Where is the photographic market going? (having a look at CIPA reports)

[Guillermo Luijk]

I took the evolution of camera shipments figures from CIPA:








With the improvement of digital sensors I guess the whole photographic industry pyramid is moving towards "lower" level devices that can already satisfy customer's needs in the field of photography:

• On on side smartphones provide enough quality for most users personal needs, with the added feature of readyness (everyone has got a mobile at any time) and connectivity (instant sharing with contacts, social networks). That is why traditional compact cameras (no interchangeable lenses) are rapidly vanishing.
• On the higher end, many DSLR users are finding they can still get enough quality by "downgrading" to mirrorless systems that are easier to carry and use. So in the end the DSLR market is also vanishing.
• In the middle of the sandwich, mirrorless systems are hardly managing to keep their users base with a bunch of camera makers struggling to gain market share.

The question is: what we'll have in the end, and who will be the actors (camera makers) to stay in the remaining non-mobile photographic market?.
If the trend follows, it seems mirrorless cameras will sell more than DSLR in about 3 years. But that is only if Canon and Nikon do NOT get seriously into the mirrorless market. Since this is quite likely to happen, the end of the supremacy of DSLR over mirroless should even be closer.

Thoughts?

[spidermike]

If the trend follows, it seems mirrorless cameras will sell more than DSLR in about 3 years.

I am not so sure, but there are so many factors that it is almost impossible to predict.

If you think about 15years ago just before digital was making a viable economic case to the general population, prior to that very few people had a camera - they were either too bulky, too expensive in terms of cost of living or too costly/inconvenient in buying and processing film. In the mid 90s the real cost of photography started to fall, so people bought a cmaera 'because they could' and then digital soon after that made it so much more convenient and both these factors led to a boom in camera ownership. And when buying a camera a 35mm camera was simply the only option in town (compared to the profusion of excellent options nowadays) and these are the people for whom a cameraphone is 'good enough'. Which is why IMO those graphs show DSLRs plummeting far quicker than CSCs are picking up - phones are not stealing market as in people swapping from DSLR to phones but taking sales that would have happened if cameraphones did not exist.

On top of this you have to overlay the deeply ingrained idea that 'real photographers buy DSLRs' - not because of any shortcomings of CSCs but a legacy from decades of DSLR use along with the old belief that 'bigger is better'...we still see posts from seasoned photographers that they want to 'upgrade' from APS-C to 35mm sensor; or newbies saying 'I want to buy a DSLR as my first decent camera' despite it showing zero improvement for the way they look at photos.
A third factor is the cost-benefit. Until about 3 years ago each camera generation brought a significant improvement in pixel numbers and sensor quality. That has now plateau'd so anyone who has a DLSR is looking at it all and thinking 'am I really getting a significant improvement for my cash outlay - and very often the answer is 'no'. So the yspend their money elsewhere and the market suddenly appears satruated: re-greening of camera kits by serial upgraders who are trapped into a 'system' and camera sales rely more and more on new buyers who have decided they want/need a DSLR.

So I think the camera market will continue to drop, but there is still a self-propagating kudos behind DSLR ownership that will see them remain the dominant format for some time to come.

[davidgp]

Hi all,

So my two cents,

For one side, even though the number of shipments of CSC cameras has increased in the latest two years, it is going in a very slow pace. I think that three year figure that you comment Guillermo, it is more due for the speed DSLR are losing sells more than the success of CSC to grab new buyers.

With all manufacturers selling less cameras each year, I expect that at some point some manufacturer will give up and close their image division. This will benefit for a period buyers, since some manufacturers are trying to get market share, like Sony, Fuji or Olympus, they are offering professional products at quite low prices (the current A7 it is selling at around $1000, full frame camera at that price will be a dream two years ago). Also, some manufacturers are starting to invest in things different to camera markets, lately Nikon has bought several medical imaging companies (this it is quite logical, Nikon it is one of the manufacturers that has the most to lose, they are quite centered in the cameras).

Also, manufacturers are focusing more and more in professional products. This it is quite obvious, professional products have higher margins, at the low end, they are selling quite cheap for people to still buy their cameras, and the margins are lower. You can see this behavior already in some manufacturers, for example Sigma it has been moving to high qualifity products for some period with their Art lenses ( in this interview their CEO already comments that there is were the margins are: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8641477642/cp-2015-sigma-interview ). Olympus is selling quite well their OM-D series, better than the PENs, Sony it is pushing with very short cycles their full-frame mirrorless cameras... Or for example Canon, their cameras are not that "sexy", but for some years they have been working in improving the optical quality of all their lenses with an step increase in price (just look at the 11-24 price...)

Regards,

David

[Isaac]

The question is: what we'll have in the end, and who will be the actors (camera makers) to stay in the remaining non-mobile photographic market?

Not enough data: How have sales to new camera users compared to upgrades changed? How has the upgrade period for different kinds-of camera user changed? How have sales to photography businesses compared to personal use changed?

[AlterEgo]

what about the used gear market - how does sales of used cameras increase or not the user base ? is it possible to assume that a noticeable amount of new (to dSLM or dSLR) users appear for example through purchases of the used gear from existing users ?

[Tim Lookingbill]

what about the used gear market - how does sales of used cameras increase or not the user base ? is it possible to assume that a noticeable amount of new (to dSLM or dSLR) users appear for example through purchases of the used gear from existing users ?

Just fixin' to mention that after checking price and availability on a used Pentax K100D DSLR to replace my current K100D which I used quite a bit since 2006 when it was first issued but now is developing problems with manual exposure adjustments using the rotary dial.

I was expecting a ton of K100D's to surface online but could only find maybe 5 at the most and they don't seem to be depreciating like film SLR's when I could get those at a pawn shop for $50 back in the late '80's. I can't find one K100D for under $100 body only and that's a 9 year old DSLR that I paid at least $430 back in 2006 new.

Where did all the used K100D's go? It can't be that popular of a camera going by Pentax market share now and back then.

Yes, we need more data to make sense of CIPA stats.

[AlterEgo]

Just fixin' to mention that after checking price and availability on a used Pentax K100D DSLR to replace my current K100D which I used quite a bit since 2006 when it was first issued but now is developing problems with manual exposure adjustments using the rotary dial.

I was expecting a ton of K100D's to surface online but could only find maybe 5 at the most and they don't seem to be depreciating like film SLR's when I could get those at a pawn shop for $50 back in the late '80's. I can't find one K100D for under $100 body only and that's a 9 year old DSLR that I paid at least $430 back in 2006 new.

Where did all the used K100D's go? It can't be that popular of a camera going by Pentax market share now and back then.

Yes, we need more data to make sense of CIPA stats.

did you ask people @ http://pentaxforums.com to sell you one ? there is chance that some people otherwise not minding to sell just do not bother... try, if you didn't so far

[Tim Lookingbill]

Didn't consider asking someone to sell their K100D on Pentax forums, but thanks for the suggestion. I've never done that and don't feel comfortable buying from a stranger online.

Besides, I already ordered one from KEH for $115 in Excellent + condition.

I guess sales of used gear don't make for a very accurate metric with regard to supply & demand in the market if there are those that just like hanging on to their own gear as part of a collection and have to be prodded into selling. Wonder how many are camera gear hoarders?

From the trillions of images posted online it'ld be a daunting task to figure out which were shot on new gear vs old. For sure no one is getting tired of photographing their world.

[Tim Lookingbill]

Oh good grief! I just checked the Pentax forum site's Used Gear section and the asking prices are ridiculously high on a wide range of gear.

Still couldn't find a K100D and I'm on my 5th page.

OK, it's not official or accurate but I'm convinced the DSLR market is comprised of gear hoarders which I believe is driving the demand and high prices. I just don't know how that fits into CIPA stats showing a decline in demand.

[spidermike]

The reason there is a decline in demand is that people are not selling gear nor are they buying it. What they have is good neough.

[Telecaster]

OK, it's not official or accurate but I'm convinced the DSLR market is comprised of gear hoarders which I believe is driving the demand and high prices. I just don't know how that fits into CIPA stats showing a decline in demand.

I own a Pentax K100D, which I haven't used in maybe seven years. I won't be selling it, though, which I guess makes me a hoarder.    It sits on a shelf in my "tech room" next to an Epson R-D1. Both cameras contain variants of the same 6mp CCD and produce quite similar-looking files. That sensor seems to provide lovely tonality at base ISO no matter what camera it's in, which may explain in part why so few K100Ds are available on the used market…

-Dave-

[Tim Lookingbill]

I own a Pentax K100D, which I haven't used in maybe seven years. I won't be selling it, though, which I guess makes me a hoarder.    It sits on a shelf in my "tech room" next to an Epson R-D1. Both cameras contain variants of the same 6mp CCD and produce quite similar-looking files. That sensor seems to provide lovely tonality at base ISO no matter what camera it's in, which may explain in part why so few K100Ds are available on the used market…

-Dave-

From your description of the K100D sensor tonality which I happen to agree with I would deem you more as a collector, not a hoarder. Hoarders IMO are those that view gear as a novelty toy to possess on an obsessive level without studying and appreciating the fine nuances of each in build quality and performance. They just like having things for the sake of having things.

Since the K100D is the only camera I've used this long I didn't have anything to compare against that made me aware of its sensor's color rendering characteristics until I came across this thread... http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/60260-k100d-vs-k200d-performance.html

...showing a comparison to Pentax's replacement, the K200D which uses the same Sony/Samsung sensor as the higher end K10D, different from the K100D's without Samsung design influences. I downloaded some K200D Raw samples and noticed a big difference in noise rendering but with less detail on ISO 800 shots with an additional "Camera Standard" profile in ACR which rendered with more diminished colors over the K100D's film like saturated look.

It's the first I've ever seen a huge difference between camera color rendering characteristics due to sensor design differences. In the past when I was looking to buy newer and more advanced camera systems I compared quite a few Raws from various models and brands and found very little differences in color rendering.

But this recent search between these two older Pentax models I can really see two types of color rendering overall, greenish with diminished hues with ashen sky blues vs slightly more cheery Velvia like primaries with magenta-ish blue skies, fresher greens and orang-ish tan skin tone in daylight shots. I know one thing for sure is that the K200D Raw edits viewed on the preview in ACR 6.7 acted quite different than my K100D edits.

Note in that Pentax forum discussion how some see the K200D's greenish AWB as more natural looking due to the greenish blue skies which is totally inaccurate and not natural at all. In fact I find the K100D far more easier to get dead to nuts accurate color in post in studio scene to screen matches over what others with far newer and more expensive cameras seem to have trouble achieving.

[Isaac]

OK, it's not official or accurate but I'm convinced the DSLR market is comprised of gear hoarders which I believe is driving the demand and high prices.

SF bay area craigslist photo+video showed 2 Pentax K100D for sale.

The trouble with obsolete digital cameras is that they were once highly valued but are now worth so little, that there's a reluctance to acknowledge the devaluation until they become so obsolete that they're just junk that cannot even be given away.

[David Sutton]

The question is: what we'll have in the end, and who will be the actors (camera makers) to stay in the remaining non-mobile photographic market?.
If the trend follows, it seems mirrorless cameras will sell more than DSLR in about 3 years. But that is only if Canon and Nikon do NOT get seriously into the mirrorless market. Since this is quite likely to happen, the end of the supremacy of DSLR over mirroless should even be closer.

Thoughts?

Recently I was one of the judges for a local photography competition. One of the categories was Instagram (yes, I had to look up what it was ).
All the images were printed on A4. The Instagram had by far the largest number of entries, had on average the sharpest and best exposed files, and by a long shot showed the most imagination in terms of camera placement and composition.
I've already gone mirrorless and don't miss the weight and the viewfinder of a dslr at all. if I wasn't printing large I'd be seriously looking at buying a mobile phone with a half decent lens in it. I can understand their popularity.
David

[Telecaster]

From your description of the K100D sensor tonality which I happen to agree with I would deem you more as a collector, not a hoarder. Hoarders IMO are those that view gear as a novelty toy to possess on an obsessive level without studying and appreciating the fine nuances of each in build quality and performance. They just like having things for the sake of having things.

Yeah…I took no offense. 

It was the K100D that killed off my interest in Canon D-SLRs. Seeing how well the former handled mid- to high-light tones compared to the 20D & 5D. (I did find the 5D better than the Pentax at shadow delineation.) I owned a K10D for awhile and wasn't particularly happy with its tonal response, but put up with it due to the camera's other capabilities. I really wasn't thrilled with any other camera tonality-wise until I picked up Oly's E-M5 a couple years ago.

-Dave-

[Ed B]

Is it that the market is correcting itself? I bought a Canon New F1 in 1984 and shot the hell out of it for 15 years because there was no reason to upgrade and nothing to really upgrade to (had a T90 as a backup though) until Eos came out. Got an Eos 3 after most of my gear was stolen (still have the F1 though) in the late 90's and didn't go digital until the mid 2000s. So, in 20 years I bought three cameras.

In the past 10 years I've bought five digital cameras and at this point with the quality of the images coming out of today's cameras I can't see a point in getting another SLR or MILC, the images they make really can't get THAT much better than they are now.

Sure, DR could increase, noise might get a little better but is any of it necessary anymore? Cameras today are good, really good. Maybe more people are feeling like I do and realize they no longer need the newest camera on the market?

[Tim Lookingbill]

In the past 10 years I've bought five digital cameras and at this point with the quality of the images coming out of today's cameras I can't see a point in getting another SLR or MILC, the images they make really can't get THAT much better than they are now.

Sure, DR could increase, noise might get a little better but is any of it necessary anymore? Cameras today are good, really good. Maybe more people are feeling like I do and realize they no longer need the newest camera on the market?

Haven't really examined image quality in newer or older cameras so I'll take your word on the lack of necessity of having to get the latest greatest (most expensive?) camera no matter if it's on a smartphone, compact, MILC or DSLR.

What I still want and don't see on any camera is the ability to quickly grab a digital camera out of my pocket or hanging from a strap around my neck and within seconds flip a "Night" switch selector button and rattle off several well exposed, reasonably sharp shots of night scenes under street lights of quickly moving objects such as prowlers, animals or stray dogs as a way to gather evidence for identification. And I'm not talking about having a preset created ahead of time at the ready. Camera manufacturers should engineer a functional low light "Night" preset that chooses the right ISO, flash power level and focus & exposure metering that allows taking an emergency shot within seconds with no delay or lag.

[davidgp]

Sure, DR could increase, noise might get a little better but is any of it necessary anymore? Cameras today are good, really good. Maybe more people are feeling like I do and realize they no longer need the newest camera on the market?

I agree with this, I bought my 5d mark ii more than 4 years ago, the camera was release in 2008, and for landscape photography it worked ok for me... I will probably change this year or next one to something with more DR and resolution, but until last year I didn't feel the urge to upgrade... The camera was enough for me...

[mezzoduomo]

Meanwhile, In Wetzlar......"Leica sales up 35%, 2014 vs 2011". I fully realize that its a small number relative to the Japanese giants, but its not as small as it was in 2011. Which other camera makers can say this, besides Apple.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/camera-maker-leica-survives-the-digital-shift-1426295228?KEYWORDS=leica

[shawnino]

Leica's success kind of confuses me.
I am surprised there are so many people who want to pay that much for what you get.
I understand Leica is targeting a different market from other manufacturers; I'm just slightly surprised that market is so interested.