Mirrorless war - Canon vs Nikon - who is the current winner?

[Hulyss]

I don't do video so I don't care if Canon offers usable 4K 8K or 19K. But I'd happily shoot with the 28-70 f2 zoom, it seems to be a great lens - sadly outside of my budget.

The Canon 28-70f2 lense is, no doupt about that, a very good lense. But the weight and size are just not comfortable at all, absolutelly no adventage over a 5D and regular 24-70f2.8. It's marginal and I tested it. After 8 hours straight shooting a weeding, a shoulder start to melt.

This fast design was maybe mendatory because Canon does not offer IS in his first R iteration.

Speaking by experience, the Z and the actual 24-70 f4 S are just extremelly efficient in all kind of reportage, the weight is present but just at the good threshold, no pain. I do not think I'm gonna buy the f2.8 version because the IS just work very good and so far, the AF never failed me; just need some practice.


I think that Canon just went a bit early with the R. It is not that small, not that light, and nowhere as efficient as a Z camera.


Side note :


I start to modifie my view on lenses. Why F4 and not F2.8 ? What does it bring to me or my clients ? The answer is roughly bokeh. For bokeh portrait I use either a50, 85 or my 180 f2.8. Landscape and f2.8 zooms ? F4 isn't imoprtant at all since we usually shoot between f5.6 and up. I think that the Z system is very good and do the job. It is not the perfect tool but it come very close to my expectations.

[Rado]

Just out of curiosity, for what applications would you consider a 28-70mm f2.0 superior to a 24-70mm f2.8?

Shooting portraits outdoors. I use primes now and often around f2 to have more of the face in focus while still having a strong background blur. A good f2 zoom would mean I don't have to swap lenses (so much). Not having 24mm is irrelevant to me - if anything I'd rather see this lens to be a 35-80mm/f2 or even 40-90mm/f2. My dream portrait zoom would be the Sigma 50-100/f1.8 but in full frame version.

As for the weight/size - I'm just a hobbyist so I don't shoot for 8 hours straight. I would also never take this lens on a hiking trip. But I mostly shoot portraits and using the Sigma Art primes for the past few years has made my arms strong ;-)

[Hulyss]

Shooting portraits outdoors. I use primes now and often around f2 to have more of the face in focus while still having a strong background blur. A good f2 zoom would mean I don't have to swap lenses (so much). Not having 24mm is irrelevant to me - if anything I'd rather see this lens to be a 35-80mm/f2 or even 40-90mm/f2. My dream portrait zoom would be the Sigma 50-100/f1.8 but in full frame version.

As for the weight/size - I'm just a hobbyist so I don't shoot for 8 hours straight. I would also never take this lens on a hiking trip. But I mostly shoot portraits and using the Sigma Art primes for the past few years has made my arms strong ;-)

I understand your needs I used to shoot portraits with fast primes, mostly 50 ish primes so I was using apperture to get subject separation. With time I found that I prefer using focal lenght for subject separation and felt in love with the 180f2.8ED. Now, with the stabilisation, it is just a joy to use (sport stab and EFCS).

Sigma primes are good and, somehow, the S line looks similar. Infact, the S line is very well build, nothing close to the "plastic fantastic kit lenses …" some naysayers forked over YouTube channels (Like the Northrup and Cie).
It is good metal, good plastics (feel like metal) and good rubber. Rings are super stiff, I only wish that "kit lenses" approach this quality ! And, cherry on the cake, the optical performances are mindblowing.

My previous camera is a D700 (I keep it, less than 50000 act since I bought it) and the weight/bulk ratio is full tilt in favor of the Z. Even the balance on my flanc is enjoyable and non intrusive as a D serie.

I love Nikon but I envy some canon lenses, the 135f2L for exemple. I hope Nikon will build Something similar in 2021.

[kers]

I love Nikon but I envy some canon lenses, the 135f2L for exemple. I hope Nikon will build Something similar in 2021.

How about the Nikkor 105mm f1.4 ?  or the 1.8 135mm Sigma ART?

I read Canon Shooters now adopt the Sigma.  (... for what its worth)

[Hulyss]

How about the Nikkor 105mm f1.4 ?  or the 1.8 135mm Sigma ART?

I read Canon Shooters now adopt the Sigma.  (... for what its worth)

Those are wonderfull lenses, especially the Nikkor, but I'm not interested. If Nikon never came with the Z mount I would have bought the 105 but I will never buy a F mount lens ever. As for the Sigma, this lense is very good but weight a metric ton (and I prefer native lenses).


The Canon 135f2L is almost light, simple, rugged, exeptional at IQ level and priced below 1000 €. This lens is a gem for portraiture.

[kers]

Those are wonderfull lenses, especially the Nikkor, but I'm not interested. If Nikon never came with the Z mount I would have bought the 105 but I will never buy a F mount lens ever. As for the Sigma, this lense is very good but weight a metric ton (and I prefer native lenses).
The Canon 135f2L is almost light, simple, rugged, exeptional at IQ level and priced below 1000 €. This lens is a gem for portraiture.

OK, but there is nothing on the Z-lens-roadmap... and the Canon 135f2 on a Z?  (needs an adapter)
at least the Nikkor105 has a native adapter...
but is understand it has something special - for me 135mm is too far away...not making contact. I even find 85 too far, but that is me i guess..
I understand in a studio you need some space not to interfere with the light.

[D Fuller]

No data other than Canon's market share remained the same, Sony went up by 15% and Nikon's went down by 15%.

Don't know if people are jumping from Nikon or just not buying Nikon...but the end result is the same.

For what time period? Have to be careful with that. Sony released two very good and quite popular cameras in late 2017 and early 2018. They had a significant sales run before Nikon released two very good and quite popular cameras in late 2018. That surely booster Sony sales for some period. The Nikon cameras were much rumored, so that likely depressed Nikon sales for a while. Canon had fewer rumors flying around than Nikon, and with its installed base would have more inertia in sales numbers than the other two.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, actually, just that there are some additional variables that could give those numbers significantly different long-term meaning.

[hogloff]

For what time period? Have to be careful with that. Sony released two very good and quite popular cameras in late 2017 and early 2018. They had a significant sales run before Nikon released two very good and quite popular cameras in late 2018. That surely booster Sony sales for some period. The Nikon cameras were much rumored, so that likely depressed Nikon sales for a while. Canon had fewer rumors flying around than Nikon, and with its installed base would have more inertia in sales numbers than the other two.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, actually, just that there are some additional variables that could give those numbers significantly different long-term meaning.

Right from Nikon's own financial reports:

Year         ILC market share        Lens market share

FY2014        36%                               33%
FY2015        34%                               31%
FY2016        34%                               29%
FY2017        26%                               24%
FY2018        23%                               21%
FY2019est    23%                               20%

So in 5 years Nikon's camera market share went down by 13% and their lens market share went down by 13%

[Hulyss]

OK, but there is nothing on the Z-lens-roadmap... and the Canon 135f2 on a Z?  (needs an adapter)
at least the Nikkor105 has a native adapter...
but is understand it has something special - for me 135mm is too far away...not making contact. I even find 85 too far, but that is me i guess..
I understand in a studio you need some space not to interfere with the light.

Yea sadly I do not think Nikon will make it before 2 years...if they make it ! It is a long journey to transit from 50 to longer focal lenghts. Honestly it is about our own feelings, not a rational thing. My favorite lenght is 180mm, it is the way I feel it, no technical calculations behind this choice. Probably more compression ? I don't know. The Nikkor 135 DC doesn't make me vibrating, the Canon 135 does. For the humans I shoot, 180mm aren't THAT far away (1.5m)

Side note :

I have total faith in the excelence of the upcoming 70-200f2.8 S. Depending on the price, this zoom might end the need of my 180.

[BernardLanguillier]

Right from Nikon's own financial reports:

Year         ILC market share        Lens market share

FY2014        36%                               33%
FY2015        34%                               31%
FY2016        34%                               29%
FY2017        26%                               24%
FY2018        23%                               21%
FY2019est    23%                               20%

So in 5 years Nikon's camera market share went down by 13% and their lens market share went down by 13%

As discussed several times, this data is completely useless without a view by segment.

Besides, what matters to photographers is the performance of equipment and it is on top of the situation you described above that Nikon released the Z6/Z7 and Canon the R... enough said.

Odds are that Nikon would still release much more appealing cameras with a market share at 10%.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BernardLanguillier]

I have total faith in the excelence of the upcoming 70-200f2.8 S. Depending on the price, this zoom might end the need of my 180.

Me too. The 70-200 f2.8 E is at Otus level in terms of image quality. The S can only be better... although I have a hard imagining what that could mean.

Cheers,
Bernard

[hogloff]

As discussed several times, this data is completely useless without a view by segment.

Besides, what matters to photographers is the performance of equipment and it is on top of the situation you described above that Nikon released the Z6/Z7 and Canon the R... enough said.

Odds are that Nikon would still release much more appealing cameras with a market share at 10%.

Cheers,
Bernard

I'm just showing facts Bernard...not gut feels like you.

As far as the % of full frame versus crop that Nikon sells...you'd be surprised...maybe 10% full frame, 90% crop...vastly consumer level.

I know you feel it's different, but I have two separate sources that says different.

[D Fuller]

Right from Nikon's own financial reports:

Year         ILC market share        Lens market share

FY2014        36%                               33%
FY2015        34%                               31%
FY2016        34%                               29%
FY2017        26%                               24%
FY2018        23%                               21%
FY2019est    23%                               20%

So in 5 years Nikon's camera market share went down by 13% and their lens market share went down by 13%

Thanks. That’s a much clearer picture.

[BernardLanguillier]

I'm just showing facts Bernard...not gut feels like you.

As far as the % of full frame versus crop that Nikon sells...you'd be surprised...maybe 10% full frame, 90% crop...vastly consumer level.

I know you feel it's different, but I have two separate sources that says different.

My feeling isn’t different. 90%/10% in volume is realistic. Where we differ is in our view about what this means in terms of the relative health of the high end FF segment of Canon and Nikon.

The volume ratio above probably translates in FF still being a larger absolute contributor to margin. And that is the relevant indicator for 2 reasons:
- there will soon be no more low end
- high end bodies mean high end lenses sale that generate in turn more revenue and are reusable on FF mirrorless bodies.

Cheers,
Bernard

[chez]

My feeling isn’t different. 90%/10% in volume is realistic. Where we differ is in our view about what this means in terms of the relative health of the high end FF segment of Canon and Nikon.

The volume ratio above probably translates in FF still being a larger absolute contributor to margin. And that is the relevant indicator for 2 reasons:
- there will soon be no more low end
- high end bodies mean high end lenses sale that generate in turn more revenue and are reusable on FF mirrorless bodies.

Cheers,
Bernard

Highly doubt 10% of the revenue contribute to the majority of the margin. I think CaNikon is hurting from their low priced high volume eroding.

[BernardLanguillier]

Highly doubt 10% of the revenue contribute to the majority of the margin. I think CaNikon is hurting from their low priced high volume eroding.

Still not sure where you got the data that low end represents 90% of revenue.

Cheers,
Bernard

[chez]

Still not sure where you got the data that low end represents 90% of revenue.

Cheers,
Bernard

Do some research on Thon Hogan’s site.

There is also a site of Nikon serial numbers for their cameras. From those range of numbers for their different cameras you can conclude that Nikon expects their entry level cameras to sell at least 10x their high end cameras.

Do a bit of work if you really want the data...or not, your choice.

[BernardLanguillier]

Do some research on Thon Hogan’s site.

There is also a site of Nikon serial numbers for their cameras. From those range of numbers for their different cameras you can conclude that Nikon expects their entry level cameras to sell at least 10x their high end cameras.

Do a bit of work if you really want the data...or not, your choice.

Agreed they sell 10 times more low end camera at about 1/4 to 1/15 the price of high end.

Which means that low end represents perhaps 60% of revenue, with much lower margins.

But what matters is the ratio of high end vs low end at Nikon vs Canon and what it means in terms of actual high segment respective market share for FF bodies and FF lenses. Empirical data point indicate that Canom and Nikon are much closer on this than the overall yearly data you provided above indicates.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Hulyss]

Me too. The 70-200 f2.8 E is at Otus level in terms of image quality. The S can only be better... although I have a hard imagining what that could mean.

Cheers,
Bernard

I hope it will be lighter than the f. Sure, IQ will be super but my little finger tell me the emphasis will be on the OOF rendering. The 24-70S does have a very good OOF rendering for a f4 lense, kind of organic and smooth. I suppose it is related to the new optical formulas and the Z mount.

[BernardLanguillier]

https://photorumors.com/2019/01/14/sony-α7-iii-vs-canon-eos-r-vs-nikon-z6-mirrorless-sales-during-the-holiday-shopping-season-in-japan/

As predicted, Sony kills it but Nikon and Canon are pretty much at the same level for FF mirrorless sales in December in Japan, although the Z6 was just introduced and was therefore not discounted at all (average selling price is 1.5 times higher). The shape of the curves indicate that Nikon should be clearly ahead by January.

Considering the huge initial market share advantage Canon was supposed to have, this appears to indicate that R sales are far below expectations.

Or... as I suspect... this simply reflects the fact that their market share in the FF segment is much closer than the global figures have us believe.

Cheers,
Bernard