# Latest sales data shows Canon maintains big market share lead in Japan for the year



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 10, 2019)

> Sales numbers for cameras and lenses tend to be freely available in Japan, which is something lacking in the rest of the world, especially Europe and North America.
> BCNRetail has released its market share numbers for the 12 months between April 2018 through to March 2019.
> *Manufacturer market share leaderboard:*
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## tron (Jun 10, 2019)

Canon is *******!


----------



## criscokkat (Jun 10, 2019)

In the Japanese market especially, there is always an underlying consumer motivation for owning the 'hot new product'.

Fujifilm deserves lots of praise for the innovations and packaging of their cameras, they've really been doing well an their sales growth is certainly reaping the benefits. However I think a certain percentage of the -6.6 percent for Sony is the wave of consumers seeing the praise for Fujifilm for the majority of the year and buying a camera from them, and not from sony which was the previous 'It' camera manufacturer. However this sales data ended before the firmware really hit for continuous eye focus and before the newer a6400. These numbers are the overall market, which is still 60-70% cameras under $1000. Obviously Nikon is the hardest hit in this market, especially since they have less of a presence at the low end.


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 10, 2019)

I hope I'm not the only one to shed a bitter tear for Wonderful Sony


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 10, 2019)

Obviously people don't understand spec sheets.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 10, 2019)

Wow, quite a hit for Nikon! I’m a canon guy obvs but I do like Nikon stuff.


----------



## tmroper (Jun 10, 2019)

Fuji also just announced they'll be making ACROS film again. They do seem to have their finger on the pulse of actual consumers. And if they market the film as something like "just like the ACROS setting in your XT-1," that would be a bold and unique strategy.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 10, 2019)

Agreed about Nikon. They make some fine cameras and lenses. We need them to provide competition for Canon .


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 10, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Agreed about Nikon. They make some fine cameras and lenses. We need them to provide competition for Canon .



That is the position Sony is in now.
Nikon shot themselves in the foot when AF came of age and refused to give up on the old antiquated mount and just kept trying to patch things on to it. They have never recovered from that big mistake. 
Canon with the RF mount kept all the features of the EF so owners don't get screwed where the Nikon Z mount leaves a lot of the dozen different F mount variants in the cold except for the latest few.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 10, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> I hope I'm not the only one to shed a bitter tear for Wonderful Sony


I have a hard time separating Sony the company from the Sony trolls who infest this site. I admit I take some delight in bad news for Sony simply because the Sony trolls are so annoying and irrational. Logically, I actually appreciate any company that pushes Canon to be more competitive.


----------



## BillB (Jun 10, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I have a hard time separating Sony the company from the Sony trolls who infest this site. I admit I take some delight in bad news for Sony simply because the Sony trolls are so annoying and irrational. Logically, I actually appreciate any company that pushes Canon to be more competitive.


There is the issue of the extent to which Sony is supporting the trolling one way or another.


----------



## EduPortas (Jun 10, 2019)

These stats are irrelevant. It just shows general tendency of sales.

The truth is camera companies have been pushing their products upmarket
so as to get the biggest chunk of profit _out of each individual sale_.

This has been going on for years and has been well documented,
at least in Nikon's case, by Thom Hogan and interviews of Nikon's execs published at The Imaging Resource.

To follow their analogy, more fish are living in the same pond,
so each sale counts much more for the company's bottom line than what it did 10 years ago
during the DSLR boom. The pond has gotten smaller, so they are stuffing each camera model
with every posible feature to hit that maximum price range within their calculations.

Example: Nikon D500 and that $2,000 initial price release.

Market share shows little in that respect.


----------



## melgross (Jun 10, 2019)

Don’t forget that when you sell tiny numbers, a big increase in percentage much easier than when you sell huge numbers. So Congrats to Fuji for increased sales, but they’re still way behind.

Canon ended the year there at about even. Not bad for a declining market. Major concern for Olympus and Nikon though. Can they reverse those drops?


----------



## unfocused (Jun 10, 2019)

I don't follow Olympus, but at a glance it looks like they might be the most at risk. Why? They start with a small share of the market like Fuji, but while Fuji is gaining ground in their niche, Olympus seems to be losing significant ground. Granted, the smaller share of the market you have, the more a drop in sales will be be magnified in your percentages. 

There was a recent thread about a photographer who was dumped from the Canon Explorers program and went to Olympus. I wonder if Olympus is trying to carve out a niche among aging bird and wildlife photographers who are looking for an alternative to big, heavy full frame lenses and cameras. It might be a good strategy, but on the other hand, a $3,000 4/3rds camera is probably a difficult sell unless it's image quality is nothing short of miraculous.


----------



## melgross (Jun 10, 2019)

And, of course, nothing about that sad case, Pentax. For a while, there was an expectation, that after Hoys sold most of what they were to Ricoh, there would be a resurgence. But Ricoh seems not to care, or are living in a fantasy world. In a recent interview, they said that the believed that after a flirtation with mirrorless, some would come back to DSLRs, and so they were sticking with that.


----------



## criscokkat (Jun 10, 2019)

melgross said:


> And, of course, nothing about that sad case, Pentax. For a while, there was an expectation, that after Hoys sold most of what they were to Ricoh, there would be a resurgence. But Ricoh seems not to care, or are living in a fantasy world. In a recent interview, they said that the believed that after a flirtation with mirrorless, some would come back to DSLRs, and so they were sticking with that.


i.e. why throw good money after bad? At this point whatever good name Pentax has had for decades has washed away for most people. Pentax had a shot at something like what Fujifilm is doing a decade ago, but it was floundered away. Hoya was only interested in the medical side of the business and by slowing down most development and laying off quite a large percentage of staff managed to not only kill the camera business before they could get a good price from selling it to another company, but managed to tank on the medical side by not having the money into it either. 

It was just another example of short term gains on all sides - only people to come out ahead were financial firms like Fidelity who pushed for the merger and made a quick buck. The chairman of Hoya was dismissed by the board just hours before the merger was pushed through because he wouldn't go along with buying Pentax because he thought they were overpriced and they wouldn't have the money to grow the company after.


----------



## Ale_F (Jun 10, 2019)

and the rest of the world?


----------



## woodman411 (Jun 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> ... However this sales data ended before the firmware really hit for continuous eye focus and before the newer a6400...



I know, next year Sony's really going to take down Canon when [fill in the blank] comes out. You're right, firmwares will fix everything, never mind the a6400 (and a9, etc), what about the unannounced but inevitable a7000 and a10 Warthog edition?! And if that doesn't work, then wait, just wait, for the a8000 and a11 (and don't forget the a9000 and a12)! Another thing, losing 1% market share in a year means they'll have nothing in 100 years! Canon is *******!


----------



## melgross (Jun 10, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> i.e. why throw good money after bad? At this point whatever good name Pentax has had for decades has washed away for most people. Pentax had a shot at something like what Fujifilm is doing a decade ago, but it was floundered away. Hoya was only interested in the medical side of the business and by slowing down most development and laying off quite a large percentage of staff managed to not only kill the camera business before they could get a good price from selling it to another company, but managed to tank on the medical side by not having the money into it either.
> 
> It was just another example of short term gains on all sides - only people to come out ahead were financial firms like Fidelity who pushed for the merger and made a quick buck. The chairman of Hoya was dismissed by the board just hours before the merger was pushed through because he wouldn't go along with buying Pentax because he thought they were overpriced and they wouldn't have the money to grow the company after.



Yeah, as I said, a sad case. It was a great company when Honeywell imported them, so long ago. But I also think that Olympus is killing itself.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jun 10, 2019)

It's a pity its not broken down more. It would be interesting to see figures for Full Frame only. Canon have a bewildering array of low priced APS-C cameras which volume wise sell very well. As a Canon user a well performing Nikon and Sony is good for me. Competition drives innovation


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 11, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> That is the position Sony is in now.
> Nikon shot themselves in the foot when AF came of age and refused to give up on the old antiquated mount and just kept trying to patch things on to it. They have never recovered from that big mistake.
> Canon with the RF mount kept all the features of the EF so owners don't get screwed where the Nikon Z mount leaves a lot of the dozen different F mount variants in the cold except for the latest few.



That's not at all what happened in Nikon. Shipment volume is down double digits for Nikon for the last two years, primarily because of the restructuring. It had nothing to do with mount and eye AF, obviously. This year's sales value for Nikon was off 28.5%, which would be after any possible mount issue.

Again, financial news of companies need financial sources. You can't make up facts about a company's fiscal health because you do or not like feature X of a camera.

The D850 bounce is done, but their logistics and chip issues, which were key in driving them into the red, are better but still in bad shape. Nikon's blamed the earthquake for too long, manufacturing and logistics operating at the level of a third rate company is killing them and completely inexcusable. The recall makes it clear that they STILL haven't been able to increase quality assurance to keep pace with lagging manufacturing ramping. 

Ushida and Umatate should have gone away, not up.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 11, 2019)

tmroper said:


> Fuji also just announced they'll be making ACROS film again. They do seem to have their finger on the pulse of actual consumers. And if they market the film as something like "just like the ACROS setting in your XT-1," that would be a bold and unique strategy.


Yes! Film is the next great thing! I just hope it is 8k film.


----------



## Jethro (Jun 11, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Yes! Film is the next great thing! I just hope it is 8k film.


Plus double film slots??


----------



## Jethro (Jun 11, 2019)

Ale_F said:


> and the rest of the world?


... is a pretty closely guarded commercial secret. People try to extrapolate from revenue changes (to the extent they announce them per operating division) but its more guesswork than anything else.


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 11, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> i.e. why throw good money after bad? At this point whatever good name Pentax has had for decades has washed away for most people. Pentax had a shot at something like what Fujifilm is doing a decade ago, but it was floundered away. Hoya was only interested in the medical side of the business and by slowing down most development and laying off quite a large percentage of staff managed to not only kill the camera business before they could get a good price from selling it to another company, but managed to tank on the medical side by not having the money into it either.
> 
> It was just another example of short term gains on all sides - only people to come out ahead were financial firms like Fidelity who pushed for the merger and made a quick buck. The chairman of Hoya was dismissed by the board just hours before the merger was pushed through because he wouldn't go along with buying Pentax because he thought they were overpriced and they wouldn't have the money to grow the company after.



???

I'm confused.

Sparx, who was a bigger shareholder than Fidelity, along with Fidelity, didn't push for the stock swap. Along with Watanuki they did NOT support the swap, but agreed to the tender offer, which of course Sparx and Fidelity did push for (it was a good deal). 

Urano pushed for the original deal, and resigned, but he worked for Pentax of course. 

The director of Hoya at the time was Hiroshi Suzuki. He's still the director. Suzuki wasn't against the deal, it was his 'baby'. He was hyped to bring 'western' style governance to the acquisition. The board didn't fire him, he's been at the post since 2003. Hoya had fantastic liquidity, with a very nice cash stockpile of over $100 billion yen at the time. No one anywhere thought they'd be short on cash after the deal.

???


----------



## Talys (Jun 11, 2019)

Clearly, Canon is ******* because everyone is buying Sony. 

Props to Fuji!


----------



## mpb001 (Jun 11, 2019)

Talys said:


> Clearly, Canon is ******* because everyone is buying Sony.
> 
> Props to Fuji!
> [/QUO


----------



## BurningPlatform (Jun 11, 2019)

BCN figures for May 2019 for all ILCs is here: https://www.bcnretail.com/research/ranking/monthly/list/contents_type=101. (Use Chrome to get Google translate to help, if your Japanese is a bit rusty).

Shows a bit more detailed picture of the camera market in Japan at the moment. As for Canon camera names, these are the same: 
T7i / EOS 800D / Kiss X9i
SL2 / EOS 200D / Kiss X9
M50 / EOS Kiss M


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 11, 2019)

BillB said:


> There is the issue of the extent to which Sony is supporting the trolling one way or another.


There is never any Nikon, Panasonic, Fuji, Sigma trolling on this forum, on Youtube etc....
Just a funny coincidence?


----------



## Del Paso (Jun 11, 2019)

unfocused said:


> I have a hard time separating Sony the company from the Sony trolls who infest this site. I admit I take some delight in bad news for Sony simply because the Sony trolls are so annoying and irrational. Logically, I actually appreciate any company that pushes Canon to be more competitive.


I totally agree as to the benefits of competition, no matter by whom.


----------



## venusFivePhotoStudio (Jun 11, 2019)

tron said:


> Canon is *******!


Let's wait until canon will release the new mirrorless 5D mark V...


----------



## twoheadedboy (Jun 11, 2019)

venusFivePhotoStudio said:


> Let's wait until canon will release the new mirrorless 5D mark V...



What are we waiting for? I'm taking great photos now.


----------



## Stuart (Jun 11, 2019)

melgross said:


> Yeah, as I said, a sad case. It was a great company when Honeywell imported them, so long ago. But I also think that Olympus is killing itself.


Olympus here in the UK is a true marketing animal, always sponsoring events, releasing neat features and promoting ambassadors, they talk an amazing game and seem to be the most hungry of all major manufacturers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 11, 2019)

Stuart said:


> Olympus here in the UK is a true marketing animal, always sponsoring events, releasing neat features and promoting ambassadors, they talk an amazing game and seem to be the most hungry of all major manufacturers.


Hungry, yes...one might think they are _starving_ for market share.


----------



## criscokkat (Jun 11, 2019)

woodman411 said:


> I know, next year Sony's really going to take down Canon when [fill in the blank] comes out. You're right, firmwares will fix everything, never mind the a6400 (and a9, etc), what about the unannounced but inevitable a7000 and a10 Warthog edition?! And if that doesn't work, then wait, just wait, for the a8000 and a11 (and don't forget the a9000 and a12)! Another thing, losing 1% market share in a year means they'll have nothing in 100 years! Canon is *******!


I never said anything about taking down Canon, I was talking about Sony's 6.6 percent drop. In this market year of april 2018-march 2019 Sony never released a new sub 1000 dollar camera. Before the a6400 was released, the last aps-c camera released was in 2016. The vast majority of sales in the metric we are discussing comes from sub $1000 cameras. In the Japanese market in particular this means less sales, because newest = best in many Japanese consumer's eyes. Their share of the market as tracked b this metric will probably improve next year simply because the a6400 will be tracked, presumably the a7000 as well, along with whatever full frame cameras (which sell in much smaller quantities). The firmware updates just keep the a7III from sliding as much month to month, which is remarkable because it's selling at a rate that is comparable with the sub 1k cameras even though it costs twice that.

Canon will be fine. Nikon and Olympus might not be, although both of them have a long tail. 20 years from now Nikon could very well be where Pentax is now, especially if they can't get a handle on their fabrication and logistics issues as others have pointed out.


----------



## criscokkat (Jun 11, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> ???
> 
> I'm confused.
> 
> ...


You are right, I had which company's board president resigned backwards, it was on the pentax side. But I know several years after the fact there was a series of articles from the son of the Hoya president that talked about that being the worst investment ever, and they did not have the capital to drive the investments that were needed to make the merger successful.


----------



## venusFivePhotoStudio (Jun 11, 2019)

twoheadedboy said:


> What are we waiting for? I'm taking great photos now.



We all are  the cameras ar very good already but we like to get new gear all the time. It's a disease )


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 11, 2019)

criscokkat said:


> I never said anything about taking down Canon, I was talking about Sony's 6.6 percent drop. In this market year of april 2018-march 2019 Sony never released a new sub 1000 dollar camera. Before the a6400 was released, the last aps-c camera released was in 2016. The vast majority of sales in the metric we are discussing comes from sub $1000 cameras. In the Japanese market in particular this means less sales, because newest = best in many Japanese consumer's eyes. Their share of the market as tracked b this metric will probably improve next year simply because the a6400 will be tracked, presumably the a7000 as well, along with whatever full frame cameras (which sell in much smaller quantities). The firmware updates just keep the a7III from sliding as much month to month, which is remarkable because it's selling at a rate that is comparable with the sub 1k cameras even though it costs twice that.
> 
> Canon will be fine. Nikon and Olympus might not be, although both of them have a long tail. 20 years from now Nikon could very well be where Pentax is now, especially if they can't get a handle on their fabrication and logistics issues as others have pointed out.




What do you think the odds are, of Nikon being in the position Pentax is now, in 20 years?

One moment I think 'no way, not Nikon'. Ten minutes later I think 'yeah, they're screwed'. lol

15 years ago they had the very same problems they still have today. A decade and a half later, a restructured company, and the only significant change is that they lost market share? 

It just baffles me that Nikon can't figure this out.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jun 11, 2019)

venusFivePhotoStudio said:


> We all are  the cameras ar very good already but we like to get new gear all the time. It's a disease )


It is. I am very sick.


----------



## mpb001 (Jun 11, 2019)

Sony can have the amateur market. Canon will continue to reign king over the advanced amateur and professional markets.


----------



## melgross (Jun 11, 2019)

Stuart said:


> Olympus here in the UK is a true marketing animal, always sponsoring events, releasing neat features and promoting ambassadors, they talk an amazing game and seem to be the most hungry of all major manufacturers.



It’s too bad then that the U.K. is such a small market, and smaller after Brexit. While the local importing arm can have some independence when it comes to marketing, they can’t do anything about the home office’s decision to continue to make cameras that very few people want, and that are increasingly making less and less sense.


----------



## melgross (Jun 11, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> That's not at all what happened in Nikon. Shipment volume is down double digits for Nikon for the last two years, primarily because of the restructuring. It had nothing to do with mount and eye AF, obviously. This year's sales value for Nikon was off 28.5%, which would be after any possible mount issue.
> 
> Again, financial news of companies need financial sources. You can't make up facts about a company's fiscal health because you do or not like feature X of a camera.
> 
> ...



It’s the other way around. They are restructuring because shipments and profits are down. They’ve stated in their quarterly reports that they will do whatever they have to, to cut costs in order to keep profits up. Companies don’t restructure for no reason. They do it because sales are forcing expenses up as a percentage of sales. So they have to drop those costs. Nikon has been cutting their service severely, for one thing.


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 12, 2019)

Side note: Sony finally figured out how to make a 600mm f/4. Saw that today.


----------



## BillB (Jun 12, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> What do you think the odds are, of Nikon being in the position Pentax is now, in 20 years?
> 
> One moment I think 'no way, not Nikon'. Ten minutes later I think 'yeah, they're screwed'. lol
> 
> ...


Studebacker, Nash, and some other car makers went under even though they made some good cars mostly because they couldn't make the cost side of the equation work. Not everybody is going to figure out a win on the cost side, especially if you need big bucks to develop and support new models to stay competitive.


----------



## stevelee (Jun 12, 2019)

BillB said:


> Studebacker, Nash, and some other car makers went under even though they made some good cars mostly because they couldn't make the cost side of the equation work. Not everybody is going to figure out a win on the cost side, especially if you need big bucks to develop and support new models to stay competitive.


Unfortunately, they quit making Studebakers about the time I got old enough to drive. A friend in college did have an Avanti. It looked really sharp at the time. I never rode in it, though. If a group of us went somewhere, I drove my (ancient even then) '54 Ford, or my friend had his grandmother's giant Buick at school instead of the Avanti, and he drove.

It would be sad for Nikon to go under, or even become a shadow of its former self. I barely could afford a Canon when I got my first SLR, and that at PX prices in the far east. It was a fine camera, but I would have aspired to a Nikon at the time. Before long I had accumulated a range of FL lenses, and my interest in getting a Nikon waned. I did have a Nikon enlarger lens eventually. 

It is about coincidental that I got into Canon DSLRs, though I guess residual good will was an unconscious factor. I went into a store to look at TVs and washers and dryers as I anticipated setting up my home where I moved when I retired. I saw a reasonable deal on a cheap Rebel with kit lens and a 75-300mm zoom, so I made the impulse purchase. That camera convinced me that I wanted a better Rebel, and I used the T3i for many years.

Still, I would be saddened if Nikon became irrelevant.


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 12, 2019)

melgross said:


> It’s the other way around. They are restructuring because shipments and profits are down. They’ve stated in their quarterly reports that they will do whatever they have to, to cut costs in order to keep profits up. Companies don’t restructure for no reason. They do it because sales are forcing expenses up as a percentage of sales. So they have to drop those costs. Nikon has been cutting their service severely, for one thing.


No it's not. The restructured for a number of reasons, which also saw them curtail their logistical reach for cameras. It's not a disjunct, as noted in the consolidated financials. 

It's part of their mid-term management plan regarding monodzukuri. They note the structure shift in imaging product business as they move money to support the new core profit pillars.

No offense intended, but did you actually read the consolidated financial results? 

They clearly denote cost cutting to supply chains.

???


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 12, 2019)

BillB said:


> Studebacker, Nash, and some other car makers went under even though they made some good cars mostly because they couldn't make the cost side of the equation work. Not everybody is going to figure out a win on the cost side, especially if you need big bucks to develop and support new models to stay competitive.



Yeah, I hear you, it's just a sad thought. I'm not a Nikon shooter, but thinking of them selling off their camera line and seeing it either being dismantled, or gutted by some Chinese firm is still a sad thought.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 12, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> That's not at all what happened in Nikon. Shipment volume is down double digits for Nikon for the last two years, primarily because of the restructuring. It had nothing to do with mount and eye AF, obviously. This year's sales value for Nikon was off 28.5%, which would be after any possible mount issue.
> 
> Again, financial news of companies need financial sources. You can't make up facts about a company's fiscal health because you do or not like feature X of a camera.
> 
> ...



OK.
My observation is Nikon screwed the pooch and clung to a system 30 years beyond it's shelf life. Canon innovated and were bashed for it until it was seen by pros as the future and taht's all she wrote. Nikon is still struggling. Yes the D850 is good but it was still the old F mount with all the limitations.


----------



## Expat Photographer (Jun 12, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> OK.
> My observation is Nikon screwed the pooch and clung to a system 30 years beyond it's shelf life. Canon innovated and were bashed for it until it was seen by pros as the future and taht's all she wrote. Nikon is still struggling. Yes the D850 is good but it was still the old F mount with all the limitations.



Actually, part of Nikon's problem was the other way around: they spent too much money developing mirrorless trying to keep pace with Sony.

Sony paid for its R&D by profits from semi-conductors, as was their plan considering they are the global giants in the sector, THEN re-align divisions so that each had to stand independently. (That ultimately semi-failed and they had to buy back their own division, deviating from their purely parent holding company strategy.)

Mitarai, the CEO of Canon, just loved this because he takes a very solid, predictable, and dependable approach to product development (and the company as a whole) and was well aware that Nikon would be forced to restructure. This was going to, and did, lead to Nikon having to make some major changes, including cuts to even how many cameras they could produce and move, i.e. supply chain optimization particularly of its imaging products business.

Ending fiscal year March 31, 2019, revenue decreased 1.2% yet operating profits increased 47%.

Their cameras didn't get 47% better, they didn't sell 47% more cameras, reviewers on YouTube didn't give Nikon 47% more positive reviews.

This change had absolutely nothing to do with products and/or features of products. This had nothing to do with things like the F mount.

What happens is that photographers go to websites, watch videos, try gear at stores/as rentals, then just start making up claims regarding a corporation's profitability and management based on whether or not product X has nice buttons or by liking or not liking the framerate 4k video is shot in. 

It's not reality though, far from it. 

Nikon's big problems? Bloated and inefficient logistics, lack of capital investments in overseas biomedical, not enough focus on FPD lithography, particularly large panels (which they turned into a 53.1% increase in operating profit last year!! sheesh).


----------



## Architect1776 (Jun 12, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> Actually, part of Nikon's problem was the other way around: they spent too much money developing mirrorless trying to keep pace with Sony.
> 
> Sony paid for its R&D by profits from semi-conductors, as was their plan considering they are the global giants in the sector, THEN re-align divisions so that each had to stand independently. (That ultimately semi-failed and they had to buy back their own division, deviating from their purely parent holding company strategy.)
> 
> ...



You seem to not understand their crash 30 years ago that they have NEVER recovered on. Mirrorless had nothing to do with it. All they have to do is bake a body and put a Sony sensor in it. Why not just buy a Sony then? That is what you are getting anyway a a7III or a9 in a Nikon body no big difference except for mirror vs mirrorless.


----------



## melgross (Jun 12, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> No it's not. The restructured for a number of reasons, which also saw them curtail their logistical reach for cameras. It's not a disjunct, as noted in the consolidated financials.
> 
> It's part of their mid-term management plan regarding monodzukuri. They note the structure shift in imaging product business as they move money to support the new core profit pillars.
> 
> ...



Yes, I have. I’ve been reading them for years. It’s clear that reduced sales have forced their hand in this. Nikon is having problems on several fronts, not just in photography. They’ve been udergoing a consolidation, of sorts. And yes indeed, they did state, in those reports that preservation of profit was a long term goal, and restructuring was in pursuit of that goal.

In fact, you should read ‘Thom Hogan’s writings on Nikon. He understands them better than they do themselves.


----------



## unfocused (Jun 12, 2019)

stevelee said:


> It would be sad for Nikon to go under, or even become a shadow of its former self. I barely could afford a Canon when I got my first SLR, and that at PX prices in the far east. It was a fine camera, but I would have aspired to a Nikon at the time. Before long I had accumulated a range of FL lenses, and my interest in getting a Nikon waned. I did have a Nikon enlarger lens eventually.
> 
> It is about coincidental that I got into Canon DSLRs, though I guess residual good will was an unconscious factor. I went into a store to look at TVs and washers and dryers as I anticipated setting up my home where I moved when I retired. I saw a reasonable deal on a cheap Rebel with kit lens and a 75-300mm zoom, so I made the impulse purchase. That camera convinced me that I wanted a better Rebel, and I used the T3i for many years.
> 
> Still, I would be saddened if Nikon became irrelevant.



Yes. I remember when Nikon was the top that everyone aspired too. Forty years ago I was a struggling newspaper photographer. I bought Canon because I could get two bodies and four lenses for less than two bodies and three lenses from Nikon. In those days, virtually every news photographer used Nikon and Canon was definitely considered second class. 

To their credit, Canon clawed their way to the top through innovation (beginning with the AE-1) and smart marketing (white lenses, extensive advertising, etc.). I think Nikon was slow to move into the amateur market, preferring to focus on professionals. Unfortunately, the professional market was vanishing beneath their feet. Their real hallmark was always the quality of their optics and they may not have invested as heavily in the electronic side of the equation, I don't know. 

Still, I wouldn't write them off just yet. Nikon and Canon have outlasted their competitors through many decades. Both still remain the top manufacturers of the highest quality cameras and the cameras that people aspire to. The shrinking low-end of the DSLR market may actually work to Nikon's advantage in the long run, as that has never been their strong suit. I'd actually place money on Nikon over Sony for the long haul.


----------



## BillB (Jun 12, 2019)

Expat Photographer said:


> Yeah, I hear you, it's just a sad thought. I'm not a Nikon shooter, but thinking of them selling off their camera line and seeing it either being dismantled, or gutted by some Chinese firm is still a sad thought.


I keep wondering if Sony is where Nikon will end up.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 10, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> I hope I'm not the only one to shed a bitter tear for Wonderful Sony



Look at the other graphic.

Sony was the only company to have in increase in revenue, so they don't need your tears. Canon and the rest all had reductions in revenue, cry for them.

Canon more or less maintained their number of units sold over the last year, but saw a big drop in revenue. What that means is that they are selling fewer high end cameras and more low end cameras than they did before. The opposite is the case with Sony. Their drop in units is probably mostly due to due to fewer low end low margin cameras being sold, with a surge in the high end high margin products.

Unless you are a point and shoot kind of a guy, the only company that is doing OK right now at the high end is Sony.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 10, 2019)

Tugela said:


> Look at the other graphic.
> 
> Sony was the only company to have in increase in revenue, so they don't need your tears. Canon and the rest all had reductions in revenue, cry for them.
> 
> ...


And Canon have a very long history of being on top of costs to the finest degree, Sony have a long history of selling all kinds of cool stuff, at a loss.

If you are looking at this from a corporate health perspective you should think of profitability, which has little to do with units sold or total revenue. If you are a camera enthusiast you shouldn't worry about any of it.

As for specifics, Sony came out with a new high end camera, the A9, Canon's high end/high priced body, 1DX MkII, is generally acknowledged to be nearing the end of its life cycle with a replacement due within the next 12 months. It is always far more nuanced to make valid and constructive comparative points from these figures but it seems to me that simple fact would favor Sony high end body sales quite considerably.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 10, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> It is always far more nuanced to make valid and constructive comparative points from these figures but it seems to me that simple fact would favor Sony high end body sales quite considerably.


Don’t bother me with facts when I’m posting my opinions!!


----------



## Tugela (Jul 25, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> And Canon have a very long history of being on top of costs to the finest degree, Sony have a long history of selling all kinds of cool stuff, at a loss.
> 
> If you are looking at this from a corporate health perspective you should think of profitability, which has little to do with units sold or total revenue. If you are a camera enthusiast you shouldn't worry about any of it.
> 
> As for specifics, Sony came out with a new high end camera, the A9, Canon's high end/high priced body, 1DX MkII, is generally acknowledged to be nearing the end of its life cycle with a replacement due within the next 12 months. It is always far more nuanced to make valid and constructive comparative points from these figures but it seems to me that simple fact would favor Sony high end body sales quite considerably.



Well, the a9 has been out for a while, and is also due to be replaced soon, lol. Maybe Canon will catch up to the a9, while the a9II makes new frontiers.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 25, 2019)

Tugela said:


> Well, the a9 has been out for a while, and is also due to be replaced soon, lol. Maybe Canon will catch up to the a9, while the a9II makes new frontiers.


What do you mean by "catch up"?


----------

