Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Mirrorless Cameras => Topic started by: Guillermo Luijk on March 11, 2018, 06:18:56 am
-
Periodically I update and plot the DLSR vs Mirrorless shipment figures from CIPA (http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html). I changed the format to include:
- Yearly average DLSR+Mirrorless sales: this figure gives us an idea of how stable is the interchangeable lens market vs mobile photography.
- Mirrorless market share (%) vs total DSLR+Mirrorless sales: when Mirrorless sell the same as DSLR this value will reach 50%.
http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/cipa.png
(http://www.guillermoluijk.com/misc/cipa.png)
Looking at the plot in 2017 I get two insights:
- Interchangeable lenses camera sales have stopped going down as in the previous years and are stable at about 1 million bodies/month. These sales could be the critical mass of those for whom a mobile phone is not a suitable device to satisfy their photography needs. Mobile phones are continuously improving, so we can't expect this limit to last forever.
- 2017 has been the best year for Mirrorless cameras since the showed up in the market: not ony for reaching the highest market share vs DSLR, but also in absolute sales (see the weight of the red area on the plot).
My guess is that if the present trend continues we can expect some stability in total DLSR+Mirrorless sales for the next couple of years (~1 million bodies/month). The Mirrorless vs DSLR convergency should be reach around the end of 2020. But...
If Canon and Nikon finally enter seriously into the game with a FF Mirrorless body before the end of 2018, I find reasonable that the Mirrorless vs DSLR equity is reached before the end of 2019. After all, every Canikon mirrorless customer will count twice, as a Mirrorless newcomer and (probably) as a DSLR lost sale.
Your thoughts?.
Regards
-
Yep, as a longtime LF photographer, then DSLR and then mirrorless, I can't see the value in DSLR when mirrorless full frame does everything I personally need.
Some pros need what DSLR can offer now, plus they have really big inventory of older DSLR equipment, so the upward trend of mirrorless should be pretty steady, but DSLRs have a really big foothold.
-
Historically, the trend has been for smaller cameras ever since about 1900, when roll film really started catching on. If this were 1918, most of us would be shooting a 5x7 camera (half plate if you're in the British Empire.) I think the current sales numbers reflect three things: (1) the upgrades from model to model have been modest compared to cost (2) camera phones are convenient and have become more capable (3) smaller cameras with small lenses are good enough for most people that want more than a camera phone.
Every time something new comes out, I evaluate what it might do for me. I look at the latest mirrorless cameras and ask, "What capability will this give me vs. what I already have?" Few of them have an autofocus system that match my D800E, and those that do cost over $3,000. Some are much smaller and lighter, and that would be a plus for travel or high altitude hiking. (But only if there are correspondingly small lenses.) I don't have any desire to spend a lot of money on a camera body--they lose value so fast and rarely has a camera made any noticeable difference in my photography. (The movements of a 4x5 are an exception.) So, I keep shooting the Nikon D800E that I bought for $1,600 a couple of years ago. It does all I want it to do, with the exception of being a bit porky on high altitude hikes. For that I have bought a Nikon D5300 that works fine. As a Midwestern guy, I tend to look at value first. The difference in cost between a Nikon D800E and either a D850 or a Sony a7RIII is about $2,400. Will there be a noticeable difference in my shots? Doubtful. Will I be able to sell more photos or book more wedding/portrait business? Definitely not. So, I keep what I have since the difference in performance doesn't even come close to the difference in cost. I'd rather continue to slowly upgrade lenses, or spend the money on something that will make a difference--travel. Thus, for me, Nikon and Sony's competition isn't the latest camera their competition offers, but the previous model selling for half on ebay. :) I do plan on eventually buying a Nikon D850, but I'll wait until used ones start selling for <$1,600. I really, really hate spending money on digital cameras. I find I have just as much fun shooting a Kodak Brownie made in 1904. In the past I've wasted thousands of $$ buying the "hot camera of the day". Made no difference in my images. For me, photography is mostly my creative outlet. If I didn't do photography I'd be learning how to play the oboe or cello.
Kent in SD
Below photo shot with a 1932 Kodak
Brownie Model F, Ilford FP4.
Garrettson, South Dakota
-
The mirrorless camera companies have proved more adept than the DSLR ones at selling features, and I’d imagine that features are what drawn in new buyers - facial recognition, eye-tracking, pixelshifting, panorama modes, video, good apps and connectivity, viewfinder overlays, etc etc. Size is a feature too but the real secret sauce is the overall wealth of features the mirrorless platform allows. And with the A9 Sony pretty well cracked the last missing feature which is advanced tracking AF. There are many many DSLRs out there but if the mirrorless outfits continue with the features then I’d expect them to do very well. The unknown is whether Canon and Nikon make a good fist of entering the mirrorless sector seriously, I guess.
-
Thanks for the data analysis Guillermo.
I am also fairly confident that ILC sales are settling down after a bubble in the transition to digital and subsequent rapid updates when the young technology was improving rapidly, and the new level will be enough to sustain most if not all the current players. (I mainly fear for Pentax.)
On the SLR/mirrorless market share split, my hunch is that a lot of mainstream “consumer” ILC buyers more or less start with “Canon or Nikon?”, as evidenced by the rapid sales gains of the objectively mediocre Canon EF-M mirrorless system. So the expected expansion of mirrorless offerings from the big two will greatly increase sales of mirrorless camera systems. For one thing, it could remove the stigma of “mirrorless must be inferior because the best professional brands do not take it seriously”.
The next question is whether that Canon+Nikon insurgency will shake out any of the smaller players.
-
I think the main impediment to Nikon & Canon isn't the cameras, but rather lenses. Fuji et al. have had a ~5 year head start on them. Simply making an adapter for existing lenses won't be enough, I don't think. If I buy a smaller camera, I will want smaller lenses to go with it. I think in terms of "system", not pieces.
Kent in SD
-
Agree, Kent. The market seems mature, so what will lure prospective purchasers? Switching systems is v expensive even with trade-in. Just upgrading the body is expensive enough. I have no need of more pixels as I do not print bigger than A3+, (13x19"). Certainly the speed with which some companies bring out new models makes me think that they do not believe they have ever got it right, so why buy? I would rather spend my money now on improving my skills and the joy of making images and printing the best.
-
<snip>
If Canon and Nikon finally enter seriously into the game with a FF Mirrorless body before the end of 2018, I find reasonable that the Mirrorless vs DSLR equity is reached before the end of 2019. After all, every Canikon mirrorless customer will count twice, as a Mirrorless newcomer and (probably) as a DSLR lost sale.
Your thoughts?.
Regards
IMO, every sold Canon or Nikon FF mirrorless body will be most often a Sony lost sale, not a DSLR lost sale. Currently, there is only one conventional choice for FF mirrorless: Sony. It will be good to have more choices.
-
i was a canon shooter, then i swap for nikon D800 ( shadows details and mp )... now i've bought an A7R III... by far the more universal camera i've never used !
but still some room for improvements...
-
Watch the On The Rocks video on the home page of this site for a discussion on this topic.
-
IMO, every sold Canon or Nikon FF mirrorless body will be most often a Sony lost sale, not a DSLR lost sale. Currently, there is only one conventional choice for FF mirrorless: Sony. It will be good to have more choices.
I agree with Roger Deakins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfYeS_20dXo that he doesn’t care if it’s an I phone or an Arri. Every camera has it’s place, but if you know it’s limitations and advantages, anybody that is any good can make excellent images. Not pixel count down to the micro level, because that doesn’t interest me or adding 4 more stops of lattitude, because I’ve always felt that every image that interests me turns into an 8 stop world.
Maybe that’s why I like ccd’s or better put lower Iso which makes you really use the light, whether it’s God’s light, arri’s or profoto.
I own mirrorless (not including the REDs) from full frame to micro 43. 99% of the time (when I use them) it’s for motion imagery, though I find the little oly’s and panasonics hold up well in stills, they seem to shoot above their specs.
I’m not knocking mirrorless, but honestly except for people like Chris B. that use them on a shift camera as a digital back, or e-commerce guys/girls that are shooting in studio, turning a gazillion shots a day plus video at the flip of a switch, I kind of don’t see the point.
Like I’ve said before, virtually every digital camera is mirrorless if you use the lcd to focus and frame. Sure the Sony A series is smaller, but so is the battery use limited and even now, I would be very surprised if any mirrorless camera will focus as well as a top end Canon or Nikon.
I think the lure of mirrorless is the size and the cost, but when I’ve run the costs of duplicating everything I carry in my Canon cases with the newest Sony’s that “will” track focus with lenses, filters, all the stuff I have to work with there is almost zero difference in price. Actually I think with the costs of top of the line Sony lenses, the new A series camera systems will be more.
But once again, this is all personal choice.
If someone made a camera for me, it would be around apsC, with a 4/3, 16x9 and super 35 crop built in that you could switch to, but still capturing the full sensor crop. The viewfinder would be optical with a clip on evf as an option and every lens would have some stabilization and the camera would track focus in still and motion as well as the 1dxII.
But that’s just me.
Bottom line we have a lot of tools to work with, even film.
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/fieldofdreams700px.jpg)
IMO
BC
-
Sure the Sony A series is smaller, but so is the battery use limited and even now, I would be very surprised if any mirrorless camera will focus as well as a top end Canon or Nikon.
I think the lure of mirrorless is the size and the cost,
(...)
The Sony A7 III is being reported as having impressive battery life, on pair with any demanding professional situation. Regarding AF, A9 and A7 III users are experiencing AF speed and accuracy in the same level as D500's, with the advantage of having a much broader AF points coverage and highly effective AF modes (e.g. face, eye) non existent for DSLR systems
Just a sample of professional social photographer, he is in love with eye AF for portraits.
A7III + MC-11 + Canon 135 F2
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/962/40966020984_50f363e446_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/25q2yNC)Oscar Fernandez Zugazaga (https://flic.kr/p/25q2yNC) by Oscar Fernandez Zugazaga (https://www.flickr.com/photos/faoss/), en Flickr
Mirrorless is no way only about size and cost, it's simply the next pardigma in digital photography.
Regards
-
The Sony A7 III is being reported as having impressive battery life, on pair with any demanding professional situation. Regarding AF, A9 and A7 III users are experiencing AF speed and accuracy in the same level as D500's, with the advantage of having a much broader AF points coverage and highly effective AF modes (e.g. face, eye) non existent for DSLR systems
Just a sample of professional social photographer, he is in love with eye AF for portraits.
No
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/cbpq.jpg)
(http://www.russellrutherford.com/cbp2.jpg)
BC
-
Yes
-
I think splitting the market into DSLR vs mirrorless makes less sense today than it perhaps once did. Today it is Medium format vs Full frame vs aps-c vs m43 vs 1" etc.
The size of the sensing area dictates the vast majority of compromises in the physics of image formation, the rest is mainly just packaging for different applications. Whether a camera is built like a tank or whether it has a mirror or not has more to do with intended use than anything else.
As far as trends are concerned I am convinced that, as EVF technology improves further and sensors get better at being on for long periods of time, the mirror will capitulate to the many advantages of computational photography, just like CCD capitulated to CMOS a decade ago.
Cheers,
Jack
-
Mirrorless is no way only about size and cost, it's simply the next pardigma in digital photography.
Regards
A bit strong. The invention of photography was a new paradigm. Digital has done to photography what Kodak did to wet plates.
It's always going to be a mixed bag. My Canon 5 focussed faster than my current Fuji, but the mirror assembly introduced focussing errors that meant I couldn't be sure I'd nailed the focus on both ends of a zoom. And I'd get tired faster holding the thing.
I wonder whether camera manufacturers will find mirrorless cheaper and easier to manufacture once they have the lenses in place. That could be the real game changer.
David
-
My take on this:
People still paint
People still use film
DSLR sales are still double that of mirrorless
DSLR's will be in use for a long time to come
Mirrorless is just another tool, one I like very much and now is my main tool, but in my mind it doesn't invalidate prior tools that still exist.
-
Yes
NO At least not I'n my world., or anyone that is serious and shooting people that are moving. Have fun.
-
@ Guillermo Luijk
Be aware that the link to your website is not working.
-
My take on this:
People still paint
People still use film
DSLR sales are still double that of mirrorless
DSLR's will be in use for a long time to come
Mirrorless is just another tool, one I like very much and now is my main tool, but in my mind it doesn't invalidate prior tools that still exist.
All that is correct, and some people make their own cameras with a wooden box as well. It's a matter on how many people use each technology.
Regarding interchangeable lens systems, a niche by itself because of smartphones being so widely used, DSLR will become a subniche. The reason is clear: DSLR advantages are vanishing and disadvantages increasing. Just think what a newcomer who has been taking pictures with a mobile will prefer, having to fiddle with light meters and try&error exposure or look at what their picture will look like, just as in their phone.
Regards
-
All that is correct, and some people make their own cameras with a wooden box as well. It's a matter on how many people use each technology.
Regarding interchangeable lens systems, a niche by itself because of smartphones being so widely used, DSLR will become a subniche. The reason is clear: DSLR advantages are vanishing and disadvantages increasing. Just think what a newcomer who has been taking pictures with a mobile will prefer, having to fiddle with light meters and try&error exposure or look at what their picture will look like, just as in their phone.
Regards
Guess it just depends what they want out of life.
Are you suggesting that cameras (real) are a niche because of another niche coming along? I have both, and would never again use a 'phone camera for anything beyond reference pics to show a shop what I'm looking for. A snap of a complicated pipe is a better way of showing the salesperson what is wanted rather than trying to explain shape etc. in words. Our Spanish hardware stores are very well stocked with almost anything a home owner might need by way of replacement parts in bathrooms and kitchens.
If there's really a niche product in photography, the 'phone is it. Niche implies a tiny area of interest.
-
The Sony A7 III is being reported as having impressive battery life, on pair with any demanding professional situation. Regarding AF, A9 and A7 III users are experiencing AF speed and accuracy in the same level as D500's, with the advantage of having a much broader AF points coverage and highly effective AF modes (e.g. face, eye) non existent for DSLR systems
Just a sample of professional social photographer, he is in love with eye AF for portraits.
A7III + MC-11 + Canon 135 F2
<snip>
Mirrorless is no way only about size and cost, it's simply the next pardigma in digital photography.
Regards
My initial impression is that my a7r III has slower and less precise AF than my D500 or D850.
The focus area on D500 is not much different than the PDAF area on a7r III.
D850 has eye tracking, it is likely not as good as a7r III's.
For me, mirrorless is mainly about size and weight. I understand some people prefer EVF to OVF, it is not my preference, though.
-
Guess it just depends what they want out of life.
Are you suggesting that cameras (real) are a niche because of another niche coming along? I have both, and would never again use a 'phone camera for anything beyond reference pics to show a shop what I'm looking for. A snap of a complicated pipe is a better way of showing the salesperson what is wanted rather than trying to explain shape etc. in words. Our Spanish hardware stores are very well stocked with almost anything a home owner might need by way of replacement parts in bathrooms and kitchens.
If there's really a niche product in photography, the 'phone is it. Niche implies a tiny area of interest.
Well when the tiny area of interest, phone cameras, is magnitudes more prominent than the wide area of interest, cameras I presume, what is that telling you about what is niche and what is mainstream?
-
All that is correct, and some people make their own cameras with a wooden box as well. It's a matter on how many people use each technology.
DSLR's are still outselling mirrorless 2:1 today (from your graph), so while you may be right in the very long term I think mirrorless is still a smaller niche as compared to DSLR's for the forseeable future.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not a DSLR fanboy and I use mirrorless almost exclusively now with great pleasure, but I also don't mind to be in a minority.
-
DSLR's are still outselling mirrorless 2:1 today (from your graph), so while you may be right in the very long term I think mirrorless is still a smaller niche as compared to DSLR's for the forseeable future.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm not a DSLR fanboy and I use mirrorless almost exclusively now with great pleasure, but I also don't mind to be in a minority.
What’s your view of very long term. I’d say mirrorless will be outselling DSLR’s within 5 years, possibly 3 years. There will be an impact when Canon and Nikon play their next generation mirrorless hands.
Another trend that is interesting is the rise of sales in Asia where mirrorless sells much better than in North America and the fall in sales in North America where DSLR is king.
-
I think we’ve reached the cusp of the tipping point where the mirror experiences a rapid decline. There are very few applications left where the dlsr out-performs a mirrorless camera. Once Nikon Joins Canon (assuming they are serious about it), the market will flip as quickly as those two want it to. Remember that the manufacturing costs for mirrorless is lower, while the price they can demand is apparently not (compare a D500 to an E-M1.2 or GH5).
If they jump in wholeheartedly this year, by next year it’s game over.
-
Frankly, I find this debate (including the ones around the whiskey barrels) boring. It's a lot like the Apple vs Windows debate. It has no end and it serves no purpose.
*disclosure* I did participate. I'm recovering.
As long as my two D800s continue to be better photographers than me, I don't care. What will happen, will happen.
It is fun to watch, though.
-
What’s your view of very long term. I’d say mirrorless will be outselling DSLR’s within 5 years, possibly 3 years. There will be an impact when Canon and Nikon play their next generation mirrorless hands.
I'm not talking about outselling, That might indeed happen in 3-5 years allthough I wouldn't be surprized if it takes longer.
But given the many times more DSLR units out there from many years of outselling mirrorless I think it will be 10 years + before the use of mirrorless gets even close to being used as much as DSLR's.
Canon is already in their 2nd generation mirrorless and it has hardly made a dent, Nikon mirrorless is still in rumor territory. I think both will have a steep uphill battle to compete against the long established mirrorless pioneers like Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic (and even Leica).
-
My first digital camera was a Kodak DCS420. It was a Nikon N90 body with this large module permanently attached. Later digital cameras were obviously more intergrated but I always felt DSLR cameras were a hybrid thing related in some way conceptually to that DCS420. The mirrorless systems go some way closer to a full intergration of sensor and camera. Closer to to what would have been designed if we didn’t have the existing cameras and production facilities influencing the design as we did with SLR cameras.
I don’t really care much what camera i use. I would use pinhole and film if that was all that was around. I would coat my own film if I had to. But I like the mirrorless. Much more than I ever liked DSLR. I liked large format and rangefinder more than any mirror cameras actually.
-
My camera of choice has to make me want to pick it up and use it. Over the course of a lifetime precious few have.
Most do just the opposite.
-
My camera of choice has to make me want to pick it up and use it. Over the course of a lifetime precious few have.
Most do just the opposite.
Good point Keith, but also very personal.
Over my photographic "life" I've been lucky enough to only buy 1 camera I didn't like using (A Canon T90 which was quickly exchanged for something else).
All my others (Leica, Leicaflex, Olympus (OM system), Konica Minolta and now Sony I have found to be a joy to use and have motivated me to go out and shoot.
The cliché is that "it's just a tool", but if the tool doesn't handle well it's of limited use to me.
-
Well when the tiny area of interest, phone cameras, is magnitudes more prominent than the wide area of interest, cameras I presume, what is that telling you about what is niche and what is mainstream?
You are confusing two things here: number of cellphones around and their use as snapshot machines; the number of cameras around and their use as serious tools for making photographs.
Those are two very different things. In that wider perspective, the use of cellphones as tools of choice for making said serious images is tiny: the niche which is giving you concern.
There was ever the snapshot "photographer" who never was a photographer in the first instance, just a kind old person looking for "I was here," imagery.
The serious amateur photographer was never of that ilk: he was sometimes a very talented practitioner of the art and, often, better able to afford expensive equipment that was his professional counterpart. (Not all pro photographers get rich.) Others were just interested in the process, and wanted to make better graphic memories than they were getting from the chemist. That group, collectively, is what the market for cameras is made from today as yesterday.
Unavoidably, the guy who has but a cellphone, is hardly thought of as a photographer, so he cannot be part of the massive group that you would dearly like to use as basis for your assertion. That being so, there is no tiny niche for cameras: they are the name of the game. Attempting to subdivide them further is silly, unless you are a manufacturer wondering what to do next.
-
DSLR's are still outselling mirrorless 2:1 today (from your graph), so while you may be right in the very long term I think mirrorless is still a smaller niche as compared to DSLR's for the forseeable future.
My point is that Canon and Nikon are having a huge influence on this trend by not entering the mirrorless market. This is going to change in the next year, so I think the convergence between mirrorless and DSLR (and convergence here means mirrorless will begin to dominate the market) can speed up a lot.
They are not preparing FF mirrorless cameras because they want to increase their customer base but because they don't want to start reducing it. If the A7 black swan from Sony didn't exist, I doubt a lot we could see any FF mirrorless from Canon or Nikon in years. They are far from audacious companies. They don't innovate and live happily as DSLR iterators.
Regards
-
Good point Keith, but also very personal.
Over my photographic "life" I've been lucky enough to only buy 1 camera I didn't like using (A Canon T90 which was quickly exchanged for something else).
All my others (Leica, Leicaflex, Olympus (OM system), Konica Minolta and now Sony I have found to be a joy to use and have motivated me to go out and shoot.
The cliché is that "it's just a tool", but if the tool doesn't handle well it's of limited use to me.
Pieter, Agreed.
I've no interest in the latest or greatest. I'm not after a system with the highest dynamic range, the best high ISO performance, the most pixels, the fastest, the best value...really, the list goes on.
Over the last 50+ years I've bought into only four systems, two of which I love/loved, two of which I liked. I loved the Hasselblad film, love the Leica digital, liked the Hasselblad digital and liked the Nikon film. All four had one thing in common, they were utterly simple. I've begged, borrowed, demoed, hired - everything except stolen - many other systems all of which have left me cold.
-
My point is that Canon and Nikon are having a huge influence on this trend by not entering the mirrorless market.
Canon has entered the mirrorless market and hasn't made a dent. Nikon is only rumors, I have to see it to believe it.
I hope they both step up to the plate and deliver something awesome, especially FF. More competition for Sony will be a good thing, but their first itteration better be good and comparable (price and performance) to the A9, A7Riii and A7iii otherwise they will deliver a stillborn.
-
Canon has entered the mirrorless market and hasn't made a dent. Nikon is only rumors, I have to see it to believe it.
I should have been more clear: Canon hasn't entered the mirrorless market with a competent product. In your strict criteria Nikon has also entered the mirrorless market with their fantastic Nikon 1 BTW.
No one is going to replace his 6D, 5D or even 80D with a mediocre APS mirrorless camera with a poor lens portfolio. And still they sold much more than the product deserved just because of the huge Canon customer base, legion of fans and sales channels.
Regards!
-
Canon has entered the mirrorless market and hasn't made a dent.
Canon has so far made a "restrained" effort with its mirrorless system, with very few lenses offered specifically for it, for example. Yet recent surveys of sales in Japan have Canon second only to Sony in mirrorless system camera sales (though I am fairly sure that the MFT total Olympus + Panasonic is ahead of Canon.)
I suspect that in a forum like this, "making a dent" requires getting the attention of professionals and demanding amateurs, who are clearly not yet being served or pursued by Canon's mirrorless offerings.
P. S. "Ninja'd by Guillermo!" as they say in some forums.
-
I'm not talking about outselling, That might indeed happen in 3-5 years allthough I wouldn't be surprized if it takes longer.
But given the many times more DSLR units out there from many years of outselling mirrorless I think it will be 10 years + before the use of mirrorless gets even close to being used as much as DSLR's.
Canon is already in their 2nd generation mirrorless and it has hardly made a dent, Nikon mirrorless is still in rumor territory. I think both will have a steep uphill battle to compete against the long established mirrorless pioneers like Fuji, Sony, Olympus and Panasonic (and even Leica).
Actually Canon mirrorless outsells all other mirrorless cameras in Japan, the only market that I know of with a breakdown.
Once mirrorless takes over, yeh DSLR usage will still outnumber mirrorless usage...but how much new developments will be put into the DSLR cameras versus the mirrorless cameras. Manufactures don't make any money off the existing cameras...they want to sell new cameras.
-
Yet recent surveys of sales in Japan have Canon second only to Sony in mirrorless system camera sales (though I am fairly sure that the MFT total Olympus + Panasonic is ahead of Canon.)
Actually Canon mirrorless outsells all other mirrorless cameras in Japan, the only market that I know of with a breakdown.
??? Any sources so we can see who is right?
-
I should have been more clear: Canon hasn't entered the mirrorless market with a competent product. In your strict criteria Nikon has also entered the mirrorless market with their fantastic Nikon 1 BTW.
The question is will Canon ever enter with a more competent mirrorless, hopefully a FF?
And with mirrorless I bracketed between MFT and FF, leaving out smaller (Nikon) and bigger (Fuji/Hasselblad), but strictly speaking they could be considered as well
-
Actually Canon mirrorless outsells all other mirrorless cameras in Japan, the only market that I know of with a breakdown.
Indeed.
Now Canon has demonstrated these past years that their sales performance has not much to do with the value of their offering.
They are just way better at sales and marketing than Nikon and probably than Sony as well, like in a different league, pro vs amateur,...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Indeed.
Any data why you believe hogloff more than BJL?
-
Re the canikon situation. As far as I am concerned I have made my choice as I wanted a lighter and smaller travel setup than my Canon 5D3 and EF lenses. I chose Fuji and have X-T2 plus zooms and primes. The 18-55 and 55-200 are fine for my travel needs and I have bought the primes as I now use the Fuji for most other occasions. If Canon bring out a mirrorles body to go with EF lenses then I do not think the weight of the body and my existing lenses will induce me to buy and use instead of the Fuji. If a new Canon mirrorless body uses non EF lenses then the conversion cost, including the loss on selling the Fuji set, will stop me.
The upshot is that Canon and Nikon are probably too late for me when they do jump properly to mirrorless. I suspect that I am not the only one in this situation, judging by the number who have already bought into mirrorless ILCs from eg Fuji and Sony.
-
The upshot is that Canon and Nikon are probably too late for me when they do jump properly to mirrorless. I suspect that I am not the only one in this situation, judging by the number who have already bought into mirrorless ILCs from eg Fuji and Sony.
Indeed. As far as I am concerned I'll be waiting for the Nikon FF mirrorless body also and decide where to go next.
Sony is appealing and shows amazing potential, but the current generation is IMHO just not quite there yet.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Re the canikon situation. As far as I am concerned I have made my choice as I wanted a lighter and smaller travel setup than my Canon 5D3 and EF lenses. I chose Fuji and have X-T2 plus zooms and primes. The 18-55 and 55-200 are fine for my travel needs and I have bought the primes as I now use the Fuji for most other occasions. If Canon bring out a mirrorles body to go with EF lenses then I do not think the weight of the body and my existing lenses will induce me to buy and use instead of the Fuji. If a new Canon mirrorless body uses non EF lenses then the conversion cost, including the loss on selling the Fuji set, will stop me.
The upshot is that Canon and Nikon are probably too late for me when they do jump properly to mirrorless. I suspect that I am not the only one in this situation, judging by the number who have already bought into mirrorless ILCs from eg Fuji and Sony.
Count me as one that has moved to Sony for a lighter kit and have no interest now with what Canon will have to offer. Too late for me.
-
Yes
Guillermo,
I'm not arguing. In fact in my first reply of this thread I said "But once again, this is all personal choice."
I also said I own mirrorless from 4/3 to FF and if you include my RED's three more "mirrorless" cameras.
All I'm saying is mirrorless with good glass is not as inexpensive as people think and because I have backups, even my smaller 4/3 camera cases weigh almost as much as my canon cases.
Rob C,
I agree with you about mobile phones. Maybe they're a niche but to me they are just a commodity that everyone owns, which serves a purpose but takes the "special" out of the photographic equation.
Maybe someday we'll have great image making mobile phones, but I find them boring, though that's because I like cameras and own 10 brands with full lenses of all stripes. I use them all, though my favorite still cameras are the Leica S, Contax/Phase, for fast killer work the 1dx1 and 1dxII canon. For motion REDs and sometimes the panasonic Gh3 and keep trying to wrap my head around the Sony AFS2, though I find the A7sII to be difficult on skin tones. (though I hear Sony has corrected that with their latest A series).
I would have gone for the gh4/5 for 4k except the processor is on the limit running a high bit rate 4k file, the autofocus doesn't work as well as the gh3 and is miles behind the 1dxII.
In fact I'm truly camera agnostic because the real relevance of a photograph is what is in front and back of the camera.
Though I do find the fuji xh1 interesting.
IMO
BC
-
??? Any sources so we can see who is right?
Here is a few year’s data. Olympus doing better that I recall reading: bad memory or a different source?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/photorumors.com/2017/11/15/the-2017-bcn-camera-rankings-are-out/amp/
-
Here is a few year’s data. Olympus doing better that I recall reading: bad memory or a different source?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/photorumors.com/2017/11/15/the-2017-bcn-camera-rankings-are-out/amp/
Thanks! Interesting to see the changes year to year.
It's a pity it's only Japan, would be nice to have this for other regions as well (or just worldwide data)