# Sony Worldwide Camera Sales Going Down



## Diko (Feb 5, 2017)

According to this *article* the latest reports Sony camera sales are down from 1.8 to 1.6 Million units. It’s really a big drop resulting approx 9.6% revenue decrease.

But the good news is sensors demand is up all time by 40% which is due to high demand of image sensors in smartphone units.

IMHO one reason could be the *Sony Kumamoto Fab after April 2016 Earthquake*

Sony also announces a realignment of its business segments. All image sensor R&D teams, including CineAlta sensors, are moved into Semiconductor group.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 5, 2017)

But...but...Canon is *******!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 5, 2017)

Sony lost a bundle in imaging sensors about a year ago due to a big downturn in smartphone sales. Smartphone sales seem to be recovering, so is the demand for sensors. In addition to smartphones, the use of video sensors in automobiles and even appliances like refrigerators is increasing, and Sony is very strong in that area.

As far as camera sales go, they are seeing the same thing other manufacturers see, low end sales are dwindling, but high end sales are picking up. So, fewer camera units sold does not mean less income from sales.


----------



## Lurker (Feb 6, 2017)

No doubt a victim of their own success. Their cameras are so good and years ahead of the competition that people don't feel the need to upgrade with every new body. Unlike stupid Canon that cripples every camera so you have buy the "next" camera to get the features that should have been in the current model. Stupid Canon.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 20, 2017)

Diko said:


> According to this *article* the latest reports Sony camera sales are down from 1.8 to 1.6 Million units. It’s really a big drop resulting approx 9.6% revenue decrease.
> 
> But the good news is sensors demand is up all time by 40% which is due to high demand of image sensors in smartphone units.
> 
> ...



Keep in mind that 2016 was a slow year for new product releases, and nothing significant happened in that regard in 2016 Q3. The most significant products in 2016 happened in Q4.

They will likely have new a7 models in 2017, and perhaps a a9. Those will probably result in an acceleration of sales, primarily at the expense of Canon and Nikon.


----------



## Sharlin (Feb 20, 2017)

Lurker said:


> No doubt a victim of their own success. Their cameras are so good and years ahead of the competition that people don't feel the need to upgrade with every new body. Unlike stupid Canon that cripples every camera so you have buy the "next" camera to get the features that should have been in the current model. Stupid Canon.


----------



## bwud (Feb 20, 2017)

Lurker said:


> No doubt a victim of their own success



haha, well DP Review did just call their recent A99ii the "ultimate SLT," which if correct would suggest Sony is done making SLT cameras


----------



## slclick (Feb 20, 2017)

All they really need is a Megabass button on the cameras and everything will be fine again.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 20, 2017)

GMasters are so expensive that Sony shooters no longer have enough money to upgrade bodies every 6 months.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 20, 2017)

Tugela said:


> They will likely have new a7 models in 2017, and perhaps a a9. Those will probably result in an acceleration of sales, primarily at the expense of Canon and Nikon.



So...different than what happened with all their prior models. Why is that, exactly?


----------



## Tugela (Feb 20, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > They will likely have new a7 models in 2017, and perhaps a a9. Those will probably result in an acceleration of sales, primarily at the expense of Canon and Nikon.
> ...



Because camera sales are highest when a model is first released, then taper off over time as improved competitor products are released? Like with every other camera on the market? Or is that to obvious for a smart guy like you?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 20, 2017)

Tugela said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



The year the a7R came out, Sony lost market share whereas Canon and Nikon gained. The year the a7RII came out, Sony gained market share, and so did Canon, while Nikon lost market share. 

It takes a special kind of exceptionally myopic person to think that the few weeks after a camera's launch matter in the long run. Good to know that you're so special and exceptional.


----------



## Jopa (Feb 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> The year the a7R came out, Sony lost market share whereas Canon and Nikon gained. The year the a7RII came out, Sony gained market share, and so did Canon, while Nikon lost market share.
> 
> It takes a special kind of exceptionally myopic person to think that the few weeks after a camera's launch matter in the long run. Good to know that you're so special and exceptional.



I finally put my a7r2 on eBay last week, wondering if it impacts Sony's market share. Theoretically someone who wanted to buy a new a7r2 will buy mine because it's cheap. That means Sony will sell one new camera less, and the market share will decrease.


----------



## Woody (Feb 21, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> The year the a7R came out, Sony lost market share whereas Canon and Nikon gained. The year the a7RII came out, Sony gained market share, and so did Canon, while Nikon lost market share.
> 
> It takes a special kind of exceptionally myopic person to think that the few weeks after a camera's launch matter in the long run. Good to know that you're so special and exceptional.



;D ;D ;D Indeed

According to Thom Hogan, we are just returning to the camera market scene in the 90's
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-nikon-q3-financials.html

"... we have a return to the 90’s: Canon has about half the ILC market, and Nikon about half of the remaining half."

In addition, all the A7 models are high-end products which represent a small market while recent Canon releases (Rebels and EOS-M) are lower end stuff which tend to sell in much greater quantities.


----------



## JBSF (Feb 21, 2017)

I don't care about Sony, though their sensor technology does show where cameras can go. I wouldn't buy a Sony body because of (1) cost, (2) poor customer support, and (3) their refresh rate, which makes every body obsolete in a matter of months.

Canon may update much more slowly than Sony, but by the time they do, a great many people want the upgrade, and the company's investment in old stock is minimal.

Sony on the other hand refreshes so often that most consumers could never afford to keep up. Their business model is extremely different, and old stock held by major retailers seems shockingly overpriced compared to current offerings.

I wonder if Sony is suffering because of Sony's business model.


----------



## YuengLinger (Feb 21, 2017)

Do their cameras have Wi-Fi? If so, you could have Sony and share!

And that takes us on a walk, man, way back to the 70's!


----------



## Mikehit (Feb 21, 2017)

Woody said:


> ;D ;D ;D Indeed
> 
> According to Thom Hogan, we are just returning to the camera market scene in the 90's
> http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-nikon-q3-financials.html
> ...




This quote right here is something the tech spec floozies lose sight of: 



> Personally, I thought that Nikon had learned something when they presented their marketing for the DLs at the original announcement. Remember all the “compact for a DSLR shooter” types of comments they made about the design and how they approached creating the product? Dead on. Every serious shooter I know—every darned one—wants a camera that works the same as, uses the same accessories as, and functions the same as their main DSLR camera. But it must be compact and thus able to fit in a small bag or even a jacket pocket so as to be carried everywhere.



Canon has strength in its product range (the 'ecosystem' to use the market-speak). Sony has isolated excellent products which is fine if you have a relatively limited requirements but Canon has an integrated range that enables you to change tack. Sure, their mirrorless are not up to standards of Sony or Olympus yet but the urgency to get there is ameliorated by the fact that people buy into the 'system' and know they have a choice of a massive range of options.
Sony had to get there quickly to keep any form of market share, to create a differentiator that made them attractive but when you have achieved that is little place to go especially when Canon comes chugging up behind and closes the gap.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 27, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



MILCs will inherit the world. Cameras will more and more be a creature of the processors in them. This is inevitable, and is the area where growth in capability is going to be.

Sony have the a7 series. Panasonic have the GH series. and so on. They can make those cameras because they have the processors to power them

Canon have the M series. They can only make that because that is the limit imposed by their processors. See the problem?

They are behind, and there is no way Canon can outperform Sony and/or Panasonic in this area, because they simply lack the expertise in silicon. Canon will always be behind, and when the processor becomes the single most important part of a camera's capability, they will be limited to the bargain bin for their sales model.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 27, 2017)

JBSF said:


> I don't care about Sony, though their sensor technology does show where cameras can go. I wouldn't buy a Sony body because of (1) cost, (2) poor customer support, and (3) their refresh rate, which makes every body obsolete in a matter of months.
> 
> Canon may update much more slowly than Sony, but by the time they do, a great many people want the upgrade, and the company's investment in old stock is minimal.
> 
> ...



It is not a question of "keeping up".

When I make a decision to buy a camera I like to think that camera is the best technology available today, which is what I would get with a Sony, not the best technology available three-five years ago (which is what you get with Canon).

A frequent refresh cycle means that when you do decide to go out and get a camera, you know that you are getting the latest tech available. I don't see that as being a disadvantage, I want the best possible tech available now. When a company like Canon tells me "No, you can't have it because Joe over there bought a camera three years ago, and he would feel bad if your camera is better than his", it pisses me off. I don't care about Joe, his feel good status is not my concern, and I don't see why him feeling good about a purchase he made ages ago should be an argument for forcing *me* to take old technology.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 27, 2017)

Tugela said:


> Sony have the a7 series. Panasonic have the GH series. and so on. They can make those cameras because they have the processors to power them
> 
> Canon have the M series. They can only make that because that is the limit imposed by their processors. See the problem?
> 
> They are behind, and there is no way Canon can outperform Sony and/or Panasonic in this area, because they simply lack the expertise in silicon. Canon will always be behind, and when the processor becomes the single most important part of a camera's capability, they will be limited to the bargain bin for their sales model.



Yes, Canon is so far behind there's no way they can outperform Sony or Panasonic. All Canon can manage to do is to sell more MILCs globally than Sony or Panasonic. See the problem?

But hey, don't let reality influence your beliefs... :


----------



## Jopa (Feb 27, 2017)

Tugela said:


> ..and when the processor becomes the single most important part of a camera's capability...



Does it mean my android phone which has a WAY better processor than any consumer FF camera in the world, can beat all those cameras? Really? 

IMO the forum needs some kind of age verification process...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 27, 2017)

Jopa said:


> IMO the forum needs some kind of age verification process...



Except that age does not automatically confer wisdom, intelligence, or common sense.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 27, 2017)

Tugela said:


> JBSF said:
> 
> 
> > I don't care about Sony, though their sensor technology does show where cameras can go. I wouldn't buy a Sony body because of (1) cost, (2) poor customer support, and (3) their refresh rate, which makes every body obsolete in a matter of months.
> ...



When I make the decision to buy a camera I like to think it meets the value proposition of what I want/need and what I am willing and able to pay at the time (which is why I recently bought a second-hand 1Dx, not a 5D4 or 1Dx2). I don't care if some portions of it are "the best" or not, nor does it irk me if something comes out sometime later with components which are better. That's a self-destructive concern in the world of electronics (unless you have bottomless pockets).


----------



## Tugela (Feb 27, 2017)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Sony have the a7 series. Panasonic have the GH series. and so on. They can make those cameras because they have the processors to power them
> ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 27, 2017)

Tugela said:


> Your problem is that you lack foresight. You think that just because something is happening now, it will always happen like that. No doubt you bought big into IBM at the dawn of the PC era, because all computers being sold at the time were mainframes. It was *inconceivable* that something like a desktop computer like a PC would find a market. Fast forward today, what happened? Was IBM right?



You keep using that word...I do not think it means what you tihnk it means. 

I have plenty of foresight, but perhaps you're confusing that with foreknowledge. They are different. Your problem (besides improperly formatting your post) is that you make blanket assumptions without data to support them. Gradual improvement in processor capability is not the same as a paradigm shift. So until you can come up with a camera-relevant analogy to portable computing and smartphones, your references to IBM and Nokia are meaningless.

You've been bitching on here about Canon using 'old tech' processors for close to 3 years now...they're gaining market share, not losing it. Tell us, with all your foresight...when exactly will 'the processor become the single most important part of a camera's capability'? Will that be tomorrow, next week, sometime after MILCs sell better than dSLRs, or sometime after pigs fly over snowbanks in hell?

As for your babbling about processor power, remember when you stated any Canon camera with Digic 7 would shoot 4K...fast forward today, what happened? Were you right?


----------



## JBSF (Feb 28, 2017)

Tugela said:


> JBSF said:
> 
> 
> > I don't care about Sony, though their sensor technology does show where cameras can go. I wouldn't buy a Sony body because of (1) cost, (2) poor customer support, and (3) their refresh rate, which makes every body obsolete in a matter of months.
> ...



I understand why you might make your choices, but you help make my point. If Sony refreshes frequently, doesn't that suggest that they deliberately cripple bodies or release them prematurely?

If you don't buy another, then you are not alone. So huge inventories of "outdated" bodies as well as new ones, very highly priced and at great expense to the company sit unsold.

My point is about their business model. It does not seem to be thought out very well. As much as some buyers may like it, I think it could be damaging.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 28, 2017)

JBSF said:


> If Sony refreshes frequently, doesn't that suggest that ... release them prematurely?



Maybe if you peg them to other cameras makes (and even if you do, there was a time when Canon was pushing out a refresh almost once per year: 9 EOSxxxD models between mid 2003 and early 2013), but as a technology company in general their releases aren't extraordinarily frequent.


----------

