# Canon thinks the camera market will drop by another 50% over the next two years



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 28, 2019)

> In an article published by the Nikkei news, Canon’s president Fujio Mitarai talks about the future of the camera business and where it’s heading over the next couple of years.
> Canon thinks that the camera market will shrink another 50% over the next 2 years, which is changing some strategies at Canon on how to deal with the change in the marketplace.
> 
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## CanoKnight (Jan 28, 2019)

Keeping investor expectations low so anything other than worst scenario will beat their expectations.


----------



## SereneSpeed (Jan 28, 2019)

Ouch...


----------



## Viggo (Jan 28, 2019)

Somewhat surprising and very interesting...


----------



## mb66energy (Jan 28, 2019)

Same procedure as elsewhere: Very low cost systems for the masses and some really expensive high end systems for the pros? Hopefully not. 

Maybe some consequences of the intransparent camera market today - what's missing are some less feature laden cameras with excellent IQ. I bought 200D and M50 for their great sensors and DPAF capability but they are full of features while lacking some ergonomics. While the 200D has no safety shift (a really interesting feature for emergencies in Av and Tv) the M50 has it while they omitted the cable release in the M50 but it's existing in the 200D. Both lack the possibility to set a Image stabilizer limit e.g. 1...5EV for shutter speed - instead it cranks up the ISO.

Hopefully they will release a good FF mirrorless which is on the slow side (not AF wise!) but sports great IQ. The existing EOS R is too expensive for my application and at that price (or 300 EUR more) I would expect a FF 4k mode in a 2018 camera.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 28, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Somewhat surprising and very interesting...


Not at all surprising considering how much market cellphones have managed to capture not just for stills but also for video.


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 28, 2019)

Does it still make sense, for Panasonic, to enter a declining market? Less cake, more slices...
Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on? Anyway, apart from Canon, nobody knows what their real strategy will be. Unlike most youtubers, they are market -experienced. We can only wait and see...and remain confident!


----------



## JonSnow (Jan 28, 2019)

Viggo said:


> Somewhat surprising and very interesting...



surprising?

we have not reached bottom yet. every chart i have seen indicates that the downward trend will keep on for a while.


----------



## LDS (Jan 28, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Maybe some consequences of the intransparent camera market today



Many contradictory statements, yours... you want a camera with less features, but then complain about the missing ones. Great IQ and fast AF but at a cheap price point. Have the cake and eat it...


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 28, 2019)

We are drowning in images. People are numb to even spectacular work now.


----------



## CanoKnight (Jan 28, 2019)

Innovation at Canon stopped in 2008. From 2000-2008 they were running rings around every other camera brand. But in 2008 they decided to focus their resources on higher margin systems and let EOS stay afloat with the barest minimum. Soon other companies moved in where Canon left off and Canon began to realize their strategy wasn't working. And now they are blaming what ?
I will make a prediction for Mr Mitarai. You sir, bet heavily on the cinemaEOS system . That's why your EOS line had laughable video offerings compared to the competition. Now watch as Indie filmmakers and journalists move away from clunky cinemaEOS type video cameras to mirrorless. The coming Panasonic S1/S1R is just the beginning.


----------



## andrei1989 (Jan 28, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on?



additional models? no way...their lineup is already very complicated...


----------



## JonSnow (Jan 28, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on? Anyway, apart from Canon, nobody knows what their real strategy will be. Unlike most youtubers, they are market -experienced. We can only wait and see...and remain confident!




it depends.... as long as hardcore canon fanboys buy cameras that miss features.
i guess it is cheaper to produce cameras with the same old sensors (no BSI, not stacked) and without 4K features that would need a beefier processor.

reusing old stuff sure creates higher profits than developing like crazy in a shrinking market.... when the customers buy your stuff anyway.

but you have to be a canon fanboy or shareholder to appreciated this strategy....


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Keeping investor expectations low so anything other than worst scenario will beat their expectations.



Not really, they are justifying investments in other areas in order to meet their growth goals. If they just claimed a 50% drop was coming, and left it at that, investors would dump their stock. There might be some sand bagging in that estimate, but I don't think anyone really knows what the right number is, just that the direction is clear and it seems irreversible. A corporation must grow exponentially forever, when a market-wide contraction comes, you either find new markets (like Fujifilm in the dying days of film) or perish.


----------



## nchoh (Jan 28, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> it depends.... as long as hardcore canon fanboys buy cameras that miss features.
> i guess it is cheaper to produce cameras with the same old sensors (no BSI, not stacked) and without 4K features that would need a beefier processor.
> 
> reusing old stuff sure creates higher profits than developing like crazy in a shrinking market.... when the customers buy your stuff anyway.
> ...



There's not much you can do. You can choose Canon who is more conservative and has after many decades proven that it can survive and be the best in photography, or you can choose Sony which has over the years shown itself to be fickle in which products it holds or drops. Among others, Sony dropped personal stereos and TV when they once held a dominating lead. I wouldn't trust Sony to continue selling cameras in the future just as I wouldn't trust Samsung to continue selling cameras.


----------



## Viggo (Jan 28, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Not at all surprising considering how much market cellphones have managed to capture not just for stills but also for video.


Not the decline, the speed of the decline..


----------



## GoldWing (Jan 28, 2019)

I expect nothing less than solid, secure and loyal support from Canon to those of us who make our lives by using their equipment. As a multiple 1DXMKII owner and with over a 100K investment in glass, I know I can depend on Canon to innovate and keep me at the top of my game. With the PanAm Games coming up this Aug, Hi-Winds in July and The Olympics in 2020 many of us are ready to invest in Canon over and over again as the new 1DXMKIII takes us into the future. Canon's loyal customers are here and CPS does a GREAT job keeping us up and running at each event and every single day we go to work! Thank you Canon!!


----------



## PerKr (Jan 28, 2019)

andrei1989 said:


> additional models? no way...their lineup is already very complicated...



agree. Now that people seem to have stopped replacing their compacts with DSLRs (and mirrorless alternatives) and instead use their smartphones maybe we will see manufacturers return to simpler lineups where each step up the ladder is obvious and motivated.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 28, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> it depends.... as long as hardcore canon fanboys buy cameras that miss features.


The majority of the ILC market are the Rebel/xxxD cameras and the EOS M line, so you’re saying that those buyers are ‘hardcore Canon fanboys’? 




JonSnow said:


> but you have to be a canon fanboy or shareholder to appreciated this strategy...


Or someone who likes taking good pictures. 

YKNJS.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Innovation at Canon stopped in 2008. From 2000-2008 they were running rings around every other camera brand. But in 2008 they decided to focus their resources on higher margin systems and let EOS stay afloat with the barest minimum. Soon other companies moved in where Canon left off and Canon began to realize their strategy wasn't working. And now they are blaming what ?


Do you know that Canon’s ILC market share is higher now than in 2008 when they ‘stopped innovating’? Does increasing popularity comprise ‘staying afloat with the barest minimum’? Does it hurt when reality slaps your opinions in the face?


----------



## bokehmon22 (Jan 28, 2019)

JonSnow said:


> it depends.... as long as hardcore canon fanboys buy cameras that miss features.
> i guess it is cheaper to produce cameras with the same old sensors (no BSI, not stacked) and without 4K features that would need a beefier processor.
> 
> reusing old stuff sure creates higher profits than developing like crazy in a shrinking market.... when the customers buy your stuff anyway.
> ...



I think that's why they have been dragging their feet to get into FF mirorless and making pro FF mirror less.

They don't want to invest too much in R&D for a shrinking market, and when they do enter FF mirrorless, they released a product that's not to disrupt their DSLR sales.

Their next lower tier make it more logical. It's all about the numbers to them. It's great business strategy but as consumer, it means they will lagged behind the competitors on values
This apply to Nikon as well.

I am skeptical to fully commit to one mount in FF mirrorless and will be buying whatever camera for my needs and use my EF lens. I doubt my next camera will be Canon.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 28, 2019)

Most of the comments here would be hilarious if they weren't so pathetic. 

People act as though it's the fault of Canon that the market is shrinking. Sure, they contributed a tiny bit by being too slow to recognize the revolution that was taking place in cell phones and social media sharing and failed to concentrate their resources on making it as easy to share photos using a camera as it is to share photos using a phone. But, Canon was certainly not alone in that regard. And, the social media tsunami was probably going to drown the industry no matter what they did.

I've always said that Canon and Nikon has seen the ups and downs before and have been planning for the inevitable contraction. This article just shows that to be true. They see what is coming and are adjusting to it. That's why Canon has made the heavy investments in the past few years in security and medical. That's why they've devoted so many research dollars into things like the "firefly" sensor and super-high resolution sensors -- it's never been about consumer cameras, even though some people on this forum never seem to get that. (Although consumer products will benefit from the research.) 

Sony and some other manufacturers have bet all their marbles that the future is mirrorless. Canon and Nikon have hedged their bets. Canon has sufficient market share to do that, Nikon's position is a bit more precarious. We will probably see a bit of contraction in lines over time, but that's most likely to occur at the lower end. I don't claim to know, and no one else on this forum should either, what the marginal cost of each Rebel iteration is, or even the marginal cost of each line and their corresponding lenses (M, ASP-C DSLR, Full-Frame DSLR and R). If any company has the resources to sustain these lines, it would be Canon. 

Please understand one thing though. Any suggestion that the decline in the market can be reversed if Canon would just make that one camera that you personally want, is just pure stupidity.


----------



## eosDave (Jan 28, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Same procedure as elsewhere: Very low cost systems for the masses and some really expensive high end systems for the pros? Hopefully not.
> 
> Maybe some consequences of the intransparent camera market today - what's missing are some less feature laden cameras with excellent IQ. I bought 200D and M50 for their great sensors and DPAF capability but they are full of features while lacking some ergonomics. While the 200D has no safety shift (a really interesting feature for emergencies in Av and Tv) the M50 has it while they omitted the cable release in the M50 but it's existing in the 200D. Both lack the possibility to set a Image stabilizer limit e.g. 1...5EV for shutter speed - instead it cranks up the ISO.
> 
> Hopefully they will release a good FF mirrorless which is on the slow side (not AF wise!) but sports great IQ. The existing EOS R is too expensive for my application and at that price (or 300 EUR more) I would expect a FF 4k mode in a 2018 camera.



Most "features" are implemented with software so there is no reason to leave them out.


----------



## Aaron D (Jan 28, 2019)

GoldWing said:


> ...to those of us who make our lives by using their equipment.



I second that. Canon gets it better than anyone else how to make tools that work. They're not going to stay on top by chasing after every consumers' fleeting whim. Professional photography is a field that's not going anywhere though it may be pruned back severely (ie: photojournalism, sorry to say), but a manufacturer that is willing to stick with it will always have customers.


----------



## hazydave (Jan 28, 2019)

I believe them. 

If you look at camera sales for serious cameras going back to the 1960s and 1970s, even then, you'll see that sales were fairly flat until some technology improvement boosted things. There was a big jump in the late 70s/early 80s, thanks mostly to Canon's AE-1 and their hard push into the consumer market, where SLRs had really not been marketed (to enthusiasts, sure, but not folks who didn't pick up a copy of "Popular Photography" on a regular basis). 

Next was automation, particularly autofocus. Then things exploded with digital, but not for a good reason. Between 1975 and 1996 I bought two cameras (Olympus OM-1 and OM-4). Between 1997 and 2012, I bought five digital cameras. Initially, they were too expensive, but really, for quite awhile, every year or two you could maybe double the quality for less than you paid for your current model. So digital exploded. 

But now digital is pretty mature. Plenty of companies produce new models every year, but it's not as if the image quality changes much in 4-5 years. And what's the big technical innovation to keep sales from dropping back to 1970s levels? I guess Canon and Nikon have decided it's mirrorless, mostly because their customers have been trying out Sony and maybe not coming back. Mirrorless probably gets us more computational photography and AI, but is that as compelling for real cameras as it is for phones? I have yet to see a phone use a technique I don't already know, though sure, automating it is nice, as long as I get the raw file when it's done.


----------



## hazydave (Jan 28, 2019)

eosDave said:


> Most "features" are implemented with software so there is no reason to leave them out.



There actually are a few reasons to leave them out. Part of it's the practical need for computation on-camera. Smartphones are already adding AI processors to deal with these things, additional cost, additional battery power. Sure, I guess we can turn them off, but the set of AI things that make sense on a consumer smartphone, to deliver better photos for a person who refuses or at least is uninterested in learning photography is very different than the AI things I want on my camera. I have a line: if the feature helps me better capture the image/capture a better image, I'm all for that. Some of the new things mirrorless cameras can offer, like visualizations in the viewfinder alone (see the world in Tri-X or Fujichrome, see a long exposure result in realtime, etc) are worthwhile. Making a better JPEG or posting directly to Instagram? Not really for me.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 28, 2019)

The transition to mirrorless is slowing some current sales as customers wait for the new bodies with the features they want to appear in the market. This could take several years to shake out and it’s not clear who the winners will be.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 28, 2019)

mb66energy said:


> Same procedure as elsewhere: Very low cost systems for the masses and some really expensive high end systems for the pros? Hopefully not.
> 
> Maybe some consequences of the intransparent camera market today - what's missing are some less feature laden cameras with excellent IQ. I bought 200D and M50 for their great sensors and DPAF capability but they are full of features while lacking some ergonomics. While the 200D has no safety shift (a really interesting feature for emergencies in Av and Tv) the M50 has it while they omitted the cable release in the M50 but it's existing in the 200D. Both lack the possibility to set a Image stabilizer limit e.g. 1...5EV for shutter speed - instead it cranks up the ISO.
> 
> Hopefully they will release a good FF mirrorless which is on the slow side (not AF wise!) but sports great IQ. The existing EOS R is too expensive for my application and at that price (or 300 EUR more) I would expect a FF 4k mode in a 2018 camera.



I agree on the models.


----------



## Architect1776 (Jan 28, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



At one time there was the F-1, EF, FTb and TLb/TX cameras.
With the same lens you had identical IQ. IQ was film dependent and they all used the same film (Sensor).
So what was different?
Shutter speeds F-1 1/2000, EF & FTb 1/1000 and TLb/TX 1/500.
F-1 had motor drives and all kinds of attachable accessories
EF was manual and automatic in one camera.
FTb had an accessory booster for low light less sophisticated than the F-1 but was still built like a tank like the F-1.
TLb/TX lacked all these features. Some like no self timer, meter on/off switch etc.

I would like to see the IQ identical on the new digital cameras.
Less ISO range, wind speed can be different and other similar features to keep the camera less expensive.
Problem is if they would use the same sensor etc. it would be more firm ware than hardware changes which would make the construction cheaper.


----------



## KrisK (Jan 28, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Does it still make sense, for Panasonic, to enter a declining market? Less cake, more slices...



Panasonic's timing does seem questionable. Their rumored system is appealing, but given what's happening in the industry, I'd have a hard time climbing on board. (That's one of the reasons I somewhat hesitatingly bought the R, as "likely to be around in 10 years" was high on my list of priorities.)



Del Paso said:


> Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on? Anyway, apart from Canon, nobody knows what their real strategy will be. Unlike most youtubers, they are market -experienced. We can only wait and see...and remain confident!



Canon has, I think, repeatedly said they're going for oh-so-boring volume, so I'd expect a full-frame RF Rebel kit to start appearing in Costco, Kohl's and elsewhere. Not that I'd buy one, but if it's what keep Canon's wheels spinning, so be it.


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 28, 2019)

I gues that explains the super high prices of the RF lenses. Same profit in a shrinking market.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Innovation at Canon stopped in 2008.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 28, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Most of the comments here would be hilarious if they weren't so pathetic.
> 
> People act as though it's the fault of Canon that the market is shrinking. Sure, they contributed a tiny bit by being too slow to recognize the revolution that was taking place in cell phones and social media sharing and failed to concentrate their resources on making it as easy to share photos using a camera as it is to share photos using a phone. But, Canon was certainly not alone in that regard. And, the social media tsunami was probably going to drown the industry no matter what they did.
> 
> ...


Agree with you except that sharing images from a camera will never be as easy as sharing from a phone, unless and until, a DSLR or equivalent has an assigned phone number and data plan.


----------



## hkenneth (Jan 28, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Agree with you except that sharing images from a camera will never be as easy as sharing from a phone, unless and until, a DSLR or equivalent has an assigned phone number and data plan.



For wireless connection interface on Canon's DSLR is terrible to say the least. It's working half the time and it's painful to work with when it's working.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 28, 2019)

hkenneth said:


> For wireless connection interface on Canon's DSLR is terrible to say the least. It's working half the time and it's painful to work with when it's working.


I wouldn't know.  I have a 5D mark III and it was obsolete and quit working when the next latest and greatest model came to market. I don't send photos from my phone anywhere either. Nobody really wants to see photos of what I'm eating or my arm holding the camera out and a toilet in the background.  My Olympus has a selfie mode, but even I don't want to see photos of me. I don't want to torture anyone else. 

My point is that sending photos from camera, to phone, to social media is cumbersome. So until a DSLR or mirrorless has an assigned # and data plan....


----------



## dtaylor (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Innovation at Canon stopped in 2008. From 2000-2008 they were running rings around every other camera brand.



OH MY GOD! I opened my camera bag expecting to find my 5Ds, 24-70 II, 100-400 II, 16-35 f/4L...and they weren't there! Even my old Canon 7D was gone! All I had was my first DSLR, the 10D, and old lenses I thought I had sold on eBay.

It..._it's like Canon stopped innovating in 2008._

_

_


----------



## tmroper (Jan 28, 2019)

Meanwhile, film sales are growing, and Kodak plans to expand production of the new Ektachrome to medium and large format. It's a tiny market that's nowhere close to what it was in the past (or to digital), but it's still an interesting contrast.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jan 28, 2019)

I have been scanning the internet lately focusing on the "what's in the bag" features of various professional photographers. I'm interested in how many of them include a smart phone and how many mention using them in their photo excursions. There's a growing recognition among pros that the phones do play a role, particularly in video, in thier offerings. The Canon exec may be right - other than early adopters, there doesn't seem to be a rush to mirrorless systems. Whether it's the lack of lenses, the expense, or just the hassle of changing systems for a few ounces of weight, there's nothing in any of the new mirrorless offerings that would tempt me yet.


----------



## LDS (Jan 28, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> My point is that sending photos from camera, to phone, to social media is cumbersome. So until a DSLR or mirrorless has an assigned # and data plan....



With 5G aiming to connect more and more devices at high speed, it would be quite possible, and you don't really need a phone number - evidently you need data access.

The big question is "are socials going to stay, or they would fade out too, eventually? Would people understand that sharing too much is a risk, and stop (or at least, share far less)? Or would the amount of data create simply a tiredness and the need of something new and different? And if "social" stays, which will be the dominant one in five years?"

I think we should look to "smartphones as imaging devices" and "social media" as two different sets that clearly now has an intersection quite big, but tomorrow? Smartphones too are showing "fatigue", as their prices increased a lot, and the performance/features added are diminishing greatly. What should be the device to sell in five-ten years? The answer may not be the one chosen looking at the past.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 28, 2019)

LDS said:


> With 5G aiming to connect more and more devices at high speed, it would be quite possible, and you don't really need a phone number - evidently you need data access.
> 
> The big question is "are socials going to stay, or they would fade out too, eventually? Would people understand that sharing too much is a risk, and stop (or at least, share far less)? Or would the amount of data create simply a tiredness and the need of something new and different? And if "social" stays, which will be the dominant one in five years?"
> 
> I think we should look to "smartphones as imaging devices" and "social media" as two different sets that clearly now has an intersection quite big, but tomorrow? Smartphones too are showing "fatigue", as their prices increased a lot, and the performance/features added are diminishing greatly. What should be the device to sell in five-ten years? The answer may not be the one chosen looking at the past.


 Back when I was driving I had one of those Verizon wifi (mifi?) plans for internet accessibility. Believe it or not, those had an assigned phone number.. They were just a little credit card sized box with an on/off button. It worked fantastically. I streamed movies and browsed the web without a hitch from just about everywhere. That is what I am imagining a camera to need inside (but smaller) to make things easier for people to share directly from their cameras. I wouldn't use it, but I imagine there are some who would. Transferring from camera, to phone, to internet just seems unnecessarily complicated and slow. My phone is 10 years old, so one can tell a smartphone isn't high on my priority list. But I know I am probably not average in that respect. Only carry the phone outside the house for long trips in case of emergency. Yeah, I'm getting too old.


----------



## Dholai (Jan 28, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> We are drowning in images. People are numb to even spectacular work now.



I agree with you 200%. Could not say it better


----------



## Dantana (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Innovation at Canon stopped in 2008. From 2000-2008 they were running rings around every other camera brand. But in 2008 they decided to focus their resources on higher margin systems and let EOS stay afloat with the barest minimum. Soon other companies moved in where Canon left off and Canon began to realize their strategy wasn't working. And now they are blaming what ?
> I will make a prediction for Mr Mitarai. You sir, bet heavily on the cinemaEOS system . That's why your EOS line had laughable video offerings compared to the competition. Now watch as Indie filmmakers and journalists move away from clunky cinemaEOS type video cameras to mirrorless. The coming Panasonic S1/S1R is just the beginning.



I know that I can only ever speak for myself, but I would never want to shoot a film on a body designed for stills like the Sony A series or the upcoming Panasonic. The ergonomics make no sense. I would much rather use a camera designed for its purpose. There are plenty of cameras designed for cinema shooting from Canon, Sony, Arri, Blackmagic...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Keeping investor expectations low so anything other than worst scenario will beat their expectations.


Canon started their shift away from the Consumer camera market a few years ago, its still imaging, but things like security cameras and medical imaging. They have been very successful.

And, Yes, they are legally bound to tell investors the truth and not give out a rosy picture when its not true. Thats cost companies like Tesla a bunch of money plus losing their Chaiman.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 28, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> Do you know that Canon’s ILC market share is higher now than in 2008 when they ‘stopped innovating’? Does increasing popularity comprise ‘staying afloat with the barest minimum’? Does it hurt when reality slaps your opinions in the face?



The problem is that a bigger share of a smaller pie may still be a net loss. As markets decline, the stronger companies increase market share as weaker companies fade away. Then, there are relatively new Chinese companies that get stronger every year and are starting to become a significant market force(not yet, just starting). Their solution is to shift to industrial applications where the Chinese are often barred, at least for the next several years. Security applications, Medical applications, areas where the Chinese are at a disadvantage because the big spenders are governments.

Lower sales means fewer dollars to spend on R&D, which can be bad for the future as well. Canon R&D spending has or is shifting to the product lines that make the biggest profits, so don't be fooled by overall R&D budgets.

We may not recognize the company 20 years from now, when they have 100% market share of almost nothing.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 28, 2019)

hkenneth said:


> For wireless connection interface on Canon's DSLR is terrible to say the least.


Especially ridiculous that it's coming from a company that invented the Print button.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 28, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Especially ridiculous that it's coming from a company that invented the Print button.


And the Facebook button.


----------



## bhf3737 (Jan 28, 2019)

Popularity of taking pictures with a cell phone and ability to share in social media is huge and may have contributed to the shrinkage. However, there are many use-cases (e.g. wild life, macro, astro, long exposures, and photography in harsh conditions, etc.) require tools other than a cell phone with smaller sensor and limited reach lens.
Have you ever seen a pro photographer taking picture of wildlife in a safari trip, race cars, soccer games, wild animals in arctics, birds in fly, portraits using flashes and light modifiers, macro picture of insects, and 8 sec shots of fireworks using his/her cell phone? Have you ever seen a professional videographer shoot a blockbuster movie merely using a cell phone? 
AI (the most abused technology term nowadays!) or whatever computation photography cannot replace the actual photographer/videographer and his/her dedicated camera. Yes, the market is shrinking but the genuine need for advanced cameras and lenses is there. Surprising trent indeed but not so much to worry about.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

With all talk of doom and gloom, I thought I’d go look to see what is actually happening at Canon. They have not released Q4 2018 yet, so this is based on Q3 estimates for 2018 (meaning these numbers are what Canon gave to shareholders as estimates using 3 quarters of actuals, and one quarter of estimates).

I had no idea what to expect, so this was illuminating for myself. Canon makes just under half of their revenue from Office, and about a quarter from Imaging. Ignoring the fact that imaging includes inkjet printers, we can expect that slice to be greatly reduced over the next two years. However, it will then be close to parity with Medical. However, if you look at profitability, Imaging is nearly twice as profitable as Medical (which was not at all what I had expected).

So if Canon hopes to offset a declining camera market, they can offset this on a dollar by dollar basis if they increase Office sales (roughly equal profit ratio). But if they want to offset it with increased Medical sales, they will need roughly $2 of new medical sales to offset every $1 lost to cameras. This also shows that Canon will still care a great deal about cameras, even at half-size, the market is still large and very profitable. Frankly, they can’t afford to just walk away.

Of course, cameras will have diminishing prestige within the company as they focus on other business units to find growth and this will impact development of new products.


----------



## Talys (Jan 28, 2019)

hkenneth said:


> For wireless connection interface on Canon's DSLR is terrible to say the least. It's working half the time and it's painful to work with when it's working.


The 6D2 is actually pretty painless on WiFi to a PC, and it works very consistently (unlike some older cameras). However, it is painfully slow with CR2's. To a smartphone or tablet, it works ok, but CR2s are too slow to be useful for me. 

On the other hand, having shot with wireless and wired tether on both Sony and Nikon too, Canon is by far the best. It isn't even close -- it's the difference between frustrating to horribly unusable. With a USB cable, Canon works decently well.


----------



## preppyak (Jan 28, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Does it still make sense, for Panasonic, to enter a declining market? Less cake, more slices...


Consider the market they are entering versus the one they are in. The m4/3 market is gonna shrink as smartphones narrow the gap in image quality. If your smartphone is 90% as good as your G85, then the G85 suddenly goes from portable to very bulky. Its why they focused so heavily on video, a space where smartphones are still WAY behind and cant possibly match for audio connections, etc.

Whereas the full-frame camera market wont be overtaken by smartphones, basically ever. They're bought by people with either significant disposable income, or who make money using the camera. So it ensures return customers and further investment.

Panasonic is making the smart choice to make money in a world that wont shrink as fast while probably spending less R&D on a market thats been shrinking for a decade now. And since they're so far in front of Canon/Nikon/etc in video, they dont need the GH6 to come out for a while. That said, Im hoping Panasonics solution to mirrorless full frame matches what they've done in the m4/3 space...making genuinely small lenses and finding real weight savings in the mirrorless design.


----------



## Rudeofus (Jan 28, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Popularity of taking pictures with a cell phone and ability to share in social media is huge and may have contributed to the shrinkage. However, there are many use-cases (e.g. wild life, macro, astro, long exposures, and photography in harsh conditions, etc.) require tools other than a cell phone with smaller sensor and limited reach lens.


The number of Canon dSLRs sold every year is huge, and it is orders of magnitude above the number of photographers doing these rather special types of photography. There will always be a need for dSLRs, but the numbers sold to this market segment may or may not support the business model of producing them, much less the research required to push the envelope of technology.

PS: I still remember and laugh about NeuroticAnatomist's immature and invective laden ramblings directed against me, when I predicted exactly this market crash several months ago


----------



## Lacikuss (Jan 28, 2019)

Well, if the current camera market of 10 Million units/year is going to fall 50% in the next couple of years and Canon plans to sell 5-6 Million units in the same period, that means that Canon will be the only Camera maker with 100% of the market. What I'm missing?


----------



## tmroper (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Now watch as Indie filmmakers and journalists move away from clunky cinemaEOS type video cameras to mirrorless. The coming Panasonic S1/S1R is just the beginning.



Now that's a mindset stuck in 2008! Because that's what people said about the 5DII. Using non-video specific cameras works for some things for some people some of the time. Nothing new about that, and no new cameras are going to change that landscape at this point.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 28, 2019)

knight427 said:


> With all talk of doom and gloom, I thought I’d go look to see what is actually happening at Canon. They have not released Q4 2018 yet, so this is based on Q3 estimates for 2018 (meaning these numbers are what Canon gave to shareholders as estimates using 3 quarters of actuals, and one quarter of estimates).
> 
> I had no idea what to expect, so this was illuminating for myself. Canon makes just under half of their revenue from Office, and about a quarter from Imaging. Ignoring the fact that imaging includes inkjet printers, we can expect that slice to be greatly reduced over the next two years. However, it will then be close to parity with Medical. However, if you look at profitability, Imaging is nearly twice as profitable as Medical (which was not at all what I had expected).
> 
> ...



In contrast, I was looking at Sony and their imaging division which is only <6% of their overall composition. By operating income, their imaging BU is a fraction of their financial services, music and picture, gaming and semiconductor business. Their semiconductor business (which supplies sensors en masse) to the smartphone industry was probably a good bet given that upcoming flagships in 2019 will utilize up to 4-5 camera modules per device and the top three manufacturers (Samsung, Huawei and Apple in that order) all utilize them. In contrast, Canon and Nikon had to diversify further into industrial sensors and medical as they will get hit considerably harder by this downturn than Sony who doesn't have a quarter of their business in imaging.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 28, 2019)

knight427 said:


> With all talk of doom and gloom, I thought I’d go look to see what is actually happening at Canon. They have not released Q4 2018 yet, so this is based on Q3 estimates for 2018 (meaning these numbers are what Canon gave to shareholders as estimates using 3 quarters of actuals, and one quarter of estimates).
> 
> I had no idea what to expect, so this was illuminating for myself. Canon makes just under half of their revenue from Office, and about a quarter from Imaging. Ignoring the fact that imaging includes inkjet printers, we can expect that slice to be greatly reduced over the next two years. However, it will then be close to parity with Medical. However, if you look at profitability, Imaging is nearly twice as profitable as Medical (which was not at all what I had expected).
> 
> ...



Appreciate your research. A couple of additional points:

Office profits are volatile and closely tied to the economy. During a recession, businesses scale back their office expenditures. They will defer purchases, maybe not renew some equipment leases, etc. While consumers do the same, it's not quite as volatile. That's especially true now with so much of camera sales coming from higher income older enthusiasts. I recall that during the great recession of a decade ago, the office division was really hit hard and Canon used imaging sales to offset some of the losses in office.

I don't think it's any surprise that the medical and industrial profit ratios are smaller. These are emerging technologies where there is heavy investment at the front end. So, while today Canon may need $2 of medical sales to offset every dollar lost in imaging, that may not be the case in the coming years. Investments being made today in that sector could lead to significantly higher profit ratios in the coming years.

But, to your overall point, yeah, Canon is not going to sacrifice a very important component of their revenue stream. There is also the prestige factor as well. There is a reason why Canon buys ads showcasing wildlife and sports photography using their big whites and why they fund "Explorers of Light." Finally, there is a pride factor at play. Canon clawed their way to the top of the pile over about a 50 year span. They are not going to yield that spot willingly.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 28, 2019)

jayphotoworks said:


> In contrast, I was looking at Sony and their imaging division which is only <6% of their overall composition. By operating income, their imaging BU is a fraction of their financial services, music and picture, gaming and semiconductor business. Their semiconductor business (which supplies sensors en masse) to the smartphone industry was probably a good bet given that upcoming flagships in 2019 will utilize up to 4-5 camera modules per device and the top three manufacturers (Samsung, Huawei and Apple in that order) all utilize them. In contrast, Canon and Nikon had to diversify further into industrial sensors and medical as they will get hit considerably harder by this downturn than Sony who doesn't have a quarter of their business in imaging.


Which is something that has always concerned me about Sony. They can shed their camera division without much of an impact on their bottom line. Photography is not a core component of their culture, but simply something they got into to make a few extra bucks. If it goes south on them, I can see them exiting the market without much hesitation.


----------



## Bentley Boy (Jan 28, 2019)

wockawocka said:


> I gues that explains the super high prices of the RF lenses. Same profit in a shrinking market.



This is not accurate. The 24-105 and 35 are less expensive than other brand offerings, and the other two lenses are the only one's of their kind and warrant the high prices. Yes there's an EF 50 1.2, but it's no match for the RF version. Prices will fall as well. As a business, you price high with the expectation of lowering to make the most profit you can and satisfy your investors.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Jan 28, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Which is something that has always concerned me about Sony. They can shed their camera division without much of an impact on their bottom line. Photography is not a core component of their culture, but simply something they got into to make a few extra bucks. If it goes south on them, I can see them exiting the market without much hesitation.



That's pretty much defines the latest Olympus camera. The career page tells the story for Olympus, they're booming, but not because of photography.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

jayphotoworks said:


> In contrast, I was looking at Sony and their imaging division which is only <6% of their overall composition. By operating income, their imaging BU is a fraction of their financial services, music and picture, gaming and semiconductor business. Their semiconductor business (which supplies sensors en masse) to the smartphone industry was probably a good bet given that upcoming flagships in 2019 will utilize up to 4-5 camera modules per device and the top three manufacturers (Samsung, Huawei and Apple in that order) all utilize them. In contrast, Canon and Nikon had to diversify further into industrial sensors and medical as they will get hit considerably harder by this downturn than Sony who doesn't have a quarter of their business in imaging.



Thanks for saving me the time! This could cut both ways for Sony system owners. As you point out, Sony made a smart play into sensors so cameras can really just come along for the ride. So long as Sony sees value in being known as a camera company, this will allow them to continue spending money on R&D. However, someone else mentioned how Sony can be fickle, this is also a risk as Sony might decide they have the mobile sensor market all snatched up and supporting a camera system just doesn’t have much upside. It’s much easier for Sony to walk away from their camera business than for Canon. But it’s also easier for Sony to use cameras as a loss leader if it brings in more business for sensors. 

But that cuts both ways for Canon too. If the market contracts much faster than predicted, they could end up facing a cash crunch requiring drastic measures (which is the only scenario I see Canon exiting the camera business). 

OK, I'm done playing armchair economist.


----------



## takesome1 (Jan 28, 2019)

R&D dollars will follow. Advancements will slow. 

The question is, how will CR fair. Since it is a rumor site and it takes longer between camera advancements will it be a boom or a bust?

There was a digital boom with DSLR's last decade, it has been a steady decline. Look at the traffic in TDP's forum over the last 10 years. Will the same thing happen here?

Who will be here at the end to turn off the lights when it is over? If there is a pool I am taking Neuro.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

crazyrunner33 said:


> That's pretty much defines the latest Olympus camera. The career page tells the story for Olympus, they're booming, but not because of photography.



I tried briefly to look at one of their quarterly reports several weeks ago. My impression was that cameras weren't something they needed to talk much about to inform shareholders what was going on.


----------



## Adelino (Jan 28, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Does it still make sense, for Panasonic, to enter a declining market? Less cake, more slices...
> Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on? Anyway, apart from Canon, nobody knows what their real strategy will be. Unlike most youtubers, they are market -experienced. We can only wait and see...and remain confident!


I think Panasonic wants to go FF for image quality, to separate from smaller sensors.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> R&D dollars will follow. Advancements will slow.
> 
> The question is, how will CR fair. Since it is a rumor site and it takes longer between camera advancements will it be a boom or a bust?
> 
> ...



This reminds me, we are going to die someday. No sense in waiting for that perfect camera, the RP is looking better and better.


----------



## cpreston (Jan 28, 2019)

CanoKnight said:


> Now watch as Indie filmmakers and journalists move away from clunky cinemaEOS type video cameras to mirrorless. The coming Panasonic S1/S1R is just the beginning.



Indie filmmakers and journalists. That is the market that you think Canon should target to maintain sales? Why do commenters keep thinking this is a significant market for DSLR's?


----------



## nchoh (Jan 28, 2019)

jayphotoworks said:


> In contrast, I was looking at Sony and their imaging division which is only <6% of their overall composition. By operating income, their imaging BU is a fraction of their financial services, music and picture, gaming and semiconductor business. ...



There are basically 2 types of companies in the camera space; imaging companies and electronics companies.

Sony and Panasonic are electronics conglomerates, cameras are just one of the many electronic products they produce.

Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm are imaging companies. Cameras are one of the related imaging products. For example, Nikon sells spectacle lenses and their claim to fame used to be steppers - equipment for making lenses.

Comparing both types of companies will give you a sense of who is in for the long haul. Sony and Panasonic can just discard their camera divisions if they lose interest in that segment, as per Samsung.

Canon's and Nikon's health is closely related to photography. If they cannot make it in cameras, they are in trouble. They will fight to the death to find a way forward with cameras. Canon's exit from photography will probably coincide with the end of photography as we now know it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 28, 2019)

Ok, so Canon projects sales are going down another 50% the next two years. *Is that where decline ends and we see a sales plateau for several years? The "bottom"?*


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 28, 2019)

I didn't read everything so far, could anybody recap - is Canon finally ******* this time?


----------



## ethanz (Jan 28, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I didn't read everything so far, could anybody recap - is Canon finally ******* this time?



Yes, might as well sell all your Canon gear to those dear souls who foretold the demise.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 28, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> I didn't read everything so far, could anybody recap - is Canon finally ******* this time?



We’ve decided everything has its season, and started singing around the campfire. Go buy what your heart desires while it still beats. Peace out.


----------



## steve oakley (Jan 28, 2019)

the C EOS are NOT clunky at all. In fact RED copies canon in having a big grip on the right side of the camera, as did Sony with the FS5. C EOS is a very compact and light body compared to the past - RED ONE ( an 11lb aluminum brick with a lens port ), F16, F35, etc. FS7 is a bigger camera. Go shoot with a F55 and then get back to me about the C EOS bodies. Arri Mini makes nice pix but is NOT a user friendly camera to work with, its just a block of CF with a lens port and electronics inside with miserable micro connectors.

that said, I just bought a fuji XT3 as a B cam and for gimbal. I should of bought a new EOS R but when it cost $1k _more_ and had poorer specs, sorry but this 30+ year canon user just couldn't do it. Canon your sales are declining because there is little brand loyalty now because we are tired of being bled of cash for no good reason and getting very marginal updates. Canon is vastly to timid in features across all its cameras. Why they don't get is that users will simply go to another brand rather than spend 2X-5X in the canon product lines to get what they want.

OTH the ergonomics of canon are solid. your hands aren't getting smaller even if the camera bodies can. you can only make things so small before the bodies become very hard to work with, especially with gloves on in the cold or rain or snow. not everyone works in a 70F studio...



CanoKnight said:


> I will make a prediction for Mr Mitarai. You sir, bet heavily on the cinemaEOS system . That's why your EOS line had laughable video offerings compared to the competition. Now watch as Indie filmmakers and journalists move away from clunky cinemaEOS type video cameras to mirrorless. The coming Panasonic S1/S1R is just the beginning.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 28, 2019)

knight427 said:


> We’ve decided everything has its season, and started singing around the campfire. Go buy what your heart desires while it still beats. Peace out.



It's a Fuji GFX50 with all lenses, and in theory I can buy it, but my wife will excommunicate me to an exile around a campfire with singing and dancing with the new camera. So no, I'd better stick to Canon for the time being.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jan 28, 2019)

bhf3737 said:


> Popularity of taking pictures with a cell phone and ability to share in social media is huge and may have contributed to the shrinkage. However, there are many use-cases (e.g. wild life, macro, astro, long exposures, and photography in harsh conditions, etc.) require tools other than a cell phone with smaller sensor and limited reach lens.
> Have you ever seen a pro photographer taking picture of wildlife in a safari trip, race cars, soccer games, wild animals in arctics, birds in fly, portraits using flashes and light modifiers, macro picture of insects, and 8 sec shots of fireworks using his/her cell phone? Have you ever seen a professional videographer shoot a blockbuster movie merely using a cell phone?
> AI (the most abused technology term nowadays!) or whatever computation photography cannot replace the actual photographer/videographer and his/her dedicated camera. Yes, the market is shrinking but the genuine need for advanced cameras and lenses is there. Surprising trent indeed but not so much to worry about.



===

As a matter of fact YES I HAVE...right here in Vancouver which is the 3rd largest film production centre in North America After LA and New York. In fact, multiple high end commercials, and photos of wildlife in a safari trip, race cars, soccer/football/hockey games, wild animals in arctics, birds in fly, human and animal portraits have ALL been shot and broadcast using iPhone AND Android phones! One of my film industry friends last year got paid over $250,000 to film a series of high end commercials (which you have seen!) for a major automotive company here in Vancouver shot ALL on iPhones! 

It was VERY DIFFICULT to tell the difference and as a person with a well-trained, 30 years video experience eye I definitely had a hard time figuring out which was filmed with the iPhone versus the ones with the Arri! I am pretty sure the general public will ALSO be hard pressed to determine what type of camera shot what!

===

I can't say what else is coming soon in terms of large sensor video-centric smartphone/tablet hardware from a certain high profile media company BUT I CAN SAY that Canon and Sony are ALSO working on large-sensor smartphones which in many cases WILL OUTPERFORM even mid-range DSLR's due to recent advancements in computational photography!

And I QUITE DISAGREE that computational photography cannot replace the actual photographer/videographer and his/her dedicated camera! OH YES IT CAN! That IS THE WHOLE POINT OF A.I. !!! As a long-time synthetic vision systems and autonomous object recognition systems programmer, I am more than qualified to indicate that there is NO REASON AT ALL that expert systems/neural net software CANNOT meet and even FAR EXCEED the imaging expertise of even well-experienced photographers/videographers!

Some of the software/hardware vision systems I have had the pleasure of consulting for CAN EASILY BEST even the most top-end photographic expert in terms of composition, speed, artistic value, etc. WHY? because THAT IS THE POINT OF TRUE General Artificial Intelligence --- to MEET and EXCEED the processing and executive function capabilities of most humans! 

To put it from a systems perspective, IT ONLY TAKES 200 PetaFLOPS of CPU horsepower to actually MATCH and EXCEED the sheer hardware processing power of the human brain in terms of human neural synapse emulation and electro-chemical process simulation! We are ALREADY AT THAT POINT !!! We are just now in the process of SHRINKING that capability down to BasketBall-sized hardware from the current warehouse-sized hardware! Once you have the hardware and Neural Net software which emulates human reasoning, there really isn't ANY SUBJECT that system cannot get and be GREAT AT doing! Photography/Videography? EASY! Medical/Dental/Psych diagnosis and treatment? NO PROBLEM! Art and Design? ALREADY THERE! There is NO JOB or HUMAN ENDEAVOUR a decently powerful hardware box (i.e. 200+ PetaFLOPS) with a good neural net software system CANNOT DO !!!

AND for emulating just high end vision recognition and high-level photography/videography skills, I only need the equivalent of FOUR 8-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 845/855 SoC CPU's to do that with a real-time high level software-based expert system to do that! That means by 2020 to 2022, when 32-core Qualcomm Snapdragons 865/875 or Apple A13/A14 chips come out THEN we will TRULY have reached that hardware threshold of our SMARTPHONES being MUCH BETTER PHOTOGRAPHERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS than 99.75% of the population!
.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 29, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> To put it from a systems perspective, IT ONLY TAKES 200 PetaFLOPS of CPU horsepower to actually MATCH and EXCEED the sheer hardware processing power of the human brain in terms of human neural synapse emulation and electro-chemical process simulation! We are ALREADY AT THAT POINT !!!



Sorry Harry, that's all just a sequence of pseudo-scientific statements; neural networks are very useful and powerful when applied within certain narrow areas but unfortunately not even close to simulate the actual human brain. Moreover they cannot even simulate a behaviour of a simple worm with 300 neurons.


----------



## flip314 (Jan 29, 2019)

wockawocka said:


> I gues that explains the super high prices of the RF lenses. Same profit in a shrinking market.



Canon has been competitive on lens prices (usually cheaper than Nikon and almost always cheaper than Sony), and I don't expect that to change.

Sony's 24-105 is $1399 vs the RF for $1099. Nikon doesn't even have a comparable lens yet, but even their 24-70 is $999. BTW, the RF has the same MSRP as the 24-105 f4L IS II ($1099)

Nikon's 35mm 1.8 is $849 vs $499 for Canon. Sonly wants $450 for their APS-C version! (I couldn't find an exactly comparable full-frame lens, but I'm sure somebody will correct me).

Right now RF looks more expensive than EF because the RF lenses are selling at their MSRP, while EF usually has some kind of discount. There's also a huge used supply of Canon lenses which makes them much cheaper to acquire. Neither of those will happen with RF for a while, so there will probably be a price disparity for a while. That's the price you pay for being an early adopter.

The 28-70mm f2 and 50mm f1.2 are exotic lenses, and it's really hard to compare them to anything else. Those you're paying a premium due to the exotic design and low volume.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Sorry Harry, that's all just a sequence of pseudo-scientific statements; neural networks are very useful and powerful when applied within certain narrow areas but unfortunately not even close to simulate the actual human brain. Moreover they cannot even simulate a behaviour of a simple worm with 300 neurons.



But his flux capacitor is nearly to 1.21 jigawatts! There’s no stopping him now, all your photos are belong to him


----------



## Mr Majestyk (Jan 29, 2019)

knight427 said:


> With all talk of doom and gloom, I thought I’d go look to see what is actually happening at Canon. They have not released Q4 2018 yet, so this is based on Q3 estimates for 2018 (meaning these numbers are what Canon gave to shareholders as estimates using 3 quarters of actuals, and one quarter of estimates).
> 
> I had no idea what to expect, so this was illuminating for myself. Canon makes just under half of their revenue from Office, and about a quarter from Imaging. Ignoring the fact that imaging includes inkjet printers, we can expect that slice to be greatly reduced over the next two years. However, it will then be close to parity with Medical. However, if you look at profitability, Imaging is nearly twice as profitable as Medical (which was not at all what I had expected).
> 
> ...



Canon's big Medical push isn't in full swing I'd say. They've only owned Toshiba a short while and they were in a lot of trouble in Japan for how they went about the deal. Medical revenue will increase dramatically going forward in the 2-4 year timescale.

With the P&S market extinct and the advanced compact next to go, I'd like to know where people think Canon will get their R&D dollars from for their higher end gear. The huge volume low margin P&S market once supplied about 70-80% of their camera revenue and was why they had a huge R&D budget for their DLSRs and L glass. I worked for Canon research for 4 years from 2011-2014 and post GFC they slashed R&D and our workforce dropped 70% in 3 years, despite having only increased for the previous 20 years. Every single project we worked on was ultimately canceled and these were in medical and camera areas and other divisions shut down. Things were grim then and have only gotten worse

I wonder how much money Canon will be prepared to siphon off from other more profitable divisions to prop up consumer imaging. Don't forget R&D costs don't shrink even as the market does, less sales, means ever higher prices to amortise costs. This is what Olympus has been doing for about 4 years now, pushing prices up and up to keep their bottom line the same form smaller sales. We are rapidly approaching a time when we've come full circle and only well healed folk will afford thew good gear. L glass superteles have skyrocketed about 125% since 2010, thanks top amalgamation of 1 series line, entry into that system has jumped 33% or so from 1D4 days, Canon mostly only releases high priced L glass, how many non-L lenses been released in last 5 years?


----------



## bhf3737 (Jan 29, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> ===
> It was VERY DIFFICULT to tell the difference and as a person with a well-trained, 30 years video experience eye I definitely had a hard time figuring out which was filmed with the iPhone versus the ones with the Arri! I am pretty sure the general public will ALSO be hard pressed to determine what type of camera shot what!


If it is VERY DIFFICULT to tell the difference please try to make a documentary or take picture of lions in a safari trip with your cell phone. Your insurance agency can EASILY tell which video/picture was taken by a cell phone --- to your next of kin!!


----------



## bhf3737 (Jan 29, 2019)

Rudeofus said:


> The number of Canon dSLRs sold every year is huge, and it is orders of magnitude above the number of photographers doing these rather special types of photography. There will always be a need for dSLRs, but the numbers sold to this market segment may or may not support the business model of producing them, much less the research required to push the envelope of technology.


Actually, there are four categories of human users who use cameras, of some kind: Artists, Businesses (wedding, journalists, etc.), Enthusiasts, and finally, Documentarians who use the camera for documenting their life and surrounding. The artists and businesses will always be there and their number may grow proportional to the population and state of economy. I guess, shrinking of the market is mostly because of those Documentarians who are using cell phones instead of cameras for various reasons. 
Canon's approach to replace diminishing human users by virtual ones (i.e. surveilance and medical imaging users) is smart and will guarantee cash-flow to save the business. Meanwhile, I guess they will try to find a way to create a sustainable stream of Documentarians to move to the other three categories by showing them innovative use-cases for which only cameras can be used. A few of those concept cameras and innovative usages are usually on demo at various photo shows by Canon.


----------



## kten (Jan 29, 2019)

If you can't tell the difference between arri and iphone footage then I doubt your video experience is in the market bm, arri and red and higher up canon cine are aimed at. If you've ever edited anything or been involved with lighting complex scenes you'd know a phone can't do what cine cams can. Sure they may look the same for certain situation and lighting when operated by the youtube content creator types but imho they are barely scratching the surface of the capabilities and would be just as well served with a dslr.

Fwiw I am not a serious video guy, although have actual independent cine folks in my family on fathers side (although he is still guy himself but got out at the end of film). None of the cine members in the pro world use dslr's (in my family I mean) never mind phones for a reason. Good luck getting your iphone to output something that has enough editing headroom when they are all compressed 422 at best I imagine. Bet some of my relatives can tell sitting at their grading desk. These cameras are not aimed at the likes of you and I and those that NEED them know why and it isn't meaningful OOC files at same settings look the sameto us posted on facebook compressed to hell. Not to mention phones don't have any choices on lenses, high DR demands of some scenes, flexibility of settings, accessories and compatibility with them and how they fit into lineup with other cameras used on set and so on.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 29, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> ===
> 
> As a matter of fact YES I HAVE...That means by 2020 to 2022, when 32-core Qualcomm Snapdragons 865/875 or Apple A13/A14 chips come out THEN we will TRULY have reached that hardware threshold of our SMARTPHONES being MUCH BETTER PHOTOGRAPHERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS than 99.75% of the population!
> .



Sounds like it's time to scale back on the psychotropics Harry. Have the doc check your meds, soon please.


----------



## dolina (Jan 29, 2019)

The Canon exec is talking about the camera business *as a whole* that includes point & shoots, consumer ILC, professional ILC and accessories

The most affected by this decline are consumer camera sales.

Consumers tend to keep their dedicated still cameras longer and not upgrade unless their camera cannot be economically repaired. They often have only 1 lens for their ILCs.

What they did upgrade often though are smartphones in which they upgrade every end of contract that typically lasts for 2 years with their carriers/telco or buy on their own every 3-5 years. 

People are incentivized to upgrade their smartphone because the camera is always better and the processing is always faster on a newer phone that is smaller than their pocket.

But when it concerns the high end/professional cameras then I expect sales to be maintained or be slightly higher.

So it really isn't exactly new news about declining sales but tacking on the 50% figure decline is what is news.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 29, 2019)

dolina said:


> The Canon exec is talking about the camera business *as a whole* that includes point & shoots, consumer ILC, professional ILC and accessories
> 
> The most affected by this decline are consumer camera sales.
> 
> ...


Where is your data to back up what you say from?


----------



## unfocused (Jan 29, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Where is your data to back up what you say from?


Are you questioning what dolina is saying? Because it's pretty much common sense and if you've followed the industry over the past several years and read any of the regular industry reports and interviews that have been covered on this forum, his remarks are consistent with those reports and interviews. 

Do you have any data that would cast doubt on his comments?


----------



## Photointo (Jan 29, 2019)

I'm with canon from 2006, but now I think the future belongs to SONY. It's like canon can't make more innovative matrix than that from 5D Mark IV...


----------



## HarryFilm (Jan 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Sorry Harry, that's all just a sequence of pseudo-scientific statements; neural networks are very useful and powerful when applied within certain narrow areas but unfortunately not even close to simulate the actual human brain. Moreover they cannot even simulate a behaviour of a simple worm with 300 neurons.



===

Neural Nets are just basically organized groups of software-based weighted results of a group of If-Then-Else/Switch/Case-Of statements done after a matrix operation (i.e. convolution kernel) has been performed on a numeric input which represents a chemical/electrical value. What I am espousing is more at the hardware level where you are actually emulating the electro-chemical gating/pass through of potassium/sodium/phosphorous/lithium/etc since it seems only about 25 trace elements are actually required for general neurochemistry. A simple record-based infrastructure held in a massive multi-dimesional array to represent general organic chemistry reactions as we know them today has in fact allowed us to emulate SPECIFIC neural structures in worms, flies, rats, cats and even humans and is the MOST PROMISING AVENUE to get to 100+ IQ Levels of General Artificial Intelligence.

In rebuttal to your earlier statement of only 300 neurons of a worm being emulated via a neural net, modern simulations of human brain tissue are now into 4.5 Million Neurons and the largest simulation I know of personally is pretty much emulating ALL 100 Billion Neurons of the human brain on a massively parallel, combined CPU/GPU system that used 128-bits wide GaAs SoC chips running at 60 GHz. The amount of local DRAM memory used for the array-of-record superstructure is into the EXABYTES of space and requires truly fast networking (Dense Wave Optical Multiplexing) into the many PETABYTES PER SECOND range at each compute node! So YES we are talking about some supremely EXPENSIVE gear!

See Waterloo prof constructs world’s second largest simulation of a human brain (2017):
https://www.therecord.com/news-stor...-world-s-largest-simulation-of-a-human-brain/

From a computational point of view, we are currently at a functional emulation level that is set at around molecular-level interactions rather than atomic-nucleus levels of emulation which means we can emulate the base organic chemistry of a human synapse. And when we organize them BY function we can actually get self-organization to take place. We haven't yet MAPPED the entire brain BUT we humans HAVE mapped common neuro-functionality to such an extent that we don't actually have to simulate the low-level atomic-level interactions but can emulate upper-level functionality enough to allow us to get to human 100+ IQ levels! Software-wise we have the technology to do so to a high degree of fidelity.

What the CURRENT PROBLEM BEING FACED is the sheer physical size of the hardware! A 200 PetaFLOP supercomputer is about the size of a small warehouse or a common high school basketball court and to make it PRACTICAL we need to shrink that down to the size of a basketball or smaller. That will take a few years! For a basic convolutional neural net that allows analysis of 3D-XYZ edges and surfaces and their comparison to common objects in any given 3D-XYZ orientation and size, we can NOW SHRINK THAT down to using only FOUR Qualcomm SnapDragon 845 SoC chips (used in many high end smartphones) which will allow us to do VERY HIGH END computational photography that can actually get to pro-level skills.

See more info on convolutional neural networks:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convolutional_neural_network

And based upon my industry contacts I do know that 16-core and 32-core ARM SoC chips ARE being worked on by BOTH Apple (A15/A16) and Qualcomm (SnapDragon 865/875) to be ready for 2021 to 2022! This means that ONE single CPU chip can be put into a Smartphone, Tablet or Mirrorless camera to allow pro-level still photography and videography to be automatically imaged by the average consumer!
.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 29, 2019)

Photointo said:


> I'm with canon from 2006, but now I think the future belongs to SONY. It's like canon can't make more innovative matrix than that from 5D Mark IV...


My Sony laptop is 7 years old and dying, but I am not buying the new Sony one... guess why.

Also, Canon helps killing the P&S market by not releasing G7X III on time. I mean, really, it's a lot of lost sales for the most promising P&S line in the last half a year.


----------



## HarryFilm (Jan 29, 2019)

kten said:


> If you can't tell the difference between arri and iphone footage then I doubt your video experience is in the market bm, arri and red and higher up canon cine are aimed at. If you've ever edited anything or been involved with lighting complex scenes you'd know a phone can't do what cine cams can. Sure they may look the same for certain situation and lighting when operated by the youtube content creator types but imho they are barely scratching the surface of the capabilities and would be just as well served with a dslr.
> 
> Fwiw I am not a serious video guy, although have actual independent cine folks in my family on fathers side (although he is still guy himself but got out at the end of film). None of the cine members in the pro world use dslr's (in my family I mean) never mind phones for a reason. Good luck getting your iphone to output something that has enough editing headroom when they are all compressed 422 at best I imagine. Bet some of my relatives can tell sitting at their grading desk. These cameras are not aimed at the likes of you and I and those that NEED them know why and it isn't meaningful OOC files at same settings look the sameto us posted on facebook compressed to hell. Not to mention phones don't have any choices on lenses, high DR demands of some scenes, flexibility of settings, accessories and compatibility with them and how they fit into lineup with other cameras used on set and so on.



---

You take 4K footage shot on any major Smartphone at 4:2:2 (preferably 4:4:4 if you can use that recording setting on your camera software), use Lanczos-3 or Lanczos-5 resizing (i.e. a 3x3 or 5x5 resampling filter) to get it down to 1920x1080p 4:4:4 uncompressed for editing, increase brightness by 5% to 10%, reduce highlights by 15%, boost shadows by 10% to 15%, increase contrast by 5% to 10%, increase saturation to personal taste AND finally add EITHER a slight Unsharp Mask for edge-enhancement (i.e. sharpening) OR an Antialias Filter...AND BOOM you get near Arri Alexa quality! I do this nearly every day!

I am NOT some average Vlogger but rather a guy with 30 YEARS of video/cinema experience on everything from 1987 era Betacam SP to Arri 2.7k to 4k Canon C700 to 8K Red cameras to Multi-camera 360 degree surround view 4k/8k setups. We do use a LOT of lighting with 5k, 10k and 20k HID cinema lighting setups on our industrial, scientific and commercial photography/videography sets. AND YES we HAVE used Smartphones and GoPros on these complex setups AND MATCHED them to Arri-shot or Canon-shot footage! When you use LOTS of lighting, shooting with smartphones works GREAT!

We have had 30 second and 60 second Car Commercials RUN on major North American, European and Asian Network TV shot ENTIRELY on iPhones! And for SOME REASON, more and more of my requests ARE for using/shooting on low-cost cameras such as smartphones from the major electronics companies! I no longer have a problem with those requests since even our scientific imaging department which I normally work for is getting in on using ARRAYS of smartphones as their imagers!

I have seen our aerospace parent company shoot it's videos in the toughest of Ground and Space conditions on small camera systems so Computational Photography has come a LOOOOONG WAY! 

On a technical note, if you shoot 8-or-10-bit 4:4:4 on an iPhone and shrink the 4K footage DOWN to uncompressed 4:4:4 1080p resolution it actually DOES look utterly fantastic! It's just math and pixel averaging which makes it look good! It's in LOW-LIGHT situations where I can tell from basic noise floor measurement which camera is which but since MOST of my imagery uses LOTS of natural and artificial lighting, we can get away with shooting on Smartphones. (this is done BY REQUEST OF THE CUSTOMER as normally I shoot on Canon C700 Global Shutter or Full frame or a Red Monstro and sometimes the odd rented Alexa-65!)

.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jan 29, 2019)

HarryFilm said:


> In rebuttal to your earlier statement of only 300 neurons of a worm being emulated via a neural net, modern simulations of human brain tissue are now into 4.5 Million Neurons and the largest simulation I know of personally is pretty much emulating ALL 100 Billion Neurons of teh human brain on a massively parallel, combined CPU/GPU system that used 128-bits wide GaAs SoC chips running at 60 GHz. The amount of local DRAM memory used for the array-of-record superstructure is into the EXABYTES of space and requires truly fast networking (Dense Wave Optical Multiplexing) into the many PETABYTES PER SECOND range at each compute node! So YES we are talking about some supremely EXPENSIVE gear!



The worm *is* being emulated https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenWorm it just doesn't behave as expected, neither does any of the existing models. Maybe one day the worm will work, but currently we humans are failing to re-create even a simple worm, so recreating a human brain is totally out of question. And it's not about the computational power, the worm's neural network doesn't require much in term of modern computers.



HarryFilm said:


> See Waterloo prof constructs world’s largest simulation of a human brain (2017):
> 
> https://www.therecord.com/news-stor...-world-s-largest-simulation-of-a-human-brain/



Harry it's like a nuclear explosion, it's a largest possible simulation of the Sun but not the Sun yet - and will never be.
The rest is very interesting topic but well beyond this forum. The point is, we're very far from having a robo-photographer, and advanced AI with scene type recognition will not affect Canon roadmap in the near future.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 29, 2019)

Del Paso said:


> Does it still make sense, for Panasonic, to enter a declining market? Less cake, more slices...
> Should Canon try to increase their market share with additional and competitive models instead of slamming the brakes on? Anyway, apart from Canon, nobody knows what their real strategy will be. Unlike most youtubers, they are market -experienced. We can only wait and see...and remain confident!


what the hell are you talking about. Canon is like number 1 they dont need anyone's advice when it comes to market share. So what if Panasonic is entering they still think it is profitable. Also if companies knew everything then none of them would ever had bad sales or go out of business.


----------



## tomscott (Jan 29, 2019)

Its a catch 22 if they don't innovate and bring new product to the market then how can they expect to sell more? The product line is so stagnant and it has been since the 5DMKIII which was 2012, thats 7 years of not much happening or improvement. The schedule of updates is so long that there isnt really much to keep up with... hard to get excited. 

In all honesty I dont frequent CanonRumours that much anymore because there is never any news worth catching up on.

Seems the same across tech generally, look at whats happening over at Apple... iPhones slumping the iMac has gone 602 days since the last update.

People are fed up all over the place waiting for updates but companies are more interested in selling services than hardware. I dont feel like we have hit the ceiling yet but maybe the investment for such improvements is a lot more than it used to be to see similar gains.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 29, 2019)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Sorry Harry, that's all just a sequence of pseudo-scientific statements; neural networks are very useful and powerful when applied within certain narrow areas but unfortunately not even close to simulate the actual human brain. Moreover they cannot even simulate a behaviour of a simple worm with 300 neurons.


There is a huge difference between emulating human reasoning and emulating human brain. And there is no practical reason to emulate human brain. Human brains suck.

Human reasoning sucks too, but there is one practical reason to emulate it: it will give a robot photographer an easily automated critic. There is no practical need in emulation of human reasoning in the robot photographer itself.


----------



## Stuart (Jan 29, 2019)

What does "corporate sales than consumer retail sales " mean - is it only in the camera space that canon is doing this.
Might cameras go the way of the lathe and only be for enthusiasts in their sheds? Or was the real decline in enthusiast sales because of waiting for the new mount cameras and then the 6 month price drops.


----------



## Pape (Jan 29, 2019)

I am more worried about stupid drone auto cameras ,what about actually intelligent cameras . Ten thousend drone randomly flying around, taking random pictures what ever topic they encounter. will eventually produce lot of really good photos. Like those famous monkeys who wrote new version of biblia.


----------



## tomscott (Jan 29, 2019)

I think its amazing that non of the big camera manufacturers are looking at what Apple/Samsung/Google are doing with computational photography and adding features into cameras that have incredible sensors. Would save so much time when editing and you could choose what is right for your situation or even turn it on or off after the fact during editing etc Night mode on the pixel 3 for example is really impressive.

DSLRs/Mirrorless are essentially the same just a different form factor, its nothing revolutionary. If anything for me they dont change much because when they are made to be ergonomic they are very similar in size and form factor. The nice thing is the benefit to lens design etc but lets be fair the suite of lenses we have is already pretty amazing.

Just feels like the industry has blinkers on and they are doing nothing other than changing the form factor which really is a plaster to sales not the answer. If they are predicting lowering of sales then less R&D will be placed into the sector so there is nothing to get excited about.

Camera phones are incredible for what they are but they are still so poor compared to a full frame DSLR because of physics.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 29, 2019)

Pape said:


> I am more worried about stupid drone auto cameras ,what about actually intelligent cameras . Ten thousend drone randomly flying around, taking random pictures what ever topic they encounter. will eventually produce lot of really good photos. Like those famous monkeys who wrote new version of biblia.


Alone, unguided? Unlikely.

But if you add millions of monkeys clicking "Like" buttons under those pictures, you can train the drones to intentionally produce photos that the monkeys will like.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 29, 2019)

tomscott said:


> Its a catch 22 if they don't innovate and bring new product to the market then how can they expect to sell more? The product line is so stagnant and it has been since the 5DMKIII which was 2012, thats 7 years of not much happening or improvement. The schedule of updates is so long that there isnt really much to keep up with... hard to get excited.
> 
> In all honesty I dont frequent CanonRumours that much anymore because there is never any news worth catching up on.
> 
> ...


 the catch 22 is that cameras can only innovate so much especially on the photo side of things.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 29, 2019)

Many people seem so addicted to their phones they can't put them down to pick up a better camera that takes two hands to operate.


----------



## Ozarker (Jan 29, 2019)

unfocused said:


> Are you questioning what dolina is saying? Do you have any data that would cast doubt on his comments?


Why would I? I'm asking. What part is it you think I am disputing? His assumptions or the data? Data is data. Personal assumptions are always open to questions. I'm not disputing anything.

"But when it concerns the high end/professional cameras then I expect sales to be maintained or be slightly higher." That's an opinion and assumption... with no data. I don't have a problem with it, just wondering where that idea comes from.


----------



## tomscott (Jan 29, 2019)

RayValdez360 said:


> the catch 22 is that cameras can only innovate so much especially on the photo side of things.



Maybe not from an image quality side as most people are pretty happy with the quality of the images available across the majority of dedicated cameras. Its usability, integration, easy share, internal editing capabilities etc etc

At the end of the day the camera is just that a dedicated stand alone tool. There is a lot they could do which would make owning, making and sharing images more intuitive and make you more likely to grab a dedicated device and reduce the need to move images over to another device to edit and share. 

Its the reason the smart phone is so popular - A, because its always with you B, because its use case is much bigger than basic communication. 

Im not saying I want a camera with the functionality of a phone etc but what smartphone companies are doing is computational photography because of the limitation of the size of the sensor and optics is pretty incredible. Imagine scaling that up from a phone sensor to a full frame sensor.

Something as simple as auto HDR on the iPhone and compare it to a DSLR and its night and day. Auto HDR that looks natural and is editable after the fact.

That is literally touching the surface.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 29, 2019)

Stuart said:


> What does "corporate sales than consumer retail sales " mean - is it only in the camera space that canon is doing this.
> Might cameras go the way of the lathe and only be for enthusiasts in their sheds? Or was the real decline in enthusiast sales because of waiting for the new mount cameras and then the 6 month price drops.



corporate sales:


----------



## djack41 (Jan 29, 2019)

Even worse for Canon. As the camera market drops, aggressive competition is taking away Canon's share of the shrinking market. Canon's refusal to invest in innovation and R&D may be a sound strategy for dealing with red ink but Canon can not expect to be #1 in market share much longer.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 29, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Even worse for Canon. As the camera market drops, aggressive competition is taking away Canon's share of the shrinking market.


The data show that Canon is not losing market share. So when you spout crap like this, you merely make yourself look foolish.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 29, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Alone, unguided? Unlikely.
> 
> But if you add millions of monkeys clicking "Like" buttons under those pictures, you can train the drones to intentionally produce photos that the monkeys will like.



I for one welcome our drone overlords along with their monkey minions.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 29, 2019)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> Continue reading...



I think few disagree that the camera market is still shrinking (albeit at a slower rate), and that the greatest contraction has and is happening on the low-end side, largely due to displacement by camera phones. 

The news in this interview is merely that Canon believes the shrinking will continue, at perhaps even a quickened pace before it bottoms. 

The logical response to this assessment would be to concentrate resources on maximizing competitive advantages in the *high end* camera and lens ranges, not prioritize the market that is shrinking fastest. I think we can safely assume that if the next R release is a low-end camera, this is not a direct response to a grand strategy related to the main point of this interview. 

When Canon is able to, it will likely be putting emphasis on the higher end models, and its capacity to do so may be a bit limited at the moment - one possible explanation for some of the limitations of its first R release. Once it figures out a few things on that side of things, I expect Canon to be concentrating on the R equivalents of the 6, 5 and 1 series, which suits me fine.


----------



## deletemyaccount (Jan 29, 2019)

What concerns me is the EF development basically grinding from a slowed rate to virtual domancy. Like many others here, I have plenty of money invested in EF lenses. I'm not about to start buying RF glass anytime soon and despite the claim of adapters working well on mirrorless with EF lenses, I find it less than appealing. I'm still shooting with a 5D3 and an aged 1DIV. I'm looking for a new body, but with many of the new announcements, it doesn't look like I'll be buying simply becauses development in DSLR FF bodies is no longer interesting or a priority to Canon.


----------



## BeenThere (Jan 29, 2019)

camerabug said:


> What concerns me is the EF development basically grinding from a slowed rate to virtual domancy. Like many others here, I have plenty of money invested in EF lenses. I'm not about to start buying RF glass anytime soon and despite the claim of adapters working well on mirrorless with EF lenses, I find it less than appealing. I'm still shooting with a 5D3 and an aged 1DIV. I'm looking for a new body, but with many of the new announcements, it doesn't look like I'll be buying simply becauses development in DSLR FF bodies is no longer interesting or a priority to Canon.


One has to adapt and move forward as trends and technologies change. ... or be left totally disappointed and frustrated. Wishing it were otherwise will not bring any changes.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 29, 2019)

Canon is ******* - writes Canon
I guess they know more than we do about the market. 
I'd say the phone is killing the cheaper end of the market. They are very good and you tend to have built in memory on your phone. You can process them on your phone. It's very convenient.
The market won't be as big as in the past but I think there will still be a hunger for DSLR's and MILC's going forward. Photography is quite addictive. Even those exclusively using phones will want to move onto better quality.
If micro 4/3 is limited then phones will always be limited compared to a DSLR/MILC.
The world's population is growing so over time there will be more people who have photography as a hobby.
Canon / Nikon / Sony all have an issue in how to make a camera better as they are so good already but there is a sizeable demand for those improvements. 
I expect they will all migrate towards the higher end of the market and reduce the number of entry level cameras.
Canon will still be taking my money for at least another few years as photography is endless. I've alot left to photograph so my gear will all need replacing at some point. Canon Photography might get dimmed a little but its not *******.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 29, 2019)

tomscott said:


> I think few disagree that the camera market is still shrinking (albeit at a slower rate), and that the greatest contraction has and is happening on the low-end side, largely due to displacement by camera phones.
> 
> The news in this interview is merely that Canon believes the shrinking will continue, at perhaps even a quickened pace before it bottoms.
> 
> The logical response to this assessment would be to concentrate resources on maximizing competitive advantages in the *high end* camera and lens ranges, not prioritize the market that is shrinking fastest. I think we can safely assume that if the next R release is a low-end camera, this is not a direct response to a grand strategy related to the main point of this interview.


Just the opposite, actually. Canon needs to convince people that used to buy a dedicated camera to continue to buy a dedicated camera. Which means selling 1" to 1/2.3" camera users, selling APS-C to 1" camera users and selling FF to APS-C camera users.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 29, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> The logical response to this assessment would be to concentrate resources on maximizing competitive advantages in the *high end* camera and lens ranges, not prioritize the market that is shrinking fastest. I think we can safely assume that if the next R release is a low-end camera, this is not a direct response to a grand strategy related to the main point of this interview.



I agree with your overall point, I disagree with your assessment of where "high end" begins. I believe that from Canon's perspective, high end begins at Full Frame. The lower spec'd RP then would make sense within this strategy as this becomes the low end of the high end, where the most volume and dollars will be after the collapse of the Rebel lineup. There are a lot of assumptions going on here, but my point is that offering a lower spec R body is not in conflict the "grand strategy" as you call it. In fact, it sets the line clearly where Canon thinks their volume will be made two years from now.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Jan 29, 2019)

knight427 said:


> I tried briefly to look at one of their quarterly reports several weeks ago. My impression was that cameras weren't something they needed to talk much about to inform shareholders what was going on.



I tried looking for the same info, at least they're not in a position like Fluke is(the electrician meter company). Fluke was taken over by a private equity firms that has more debt than it can handle, now they're hiring more sales and creatives and just trying to sell any junk that sticks. That's the first thing that came to my mind when I saw that Olympus camera.


----------



## nchoh (Jan 29, 2019)

[email protected] said:


> I think few disagree that the camera market is still shrinking (albeit at a slower rate), and that the greatest contraction has and is happening on the low-end side, largely due to displacement by camera phones.
> 
> The news in this interview is merely that Canon believes the shrinking will continue, at perhaps even a quickened pace before it bottoms.
> 
> ...



The camera market is shrinking... but camera sales are also slowing due to another reason.

Cameras are becoming good enough. Remember the days when cameras had 8MP and the IQ sucked? When the next better model came out, it was visibly better. We are now in a phase where even the low end cameras give good IQ. The reasons for upgrading your camera every other year is getting less. If the largest you post to is Facebook, then almost every camera sold today will suffice. Sports and BIF are some of the few scenarios where the enthusiast or pro are still looking for better features (AF) in the camera. The mass majority of users will not be able to justify a camera upgrade.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jan 29, 2019)

I used to have a number of in between systems like an RX100, a travel superzoom and even a GX body w/ kit lens for travel. These days, I don't have any other system other than my working FF bodies. When I go on a trip or vacation, I'll commonly just bring my smartphone, a gopro or two and perhaps some add-on lenses and a compact smartphone gimbal. Currently, I have both an XS Max and a Mate 20 Pro (not available in the US due to political reasons), but the Mate 20 Pro can shoot FLs from 16mm to 80mm. While I still prefer manual controls, use apps like LR, Filmic Pro and connect external accessories like lights and mics, etc. I have to admit that the average consumer can simply leave everything on auto, use the native camera app and in the case of the Mate 20 Pro, use the AI mode that can recognize 1500 unique scenes in 25 categories which best tunes the output accordingly. Both of these devices also have an IP68 rating meaning I can take it from the resort hotel to the swim up bar without guessing how "weather resistant" my ILC might be. Zoom is one of the few remaining advantages available to ILC systems and that is quickly being eroded with upcoming Samsung and Apple flagships moving to 4-5 camera modules.


----------



## Kit. (Jan 29, 2019)

nchoh said:


> The reasons for upgrading your camera every other year is getting less. If the largest you post to is Facebook, then almost every camera sold today will suffice. Sports and BIF are some of the few scenarios where the enthusiast or pro are still looking for better features (AF) in the camera.


And if you need to take pictures of running toddlers, the "upgraded" cameras can fail miserably where the previous generation worked well.


----------



## deletemyaccount (Jan 29, 2019)

BeenThere said:


> One has to adapt and move forward as trends and technologies change. ... or be left totally disappointed and frustrated. Wishing it were otherwise will not bring any changes.


Or we could wait and see and bear with Canon's typical long product cycle. Not everyone wants to go mirrorless and pros with plenty of glass aren't abandoning the EF mount. As to disappointment, more aptly named as impatient.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 29, 2019)

neuroanatomist said:


> The data show that Canon is not losing market share. So when you spout crap like this, you merely make yourself look foolish.


Sorry but your wrong, Nero. Quit the fanboy routine.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 29, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Sorry but your wrong, Nero. Quit the fanboy routine.


----------



## dolina (Jan 29, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Where is your data to back up what you say from?


Look at my post history for the past 11 years and the data you are looking for will crop up.

What is news to me is the 50% decline within 2 years.


----------



## dolina (Jan 29, 2019)

camerabug said:


> What concerns me is the EF development basically grinding from a slowed rate to virtual domancy. Like many others here, I have plenty of money invested in EF lenses. I'm not about to start buying RF glass anytime soon and despite the claim of adapters working well on mirrorless with EF lenses, I find it less than appealing. I'm still shooting with a 5D3 and an aged 1DIV. I'm looking for a new body, but with many of the new announcements, it doesn't look like I'll be buying simply becauses development in DSLR FF bodies is no longer interesting or a priority to Canon.


With the release of these lenses below I expect newer EOS full frame bodies to continue at least until the year 2030,

2018
Canon EF 400mm F2.8L IS III USM 
Canon EF 600mm F4L IS III USM
Canon EF 85mm F1.4L IS USM
Canon TS-E 50mm F2.8L Macro
Canon TS-E 90mm F2.8L Macro
Canon TS-E 135mm F4L Macro
2017
Canon EF 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II USM
2016
Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM
Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM
2015
Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II USM 
Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 STM
Canon EF 11-24mm F4L USM 
2014
Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II USM 
Canon EF 24-105mm F3.5-5.6 IS STM 
Canon EF 400mm F4 DO IS II USM 
Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM 

So I expect at least 2 more 1D bodies, 2 more 5D bodies, 2 more 5Ds bodies, 2 more 6D bodies and maybe 2 more 7D bodies.

I would be surprised if Canon were to continue announcing more EF lenses. It makes more sense to put scarce R&D money into RF system development.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 29, 2019)

camerabug said:


> What concerns me is the EF development basically grinding from a slowed rate to virtual domancy. Like many others here, I have plenty of money invested in EF lenses. I'm not about to start buying RF glass anytime soon and despite the claim of adapters working well on mirrorless with EF lenses, I find it less than appealing. I'm still shooting with a 5D3 and an aged 1DIV. I'm looking for a new body, but with many of the new announcements, it doesn't look like I'll be buying simply becauses development in DSLR FF bodies is no longer interesting or a priority to Canon.



Everything you say is not a fact - merely your fear. Canon has said in interviews that they will continue to develop DSLRs. The fact that they are pushing out RF lenses and R bodies at an accelerated rate only makes sense as they need to develop the entire system. This does not mean DSLR development won;t continue as it has. If you already have plenty of EF lenses, then the fact that Canon will be concentrating on RF lenses for the next year or more shouldn't be a concern. The EF line is mature and has a wide range of lenses in case you still are in the market for a new lens. 

Why people think that having one mirrorless camera with 4 lenses spells the end for DSLRs is really odd, in my opinion.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 30, 2019)

djack41 said:


> Sorry but your wrong, Nero. Quit the fanboy routine.


Show us the data that support your claim. Or to put it more bluntly, put up or shut up.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Jan 30, 2019)

tomscott said:


> Maybe not from an image quality side as most people are pretty happy with the quality of the images available across the majority of dedicated cameras. Its usability, integration, easy share, internal editing capabilities etc etc
> 
> At the end of the day the camera is just that a dedicated stand alone tool. There is a lot they could do which would make owning, making and sharing images more intuitive and make you more likely to grab a dedicated device and reduce the need to move images over to another device to edit and share.
> 
> ...


 i meanin the realm of actual photography. THey can make them more like phones or have a better os. Better in camera automation is cool even though for now you getter more options and better results with doing it outside the camera. But none of this is realy big innovations, just more convenience. i dont see it making a camera a must have. I never heard this " the 5d mk IV has a nice touch screen and easy to navagate menus, now I must by a professional camera" when it came out.


----------



## knight427 (Jan 30, 2019)

dolina said:


> With the release of these lenses below I expect newer EOS full frame bodies to continue at least until the year 2030,
> 
> 2018
> Canon EF 400mm F2.8L IS III USM
> ...



Based on Canon's public statements, they would say they will make DSLRs so long their customers want them. Of course that actually means if there are enough customers who are willing buy them in sufficient volume.

Based on nothing but guessing, I think the 6D line is done. As a 6D owner with a small EF lens collection (5 lenses, 2 extenders), I just don't see a reason to stick to EF when RF is clearly where Canon is going. I'm sure I'd feel differently if I had a large collection of EF glass, but I'm thinking a lot of 6D and 6D2 owners are in the small collection boat with me. One contradictory element to this is that if EF lens prices depreciate enough, I might choose to buy more EF lenses after switching to RF. The problem is that I'd be most interested in the high end stuff (400 f/4 DO II and 600 f/4) which will hold its value much better than the rest.

In regards to 7D, I think one body at most. And if we haven't heard about it by mid 2019, I think it's done too. My rationale behind this is based only on anecdotal evidence that the 7D2 wasn't a good seller for Canon. I don't think they will have a high end APS-C body in both EF and RF, and I'm pretty sure they are going to release an RF APS-C body in time for the 2020 Olympics alongside the 1dX3, giving their Pro users the choice of FF EF or crop RF. Maybe they'll even release a fourth adapter using their speed booster patents.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 30, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Nobody really wants to see photos of what I'm eating or my arm holding the camera out and a toilet in the background.



Don't sell yourself short!


----------



## scyrene (Jan 30, 2019)

tomscott said:


> Its a catch 22 if they don't innovate and bring new product to the market then how can they expect to sell more? The product line is so stagnant and it has been since the 5DMKIII which was 2012, thats 7 years of not much happening or improvement. The schedule of updates is so long that there isnt really much to keep up with... hard to get excited.



"Stagnant" - translation: they haven't released anything Tom Scott liked enough to buy


----------



## dolina (Jan 30, 2019)

Then again I could be wrong.

EOS bodies were introduced in 1987 and the last FD body was introduced in 1990 and then was discontinued in 1993.



knight427 said:


> Based on Canon's public statements, they would say they will make DSLRs so long their customers want them. Of course that actually means if there are enough customers who are willing buy them in sufficient volume.
> 
> Based on nothing but guessing, I think the 6D line is done. As a 6D owner with a small EF lens collection (5 lenses, 2 extenders), I just don't see a reason to stick to EF when RF is clearly where Canon is going. I'm sure I'd feel differently if I had a large collection of EF glass, but I'm thinking a lot of 6D and 6D2 owners are in the small collection boat with me. One contradictory element to this is that if EF lens prices depreciate enough, I might choose to buy more EF lenses after switching to RF. The problem is that I'd be most interested in the high end stuff (400 f/4 DO II and 600 f/4) which will hold its value much better than the rest.
> 
> In regards to 7D, I think one body at most. And if we haven't heard about it by mid 2019, I think it's done too. My rationale behind this is based only on anecdotal evidence that the 7D2 wasn't a good seller for Canon. I don't think they will have a high end APS-C body in both EF and RF, and I'm pretty sure they are going to release an RF APS-C body in time for the 2020 Olympics alongside the 1dX3, giving their Pro users the choice of FF EF or crop RF. Maybe they'll even release a fourth adapter using their speed booster patents.


----------



## Pape (Jan 31, 2019)

when mirrorless is better than dslr ,they stop dslr making .
Its not sure if mirrorless autofocus will never be as good


----------



## tomscott (Jan 31, 2019)

scyrene said:


> "Stagnant" - translation: they haven't released anything Tom Scott liked enough to buy



Ive bought plenty through necessity. I just don't get excited about any of it anymore.Its replacing worn out gear rather than vastly superior gear.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 31, 2019)

tomscott said:


> Ive bought plenty through necessity. I just don't get excited about any of it anymore.Its replacing worn out gear rather than vastly superior gear.



Is excitement a prerequisite? I get less excited by a lot of things, but put it down to age, or changes in my temperament, rather than what is on offer being less intrinsically good. As others have said for a long time, in many ways, the days of 'vastly superior' are over, because the technology and market of digital cameras are mature. Until something technologically game changing comes along, it's just slightly better iterations for the time being - whatever company you look at. Sorry if I was too scathing btw


----------



## dolina (Feb 1, 2019)

knight427 said:


> Based on Canon's public statements, they would say they will make DSLRs so long their customers want them. Of course that actually means if there are enough customers who are willing buy them in sufficient volume.


I have not bought a new Canon body since the 5Ds R on June 2015. 

On a lark I got myself a Sony a7R II on January 2016.

I had an opportunity to get the 1D X Mark II at distributor's pricing without sales tax within 6 months of release but skipped on that because it offered nothing significant enough to buy.

3 years later, nothing really new catches my eye. I'm more excited abut the next iPhone than another heavy camera that will gather dust in my camera cabinet.


----------



## knight427 (Feb 1, 2019)

dolina said:


> I have not bought a new Canon body since the 5Ds R on June 2015.
> 
> On a lark I got myself a Sony a7R II on January 2016.
> 
> ...



I was peeking at your 500px photos. Is that 800 mm f/5.6 lens also gathering dust? If so, you're making me cry a little bit.


----------



## Talys (Feb 1, 2019)

knight427 said:


> Based on nothing but guessing, I think the 6D line is done. As a 6D owner with a small EF lens collection (5 lenses, 2 extenders), I just don't see a reason to stick to EF when RF is clearly where Canon is going.



As a 6D2 and R owner, I pick my 6D2 over the R nine times out of ten, despite the R having a better sensor. The main reason is that I like the 6D2's performance with a flash or strobes better (mostly because the AF illuminator works perfectly), and a majority of my non-wildlife photography is with augmented lighting, with anything from a single bounce flash to a bunch of studio lighting and modifiers.

On the other hand, EF works great adapted on R. I don't think there's any reason not to get an R, if you have a collection of EF lenses. They don't _feel_ at all like the lens wasn't natively made for the body.


----------



## dolina (Feb 2, 2019)

knight427 said:


> I was peeking at your 500px photos. Is that 800 mm f/5.6 lens also gathering dust? If so, you're making me cry a little bit.


Haven’t touched the wretched thing in about half a decade.

Long story short... Should have taken up grad school instead.

Take a look at the threads I made on CR to see what other dust has been collecting lenses.


----------



## Bert (Feb 3, 2019)

Has anyone been able to read the Nikkei interview? It is in Japanese & behind a paywall as far as I can tell.
My interest is that a 50% drop seems hard to reconcile with #ome of the projections in the information provided in Canon’s financial projections.
If anybody knows of a site with the interview or significant extracts, I would be interested
Thanks, Bert
PS: one extract fyi


----------

