# Canon Profits Drop 16% in Second Quarter



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 27, 2015)

```
FROM REUTERS:</p>
<p>Japan’s Canon Inc cut its earnings outlook for the full year and reported a 16 percent fall in quarterly profit as consumers, increasingly in the habit of taking photos with their smartphones, bought fewer compact digital cameras.</p>
<p>The world’s largest camera maker said on Monday its second-quarter net profit fell to 68 billion yen ($552 million) compared with 81 billion yen a year earlier. Analysts on average expected 65 billion yen, according to Thomson Reuters data.</p>
<p><a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/27/us-canon-results-idUKKCN0Q10FD20150727" target="_blank">Read more at Reuters</a></p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR, so they're turning to smartphone cameras in their quest for better IQ.


----------



## Valvebounce (Jul 27, 2015)

Hi Neuro. 
One has to assume suppose that these phones are now using FF Sony sensors? ;D

Cheers, Graham. 



neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR, so they're turning to smartphone cameras in their quest for better IQ.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jul 27, 2015)

There are billboards all over NYC that say "Shot with an iPhone 6". Not sure why anyone needs anything else!


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jul 27, 2015)

pdirestajr said:


> There are billboards all over NYC that say "Shot with an iPhone 6". Not sure why anyone needs anything else!



For most people, that's all they do need (not necessarily an iphone though)

A camera is a tool. If a lower cost, easier to carry, easier to use tool does the job needed, why would anyone use anything else? If it does not do the job needed, than a different tool is needed.


----------



## Greenmeenie (Jul 27, 2015)

I'm sure ALL the big camera manufacturers are dealing with the impact of smartphones. That ship has sailed. Canon needs to worry about Sony. I know dozens of photogs who have jumped ship from Canon & Nikon to Sony because they like what Sony is doing in the FF Mirrorless department and are disgusted by Canon & Nikon dragging their feet.

Seriously. They need to step up their game. All camera manufacturers got caught sleeping with the smartphone threat. But the writings on the wall with Sony. If Canon & Nikon don't change their smug attitude, they're gonna keep losing $$.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

Greenmeenie said:


> Seriously. They need to step up their game. All camera manufacturers got caught sleeping with the smartphone threat. But the writings on the wall with Sony. If Canon & Nikon don't change their smug attitude, they're gonna keep losing $$.



I'm sure Canon and Nikon will still be making cameras in a few years, I wonder if that's true for Sony.


----------



## arthurbikemad (Jul 27, 2015)

An iPhone pmsl....lol

You work for Crapple?



Swap my 5D3 for an iPhone... err, no....lol

An HTC M9 maybe 

On a real note, so sales are down a tad, and that's with my years spend.. sounds like they need some Tesco's management, then the sales would be up 150%


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jul 27, 2015)

"Despite firm sales in Japan, interchangeable-lens digital cameras continued to face severe conditions in other regions while *sales volume for digital compact cameras decreased in most regions* compared with the same period of the previous year," Canon said in a statement.It also said the weak *yen was inflating operating costs*. 

1) Compact cameras are certainly dying: maybe Canon (plus Sony and Nikon) can replace this dying market with their 1 Inch "premium" models. Less units sold, higher margins (maybe).
BTW, I just ordered a Fuji XP-80 compact because I needed a minimalistic waterproof camera for my vacations. 
To sum it up: I think "market niches" will survive, whereas general purpose compact cameras will disappear.

2) When I was young, my teachers used to tell me that an inflated yen would help Canon profits. Can I sue them for mis-teaching? :


----------



## Sabaki (Jul 27, 2015)

Canon for now remain the market leader but they no longer lead in the innovation stakes. 

What they need to do isn't a major mystery but let's wait and see what happens over the new 3-5 years. 

Perhaps P&S cameras will be replaced by the Rebel line, full frame becomes second tier and a larger format camera becomes the new top-of-the-line formay


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 27, 2015)

When a market shifts, it often shifts faster than the finance types believe. Canon announced a shift about two years ago to premium compact cameras with larger sensors. But, will buyers pay up to $1000, or in the case of sony $1300 for a point and shoot. I don't think so.


----------



## Nitroman (Jul 27, 2015)

Maybe they should try lowering their prices ...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 27, 2015)

Nitroman said:


> Maybe they should try lowering their prices ...



They were giving away the entry level P&S cameras in the refurb store, some were $49. Obviously, with Canon's cost structure, they lost a lot of $$ disposing of cameras that no one wants.

That's why they dropped out of the entry level P&S market. I expect to see only a few new models go for less that $400 or $500. They have continued to make a few lower priced models, but sales are dropping fast.

When you are already churning out a million cameras a year, you cannot afford to keep losing money on each one while hoping that sales pick up. Canon is smarter than that, they do know how to make money, but that does not keep profits from dropping as sales fall. They believe that higher end and more capable P&S cameras will sell, but I'm doubting that. I have a G1 X II and, while I like it, it does not hold a candle to my 5D MK III in so many ways.


----------



## retroreflection (Jul 27, 2015)

We could be living in a golden age of photography.
Some golden ages are preceded by silver and followed by a tasteful return to a variety of materials each employed to their sustainable best.
Other golden ages are followed by pestilence, war, and depraved impoverishment.

Photography's silver halide age has been severely beaten down by the economics of markets lost to silicon (my materials analogy is breaking up). Bankruptcy of Kodak - unthinkable in the 80's, now it makes perfect sense.

Mobile devices are chipping away at the old camera market. As the demand for old style interchangeable lens cameras drops, the sustainability of the manufacturers also drops. I hope that the manufacturers of the systems in which I have lens investments can survive. Considering that, I think Canon should continue on its conservative path while pursuing other profitable ventures. Sony should drop the manufacture of cameras (and TVs, PCs, gaming systems, etc.) and concentrate only on sensors.
If the market drops too much, we could very well be faced with full frame cameras that have to be priced at current MF levels just to cover the development and manufacturing of niche products.


----------



## sanj (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Greenmeenie said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously. They need to step up their game. All camera manufacturers got caught sleeping with the smartphone threat. But the writings on the wall with Sony. If Canon & Nikon don't change their smug attitude, they're gonna keep losing $$.
> ...



I hope and wish all three keep making cameras. Going by current trends Sony is pushing it which helps all of us. Fuji should continue too. Iphone camera should keep getting better.


----------



## jrista (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR, so they're turning to smartphone cameras in their quest for better IQ.



Nice, start the DR debate right out the gate. -.- For a guy who proposes to hate it...you do tend to bring it up at every opportunity...

The article discussed the drop in compact sales, which has nothing to do with IQ and everything to do with the ubiquity of smartphones. Most consumers lack a real interest in IQ, and have intense interest in Polaroid-esque instagrammification.


----------



## Joe M (Jul 27, 2015)

I guess for those who don't want to use their phone, a pocket-able P&S will always be handy. I seriously doubt Canon can continue to make money at it anymore. As far as SLRs go, I wonder if Canon realizes that most country's economies are still rather soft. Even from a business point of view, I will have to think long and hard before I upgrade my pair of 5D3s to the 5D4 unless they provide something mindblowing that will actually generate income the 5D3 can't. I think all camera manufacturers have to realize from here on out it's going to be a tough sell to most consumers as the digital camera has peaked for the most part. Except for those who really need the incremental improvements, I don't know anyone personally that's looking to buy a new camera.


----------



## roguewave (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR, so they're turning to smartphone cameras in their quest for better IQ.



Funny, coming from exactly the person who likes to quote sales numbers as proof of Canon's product superiority. So yeah, by your own logic, smartphone cameras eating away Canon's market share means they must be better .


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

jrista said:


> The article discussed the drop in compact sales, which has nothing to do with IQ and everything to do with the ubiquity of smartphones.



The article also discussed ILCs. 



> Despite firm sales in Japan, interchangeable-lens digital cameras continued to face severe conditions in other regions...







roguewave said:


> [Funny, coming from exactly the person who likes to quote sales numbers as proof of Canon's product superiority. So yeah, by your own logic, smartphone cameras eating away Canon's market share means they must be better .



Exactly. Smartphone cameras best meet the needs of far more people than dSLRs. Do you disagree?


----------



## AdjustedInCamera (Jul 27, 2015)

Sabaki said:
 

> Perhaps P&S cameras will be replaced by the Rebel line, full frame becomes second tier and a larger format camera becomes the new top-of-the-line formay



+1 this makes sense to me. An advantage Canon's low end cameras should have over iphones is physical space for the sensor, they should aim to exploit that as fully as possible.

In my view the biggest problem Canon has (and the dedicated camera industry generally) is that they are not correctly targeting the consumer maket with their higher-end cameras. The view seems to be that the 'professionals' have all the money so the higher-end stuff is aimed at them with cut-down versions available for everyone else.

In reality I suspect that this results in lost sales as the average consumer finds that the Canon offering doesn't fit well into the wider consumer electronics eco-system, e.g. they are expected to pay extra for GPS & WiFi, their television can show 4k but their Canon camera can't capture it. This is before you look at the fact we have ML trying to fix the gap between what people expect these days in terms of software functionality, functionality by-the-way that would be really useful to someone transitioning from iPhone/PNS to a dedicated camera.

I think canon should:
- Integrate with the iPhone fully. Find some way to get iPhone apps to run inside the camera. This would help transition users and provide an open software platform for features and tutorials. It would also help address the hopeless UI that Canon's camera have. Yes, I know the camera ergonomics are good, but the software UI could have come straight out of the mainframe switch interface of the 1960s.
- There needs to be a clear range of cameras aimed at non-pros. Differentation should be easy as it seems every consumer features makes pros ill anyway  swivel screen, picture mode icons on the mode switch, SD cards, etc.  This range will not be driven by what people need (only pros need a camera) but by what people want, can have, and expect from the wider consumer electronics eco-system given that they are spending serious money on a dedicated device.

This may result in some non-pro cameras costing more than the 5Ds. I look at the sales of BMWs, etc. at the moment and believe there's a market there. Having said that I could just be talking about myself


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > The article discussed the drop in compact sales, which has nothing to do with IQ and everything to do with the ubiquity of smartphones.
> ...


I guess the DxO one camera is looking like a good business decision.


----------



## jonathan7007 (Jul 27, 2015)

Sony has already told the financial press that the company will back away from Sony-branded consumer devices to focus on component supply, like sensors. So they are signalling that they will move out of camera bodies (my interpretation).

Sony's news release can be found on Reuters. About a month ago.

CR readers, do you think the smartphone addons like the DxO 1" sensor camera will gain enough marketshare to reward any player with some profits? (I have forgotten the release price.)


----------



## AvTvM (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR ...



yes, thats part of it. But even more so, Canon is not offering enough attractive products. Expensive new L lenses, as good as they may be don't do it for the majority of photographers, if there are no 

Myself and obsiouly many other former and potential new customers are holding off buying any more Canon sh*t, until they offer 
* a fully competitive APS-C mirrorless system
* a fully competitive FF mirrorless system
* fully competitive APS-C and FF sensors in all of their cameras - with and without mirrors
* improved wireless ETTL protocol with 2nd curtain flash and zoom head control 
* stunning new Eye Control AF system (v2.0) ... 
* other truly injovative stuff that helps getting the photots we want rather than just being electronic fluff

No, I am definitely not going to buy yet another marginally improved mirrorslapper. Yes I am happy to hurt Canon sales. If need be, for an indefinite period of time. Until they get the message.


----------



## roguewave (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> roguewave said:
> 
> 
> > [Funny, coming from exactly the person who likes to quote sales numbers as proof of Canon's product superiority. So yeah, by your own logic, smartphone cameras eating away Canon's market share means they must be better .
> ...



No, that's right - many people choose smartphone cameras because of aspects like size, convenience, connectivity and not because they produce better images. Which is exactly why I think your bringing in sales numbers in camera comparisons is inconclusive. Higher sales may or may not mean better cameras; people may base their buying decisions of such factors as existing lens collections, resale value, customer service, that have nothing to do with the camera quality itself.


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

Looking forward to CIPA report.

In the Philippines the sale of dedicated still cameras declined 10% year after year since 2013.

There is even a rumor that Sony will cease sales here.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 27, 2015)

jonathan7007 said:


> CR readers, do you think the smartphone addons like the DxO 1" sensor camera will gain enough marketshare to reward any player with some profits? (I have forgotten the release price.)



Not for me - the advantage of the smartphone camera is that it's already in my pocket. If I have to bring something else, especially something that doesn't easily fit into a pocket, I'll just bring a real camera, whether it's the 5D3, SL1, or an even smaller model (like an LX100/ RX100iv). I don't get the appeal of smartphone camera addons, at all.


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> jonathan7007 said:
> 
> 
> > CR readers, do you think the smartphone addons like the DxO 1" sensor camera will gain enough marketshare to reward any player with some profits? (I have forgotten the release price.)
> ...


It could have enough appeal to be profitable for DxO.

The come on with the camera is a hardware connectivity with smartphones for direct Internet sharing.

Canon's so conservative with their products they missed the boat with it by dragging their feet with stupid easy connectivity with smartphones.

RX100iv is $1,000. More coin that casual photogs would spring for.

We on CR do not think it is much as we are used to buying 1DX, 5Ds, 7D2 and the like.


----------



## George D. (Jul 27, 2015)

The Powershot line is way overextended. Diversification is one thing oversupply is another. 

There are currently thirteen (13) different SX series models, ten (10) ELPH, seven (7) A and four (4) N series models. That's 34 models marketed in different colors too. Of course Canon is losing profit, all these cameras can be equaled or bested by a good smart phone. Such a waste of resources. Who even wants to read the specs of 34 different point & shoot cameras to select one.

There should be an amalgamation of all these series, half of them models or less plus the S and G series.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly, consumers are dissatisfied with the low ISO DR offered by Canon's sensors and disillusioned about the prospects of Canon improving that low ISO DR ...
> ...



Yeah, those steps will absolutely certainly stop ILCs from losing sales to smartphones. Doubtless, without a doubt. :


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

When Steve Jobs came back to Apple he cancelled a lot of projects and focused on a core product line.

If Canon's smart they will do the same. If they aren't they'll end up being like Leica before the M9.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Greenmeenie said:
> 
> 
> > Seriously. They need to step up their game. All camera manufacturers got caught sleeping with the smartphone threat. But the writings on the wall with Sony. If Canon & Nikon don't change their smug attitude, they're gonna keep losing $$.
> ...



Since their sales are increasing while those for Canon and Nikon are dropping like a rock, they probably will be.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

roguewave said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > roguewave said:
> ...



You make good points. They might even be relevant..._if_ I claimed that selling more cameras meant they were of higher quality. But I haven't...so, they aren't.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 27, 2015)

jonathan7007 said:


> Sony has already told the financial press that the company will back away from Sony-branded consumer devices to focus on component supply, like sensors. So they are signalling that they will move out of camera bodies (my interpretation).
> 
> Sony's news release can be found on Reuters. About a month ago.
> 
> CR readers, do you think the smartphone addons like the DxO 1" sensor camera will gain enough marketshare to reward any player with some profits? (I have forgotten the release price.)



If that were so they would not be refreshing so many of their branded camera products with new significant updates.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 27, 2015)

dolina said:


> Looking forward to CIPA report.
> 
> In the Philippines the sale of dedicated still cameras declined 10% year after year since 2013.
> 
> There is even a rumor that Sony will cease sales here.



The demand for cameras that cost the equivalent of a years salary for the average Joe in third world armpits is low? What a surprise!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

Tugela said:


> If that were so they would not be refreshing so many of their branded camera products with new significant updates.



From Wikipedia:

_Sony Vaio's latest designs were released during a period of low PC sales and included models with innovations such as magnetized stands and the Vaio Tap, which was designed with a completely separate keyboard. The latest models were complemented by the Windows 8 operating system._

Soon thereafter, Sony divested the Vaio line.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 27, 2015)

George D. said:


> The Powershot line is way overextended. Diversification is one thing oversupply is another.
> 
> There are currently thirteen (13) different SX series models, ten (10) ELPH, seven (7) A and four (4) N series models. That's 34 models marketed in different colors too. Of course Canon is losing profit, all these cameras can be equaled or bested by a good smart phone. Such a waste of resources. Who even wants to read the specs of 34 different point & shoot cameras to select one.
> 
> There should be an amalgamation of all these series, half of them models or less plus the S and G series.



They probably only need three P&S models: a pocketable version, a premier version with a better lens and a superzoom. There isn't really need for any more than that.


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

The same is being experienced worldwide but lazy to google the facts for you. 

It would be an unpleasant surprise to DxO if Apple were to offer a larger image sensor in the next iPhone. ;D



Tugela said:


> dolina said:
> 
> 
> > Looking forward to CIPA report.
> ...


----------



## Tugela (Jul 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > If that were so they would not be refreshing so many of their branded camera products with new significant updates.
> ...



That is because no one was buying their laptops. That isn't the case with their cameras.

You seem to be forgetting that their camera line up is driven by technology largely being developed on the backs of the cell phone market. There is relatively little additional investment required to be on the cutting edge as a result. For Sony the camera market is essentially free money.

That is not the case with Canon and Nikon. For them, new technology will require significant investment that is not being subsidised by other related industries, and in the end that burden will render them uncompetitive. It is like the arms race between the Soviet Union and the USA, ultimately the resource strain imposed by the arms industry and the lack of useable flowoff from that endeavour caused the collapse of the soviet system. Companies like Sony and Samsung WILL win in the end, if they stay the course. The technological dynamics are in their favor.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 27, 2015)

Tugela said:


> The demand for cameras that cost the equivalent of a years salary for the average Joe in third world armpits is low? What a surprise!



Wow! That's offensive.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 27, 2015)

Once again, I'm amused at how people respond without reading the article.



> The world's largest camera maker said on Monday its second-quarter net profit fell to 68 billion yen ($552 million)... Analysts on average expected 65 billion yen...



So they beat analysts expectations by $3 billion yen.



> Shares of Canon fell 0.75 percent ahead of the earnings release, compared with a 0.95 percent fall in the broader market.



So, even with the drop in earnings report, they beat the market.

So, Canon is doing better than the broader market and doing better than analysts predicted. And, let's not forget the bottom line: this is an announcement of smaller *profits* not an announcement of any loss.

It looks to me that Canon knows the market better and has better strategies than anyone on this forum.


----------



## jonathan7007 (Jul 27, 2015)

Tugela,
Some pros are trying out Sony bodies for their work. Some high-end amateurs are buying kits. But do you have any knowledge that there are big enough sales to satisfy a corporate bean-counter who does not care about a company's long-time tradition in the photo market? (Canon may have the older brother of the same bean-counter...)

I agree that Samsung may inherit their place. It depends, for these entrants, on their willingness to suck up losses in the first, what, 2 years? 5 years? 10 years?

Sony told the world recently they were NOT making enough to continue. You can look it up. Maybe a fib to [temporarily]help the stock but probably not. They had stuff in the pipeline and must have decided there is some upside to releasing it. I have no knowledge that they would exit at a dead run but they have said they will exit.

BTW, Nikon and Canon do NOT exhibit the same corporate/business unit breadth: Nikon is way more driven by camera sales revenue than Canon, who DOES have a lot of other businesses. Fuji seems to have parallels to Canon. They are said to be subsidizing their high-end photo gear with the other pieces.

I am glad I didn't buy a Sony A7-whatever, although I considered trying it out. I figured it needed some maturation, and many must have thought the same way.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Jul 27, 2015)

canon is going to turn things around by raising the price on all their lenses by about 200%


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 27, 2015)

Tugela said:


> That is because no one was buying their laptops. That isn't the case with their cameras.
> 
> You seem to be forgetting that their camera line up is driven by technology largely being developed on the backs of the cell phone market.


 
Ahhh, so _that_ explains why Sony themselves predicted their own camera sales will drop 50% by FY17. Thanks for clarifying. 




unfocused said:


> So, Canon is doing better than the broader market and doing better than analysts predicted. And, let's not forget the bottom line: this is an announcement of smaller *profits* not an announcement of any loss.
> 
> It looks to me that Canon knows the market better and has better strategies than anyone on this forum.



Some people on this forum have the business acumen of a bowling ball.


----------



## gregory4000 (Jul 27, 2015)

Cell phones is the cause for the drop of 16%.
It's simple. It's a matter of contentment.
Most everyone except the professional shooter or the few that care about a better photo.
the mass majority are content with the image their cell phone gives and this technology will only continue to improve and narrow the gap with better cameras. Remember, the camera is free on the phone and shoots very well for the most easy to carry camera to can carry at all times.
I was at a festival where almost everyone was shooting pics and videos. Out of the 200 people taking memory with their cameras, only myself and another shooter were holding something other than a cell phone.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jul 27, 2015)

I seriously doubt performance in DSLR and Lens sales has had much influence on the 16% drop. A quick look at Wikipedia directs to a 2011 report stating that over 50% of revenues comes via business streams related to copiers, printing, scanners and presumably inks, over 35% from consumer products, including broadcast, industry, camcorders, cameras and lenses, and just over 10% from office/business type equipment like EPOS, computers, tracking, calculators etc. I'd imagine a fair wedge would be via patant licensing too. Given the huge portion of the business is linked to copiers, printers and inks, there's a fair guess that the general global slowdown hitting business will be primarily behind the 16% drop.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 27, 2015)

dolina said:


> It could have enough appeal to be profitable for DxO.
> 
> The come on with the camera is a hardware connectivity with smartphones for direct Internet sharing.
> 
> ...



How much point is there to a $200 compact over a smartphone, though? I just don't see the point. And I did say "or the RX100iv"; the LX100 is cheaper than that. And there are other options; I just can't remember them off the top of my head, since I'm not in the market. I don't think I've actually seen anyone with a compact in the last year or two. Everyone I see shooting is either using their phone or a DSLR.


----------



## emko (Jul 27, 2015)

Sony is in a good position making the best sensors even if their camera sales slow down because of phones they still make profits from the sensor sales to the phone manufactures. They cant even keep up with phone sensor demands this is the reason they get to push the sensor tech so far. What was it like somewhere around 50% of the demand form Chinese phone manufactures they cant supply.

If only Canon did this early on we would of had better sensors in our DSLRS phones push technology the most right now since they spend so much R&D you can see every advancement from Sony sensors start off on a phone sensor.

I don't know what Canon will do but at this rate their market will go to Sony and phones i guess Canon still have their printers and calculators.


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> dolina said:
> 
> 
> > It could have enough appeal to be profitable for DxO.
> ...



LX100 is about $200 less but still a lot of coin for someone who use their camera for selfies, photos of food, cats, dogs and group photos.

When you see DSLRs in the hands of casual photogs what model do they tend to use and from what year was it introduced to the market?


----------



## 9VIII (Jul 27, 2015)

For the health of the consumer camera industry I think they should ditch all sensor sizes but APS-C and full frame. People can tell, a FF image looks different and usually better than smaller sensors.
Canon should make APS-C standard across all point and shoot bodies, and market the 80D as the ultimate consumer level step-up body, giving people full frame for under $1K.
Make the 80D the videographer's body with DPAF, and keep everything above it photo-centric with much better phase detect AF.


----------



## dolina (Jul 27, 2015)

9VIII said:


> For the health of the consumer camera industry I think they should ditch all sensor sizes but APS-C and full frame. People can tell, a FF image looks different and usually better than smaller sensors.
> Canon should make APS-C standard across all point and shoot bodies, and market the 80D as the ultimate consumer level step-up body, giving people full frame for under $1K.
> Make the 80D the videographer's body with DPAF, and keep everything above it photo-centric with much better phase detect AF.



That's the industry's direction as a whole.


----------



## steliosk (Jul 28, 2015)

If Canon targets at smartphone users, lowering the prices might be a good start.
Overpricing is not.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 28, 2015)

Canon needs a new business model. They should start charging for their Image Gateway, then subsidize camera purchases with a signed 2-year subscription contract. 

;D


----------



## Hector1970 (Jul 28, 2015)

Looks like a tough business environment for Canon.
The photo industry is probably a victim of it's own success.
Technology has moved so fast that camera's are capable of taking great photos.
The improvements are very marginal and not perceptible to non-photo geeks.
We'll only find out in retrospect whether this is a key moment in time for Canon and Nikon.
As time goes by they could possibly end up merging.
Sony will be interesting too.
With the accounting scandals at Toshiba and previously at Olympus a scandal at Canon , Nikon or Sony could finish them off. 
Sony's survival in t he photo business is probably dependent on the overall health of the business.
If they are going well then the could bleed Canon and Nikon dry. They seems to be delivering the biggest advancements in sensor technology but can't as yet match Canon or Nikon lens.
A Sony / Canon merger may make sense someday.


----------



## that1guyy (Jul 28, 2015)

Maybe they should offer products that are more exciting and enticing to customers instead of just boring. Glad to see their profits drop. Maybe once they are facing a deficit will they actually start to do something to reinvigorate their camera division.


----------



## Diltiazem (Jul 28, 2015)

Joe M said:


> I guess for those who don't want to use their phone, a pocket-able P&S will always be handy. I seriously doubt Canon can continue to make money at it anymore. As far as SLRs go, I wonder if Canon realizes that most country's economies are still rather soft. Even from a business point of view, I will have to think long and hard before I upgrade my pair of 5D3s to the 5D4 unless they provide something mindblowing that will actually generate income the 5D3 can't. I think all camera manufacturers have to realize from here on out it's going to be a tough sell to most consumers as the digital camera has peaked for the most part. Except for those who really need the incremental improvements, I don't know anyone personally that's looking to buy a new camera.



You bring up an important point to the equation: most cameras are already pretty good in what they are supposed to do with excellent IQ, so most users (I would guess more than 90%) are not looking to upgrade in near future. A typical 5DIII user is perfectly happy with his/her camera, it will be extremely difficult for Canon to offer something that will make majority to upgrade. Same is true for most other Canon or Nikon ILCs (smaller brands don't influence overall camera sale that much)

Other important factors in the equation are smartphone (most important actually) and world economy. 

It is often suggested in these forums that if Canon were 'innovative' they would have done better. If we go by the 'innovations' shown by other brands and assume that those were present in Canon cameras too, there is no reason to believe that they would have done significantly better maybe except for mirrorless. But mirrorless market is still small and there is nothing to suggest that things would change in near future. 

Cameras and display media will have to change substantially before camera can return to their old glory.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 28, 2015)

dolina said:


> LX100 is about $200 less but still a lot of coin for someone who use their camera for selfies, photos of food, cats, dogs and group photos.
> 
> When you see DSLRs in the hands of casual photogs what model do they tend to use and from what year was it introduced to the market?



I can't tell for all of them. Have distinctly seen a 5D3, some indeterminate Canons, some Nikons (both consumer and prosumer-size, by their looks) and one or two Sony cameras _ever_ on my runs down by the lake, no matter how much chatter they generate. I wish I could be more specific than that, but I usually see these people while I'm running, and can't read model numbers without running right past people, which I'm sure they'd appreciate.

And, all the people I know who take pictures for selfies, photos of food, cats, dogs, and group photos... either use a DSLR for some or all of that, or a smartphone. I haven't seen a single pocketable compact in years. It may be a matter of demographics and living in Austin, which is quite a rich city, but not one. And I'm the sort of guy keeping tabs of when I see Windows Phones, for example.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 28, 2015)

that1guyy said:


> Maybe they should offer products that are more exciting and enticing to customers instead of just boring. Glad to see their profits drop. Maybe once they are facing a deficit will they actually start to do something to reinvigorate their camera division.



You mean besides the 100-400ii and 11-24, besides the amazing and affordable EF-S STM line, dual-pixel AF, and 5DS/R?

I suppose if you're after excitement instead of innovation, they could hire Ashton Kutcher to do a series of commercials.


----------



## gregory4000 (Jul 28, 2015)

Canon is the best for their lens technology. 
They should develop a micro compact IS zoom lens for cell phones.
selling theses to Apple and samsung ,etc would offer canon a healthy finacial position for the future.
Large masses will be using their lenses world wide and this will allow Canon to develop even better future lenses
with the profits they gain.


----------



## Diltiazem (Jul 28, 2015)

that1guyy said:


> Maybe they should offer products that are more exciting and enticing to customers instead of just boring. Glad to see their profits drop. Maybe once they are facing a deficit will they actually start to do something to reinvigorate their camera division.



You seem to forget that drop in profit is not quite unique to Canon, it's a reflection of general camera industry. Their camera division is still making money, only other brand doing so in last few years is Nikon. I am pretty sure they know what they are doing.


----------



## kphoto99 (Jul 28, 2015)

I just came back from 3 weeks in Europe, mostly touristy places. I saw lots of Canon rebels, few 7(0)Ds, some Nikons (don't know what). Fair bit of 5DII(I), mostly in the hands of people from China. But what surprised me the most is the amount of Sony cameras, easily four times as much as all other brands combined.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 28, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Canon needs a new business model. They should start charging for their Image Gateway, then subsidize camera purchases with a signed 2-year subscription contract.
> 
> ;D



What they really need to do is drop raw for dng. Yeah...that's the ticket.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 28, 2015)

Doom and Gloom! When I start seeing massive operating losses, then I'd worry. Let's not forget that profits are counted after all costs... including capital investments and R&D. A drop in profits does not always tell the whole story. Exchange rates have some to do with this too. Canon is not in trouble. Their P&S line might be, but otherwise things are fine. Sony? Ha!


----------



## MiamiC70 (Jul 28, 2015)

Nitroman said:


> Maybe they should try lowering their prices ...



My thoughts exactly!


----------



## EduPortas (Jul 28, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Doom and Gloom! When I start seeing massive operating loses, then I'd worry. Let's not forget that profits are counted after all costs... including capital investments and R&D. A drop in profits does not always tell the whole story. Exchange rates have some to do with this too. Canon is not in trouble. Their P&S line might be, but otherwise things are fine. Sony? Ha!



This.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 28, 2015)

*Upon taking into consideration these foreign exchange rate assumptions and the current economic forecast,
Canon projects full-year consolidated net sales in 2015 of ¥3,860.0 billion, a year on year increase of 3.6%;
operating profit of ¥380.0 billion, a year on year increase of 4.5%; income before income taxes of ¥390.0
billion, a year on year increase of 1.8%; and net income attributable to Canon Inc. of ¥255.0 billion, a year on
year increase of 0.1%.*

http://www.canon.com/ir/results/2015/rslt2015q1e.pdf

One quarter means nothing. If the quality of my lenses and speedlites and camera mean anything... Canon is very healthy.


----------



## Oakville (Jul 28, 2015)

Don't forget that the best camera you're shooting with is the available one. 90 % of the people don't care for the quality of the image - they just need something to shoot with and that is the phone from the pocket. Everybody knows how difficult is to deal with 1-2 bodies and a bunch of big and heavy lenses - handful of people are willing to do this in the name to get the perfect image. Less people with big lenses - less profit for the producer.
One more thing - the new iPhone 7 is rumored to have 16 MB camera with DSLR quality (I doubt that), but believe me - millions of people will think that this is just enough for a good picture, right?

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

www.OakvilleWeddingArtPhotography.com
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Canon 70D, Canon Rebel T3i, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, Canon EFS 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, Canon EFS 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon 430EX II


----------



## emko (Jul 28, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Doom and Gloom! When I start seeing massive operating loses, then I'd worry. Let's not forget that profits are counted after all costs... including capital investments and R&D. A drop in profits does not always tell the whole story. Exchange rates have some to do with this too. Canon is not in trouble. Their P&S line might be, but otherwise things are fine. Sony? Ha!



Yea Sony is in such trouble when all the sales lost to Phones include a SONY SENSOR in them LOL yup this is a big problem for SONY HAHAHAi


----------



## Woody (Jul 28, 2015)

From http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/07/27/us-canon-results-idUKKCN0Q10FD20150727
"Despite firm sales in Japan, interchangeable-lens digital cameras continued to face severe conditions in other regions..."

From http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/13342/camera-sales-may-2015-data-%E6%9C%A8%E8%A3%BD%E3%81%AE%E6%A3%BA%E5%A4%A7%E3%81%8D%E3%81%AA%E9%9F%B3%E9%9B%A8
Number of DSLR units shipped worldwide in Apr-May 2015 actually increased.

When put together, the above 2 pieces of news seem to indicate a severe drop in Canon market share for DSLRs worldwide.


----------



## brianftpc (Jul 28, 2015)

Just wait till the Nikon D900 uses that 42MP sensor...has better autofocus than the A7r II...14bit RAW...Dynamic Range out the ass. See what the profits look like then. At least you'll be able to buy a 5DsR for 1999.99 by then.


----------



## Takingshots (Jul 28, 2015)

They thought they have the best "light bulb" in the market when they invented it but now someone else has just led the way with the "LED" ...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 28, 2015)

emko said:


> Yea Sony is in such trouble when all the sales lost to Phones include a SONY SENSOR in them LOL yup this is a big problem for SONY HAHAHAi





brianftpc said:


> Just wait till the Nikon D900 uses that 42MP sensor...has better autofocus than the A7r II...14bit RAW...Dynamic Range out the ass. See what the profits look like then.



Might want to at least 2 and 8 days, respectively, for quarterly reports from Sony and Nikon.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 28, 2015)

emko said:


> Yea Sony is in such trouble when all the sales lost to Phones include a SONY SENSOR in them LOL yup this is a big problem for SONY HAHAHAi



They will (presumably) make more money on an A7R2 (sounds like a Star Wars droid) sold at retail than on a tiny sensor sold to Apple. Just like Toyota would really rather sell you a Tundra than a Corolla.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 28, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> emko said:
> 
> 
> > Yea Sony is in such trouble when all the sales lost to Phones include a SONY SENSOR in them LOL yup this is a big problem for SONY HAHAHAi
> ...



Would Toyota make more money by selling one Tundra or by selling 200 Corollas? There's good fiscal logic behind the idea that Sony will reduce consumer electronics lines (TVs, cameras) and focus on component production (sensors).


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jul 28, 2015)

Oakville said:


> 90 % of the people don't care for the quality of the image - they just need something to shoot with and that is the phone from the pocket.



That first part is a little misleading. It is not that the public does not care for the quality of the image, but more that the public is satisfied with the quality of the image from their cell phone. There is a difference. 

It is hard to convince anyone "you should not be satisfied with what you are satisfied with, you really should be satisfied with what satisfies me!". ;D Although I suspect that many threads here try to do exactly that. 

They are especially satisfied with the quality of the image when considered along with the multitude of other advantages of a cell phone camera as compared to the disadvantages of a DSLR or Mirrorless camera system.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jul 28, 2015)

Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.

My new SONY is shipping Tuesday next week (may take a while before I have it my hands though). 

Had hoped so much for the 5DIV to be my next DSLR - but it was not to be. 

When the 5DIV arrives I will decide if there is any reason to continue with Canon. Meanwhile, I have started selling some of my Canon gear.


----------



## fragilesi (Jul 29, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > emko said:
> ...



Agree, Sony used to be rock solid at producing whole systems (TVs, hi-fis and the like). They could impose pricing like few others because of the quality of what they sold. Now they have lost customer service and overall system quality by a wide margin. The suggestions that they are strong innovators compared to Canon is already suspect when you take overall systems into account but falls completely flat if you want something you can genuinely rely on. A lot of people don't sweat that too much particularly at the outset but a fair proportion of those will learn over time and return to systems with more longevity. Achieving quality takes at least as much innovation as ANYTHING Sony has done. 

On the component sales it would be fascinating to see what kind of deal Sony were able to strike for those iPhone sensors. If Apple's suggested 40% profit margins are even close it's hard to see a massive markup for Sony there.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jul 30, 2015)

MiamiC70 said:


> Nitroman said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe they should try lowering their prices ...
> ...



+1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.

The 6D is currently Canon's best value offer - I just got one for 1.150 USD as a backup/replacement and it takes excellent pictures - but even that camera does not match what Nikon has on the table.


----------



## fragilesi (Jul 30, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> MiamiC70 said:
> 
> 
> > Nitroman said:
> ...



So why did you buy it?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 30, 2015)

fragilesi said:


> So why did you buy it?



I say that Canon is terrible, everyone else has better products with better value, CPS lost my lens and lied about it...so I think I'll give Canon more of my money. 

I guess actions speak louder than words.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 30, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Once again, I'm amused at how people respond without reading the article.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



With the title "Canon Profits Drop 16% in Second Quarter", that is good enough for many to start typing ;D


----------



## Maiaibing (Jul 30, 2015)

fragilesi said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > +1 Canon cannot continue to offer less and ask more than the competition.
> ...



Nikon was not an option due to my large investment in Canon lenses. So the 6D was the obvious choice.

I'm actually going dual system with the new SONY to see how it works in real life and if dual system is worth the cost and compromises. When the 5DIV comes out I will decide on my system future.

In addition, as long as I have Canon lenses I will always want to have a Canon body at hand. There will be times I will not want to allow for any compromises using a SONY body/Canon lens combo. And any dual system setup will involve compromises.


----------



## dak723 (Jul 31, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.
> 
> My new SONY is shipping Tuesday next week (may take a while before I have it my hands though).
> 
> ...



You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jul 31, 2015)

dak723 said:


> You might want to wait before you sell that Canon gear. I bought a Sony A7 II hoping to replace my Canon 6D. The Canon took what I considered to be the better pics when I shot "side by side' comparisons, so I returned the Sony. Just to make sure that my disappointment with the Sony was justified, I bought the original a A7. Same story - the Canon 6D had the better IQ as far as I was concerned. That, plus FAR better lenses and better (optical) viewfinder made my decision to stick with Canon an easy one.



I agree that a cautious approach is recommended until we see how it works out in real life. So far I'm just selling some older Canon bodies and a few lenses and accessories that I am not using much anyway to avoid having a large sell off all at once should I decide to shift system.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jul 31, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007
> 
> http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-books-highest-q1-profit-since-2007-also-forecasts-it-will-sell-more-cameras-than-expected/
> 
> http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/library/er.html


 
Dramatic fall in unit sold in the quarter and forecasted (Q1: from 2.2 to 1.7 millions; Year on Year: from 8.5 to 5.9 millions), more than offset by the improved mix (more hig_margin_full_frame_bodies).
Just to spread some of my culture, I'll let you fellow friends from Canonrumors know that it can be more useful to exclude some extraordinary items (source: 
http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/15q1_sony.pdf)
​Operating income in the current quarter includes a 151 million U.S. dollar (*18.1 billion* yen) gain on the remeasurement to fair value of Sony Music Entertainment (“SME”)’s 51% equity interest in Orchard Media, Inc. (“The Orchard”), which had previously been accounted for under the equity method, as a result of SME increasing its ownership interest to 100%, in the Music Segment, as well as a gain of *12.3 billion* yen (101 million U.S. dollars) from the sale of a part of the logistics business, in connection with the formation of a logistics joint venture, recorded in Corporate and elimination. Operating income in the same quarter of the previous fiscal year included a gain of *14.8 billion* yen recognized on the sale of certain buildings and premises at the Gotenyama Technology Center in Japan, recorded in Corporate and elimination.​​Here's my reconciliation:
a) *Apparent increase in Operating Income: +38.8 Billions*
b) Items to be excluded for comparability purposes: Q1 2015 "SME" 18.1 Billions
c) Sales of part of the investments Logistics business: Q1 2015: 12.3 Billions
d) Q1 2014 Sales of Buildings and premises: 14.8 Billions
e) *"Normalized" increase in Operating Income (a-b-c+d) = +23.2 Billions*
[Investor Relators tend to focus on "results excluding non recurring items", i.e. "normalized" results only when the non recurring gains exceed the non recurring losses]


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 31, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007



For the Imaging Products & Solutions segment, which includes digital cameras:

Sales: +3.5% (FX impact: +8%). 

So, if you don't consider the effect of currency exchange rates, it's a loss. 

JohanCruyff's point is also relevant – companies generally exclude 'one-time charges' (losses) from summary figures, but don't always do so for one-time gains. 

Sony's best Q1 in years is a 200% y/y gain, and net income was 80 B¥. Canon's net income after a 16% y/y loss was 68 B¥. From an investor perspective and overall corporate health, Canon's dividend yield is 4.5%. Sony's dividend yield is...zip – they canceled their dividend last year (for the first time in corporate history) and have not reinstated it.


----------



## msm (Jul 31, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Sony posts best Q1 profit since 2007
> ...



Edit: Nm that, I see that you speak of sales but dilbert spoke of profits which confused me.

I have to wonder tho, the reuters article speaks of Canon inc as a whole as far as I can see dropping 16% profits, then what is the result for Canons imaging division? While the Sony imaging division is doing well on fewer units sold which could indicate that the A7 series is fairly successful and likely taking some of that profit from Canon.


----------



## msm (Jul 31, 2015)

> Within the Imaging System Business Unit, although sales volume of interchangeable-lens digital cameras
> declined due to market shrinkage, the U.S. market showed signs of recovery with sales volume increasing
> from the same period of the previous year. Solid demand for advanced-amateur models, such as the EOS 7D
> Mark II, contributed to an improvement in the gross profit ratio. As for digital compact cameras, although
> ...



Find it a bit interesting that the Sony imaging & Solution segment generates more than 70% of the profit and 2/3rds of the sales of the Canons Imaging System Business Unit which apparantly includers printers. I would have expected Canon's camera business to be much larger compared to Sony.


----------



## that1guyy (Aug 1, 2015)

dak723 said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > Its a fast changing market place. Time will tell where this all ends.
> ...



So you bought the old version in the hopes it would better than your 6D when the newer mark ii version wasn't? Good logical skills there.


----------



## dak723 (Aug 1, 2015)

that1guyy said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



If that is what you took away from my comments then you have neither logic skills or intelligence skills. If you did even a few minutes of research you would know that the difference in the A7 and the A7 II are almost all ergonomic. I bought the A7 II first and was disappointed in the fact that it underexposed almost everything by more than one stop. It also had a very mediocre kit lens. When I decided to give Sony another look, I chose the original A7 because it was considerably cheaper. The image quality, based on all the information, was essentially identical. 

Of course, the point of my post was that the person I responded to might want to wait until he sold all of his Canon lenses because he might find that the Sony was not as good as advertised. I hope you get the point this time.


----------



## fragilesi (Aug 1, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> fragilesi said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



Okay so, you thought Nikon had a better camera but bought the 6D because of your lens collection.

Now you think Sony has a better camera but presumably like most don't rate their lens range so you are going with Sony + 3rd party adaptor + Canon lens which you view as a compromise and the Canon body + lens is your best option given your lens investment.

Sounds to me like you recognise than Canon still offers a pretty strong overall proposition which is kind of out of tune with your original comment.


----------



## Maiaibing (Aug 1, 2015)

fragilesi said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > fragilesi said:
> ...



Sounds to me you choose to meet the world with your eyes shut.

My original comment was that Canon is offering less and asking more for their cameras. What I observe is that Nikon's discount model D750 beats Canon's "Pro" 5DIII on almost every count - and costs less. I also observe that as cheap as my new 6D was for a few hundred dollars more I could have gotten a D750 - a far superior camera.

Canon clearly lags behind when it comes to their bodies. To some better high iso, better AF, faster fps, more megapix does not matter. Good for them. To me its a frustration almost every time I go out to shot.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 1, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> To some better high iso, better AF, faster fps, more megapix does not matter. Good for them. To me its a frustration almost every time I go out to shot.



Yes, not having the better high ISO, better AF, faster fps, and better lenses that my Canon system delivers would certainly frustrate me.


----------



## fragilesi (Aug 1, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> fragilesi said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



Well ignoring your rudeness let's continue.

You have this opinion that the Nikon is vastly superior which is far from universally shared. You still chose the Canon citing your investment in their lenses. You are now going to try a trial system with the Sony rather than the Nikon using a third party adaptor with those Canon lenses. Presumably that's for the same reason while recognising it's a compromise and that for important work you'd stick with the Canon. Yet despite the fact it takes "excellent" pictures you find it a frustration "every time" you use it. 

Still sounds like muddled thinking to me.

You said Canon offers less and asks for more, and now you've qualified that as relating to just bodies. Even if we did accept your opinions about the relative merits of the bodies it seems that as an overall system Canon still has a very competitive offer. Here the D750 costs approx 40% more than the 6d by the way, hardly insignificant. I would expect the D750 to have a significant edge for that kind of premium.

Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it. The 5DIV is not going to be an inexpensive camera.


----------



## Maiaibing (Aug 1, 2015)

fragilesi said:


> Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you switch systems properly and that you should just do it.



Tuesday my new SONY ships. ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 1, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> fragilesi said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds to me like you're going to think the grass is greener until you *switch systems properly* and that you should just do it.
> ...



Presumably with several new lenses, too. Or do you not understand the phrase 'switch systems'?


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 1, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > fragilesi said:
> ...



Well, moving from Canon to Sony makes 'switching system' a lot easier. For a nice start all it takes is a new Sony camera plus some old Canon lenses and a simple metabones adapter. ;D

Everything else can be done at leisure and in good time. Keep good/unique Canon glass via adapter, sell some lenses, buy some new native Sony/Zeiss glass. And by the time Canon has managed to finally round out their RT flash system, Sony may have an even better radio wireless system available.


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 2, 2015)

dilbert said:


> To throw it out there, if Nikon introduced a variant of the D810 but in a mirrorless (A7RII) form factor, I'd dump Sony in a heartbeat for that (lossless raw files, good resolution, IQ, etc) if there was a metabones adapter for it.



Nikon is way too scared about the future of their established mirrorslapper-lens mount (F-mount) than Canon is about the future of EF. Both companies know perfectly well, that a really winning FF-sensored mirrorles camera absolutely REQUIRES a new native, short flange-back mount. They also should know, that a simple native adapter would easily bridge the gap to their old lens mount, to make the transition easier for their customers. But, they figure, that would cost them a lot more in sales of F / EF lenses. Therefore Nikon - and a good portion of their very conservative mirrorslapper user base (even more so than Canon users!) - can only imagine FF mirrorless cameras with a full-size legacy F-mount up front. Of course this will result in a yellow Nikon camera as attractive as the infamous Pentax K-01 -> http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxk01  ;D

Not surprisingly, CaNikon's overall strategy driven by their old-fart ultra-conservative japanese beancounter managements companies is simply trying to delay the total system switch to mirrorless systems for as long as they possibly can, with not much of a plan, what to do once it becomes "inevitable". 

Given this mindset I do not expect Canon or Nikon to bring FF mirrorless competitors to the Sony A7 II / A7R II and their native FE lens set in the foreseeable future. And even then it will likely have a lot of artificial "product differentiation" built in, to make it less capable a camera than their top-tier DSLRs. Good thing is, that might give Sony (and Samsung) just enough time to finish off Nikon (and make the Canon camera business a loss leader). That is pure speculation of course, but I'd love to see it happen, simply because it would be a corporate fate so well deserved. ;D


----------



## dak723 (Aug 2, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > To throw it out there, if Nikon introduced a variant of the D810 but in a mirrorless (A7RII) form factor, I'd dump Sony in a heartbeat for that (lossless raw files, good resolution, IQ, etc) if there was a metabones adapter for it.
> ...



Alas, your obvious hatred of Canon and your desire to see them go under influences all your arguments and makes them rather useless. You don't like mirrorslappers - but aside from the larger size I see no valid arguments for their inferiority. And many photographers are perfectly happy with a larger camera. And even more so, many photographers prefer the optical viewfinder. The rather inferior viewfinder of the Sony A7 II was one of the major reasons I returned it and kept my 6D mirrorslapper.

If you prefer mirrorless, you now have some excellent choices, so there is no reason to complain. You can get the Sony and use your Canon lenses. I would think this should make you happy. It shouldn't matter to you at all what Canon does.

Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 3, 2015)

dak723 said:


> Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?



1. While I do not really "like" any large corporation, I have no "hatred" against Canon. I'm just watching their stills imaging product strategy strictly from a customer's perspective and taking some educated guesses where that might lead them. 

2. I don't want to see those mirrorslappers disappear overnight. They will disappear soon enough, but its going to take some time. Everybody can buy and use whatever type of camera they want. But it needs to be avaliable for purchase! All I want from Canon is a kick-ass FF mirrorless system. If they would also continue to churn out minor iterations of their old mirrorslappers again and again, no problem with me. All I want is the choice - mechanical mirror slapping in the lightpath ... or rather not. 

3. I would like to BUY a Canon mirrorless FF camera that is fully competitive with or bests either the Sony A7 II or the A7R II. I would also like to BUY a few new native Canon lenses along with it - nicely balancing size/weight, performance and price. 

4. I do dislike Sony as a company [way more than Canon] and more importantly, I really prefer the Canon user interface. Also, I don't like the idea of a reverse-engineered third party lens adapter to use my existing EF glass on a Sony body. Just as on my EOS M, I would like to buy prefer a reasonably priced, native Canon adapter to mount existing EF glass on a not-yet existing Canon FF mirrorless camera.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 3, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > Ultimately, when today's generation of users who have grown up with smartphones and other devices that have EVFs become the majority of camera buyers, then the optical viewfinder and the mirror may indeed disappear. But my question to you is - why do want that to happen now when so many folks prefer the optical viewfinder?
> ...



Those "wants" seem reasonable, but when they become the topic of repeated posts on multiple threads, it begins to look a lot like obsession. Especially, when there seems to be an undertone that Canon is somehow deliberately denying you the camera you want.

Let's face it. When, and if, it makes economic sense for Canon (or Nikon) to produce a full-frame mirrorless camera they will do so. Companies are in the business of making money and that means they are interested in making products that their research shows will sell in sufficient quantities to offset development costs and make a profit. 

For a different take on the mirrorless debate, I'd suggest reading the interview with a Fuji executive that was referenced in a recent Photo Rumors post. The shortened version is that Fuji looked at both APS-C and Full Frame and concluded that APS-C was the best format for mirrorless. I'm not saying they are right and Sony is wrong, but their reasoning seems sound to me – the size advantages of mirrorless essentially disappear once you start developing full frame bodies and lenses and the difference in quality between APS-C and Full Frame is not that great. 

Frankly, as companies go, I have a great deal of admiration for Fuji, since they were able to reinvent themselves when their core business (film) disappeared, while Kodak allowed itself to go extinct. 

There is nothing wrong with wanting "a kick-ass FF mirrorless system" from Canon, but it is wrong to: a) assume that you know their business better then they do and we can somehow be certain that such a camera would be profitable and b) that there is some hidden agenda that keeps them from offering you the camera you specifically want. 

Finally there is this: constantly posting the same complaint on a camera forum is not going to make your wishes come true, but it does make you appear obsessive and makes it all that much easier for people to dismiss your point of view.


----------



## msm (Aug 3, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Let's face it. When, and if, it makes economic sense for Canon (or Nikon) to produce a full-frame mirrorless camera they will do so. Companies are in the business of making money and that means they are interested in making products that their research shows will sell in sufficient quantities to offset development costs and make a profit.



Let's not assume companies always does the right thing, history is full of examples of the opposite. Also market research is not an exact science, ppl might not even know what they want before they see it.



unfocused said:


> For a different take on the mirrorless debate, I'd suggest reading the interview with a Fuji executive that was referenced in a recent Photo Rumors post. The shortened version is that Fuji looked at both APS-C and Full Frame and concluded that APS-C was the best format for mirrorless. I'm not saying they are right and Sony is wrong, but their reasoning seems sound to me – the size advantages of mirrorless essentially disappear once you start developing full frame bodies and lenses and the difference in quality between APS-C and Full Frame is not that great.



Let's not assume that ppl buy mirrorless for size either, many don't. Also wrong to assume that those who do buy it for size will want use the same f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms as many do on DSLRs.



unfocused said:


> Finally there is this: constantly posting the same complaint on a camera forum is not going to make your wishes come true, but it does make you appear obsessive and makes it all that much easier for people to dismiss your point of view.



Well there are 2 sides of thise debate on this forum and each side is as obsessive as the other.


----------



## sanj (Aug 3, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > To throw it out there, if Nikon introduced a variant of the D810 but in a mirrorless (A7RII) form factor, I'd dump Sony in a heartbeat for that (lossless raw files, good resolution, IQ, etc) if there was a metabones adapter for it.
> ...



So much anger and frustration. Wonder if Canon is indeed so bad...


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 3, 2015)

sanj said:


> So much anger and frustration. Wonder if Canon is indeed so bad...



well, seeing how well Sony is doing again these days, I fully understand all the anger and frustration at Canon senior management. They could have easily killed Sony's camera business (not sensors) had they come out with a winning FF mirrorless system before Sony did. 
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7849068764/sensor-sales-help-sony-triple-net-profit-in-second-quarter


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > So much anger and frustration. Wonder if Canon is indeed so bad...
> ...



Yeah, the linked article really highlights the impact of FF MILCs on Sony's bottom line. Very astute of you to notice!


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 4, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



Well, it might show the other way round: Sony might not be able to report any net profit at all, much less so a marked improvement ... had Canon done, what should have been done.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 4, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



Had Canon done...what? Made sensors for cell phone cameras? Made game consoles? Did you actually read the article you linked?


----------



## bosshog7_2000 (Aug 4, 2015)

Let me preface what I say by stating I've been a LONG time Canon supporter and spent more money on their gear than I like to think of: EllanII, EOS3, 20D, 5D, 1DSII, G10, S90, 7D, 5Dii....you get the point. 

At some point I decided that less is more and so I've gotten rid of all my Canon equipment for a high end mirrorless selection. I have to say...I've never been happier. There's no doubt that Canon makes great gear but for me personally I've decided I don't need a lot of what Canon high end DSLR's brought me. 

I have to think many others feel the same way and that Canon (although in denial) is slowing losing ground to the Sony/Fuji/Olympus's of the world. For people like myself who do not need state of the art AF or 12fps, it makes much more sense to buy a much smaller/lighter camera with equal (and in many cases better) image quality. 

It's amazing where technology has taken us. Even if you're a long time Canon guy/gal heavily invested in glass you can buy an A7Rii with probably the best full frame sensor in the world and still be able to use all of your canon lenses AND have decent AF speed....


----------



## RLPhoto (Aug 5, 2015)

You can add, more or less, 3000$ worth of losses was directly caused me deciding to buy a A7Rii.


----------



## dak723 (Aug 5, 2015)

dilbert said:


> bosshog7_2000 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



I have a fairly simple philosophy when it comes to cameras. Which camera gives me the images I think look best. I don't care what others think. I don't care what the internet test scores are. I have no particular loyalty to Canon. The only camera company I would have any sense of emotional attachment to would be Olympus (my first camera was an OM-1).

All that said, when I needed a replacement for my 300D, I tried out some alternatives. I tried the Olympus EM-5, the Canon 6D, and the Canon SL1. I returned the EM-5 and got the Olympus EM-1. I liked both Olympus offerings, especially the size. I thought the EVF was much better than expected. But ultimately, the IQ was not as good as the Canons (either one). Eventually I tried the Sony A7 and the A7 II. I really liked the size (compared to the 6D), but the IQ was not to my liking. I preferred the Canons. The Sony lenses were very poor and the EVF was nowhere as good as the the Olympus, either, but if the IQ was better (or even equal to) the 6D, I would have considered keeping the Sony and sold the Canon.

So my advice (which seems to be a no-brainer) (insert joke here if desired) is until you actually try these other brands and compare, don't assume the other camera makers are doing a better job.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 5, 2015)

dak723 said:


> ...don't assume the other camera makers are doing a better job.



Oh, puhhhleeeez. All you need to do is look at DxOMark to see that _everyone_ makes better cameras than Canon.


----------



## AvTvM (Aug 6, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Had Canon brought a kick-ass APS-C and FF mirrorless system (bodies + native lenses) to market before or shortly after Sony did then Sony would have made such a liss in their stills imaginh business, that they could nit easily have covered it with any profits from phone sensors or game consoles. Their stills imaging department would have been closed within a year and a half.


----------



## fragilesi (Aug 8, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Had Canon brought a kick-ass APS-C and FF mirrorless system (bodies + native lenses) to market before or shortly after Sony did then Sony would have made such a liss in their stills imaginh business, that they could nit easily have covered it with any profits from phone sensors or game consoles. Their stills imaging department would have been closed within a year and a half.



Jeez, it's really that easy to produce a whole system (bodies and native lenses) . . . 

Why do people seem to think that Canon have an inexhaustible R&D capacity?


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 8, 2015)

fragilesi said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Had Canon brought a kick-ass APS-C and FF mirrorless system (bodies + native lenses) to market before or shortly after Sony did then Sony would have made such a liss in their stills imaginh business, that they could nit easily have covered it with any profits from phone sensors or game consoles. Their stills imaging department would have been closed within a year and a half.
> ...



People whine about what they want and expect others to create custom solutions for them....


----------



## unfocused (Aug 8, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> fragilesi said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



They also haven't the faintest idea how businesses actually work.


----------



## MarkII (Aug 8, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Now that Sony have a workable alternative (A7RII series plus metabones), many people are going to look at their collection and realize that they don't need to sell everything in order to change brand. Thus the mental barrier for changing brand of camera is substantially lowered.



Well, I am definitely in this camp. Previously, I would have upgraded to the 5Ds(r) without hesitation, but Canon's pricing and the arrival of alternatives has put this on hold until I can try said alternatives.

Currently, I use a mix of Canon, Olympus (mainly for travel) and Leica (film). The new Sony is potentially a way to unify all of these systems in to one, allowing both the best IQ, small size/weight for travel, and the option to use the best Canon lenses. Here, the A7rII is cheaper than the newer Canon FF bodies, and so if the reviews look good and the camera handles well, I will be adding a Sony rather than upgrading the 5DII to a 5Dsr. I can keep the 5DIII for those occasions when the Sony handling is not sufficient.

Canon should be very worried about this. Their marketing tends to assume that the only competition is from themselves. But when you can effectively use Canon lenses on another vendors body, that assumption starts to look very dodgy.

The camera market is very difficult at the moment, but it is telling that Canon is posting a negative outlook, while other companies are seemingly gaining ground (Olympus, despite its numerous problems, is increasing sales and revenue, for example). It is hard not to see this as a result of Canon's recent lack of innovation and fear of cannibalising their own sales.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 8, 2015)

MarkII said:


> ... it is telling that Canon is posting a negative outlook, while other companies are seemingly gaining ground...



Why do people make sh*t up?

There is a huge difference between exceeding analysts projections with $552 million profit and "posting a negative outlook."

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 9, 2015)

dilbert said:


> ...the outlook for Canon profits is negative.



Clearly, you don't know what negative means either.


----------



## MarkII (Aug 9, 2015)

unfocused said:


> MarkII said:
> 
> 
> > ... it is telling that Canon is posting a negative outlook, while other companies are seemingly gaining ground...
> ...



And some people are completely incapable of reading the original news item, linked in the front page article.

The headline at Reuters (if you would care to spend 2 seconds to click on the news link in the leading article) is "Canon cuts outlook as weak camera sales hit second-quarter profit". This is because, as is explained in Canon's press release, while Canon beat (their previously reduced) expectations, they also cut their projected (and still to be determined) profit for the full year. 

The person making sh*t up here is not me, as anyone who can read and understand the word "negative" can see.


----------



## unfocused (Aug 9, 2015)

Okay, I plan on this being my last post on this "negative outlook" bull.

Here is what the Reuters article actually said: "The firm said it now expects full-year profit of 245 billion yen rather than the 255 billion it forecast three months ago."

So, Canon cut its own forecast on what they projected their profits to be. They did not issue a "negative outlook."

In fact, only a rating agency – not a company – issues a negative outlook. A negative outlook means that at least one of the three rating agencies (Standard & Poor's, Fitch Ratings, or Moody's Investor Services) expects to downgrade the rating they issue on a company's or government's long term borrowing. 

A negative outlook is a signal from the investor community that they believe a company or a government needs to adjust its course in order to assure long-term financial viability. 

Even if you want to use the term in some sort of colloquial sense, I am certain Canon would strongly disagree with the statement that they have issued a negative outlook. 

The company is making a healthy profit. They actually did slightly better than outside analysts projected. And, in addition, while the overall market dropped, Canon stock actually beat the market. 

I recognize that people who are buying Sony cameras want to feel good about their purchases. Confirmation bias is everywhere. But, it is self-delusional to twist a *$552 million quarterly profit* into a negative.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 9, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Here is what the Reuters article actually said: "The firm said it now expects full-year profit of 245 billion yen rather than the 255 billion it forecast three months ago."
> 
> I recognize that people who are buying Sony cameras want to feel good about their purchases. Confirmation bias is everywhere. But, it is self-delusional to twist a *$552 million quarterly profit* into a negative.



Perhaps not self-delusion as much as a certain level of sharpness in terms of business acumen.


----------



## MarkII (Aug 10, 2015)

unfocused said:


> The company is making a healthy profit. They actually did slightly better than outside analysts projected. And, in addition, while the overall market dropped, Canon stock actually beat the market.
> 
> I recognize that people who are buying Sony cameras want to feel good about their purchases. Confirmation bias is everywhere. But, it is self-delusional to twist a *$552 million quarterly profit* into a negative.



The only delusional bull here is your spinning the Reuters report. The headline title I quoted is the newsworthy part of the earnings release. Canon only beat expectations because they lowered them previously. And they have lowered them again. While it is positive that Canon are making a profit, do you really think that Canon believes that lowering its profits forcecast is a good thing?

As to the comment about "feeling good about buying Sony", I think that it explains why you making such insulting and distorted posts. These are camera companies, not football teams. If you own sense of self worth is based on how profitable the companies are that you buy from, I think you have a problem. I choose my equipment based on what what works photographically, not based on what label it has or how much profit the company makes. Nothing lasts forever.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 10, 2015)

MarkII said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > The company is making a healthy profit. They actually did slightly better than outside analysts projected. And, in addition, while the overall market dropped, Canon stock actually beat the market.
> ...



Exactly, and as a professional image creator I can't imagine not using the camera company that takes the time and trouble to make an 11-24, that I use extensively, or a 17TS-E that I also use extensively, or a company that has a radio based flash (that I also use) as well as plenty of third party support from companies like Profoto (the B1 and B2 are ETTL game changers) to Yongnuo who supply enthusiasts with feature rich yet bargain priced Canon and Nikon compatible accessories.


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 10, 2015)

Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
"Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
"Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
"Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.

Just seems like strange usage to me. I never see people write:
"Ford Motor Company have announced three new models for 2017."
or "Kraft Cheese are spinning off the XYZ unit this quarter."
or "The man were upset by recent happenings."

I only see this on this forum. I've never seen this anywhere else. Some people here do it very consistently.

Maybe I am (are?)confused? 

The Reuters news story at the beginning of this thread doesn't do this. 

Dilbert, you do it (Not just you). I am just curious as to why.

Just wondering.


----------



## zim (Aug 10, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
> "Canon have" instead of "Canon has"
> "Canon were" instead of "Canon was"
> "Canon are" instead of "Canon is" etc.
> ...



Ah, English as she is spoke!
I think it might be something Canon done 

Don't know about the pacific  people your talk about but I think it's reasonable to cut a lot of slack to non naïve English speakers on the interweb


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 10, 2015)

dilbert said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Well, I've thought of this a little. Even you don't do it all the time. I looked back through a few of your posts (to see whether there was some joke I missed involved and several were privy, but not I) and in #52 and #53 you have a different usage... more traditional to my ear. Then I asked myself whether you or others may be just using a different dialect of English. Here in the United States word usage can change in different parts of the country, just like it does in Mexico and probably many other places.

I wondered if maybe this usage is sort of like a Royal referring to themselves in third person. I honestly do not know. I just enjoy running into different dialects.

I have a co-worker from southern England who traveled to North Carolina on a job one week and asked a checkout girl whether she was from England or not (He hadn't been in the USA for long). To his ear her country dialect sounded like what he grew up with. She was not from England, but a native North Carolinian.

On the subject of whether Canon is a single entity or not: I would think the parent company in Japan owns the divisions representing Canon all over the world. So like the Trinity (three in one), yes, I think so.

My asking was not a criticism. My English is far from perfect. Just wondering about it all. As I read posts I understand there are people from all over the world on this forum. Sometimes I can tell by usage what region of the USA a person may be from because I am a fan of dialects. This one was stumping me and sounded quite odd to my mind's ear. I was thinking maybe it was an English dialect from the asian continent, but someone who speaks and writes a lot of English.

Someone commented about my usage of "Ford Motor Company". You are right. I neglected to use "The". That would be my normal usage. On the other hand, Ford tends to refer to itself as "Ford Motor Company" all over their corporate website. So I guess either way is fine. That is far different than what I pick up when I hear (read) the usages around Canon.

Y'all have a nice day! ;D


----------



## Ozarker (Aug 10, 2015)

zim said:


> CanonFanBoy said:
> 
> 
> > Off topic, but why do I keep seeing people use:
> ...



It wasn't meant as a criticism. I _*think*_ the person I mentioned and asked is a native speaker. Just curiosity.


----------



## Valvebounce (Aug 11, 2015)

Hi CanonFanBoy. 
Not only the website, they also don't or didn't use 'The' when they cast FoMoCo in to their parts or print their packaging. For spoken or written use it is probably more correct to use 'The' than to not. 
As for your main question, some of it is due to the many other nationalities that speak English confusing the grammar, which should be excused. Then the rest is down to the widespread misuse of the English language which slowly becomes the norm and then causes the language to evolve, most languages are living, and therefore they must change and adapt, much to the horror of those of us taught grammar at school! ;D
Before anyone picks holes in my grammar, I know it is not always correct but I try! 

Cheers, Graham. 



CanonFanBoy said:


> Someone commented about my usage of "Ford Motor Company". You are right. I neglected to use "The". That would be my normal usage. On the other hand, Ford tends to refer to itself as "Ford Motor Company" all over their corporate website. So I guess either way is fine. That is far different than what I pick up when I hear (read) the usages around Canon.
> 
> Y'all have a nice day! ;D


----------



## AlanF (Aug 11, 2015)

CanonFanBoy said:


> zim said:
> 
> 
> > CanonFanBoy said:
> ...



Collective nouns, names of companies etc should indeed take the singular of verbs. The Americans are much more careful about the correct grammar than the Brits. Our ill-educated politicians are among the worst culprits and usually say the "Government are.." instead of the correct the "Government is" etc.


----------

