced-amateur, people who value the image quality and expressive possibilities afforded by cameras with large sensors and an abundance of interchangeable-lenses to remain. For the market overall, however, we expect the trend of market contraction to continue for...



Continue reading...


----------



## edoorn (Apr 24, 2019)

So, full speed ahead then for mirrorless. They can't afford to miss out on this.


----------



## bichex (Apr 24, 2019)

In this context, leaving line 7D, seems like a bad idea


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2019)

Interesting numbers.

Entire ILC market is 8.6 million and Canon expects to sell 4.2 million, so Canon controls just under half the market and everyone else splits the remaining 50%.

The compact camera market is 8.5 million, and Canon has 2.6 million of that, or roughly 30% of the market.

First quarter ILC sales were 850,000, but Canon expects to sell 4.2 million over the year. That's about 20% of their annual sales in the first three months of the year. I'm guessing that the first quarter is the slowest quarter of the year.

Canon is relying more heavily on the enthusiast market to maintain market sales as compact DSLRs (Rebels) and point and shoots decline in sales. However, it's the lower end of the product line (RP) that is making the money. No surprises here, just confirmation of what most of us already knew.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2019)

bichex said:


> In this context, leaving line 7D, seems like a bad idea


CR1 rumors are seldom accurate.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 24, 2019)

"... accelerated market contraction for DSLRs, in particular, entry-level models, ... "

Canon sells most.
Canon knows best. 
Canon spends multi-millions on market research.
Canon offers about a dozen different "Rebel Kiss" DSLRs in parallel.

Smart Canon!
or not? 

LOL.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 24, 2019)

Even before the shock of Lehman Brothers, when we were posting positive results, we started
preparation to transform our business portfolio recognizing its necessity, with the anticipation of
possible market maturity of our core businesses. As a first step, we started acquiring industrial
equipment companies from 2005. Later, we sequentially added acquisitions in areas such as
commercial printing and network cameras. And in 2016, we ushered in Medical. As a result, we now
have four new businesses.

In general, each of the new businesses is growing, and this year’s total new business sales ratio
to our company’s overall sales is expected to increase to 25%, whereas it was only 9% in 2015. The
transformation of the business portfolio is progressing as we planned aligned with our mid-term
direction. As a result, our company has changed itself from a traditional camera and office
equipment oriented company to one that now has new business spheres.

As for existing businesses such as cameras, we expect the market contraction to continue for
another two to three years, due to the rise of the smartphones. That said, there is a portion of
the market that will certainly remain, in particular segments serving the needs of professionals
and advanced amateurs. Therefore, in order to defend our top market share position, we will sustain
our maximum business efforts. At the same time, we are taking measures to shift our business focus
toward B2B, expanding our business sphere to automotive and industry use.

This year, environmental changing factors such as the global economic slowdown triggered by trade
friction between the U.S. and China and faster than expected camera market contractions, are
impacting our results, temporarily stalling our business performance.
That said, the new businesses as a whole are growing steadily realizing business portfolio
transformation as we have planned. Thus, we will further accelerate and try to link to recovery
from next year on.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 24, 2019)

Don't expect a lot of APS-C DSLR's, they are not selling. That is probably why there will be no 7D MK III, it would lose a ton of money. Canon is pushing Mirrorless, and Full Frame. 

Mirrorless cameras, known for being small and lightweight, are increasing their presence in the 
market. Amid this situation, *we will steadily shift our focus from DSLR to mirrorless cameras* with 
the aim of maintaining our overwhelming competitiveness, which we have built upon DSLRs.


In the first quarter as well, we grew our unit sales of mirrorless cameras at a pace far exceeding 
the overall market, thanks to such new products as the EOS M50 and EOS R. Additionally, at the end 
of the quarter, we further enhanced our lineup, with the launch of the EOS RP, a smaller and 
lighter mirrorless camera equipped with a full-frame sensor and the same new mount found on the EOS 
R. Additionally, we plan to release six new models of RF lenses within the year. Users have not 
only praised the performance of these bodies and lenses, but also expressed their high expectations 
for the R system overall having felt our sense of urgency in strengthening our lineup over a short 
period of time. We will work to maintain sales growth of the EOS RP, which got off to a flying 
start, while also successively launching new RF lenses as we work to further stimulate sales of our 
strengthened mirrorless lineup.
From a profit perspective, in the *full-frame sensor category where particularly high growth 
continues,* even among mirrorless models, we will work to improve our product mix, actively 
expanding sales of both R System products. Additionally, for lenses with high profitability, we 
will not only promote sales of RF lenses, but also continue to promote the appeal of our broad 
range of EF lenses. Furthermore, we will work to expand automation initiatives not only to other 
products, but also other processes, raising our cost competitiveness and linking this to a recovery 
in profitability.


----------



## deletemyaccount (Apr 24, 2019)

I'm smelling even sooner abandonment of Canon's DSLR line from this recent financial report/projection. They continue to suggest the supporting of the EF mount but that doesn't smell any better. I have a good number of Canon EF & DSLR's in my possession. This inevitably will decide on a new direction.


----------



## amorse (Apr 24, 2019)

Well, I guess that explains the suggestion that Canon may eventually release an even cheaper model than the RP. If FF bodies are selling, lowering the bar for entry will make a big difference. I can't help but imagine that they need to really prioritize development of low-cost RF lenses to match up with their low-cost models.

It'll be very interesting to see how this year plays out.


----------



## Ale_F (Apr 24, 2019)

My 50c on APS-C: I think the market of 4000D, 2000D, 250D, 800D, 80D and 7D2 is too segmented and now outdated. When I started, the entry solution was the 350D. Back to the past:
MILC world: APSC and FF is the future, all segment, all models
DSLR: 
APS-C: 3 models like 850D, 90D and 7D3.
Full frame: I imagine 5D5 and 1dx3, no others.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 24, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> "... accelerated market contraction for DSLRs, in particular, entry-level models, ... "
> 
> Canon sells most.
> Canon knows best.
> ...


Ignoring your facetiousness, yes...smart Canon. The market is changing more than previously, and Canon has adjusted their strategy to match.


----------



## ethanz (Apr 24, 2019)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Even before the shock of Lehman Brothers, when we were posting positive results, we started
> preparation to transform our business portfolio recognizing its necessity, with the anticipation of
> possible market maturity of our core businesses. As a first step, we started acquiring industrial
> 
> ...



Is that from Canon's financial results? If so, that is quite the statement. They were anticipating it for for 12 years.


----------



## Kit. (Apr 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Is that from Canon's financial results?


Yes.


----------



## shawn (Apr 24, 2019)

My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.


----------



## amorse (Apr 24, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.


Would that be enough though? I don't think cell phones maintain an advantage just because they're connected to social media and the internet, they've got an advantage because nearly every person has one on them all the time, and people fiercely resist giving them up. You could argue that many Canon models already have the power to share on social media though maybe not as directly as some would like. For me, I've frequently connected my 5D IV to my phone via wifi, raw processed an image on the phone and had it on instagram within minutes after shooting. 

For applications like Instagram (where resolution is largely irrelevant), one could argue that a phone's camera isn't that far behind a full featured camera body for many users (obviously excluding professional photographers and amateur photography enthusiasts). If we think back to who was using point and shoot cameras, it was often people who just wanted some nice family and vacation photos - I'd argue that a reasonably good cell phone camera will be more than enough for that application, so why would those people bother with a full camera?

I'm honestly not sure what Canon could do to increase competitiveness with cell phones, other than playing up the benefits a larger sensor brings which is having physics on your side, though obviously only a portion of the camera buying population would even notice the difference, hence the expectation that new Camera buyers will move up market. For instance, I really don't think many people could tell the difference on Instagram between the same image shot with a 4000D with its kit lens in perfect light versus a dual (or more) lens cell phone. As cell phones continue to use software and computational photography to mimic the results a larger sensor can bring, I think you'll see even more potential low-end camera buyers just rely on their cell phone - not everyone can tell the difference in the end result anyway.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 24, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.


What makes you think they haven’t tried? It’s not just portability, it’s also carrying a second device that duplicates just one function of a device you are already carrying.


----------



## ethanz (Apr 24, 2019)

What if Canon made cell phone image sensors?


----------



## woodman411 (Apr 24, 2019)

amorse said:


> Would that be enough though? I don't think cell phones maintain an advantage just because they're connected to social media and the internet, they've got an advantage because nearly every person has one on them all the time, and people fiercely resist giving them up. You could argue that many Canon models already have the power to share on social media though maybe not as directly as some would like. For me, I've frequently connected my 5D IV to my phone via wifi, raw processed an image on the phone and had it on instagram within minutes after shooting.
> 
> For applications like Instagram (where resolution is largely irrelevant), one could argue that a phone's camera isn't that far behind a full featured camera body for many users (obviously excluding professional photographers and amateur photography enthusiasts). If we think back to who was using point and shoot cameras, it was often people who just wanted some nice family and vacation photos - I'd argue that a reasonably good cell phone camera will be more than enough for that application, so why would those people bother with a full camera?
> 
> I'm honestly not sure what Canon could do to increase competitiveness with cell phones, other than playing up the benefits a larger sensor brings which is having physics on your side, though obviously only a portion of the camera buying population would even notice the difference, hence the expectation that new Camera buyers will move up market. For instance, I really don't think many people could tell the difference on Instagram between the same image shot with a 4000D with its kit lens in perfect light versus a dual (or more) lens cell phone. As cell phones continue to use software and computational photography to mimic the results a larger sensor can bring, I think you'll see even more potential low-end camera buyers just rely on their cell phone - not everyone can tell the difference in the end result anyway.



Agree, hopefully Canon can maintain the physics advantage with their larger sensors, but maybe they'll have to eventually partner with a mobile maker to increase their computational photography abilities - Samsung or Huawei come to mind, someone big enough to really help. I'm guessing if Canon partnered earlier, they would already have a well implemented panoramic mode, better object detection (recognizing pets for example), or how about detecting multiple faces and automatically selecting the widest aperture to get all faces in focus? Anyway, the possibilities are endless, but again, Canon may need a partner to accelerate the computational side.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 24, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.


Portability, included with contract for free (in many cases), fits in back pocket, etc.

Market contraction IS an unavoidable consequence of cell phone cameras. Want a camera to send to Instagram on the fly? Then the camera needs a phone number. But then, people are still carrying the phone.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> What if Canon made cell phone image sensors?


They'd have to drop three letters from their name, and add two others.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.



This has been a problem for years: 



 (2015 presentation)

Unfortunately, all the camera manufacturers stuck their heads in the sand (or perhaps in some part of their anatomy). It might have been impossible to save the market, but they didn't even try. Now it is too late to retain the consumer market. 

Even worse, their clunky implementation of WiFi has done a real disservice to their professional base. Instead of helping photojournalists compete with reporters armed with cell phones and iPads, they just left them to struggle until most photojournalists lost their jobs. Wedding photographers will see their market continue to shrink as cell phones become better and better and price-conscious couples decide a photographer is an expense they can do without. 

People complain on this forum that companies don't care enough about esoteric concerns like dynamic range, but the reality is they should have been spending less time on the things that forum dwellers consider important, and more time on making cameras easier to use and to share images.


----------



## amorse (Apr 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> What if Canon made cell phone image sensors?


They could, but that may be a big hill to climb. Sony is all over that - I saw an article claiming that they made 40% of all cell phone camera modules back in 2014. I half expect that Sony's investment into sensor technology was done with cellphones and other applications being the primary target, and this is what has enabled their development in sensor technology for the ILC market. 

This kind of diversification is not dissimilar to what Canon is doing - they invested in other imaging branches like medical and security and I think they mentioned a focus on cameras for vehicles as well. I think it is becoming mandatory (in some regions) that all new vehicles come with a back up camera, so there will certainly be market for those sensors into the future. As photographers it's really easy to forget that the imaging business is so much larger than ILCs.

Really, it seems like outside of ILC imaging businesses Canon has targeted the high-end/high-value/low-volume segment while Sony has targeted the low-end/high-volume segment. We'll see if they stay the course, but hey, ya never know!


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2019)

ethanz said:


> What if Canon made cell phone image sensors?





amorse said:


> They could, but that may be a big hill to climb. Sony is all over that ...



I believe Canon is instead concentrating on the next big demand for imaging sensors (rather than the last one) – medical imaging, imaging sensors for vehicles and security and surveillance. A lot of the cutting-edge imaging innovations that they have announced in recent years (such as extremely low-light imaging) has been targeted to these markets.


----------



## amorse (Apr 24, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I believe Canon is instead concentrating on the next big demand for imaging sensors (rather than the last one) – medical imaging, imaging sensors for vehicles and security and surveillance. A lot of the cutting-edge imaging innovations that they have announced in recent years (such as extremely low-light imaging) has been targeted to these markets.


Agreed - I've heard/read the same thing. 

I find it really interesting that Sony has focused much of their efforts (recently) on the high-end/low volume market for ILCs and the low-end/high volume market for everything else while Canon seems to have done the opposite, focusing really on (or at least earning the bulk of their ILC revenue from) the low-end/high volume market for ILCs and the high-end/low volume market for everything else. Interesting to see how each company approaches the various markets. That's a significant over-generalization to be fair. 

Now that Canon is stating that the lower-end market is drying up and FF sensors with higher margins are making more sense, I wonder how that translates to Canon's approach to servicing the ILC market. Maybe less segmentation in the APS-C and P/S range, and more models to service more niches in the FF range?


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Apr 24, 2019)

amorse said:


> Agreed - I've heard/read the same thing.
> 
> I find it really interesting that Sony has focused much of their efforts (recently) on the high-end/low volume market for ILCs and the low-end/high volume market for everything else while Canon seems to have done the opposite, focusing really on (or at least earning the bulk of their ILC revenue from) the low-end/high volume market for ILCs and the high-end/low volume market for everything else. Interesting to see how each company approaches the various markets. That's a significant over-generalization to be fair.
> 
> Now that Canon is stating that the lower-end market is drying up and FF sensors with higher margins are making more sense, I wonder how that translates to Canon's approach to servicing the ILC market. Maybe less segmentation in the APS-C and P/S range, and more models to service more niches in the FF range?



The reason Sony doesn't focus on the low end market is because their Semiconductor unit owns it(cell phone cameras), Canon owns the mid-range market. Sony's cell phone camera sensor market share is what fuel's their semiconductor R&D. It wouldn't surprise me if Sony sells the unit someday to someone like Samsung.


----------



## amorse (Apr 24, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> The reason Sony doesn't focus on the low end market is because their Semiconductor unit owns it(cell phone cameras), Canon owns the mid-range market. Sony's cell phone camera sensor market share is what fuel's their semiconductor R&D. It wouldn't surprise me if Sony sells the unit someday to someone like Samsung.


Do you think they'd sell the semiconductor business? I had thought Sony openly stated they planned to focus on their entertainment and imaging businesses as core to their success. On the other half of that equation, their Playstation business has been tremendously successful (their most profitable business), but with Google openly announcing establishment of Stadia game streaming service, and Apple reportedly developing their own streaming service, Sony's cash cow in Playstation could be challenged, and using their imaging business to diversify their holdings may be a serious asset they don't want to lose at this juncture. 

Who knows though - I guess the reality is that there are so many external factors influencing the decisions these companies make that it can really obscure predictions on what products do and do not make financial sense to build/market.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 24, 2019)

Cell phone photography offers instant gratification. From ease of use to sharing, it can't be beat. With so many DSLR "photographers" today, it's hard to compete at an economical level. When a wedding album consists of a bunch of cell phone photos that the guests shared with you, that's a sign of the times. Media outlets dumping staff photographers was a major turning point in the print world. TV stations are doing "Live Shoots" with cell phones! 
The DSLR has to be more innovative and packed with features to stay competitive. As far as marketing goes, there needs to be a different approach that will leave you with the impression that the cell phone camera is only a "toy". Right now, the majority or really great photos sit on a hard drive or in social media.
**Solutions
-More innovative features built in.*
-*New marketing approach*. I can think of many methods on this subject. Since cell phone photos are limited in quality and cropping, focus on the strengths of the "real camera". For instance- a baseball game where the son or daughter makes a big play. The parent is using a cell phone but next to them is a person with a Canon camera. While the parent is overjoyed with the play, the cell phone photo can't reproduce the moment with enough quality to make out the child or play. The parent next to them shows a great capture on their Canon DSLR- not a top of the line DSLR but one that is affordable with a fairly good lens.(not a "L")
-*Institute a monthly contest* that is free to enter with a lot of great prizes.(no cell phone photos allowed, Canon only) It's important to have enough categories and prizes that people will feel they have a chance of winning something.
-*Develop an online Canon Magazine* that is dedicated to the contest, camera techniques, an interviews.
Use the winner's photos in advertising. These select photos would involve separate rights and a monetary awards.
Work with media and other print outlets to develop a simple method to license contest entries with a set standard of rights and fees.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Apr 24, 2019)

The smartphones will win the majority of the market but camera manufacturers have some of the guilt:

Compact cameras have no better image quality than smartphones (except expensive premium compacts) and almost always worst jpeg's. Connectivity is much worse. Improve out of camera image quality, video quality, connectivity, add more direct controls and better lenses. 

Improve entry level DSLR and mirrorless cameras. Again, pictures out of a ILC often look worse than from a cellphone. Pictures are lifeless, muted, details are washed, etc. Beginners often have problems with autofocus because of the shallow DOF of big sensors. Sony is going in the right direction here with the real time AF. Overall entry level ILC experience is poor. Improve that, make them feel more premium.


----------



## canonnews (Apr 24, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones???



the only way Canon can compete with smartphones is to make a smartphone.

there's no way an ILC can compete in the same space as a smartphone, even if you give it the ability to have a SIM slot.

Not to mention in a lot of cases, you get subsidized on the price of the phone especially if you don't pick the latest and greatest.

Making it easier to share images helps, but it's not going to move it that much. People carry a smartphone around with them all the time. Why? because they need a phone. An actual phone for calls and messages. At the same time, it connects via the Internet to social media.
And it can take good enough pictures for messages and social media.

That's the majority of users of said cameras. they will never pick up an ILC no matter how good it is. Why? because everyone needs a phone / messaging anyways. They'll never print their images, they'll show their friends the images on their phones or share their social media posts with friends.

The only way camera companies could get around that is to basically convert their cameras into full fledged andriod devices that can be phones as well. and even then, you can't put it into your pocket and carry it around.

no matter which way you slice or dice it, it's just not going to work.


----------



## josephandrews222 (Apr 25, 2019)

...from the piece:

"Going forward, we will continue our efforts to expand sales of premium G-series models in our effort to link this to a recovery in profitability."

So Canon's solution to recovering profitability is to sell smallish cameras (including the G7X-whatever and the G9X-whatever, both of which I remain interested in) at relatively high prices.

Hey, it works for Apple.


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> "... accelerated market contraction for DSLRs, in particular, entry-level models, ... "
> 
> Canon sells most.
> Canon knows best.
> ...



Yeah, this: 

_"Users have not only praised the performance of these bodies and lenses but also expressed their high expectations for the R system overall having felt our sense of urgency in strengthening our lineup over a short period of time."_

As I've stated before, sense of urgency = playing catch up on FF MILC. **

**Cue forum fireworks and backlash amongst those who say Canon meant to feel this sense of urgency all along because of their infallible market research


----------



## mover (Apr 25, 2019)

This is so typical. A bunch of rocket scientists and corporate men that think they know everything and they have ZERO COMMON SENSE. I am a mover and I have moved them all. COMMON SENSE is a very rare thing among these people. Do they even have a lady at the top? If you were to look at who takes the most pictures in the world you would soon see it is girls taking selfies. Do they even give you an option to pick a different color for a camera. This is like selling cars only in black and an occasional white. Wow! They should have used there Brand recognition and teamed up with a phone manufacture. The only thing that has saved Canon is their competition is just as brain dead as them. Sony making a camera that feels like crap with a touch screen that does what? Something a cell phone did better over 10 years ago. Don't get me started on their menu system. Nikon charges the same price for their Z7 as the superior D850 and Nikon's guys are probably the most arrogant of the bunch. I am not saying Canon is *******. With their competition it is pretty hard not to be number one. Sometimes though it is just comical. No matter what they do they will not catch the cell phone market. That boat has sailed and Apple and Samsung are facing the same problem Canon is, THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURNS! Maybe I am wrong. Who cares, I am just an old man that did not even graduate high school, but as a mover I never have a problem carrying around all those heavy cameras and lenses I own.


----------



## Pape (Apr 25, 2019)

canonnews said:


> the only way Canon can compete with smartphones is to make a smartphone.
> 
> there's no way an ILC can compete in the same space as a smartphone, even if you give it the ability to have a SIM slot.
> 
> ...


I think you can make ILC flat enoug to fit pocket. But you need remove lcd screen from camera back and put it on top. Sensor needs to be as back as possible ,where lcd is now . and grip need to be foldable to side. Good pancake lens as basic lens , 1cm lens 2 cm flange distance and half cent for sensor and back wall =3,5cm
uh forgot RF objectives are 2cm longer so 5,5cm but maybe DO lens could shave 1cm away ?


----------



## snappy604 (Apr 25, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> Agree, hopefully Canon can maintain the physics advantage with their larger sensors, but maybe they'll have to eventually partner with a mobile maker to increase their computational photography abilities - Samsung or Huawei come to mind, someone big enough to really help. I'm guessing if Canon partnered earlier, they would already have a well implemented panoramic mode, better object detection (recognizing pets for example), or how about detecting multiple faces and automatically selecting the widest aperture to get all faces in focus? Anyway, the possibilities are endless, but again, Canon may need a partner to accelerate the computational side.



I've thought the same for a long time too. They make great lenses, they make good sensors... but cell phones can get pretty decent results with tiny sensors on photos and video due to some amazing things they achieve with computational horsepower and inter-connectivity. Instead of letting phones cannibalize their market, they should augment their capabilities by take lessons and ideas from the phone market. Stop micro-segmenting, get fewer, cleaner lines with more capabilities that make you shine apart from phones.


----------



## bokehmon22 (Apr 25, 2019)

mover said:


> This is so typical. A bunch of rocket scientists and corporate men that think they know everything and they have ZERO COMMON SENSE. I am a mover and I have moved them all. COMMON SENSE is a very rare thing among these people. Do they even have a lady at the top? If you were to look at who takes the most pictures in the world you would soon see it is girls taking selfies. Do they even give you an option to pick a different color for a camera. This is like selling cars only in black and an occasional white. Wow! They should have used there Brand recognition and teamed up with a phone manufacture. The only thing that has saved Canon is their competition is just as brain dead as them. Sony making a camera that feels like crap with a touch screen that does what? Something a cell phone did better over 10 years ago. Don't get me started on their menu system. Nikon charges the same price for their Z7 as the superior D850 and Nikon's guys are probably the most arrogant of the bunch. I am not saying Canon is *******. With their competition it is pretty hard not to be number one. Sometimes though it is just comical. No matter what they do they will not catch the cell phone market. That boat has sailed and Apple and Samsung are facing the same problem Canon is, THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURNS! Maybe I am wrong. Who cares, I am just an old man that did not even graduate high school, but as a mover I never have a problem carrying around all those heavy cameras and lenses I own.



Not all their competition is brain dead. Sony may not to make a well rounded great camera with Canon intangibles but I suspect their next generation will address those issues. They also have no issues selling A7III despite their flaws. 

Panasonic S1 is already what I wanted Canon 5DV FF mirrorless - 5.76 million dot EVF, IBIS, dual card slot, ergonomic, weather sealing, 4K60, fully touch screen LCD, good color, and competitive sensor with dynamic range and ISO performance for clean 12,800 ISO all for same price as EOS R. 

They had Panasonic S1 for $2250 with free battery and grip. I couldn't believe I could sell my Canon 5DIV for $2000. That's one good thing about Canon brand recognition. Good resale value.

Alot of people here mention this will force Canon to be aggressive but development take time to mature. Competitors aren't sitting still either and more and more customers already switch to a different system that provide good value.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> .... smart Canon. The market is changing more than previously, and Canon has adjusted their strategy to match.



adjusted strategy so timely, decisively and successfully ... that in "camera" they now are -47% vs. their own projection for 2019 and expect -14.5% revenues FY 2019 vs. previous year. Not to mention effects this will have on profitabilty. 

Additional hint: potential market for ever more expensive FF cameras, lenses and "premium" G-compacts is limited. Very limited. Most potential buyers are more budget-limited and budget-minded, luckily. And intelligent enough to also not waste money on junk like EOS 4000 or Rebel/Kiss DSLRs any longer, when they can get better functionality in smaller packages as well. 

SMART, Canon!


----------



## Kit. (Apr 25, 2019)

josephandrews222 said:


> ...from the piece:
> 
> "Going forward, we will continue our efforts to expand sales of premium G-series models in our effort to link this to a recovery in profitability."
> 
> ...


If what they are doing with G7X III can be called "efforts to expand sales", it must be a groundbreaking camera.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 25, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> _"Users have not only praised the performance of these bodies and lenses but also expressed their high expectations for the R system overall having felt our sense of urgency in strengthening our lineup over a short period of time."_
> 
> As I've stated before, sense of urgency = playing catch up on FF MILC. **


Yeah, I’ll see your biased overinterpretation and raise you an opposite biased interpretation. 

_We apologize to the DSLR buyers who comprise the majority of our customers for releasing two FF MILCs, three RF lenses and announcing a bunch more. We’ll get back to launching DSLRs and EF lenses soon. 

_


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

Dedicated cameras cannot compete with cameraphones _in the same space_. true. but ... in addition to additional device/weight/expense all (!) camera makers allowed for massive disadvantages in ease of use and communication functionality in their cameras. only balanced by "better image quality" and "(more) zoom / focal length (range)"as sole advantage. and that advantage has eroded to the point that cameras with sensors smaller than APS-C dont offer much more, if at all. 

totally the camera makers own fault. now they are paying the price for sticking stubbornly with bulky DSLRs and communication-handicapped "unsmart" cameras. 

instead of focusing on FF and higher prices they would be well advised to turn all of their "consumer, prosumer, enthusiast" efforts onto "computational imaging" with compact devices sized like a (beefy) smartphone and a number of lens modules, without need for large optical lenses. along the lines of Light L16, only better and as well-communicating and intuitive to use as the very best smartphones.

if they don't, soon ! - then somebody else will.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> adjusted strategy so timely, decisively and successfully ... that in "camera" they now are -47% vs. their own projection for 2019 and expect -14.5% revenues FY 2019 vs. previous year. Not to mention effects this will have on profitabilty.
> 
> Additional hint: potential market for ever more expensive FF cameras, lenses and "premium" G-compacts is limited. Very limited. Most potential buyers are more budget-limited and budget-minded, luckily. And intelligent enough to also not waste money on junk like EOS 4000 or Rebel/Kiss DSLRs any longer, when they can get better functionality in smaller packages as well.
> 
> SMART, Canon!


The market is contracting, and global economies are hard to predict. I suspect you’ll see the same pattern in IR releases from other ILC manufacturers 

Hint: Come back when Canon has lost market share.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Apr 25, 2019)

Canon death is exaggerated. As is the death of photography to cell phones. Serious photographers will always want the best images they can get regardless of how they are shown, stored or commercially used. 
I took some shots with an iPhone X at my last portrait shoot using continuous lights instead of strobes and my trusty 5DS at its 100 ISO setting using a EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM and a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II. Its not until you pull shots into Lightroom or Photoshop and then start working on them you realise just how limited an iPhone X file is. They are fine straight off of the cell phone and loaded to Facebook or Instagram but take a file through the same process as a 5DS file in Lightroom and then Photoshop and things fall apart quickly. Compositionally your compromised whilst shooting with the device and whilst they don't do a half bad job in colour balance you dont get the flexibility from a 5DS raw file. 

Same is true for landscape or in my opinion any other form of photography. The advantages are always having a camera and instant upload to social media but in every other respect they are not a replacement for DSLRs or mirrorless full frame cameras.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> The market is contracting, and global economies are hard to predict. I suspect you’ll see the same pattern in IR releases from other ILC manufacturers
> Hint: Come back when Canon has lost market share.



Yes, also looking forward to seeing Nikon's numbers. If Canon's camera business is already down like this, Nikon must be truly and well-deservedly suffering, thanks to clinging even more to marginally iterated DSLRs and not offering any crop-sensor mirrorless system at all. oO

Meanwhile Canon's often-ridiculed EOS M line has definitely helped them noticeably - especially for _units sold_. ALso deservedly so, since EOS M - especially with M50 and today's lens lineup, now, many years after its start - offers precisely what vast majority of crop-system users are looking for:

best price/value, a.k.a. "most bang for limited bucks" - compared to FF gear and to competition (Sony, Fuji - haha)
less bulk
decent enough IQ
good functionality and usability
Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs. 

And had Canon launched their EOS RP at the time of and instead of the 6D MK. II and a sensibly-priced EOS R with sensor and performance like a 5D Mk. V along with a set of affordable and smallish RF lenses (e.g. 24-70/f/4 IS, plus a few f/1.8-2.0 primes] they would be in even better shape today.

But - apparently their multi-million market research was not as SMART as some simple COMMON SENSE.


----------



## Kit. (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs.
> 
> And had Canon launched their EOS RP at the time of and instead of the 6D MK. II and a sensibly-priced EOS R with sensor and performance like a 5D Mk. V along with a set of affordable and smallish RF lenses (e.g. 24-70/f/4 IS, plus a few f/1.8-2.0 primes] they would be in even better shape today.
> 
> But - apparently their multi-million market research was not as SMART as some simple COMMON SENSE.


I don't think it's called "common sense". I think it's called "wishful thinking".


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> I don't think it's called "common sense". I think it's called "wishful thinking".



nope. It was plain to see even years ago for anybody with common sense. All of the options I posted above would have been fully possible for Canon. Technically and financially. No major issues at all. Sony had already demonstrated well before, how to do it.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Apr 25, 2019)

Exactly. And that's one of the reasons why it's pointless to compete with smartphones in the 'connectivity' field. Connectivity and instant upload may help sports/photojournalists. 
But with cameras like 5DIV or 5DS, people mostly shoot raw for further postprocessing. And connectivity doesn't help much here. Although I'd be happy if I could upload actual full sized raws to my phone and edit them in LR mobile. But I highly doubt such a feature will help the decline of ILCs.



jeffa4444 said:


> Canon death is exaggerated. As is the death of photography to cell phones. Serious photographers will always want the best images they can get regardless of how they are shown, stored or commercially used.
> I took some shots with an iPhone X at my last portrait shoot using continuous lights instead of strobes and my trusty 5DS at its 100 ISO setting using a EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM and a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II. Its not until you pull shots into Lightroom or Photoshop and then start working on them you realise just how limited an iPhone X file is. They are fine straight off of the cell phone and loaded to Facebook or Instagram but take a file through the same process as a 5DS file in Lightroom and then Photoshop and things fall apart quickly. Compositionally your compromised whilst shooting with the device and whilst they don't do a half bad job in colour balance you dont get the flexibility from a 5DS raw file.
> 
> Same is true for landscape or in my opinion any other form of photography. The advantages are always having a camera and instant upload to social media but in every other respect they are not a replacement for DSLRs or mirrorless full frame cameras.


----------



## Kit. (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> nope. It was plain to see even years ago for anybody with common sense.


Actually, anybody with common sense should be skeptical about it right now.



xeppelin said:


> All of the options I posted above would have been fully possible for Canon. Technically and financially.


That wasn't your claim. Your claim was "they would be in even better shape today". Which is wishful thinking.



xeppelin said:


> No major issues at all.


You are not doing any business that involves shipping physical objects, aren't you?


----------



## preppyak (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today. But, they chose to hold back M and push umpteen iterations of slightly and artificially marketing-differentiated "rebel kisses" and xxD DSLRs.


The problem with this theory is that EF-M isnt compatible with RF. So, an M50 user who wants to upgrade is suddenly trapped with equipment whose value has dropped significantly since purchasing (down >20% since launch 1 year ago), and whose pathway to full-frame is actually cheaper to go to Sony if they want native lenses.

Sticking to their DSLR lineup is what kept a lot of users in the EF mount business, which kept their user base high enough to hope people transition to the R or RP. Its a declining market from there, but at least people see a cheaper upgrade path to an RP right now than an A7III.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

preppyak said:


> So, an M50 user who wants to upgrade is suddenly trapped with equipment whose value has dropped significantly since purchasing (down >20% since launch 1 year ago),



People with sufficient disposable income to realistically think about "upgrading to FF" can easily handle a "dramatic" loss of 20% on a "total investment" of 600 - 1000 USD [M50 + 1 or 2 lenses]. Total non issue in real life. When those folks "go FF", they just keep their EOS M system as small/light secondary system or they sell it or give it to their kids/friends.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 25, 2019)

I always find it interesting to read comments from users telling a large company how to run their business. They may be right, but why aren't they billionaires with their own companies?


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

Kit. said:


> You are not doing any business that involves shipping physical objects, aren't you?



nope. And if I did on a global scale, then - unlike SMART Canon - I would not use 3 different sub-brands/product designators for the same physical product [eg Rebel/Kiss/xxxD]. And I would put all communication functionality on modules that can be slotted into an industry standard card slot. Just those 2 simple, common sense measures would dramatically reduce number of SKUs, significantly reduce marketing expense, strengthen (sub-) brand recognition and value, make product & FCC certifications for different markets/regulations much simpler and faster and also make physical distribution, warehousing and any other logistics processes a lot easier and less costly. 

But, SMART Canon knows better. Right?


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I always find it interesting to read comments from users telling a large company how to run their business. They may be right, but why aren't they billionaires with their own companies?



Maybe because there are significant entry barriers to start-up a "REALLY RIGHT" imaging products company. Or because they are billionaires already, who knows? 

Or, more generically: you don't have to be a (good) cook youself to recognize whether a meal is good or not.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Canon is relying more heavily on the enthusiast market to maintain market sales as compact DSLRs (Rebels) and point and shoots decline in sales. However, it's the lower end of the product line (RP) that is making the money. No surprises here, just confirmation of what most of us already knew.


I think we are returning to times like those back when SLRs and ILC rangefinders defined a nuch smaller enthusiast's & pro market. It had grown unusually big with digital compacts and low level DSLRs when everybody went digital 10-15 years back. The classic point- and shoot-market has now turned into the smartphone market. Btw high-end smartphones deliver so good images that it's really getting harder to compete for the classic camera industry. I expect that we are going to see some more company fusions like the takeover of the Pentax camera division by Ricoh back in 2011.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> What makes you think they haven’t tried? It’s not just portability, it’s also carrying a second device that duplicates just one function of a device you are already carrying.


You nailed it. Only enthusiasts are happy to carry an extra camera besides their smartphone.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Don't expect a lot of APS-C DSLR's, they are not selling. That is probably why there will be no 7D MK III, it would lose a ton of money. Canon is pushing Mirrorless, and Full Frame.


Not sure about that, since the 7D is a high-end APS-C line and addresses enthusiasts anyway. I agree regarding the Rebel sort of mainstream market. Looking at those sales figures I expect Canon to replace cheap DSLRs by mirrorless cameras now very quickly. It is also a logical development from on the production side, since ML cameras can be made mechanically less complex than mirror slappers. In particular when electronic global shutters are good enough ML cameras can be quite simple: sensor, electronics, EVF and a body with all interfaces needed, no mirror, no mechanical shutter. Instead of including an electromechanical IBIS Canon could go for electronic IS like in better smartphones. Electronics is much cheaper to implement in a production line than high precision mechanical parts.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

My impression is that the Canon management acts with a wise mix of caution and risk in times of a shrinking camera market. The looming success of the RP, if it develops further like that, seems to indicate that they understand the market quite well.


----------



## Kit. (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> nope.


It shows:



xeppelin said:


> And if I did on a global scale, then - unlike SMART Canon - I would not use 3 different sub-brands/product designators for the same physical product [eg Rebel/Kiss/xxxD]. And I would put all communication functionality on modules that can be slotted into an industry standard card slot. Just those 2 simple, common sense measures would dramatically reduce number of SKUs, significantly reduce marketing expense, strengthen (sub-) brand recognition and value, make product & FCC certifications for different markets/regulations much simpler and faster and also make physical distribution, warehousing and any other logistics processes a lot easier and less costly.
> 
> But, SMART Canon knows better. Right?


Right.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> Agree, hopefully Canon can maintain the physics advantage with their larger sensors, but maybe they'll have to eventually partner with a mobile maker to increase their computational photography abilities - Samsung or Huawei come to mind, someone big enough to really help.


That's not so easy. Samsung has its own camera section which is declining and doesn't seem to profit from their Galaxy smartphones. Smartphone cameras are technically a very different thing. In fact, Leica now co-operates with Huawei, but I guess it is more a sort of allowing Huawei to use Leica as a luxury brand. The designs and the materials used for those small smartphone camera lenses is a completely different world than a classic Summilux or Noctilux lens.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 25, 2019)

Ale_F said:


> My 50c on APS-C: I think the market of 4000D, 2000D, 250D, 800D, 80D and 7D2 is too segmented and now outdated. When I started, the entry solution was the 350D. Back to the past:
> MILC world: APSC and FF is the future, all segment, all models
> DSLR:
> APS-C: 3 models like 850D, 90D and 7D3.
> Full frame: I imagine 5D5 and 1dx3, no others.


Maybe we will not see any 850D since the M50 seems to sell quite well, but otherwise I agree with your list. There is another hint that APS-C DSLRs are the first ones to fade away: the recent posts by CR about new lens patents filed by Canon does not show any new EF-S lenses (if I didn't miss one), only EF and of course RF lenses.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 25, 2019)

Why do people think that the addition of one format (EOS-R) automatically requires that another format must be phased out? A key fact highlighted at the beginning of this thread is that Canon currently hold 50% of the interchangeable lens camera market. As the overall market shrinks, there will likely be companies that drop out or consolidate their lines. That seems like an opportunity for the dominant player in the market to scoop up even more market share. 

Only Canon knows how many units they need to sell be keep a line profitable, but I suspect it is fewer than most people here think. APS-C and full frame DSLRs, Mirrorless APS-C and Full Frame -- four formats -- it's entirely possible Canon will keep all four going while they strive for 80-90% of the market.


----------



## espressino (Apr 25, 2019)

shawn said:


> My problem with Canon is they sit around and act like market contraction is an unavoidable consequence of cell phone use... Why don't they DO something to compete better with cell phones??? Why don't they make the cameras capable of posting to instagram? Is it really so far fetched? I mean, if they came up with something that let people do what they want to do, which is share pictures on the fly, then the only advantage a cell phone has would be the portability.



Until last year it was possible to post straight to facebook from wifi-enabled cameras such as the M100, 77D, G7XII but then facebook removed the api so that's no longer possible. But back then I often wondered why it wasn't possible to do the same on instagram.

Canon's wifi implementation in its cameras is still a tad better than fuji's but almost each of their entry- to mid-level camera has a different implementation of how you connect and images are shared. It's infuriating because it's unnecessarily complicated. Moreover: why can't their entry-level cameras which are aimed at smartpone shooters connect with their Zoemini printers? It's just a tiny detail but unlike the lenses, which are an amazing, coherent system, these ancillary capabilities don't seem very well-thought out. (Don't get me started on the fact that the Powershot G7 X ii had support for wifi connections on MacOS 10.11, then it stopped working with 10.12 and Canon has never bothered to update the software.)


----------



## espressino (Apr 25, 2019)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Meanwhile Canon's often-ridiculed EOS M line has definitely helped them noticeably - especially for _units sold_. ALso deservedly so, since EOS M - especially with M50 and today's lens lineup, now, many years after its start - offers precisely what vast majority of crop-system users are looking for:
> 
> best price/value, a.k.a. "most bang for limited bucks" - compared to FF gear and to competition (Sony, Fuji - haha)
> less bulk
> ...



I agree with half your point: the bang-for-buck APS-C argument works very strongly in Canon's favour. But I wonder if the APS-C DLSR and EF-S lens segment wouldn't be doing better if they had actually released new models in the last 20+ months (with the ensuing buzz). Like it or not but people like having a 'new' camera model; I guess they've been taught that by smartphones. The 2000/3000/4000D are cameras that actually damage the brand IMHO, especially when compared to the M100, which has often been on sale as a kit for 250-300€ in Germany, which is an amazing bang-for-buck-for-image-quality-for-touchscreenfeatures-millennials-care-about ratio.


----------



## espressino (Apr 25, 2019)

jeffa4444 said:


> Canon death is exaggerated. As is the death of photography to cell phones. Serious photographers will always want the best images they can get regardless of how they are shown, stored or commercially used.
> I took some shots with an iPhone X at my last portrait shoot using continuous lights instead of strobes and my trusty 5DS at its 100 ISO setting using a EF 24-70mm f2.8L II USM and a EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II. Its not until you pull shots into Lightroom or Photoshop and then start working on them you realise just how limited an iPhone X file is. They are fine straight off of the cell phone and loaded to Facebook or Instagram but take a file through the same process as a 5DS file in Lightroom and then Photoshop and things fall apart quickly. Compositionally your compromised whilst shooting with the device and whilst they don't do a half bad job in colour balance you dont get the flexibility from a 5DS raw file.
> 
> Same is true for landscape or in my opinion any other form of photography. The advantages are always having a camera and instant upload to social media but in every other respect they are not a replacement for DSLRs or mirrorless full frame cameras.



Exactly. And it is one of my pet peeves that people on this forum often keep jumping from one extreme to another: if you don't half a full-frame camera then you might as well just use a phone. There's plenty of space in-between. 
Smartphones are expensive and get obsolete a lot more quickly: people tire of that eventually. It's all anecdotal evidence but several of my friends who were never interested in photography, and don't know anything about the technical aspects of it, now look back at their smartphone photos from two years ago vs. those taken with their current aps-c camera and are astounded how crappy the former look in hindsight. And taken with a camera that came at a fraction of the price of a smartphone. (Unlucky for Canon, of course, they're going to hold on to that camera for a few more years, but phones are only ever improving incrementally as well, which is why apple too is looking for other ways to generate revenue). All I'm trying to say is that I think the industry appears right now way to resigned to this feeling of doom and gloom. Throw some aggressive marketing $$s at people and see what sticks. I'm convinced that there's a vast untapped potential of customers who just don't realise that cameras are so much better at taking photos, and that they want to do that too but just don't know it yet.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> Had Canon migrated their entire lower-mid range APS-C ILC offering from DSLRs [xxxxD, xxxD, xxD including 80D] to [better] EOS M and [somewhat stronger] EF-M lineup already earlier [e.g. instead of M2, M3], they'd be in better shape today.
> But - apparently their multi-million market research was not as SMART as some simple COMMON SENSE.


Really? You know this for a fact?? How would that have worked, exactly? Because the fact is that DSLRs remain more popular than MILCs. And since you mentioned the 80D, the year that camera was launched DSLRs were 73% of the ILC market. But you claim that Canon should have dropped 3/4 of the market in favor of the much smaller segment. 

Evidently simple COMMON SENSE is not very common, particularly in your post.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Because the fact is that DSLRs remain more popular than MILCs.



Well, let's see for how much longer this is going to "remain". To me it looks like a massive landslide is under way. 
http://cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201903_e.pdf
One category is above 100%, all others are (far) below. Check out the facts and numbers and draw a trendline. 


In Canon's own words:

"...accelerated market contraction for DSLRs, in particular entry-level models..."
"...we grew our unit sales of mirrorless cameras at a pace far exceeding the overall market..."
"...the level of camera inventory was high due to a slowdown in sales of mainly DSLRs.
Sounds to me, like they stayed in DSLRs for too long and are now sitting on piles of unsold "rebel kisses". SMART Canon.


----------



## dolina (Apr 25, 2019)

DSLR will never disappear... mirrorless is a joke...


----------



## unfocused (Apr 25, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> Well, let's see for how much longer this is going to "remain". To me it looks like a massive landslide is under way.
> http://cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201903_e.pdf
> One category is above 100%, all others are (far) below. Check out the facts and numbers and draw a trendline.
> 
> ...



Interesting. It does appear the worldwide shipments of mirrorless eclipsed slrs in the first three months of this year. That's a first as near as I can tell.
With Canon controlling 50% of the overall interchangeable lens camera market, one could assume that a large portion of that growth this year has come from Canon sales. 

SMART Canon.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 25, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Interesting. It does appear the worldwide shipments of mirrorless eclipsed slrs in the first three months of this year. That's a first as near as I can tell.



in value (yen) yes. 55.7 vs. 45.6 bn ¥

in units DSLRs are still in lead: 972 vs 755 k but gap is rapidly closing. 

in yen value, MILCs took the lead already back in september 2018


http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201809_e.pdf


and every month since then. 

ofc those stats would be even more interesting and telling, if FF and "crop" sensor numbers were shown separately. not to mention a breakdown by CIPA member = by company.


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 26, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Yeah, I’ll see your biased overinterpretation and raise you an opposite biased interpretation.
> 
> _We apologize to the DSLR buyers who comprise the majority of our customers for releasing two FF MILCs, three RF lenses and announcing a bunch more. We’ll get back to launching DSLRs and EF lenses soon.
> 
> _



At least you admit bias  

And that’s not a denial of playing catch up


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 26, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> At least you admit bias



well, here is Canon's bias after Q1/2019 in their own words:

"...we will steadily shift our focus from DSLR to mirrorless cameras..."


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 26, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Interesting. It does appear the worldwide shipments of mirrorless eclipsed slrs in the first three months of this year. That's a first as near as I can tell.
> With Canon controlling 50% of the overall interchangeable lens camera market, one could assume that a large portion of that growth this year has come from Canon sales.
> 
> SMART Canon.


Majority of ILCs sold remain DSLRs. The ILC market is changing...Canon is maintaining their market dominance. They’re not ‘late’ to mirrorless, they’re right on time. SMART Canon.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 26, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> nope. It was plain to see even years ago for anybody with common sense. All of the options I posted above would have been fully possible for Canon. Technically and financially. No major issues at all. Sony had already demonstrated well before, how to do it.


It is far easier to look back and call plays after the fact than to actually be a contributor to the team. Especially when one hasn't got any skin in the game.


----------



## mover (Apr 26, 2019)

I love all these statements on how SMART Canon is. I ask, compared to what? Compared to the rest of these camera companies. Ok maybe, but does that make them SMART? You could have three stooges and have one smarter than the others but does that make the one smart? I will admit I am happy we have rocket scientists, programmers and people who make great things for us but there are other kind of SMART people with COMMON SENSE who know how to make things easier and less complicated or better that get overridden by these IDIOT SAVANTS and the rest of us just shake our heads and say WTF were they thinking as we suffer and just have to laugh about it. Oh well, what do I know? I just move all the crap people buy.


----------



## justaCanonuser (Apr 26, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Only Canon knows how many units they need to sell be keep a line profitable, but I suspect it is fewer than most people here think. APS-C and full frame DSLRs, Mirrorless APS-C and Full Frame -- four formats -- it's entirely possible Canon will keep all four going while they strive for 80-90% of the market.


That's true. I think it is a bit like in the automobile industry: they use unified platforms as a base for different models. Regarding Canon one visible element is sensors: they use one type of sensor in different cameras in the APS-C and the FF segment. In the FF segment they currently have a greater variety of different sensors, but since those cameras are more expensive, it works economically. Same with the Digic processors etc.


----------



## xeppelin (Apr 26, 2019)

looking at Canon Q1 financials, an educated guess about how many cameras Canon needs to sell to still make a profit in "cameras" category would be possible. unfortunately published dara is not detailed enough to break it down further. 

not going to invest 5 minutes into the exercise though. iwill just wait for Q2 results and CIPA numbers. And Nikon financials, really curious to see those.


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 26, 2019)

Canon were late into the MILC market. They may have been in a more dominant position if they had moved in earlier. Sony certainly got a chance to get up an running.
I think they were caught out by their popularity (as from a photographic perspective they only bring marginal advantages (smaller size (not a big advantage given the size of the top end glass) and silent shutter). Being later into the market meant they have to go through the mistakes of earlier models or invent something completely new. They had most of the technology already and knew they were excellent lens makers. For the Canon lens designers it probably really rejuvenated their work as DSLR lens improvements had become incremental. They had a ready made bunch of loyal customers who are looking for something a little different or a little more like what Sony can offer.
It will be interesting where Canon go from here. I've no doubt on the lens they will continue to excel. It would be more the sensors which Canon might struggle in house to improve upon. They are taking their time with the professional mirrorless cameras. This is maybe because they want to make a great leap forward or they are having difficulty producing something worthy of a Canon professional mirrorless camera.


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 26, 2019)

xeppelin said:


> well, here is Canon's bias after Q1/2019 in their own words:
> 
> "...we will steadily shift our focus from DSLR to mirrorless cameras..."



Yes, I know  In other words, "very quickly."


----------



## canonnews (Apr 26, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> Canon were late into the MILC market.


Canon entered the mirrorless market in 2012.


----------



## martti (Apr 26, 2019)

Nobody from Canon has as yet called me for my advice.
The last time I looked in their business figures, they were beating the market.
There is absolutely no reason to believe that this would change.
They have markets in their sights for products we have no idea about.
Nikon will capsize first.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 26, 2019)

canonnews said:


> Canon entered the mirrorless market in 2012.


And today they lead that market segment, along with the DLSR segment and of course the overall ILC market. But still, some people petulantly refuse to let facts influence their opinions.


----------



## Etienne (Apr 26, 2019)

McDonalds sells the most hamburgers, but I ain't buying one.


----------



## Hector1970 (Apr 26, 2019)

canonnews said:


> Canon entered the mirrorless market in 2012.


They only dipped their toe into it.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 26, 2019)

Hector1970 said:


> They only dipped their toe into it.


Sure, and their toe was the #2 best-selling domestic MILC, behind only a 2-gen-old Sony NEX model. That was a pretty big toe. Even today, with two bodies and four lenses available compared to the DLSR lineup, that’s not even a whole foot dipped in. Just sayin’.


----------



## Kit. (Apr 26, 2019)

Etienne said:


> McDonalds sells the most hamburgers, but I ain't buying one.


Are you also a Burger King marketer?


----------



## LDS (Apr 29, 2019)

espressino said:


> acebook removed the api so that's no longer possible. But back then I often wondered why it wasn't possible to do the same on instagram.



The problem is exactly that - those companies have APIs they can change at will (and often anybody seen as a competitor is cut out without notice), and to use them you have usually to abide to their business model, and you know, what is Facebook business model, don't you?

It would become complex for Canon (or anybody) else to keep cameras updated with Facebook (or anybody else) whims. I would also not be a good promotion if three years old cameras start to lose such functionalities just because their software is no longer updated.


----------



## espressino (Apr 29, 2019)

LDS said:


> The problem is exactly that - those companies have APIs they can change at will (and often anybody seen as a competitor is cut out without notice), and to use them you have usually to abide to their business model, and you know, what is Facebook business model, don't you?
> 
> It would become complex for Canon (or anybody) else to keep cameras updated with Facebook (or anybody else) whims. I would also not be a good promotion if three years old cameras start to lose such functionalities just because their software is no longer updated.


Of course! You're absolutely right about that. And I'm actually glad Canon then removed the facebook icon from the menu. And whether it is a good idea to have always-connected cameras is another matter. I just wanted to point out that this functionality used to exist because people on this forum keep saying that camera makers couldn't provide sufficient social media connectivity because cameras have no sim card etc. etc.
By the same token it makes no sense not to provide intra-Canon connectability: why can't the Zoemini connect to an EOS M50 but needs exactly one of those devices from one of those phone makers who might drop their support for a compatible camera app anytime in the future.


----------



## Dphotos (May 2, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...


Just shows to me this company failed to listen to the market. The higher ups who make Canon camera decisions are clueless. Did they not see the shift to Sony and Fuji for the mirrorless? This reminds me of the executives at Kodak? They fail to understand what digital cameras would do. I hope Canon fired those higher up because it was them who create this large income loss. Canon simply needed to come out with a professional mirrorless camera that is full frame, shoots well in low light, can shoot a high number of RAW images in the silent mode, can shoot non compressed 4K with video, has two card slots and could use existing Canon glass. We are in year 2019 and they still have failed to manufacture a camera like that. A few years ago at the NAMM show I asked Canon when will them come out with a profession mirrorless camera. I recieved no answer. The sales reps at these shows are just clueless too.


----------



## Mikehit (May 3, 2019)

Dphotos said:


> Just shows to me this company failed to listen to the market. The higher ups who make Canon camera decisions are clueless. Did they not see the shift to Sony and Fuji for the mirrorless? This reminds me of the executives at Kodak? They fail to understand what digital cameras would do. I hope Canon fired those higher up because it was them who create this large income loss. Canon simply needed to come out with a professional mirrorless camera that is full frame, shoots well in low light, can shoot a high number of RAW images in the silent mode, can shoot non compressed 4K with video, has two card slots and could use existing Canon glass. We are in year 2019 and they still have failed to manufacture a camera like that. A few years ago at the NAMM show I asked Canon when will them come out with a profession mirrorless camera. I recieved no answer. The sales reps at these shows are just clueless too.



Another forum neophyte who demonstrates a lack of knowledge of product development and the camera market in particular. Canon vastly outsells Sony, and even beats them in mirrorless - all the Sony hoo-ha is about a very small market sector in FF mirrorless ILCs.
Have you asked why Sony cannot make a workable touch screen despite all their experience with mobile phones? Or why they are limited to stop-down focussing which some are saying limits the usefulness of their cameras for birds in flight or fast sports? Or a decent GUI? Or a decent after-sales support?
Canon has admitted their products are limited by their sensor technology and have moved to refocus (no pun intended!) on that aspect of their technology - but the reality is that those areas where SOny are advancing are increasingly at the margins of what most people use day-to-day.

What makes you think Canon does not focus will in low light? Canon can shoot non-compressed video in 4k:what makes you think they cannot? And what on earth do you mean by 


Dphotos said:


> Canon simply needed to come out with a professional mirrorless camera that...could use existing Canon glass.


Because they can.

Yes, Sony make excellent cameras but posts like yours exaggerate the impact of those differences.


----------



## Kit. (May 4, 2019)

Dphotos said:


> This reminds me of the executives at Kodak? They fail to understand what digital cameras would do.


I wonder who was the one who invented this BS about Kodak.


----------

