2012 Japan sales of mirrorless & SLRs

Kunzite · 05-17-2013, 09:54 AM

About 5.8% of the Japanese ILC market did.

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 10:00 AM

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Hardly any difference until you look at the sensor size where the Nikon trumps big time.

Oh, yeah! the price:

Nikon J2:

Nikon 1 J2 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm VR Zoom 27572

Pentax Q10:

Pentax Q10 Compact Digital Interchangeable Lens Camera 12161 B&H

I will agree that the Q has a great traditional photographers design over the Nikon, but the Nikon 1 system has price parity and is a more robust system with a much bigger sensor, phenomenal AF, better low light performance, and now 3 bodies in production.

I think Sony and Nikon with the 1" format have totally taken Pentax, Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus by surprise on features and price, though I will admit the Nikon V2 looks like Frankencamera.

Oh...and I did the Q a favour by using the J2 and its mid-range price point. The J3 is smaller....than the Q (but 19% heavier):

http://camerasize.com/compare/#374,401

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

About 5.8% of the Japanese ILC market did.

Mirrorless sales only. Not DSLR's ILC as they are. I follow BCN, too:

http://bcnranking.jp/news/1212/121228_24511.html?pmc_id=2&order=1&sns_id=24511

5.8% with the smallest sensor is NOT going to chase down m43 and 1". Sorry. No horsepower.

Kunzite · 05-17-2013, 10:14 AM

My bad, I wanted to write "MILC".

**monochrome** · 05-17-2013, 10:15 AM

Oh dear. Pentax is doomed. Again.

And here I was just starting to feel good.

Damn.

mamethot · 05-17-2013, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

No one buys "small". Marketing myth. They buy value and performance. The Q has neither.

I bought the Q because of its size when the price dropped. So you are partly right ;-)

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by mamethot

I bought the Q because of its size when the price dropped. So you are partly right ;-)

You got half a sensor. Good for you

cfraz · 05-17-2013, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Oh dear. Pentax is doomed. Again.

And here I was just starting to feel good.

Damn.

Don't let those comments get you down. Different folks have different criteria for judging value. Remember your antagonist here was the one who vehemently argued the Big Mac is the world's best hamburger because it sold the most units. I'm not an economist and I don't care a bit how many they've sold. My value criterion for burgers is taste.

The Q sub forum is chock full of comments like "I haven't had this much fun shooting in years." Apparently having the largest sensor isn't the only factor that brings satisfaction to photographers. I was certainly sceptical but after looking at many Q photos decided it might be ok. So for just over 200 bones I got my kit. And guess what? It is an incredibly fun camera for me. And there are tons of shooting situations and picture viewing scenarios where a 1 inch sensor stuffed in the Q would make zero perceptible difference in results. For other situations I have my K200D (yes, I know this just opens me up to more ridicule - there are cameras this size with bigger sensor).

I'm glad there are still companies making products not limited to a single most popular or most economically viable design criterion. The Q isn't for those who mostly talk about cameras, but for those who like to shoot it can be just the ticket.

jogiba · 05-17-2013, 11:44 AM

To say the Q sensor is too small is the same as telling someone that any wrench or socket under 6mm is not worth buying. The 5.5x crop has an advantage when using telephoto and macro lenses.

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 11:51 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jogiba

To say the Q sensor is too small is the same as telling someone that any wrench or socket under 6mm is not worth buying. The 5.5x crop has an advantage when using telephoto and macro lenses.

So the Q, a camera with 5.9% of the MILC market share, is pretty good at 10% of the photomilieu (just made that up), but worse than the other 90% of photos taken.

Niche of a niche. The whole point of an ILC system is to be very good in all segments of the photomilieu (really liking this word).

Each to their own, but the value proposition of the Q is weak.

Quicksand · 05-17-2013, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

You got half a sensor. Good for you

Arg. Stop trying to make the Q something it isn't.

It's a compact camera with interchangeable lenses. That's all! And it seems to take pictures that are quite nice, given the constraints.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. It really is that simple.

The sales figures suggest that it's doing pretty well in Japan -- so there's really no reason to begrudge Pentax for making the thing.

cali92rs · 05-17-2013, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Mistral75

As far as I have read, not for Japanese companies. Take a look at CIPA figures for the 1st quarter of 2013 compared to the 1st quarter of 2012 (these are the latest figures currently available) for total shipments worldwide:

Digital Still Cameras Total: minus 43.4% in volume (number of units sold) and minus 33.4% in value (turnover generated)
Cameras with Built-in Lens: minus 47.6% in volume and minus 44.8% in value
Single Lens Reflex Cameras: minus 33.2% in volume and minus 19.1% in value
Non-Reflex Cameras with Interchangeable Lens: minus 18.5% in volume and minus 17.9% in value
Interchangeable Lenses: minus 12.1% in volume but plus 9.1% in value (the "Lenses for 35mm format Cameras" segment is growing, the "Lenses for smaller than 35mm format Cameras" is shrinking)

Not particularly the most cheerful of reports.

Sources: CIPA reports; http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201303_e.pdf for cameras and http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/s-201303_e.pdf for lenses.

I think we have gotten to the point where cameras are good enough, and the changes are so small that it doesn't make much sense to rush out to buy the latest and greatest. Sure, you will buy a new camera when it breaks, but the incentive is to upgrade is just not there.

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 12:04 PM

Don't get me wrong, I think the Q is excellent design. It reeks of smart layout and controls. Takes a standard flash. I have fondled one a few times at Henry's (who, BTW, no longer keep them on shelf stock where I live).

But Nikon and Sony are getting the same form factor (or smaller!) with a much, much larger, more versatile sensor at nearly the same price point. In doing so they are making a sharp break between P&S digicam price and sensor size and new super-compacts (RX100) and MILC's (CX sensor). They are providing the basis for high-ISO shooting in a compact form while not treading on too far towards APS-C quality but certainly making a run at m43. The Q does neither. It's a system camera competing against point and shoot, which are themselves discovering an asteroid called smartphone hit.

**Aristophanes** · 05-17-2013, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by Quicksand

Arg. Stop trying to make the Q something it isn't.

It's a compact camera with interchangeable lenses. That's all! And it seems to take pictures that are quite nice, given the constraints.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. It really is that simple.

The sales figures suggest that it's doing pretty well in Japan -- so there's really no reason to begrudge Pentax for making the thing.

Sales figures are dismal. In fact, Pentax Japan has twice commented that sales are disappointing, and have gone to lengths, not normally seen in a Japanese camera company, of assuring the product.

That's often a sign there is trouble, saving face and all.

I didn't buy it. RX100 is tempting. Ricoh GR is more tempting. DA 15 is even more tempting.

Quicksand · 05-17-2013, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

DA 15 is even more tempting.

A crop DA? Enjoy your half a lens.

(Totally kidding. The 15 is favorite lens by far, and I also have the 43 and 77.)

05-17-2013, 10:00 AM	#227
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Compare camera dimensions side by side Hardly any difference until you look at the sensor size where the Nikon trumps big time. Oh, yeah! the price: Nikon J2: Nikon 1 J2 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm VR Zoom 27572 Pentax Q10: Pentax Q10 Compact Digital Interchangeable Lens Camera 12161 B&H I will agree that the Q has a great traditional photographers design over the Nikon, but the Nikon 1 system has price parity and is a more robust system with a much bigger sensor, phenomenal AF, better low light performance, and now 3 bodies in production. I think Sony and Nikon with the 1" format have totally taken Pentax, Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus by surprise on features and price, though I will admit the Nikon V2 looks like Frankencamera. Oh...and I did the Q a favour by using the J2 and its mid-range price point. The J3 is smaller....than the Q (but 19% heavier): http://camerasize.com/compare/#374,401 Last edited by Aristophanes; 05-17-2013 at 10:18 AM.

05-17-2013, 12:02 PM	#237
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Mistral75 As far as I have read, not for Japanese companies. Take a look at CIPA figures for the 1st quarter of 2013 compared to the 1st quarter of 2012 (these are the latest figures currently available) for total shipments worldwide: Digital Still Cameras Total: minus 43.4% in volume (number of units sold) and minus 33.4% in value (turnover generated) Cameras with Built-in Lens: minus 47.6% in volume and minus 44.8% in value Single Lens Reflex Cameras: minus 33.2% in volume and minus 19.1% in value Non-Reflex Cameras with Interchangeable Lens: minus 18.5% in volume and minus 17.9% in value Interchangeable Lenses: minus 12.1% in volume but plus 9.1% in value (the "Lenses for 35mm format Cameras" segment is growing, the "Lenses for smaller than 35mm format Cameras" is shrinking) Not particularly the most cheerful of reports. Sources: CIPA reports; http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201303_e.pdf for cameras and http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/s-201303_e.pdf for lenses. I think we have gotten to the point where cameras are good enough, and the changes are so small that it doesn't make much sense to rush out to buy the latest and greatest. Sure, you will buy a new camera when it breaks, but the incentive is to upgrade is just not there.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
BCN Mirrorless camera sales ranking for 2012	Christine Tham	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	01-04-2013 12:05 AM
2012 Camera Sales in Japan	JPT	Photographic Industry and Professionals	12	01-01-2013 06:14 AM
Pentax Q sales in Japan	Paul Ewins	Pentax Q	11	11-03-2012 05:34 AM
Quotes from a Sales Rep of Pentax (Japan)	leonsroar	Pentax News and Rumors	45	05-26-2012 04:04 AM
Sales of the K-x in Japan pushed back 17 days	creampuff	Pentax News and Rumors	13	10-11-2009 04:20 PM

05-17-2013, 09:54 AM	#226
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	About 5.8% of the Japanese ILC market did.

05-17-2013, 10:06 AM	#228
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Kunzite About 5.8% of the Japanese ILC market did. Mirrorless sales only. Not DSLR's ILC as they are. I follow BCN, too: http://bcnranking.jp/news/1212/121228_24511.html?pmc_id=2&order=1&sns_id=24511 5.8% with the smallest sensor is NOT going to chase down m43 and 1". Sorry. No horsepower.

05-17-2013, 10:14 AM	#229
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	My bad, I wanted to write "MILC".

05-17-2013, 10:15 AM	#230
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Oh dear. Pentax is doomed. Again. And here I was just starting to feel good. Damn.

05-17-2013, 11:18 AM	#231
mamethot Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Greater Montreal Area Posts: 736	Originally posted by Aristophanes No one buys "small". Marketing myth. They buy value and performance. The Q has neither. I bought the Q because of its size when the price dropped. So you are partly right ;-)

05-17-2013, 11:29 AM	#232
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by mamethot I bought the Q because of its size when the price dropped. So you are partly right ;-) You got half a sensor. Good for you

05-17-2013, 11:37 AM	#233
cfraz Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Oregon, USA Posts: 521	Originally posted by monochrome Oh dear. Pentax is doomed. Again. And here I was just starting to feel good. Damn. Don't let those comments get you down. Different folks have different criteria for judging value. Remember your antagonist here was the one who vehemently argued the Big Mac is the world's best hamburger because it sold the most units. I'm not an economist and I don't care a bit how many they've sold. My value criterion for burgers is taste. The Q sub forum is chock full of comments like "I haven't had this much fun shooting in years." Apparently having the largest sensor isn't the only factor that brings satisfaction to photographers. I was certainly sceptical but after looking at many Q photos decided it might be ok. So for just over 200 bones I got my kit. And guess what? It is an incredibly fun camera for me. And there are tons of shooting situations and picture viewing scenarios where a 1 inch sensor stuffed in the Q would make zero perceptible difference in results. For other situations I have my K200D (yes, I know this just opens me up to more ridicule - there are cameras this size with bigger sensor). I'm glad there are still companies making products not limited to a single most popular or most economically viable design criterion. The Q isn't for those who mostly talk about cameras, but for those who like to shoot it can be just the ticket.

05-17-2013, 11:44 AM	#234
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	To say the Q sensor is too small is the same as telling someone that any wrench or socket under 6mm is not worth buying. The 5.5x crop has an advantage when using telephoto and macro lenses.

05-17-2013, 11:51 AM - 1 Like	#235
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by jogiba To say the Q sensor is too small is the same as telling someone that any wrench or socket under 6mm is not worth buying. The 5.5x crop has an advantage when using telephoto and macro lenses. So the Q, a camera with 5.9% of the MILC market share, is pretty good at 10% of the photomilieu (just made that up), but worse than the other 90% of photos taken. Niche of a niche. The whole point of an ILC system is to be very good in all segments of the photomilieu (really liking this word). Each to their own, but the value proposition of the Q is weak.

05-17-2013, 11:58 AM	#236
Quicksand Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area) Posts: 1,519	Originally posted by Aristophanes You got half a sensor. Good for you Arg. Stop trying to make the Q something it isn't. It's a compact camera with interchangeable lenses. That's all! And it seems to take pictures that are quite nice, given the constraints. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It really is that simple. The sales figures suggest that it's doing pretty well in Japan -- so there's really no reason to begrudge Pentax for making the thing.

05-17-2013, 12:04 PM	#238
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Don't get me wrong, I think the Q is excellent design. It reeks of smart layout and controls. Takes a standard flash. I have fondled one a few times at Henry's (who, BTW, no longer keep them on shelf stock where I live). But Nikon and Sony are getting the same form factor (or smaller!) with a much, much larger, more versatile sensor at nearly the same price point. In doing so they are making a sharp break between P&S digicam price and sensor size and new super-compacts (RX100) and MILC's (CX sensor). They are providing the basis for high-ISO shooting in a compact form while not treading on too far towards APS-C quality but certainly making a run at m43. The Q does neither. It's a system camera competing against point and shoot, which are themselves discovering an asteroid called smartphone hit.

05-17-2013, 12:05 PM	#239
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Quicksand Arg. Stop trying to make the Q something it isn't. It's a compact camera with interchangeable lenses. That's all! And it seems to take pictures that are quite nice, given the constraints. If you don't like it, don't buy it. It really is that simple. The sales figures suggest that it's doing pretty well in Japan -- so there's really no reason to begrudge Pentax for making the thing. Sales figures are dismal. In fact, Pentax Japan has twice commented that sales are disappointing, and have gone to lengths, not normally seen in a Japanese camera company, of assuring the product. That's often a sign there is trouble, saving face and all. I didn't buy it. RX100 is tempting. Ricoh GR is more tempting. DA 15 is even more tempting.

05-17-2013, 12:12 PM	#240
Quicksand Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area) Posts: 1,519	Originally posted by Aristophanes DA 15 is even more tempting. A crop DA? Enjoy your half a lens. (Totally kidding. The 15 is favorite lens by far, and I also have the 43 and 77.)