[NickLarsson]

http://www.43rumors.com/mirrorless-sales-in-eu-and-usa-doing-pretty-bad/

[Asahiflex]

So now Pentax seems to be the smartest of the bunch. No wonder the K-01's production was stopped.

[Uluru]

Mirrorless sales in EU and USA doing pretty bad. | 43 Rumors

Stats from the link say this:

• Oversaturated markets
• EU and Americas in the economic state of general prolapse
• Smartphone effect taken full scale
• No, people don't need to buy new cameras every year; nor every 2 years; nor every 3 years.
• Most interesting numbers — that of Asia together with Japan, where 3/4 of world's population live — are missing.

So the picture is fairly incomplete to say what is happening globally indeed.

[Mistral75]

Stats from the link say this:

• Oversaturated markets
• EU and Americas in the economic state of general prolapse
• Smartphone effect taken full scale
• No, people don't need to buy new cameras every year; nor every 2 years; nor every 3 years.
• Most interesting numbers — that of Asia together with Japan, where 3/4 of world's population live — are missing.

So the picture is fairly incomplete to say what is happening globally indeed.

Here is the complete picture:

- bodies: http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201304_e.pdf
- lenses: http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/s-201304_e.pdf

---

Last edited by Parallax; 06-17-2013 at 05:02 AM.

[Aristophanes]

Here is the complete picture:

- bodies: http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201304_e.pdf
- lenses: http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/s-201304_e.pdf

Translation:

1) Europe and the Americas love their DSLRs and are lukewarm towards mirrorless.

2) The Japanese like all sorts of cameras and are, in fact, obsessed with cameras and buy everything under the sun.

3) Asia and elsewhere like mirrorless but not as much as DSLR's, through mirrorless is increasingly popular there, probably due to price, video, and the lack of PC's (digital darkroom).

4) If you go back and look at earlier sales figures the whole market growth is slowing (saturation) and P&S are being completely engulfed by smartphones.

[falconeye]

Translation:

Pretty much agree.

Question is what draws people into mirrorless.

Another indication is the relative success of the Nikon 1 system.


I assume that the price difference between mirrorless and entry SLR is too small to make people prefer mirrorless based on price. And a mirrorless does less any entry SLR does.

So, this leaves the form factor as a reason to buy mirrorless. I wonder if many just use their smartphone camera anyway, so mobility isn't that big of an issue anymore.

Mirrorless may be interesting for us as a second system.

But it may not be that interesting as a second system to smartphone users.

So, the smartphone wave makes SLRs look a more unique market proposition. Even though they may be considered dinosaurs


Speaking for myself, I use my 808 Pureview on the road and grab my SLR when I want to do some more serious shooting. I don't see where exactly a mirrorless does fit here.

[kenafein]

Pretty much agree.

Question is what draws people into mirrorless.

Another indication is the relative success of the Nikon 1 system.


I assume that the price difference between mirrorless and entry SLR is too small to make people prefer mirrorless based on price. And a mirrorless does less any entry SLR does.

So, this leaves the form factor as a reason to buy mirrorless. I wonder if many just use their smartphone camera anyway, so mobility isn't that big of an issue anymore.

Mirrorless may be interesting for us as a second system.

But it may not be that interesting as a second system to smartphone users.

So, the smartphone wave makes SLRs look a more unique market proposition. Even though they may be considered dinosaurs


Speaking for myself, I use my 808 Pureview on the road and grab my SLR when I want to do some more serious shooting. I don't see where exactly a mirrorless does fit here.

I think there is a perception, which is hard to overcome, that a DSLR is a real camera and a mirror-less is not. A mirror-less camera is perceived as less than a DSLR from the beginning, even though my NEX 6 is just as good as my K-r was and is, in many ways, better than my K-5. I got into the NEX system for legacy glass; and that's, obvioulsy, a niche market. I still think mirror-less is the future, but look how long it took Americans to give up their gigantic gas-guzzling cars.

Mirror-less cameras, as a whole, are too expensive, too. When you are trying to sell to a market that already perceives your product as lesser to any DSLR(real camera), you can't charge more for it.

---

Last edited by kenafein; 06-17-2013 at 12:54 PM.

[Aristophanes]

I think the reason why developing nations like mirrorless is:

1) Price (I have seen m43 kits for $250 and Nikon 1 series at Wal-Mart for $180...Canadian $'s)
2) More networked
3) Better in-camera functions/editing for the non-PC market
4) Form factor
5) Second system

I think the market appeal of a DSLR is:

1) It's a "real" camera (first system)
2) Huge ecosystem (even Pentax)
3) Performance, esp. AF speed and sensor size and controls
4) Better IQ
5) Value

The Fuji X-system is an interesting hybrid. Higher price than the norm of mirrorless, but a true "real" system with excellent IQ and close-enough performance. The OM-D 5 I have been told is a poor seller, I think partly because the price begs looking at a "real" DSLR despite the size penalty.

I think the real appeal of mirrorless is that they are superior to a cameraphone in many respects (IQ, performance) but, even more importantly, many of them are more capable at in-camera editing and networking without a PC intermediary. By far most consumers in the developing world do not have, and never will have, a PC. In that case, mirrorless is the only choice; and DSLR's need to get some of that functionality into the camera, particularly networking. We see that with the K-30 and the filters/effects, and now with the K-50 with Eye-Fi heightened capabilities, but they have further to go.

[cali92rs]

I think there is a perception, which is hard to overcome, that a DSLR is a real camera, and a mirror-less is not. A mirror-less camera is perceived as less than a DSLR from the beginning, even though my NEX 6 is just as good as my K-r was and is, in many ways, better than my K-5. I got into the NEX system for legacy glass, and that's, obvioulsy, a niche market. I still think mirror-less is the future, but look how long it took Americans to give up their gigantic gas-guzzling cars.

Mirror-less cameras, as a whole, are too expensive, too. When you are trying to sell to a market that already perceives your product as lesser to any DSLR(real camera), you can't charge more for it.

Good point, and I would like to add that a lot of mirrorless cameras are better at taking pictures than most users can take advantage of anyway. So why not choose a cheaper, smaller camera?
Now, of course there is gray area. The Nikon V2 and the OM-D for example, seem way out of bed when it comes from a price/performance standpoint. But there are cheaper micro 4/3 options that offer more flexibility and performance than most users need at a cost AND size that is more attractive than entry level DSLRs.

[falconeye]

3) Better in-camera functions/editing for the non-PC market
...
even more importantly, many of them are more capable at in-camera editing and networking without a PC intermediary. By far most consumers in the developing world do not have, and never will have, a PC.

Aristophanes, you said so on several occasions now and I am curious.

I would have assumed that any ILC is a luxury good in the developing word, i.e., only common for the richer part of it.

But I would assume at the same time, that purchase of a tablet or notebook would always come first, well before any ILC. And a smartphone would come before any ILC too (as it has the required camera function). Order of purchases should roughly mimic that of our kids, I guess.

So, I would not think in-camera editing and networking is a point of consideration for ILCs, for any part of the world.

Do you have any sources you can share to better assert your point of view?

[kenafein]

I think the reason why developing nations like mirrorless is:

1) Price (I have seen m43 kits for $250 and Nikon 1 series at Wal-Mart for $180...Canadian $'s)
2) More networked
3) Better in-camera functions/editing for the non-PC market
4) Form factor
5) Second system

I think the market appeal of a DSLR is:

1) It's a "real" camera (first system)
2) Huge ecosystem (even Pentax)
3) Performance, esp. AF speed and sensor size and controls
4) Better IQ
5) Value

The Fuji X-system is an interesting hybrid. Higher price than the norm of mirrorless, but a true "real" system with excellent IQ and close-enough performance. The OM-D 5 I have been told is a poor seller, I think partly because the price begs looking at a "real" DSLR despite the size penalty.

I think the real appeal of mirrorless is that they are superior to a cameraphone in many respects (IQ, performance) but, even more importantly, many of them are more capable at in-camera editing and networking without a PC intermediary. By far most consumers in the developing world do not have, and never will have, a PC. In that case, mirrorless is the only choice; and DSLR's need to get some of that functionality into the camera, particularly networking. We see that with the K-30 and the filters/effects, and now with the K-50 with Eye-Fi heightened capabilities, but they have further to go.

My friend's D5100 has a dizzying amount of in camera editing options. They missed wifi in the 5200, though there is an optional adapter. I bet they'll have it in the 5300. I expect Sony's new line of, DSLR form factored, mirror-less cameras to take full advantage of their wifi and playmemories features from the NEX(hopefully greatly improved).

[monochrome]

Does the wife know that (1) she's considered camera gear [presumably akin to an old camera bag - not that I would call your wife an old bag, mind you, but I assume for carrying your gear when not in use] and, more importantly, (2) that you consider that bringing her along on your vacation is overkill?

Did I forget to mention that it is her house?

I bought a Eye-Fi Mobi for her Q and a Eye-Fi Pro x2 for mine. And she's not my old bag, but I am certainly her old man,.

[tclausen]

Did I forget to mention that it is her house?

I bought a Eye-Fi Mobi for her Q and a Eye-Fi Pro x2 for mine. And she's not my old bag, but I am certainly her old man,.

Oh dear, are you in trouble

[RonHendriks1966]

I think the reason why developing nations like mirrorless is:

1) Price (I have seen m43 kits for $250 and Nikon 1 series at Wal-Mart for $180...Canadian $'s)
2) More networked
3) Better in-camera functions/editing for the non-PC market
4) Form factor
5) Second system

I think the market appeal of a DSLR is:

1) It's a "real" camera (first system)
2) Huge ecosystem (even Pentax)
3) Performance, esp. AF speed and sensor size and controls
4) Better IQ
5) Value

The Fuji X-system is an interesting hybrid. Higher price than the norm of mirrorless, but a true "real" system with excellent IQ and close-enough performance. The OM-D 5 I have been told is a poor seller, I think partly because the price begs looking at a "real" DSLR despite the size penalty.

I think the real appeal of mirrorless is that they are superior to a cameraphone in many respects (IQ, performance) but, even more importantly, many of them are more capable at in-camera editing and networking without a PC intermediary. By far most consumers in the developing world do not have, and never will have, a PC. In that case, mirrorless is the only choice; and DSLR's need to get some of that functionality into the camera, particularly networking. We see that with the K-30 and the filters/effects, and now with the K-50 with Eye-Fi heightened capabilities, but they have further to go.

The fun part in this is that I live in the more developed part off the world and next week I have an image in a magazine that comes straight out off my K-01 and is made from RAW with one off the color-filters. So I have to agree with you on this one.

My sister in law has a Olympus E-PL1 and she loves all those filters in the artistic way. She makes jpg's only.

[philbaum]

As to the comment that mirrorless are being priced too high, I think that will change.

Mirrorless are like any other new product format. Someone has to pay for the initial engineering and planning that goes into it. Generally, companies are going to want a product to carry its own overhead costs. I would expect that there is a lot of money currently being invested into reducing AF times for mirrorless. Someone has to pay for that.

As mirrorless products become more refined and formulaic, then expect prices to fall. If miirorless cameras, ilc, cannot be produced for less than DSLRs, then they probably deserve to go away.