[beholder3]

We all read the bad news from other ILC makers.

Canon reported -82% profits for the most recent quarter compared to last years'.

Sony now also reports -73% profits for the most recent quarter compared to last years'.


After ok previous quarters, the increased competition and holding back customers begins to show the manufacturers weaknesses.


In Q4/2017, Sony's imaging (IP&S) division showed operating income/profit of 6868 mill yen versus the 1844 mill yen in Q4/2018.
Sony Global - Earnings Announcement
From now on these figures will be hidden and not available any more since Sony did some mixing up of divisions and dedicated camera profits will not be visible any longer.


While their marketing departments all "predict" / claim to recover somehow, I guess it will be an interesting year 2019.

In this struggling world they (Nikon, Sony, Panasonic) now try it with hefty price reductions: The full-frame mirrorless price war has started - Photo Rumors

I am convinced there is no way they can continue to hike prices on upper models 1:1 to compensate for loss of sales in lower models. Even the toughest fans will not be milked for many more years.

[BigMackCam]

In this struggling world they (Nikon, Sony, Panasonic) now try it with hefty price reductions: The full-frame mirrorless price war has started - Photo Rumors

I am convinced there is no way they can continue to hike prices on upper models 1:1 to compensate for loss of sales in lower models. Even the toughest fans will not be milked for many more years.

I guess we all knew the price war would come. I am, though, surprised by just how quickly it's started. It can only be six months since the Z7 was released, right?

If Ricoh / Pentax had jumped into the mirrorless fray as some folks wanted (and still want), it really could have put the brand at serious risk...

[biz-engineer]

My K-1 is good enough (nearly the best for IQ), so I'm not in hurry to buy any other full frame camera. When the Z7 will be at $1000 and my K-1s dead, maybe I'll get one, although I do not consider any of these 40Mp MILC models are any better than a Pentax for AF tracking. The only + of those new MILC models is 4K vid., something I don't use.

IMO, camera makers should rather develop MF mirrorless (like Fuji, but better), instead on making more of the same FF kind-off cameras.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Digital cameras are at the point now where the law of diminishing returns has kicked in, as it always does eventually. The days are gone when a manufacturer's latest model would offer so many obvious advantages over the previous one that people felt they just had to have it right away. For Pentax, the K-1 with its full frame sensor was probably the last camera that will have that sort of game changing impact, while other manufacturers have passed similar points themselves several years ago. Camera makers are trying hard to convince users that mirrorless is the new technology that you've just gotta have, but many users just aren't buying. And they won't unless some other new technology comes along that really is a must-have.

I've been wondering if maybe the real gap in the market is for people who want something better and more versatile than their smartphones but don't want to jump right in the deep in with a DSLR. Over recent months I've had conversations with about half a dozen family and friends, all women, who have discovered that they find photography creatively fulfilling and want something better than their smartphones. Several of them have already invested in compact cameras, tending to go for Sony because of brand recognition, but they've all ended up feeling that they haven't really ended up with anything that offers much more creative potential than their phones. They've all gone back to using their phones as their main cameras after a month or two.

So just a little suggestion to camera manufacturers: instead of trying to so hard to grab the dwindling market of middle-aged blokes who love obsessing over the technical minutiae of lenses and sensors in online forae, why not focus on the seemingly huge potential market of women who want cameras that let them express their creativity through photography without having to become camera nerds?

And no, I'm not going to offer any suggestions about what sort of cameras it is that women really want. Camera manufacturers could always, you know, ask them. . .

---

Last edited by Dartmoor Dave; 04-28-2019 at 01:17 AM. Reason: Typo

[biz-engineer]

why not focus on the seemingly huge potential market of women who want cameras that let them express their creativity through photography without having to become camera nerds?

That's one thing for sure. I would add; when we were upgrading from 10Mp to 16Mp to 24Mp apsc, keeping the same lenses, eventually buy one lens to complement lenses we already had, the upgrade bill wasn't that high. Now if you consider a new MILC system with new lenses, the cost is 5 x what it was when upgrading a DSLR body only. It's a huge step that only a small number of camera users can afford.

[repaap]

I suppose it also has some to do with customers going to wait what happens now. They have perfectly good gear already. Especially with one thinking of should they wait to see where mirrorless is actually going. Nikon and Canon introduced that new mount. There is now that L-mount. My gear is with (x)-mount and don't really want to start my investment with my glass again, should react now or wait.

Happy ones are those who have already jumped on new great gear, or are they.


Lot of questions. I suppose that there is going to be only mirrorless (maybe!) in 3-5 yrs. but meanwhile we will just have to wait, if these new mounts are going to be popular, or if there will be a risk of big flop. Lot of people are going to choose phone to take pictures with. Some of them are almost as expensive as entry level Canon FF mirrorles, with some lenses. For most phone is already better option than a camera system.


There are more options than ever. Competition is big too.


But as already noted, if Ricoh went in this big Mirrorless competition going on right now, there would have been a big risk of failure.

[chrism888]

Kind of on topic and a slight tangent, I don't see myself upgrading my kit for years, ( K1 / K3 / 645z ) it does everything I want it to, bodies and lenses and it will age gracefully with me, there's also the almost constant upgrade needed in software etc so I'm happy for a good number of years.

[monochrome]

The global economy is slowing everywhere and sentiment is conservative.

I thought about

• GRIII
• DA*11-18
• Theta Z1

But I can wait for holiday sales - or just shoot with what I have. I think if I’m a marginal buyer there’s something secular happening.

[pentageek]

Now if you consider a new MILC system with new lenses, the cost is 5 x what it was when upgrading a DSLR body only.

And if I invest all these money, will my pictures become 5x better? No. Of course 'joy of new toy' a.k.a. 'GAS' can play considerable role in such purchase, but this is another story.

[Dan Rentea]

Now if you consider a new MILC system with new lenses, the cost is 5 x what it was when upgrading a DSLR body only. It's a huge step that only a small number of camera users can afford.

The thing is that I have tested EOS R for 3 weeks and for the majority of the time I tried to use the EF 35mm f2 with adaptor vs. RF 35mm f1.8 to see if there are differences in terms of Af speed and image quality. My conclusion is that I don't need to buy the new RF 35mm lens as long as my 35mm f2 lens (and all my other EF lenses) work great on EOS R mirrorless. If I decide to invest in mirrorless, I will buy the RF lenses gradually. For example, from all the lenses I have, the 70-200mm f4L IS lens is the only one that needs a replacement due to extensive use. If I decide to invest in mirrorless, the 70-200mm lens is the only one that I will buy in RF mount when it will become available. There is no need to sell the new EF 85mm f1.4L IS lens for the RF 85mm f1.2L lens that will be released soon as long as the EF lens work flawlessly on EOS R.

I don't know where this idea that you have to buy also the lenses dedicated to mirrorless cameras when you decide to invest in mirrorless came from?! For example, there are still Sony shooters happy with their Canon lenses mounted on Sony cameras. Why this idea that you have to invest additional 5.000-7.000$ in lenses as long as the transition is soo smoth with adapters?!

[normhead]

I don't know where this idea that you have to buy also the lenses dedicated to mirrorless cameras when you decide to invest in mirrorless came from?! For example, there are still Sony shooters happy with their Canon lenses mounted on Sony cameras. Why this idea that you have to invest additional 5.000-7.000$ in lenses as long as the transition is soo smoth with adapters?!

Camera marketers. Using old lenses is not part of the business model. The model is tell people they can use their old lenses and then wait until their will breaks down and they start buying new ones. It worked on my. I had a Tamron 18-300 that was my travel lens on film. I bought the *ist so I could continue using it. But I also bought a Sigma 70-300. I used the old Tamron exactly once. That was enough.

[reh321]

I don't know where this idea that you have to buy also the lenses dedicated to mirrorless cameras when you decide to invest in mirrorless came from?! For example, there are still Sony shooters happy with their Canon lenses mounted on Sony cameras. Why this idea that you have to invest additional 5.000-7.000$ in lenses as long as the transition is soo smoth with adapters?!

That is why Canon is in such a strong position compared to other traditional DSLR manufacturers. They need to work out some details with respect to EOS-R body design, but that is not much different from EOS design, and they've already gained a fair bit of experience with EOS-M design. By going to EF/USM lenses over thirty years ago, the lenses their users think of as "legacy" are fully compatible with EOS-R via adapter. Nikon users, in particular, will have no make a much larger jump, so they are much more likely to wander off to some other brand while making the transition.

[WPRESTO]

Nothing mentioned about Olympus. Their newly released super MFT started @ just under $3000. With it's built-in lower hand grip it weighs as much as a K1, and despite its whiz-bang features, IMHO the price and weight totally negate the purpose and attractiveness of MFT. I suspect and predict it will be a marketing failure.

[Dan Rentea]

Camera marketers. Using old lenses is not part of the business model. The model is tell people they can use their old lenses and then wait until their will breaks down and they start buying new ones. It worked on my. I had a Tamron 18-300 that was my travel lens on film. I bought the *ist so I could continue using it. But I also bought a Sigma 70-300. I used the old Tamron exactly once. That was enough.

I'm not a fan of old lenses. Never was and never will be. I like to work with new and fast lenses rather than dealing with the common problems of old lenses (chromatic aberations, not that sharp wide open, not that fast to focus, etc.). I know exactly what lenses I need for what I shoot and I don't buy lenses that I will use just a few times in a year. For those situation I have the renting option that allows me to rent the best lens I need for a specific task.

I use f4 zoom lenses due to the fact that the f4 zoom lenses are sharp, small, light and decent in terms of price. And I use fast L primes when I have paid shooting sessions. I don't use f2.8 zoom lenses due to: size, weight and due to the fact that a 70-200mm f2.8 lens for example will get you noticed right away and people tend not to be comfortable at corporate events when someone is pointing a big lens on them. Primes are more discret, also lighter and faster. The 85mm f1.4L lens will also keep my ISO lower than an f2.8 lens or it will help me have a faster shutter speed. I tend not to use flash so a fast aperture helps me in this regard. This is just me and others shoot only with f2.8 lenses and get excelent results. I saw what a 400mm f2.8 lens did on my 6D a few years ago and since then I understood that if I want performance, old and vintage lenses will not make my life easier. Even with this in mind I also shoot a lot with the 85mm f1.8 lens which costs 15% of the 85mm f1.4L lens because it's light and good enough for going out shooting portraits with friends. But for paid jobs it stays at home.

When I hear people telling me that I have to invest in 5 RF lenses if I go to mirrorless route, first I make sure that I really need to do this. The new RF 85mm f1.2L lens will have to be really and I mean really good compared to EF 85mm f1.4L lens which was released one and a half years ago. If I see a noticeable difference on EOS R between these 2 lenses, then I will have some decisions to make knowing also that a pro Canon mirrorless camera is around the corner. But, for the moment there are no equivalent RF lenses that I can compare to my EF lenses and my EF lenses work on EOS R as good as they work on 5D Mark IV. If the new RF equivalent lenses and the upcomming Canon mirrorless cameras will make a difference, then I start working on the investment plan. A fixed percentage from my paid shootings is going for investements (lenses, cameras and accesories) and I have half of the budget ready and the other half of the budget will be covered by selling the EF lenses if I decide to go on the mirrorless route. The EVF is giving me some trouble... In another topic I was talking about familiarity in shooting with my gear. Shooting with EOS R is a learning curve even for me, a Canon shooter, and I will try and learn the new system before making a huge investment in 4-6 RF lenses. I still hope that Canon will release a 5D Mark V so that I can postpone the decision for another 4 years. By then mirrorless will probably become a mature system on Canon and I will learn by then to deal with EVF.

Who knows, maybe smartphones will be our future cameras and medium format cameras will replace APS-C and full frame cameras.

[biz-engineer]

My conclusion is that I don't need to buy the new RF 35mm lens as long as my 35mm f2 lens (and all my other EF lenses) work great on EOS R mirrorless. If I decide to invest in mirrorless, I will buy the RF lenses gradually.

I really wonder what the point of using an EOS R with an adapter when you can use a 5DIV without adapter and with better AF servo tracking.