[eddie1960]

Compact system camera success story continues



,
b. 22% is not a whole lot, probably there was still a "massive increase" in DSLR sales so DSLR makers should not be concerned or anything,

22% is not a lot!! What planet are you from again . In market share terms companies are happy when they gain 1% and 2%. yes it was only the UK but it is an indicator, as is Japan. Any one I know in any area of retail would be over the moon with 22% year over year growth (i spent 25 years in consumer electronics myself) And this 22% ate someones lunch so to speak, it didn't materialize out of thin air. Some has definitely come from the point shoot market, but i imagine some is also coming from DSLR market potentials as well. This is not a new product category like Video was or for that matter DVD, but a new sub category of a relatively mature category camera sales, with a defined market size and primarily what happens is shifts in sub category buying patterns. As an example in the late 60's and 70's SLR sales exploded (and pentax really led the consumer market the whole time) Compact camera quality increased people tired of carrying the larger SLRS and from the mid 80's to the early part of the century Compact sales soared and SLR declined dramatically with the exception of the pro and enthusiast markets. This really continued in digital, but as compacts weren't capable of image quality as pricing dropped SLR made a comeback. now we are in another division of the market. For compact Phones will likely take over the lower end of the market for the most part, super zooms, advanced compact and MILC will take the middle and probably a good portion of the entry level interchangeable lens market as they will satisfy most peoples needs (1.5/2/2.5 x crop won't be as big an issue as we make it as a group of enthusiasts who have different needs) SLR will continue to serve the Mid high end of the market. Pentax needs to position themselves for the middle part of the market because at some point they will lose share in that volume category if they don't. whether they try and leverage the existing lens base or offer 2 options with something smaller is up to them (remember they own Kenko who announced that crazy little C mount system, I can see a 110 variant on that, and later a higher end that leverages our part of the market

[juu]

eddie1960, YOY growth was 160%, not 22%. I think I will let someone else respond on the rest of your points.

[eddie1960]

eddie1960, YOY growth was 160%, not 22%. I think I will let someone else respond on the rest of your points.

my bad 22% of the market is substantial, (what's pentax's share again?) 160 growth is huge. last time i saw those growth numbers was DVD when it dropped below $300 a unit. they stayed pretty high with DVD until the market was saturated but the most profitable year was probably the one that was the drop below $300 to the drop Below $200 where the growth in units was making up for the declining dollars in the race to the bottom
ILC of any sort won't race to that level IMHO, point shoots pretty much already have and like i said i can see phones replacing most of that market (look at how many daily pictures/users there are for androids and i phones on flickr. As some of the more sophisticated phones come on stream this will just increase (the lumix Panasonic for instance, or the LG with the Pentax lens, or the Sony)

I really like being part of an enthusiast community on this forum but sometimes I think we are blind to the mass market. we are not the mass market we are a subset who are more demanding. the mass market are snapshooters (it always was that's why brownies did so well 55+ years back)
Do I want to see a MILC that leverages my lenses. Yep. Do I think Pentax needs to issue one, no I think they need to leverage the market for small to draw new users to the brand, whether they release my ideal little camera or not. I'm not completely dedicated to one brand/idea and already run multiple cameras, for small if I have to I can look to others (like the Fuji X100 which really addresses most of what i want in small more than the m4/3 or nex's do at the moment. If I want to have a multi lens system I've already committed to a larger size, so small differences in the body size between a milc and my k7 won't grab me. but I know I'm not the target market. My wife on the other hand probably is which is the main reason i pay any attention to it at all as she is due for a new camera. That is why I would like one that utilizes my existing lens base so we can share lenses

[Aristophanes]

I've heard that worked wonders for the move from film to digital for many companies.

Actually, it did for most. As I've said many times before we live in the Golden Age of SLR. The # of DSLR units sold today is simply staggering compared to SLR sales 10 or 20 years ago:

Death Spiral of Serious Photography

If you are Canikon or even Pentax the last 10 years has seen an explosion of market activity from the dark days of the 1990's. The big losers in the transition to digital were Konica, Minolta, Bronica, Mamiya, and a few bit players who were in the SLR market. The rest who stuck it out have done pretty well.

The worst of the players (besides Minolta) has, quite frankly, been Olympus. 43 simply did not keep up with APS-C and was marginalized. m43 is an attempt to rescue 43. The focus on small form factor is well thought out, but in the long run those who prefer better sensor IQ and backwards compatibility will look elsewhere, even at the expense of weight. The last decade's worth of stellar DSLR and lens sales bodes well for continuity of lens mounts and compatibility.

Right now m43 polls well due to being first to market. But when the APS-C offerings from Canon, Nikon, Sony, and probably Pentax jump in, and perhaps bracket with a MILC at 2.5-7x, then it will be a dogfight not at all dissimilar to the original sensor format dogfight, which 43 lost.

[uccemebug]

22% is not a lot!! What planet are you from again

I think the list of "suggested responses" was a tad facetious. ;^) I like your analysis of past and present breakdown.

Customers who simply want a small system and either don't have a full size system or don't care about compatibility? This is the least compelling argument for me. Those customers already have an ever increasing list of options. To expend resources just to join an ever more crowded market space, and to wait this long to do so seems well, stupid.

It's madness. None of the options seems to add up at first evaluation; whatever Hoya does now, they carry risk. We certainly are living in interesting times.

In any case, they'll do what they do. And I'm sure they have access to all kinds of data and expertise far beyond anything here.

Let's hope so! :^D

CSC sales in Japan accounted for one third of all changeable lens cameras sold during December

Very, very impressive. Having observed the buying habits in Tokyo over the past five years, I'd bet that December sales are as large a proportion of sales in that country as they would be in the west. You don't want to be anywhere near a Bic or Yodobashi camera that month....

[Aristophanes]

Very, very impressive. Having observed the buying habits in Tokyo over the past five years, I'd bet that December sales are as large a proportion of sales in that country as they would be in the west. You don't want to be anywhere near a Bic or Yodobashi camera that month....

What's interesting about Japanese sales data is the sheer volume of cameras sold, and the fact that some end-of-cycle products like the Nikon D90 still command amazing sell-through #'s.

Put it together and you see the exact same trend experienced since the late 1960's in cameras: people own both an SLR and a smaller unit. I suspect a very large # of mirrorless sales are as 2nd units for those same D90 buyers.

[eddie1960]

nice link, pretty much sums up what i saw in retail. digital did bring back the SLR, but I still think it is a limited market. the population worldwide now versus 81 considerably larger so the larger number of dslr users is no surprise ( population in 81 was a shade over 4.5 billion, this year it is forecast to pass 7 billion)
as a share of the total camera market including cell phone cameras (the new disposable I think) it probably won't be much different once market saturation hits
the advent of good small affordable cameras killed the need for big slrs for the majority. the computer like marketing due to sensor improvements will eventually hit a wall due to law of diminishing returns (really with sensors like the one in the K5 we are fast approaching that, at some point even the lowest cost cameras will have sensors capable of outperforming our needs, for many this may already be true. Excluding the exotic MF and large format markets where there is a lot of room for development there is a limited time before in the SLR world apsc and 4/3 and all sensors less than FF become redundant. Apsc and 4/3 will end up relegated to entry level cameras most likely of the MILC variety (probably with very good video features) interspersed with some super-zoom and quality fixed lens models, based on historical buying patterns. i could also see the rapid death of the consumer video camera as the MILC video improves and becomes more user friendly with decent AF (yes I know that MF is the way serious videographer shoot, but mom and pop want easy not complicated

I Lived through the first SLR boom and remember watching it fall apart while i was in retail. I can see it happening again for the same reasons it did the first time. Only difference is the numbers are bigger all round now as the population is as well.

I think a 2 MILC system is pentax's best chance of retaining and growing over all market share. the kenko type idea will appeal to the size concious consumer and the apsc version cna be targeted at the current entry level slr clients, with a path to SLR through lens compatability

[juu]

Actually, it did for most.

It seems you've somewhat missed the point I was making, and have simply used this as an opportunity to switch to the only tune you play. Compare this to Kunzite, who did understand what I meant and made a decent counter-point.

As I've said many times before we live in the Golden Age of SLR.

Yep, and it will take a few years before it is clear to most people that this age is coming to an end. Some are slower than others.

m43 is an attempt to rescue 43.

I think everyone has given up on rescuing 43, including Olympus. m43 is a successful attempt of making a compact interchangeable lens system, and no longer needs 43. Labeling it as "attempt to rescue 4/3" is quite inaccurate.

The focus on small form factor is well thought out, but in the long run those who prefer better sensor IQ and backwards compatibility will look elsewhere, even at the expense of weight.

Yep, and there will be quite a few of them. And quite a few who will not.

Right now m43 polls well due to being first to market. But when the APS-C offerings from Canon, Nikon, Sony, and probably Pentax jump in, and perhaps bracket with a MILC at 2.5-7x, then it will be a dogfight not at all dissimilar to

Well, let's see.

Sony has already jumped in and has given m43 a fair fight. Still, based on the latest BCN rankings, it does not appear to be winning in Japan.

The rest haven't even announced any APS-C offerings. It may take them years and years to release them.

And Samsung is getting trounced, although they have released a decent lens roadmap.

So obviously it isn't and won't be a home run for any of the formats. But I think to write off m43 using the bizzare logic of "CF 2.5x good, CF 1.5x good, CF 2x bad" at a time when it is still the leading mirrorless format shows your bias.

the original sensor format dogfight, which 43 lost.

I'd think that 4/3 came to the fight late and was only really supported by Olympus (with a token Panasonic involvement). Also, the need to still have a prism/mirror assembly made the space savings moot.

All of these aspects are different in the case of m43.

[Pål Jensen]

22% is not a lot!! What planet are you from again . In market share terms companies are happy when they gain 1% and 2%. yes it was only the UK but it is an indicator, as is Japan. Any one I know in any area of retail would be over the moon with 22% year over year growth (i spent 25 years in consumer electronics myself) And this 22% ate someones lunch so to speak, it didn't materialize out of thin air. Some has definitely come from the point shoot market, but i imagine some is also coming from DSLR market potentials as well.

They are stealing sales from P&S's. DSLR continues to increase in sales. Thats why Canon and Nikon is not that interested so far....

[Aristophanes]

My comment on eddie1960's comments are:

1) Market saturation now takes far longer than it did way back when because the developing world's middle class is nascent and so much bigger.

2) The market may be limited, but display tech is getting larger, so while the average SLR viewer was still looking at 4x6, with a glossy magazine being "high" fidelity, today we process on 21" monitors and will increasingly view on 50" backlit LEDs'. That 3MP cameraphone pic is not going on that display, so the demand for IQ will be there in parallel ascendancy.

3) There is a law of diminishing returns and we have hit it with regards to how many optics are outresolved by sensors. This favours bigger sensors, but it will be in the long run (7-10 years). It's no accident that all Sony's NEX and A-Mount pellicle cameras can accommodate FF.

4) I see MILC challengin bridge cameras, and EVIL challenging DSLR, except the higher-end models where OVF and phase detect still rule. There will be a lot of concurrent trends for awhile. The sunk cost DSLR at $375 kit will outsell the MILC at $500 in those new markets of the middle class where price point is everything. The Japanese buy multiple cameras; the new middle class Brazilian will buy one.

5) I hope beyond hope that someone makes an affordable rangefinder digital option to Leica. It may be the best way pf preserving the OVF.

[Aristophanes]

The rest haven't even announced any APS-C offerings. It may take them years and years to release them.

And Samsung is getting trounced, although they have released a decent lens roadmap.

So obviously it isn't and won't be a home run for any of the formats. But I think to write off m43 using the bizzare logic of "CF 2.5x good, CF 1.5x good, CF 2x bad" at a time when it is still the leading mirrorless format shows your bias.

I'd think that 4/3 came to the fight late and was only really supported by Olympus (with a token Panasonic involvement). Also, the need to still have a prism/mirror assembly made the space savings moot.

All of these aspects are different in the case of m43.

43 was developed by Olympus and Kodak a decade ago. It was not "late". It came about at the exact same time as the DSLR market took off and was an attempt in part to compete on price since the sensor was the single largest cost.

They did the exact same thing with Fuji and the xD card technology. How'd that turn out?

It never helped that 43 was inferior...and still is, to a larger sensor.

And I think we'll be hearing from Canikon and Pentax very soon now.

1.5x better than 2x
2x better than 2.5x

But if you're making a 2.5x and a 1.5x and an MF or FF spreading the love around multiple sales lines, market channels and price points...and the other guy has all his eggs in 2x.....

...the 2x guy is counting on everyone to rally around a single body and lens mount. The other guys get to sell multiple units and diversify if the market so chooses.

That makes Mr. 2x not a "standard" but a niche as the camera market history has shown a propensity for diversity.

And back to he OP, not a route Pentax should go. I'll take a variety of sensors and bodies from Pentax rather than a single inferior sensor compared to the status quo, TYVM.

[eddie1960]

My comment on eddie1960's comments are:

1) Market saturation now takes far longer than it did way back when because the developing world's middle class is nascent and so much bigger.

2) The market may be limited, but display tech is getting larger, so while the average SLR viewer was still looking at 4x6, with a glossy magazine being "high" fidelity, today we process on 21" monitors and will increasingly view on 50" backlit LEDs'. That 3MP cameraphone pic is not going on that display, so the demand for IQ will be there in parallel ascendancy.

3) There is a law of diminishing returns and we have hit it with regards to how many optics are outresolved by sensors. This favours bigger sensors, but it will be in the long run (7-10 years). It's no accident that all Sony's NEX and A-Mount pellicle cameras can accommodate FF.

4) I see MILC challengin bridge cameras, and EVIL challenging DSLR, except the higher-end models where OVF and phase detect still rule. There will be a lot of concurrent trends for awhile. The sunk cost DSLR at $375 kit will outsell the MILC at $500 in those new markets of the middle class where price point is everything. The Japanese buy multiple cameras; the new middle class Brazilian will buy one.

5) I hope beyond hope that someone makes an affordable rangefinder digital option to Leica. It may be the best way pf preserving the OVF.

reponses
1- yes there are more emerging markets, but saturation will come and percentages aren't based on population numbers or sales units. When i was measured for performance in retail it was % that counted not $.

2. i never said camera phones would be 3 MP they won't there are already 8mp and larger on or near market. no reason phone sensors can't improve like all the other sensors have

3. I doubt at the current rate of development it will take 7-10 years for bigger sensors to become predominant, i would say 5 years is more realistic

4. the sunk cost marketing works for short term, but is short sited when the market is in the midst of change. older tech will continue to be sold into emerging markets, but not always by the big players. go to the right market and you can still buy a picture tube television in 3rd world markets, but it's been about 4 years since they were completely abandoned in north america, and the big names no longer make them

5 - so do i but i'm not holding my breath for this to happen. it's been several decades since RF commanded anything but a sliver of the market, and operationally they are much more complex to manufacture than SLRs. the only people with a vested interest in the market who don't have a digital are Bessa and Zeiss, neither of whom i see making one without some major assistance from another partner (like the epson was) and Fuji is the most viable for that, less so now that they have the x100 system developed

[Pål Jensen]

reponses
3. I doubt at the current rate of development it will take 7-10 years for bigger sensors to become predominant, i would say 5 years is more realistic

I doubt larger sensor ever will become predominant. If anything, the mass market will gravitate towards smaller sensors.

[juu]

today we process on 21" monitors and will increasingly view on 50" backlit LEDs'.

Actually, the maximum resolution used at least somewhat commonly doesn't appear to have changed for a few years now, it is still WUXGA with a very rare WQXGA (and 1080p for TVs). What's a nice monitor I could buy for £1000 in 2008? A WQXGA. In 2011? Still a WQXGA. What resolution does it have? 4 MP. Not a whole lot really.

The average 21'' monitor and HD TV is actually 1920 x 1080 for a whopping 2 MP!

If that's your argument for the need for higher and higher resolution pictures, you need to rethink it.

3) There is a law of diminishing returns

Exactly, of how many MP is enough for most intents and purposes. Once we reach those MP at an acceptable IQ, it will be "good enough" for most people, and the competition may start on camera/lens weight/size. Many would argue we've already reached that point

[Aristophanes]

Exactly, of how many MP is enough for most intents and purposes. Once we reach those MPix at an acceptable IQ, it will be "good enough" for most people, and the competition may start on camera/lens weight/size. Many would argue we've already reached that point

You can go ahead and buy "good enough". Looks like you already have. Maybe your photos are "good enough", too. Mine are precious. I like them excellent, like a Limited lens.

So you go ahead, stand on the soapbox and speak to the "good enough" of a downgrade to the inferior m43 sensor format for Pentaxians so they can be like "most people".

I can see Pentax's marketing for its MILC: Good enough for most people