# 2019 global camera market share numbers are out, Canon leads the way



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 14, 2020)

> The Nikkei Asian Review has released its 2019 worldwide market share report for camera manufacturers, as well as other industries.
> The big 3 are still the big 3, but we have a new #2.
> 
> Canon 45.4% (+ 2.4)
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## Eagle Eye (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon is 54.6% *******.


----------



## Twinix (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon can just print out money and whatever they want. What printer brand does Nikon use at their office?


----------



## unfocused (Aug 14, 2020)

Other Stats:

Inkjet Printers: Canon -- 26.5% 
CMOS Sensors: Sony -- 53.5%
Diagnostic Imaging Equipment: Canon -- 9.4%
Soft Drinks: Coca-Cola -- 47%


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 14, 2020)

Twinix said:


> Canon can just print out money and whatever they want. What printer brand does Nikon use at their office?



I know it was a humorous reply but...

No they can't there are printer identifiers on every piece of paper out of a high end printer so investigators know where it came from, and most printing software won't allow you to print copies of paper money anyway.


----------



## landon (Aug 14, 2020)

Legacy. Public (90%+ camera income) will go with the brand they trust most. Especially in unpredictable times. Especially with electronics. *The bru ha-ha over the R5/R6 release will not make a difference with ordinary folks. Nobody keeps up with NICHE news unless they're into it. 
People go into a camera stores with a budget, and stick to it. While hanging around camera store, I've never heard people (90%) asking about Ibis, rolling shutter, DR, etc.... 
Canon got the camera esthetic SPOT ON. Their design is curved, flushed, robust. I think they've got most of the women customers.


----------



## slclick (Aug 14, 2020)

landon said:


> Legacy. Public (90%+ camera income) will go with the brand they trust most. Especially in unpredictable times. Especially with electronics. *The bru ha-ha over the R5/R6 release will not make a difference with ordinary folks. Nobody keeps up with NICHE news unless they're into it.
> People go into a camera stores with a budget, and stick to it. While hanging around camera store, I've never heard people (90%) asking about Ibis, rolling shutter, DR, etc....
> Canon got the camera esthetic SPOT ON. Their design is curved, flushed, robust. I think they've got most of the women customers.


Bingo, re: Costco Rebel bundles.


----------



## Twinix (Aug 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I know it was a humorous reply but...
> 
> No they can't there are printer identifiers on every piece of paper out of a high end printer so investigators know where it came from, and most printing software won't allow you to print copies of paper money anyway.


And so much more. Its really fascinating how advanced it is and how many different levels of verification and identification they have today.


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 14, 2020)

landon said:


> Legacy. Public (90%+ camera income) will go with the brand they trust most. Especially in unpredictable times. Especially with electronics. *The bru ha-ha over the R5/R6 release will not make a difference with ordinary folks. Nobody keeps up with NICHE news unless they're into it.
> People go into a camera stores with a budget, and stick to it. While hanging around camera store, I've never heard people (90%) asking about Ibis, rolling shutter, DR, etc....
> Canon got the camera esthetic SPOT ON. Their design is curved, flushed, robust. I think they've got most of the women customers.


A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


----------



## landon (Aug 14, 2020)

ScottyP said:


> A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


I'm from Australia. There's Costco here. But we do have some camera stores, and big electronics stores. BUT it's crickets in the camera section of electronics stores. You can see cob webs in the display cabinet.


----------



## mpb001 (Aug 14, 2020)

Looks like the writing is on the wall for Nikon. Hopefully, they can continue as a niche player.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> Looks like the writing is on the wall for Nikon. Hopefully, they can continue as a niche player.


I hope they can hit a couple of home runs and drive the industry. 3 big players is better for us as consumers.


----------



## Colorado (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I hope they can hit a couple of home runs and drive the industry. 3 big players is better for us as consumers.


Absolutely. 3 competitors leads to a lot of forced innovation. 2 competitors tends towards a much more stale suite of products. This is true across most industries, not just cameras.


----------



## Joules (Aug 14, 2020)

There definitely are camera stores at my city, although being the second largest city of Germany may make it a poor comparison to most other cities.

On one of my visits to one of the oldest such stores I witnessed a lady coming in, wanting to purchase a new Camera. She said the sales person that she would like to go with Canon, as she already had an old rebel and a kit lens in the past. I was pretty surprised when I heard them answer that she might want to consider other brands, as Canon had struggled to compete with newer offerings and her kit lens didn't tie her into the ecosystem. I didn't listen to the rest of the exchange.

The point here is, the endless 'Canon is *******' talk may not really get through to people who don't visit forums to such a degree as us folks here. But it can still reach them in other ways.

On the other hand, I know two people who wanted to go for a better camera than their smartphone and ended up with Rebels (800D and 200D). They weren't influenced by me, so Canon's definitely still appealing to a lot of people. Obviously, the market share numbers are far better proof of this than anecdotes 

Guess I don't really have a point here. Just wanted to share an experience regarding the existance of camera stores and people purchasing Canon.

In the twisted reality that is the internet, none of this matters anyway. Canon is *******


----------



## sdz (Aug 14, 2020)

ScottyP said:


> A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


The stores on the North Side and downtown are closed. It's Best Buy or nothing.


----------



## sdz (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon is *******. This we know for sure.


----------



## KrisK (Aug 14, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> Looks like the writing is on the wall for Nikon. Hopefully, they can continue as a niche player.



I wonder about Fuji. Does their 4.7% cut give their shareholders a sufficient return on their investment to keep them in the game long term?
I don't pretend to know -- maybe the numbers are great. But in comparison, Nikon looks fantastic (based on this single metric.)


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

sdz said:


> The stores on the North Side and downtown are closed. It's Best Buy or nothing.


I have 3 main pure Camera stores in the Vancouver BC area, we also have London Drugs, Best Buy(kinda) 3 our 4 high end video sales/rental places to support the film industry and a couple of smaller players that have been around forever.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 14, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I know it was a humorous reply but...
> 
> No they can't there are printer identifiers on every piece of paper out of a high end printer so investigators know where it came from, and most printing software won't allow you to print copies of paper money anyway.



There are patterns of little yellow circles on most countries' paper money (it even has a nickname, EUrion), and any current-model printer or scanner will shut down when they see those patterns.


----------



## Jim Corbett (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon is definitely the torch runner of 2020's camera Olympics


----------



## SteveC (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon 45.4% (+ 2.4)
Sony 20.2% (+ 0.9)
Nikon 18.6% (- 1.6)
Fujifilm Holdings 4.7% (- 0.4)
Panasonic 4.7% (0.0 )

Adding these numbers up, the top five have 93.6 percent of the market. The top five grew a total of 1.3 percent. Canon's growth was 0.4 percentage points greater than the losses by Nikon and Fujifilm combined, so it has to have got some numbers from people below the top five.


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 14, 2020)

Statistical confirmation that the zombie apocalypse has hit the camera market. All canon's products are DOA, so the dead lead the way!


----------



## bbasiaga (Aug 14, 2020)

Twinix said:


> Canon can just print out money and whatever they want. What printer brand does Nikon use at their office?



I'd really like to know who Nikon uses. I worked for a food company here in the US. We got a new CEO and he came from a different food company (Pepsi Co.). Upon arrival, he had all of his former company's products removed from our buildings - No pepsi in the cafeteria, none of their brands of chips in the vending machines, etc. The corporate world can be a petty place.


----------



## AlanF (Aug 14, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Absolutely. 3 competitors leads to a lot of forced innovation. 2 competitors tends towards a much more stale suite of products. This is true across most industries, not just cameras.


Yes indeed. We want all three to be profitable so they can do R&D and not go bust.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

Hi. My name is Bert and I'm a Canoholic.

HI BERT!


----------



## unfocused (Aug 14, 2020)

landon said:


> Legacy. Public (90%+ camera income) will go with the brand they trust most. Especially in unpredictable times. Especially with electronics. *The bru ha-ha over the R5/R6 release will not make a difference with ordinary folks. Nobody keeps up with NICHE news unless they're into it...



I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic. 

Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire." 

As I've tried to explain before, it's not the reality that matters. It's the perception And, Canon does not want anything that damages their carefully cultivated image. People do buy based on the brand they trust the most, but it is very easy to lose that trust, especially in today's internet age. 

We don't know what if any damage the R5's negative publicity has done to Canon. But, we shouldn't just write it off because *we* don't think it is significant.


----------



## usern4cr (Aug 14, 2020)

ScottyP said:


> A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


Well, lucky for me there *IS* a camera store in Lexington, Kentucky. A few months ago I called and asked them to put me down on their list to buy the R5 and a RF 15-35 f2.8. I forgot about them as they didn't call back and I pre-ordered the first day at B&H and later pre-ordered (late) at CPW (CanonPriceWatch) and waited for 1st delivery, hopefully from an online store for no sales tax or even further savings (if CPW). When the 1st batch was sent out I wasn't sent any from B&H, and was way far away on the list at CPW. But who surprises me and calls me? - My local camera store - they say, "We just got our R5s in and if you want yours them come on in!" I did - only had to pay full MSRP and 6% state tax. But I *GOT* a R5 in my hands. I didn't get the RF 15-35. They told me they sold 1 R5 before me to a guy who's buying it just to sell to another guy who's going to pay him $6,000 OVER the MSRP price, and he wanted to buy BOTH of them (his and mine) as his friend would pay him the same for a 2nd one! But the store made sure I could accept mine before selling it to him. Nice store, there!

I then called CPW to get 4 RF lenses (RF 15-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 & 800 f11) and they hooked me up with a authorized North American Canon dealer to get them below MSRP (minimum price you can advertise to sell), but above MRP (minimum you can sell it at without advertising) - that saved me a lot of money (thanks, CPW!), enough to pay for the R5 tax several times over. Got them all in less than a week.

So now I'm a happy camper and new Canon owner for the 1st time, and what do I think when I put the R5 with one of the trinity RF L IS f2.8 zooms next to my "old" (2x crop) Olympus EM1_II with 12-100 f4 pro? I think, "Man, this is one big & heavy camera! - My old EM1_II feels like half the weight (sigh)". But I know the R5 will make it more than worthwhile!  (and my brother will be the lucky one getting my EM1_II gear)


----------



## David_E (Aug 14, 2020)

SteveC said:


> _There are patterns of little yellow circles on most countries' paper money (it even has a nickname, EUrion), and any current-model printer or scanner will shut down when they see those patterns._


OK, so much for my plan to photograph my wife in her Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini.


----------



## csibra (Aug 14, 2020)

Well, well, well good by fuji&pana. Prepares: Nikon. ;(


----------



## David Hull (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I hope they can hit a couple of home runs and drive the industry. 3 big players is better for us as consumers.


So? What is wrong with being #3?


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 14, 2020)

David Hull said:


> So? What is wrong with being #3?


It's not #1 or #2?

Did I get it right?


----------



## jam05 (Aug 14, 2020)

ScottyP said:


> A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


Electronics Depts. B&H NYC, Adorama, Sammys, Vistek Canada, Precision Camera, Best Buy. Costco. Walmart. Target. University and Campus bookstores........


----------



## 20Dave (Aug 14, 2020)

From a camera perspective, Canon may not be *******, but I can see a potential slowdown in innovation because of something that nobody has commented on yet:


> ...the overall market contracted 22.4%


That is a huge drop. A 20+% drop in a market leads to a much bigger hit on profitability, with R&D budgets suffering as a result. And with Nikon and Sony actually losing market share in a market that bad, yikes!


----------



## brad-man (Aug 14, 2020)

landon said:


> Legacy. Public (90%+ camera income) will go with the brand they trust most. Especially in unpredictable times. Especially with electronics. *The bru ha-ha over the R5/R6 release will not make a difference with ordinary folks. Nobody keeps up with NICHE news unless they're into it.
> People go into a camera stores with a budget, and stick to it. While hanging around camera store, I've never heard people (90%) asking about Ibis, rolling shutter, DR, etc....
> Canon got the camera esthetic SPOT ON. Their design is curved, flushed, robust. I think they've got most of the women customers.


You heard it guys. Your wives & girlfriends have been lying to you. Chicks dig a canon...


----------



## SteveC (Aug 14, 2020)

David_E said:


> OK, so much for my plan to photograph my wife in her Itsy Bitsy Teeny Weeny Yellow Polka Dot Bikini.





You're okay so long as the pattern is not exactly the same, and it's a pretty random-looking pattern.

Now what was that comedy movie where the East German Stasi played that record (with a hole drilled off center) as a form of torture?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic.
> 
> Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire."
> 
> ...



Interesting perspective. I guess I'm just old and more out of touch than I thought.

If I'm looking for a camera, I come to sites like this and maybe POTN and read, read, and read some more.

Then I go to the library (in this case RB Digital) and read every photography magazine I can find with the subject that I'm researching.

Then I'll go to sites like Jan Wegener and Gordon Laing and see what they have to say. In my opinion they are two 'reviewers' that don't buy into the drama and just give their opinion and review.

Then I'll go to the seller's sites and read reviews and see what people are talking about. In many cases just one sentence or two of a review is enough to let me know if the person has a point or is just more ZOMG! Sometimes you can read ten words and you'll know the person has no idea what they're talking about and that their one-star rating is a result of them just not knowing what they're doing.

I do agree with you. People these days often get their 'news' from the wrong places and listen to a friend of a friend of a friend without doing any homework on their own. One trip to Reddit will quickly show you how bad it is. It's sad, but that's where we are.


----------



## polo2019 (Aug 14, 2020)

Canon will continuously dominate the market, especially after releasing R5 and R6..Nikon will be sold within 2 years to another company in Japan, but not to Chinese.. Sony will increase its share, but not much... Sony is not in a good shape either...


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 14, 2020)

usern4cr said:


> Well, lucky for me there *IS* a camera store in Lexington, Kentucky. A few months ago I called and asked them to put me down on their list to buy the R5 and a RF 15-35 f2.8. I forgot about them as they didn't call back and I pre-ordered the first day at B&H and later pre-ordered (late) at CPW (CanonPriceWatch) and waited for 1st delivery, hopefully from an online store for no sales tax or even further savings (if CPW). When the 1st batch was sent out I wasn't sent any from B&H, and was way far away on the list at CPW. But who surprises me and calls me? - My local camera store - they say, "We just got our R5s in and if you want yours them come on it!" I did - only had to pay full MSRP and 6% state tax. But I *GOT* a R5 in my hands. I didn't get the RF 15-35. They told me they sold 1 R5 before me to a guy who's buying it just to sell to another guy who's going to pay him $6,000 OVER the MSRP price, and he wanted to buy BOTH of them (his and mine) as his friend would pay him the same for a 2nd one! But the store made sure I could accept mine before selling it to him. Nice store, there!
> 
> I then called CPW to get 4 RF lenses (RF 15-35 f2.8, 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 & 800 f11) and they hooked me up with a authorized North American Canon dealer to get them below MSRP (minimum price you can advertise to sell), but above MRP (minimum you can sell it at without advertising) - that saved me a lot of money (thanks, CPW!), enough to pay for the R5 tax several times over. Got them all in less than a week.
> 
> So now I'm a happy camper and new Canon owner for the 1st time, and what do I think when I put the R5 with one of the trinity RF L IS f2.8 zooms next to my "old" Olympus EM1_II with 24-100 f4 pro? I think, "Man, this is one big & heavy camera! - My old EM1_II feels like half the weight (sigh)". But I know the R5 will make it more than worthwhile!  (and my brother will be the lucky one getting my EM1_II gear)



Congratulations. Enjoy it like we know you will!

I chuckle when people talk about the weight of their camera with one of the "small" lenses on. I, like many wildlife shooters, am so used to hoofing through the woods carrying a 100-400L II and a 1.4X (or something bigger and heavier still) mile after mile that I don't even notice it anymore. When I throw on a "small" lens like my 100L f/2.8 or 16-35L f/4 it feels like I forgot to put the lens on.

I swear my right arm is three inches longer than my left.


----------



## slclick (Aug 14, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I'd really like to know who Nikon uses. I worked for a food company here in the US. We got a new CEO and he came from a different food company (Pepsi Co.). Upon arrival, he had all of his former company's products removed from our buildings - No pepsi in the cafeteria, none of their brands of chips in the vending machines, etc. The corporate world can be a petty place.


Epson, not hard to deduce.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 14, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Interesting perspective. I guess I'm just old and more out of touch than I thought.
> 
> If I'm looking for a camera, I come to sites like this and maybe POTN and read, read, and read some more...



Yeah, I probably should have elaborated a bit. I'm not talking about informed consumers or even potential R5 buyers. I was thinking more about the people who decide they want a camera and only have one question: "What's a good camera to buy?" We think the negative buzz around the R5 only affects the R5, but it can affect any potential sale. Somebody who thinks $600 is a lot of money to spend on a camera can be impacted by the negativity even if they would never in a million years buy an R5. And, of course, there are a lot more of those $600 camera buyers than there are those of us who would pay $3,800 (Or in my case are foolish enough to pay $6,400 for a 1Dx).


----------



## jam05 (Aug 14, 2020)

There are some pretty long faces pondering at that gap from #1 to the distant second place. And these are last years numbers. The M50 & M6 mkII are very popular cameras as is other Rebels. People talk about Canon marketing. It's aparent that they know their market quite well.


----------



## sdz (Aug 14, 2020)

Ramage said:


> I have 3 main pure Camera stores in the Vancouver BC area, we also have London Drugs, Best Buy(kinda) 3 our 4 high end video sales/rental places to support the film industry and a couple of smaller players that have been around forever.



I lived in NYC for years. I began my time there by living in the YMCA attached to what became B&H. It's kinda like a hometown store for me. On the other hand, there is something to be said about entering a brick and mortar building to look at the stuff you want to buy. NYC is a long ways off these days.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Aug 14, 2020)

Nikon make some incredible gear and it’s sad to see them falling behind. The way I see it, Canon and Nikon are pretty similar.. while Sony is different. I’d guess the vast majority of new buyers who don’t want a Sony would go with Canon because of the name and their reputation. So it seems Nikon’s decline is a natural inevitability. Shame.


----------



## CanonOregon (Aug 15, 2020)

ScottyP said:


> A camera store? Where are there any camera stores anymore? None in Pittsburgh, not really; we have to drive to Ohio. Internet has taken its toll.


True but there are a few around- one in Dallas, Oregon, of all places, doing very well. Really stinks what looters did to Central Camera in Chicago!


----------



## Bennymiata (Aug 15, 2020)

There are still a number of good camera stores open and doing business in Sydney.
What happened to Olympus?


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Yeah, I probably should have elaborated a bit. I'm not talking about informed consumers or even potential R5 buyers. I was thinking more about the people who decide they want a camera and only have one question: "What's a good camera to buy?" We think the negative buzz around the R5 only affects the R5, but it can affect any potential sale. Somebody who thinks $600 is a lot of money to spend on a camera can be impacted by the negativity even if they would never in a million years buy an R5. And, of course, there are a lot more of those $600 camera buyers than there are those of us who would pay $3,800 (Or in my case are foolish enough to pay $6,400 for a 1Dx).



Foolishness to one person is brilliance to another. It's all a matter of perspective. I try very hard not to criticize another person's buying decisions - I'm not in their shoes.

You're spot on about the "which camera should I buy?" people out there. Reddit will scare the hell out of you in that regard. And the advice given? YIKES! I know a little stuff, and others here are stunning in their knowledge, but damn. Bad advice given and being (apparently) accepted at face value and followed. I mean BAD advice.


----------



## Joules (Aug 15, 2020)

Bennymiata said:


> What happened to Olympus?


They sold off their camera division and likely will be dwindling from now on. There are probably many reasons behind that. MFT being a format that is not distinct enough from smartphone quality to some may be part of it.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Yeah, I probably should have elaborated a bit. I'm not talking about informed consumers or even potential R5 buyers. I was thinking more about the people who decide they want a camera and only have one question: "What's a good camera to buy?" We think the negative buzz around the R5 only affects the R5, but it can affect any potential sale. Somebody who thinks $600 is a lot of money to spend on a camera can be impacted by the negativity even if they would never in a million years buy an R5. And, of course, there are a lot more of those $600 camera buyers than there are those of us who would pay $3,800 (Or in my case are foolish enough to pay $6,400 for a 1Dx).



That's true. I recently talked to a friend who wants to buy a camera. He doesn't know anything about cameras, he just wants something small and easy to use.
When i recommended Canon M, he said Canon is not that good and was told Sony and Nikon are better.

In today's world headline grabbing features are very important. And that's why i hate spec-warriors who recommend a camera to someone because it has "oversampled, crisp 16K video in LOG and 512FPS" and then later you see videos on Youtube taken with the said camera, full of back and forth focus hunting
and half of it is out of focus. But at least it's crisp and detailed and can be graded.


----------



## WriteLight (Aug 15, 2020)

CanonOregon said:


> True but there are a few around- one in Dallas, Oregon, of all places, doing very well. Really stinks what looters did to Central Camera in Chicago!


I hadn't seen that. That makes me really sad. Chicago is my hometown - lived in many different neighborhoods, worked, and went to school there. It's better than that.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Aug 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Interesting perspective. I guess I'm just old and more out of touch than I thought.
> 
> If I'm looking for a camera, I come to sites like this and maybe POTN and read, read, and read some more.
> 
> ...



During the last video game console release, Microsoft revealed their hand first and were going to try to make some major changes (a lot of dealing with trying to curb second hand game sales and getting people to buy more directly) and one of these changes was that the Xbox One would need to "always" (periodically) be connected to the internet to play your games, even games that didn't have an online component.

There was a major backlash, it was reported everywhere and made enough news that people who didn't play heard of the controversy. Sony made their console announcement, and the rumors of them following a similar path were either wrong or Sony changed their mind after seeing how Microsoft was getting slammed and they didn't announce anything like that.

Microsoft read the room, and the console launched without that requirement but the damage was done.

Sony ended up taking the number one spot back from Microsoft for this gaming generation.

Because of the backlash of a feature that was never implemented because Microsoft quickly reversed course. 

The announcement was back in 2013, and to this day there are people who will ask if they buy an Xbox One if they need an internet connection to be able to use it.

The internet can be viscous. I'm not saying this will definitely happen with Canon and the overheating issue, but terrible news can be sticky in a way that good news isn't.

(Side note: Microsoft and Sony are on the verge of a new generation of consoles being released this year. And after Sony losing ground to Microsoft on the second generation because they were too cocky, and Microsoft losing ground back to Sony for doing the same thing, this time both of them are being extremely secretive of details, waiting for the other to break the silence first. Particularly with the cost of the devices.)


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 15, 2020)

PhotoGenerous said:


> During the last video game console release, Microsoft revealed their hand first and were going to try to make some major changes (a lot of dealing with trying to curb second hand game sales and getting people to buy more directly) and one of these changes was that the Xbox One would need to "always" (periodically) be connected to the internet to play your games, even games that didn't have an online component.
> 
> There was a major backlash, it was reported everywhere and made enough news that people who didn't play heard of the controversy. Sony made their console announcement, and the rumors of them following a similar path were either wrong or Sony changed their mind after seeing how Microsoft was getting slammed and they didn't announce anything like that.
> 
> ...




I get your point.

This will probably come out wrong, but it seems to me that despite the education level of the US population rising over the last 20 years, people seem to be getting dumber every day. Heck, every minute.


----------



## brad-man (Aug 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I get your point.
> 
> This will probably come out wrong, but it seems to me that despite the education level of the US population rising over the last 20 years, people seem to be getting dumber every day. Heck, every minute.


One only needs to look at our political situation to know how true that is...


----------



## David_E (Aug 15, 2020)

PhotoGenerous said:


> _The internet can be viscous._


More so in the winter than in the summer, though.


----------



## PhotoGenerous (Aug 15, 2020)

David_E said:


> More so in the summer than in the winter, though.



Lol, whoops. Although I suppose my typo still works with what I said.


----------



## Jack Jian (Aug 15, 2020)

mpb001 said:


> Looks like the writing is on the wall for Nikon. Hopefully, they can continue as a niche player.


I was happy when they release their Z6 & Z7. But when they announced the useless 0.95 lens, I realized they have no one who's skilled in business & marketing. I saw by then the writings on the wall.


----------



## Pierre Lagarde (Aug 15, 2020)

Joules said:


> ...
> 
> On the other hand, I know two people who wanted to go for a better camera than their smartphone and ended up with Rebels (800D and 200D). They weren't influenced by me, so Canon's definitely still appealing to a lot of people. Obviously, the market share numbers are far better proof of this than anecdotes
> 
> ....


Indeed.
That and the fact EOS M50 did so well these last months. It has replaced many Canon DSLRs over the world and is a success in the vlogging area too.


----------



## TominNJ (Aug 15, 2020)

Interesting article. I think there’s a lot of truth in the saying “you date your camera and you marry your lenses.” Dumping all your glass and starting over in a new system is an expensive procedure. I certainly don’t believe that Nikon and Sony users are jumping ship.

I’m not sure what conclusions can be reached from those numbers. Maybe just that Canon users had more incentive to buy new glass with the R system and that Nikon didn’t have as many compelling new products to drive sales. Canon will probably gain again in 2020 with the R5. After that?

That drop in total market is really bad. Less total sales will mean fewer innovative new products and higher prices for the ones that do reach the marketplace.


----------



## BeenThere (Aug 15, 2020)

This year and probably next should be a significant bump up in Canon camera body and lens sales given the R5 and R6 introductions and the new lens mount. Also the promise of new M models to come. Sony will likely hold their own given their rapid pace of new models and state of the art sensors. But Nikon has been kind of meh since D850. Nikon can still produce great cameras if Sony will sell them their latest and best sensors. Doubtful in my mind that Nikon can ever catch up to Canon in lens quality and diversity.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 15, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> This year and probably next should be a significant bump up in Canon camera body and lens sales given the R5 and R6 introductions and the new lens mount. Also the promise of new M models to come. Sony will likely hold their own given their rapid pace of new models and state of the art sensors. But Nikon has been kind of meh since D850. Nikon can still produce great cameras if Sony will sell them their latest and best sensors. Doubtful in my mind that Nikon can ever catch up to Canon in lens quality and diversity.




Some new M lenses would also be good for sales. A decent standard zoom, like 15-60 F4 and a high quality 70-300 type of lens would do certainly good for the system.


----------



## Eclipsed (Aug 15, 2020)

Looks like my switch to Canon from Nikon last year had a big impact.


----------



## Eclipsed (Aug 15, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic.
> 
> Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire."
> 
> ...


The $3900 R5 is SELLING for $5000+ on EBay. Crisis is fake.


----------



## Eclipsed (Aug 15, 2020)

Jack Jian said:


> I was happy when they release their Z6 & Z7. But when they announced the useless 0.95 lens, I realized they have no one who's skilled in business & marketing. I saw by then the writings on the wall.


For me, it was their horses leg 70-200 compared to the RF70-200 and other advanced designs that made me dump Nikon for Canon even as a happy Z6 owner. Plus the Nikon big lenses are a generation behind.
Name a leading lens design Nikon has released in the last couple years. Then look at Canons last year.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Aug 15, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Electronics Depts. B&H NYC, Adorama, Sammys, Vistek Canada, Precision Camera, Best Buy. Costco. Walmart. Target. University and Campus bookstores........



I am fortunate to have both Glazer's and Kenmore camera within 30 minutes drive.


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 15, 2020)

The Nikon Z system was a much more impressive set of cameras than the original R in my opinion. But they put it out with mostly amateur glass. Canon had a so-so FF mirrorless system, but was putting out bonkers pro glass. With the advent of the R5, Canon now has a world-beating system for stills. Nikon has the ability to adapt Sigma and Tamron glass with decent results. I'm not all that optimistic that Nikon will catch up on the lens front anytime too soon, which is too bad. I've never shot Nikon, but I've benefited from the Canon and Sony bodies that have been pushed by Nikon's bang-for-buck ratio in the marketplace, especially after their 800 series came out. 

The Sony-Canon share competition is interesting, but complex. There are people who moved to Sony (like I did) to get high resolution + high frames per second. But they're very vulnerable to moving back to the R series now (I just did). But there are video people who are going to flock to the Sony A7s3 and continue the migration to the Panasonic full frame offerings. 

The upshot: I think you'll see Canon's share rise in terms of revenue , and Sony's share rise in terms of number of bodies sold, as they come out with their lower-end full frame. Nikon will shrink in both. Panasonic will shrink unless it gets a real AF with eye detect system, which would really change things given that they have Sigma backing them on glass.


----------



## melgross (Aug 15, 2020)

And Nikon continues its slide to irrelevance. Who would have thought, a few years ago, that Sony would bypass Nikon? Very few, I would imagine.


----------



## Joules (Aug 15, 2020)

melgross said:


> And Nikon continues its slide to irrelevance. Who would have thought, a few years ago, that Sony would bypass Nikon? Very few, I would imagine.


Well, there are still tons of people who expect Sony to beat Canon, so ... in terms of absolute numbers, probably more than very few


----------



## unfocused (Aug 15, 2020)

Eclipsed said:


> The $3900 R5 is SELLING for $5000+ on EBay. Crisis is fake.


Irrelevant. Try actually reading my posts.


----------



## dwarven (Aug 15, 2020)

Joules said:


> They sold off their camera division and likely will be dwindling from now on. There are probably many reasons behind that. MFT being a format that is not distinct enough from smartphone quality to some may be part of it.



This is nonsense. Even MFT is far beyond smartphone quality. MFT also offers some pretty unique glass. The Olympus camera division is going under because they put all of their eggs in the MFT basket in a market that says "FF is better no matter what", which is also more nonsense. The OM-D E-M1 Mark III, for example, is one of the best camera bodies on the market. It has better weather sealing and IBIS than any other manufacturer at a fraction of the weight. If I was shooting in harsh conditions I'd pick that body over any FF. In short, Olympus lost the marketing war. It wouldn't have hurt to put out an APS-C body or two either.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 15, 2020)

melgross said:


> And Nikon continues its slide to irrelevance...



There are plenty of companies that happy succeed with 20% of the market. I would not count Nikon out and I certainly would not declare them irrelevant.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Aug 15, 2020)

Well I helped Nikon as best I could. One year ago I switched from Canon to Nikon (which is why I haven't been on this forum for a while). I switched for the D850 (which IMO is the best DSLR ever made) and for the 500PF lens (which IMO is the best long telephoto ever made, when you factor in the small size).

Mirrorless I know nothing about and who knows how that will play out with Canon versus Nikon and the early leader Sony. I do find it bizarre (really, really bizarre) that Canon would release two super telephoto lenses in this category with a maximum aperture of f/11 ? And then say you can add a 2x converter for a maximum aperture of f/22 ? They must be very confident in the high ISO capabilities of their mirrorless system.


----------



## Colorado (Aug 15, 2020)

MrFotoFool said:


> Mirrorless I know nothing about and who knows how that will play out with Canon versus Nikon and the early leader Sony. I do find it bizarre (really, really bizarre) that Canon would release two super telephoto lenses in this category with a maximum aperture of f/11 ? And then say you can add a 2x converter for a maximum aperture of f/22 ? They must be very confident in the high ISO capabilities of their mirrorless system.



Not high ISO tests but you might find these interesting.





Canon R5 with 800 F11 RF and 1.4X


I've not had hardly any time to use these yet but here are just a few shots. I just got the 1.4 X this afternoon so not much time with it at all....



www.fredmiranda.com









RF 600 + RF 1.4x initial samples w/crops


So far, I'm impressed with the performance of the RF 1.4x TC on the RF 600. The results are so much better than cropping, there's almost no point i...



www.fredmiranda.com


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Aug 15, 2020)

MrFotoFool said:


> Well I helped Nikon as best I could. One year ago I switched from Canon to Nikon (which is why I haven't been on this forum for a while). I switched for the D850 (which IMO is the best DSLR ever made) and for the 500PF lens (which IMO is the best long telephoto ever made, when you factor in the small size).
> 
> Mirrorless I know nothing about and who knows how that will play out with Canon versus Nikon and the early leader Sony. I do find it bizarre (really, really bizarre) that Canon would release two super telephoto lenses in this category with a maximum aperture of f/11 ? And then say you can add a 2x converter for a maximum aperture of f/22 ? They must be very confident in the high ISO capabilities of their mirrorless system.



While i like the new Canon F11 primes for what are and the innovation, Nikon will soon have a 100-400 and an affordable 200-600 which will make them a very good choice for wildlife shooters.


----------



## Bert63 (Aug 15, 2020)

Cryhavoc said:


> I am fortunate to have both Glazer's and Kenmore camera within 30 minutes drive.



Glazer's in Seattle? Used to love to road trip down there. Used to be a fun store.

Seattle these days? No thanks.


----------



## CSD (Aug 15, 2020)

The problem with Nikon unlike Canon/Sony is myriad but comes down to diversity in multiple markets to ride out the storms and, more importantly, they don't produce their own sensors. When a company is dependent on their competition for sensors then that'll always put them at a disadvantage and makes it near impossible to catch up. The writing has been on the wall for almost a decade. Nikon does some amazing gear, but they lost the first half of the war to Canon when we saw CCD vs CMOS sensors, then the last decade with Sony eating their lunch mostly leaving Canon mostly unaffected. We're going to see a lot of disruption and consolidation over the next five years, and in ten the market landscape will be completely different to what it is today with AR and mobile products replacing cameras as we see today. Cameras as we know them is a dead end road except to professionals and enthusiasts. 

This is why Nikon is likely to drop out of the market or essentially become a niche camera company leaving it to Sony or less likely Fuji to take their place. Almost all technology markets shrink to a duopoly. Intel vs AMD, Windows vs Mac, Android vs iOS, Xbox vs PS 5. You get the idea, it's not a hard and fast rule, but eventually markets gravitate to this until a disruptive business comes along but even then they're likely to get bought out.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 15, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> People these days often get their 'news' from the wrong places and listen to a friend of a friend of a friend without doing any homework on their own.



Pretty sure that's always been the case. At least now we have easy access to the widest range of information and opinion (even if too few people make use of it).


----------



## scyrene (Aug 15, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> Canon had a so-so FF mirrorless system, but was putting out bonkers pro glass. With the advent of the R5, Canon now has a world-beating system for stills.



A few people pointed this out on these forums in the past couple of years - when so many people came to moan that there 'was no body that matched the glass'. It was a long game, and it ought to pay off.


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 16, 2020)

Joules said:


> They sold off their camera division and likely will be dwindling from now on. There are probably many reasons behind that. MFT being a format that is not distinct enough from smartphone quality to some may be part of it.



Thank you for demonstrating exactly what is wrong with the internet - and exactly how it is influencing buying decisions far more than most people think. For a few years now, this has been the oft-repeated mantra on the internet "MFT is not distinct enough from smartphones." And because of that, "MFT is dead." And fools like the Northrups put out a video with that title and theme and then have either the nerve or the ignorance to think that they had absolutely no influence on Olympus' demise. Having owned cameras in MFT, APS-C and FF formats I can say from experience that their is so little difference between these formats, that all the other internet buzz proclaiming that one system is far superior or another system is dead is complete rubbish. You have smartphones on one level and the all 3 ILC formats at another. So, I'm not trying to pick on you. You are just repeating the same bullcrap that is circulating on the internet. It's so easy to do.


----------



## Czardoom (Aug 16, 2020)

scyrene said:


> Pretty sure that's always been the case. At least now we have easy access to the widest range of information and opinion (even if too few people make use of it).


What we used to have was a few sources of information, but almost all of them were informed (such as photo magazines or people working in actual camera stores - which at least in my experience, were knowledgeable and experienced.) What we have now is the widest range of mis-information and ill informed opinion that the world has ever seen. Estimates by companies that look into this sort of thing, say that somewhere between 20-40% of reviews on the internet may be fake or compensated. We have seen fairly well organized internet reviews and Sony fanboy campaigns on forums such as this one for years. 

My advice would be for anyone interested in photo equipment to stay away from the internet. Unless you have a lot of experience and time spent, you will have no clue who to trust and who is a phony at best and a propogandist at worst.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 16, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic.
> 
> Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire."
> 
> ...


I don't think the short term storm in a teacup 'overheating' hogwash is going to have any effect on the long term sales of the camera. I don't remember the last time one of the big three put out a camera that is trading at 40% over list price (eBay sold listings are from $6,299 to $4,950 with most in the $5,500 range), that is unprecedented and more akin to limited edition Leica's that will do far more for a positive image than the talking heads will do for negative publicity. Add in the fact that actual pro photographers are starting to get out really good reviews with the camera faultlessly being used as designed and the camera is looking to be a game changer for many and strikes to the very heart of what people think they need. I think the R5 is *the* camera of the moment and nothing will stop it being a massive sales success and it will lift the sales of the baby brother R6 with it.

Indeed I think the two new R cameras are going to be so successful it will effectively end EF, much to my regret. I think virtually all EOS R&D is going to be ploughed into new RF lenses and R bodies with a Canon version of the α7S III the most obvious next step to create a market with a straight three way head to head between Canon and Sony.

Canon R? vs Sony α7S III
Canon R6 vs Sony α7 III
Canon R5 vs Sony α7R IV


----------



## Eclipsed (Aug 16, 2020)

unfocused said:


> Irrelevant. Try actually reading my posts.


I did. Your ability to read the minds of consumers you’ve never met did not impress. I offered market data.


----------



## Joules (Aug 16, 2020)

dwarven said:


> This is nonsense. Even MFT is far beyond smartphone quality. MFT also offers some pretty unique glass.


Just out of curiosity, would you mind naming some of these unique lenses?



Czardoom said:


> For a few years now, this has been the oft-repeated mantra on the internet "MFT is not distinct enough from smartphones." [...] Having owned cameras in MFT, APS-C and FF formats I can say from experience that their is so little difference between these formats, that all the other internet buzz proclaiming that one system is far superior or another system is dead is complete rubbish. [...] So, I'm not trying to pick on you. You are just repeating the same bullcrap that is circulating on the internet. It's so easy to do.


Don't you guys go in a bit too deep here? I did not write that Smartphones produce similar image quality than MFT or that the shortfalls of MFT mean it will go away. Nor am I repeating anyone here.

Read what I said:

"MFT being a format that is not distinct enough from smartphone quality *to some* may be part of it"

Granted, quality is a bit to vague. I meant the quality of the overall experience, not just specifically image quality. 

I mainly meant to point out that there is a large portion of buyers that are content with modern smartphones and that may have something to do with the fate of Olympus. The first part of that sentence is just a fact. The second is speculation on my part, but does not say what you implied I'm saying. You can offer far superior image quality and still have people who don't see sufficient value to go from something that fits into every pocket and is always with you to something that only fits into some pockets and therefore is with you only sometimes. At the end of the day, these devices all take pictures. As the number of overall sales shows, that is all it takes for a large chunk of people. They don't perceive enough value for them personally to justify the cost and carry the gear associated with larger systems.

Once you get into the people who do see this value, they may not care about size and weight all that much. This shrinking of the market affects all systems, but since MFT is explicitly about size and weight, I believe the system is indeed facing a steeper uphill battle as it operates in the narrower realm of customers that care about size and weight, but not so much that they are willing to accept the tradeoffs in image quality, usability and flexibility that using a smartphone would entail.

There are niches in each market. As long as the companies serving them know their customers well and have the means to serve them in a sustainable manner, nobody has to go away. But on the other hand, we see Canon in the offense for a change, rounding out the RF system into all directions. And there are lots of rumors that EF-M will finally see some love as well. I doubt that will leave the market share figures unchanged.


----------



## Gino_FOTO (Aug 16, 2020)

The suffering of this industry is just like oppressing on board of the sinking Titanic, some passengers hopefully survive, but no one can escape without some sort of trauma.


----------



## scyrene (Aug 16, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> What we used to have was a few sources of information, but almost all of them were informed (such as photo magazines or people working in actual camera stores - which at least in my experience, were knowledgeable and experienced.) What we have now is the widest range of mis-information and ill informed opinion that the world has ever seen. Estimates by companies that look into this sort of thing, say that somewhere between 20-40% of reviews on the internet may be fake or compensated. We have seen fairly well organized internet reviews and Sony fanboy campaigns on forums such as this one for years.
> 
> My advice would be for anyone interested in photo equipment to stay away from the internet. Unless you have a lot of experience and time spent, you will have no clue who to trust and who is a phony at best and a propogandist at worst.



Determining the reliability of sources of intormation is a critical skill, now more than ever. Eschewing the largest source of knowledge because it can be challenging is hardly a viable approach, and taking advice on trust (simply because it's coming from more traditional sources, like a salesperson in a shop, or a magazine) isn't something I would recommend.


----------



## Woody (Aug 16, 2020)

I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Aug 16, 2020)

Woody said:


> I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji.



It's actually hard to tell who they lost it to. 
Anyway the D5 wasn't a huge success, Z6 and Z7 weren't either, Z mount lenses are also lagging behind Canon and Sony.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 16, 2020)

KrisK said:


> I wonder about Fuji. Does their 4.7% cut give their shareholders a sufficient return on their investment to keep them in the game long term?
> I don't pretend to know -- maybe the numbers are great. But in comparison, Nikon looks fantastic (based on this single metric.)


Fuji reorganized nearly 10 years ago. Cameras are an afterthought.


----------



## jam05 (Aug 16, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Canon 45.4% (+ 2.4)
> Sony 20.2% (+ 0.9)
> Nikon 18.6% (- 1.6)
> Fujifilm Holdings 4.7% (- 0.4)
> ...


Canon did not get its gains from others losses but from their non gains. From what they failed to gain. Losses went to smartohone sales.


----------



## landon (Aug 16, 2020)

Woody said:


> I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji.


They stopped paying ransom money to youtubers.


----------



## geffy (Aug 16, 2020)

when my donkey died we put a nikon in the coffin, when the duck goes it could well be a canon because that rx10 is going nowhere but in my coffin


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 16, 2020)

geffy said:


> when my donkey died we put a nikon in the coffin, when the duck goes it could well be a canon because that rx10 is going nowhere but in my coffin


You put your donkey in a coffin?


----------



## SteveC (Aug 16, 2020)

jam05 said:


> Canon did not get its gains from others losses but from their non gains. From what they failed to gain. Losses went to smartohone sales.



True, Canon likely lost TOTAL sales.

But you couldn't know that from these numbers which are _market share_, they are the percentages of the shrinking pie. So Canon has gained _market share_ at the expense of others, including companies not in the top five.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 16, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I doubt if Canon is quite that optimistic.
> 
> Yes, the average buyer isn't paying any attention to the "bru ha-ha" but they don't have to. All they need to see is some internet buzz that Canon released a camera that overheats. They can come across that just Googling for information, which is how people decide what to buy today -- not by going into non-existent camera stores. Or they may not know any more than "my friend's cousin's uncle told him not to buy a Canon because they catch on fire."
> 
> ...


Eventually, the bru ha-ha will die down and stop, just like it did with horrible dynamic range and the horrible banding and all the other over hyped so-called "problems" that Canon cameras have supposedly had over the years. For many people the R5 and R6 are the stills cameras they always wanted Canon to make.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 16, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Interesting perspective. I guess I'm just old and more out of touch than I thought.
> 
> If I'm looking for a camera, I come to sites like this and maybe POTN and read, read, and read some more.
> 
> ...



I doubt I'll live long enough to do all that!

Jack


----------



## woodman411 (Aug 16, 2020)

Woody said:


> I am curious. What happened to Nikon??? They lost their market shares to Sony and Fuji.



As many have commented on before, the writing was on the wall for Nikon as soon as they ceded their top product sensors to Sony. The 3 foundation legs of a camera company: sensors, lenses, and autofocus; lose one of them, and it's over. This is also the reason why Canon will not lose to Sony, because Sony chose to compromise their e-mount for crop lens compatibility, at the expense of innovation. The game-changing RF lenses, though pricey, show the full potential of a proper mirrorless mount, while Sony will continue to be hobbled with their e-mount decision for years to come.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Aug 16, 2020)

Speaking of dumping systems, what I'd like to know is what Artie is saying about his hit rate with respect to BIF.  Time to jump systems?

Jack


----------



## unfocused (Aug 16, 2020)

David Hull said:


> For many people the R5 and R6 are the stills cameras they always wanted Canon to make.


I agree with that, and may even be in that category myself, although "always wanted" is a bit of a stretch. 



David Hull said:


> Eventually, the bru ha-ha will die down and stop, just like it did with horrible dynamic range and the horrible banding and all the other over hyped so-called "problems" that Canon cameras have supposedly had over the years.



Those died down because Canon significantly improved its sensors on both fronts. They didn't just hunker down and hope the complaints would go away, which is what some people on this forum are advocating, with their "The R5 is perfect for my purposes, so all complaints are ridiculous" attitude. 

My point, which several folks on this forum don't seem to get, is that bad publicity can affect more than the sales of a particular model. It contributes to an overall perception of a brand, which is why Canon is very protective of its reputation and ultimately addresses the concerns. The fact that a few sellers on eBay are gouging naive R5 buyers during a global pandemic that has impacted supplies is evidence of nothing except that fools and con men are born every minute. 

I am confident that Canon is very aware of the damage that the negative publicity has done to their reputation and if they can make post-production fixes to address some of the overheating issues, they will do that. 

The forum experts seem to be of a mind that Canon should just circle the wagons and hope everything goes away. I'm confident that Canon's management is smarter than they are and I'm relieved by that.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I know it was a humorous reply but...
> 
> No they can't there are printer identifiers on every piece of paper out of a high end printer so investigators know where it came from, and most printing software won't allow you to print copies of paper money anyway.


Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

bbasiaga said:


> I'd really like to know who Nikon uses. I worked for a food company here in the US. We got a new CEO and he came from a different food company (Pepsi Co.). Upon arrival, he had all of his former company's products removed from our buildings - No pepsi in the cafeteria, none of their brands of chips in the vending machines, etc. The corporate world can be a petty place.


Kudos for Canon to test Sony CFe cards and approve them for use in 1DXiii and R5


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Kudos for Canon to test Sony CFe cards and approve them for use in 1DXiii and R5



I just wish there were good low capacity cards tested that weren't Sony. I've hated that company since LONG before I got into photography.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 17, 2020)

unfocused said:


> I agree with that, and may even be in that category myself, although "always wanted" is a bit of a stretch.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I guess Canon had a number of choices here. 

1. They could have left out the offending modes and then everyone would been whining about the "Cripple Hammer" saying that they had an 8k capable camera but they crippled the camera, saving that feature for their expensive video line never knowing that there was a good reason that they left those modes out.

2. They Could have put in a fan or some sort of heat-pipe based passive cooling making the camera larger, heavier, with less weather sealing and shorter battery life which would tick off their stills users (like myself) who have no real interest in video.

3. They could take the path that they did and enable all the video possibilities even though they incur some limitations as a result of their efforts to achieve some of the other design goals for the device.

As for me, I would have been pretty happy with #1, but I wouldn't have been too happy paying $3900 for it. As for the "always wanted" part, people in Canon forums have been bellyaching about banding, 1 stop less DR, no IBIS, one card slot and not enough resolution for ages. This thing checks off all those boxes (IMO, anyway). However, the 5D series has always been priced in the $3300 to $3500 range. It looks like they tacked on another $400 for their perception of the value of the HD video (that really doesn't work well). I'll be curious how long the market supports that.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.


Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.

But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 17, 2020)

melgross said:


> And Nikon continues its slide to irrelevance. Who would have thought, a few years ago, that Sony would bypass Nikon? Very few, I would imagine.




To me it seemed inevitable. Nikon should have hit the panic button on sensors the second Sony made their first full frame and started trying to make their lenses look like Canon lenses. Sony has been obviously copying the best from everyone (lens looks, menus, PDAF, etc). Now that Sony ergonomics are no longer utter garbage, most innovations in the industry seem to be about image quality or focus performance or speed- all of which tie heavily into the sensors. 

While everyone was mocking Canon for being behind on sensors by a 1.5-2 (mostly irrelevant) stops of DR, they bought their own chip and sensor foundry and hired their own technical staff to make sensors for themselves. Once the 5D4 was out Canon sensors were caught up enough not to matter to practical people who actually take real pictures. Canon lead the market in focus performance with DPAF, which everyone soon copied. With the R5 and R6, the sensor performance is incredible and on par with everyone else or better. Focusing, ergonomics, overall lens and accessory system, etc. are all class leading or extremely competitive.

It takes many millions and several years to start a chip division and fab/foundry and I don't think Nikon has that time. I haven't seen Nikon innovate significantly since they got into Sony sensors heavily with D650-D850. No idea why their lens lines seem to be stagnant as well. My best guess is Nikon will either release something incredible to right the ship, or be absorbed by Sony, or join with Panasonic within a couple years.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.
> 
> But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.




A very, very, very long time ago the United States would print a sheet with multiple different denominations on it, e.g., two ones, a two and a five, or two fives, a ten and a twenty. That tended to drive them to be the same size. Now of course the sheets that go through the printer are the same size regardless of denomination, and a 4x8 layout is used (we're transitioning to 5x10).

We have transitioned to having a large number on the reverse of the note, and I understand the blind can feel the difference (though I find it hard to believe, myself).

The Hollerith "computer card" originated well before electronic computers, and it was sized to match the large-sized money the US used before 1928. That way he could use the same machinery banks used to handle currency.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

SteveC said:


> I just wish there were good low capacity cards tested that weren't Sony. I've hated that company since LONG before I got into photography.


I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.



Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the _reader_ from my brick and mortar!

There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.
> 
> But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.


Clearly off topic but still interesting - to me  )
Australia invented polymer currency >30 years ago 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_banknote
although Note Printing Australia doesn't actually make the substrate any longer 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Note_Printing_Australia
but has produced currency for 19 countries


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the _reader_ from my brick and mortar!
> 
> There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.


Approved CFe cards:
https://www.canon-europe.com/suppor...r_products/content/faq/?itemid=tcm:13-1997134
CFe - only the 512GB Sandisk is approved. Lexar 128GB is also approved
I ordered my Sony CFe card from Amazon that got it from the US as none were locally available.

SD - Sandisk 128GB is rated U3 only (no V rating) but comes in 8th in this speed comparison (sustained write) - ahead of other V60 and V90 cards. Almost double the write speed of the V90 Delkin card!
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Approved CFe cards:
> https://www.canon-europe.com/suppor...r_products/content/faq/?itemid=tcm:13-1997134
> CFe - only the 512GB Sandisk is approved. Lexar 128GB is also approved
> I ordered my Sony CFe card from Amazon that got it from the US as none were locally available.
> ...



Yeah I saw the original rating and really have heard too many bad things about Lexar to want to buy their 128GB card.

V90 is well under the speed of any reasonable SD II (or whatever they call it) card; they'll need a fourth rating system (hopefully one that addresses sustained write speed) to clutter up the labels even more.


----------



## geffy (Aug 17, 2020)

landon said:


> They stopped paying ransom money to youtubers.


an act of love, like pretending your happy with your wife being a nikon owner


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

geffy said:


> an act of love, like pretending your happy with your wife being a nikon owner



Nikon? You're behind the times mate, Sony is the Dark Side now.


----------



## stevelee (Aug 17, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The Hollerith "computer card" originated well before electronic computers, and it was sized to match the large-sized money the US used before 1928. That way he could use the same machinery banks used to handle currency.


Hollerith developed his card technology from that used Jacquard looms. I don't know how the size compared.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.






privatebydesign said:


> Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.
> 
> But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.



I've got a cousin who has been blind from birth. I don't know how she does it, but she can tell by feel the difference in U.S. currency denominations.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 17, 2020)

David Hull said:


> Well, I guess Canon had a number of choices here.
> 
> 1. They could have left out the offending modes and then everyone would been whining about the "Cripple Hammer" saying that they had an 8k capable camera but they crippled the camera, saving that feature for their expensive video line never knowing that there was a good reason that they left those modes out.
> 
> ...



$3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars

$3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.

The average of the two is $3,863 which is $36 less than the introductory price of the R5.

Tell me again how the price went up $400 when adjusted for inflation?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 17, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> $3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars
> 
> $3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.
> 
> ...


Prices of the 5 series drop or remain the same each time a new one is introduced because of inflation. its the same for many electronic devices. TV sets are a prime example, prices of the new models are amazingly low compared to smaller screens with less resolutions in the past.

Look at the original 5D Mark 1 price adjusted for inflation. The R5 is a bargain.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.






SteveC said:


> Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the _reader_ from my brick and mortar!
> 
> There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.



U ratings are maximum sustained read speeds.

V ratings are minimum sustained write speeds.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> U ratings are maximum sustained read speeds.
> 
> V ratings are minimum sustained write speeds.



According to this, they are BOTH minimum write speeds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD_card

Which means I was wrong in thinking they were max speeds.

Regardless--the sorts of speeds expected of a UHS 2 card , much less a CFExpress, are well in excess of V90, so the ratings are essentially meaningless; it's like maxing out an aptitude test--there's no way to know the guy's ability, just that it's somewhere north of the test's maximum.


----------



## dwarven (Aug 17, 2020)

Joules said:


> Just out of curiosity, would you mind naming some of these unique lenses?











Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens


Buy Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 80-300mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/2.8 to f/22, Three Aspherical and Four ED Elements, ZERO Lens Coating, Dual VCM AF System, Manual Focus Clutch, Programmable L-Fn Function Button, Removable...




www.bhphotovideo.com












Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm f/4-5.6 II POWER O.I.S. Lens with Lens Care Kit


Buy Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm f/4-5.6 II POWER O.I.S. Lens with Lens Care Kit featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 200-600mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/4 to f/22, One Extra-Low Dispersion Element, Linear Autofocus Motor, POWER Optical Image Stabilizer, Splash and Dustproof...




www.bhphotovideo.com












Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens with UV Filter Kit


Buy Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens with UV Filter Kit featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 200-800mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/4 to f/22, 1 Aspherical ED, 1 UED & 2 ED Elements, High-Speed 240 fps AF, Focus Limiter, POWER O.I.S., Dual I.S...




www.bhphotovideo.com












Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO Lens


Buy Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-100mm f/4 IS PRO Lens featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 24-200mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/4 to f/22, Aspherical and Low Dispersion Elements, ZERO Coating and Z Coating Nano, MSC AF System, Manual Focus Clutch, Optical Image Stabilization, Sync IS...




www.bhphotovideo.com





There are plenty more, and they're all significantly lighter than their closest full frame counterparts. I'd also encourage you to do some side by side comparisons of MFT and cell phone pictures, because it seems you don't really know what you're talking about. Here, I'll even get you started on your new learning experience.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens
> 
> 
> Buy Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 80-300mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/2.8 to f/22, Three Aspherical and Four ED Elements, ZERO Lens Coating, Dual VCM AF System, Manual Focus Clutch, Programmable L-Fn Function Button, Removable...
> ...



Panasonic/Lumix does have an M5 mark II.


----------



## David - Sydney (Aug 17, 2020)

SteveC said:


> According to this, they are BOTH minimum write speeds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD_card
> 
> Which means I was wrong in thinking they were max speeds.
> 
> Regardless--the sorts of speeds expected of a UHS 2 card , much less a CFExpress, are well in excess of V90, so the ratings are essentially meaningless; it's like maxing out an aptitude test--there's no way to know the guy's ability, just that it's somewhere north of the test's maximum.


The R5 advanced user guide (page 904) states what Vxx speed is needed for different video formats. 10 bit 8K IPB needs V90 for instance (minimum 90MB/s) with the USH-II half duplex max speed of ~300MB/s
The strange part of all this is that the UHS-II spec was released in 2011, 2016 was UHS-III(~600MB/s) and SD express in 2017 covering gigabit speeds and 2020 now up to 4GB/s. UHS-II cards are pretty new in the market. Who knows when SD Express might turn up in a local store near you.


----------



## Joules (Aug 17, 2020)

dwarven said:


> Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens
> 
> 
> Buy Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO Lens featuring Micro Four Thirds System, 80-300mm (35mm Equivalent), Aperture Range: f/2.8 to f/22, Three Aspherical and Four ED Elements, ZERO Lens Coating, Dual VCM AF System, Manual Focus Clutch, Programmable L-Fn Function Button, Removable...
> ...


Thanks for pointing those lenses out. I do wonder though how unique they'll actually be in the long term.

The 40-150 mm already has an equivalent that's 40 g lighter at only 710 g (although on an R, with the 110 g adapter it would actually be 70 g heavier):








Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens


Buy Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM Lens featuring EF-Mount/Full-Frame Format, Aperture Range: f/4 to f/45, One Ultra Low Dispersion Element, NANO USM Autofocus System, Optical Image Stabilizer, Lens Information Display, Full-Time Manual Focus, Rounded 9-Blade Diaphragm. Review Canon null




www.bhphotovideo.com





There are no equivalents for the zooms yet, but since we now know Canon is willing to push into the realm of slow aperture telephotos, that may well change in the near future.

As for the 12-100, that looks really versatile considering the weight. The closest choice would be the also quite new super zoom:


Redirect Notice



190 g heavier at 750 g. But also far less expensive and with greater range and light gathering ability, so it is an apples to oranges comparison.

Any way, I don't think we disagree on how smartphones compare to ILC and MFT specifically. I know what type of quality you get from crop sensors. I never said smartphones deliver the same image quality. But lets make my position clear just to avoid further confusion: If you know what you're doing, you can get amazing pictures with MFT and will encounter many situations where a smartphone would limit you severely if you shoot a lot of different subject genres.

I think we agree here, right?

So, let me repeat my original point: a lot of people are content with their smartphones, as they value different things than us photo enthusiasts when it comes to the process and results of photographing. They don't put the same value as us on the ability to have greater control about the settings, change the lens to fit the situation at hand and get the overall better quality associated with gathering more light.

As Smartphones become more capable due to computational photography and more cameras, the number of these people increases. So those that buy dedicated cameras become fewer. We still agree, right?

So, we have people who see the pictures of ILC and don't see a sufficient difference for their personal shooting preferences to justify spending or carrying more than they do with their smartphone.

And then you have the people who are willing to spend and carry more. Among those, I think the group that is so concerned with size and weight that they consider MFT, but not so concerned that the stick with smartphones, is not the majority. So it's a niche. And you can absolutely survive as a company by serving a niche. Seems like Olympus didn't. Either they did not operate well enough, or the market has decided that despite being as great as they are, their cameras aren't great enough.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 17, 2020)

Michael Clark said:


> $3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars
> 
> $3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.
> 
> ...


Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.


----------



## Colorado (Aug 17, 2020)

David Hull said:


> Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.


Sensor? What are the R/D costs on a new 45MP sensor with higher DR compared to reusing the existing 1DX3 sensor? (I don't know, just asking.)


----------



## Andreasb (Aug 17, 2020)

The numbers from Nikkei don't add up, see Thom Hogans post


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

David - Sydney said:


> The R5 advanced user guide (page 904) states what Vxx speed is needed for different video formats. 10 bit 8K IPB needs V90 for instance (minimum 90MB/s) with the USH-II half duplex max speed of ~300MB/s
> The strange part of all this is that the UHS-II spec was released in 2011, 2016 was UHS-III(~600MB/s) and SD express in 2017 covering gigabit speeds and 2020 now up to 4GB/s. UHS-II cards are pretty new in the market. Who knows when SD Express might turn up in a local store near you.



I recall reading somewhere that 340MBps were needed for some of the modes. That's way above the minimum possible meaning of V90.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 17, 2020)

Andreasb said:


> The numbers from Nikkei don't add up, see Thom Hogans post



He says that two categories were reported in 2018, but only one combined one in 2019. He then "puts the two numbers together" to get what he thinks are equivalent (to 2019 methodology) numbers.

But how did he put them together? He doesn't say, so I have no way of knowing if he did it right. If Xenon cameras (to make up a fictitious example to illustrate) had 3 percent of the market share in ILC and 9 percent in compact, you can't just simply average them and say Xenon did 6 percent in 2018; perhaps compact is 90 percent of the combined market and you should get 8.4% (9 x .9 + 3 x .1) as your answer, or maybe it's the other way around and your answer should be 9 x .1 + 3 x .9 = 3.6%.

So since I don't know how HE put the numbers together, and I don't know how Nikkei did it, I can't evaluate his claim.


----------



## melgross (Aug 17, 2020)

Thom ?Hogan, today, on his site, makes a point these numbers make no sense. I tend to agree. Canon’s share was 51% last year, and now it’s in the mid 40s, after having gone up? Somehow, the numbers are being counted differently than before, which means we can’t trust what they mean.


----------



## landon (Aug 17, 2020)

Sorry Off Topic. Anyone here has got Photoshop? 
Can you do me favour? Test this out for me. 

- Open any image in Photoshop
- Draw any shape -- BUT leave it blank. No line, No border.
- Exit and Save.
- Open the .psd file. 

Do you get an error that you can't open the file? (I've never had this happen to me before. Thanks)


----------



## geffy (Aug 17, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Nikon? You're behind the times mate, Sony is the Dark Side now.


thats the girlfriend


----------



## AEWest (Aug 17, 2020)

dwarven said:


> This is nonsense. Even MFT is far beyond smartphone quality. MFT also offers some pretty unique glass. The Olympus camera division is going under because they put all of their eggs in the MFT basket in a market that says "FF is better no matter what", which is also more nonsense. The OM-D E-M1 Mark III, for example, is one of the best camera bodies on the market. It has better weather sealing and IBIS than any other manufacturer at a fraction of the weight. If I was shooting in harsh conditions I'd pick that body over any FF. In short, Olympus lost the marketing war. It wouldn't have hurt to put out an APS-C body or two either.


Olympus is the very best camera that nobody buys.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 18, 2020)

Colorado said:


> Sensor? What are the R/D costs on a new 45MP sensor with higher DR compared to reusing the existing 1DX3 sensor? (I don't know, just asking.)


That depends on how they cost it. I suspect that the cost is about the same for the R5 sensor as it is for the R6. I think that they are the same generation, same fab line etc.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 18, 2020)

David Hull said:


> That depends on how they cost it. I suspect that the cost is about the same for the R5 sensor as it is for the R6. I think that they are the same generation, same fab line etc.



The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond its true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.

But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the _most significant_ and _most costly_ difference between the two models.


----------



## Colorado (Aug 18, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond it's true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.
> 
> But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the _most significant_ and _most costly_ difference between the two models.


I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 18, 2020)

Colorado said:


> I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.


That’s factually incorrect sorry. The US$3750-4000 Price range was ”predicted” by a large number of forum members who understood the market dynamics at the time. myself included @ $3,750


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 18, 2020)

Colorado said:


> I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes I had posted my guess at $3,995 a while ago.


----------



## Eclipsed (Aug 18, 2020)

David Hull said:


> Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.



Then there’s the 900 megapixels per second of the R5...


----------



## sanj (Aug 18, 2020)

Colorado said:


> I'll add that when the specs were leaked many many people predicted an MSRP for the R5 of $5000+. More still were in the $4000's. Almost nobody expected a retail price in the 3's.


Noooo. Many many predicted around 3650$


----------



## simeyesky (Aug 18, 2020)

SteveC said:


> He says that two categories were reported in 2018, but only one combined one in 2019. He then "puts the two numbers together" to get what he thinks are equivalent (to 2019 methodology) numbers.
> 
> But how did he put them together? He doesn't say, so I have no way of knowing if he did it right. If Xenon cameras (to make up a fictitious example to illustrate) had 3 percent of the market share in ILC and 9 percent in compact, you can't just simply average them and say Xenon did 6 percent in 2018; perhaps compact is 90 percent of the combined market and you should get 8.4% (9 x .9 + 3 x .1) as your answer, or maybe it's the other way around and your answer should be 9 x .1 + 3 x .9 = 3.6%.
> 
> So since I don't know how HE put the numbers together, and I don't know how Nikkei did it, I can't evaluate his claim.



What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%


----------



## melgross (Aug 18, 2020)

simeyesky said:


> What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%


I’m not so sure. We do know that the numbers this year are being calculated differently, so they bear little relation to last year’s. Thom is correct. He’s just using the numbers presented to everybody. He isn’t using his own, as you seem to be saying, for some reason.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 18, 2020)

simeyesky said:


> What is sure is that Thom is wrong in his calculations, as he ends up with 2018 market shares as : Canon 51.2% + Nikon 28.7% + Sony 20.0% = 99.9%



So it would seem that the prior numbers were of the market share among the top three, whereas this year's numbers pull in additional manufactures (including some below the top five that are listed).

That could explain a lot of discrepancies right there.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 18, 2020)

SteveC said:


> The point being you listed a bunch of things the R5 has better than the R6, then dismissed them as minor, and not expensive to provide. This was on the way to insinuating that Canon's price for the R5 is inflated beyond its true additional value vis-à-vis the R6.
> 
> But you totally left out the sensor in your list, and it is probably the _most significant_ and _most costly_ difference between the two models.


OK, how is the sensor cost different? The die for each is the same size, I am assuming that they are both made on the same fab line, in the same process node, etc. In which the cost won't be much different. Semiconductor cost is determined by the finished cost of the wafer divided by how many chips you get off of it (with adders for packaging, test etc.). So, if the finished cost of a wafer is $2500 and the yield is 25 chips then the cost per chip is $100 whether is has 25 MP or 50 MP. What you charge for it is a different story. 

I still maintain that an EOS R6 and an EOS R5 are almost identical with a few differences (some of which I listed). I don't think there is a $1000 difference. That doesn't stop them from pricing it that way -- assuming that the customers will pay it and the competition doesn't come along offering something as good for a lower price. This appears to be what happened to the EOS R. I am guessing that there is room to move in the R6 as well.

Here are a couple different questions: Would they have priced it higher if the higher definition video modes actually worked well? Also, what is the use case for the video as it is? If you can only shoot for 20 minutes (and even that is qualified), after which you have to power the thing down and let it cool for 2 hours (?), in what situation is that actually usable? Can you still shoot stills if it has overheated like that?


----------



## SteveC (Aug 18, 2020)

David Hull said:


> OK, how is the sensor cost different? The die for each is the same size, I am assuming that they are both made on the same fab line, in the same process node, etc. In which the cost won't be much different. Semiconductor cost is determined by the finished cost of the wafer divided by how many chips you get off of it (with adders for packaging, test etc.). So, if the finished cost of a wafer is $2500 and the yield is 25 chips then the cost per chip is $100 whether is has 25 MP or 50 MP. What you charge for it is a different story.
> 
> I still maintain that an EOS R6 and an EOS R5 are almost identical with a few differences (some of which I listed). I don't think there is a $1000 difference. That doesn't stop them from pricing it that way -- assuming that the customers will pay it and the competition doesn't come along offering something as good for a lower price. This appears to be what happened to the EOS R. I am guessing that there is room to move in the R6 as well.
> 
> Here are a couple different questions: Would they have priced it higher if the higher definition video modes actually worked well? Also, what is the use case for the video as it is? If you can only shoot for 20 minutes (and even that is qualified), after which you have to power the thing down and let it cool for 2 hours (?), in what situation is that actually usable? Can you still shoot stills if it has overheated like that?



Quite possibly the sensor IS more expensive to fabricate, using as it does smaller circuitry sizes. Or it may make no difference; I don't know if the same foundry makes them both with the same equipment. But you do have to amortize development costs, too: the R5 is the first camera with this sensor, the R6 is using a previously used sensor.

But that's not the only aspect of it; you have to be able to handle more data, more quickly in the R5 than in the R6 (and that, indeed, is _part_ of the overheating issue), which requires more processing power, likely more memory for the buffer, and on and on and on. And this will more than likely apply to the autofocus system as well. It's not just a matter of dropping a different wafer onto the spot that says "put sensor here."

I had no difficulty ponying up the extra cash for the higher-res sensor, video modes or no video modes.


----------



## melgross (Aug 19, 2020)

David Hull said:


> Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.


You’re missing a number of things that make a large bit of the price difference. Why?

the 45mp sensor costs considerably more than the 20mp sensor. The higher rez EVF costs considerably more as well. A difference in bodies. The R5 has an all magnesium body. The R6 uses a polycarbonate front. The R5 is better weather sealed than the R 6. The 5 is sealed to the standard of the 5Dmk IV, and the 6 to the standard of the D6.

those are a lot of differences, and they’re all significant. There are some smaller differences as well. How you can pretend they don’t exist, or matter, only you can know.


----------



## melgross (Aug 19, 2020)

David Hull said:


> OK, how is the sensor cost different? The die for each is the same size, I am assuming that they are both made on the same fab line, in the same process node, etc. In which the cost won't be much different. Semiconductor cost is determined by the finished cost of the wafer divided by how many chips you get off of it (with adders for packaging, test etc.). So, if the finished cost of a wafer is $2500 and the yield is 25 chips then the cost per chip is $100 whether is has 25 MP or 50 MP. What you charge for it is a different story.
> 
> I still maintain that an EOS R6 and an EOS R5 are almost identical with a few differences (some of which I listed). I don't think there is a $1000 difference. That doesn't stop them from pricing it that way -- assuming that the customers will pay it and the competition doesn't come along offering something as good for a lower price. This appears to be what happened to the EOS R. I am guessing that there is room to move in the R6 as well.
> 
> Here are a couple different questions: Would they have priced it higher if the higher definition video modes actually worked well? Also, what is the use case for the video as it is? If you can only shoot for 20 minutes (and even that is qualified), after which you have to power the thing down and let it cool for 2 hours (?), in what situation is that actually usable? Can you still shoot stills if it has overheated like that?


high rez sensors do cost considerably more, like it or not. They always have, and they always will. The reject rate is higher with more dense chips. That’s just one area. But the lenses are much smaller and more expensive. The RGB filter is more expensive. The positioning of these parts needs to be considerably more precuse, and leads to more rejects.Pretty much everything regarding it is more expensive. They cost more than $100, several hundred.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 19, 2020)

melgross said:


> high rez sensors do cost considerably more, like it or not. They always have, and they always will. The reject rate is higher with more dense chips. That’s just one area. But the lenses are much smaller and more expensive. The RGB filter is more expensive. The positioning of these parts needs to be considerably more precuse, and leads to more rejects.Pretty much everything regarding it is more expensive. They cost more than $100, several hundred.



The man is convinced he's being forced to pay extra for video features he didn't want. We've been over and over and over that and it never does any good.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 19, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Quite possibly the sensor IS more expensive to fabricate, using as it does smaller circuitry sizes. Or it may make no difference; I don't know if the same foundry makes them both with the same equipment. But you do have to amortize development costs, too: the R5 is the first camera with this sensor, the R6 is using a previously used sensor.
> 
> But that's not the only aspect of it; you have to be able to handle more data, more quickly in the R5 than in the R6 (and that, indeed, is _part_ of the overheating issue), which requires more processing power, likely more memory for the buffer, and on and on and on. And this will more than likely apply to the autofocus system as well. It's not just a matter of dropping a different wafer onto the spot that says "put sensor here."
> 
> I had no difficulty ponying up the extra cash for the higher-res sensor, video modes or no video modes.





SteveC said:


> The man is convinced he's being forced to pay extra for video features he didn't want. We've been over and over and over that and it never does any good.


Not exactly, read my post more carefully. It is one thing to pay for something you don't want or don't need. We do that all the time. You can probably say that about the whole damn camera ;-). However, in this case, it seems that we are being asked to pay for something that isn't really very practical. What is the use case for the 8k mode when you have to cool the camera down an hour+ after shooting video for 20 minutes. Even as a stills shooter, I find the ability to grab stills shots out of the 8k stream interesting. I can think of shots where that might be usable. However, if I overheat the camera, can I drop back to stills or do I have to put it back in the pack and go have a couple beers.

it was more of a comment or observation rather than a complaint. I still think that the R5 is a really great camera for stills shooters, it checks all of the boxes that many Canon users have been wanting but, i don't think that the HD video features are going top prove that useful. I would be interested in hearing from others what they thing the use cases for a video camera with these sorts of limitations would be.


----------



## David Hull (Aug 19, 2020)

melgross said:


> high rez sensors do cost considerably more, like it or not. They always have, and they always will. The reject rate is higher with more dense chips. That’s just one area. But the lenses are much smaller and more expensive. The RGB filter is more expensive. The positioning of these parts needs to be considerably more precuse, and leads to more rejects.Pretty much everything regarding it is more expensive. They cost more than $100, several hundred.


Yea, you have a point. I wasn't thinking about the lens and filter part which might impact final yield. I come from some 30 years in semiconductor manufacturing for large SoC's where it pretty much works as I described -- chips that consumed the same wafer area tended to be the same cost at that point. Then there is packaging and testing.


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 31, 2020)

David Hull said:


> Well, then there is nothing to complain about then. In your view they gave you a better camera for the same price, and threw in the video for free so who cares how well it works? I will point out though that the only thing different about the R5 from the R6 in terms of actual components is the VF, the CFE slot, a couple connectors and a slightly better chassis. Yet the R6 is $1k less. IMO, one of the things they are counting on to justify the higher price is the video capabilities.



I'm not complaining, I was responding to you who was complaining that the enhanced video features added $1000+ to the price. That's simply not true, based on the price history of 5-series cameras.

You're also forgetting the difference between 45MP and 20MP...


----------



## Michael Clark (Aug 31, 2020)

David Hull said:


> OK, how is the sensor cost different? The die for each is the same size, I am assuming that they are both made on the same fab line, in the same process node, etc. In which the cost won't be much different. Semiconductor cost is determined by the finished cost of the wafer divided by how many chips you get off of it (with adders for packaging, test etc.). So, if the finished cost of a wafer is $2500 and the yield is 25 chips then the cost per chip is $100 whether is has 25 MP or 50 MP. What you charge for it is a different story.
> 
> I still maintain that an EOS R6 and an EOS R5 are almost identical with a few differences (some of which I listed). I don't think there is a $1000 difference. That doesn't stop them from pricing it that way -- assuming that the customers will pay it and the competition doesn't come along offering something as good for a lower price. This appears to be what happened to the EOS R. I am guessing that there is room to move in the R6 as well.
> 
> Here are a couple different questions: Would they have priced it higher if the higher definition video modes actually worked well? Also, what is the use case for the video as it is? If you can only shoot for 20 minutes (and even that is qualified), after which you have to power the thing down and let it cool for 2 hours (?), in what situation is that actually usable? Can you still shoot stills if it has overheated like that?



Yield will not be the same for sensors with radically different pixel densities. There will be more errors on the smaller pixel densities, which will cause a higher percentage of the chips made from each wafer to be rejected.


----------

