[LeeRunge]

It’s the only option they have. D3000/5000 sales are gone with the latest smartphones. All point and shoot sales cratered and gone. That’s where you’re seeing the massive sales number drops. A d5000 whatever takes images that look worse to the average user than an iPhone in auto mode.

All that’s left is high end 1000+ body’s for Nikon which means massive revenue drops compared to last years until they shrink to a size that supports that at a profit. It’ll either die in the process of that shrink or come out as a much smaller higher end camera company.

The iPhone just works better for average users for most photographic needs. Samsung just added 10x optical capability on the latest galaxy and we’ll see that on the iPhone in a generation or two as well.

In all those bad numbers they did mention really strong sales of the z6 and 7ii which have only been out a few months and are out of stock all the time. So looks like a chunk of the F mount base is moving over now. That’ll be the future a much smaller Nikon probably in third place behind Canon and Sony if they survive the downsizing and can keep up with R/D.

Smartphones will continue to erode those sales as they add telephoto capability and AF for things like birds in flight, astrophotography (seeing that already) etc. Many people will just get to the “good enough” stage with the smartphone and be done with ILC cameras. Only the small pool of professionals and very enthusiastic hobbyists will remain.

As mentioned here many times before probably the best place to look is the 80s or something for SLR ILC sales to see where it’ll settle. Much smaller versions of the manufacturers in the future.

---

Last edited by LeeRunge; 02-05-2021 at 09:13 AM.

[beholder3]

Nikon numbers are out:

• ILC Camera sales FY20/3 versus 21/3 forecast: Drop from 1,620,000 to 850,000 --> -48%
• Lens sales FY20/3 versus 21/3 forecast: Drop from 2,650,000 to 1,400,000 --> -47%

see: https://nikonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Forecast-for-the-Imaging-...s-1536x853.png

I am not aware of any other company I know that looses customers that fast.

Isn't that just a natural consequence of a 70% reduction of P&S sales?

It obviously is a key drivers, yes. Any drop in P&S while still selling more expensive ILC can be put nicely sounding as "moving upmarket".

The correct sentence is:

They sell increasingly more expensive cameras to the rapidly shrinking remaining few people, who still choose to buy Nikon.

If last year you knew 4 people who bought a Nikon, this year it's only 2.

[LeeRunge]

---------- Post added 02-05-2021 at 10:20 AM ----------

It obviously is a key drivers, yes. Any drop in P&S while still selling more expensive ILC can be put nicely sounding as "moving upmarket".

The correct sentence is:

They sell increasingly more expensive cameras to the rapidly shrinking remaining few people, who still choose to buy Nikon.

If last year you knew 4 people who bought a Nikon, this year it's only 2.

I think your seeing the loss of d3000/5000 as the iPhone 12 images look better than those cameras in auto mode for casual shooters. Nikon is basically actively shrinking to full frame users only and a small remnant of aps-c.

They did mention z ii sales were at record highs for them so f mount owners are moving over. There’s just waaaaaay less of them than the casual d3000 users of the past.

Smaller Nikon if they make it through the shrink for the future.

If they’re going to ever bother with a 500-600 dollar APS-C camera again it better actually take a better looking image in auto for the average casual user that buys those. They don’t right now. I’ve personally witnessed that a few times as people thought the bigger camera must take a better looking shot than a smartphone and then the disappointment. They want nothing to do with editing RAW files. They just want a click and better looking then the friends smartphone. Right now it’s the opposite. Hence 50% less sales numbers for Nikon!

[Mistral75]

Isn't that just a natural consequence of a 70% reduction of P&S sales?

Do the maths, taking for instance the average FOB price of ILCs, lenses and compact cameras as reported by CIPA for April 2019 - March 2020 and the number of units from each category sold by Nikon, and you'll see that a 47/48% decrease in ILCs and interchangeable lenses together with a 70% decrease in compact cameras can't explain a 36% decrease in revenue without a massive increase of the average price of the ILCs and lenses sold.

It's even more obvious if you look at the last quarter: 51/52% decrease in ILCs and interchangeable lenses, 65% decrease in compact cameras, 25% decrease in revenue --> around 50% increase in average selling price, not explained by the reduction of compact camera sales.

[Serkevan]

Do the maths, taking for instance the average FOB price of ILCs, lenses and compact cameras as reported by CIPA for April 2019 - March 2020 and the number of units from each category sold by Nikon, and you'll see that a 47/48% decrease in ILCs and interchangeable lenses together with a 70% decrease in compact cameras can't explain a 36% decrease in revenue without a massive increase of the average price of the ILCs and lenses sold.

It's even more obvious if you look at the last quarter: 51/52% decrease in ILCs and interchangeable lenses, 65% decrease in compact cameras, 25% decrease in revenue --> around 50% increase in average selling price, not explained by the reduction of compact camera sales.

Unsurprising, considering that the cheap Z lenses (i.e. the bulk of sales) like the 50/1.8, the 24-200 or the f/4 zooms are substantially more expensive than their F mount counterparts, and the cheapest Z cameras start at... what, double the price of a D3500?

[Rondec]

Whatever else mirrorless cameras are, it isn't cheaper than SLRs. Maybe some day they will come out with them, but at this point, most companies have foregone cheap APS-C cameras and lenses.

[boriscleto]

Unsurprising, considering that the cheap Z lenses (i.e. the bulk of sales) like the 50/1.8, the 24-200 or the f/4 zooms are substantially more expensive than their F mount counterparts, and the cheapest Z cameras start at... what, double the price of a D3500?

The cheapest Z is $200 more than a KP.

[Serkevan]

The cheapest Z is $200 more than a KP.

In Europe the Z50 is actually 200€ cheaper than the KP, huh.

[Rondec]

In Europe the Z50 is actually 200€ cheaper than the KP, huh.

Interesting. The KP on B and H is 700 and the Z50 is 860. Regardless. It's pretty pricey for "entry level gear." It seems clear based on the Z5 price that Nikon wants to get everyone into a full frame camera and forget about APS-C, particularly entry level APS-C.

That's the sort of plan that gets more money in the short term, but can steer those interested in photography who don't have finances for a 1000 dollar camera away from Nikon.

[Serkevan]

Interesting. The KP on B and H is 700 and the Z50 is 860. Regardless. It's pretty pricey for "entry level gear." It seems clear based on the Z5 price that Nikon wants to get everyone into a full frame camera and forget about APS-C, particularly entry level APS-C.

That's the sort of plan that gets more money in the short term, but can steer those interested in photography who don't have finances for a 1000 dollar camera away from Nikon.

In Germany the Z50 right now is 780€ and the KP is 1099€ (but 959€ at another store). The Z5 is 1199€.

[LeeRunge]

Whatever else mirrorless cameras are, it isn't cheaper than SLRs. Maybe some day they will come out with them, but at this point, most companies have foregone cheap APS-C cameras and lenses.

The cheap DSLR market’s likely dead as casual users see smartphones taking better images with no effort compared to auto on a dslr. They don’t want to edit anything. We’re now seeing 10x zooms on phones so the last attraction was the 200mm cheap zoom in the kit but that’s no longer needed.

Really all they have left is full frame or high end APS-C.

[beholder3]

Really all they have left is full frame or high end APS-C.

Assumng this claim was close to reality in the future:

What do they think is the path for future new users into their ILC world?

The smartphone users will directly shell out 2000 EUR for his very first ILC step with two zoom lenses which cover what he had in his smartphone so far?
The world only consists of risk loving rich idiots? Who tries new stuff with 2000 EUR investments first?

IMHO the makers absolutely and quickly need attractive and < 700 EUR kits (I think even below 500 is required) even if a) they make no profits on those and b) the numbers they sell are 1/10 of what it used to be.
Else they have zero new influx and go the way of the dodo once all grandpas with money have died away.
The entry level business is not there for making money on it but to breed the money spenders of the future.

[biz-engineer]

Whatever else mirrorless cameras are, it isn't cheaper than SLRs. Maybe some day they will come out with them, but at this point, most companies have foregone cheap APS-C cameras and lenses.

I remember very well when the CEO of Sony camera provoked Canon and Nikon by inviting them to enter the full frame mirrorless market. Of course it was a tricky business trap from Sony. Sony knew their play ground. Canon and Nikon going into mirrorless is a huge trap , because most people who wanted a mirrorless went Sony, when going mirrorless Canon and Nikon would inevitably find a market smaller than they imagined. Canon are hardly making it, even with brutal investment in their RF system, and it's even harder for Nikon who now find themselves trapped in the middle of the arena, after putting all their R&D on mirrorless and not seeing sales to match their expenses.

[Rondec]

The cheap DSLR market’s likely dead as casual users see smartphones taking better images with no effort compared to auto on a dslr. They don’t want to edit anything. We’re now seeing 10x zooms on phones so the last attraction was the 200mm cheap zoom in the kit but that’s no longer needed.

Really all they have left is full frame or high end APS-C.

I don't think that's true. I have known several people who were dissatisfied with their phone cameras. They all bought T6/T7 type cameras with dual lens kits. The price with both lenses was between 500 and 600 dollars. They were buying it for better indoor sports shooting and for trips. They all seem pretty satisfied.

Regardless, I don't think the issue is that the brands couldn't sell cameras in the 400-600 dollar range, it is that they don't want to.

[LeeRunge]

Assumng this claim was close to reality in the future:

What do they think is the path for future new users into their ILC world?

The smartphone users will directly shell out 2000 EUR for his very first ILC step with two zoom lenses which cover what he had in his smartphone so far?
The world only consists of risk loving rich idiots? Who tries new stuff with 2000 EUR investments first?

IMHO the makers absolutely and quickly need attractive and < 700 EUR kits (I think even below 500 is required) even if a) they make no profits on those and b) the numbers they sell are 1/10 of what it used to be.
Else they have zero new influx and go the way of the dodo once all grandpas with money have died away.
The entry level business is not there for making money on it but to breed the money spenders of the future.

The Canon RP with lens costs less than top end iPhones. About 1079 EUR here. There’s also plenty of used gear. Nikon did create the Z50, but it costs nearly what the RP costs. I think in the future smartphones WILL be the stepping stone into photography. They’re killing the D3/5000 lines because smartphones are eating those sales, just like they did to all the point and shoots. I never bought one of those “entry” camera’s when I got into ILC cameras. I’m not sure how many people actually buy those then upgrade later vs they bought them and used them in auto mode the entire time. Now they just use smartphones instead.

My “first” ILC camera cost hundreds more than the RP does now, which is a full frame, and just for the body. It was a Pentax K-7.

---------- Post added 02-06-2021 at 08:50 AM ----------

Interesting. The KP on B and H is 700 and the Z50 is 860. Regardless. It's pretty pricey for "entry level gear." It seems clear based on the Z5 price that Nikon wants to get everyone into a full frame camera and forget about APS-C, particularly entry level APS-C.

That's the sort of plan that gets more money in the short term, but can steer those interested in photography who don't have finances for a 1000 dollar camera away from Nikon.

Smartphones are the entry level camera these days.

---------- Post added 02-06-2021 at 08:54 AM ----------

I remember very well when the CEO of Sony camera provoked Canon and Nikon by inviting them to enter the full frame mirrorless market. Of course it was a tricky business trap from Sony. Sony knew their play ground. Canon and Nikon going into mirrorless is a huge trap , because most people who wanted a mirrorless went Sony, when going mirrorless Canon and Nikon would inevitably find a market smaller than they imagined. Canon are hardly making it, even with brutal investment in their RF system, and it's even harder for Nikon who now find themselves trapped in the middle of the arena, after putting all their R&D on mirrorless and not seeing sales to match their expenses.

Nikon just reported record mirrorless sales for the Z6ii and Z7ii in their last report. Still at a loss with all the downsizing and drop in overall unit sales (D3000/5000’s dropping way off etc). Those two cameras have been out of stock for months. They’ll be in a smaller market for sure but with much higher margin body’s. The F mount users are now switching over to mirrorless in some numbers. That’ll probably increase as their high end body is coming this year as a Z8/9.

It’s going to be a much smaller world for all of them in the coming years as the entry market is going away to smartphones. ILC will be for pro’s and enthusiasts with deep pockets.

---------- Post added 02-06-2021 at 09:02 AM ----------

I don't think that's true. I have known several people who were dissatisfied with their phone cameras. They all bought T6/T7 type cameras with dual lens kits. The price with both lenses was between 500 and 600 dollars. They were buying it for better indoor sports shooting and for trips. They all seem pretty satisfied.

Regardless, I don't think the issue is that the brands couldn't sell cameras in the 400-600 dollar range, it is that they don't want to.

I guess it depends on what phone they were using. I mean the top end phones are double the cost of a T7 kit. For sure that will outperform a 150 dollar smartphone for example. Their days are numbered though. 10x optical zoom is already here on smartphones and the AF is getting really fast. In the next few generations they’ll have zoom comparable to the kit lenses and AF is basically already better on the higher end smartphones.

I’ve seen the opposite with people buying D3500’s etc and immediate disappointment in the image compared to their smartphone. When you explain RAW and editing they don’t want anything to do with that. In my case they just though the “real” camera HAD to take a better auto picture. It doesn’t. Smart HDR does most of the tricks that photographers do in post production, without any effort and instantly.

For now I can see the scenario with a telephoto keeping some sales for a few years, but smartphones are coming for them. In 5 years I think those kit’s will be pretty much gone. Nikon doesn’t even seem to be bothering with APS-C at this point other than the Z50 which is basically a high end variant. And very limited support for it. All focus is on the full frames.

Iphone will probably have a 200mm eq. telephoto in the next few generations now that the latest Samsung does. AF is already good at tracking. I’m sure they’ll add the adjustable bokeh effects to it as well, same as they current 65mm telephoto. For most that’ll work better than dragging a T7 around with a couple lenses.

---------- Post added 02-06-2021 at 09:39 AM ----------

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Not cheap, but this will be cheap smartphones in a few years. Where will these be at in 5 years? While they don’t match up in quality the smartphones are so close now in many images you really have to look to tell the difference. That means good enough for the bulk of peoples needs.

They can shoot in low light now, astrophotography, macro, telephoto needs. AF that works great. And unmatched for sharing which is the bulk of why people have a camera in the first place.

Smartphones are entry level photography. If people want more they’ll start looking into ILC’s and full frames. I think the stepping stone model is dead.