[normhead]

I think the "death of the DSLR" if it happened would be due to companies wanting to cut product lines and migrate their users, not due to consumers just voluntarily giving them up. The big boys have been pushing mirrorless hard and their recent affordable DSLR options have been sort of pointless (have you tried to use the OVF on a recent Rebel? Why bother?)

With the two biggest camera makers both getting into the mirrorless market, that market is about to go through som major upheaval. It will be interesting to see how it play out.

I'll need lots of popcorn and a good comfy sofa.

[biz-engineer]

Without new DSLR models being released and equally promoted, it doesn't matter what customer demand, because DSLR will die of having been killed by camera makers allocating all R&D funds to develop camera system around new lens mounts. It's business driven, no demand driven.

[BigMackCam]

Without new DSLR models being released and equally promoted, it doesn't matter what customer demand, because DSLR will die of having been killed by camera makers allocating all R&D funds to develop camera system around new lens mounts. It's business driven, no demand driven.

True... But someone, I think (hopefully Ricoh) will continue to develop DSLRs. And, much as Leica has continued to develop rangefinders, there'll still be demand. At what level, who can say? But I'm pretty certain there'll be demand. Discussions on these very forums should tell us that...

[Wheatfield]

Wheatfield:

The fact that DSLR's are slowly going the way of the cassette deck or the VHS tape does not mean people are holding off on their discretionary spending: I think rather the discretionary spending has been routed into new purchases (I.e, $1,000 smart phones vs. 1,000 cameras). As an aside, I never thought camera purchases were discretionary to me. I consider my picture taking to be a serious hobby just as I don't consider golf clubs discretionary. However, a non-enthusiast or occasional picture snapper would consider an advanced DSLR of Mirrorless to be discretionary; If you meant the latter than I agree with you--a casual camera user is now investing in an ever better camera phone--fact of life. Ethusiasts and pros are all that remain of this market.

That may be, though for most people, a camera would be far more of a discretionary purchase than a 1k cell phone. DSLR sales are down, but so is every other category.
If you are in the position of having to choose between next month's rent and a new camera, then the camera is very much discretionary spending. The difference between discretionary spending and non discretionary spending is the difference between need and want.
You may think that a new camera is non discretionary spending, but all you are doing is jumping from want to need (something my wife says I am able to do faster than anyone she knows).
Let's face it, very few people really NEED a camera, and let's face it, not only does no one need a new set of golf clubs, no one needs a golf course. That is just about the epitome of discretionary spending.
What is going to hold people back from spending on non necessities is the very real possibility of ruinous inflation taking hold as leaders with no real grasp of economics continue to sabotage the world marketplace.

And with that, I must bid adieu to this thread.

---

Last edited by Wheatfield; 07-02-2019 at 07:09 PM.

[normhead]

Looking at the graph, the way things have gone the last four months, it certainly looks like DSLR sales may stay ahead of mirrorless for the near future. At some point that could change. But right now it's close enough to a 50/50 split it might be bit early to call in the final score.

DSLRs are pretty stubbornly hanging on to their lead. mirrorless have never had a lead and the whole fad thing about mirrorless appears to be pretty much over.

I wonder why people see mirrorless as happening thing, when they haven't even for quarter had more sales than DSLRs.

Not only that, the mirrorless line has pretty much held even since 2012. We aren't seeing mirrorless increase, we've seen DSLR sales drop. At this rate it will take mirrorless 6 years to sell as many bodies as DSLRs sold in 2014. Looking at the volumes under the lines since 2012, Even in 2017, DSLRs sold twice as much as Mirrorless. The future of mirrorless still depends in convincing the double the size DSLR user base to switch.

From the 2012 to present trees, Mirrorless isn't increasing. But DSLR have gone way down. With all due respect to the mirrorless champions, the fat lady hasn't sung and this isn't over. Given that the last little while Mirrorless and DSLR's have both pretty much mirrored each other's miserable performance, that the trend I see. The market goes up dan down, but so far DSLRs maintains the lead. And we're talking numbers over 7 years here. Mirrorless is no longer a new technology that can be expected to dramatically increase it's numbers. From here on in it looks like Mirrorless and DSLRs numbers will be pretty much lock step, and the large manufactures who had sales of 1million 6 a quarter are going to continue to be hammered by sales volumes 1/4 that.

The mirrorless makers not unlike Pentax, are in the position where they can make money just continuing to do what they've been doing. Their sales have been remarkably steady. The DSLR free fall from the last 7 years appears to be ended for the moment. I suspect Canon and Nikon are the companies looking at desperate times. They could claim 100% market share, and still only have 1/4 the sales they had in 2013.

[RobA_Oz]

The sales graph provides interesting detail in a number of areas (including pre-Christmas and EOFY sales bumps, for example) but the most interesting feature is that MILC sales have been pretty much unchanged over a six-year period, while DSLR sales have been steadily declining. Evidence for the often-trumpeted sales pitch from on-line boosters, to the effect that MILC growth is strong/growing/phenomenal (take your pick) is lacking in this presentation.

There’s undoubtedly a variety of vectors involved in all this, but I suspect that, as with the smart phone sales phenomenon, feature and performance plateaus are playing a significant, maybe a major part in the overall sales picture.

I don’t know how much of the sales decline is due to wariness about the economic outlook, but if people aren’t watching global affairs closely, and considering how to best protect their financial positions in the near-term then they’re probably going to be doing so soon.

[RGlasel]

I don’t know how much of the sales decline is due to wariness about the economic outlook

We don't have previous years data for China, but I think macroeconomics can be ignored in the case of standalone cameras. China is the only emerging country with enough camera business to justify a separate category in CIPA stats and there are signs that consumer confidence in China is definitely slowing down and may have reversed course. For consumers, the key economic factor is employment and people losing their jobs affects what they spend on transportation first, followed by decisions on upgrading housing (both buildings and the big ticket items inside their abodes) and special events (vacations, weddings). The employment picture in Japan, Europe and North America is generally positive. Consumer demand for electronic devices is stagnant because of non-economic factors like a lack of excitement from new products, a maturing customer base and dampened desire to show off new purchases.


The decline in camera sales is almost entirely the result of consumers who wanted to buy 5-10 years ago, no longer wanting to buy cameras and lenses. In fact, so many consumers have dropped out of the hunt for new cameras that general trends don't determine month to month changes, it is specific events like new model introductions or marketing campaigns by Canon, Nikon and Sony that move the needle for good or bad. The MILC business is almost entirely people who bought DSLRs some time ago and are looking for something different because they want to spend money on their hobby, but don't see the point of buying a new DSLR. Once those photographers have bought a MILC, the MILC business will drop faster than the DSLR business.

[mee]

The market is shrinking as the products mature, and people are rightfully concerned that the economic bullying that is being trumpled on the world is going to lead to a recession. It's no wonder people have closed their wallets to discretionary spending.

One man sees it as economic bullying being 'trumpled' (as you put it) on the world, another sees it as stemming the tide of factions rising power in the world that might do the west more harm than good long term.

Actually, the market could probably use a recession as it is overvalued in some places.. esp tech. And housing is outrageous.

There is a lot of photography out there, but how much documentation style photography? Lots of scenic places get a ton of exposure from instagram types taking artsy shots, but how many are doing ansel adams type work? And I don't mean the hyper saturated color and micro contrast stuff that is plastered everywhere, but careful shots with light (tasteful) post work?


Maybe as the popularity subsides in the consumer market, photography gets back to being photography and certain types of photography become more valued? I really like to see old photos of towns and points of interest, as well as candid shots of people out and and about and daily living. Not so much the artsy 3 flash posed stuff...

[RGlasel]

how many are doing ansel adams type work? And I don't mean the hyper saturated color and micro contrast stuff that is plastered everywhere, but careful shots with light (tasteful) post work?

If Ansel Adams was alive today and didn't have celebrity status, no one would buy his prints. You need to make your prints stand out in less than 1 second or people move on to something else. Today's consumer would look at Adams' work and think they could do the same.

[mee]

If Ansel Adams was alive today and didn't have celebrity status, no one would buy his prints. You need to make your prints stand out in less than 1 second or people move on to something else. Today's consumer would look at Adams' work and think they could do the same.

I'm not concerned about what is trendy or sells to the masses, but what is historical and meaningful to generations beyond ours.

I doubt someone 50 or 100 years from now will really care to see a hundred tarted up shots of a famous landmark. But they might want to see how it really was without so much makeup (and yet also high resolution, high quality that people aren't getting with their smartphones -- need a dedicated camera still!).

[MetalUndivided]

Since Nov. 2018 the lines have been pretty much in-sinc, with DSLRs having a slight edge. It's less than it used to be, but, no sign we are ever going to have a completely mirrorless camera market yet.

Wait until Canikon introduce entry level mirrorless and discontinue their entry level DSLR lines.

[monochrome]

Not to me, it ain't

1.48 BILLION Smartphones were sold in 2018, a decline of 5% from 2017. More than 1 in 8 human beings bought a Smartohone last year. I submit that defines a Smartphone as a necessity.

[biz-engineer]

I submit that defines a Smartphone as a necessity.

No. Most phones are sold for $1 bundled with a telecom operator subscription contract. Buying a phone separate from call and data contracts isn't as cost effective for the user. When switching contract, everyone can get a new phone for free so why not do it? If a camera was paid by call subscriptions, the camera market would be huge and people would change every 2 years for getting the latest in camera gizmo seemingly free of charge.

[swanlefitte]

Dslr has only 3 players,
Mirrorless has 7?
A quick look at bhphoto shows 29 pages of mirrorless cameras and packages and 14 pages for dslr.
You can see it both as business offering what the people want and also as people buy what business sells.
Still 7 companies divide up the mirrorless pie and 3 the dslr pie. Unless mirrorless is 2.33% bigger the smaller pie has bigger slices that can stand out from each other better.

[biz-engineer]

The funny thing is how corporations are completely directed by careless shareholders and how inconsiderate they are for customers, and employees. Fooling customers never work, companies just screw themselves by doing so. For any business to be healthy, the condition is to deliver products/services that solve customer problems, new mirror-less systems at increased prices don't solve any customer problem, they are just designed to pump more money out of less customers, and require more promotional spending. What camera makers are doing now isn't what successful companies are doing in other sectors: providing superior value to customers.