[Winder]

The way i read the report, Jan 2015 shows more decline for compact systems than for DSLRs. The total value shipped for DSLRs in Jan was up 8.8% and down 21% for MILC. And several other numbers were similar for units also. Declines for DSLRs in many cases, but WORSE declines for MILC.

There is a problem with using yearly numbers for comparison. Product cycles are not yearly. 2012 saw the release of the Fuji X-Pro 1, Olympus OMD-EM5, and Sony NEX-7. That was a big year for mirrorless. Photokina only happens every 2 years and those years see the launch of more new product and higher sales going into the holidays. What is the average growth/decline over a 4-6 year period?

[Zygonyx]

Growth rate of mirrorless units sold has been 75-80% lower than expected btw 2010 and 2014, on a yearly basis.
This, plus the figures shown by CIPA = -21% for shipped ML in jan-jan2014-15 / previous year, make somebody understand that mirrorless are definitely no far west.

[mecrox]

Growth rate of mirrorless units sold has been 75-80% lower than expected btw 2010 and 2014, on a yearly basis.
This, plus the figures shown by CIPA = -21% for shipped ML in jan-jan2014-15 / previous year, make somebody understand that mirrorless are definitely no far west.

One needs to look at long-term trends for these figures to mean a thing, imho. One month is certainly no indication of anything much in the second example you quote. I wonder who did the expecting in the first example you mention? They must be feeling a little embarrassed by now. However, the CIPA stats over the past few years do show pretty clearly than the camera biz overall is contracting and changing no matter how the individual segments break down. Personally I think mirrorless cameras - a very broad church when stated like that, admittedly - are here to stay and will grow in importance, but that's just my 2 cents. Bear in mind that camera-makers complicate the picture by playing the stats, at least according to Tom Hogan, packing the market to get their figures up just before the annual reports are due even if in reality a chunk of the stuff will end up on shelves for years or being almost given away. So the stats don't really tell us the one thing which really does count: what actually sells and at what price too. Without profits, the companies are all foobared no matter what the shipment figures are.

[Winder]

Growth rate of mirrorless units sold has been 75-80% lower than expected btw 2010 and 2014, on a yearly basis.
This, plus the figures shown by CIPA = -21% for shipped ML in jan-jan2014-15 / previous year, make somebody understand that mirrorless are definitely no far west.

What was the expected growth rate of mirrorless from 2010 - 2014? Where are you getting that data?
What was the actual growth rate of mirrorless from 2010-2014?
What was the actual growth rate of DSLRs from 2010 - 2014?

[clackers]

We can see how IDC bought into the hype, big time:


Digital Imaging: An IDC Estimate Misses the Mark : Stephen E. Arnold @ Beyond Search

[osv]

This is not a matter of OVF versus EVF : live view is always available if you need it, on DSLR with OVF.

lcds are useless outdoors, and even at night, it's no comparison to an evf, because it's a low-rez lcd vs. a higher-rez oled screen.

and do you really think that you can run around shooting a dslr like it's a smartphone, holding it away from your face so that you can see the rear lcd? please.

---------- Post added 03-18-2015 at 08:16 PM ----------

Is Canon really taking "such a beating"? Canon at least is turning a profit, while the mirrorless companies continue to lose money.

it's funny how you keep repeating the same false information over and over again... your post from 2/8/2015:

Through poor management, mirrorless companies (particularly Olympus and Sony) have lost millions of dollars developing their mirrorless systems, and now find themselves cash poor and vulnerable to any severe economic shock.

"Sony’s shares have doubled in value over the past year and are among the top performers on the Tokyo Stock Exchange"
Sony shares post biggest daily gain in nine years after upgrading outlook | NewsDaily

"Sony Shares Surge After Best Quarterly Profit in 7 Years
Sony will boost the output capacity of image sensors by 33 percent to 80,000 wafers by the end of June 2016, the company said Monday. It’s also shifting 220 employees involved in the development and production of chips for gaming consoles to the image sensor business and other operations.

The company gained a competitive advantage after switching to a technology known as complementary metal-oxide semiconductors, or CMOS. The sensors help record images in low light or with strong backlight, boosting the quality of pictures from smartphone and car cameras.

The electronics company expects camera modules and sensors to generate about 63 percent of its device unit revenue in the year ending March 2018, it said in November.

Full-year operating income from games is forecast to reach 40 billion yen, while weakness in the Japanese yen will help the imaging-products division post earnings of 53 billion yen even as digital-cameras sales slide."
Sony Shares Surge

So the imaging division made a ¥53 billion operating income...


Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/137-photographic-industry-professionals/2...#ixzz3UnWiGuLg

---------- Post added 03-18-2015 at 08:17 PM ----------

Growth rate of mirrorless units sold has been 75-80% lower than expected btw 2010 and 2014, on a yearly basis.
This, plus the figures shown by CIPA = -21% for shipped ML in jan-jan2014-15 / previous year, make somebody understand that mirrorless are definitely no far west.

"DSLR vs. Mirrorless 2013-2014: NO drop in mirrorless produced & 24% drop in DSLR produced in 2014"

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/137-photographic-industry-professionals/2...#ixzz3UnX7jEDD

[Uluru]

l... NO drop in mirrorless produced & 24% drop in DSLR produced in 2014"

Do you understand that is why they bleed in losses?
They are flooding the market with mirrorless rubbish to show nice output numbers, but the balance sheets are red like blood.

On the other hand, even Nikon realised they must be smarter than that, and are adjusting production numbers to lower volumes.
But mirrorless guys aren't doing that. They keep the illusion that everything is better than it is.

[osv]

Do you understand that is why they bleed in losses?
They are flooding the market with mirrorless plastic to show nice output numbers, but the balance sheets are red like blood.

overproduction of a product will not improve the sales numbers... wait, you think that it's going to actually fool the stockholders into not seeing lower sales volume?

i rather doubt that.

On the other hand, even Nikon realised they must be smarter than that, and are adjusting production numbers to lower volumes.

dslr companies lowered production numbers because their percentage of sales was dismal last year, it fell by a bigger percentage than mirrorless sales did.

think "overstock", and dumping product to compensate for lost sales.

[reh321]

@Kunzite and RonHenricks:

The way i read the report, Jan 2015 shows more decline for compact systems than for DSLRs. The total value shipped for DSLRs in Jan was up 8.8% and down 21% for MILC. And several other numbers were similar for units also. Declines for DSLRs in many cases, but WORSE declines for MILC.

First time i've seen worse trend for MILC than DSLRs over the last year. Perhaps a one time correction or perhaps products are now correctly positioned for their normal demand. 2015 could be an interesting year.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201501_e.pdf

I plowed through the past three years of that data,
entered monthly shipments into a spreadsheet,
calculated percentage of ILC shipments that are DSLR cameras,
and plotted the results.

Frankly, I was surprised by the results, which seem to show that DSLR shipments have been a fairly constant percentage of all ILC shipments during that time.

Note:
October 2013 is the last month in which DSLR shipments were at least 80% of all ILC shipments.
Before that month, DSLR shipments averaged 81% of all ILC shipments.
After that month, DSLR shipments averaged 76% of all ILC shipments,
so there does appear to be a slight change at around that point.

[Winder]

Do you understand that is why they bleed in losses?
They are flooding the market with mirrorless rubbish to show nice output numbers, but the balance sheets are red like blood.

Post a link to this bloody balance sheet.

Sony's camera division has been hurting because of A-mount and the implosion of the P&S market. Pentax moved to #3 in DSLR sales because Sony A-mount sales have sunk. The Sony A7 line however has sold much better than they expected. Sony has moved resources away from A-mount to mirrorless because of the falling DSLR sales. The A7R mark 2 is expected to be released in less than 2 months. The A7 line has been a huge success for Sony even with the pathetic native lens line-up.

The Fuji XT-1 is specifically listed in Fuji's 2014 financial report for its strong sales. It sold so well they produced a titanium edition that sold for a $200 premium. Companies don't make special edition premium models for cameras that don't sell well. Fuji's 2014 report says camera division was up 8% over 2013 even after the decrease in sales of P&S. Fuji cites strong sales from X-mount and instant cameras. After a .8 billion Yen loss in 2013 the imaging division was 3.6 billion Yen in the positive in 2014. Hardly bleeding.

Sony and Fuji APS-C and FF MILC represent direct competition for ASP-C and FF DSLRs. Olympus and Panasonic are not really direct competition. They laid the ground work for mirrorless, but because of the small sensor they aren't really able to compete directly. Panasonic focuses on HD and 4K video. Olympus targets a very unique niche of photographers. Both companies are struggling in the camera market and have been passed by Sony. Sony and Fuji MILC are the direct competitors of the DSLR. Both of those companies have done good job in gaining market share and pulling away DSLR buyers.

Lots of people here seem to understand that Pentax is probably not going to sell enough FF bodies and lenses in year one or year two to recover the initial R&D costs. It will take 5+ years to build the customer base and lens line up for FF to really be profitable. The same applies to new systems like the Sony A7 line and Fuji X-mount. Fuji has done an outstanding job of putting top quality glass on the market and growing its system. From 0% MILC market share to 8% in just a few years and they expect to double that over the next 2 years. Sony is in the first 2 years of the FE system. Its going to take a couple more years before they will have a decent lens system. In the next 3 years you are going to see big moves by Sony and Fuji.

[Kunzite]

Technically speaking, Sony abandoned DSLRs by 2011
Perhaps it was their failure to compete on the DSLR market - high ambitions, poor execution - that led to the move towards mirrorless? Perhaps they thought that if they launch 6-7 cameras a year, they would gain a lot of market share and were surprised when that didn't happened?

If that's how we're measuring, then the K-3 sold much better than the X-T1: Pentax made both a Limited Silver and a Prestige edition.
By the way, Fuji isn't exactly attributing their return to profitability to mirrorless; but I'll link to the report instead of offering my own interpretation:
http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/investors/annual_reports/2014/pack/pdf/RO...-Solutions.pdf
And - I have to say it - in Japan, Pentax is beating Fuji with the Q :naughty:

I'm not sure about those 5+ years of losses, do you have any data to support it? We're talking about expanding a 40-years mount into 35mm DSLR territory here, with an user base, with existing lenses - it's not like they'll be starting from scratch.

[Uluru]

Lots of people here seem to understand that Pentax is probably not going to sell enough FF bodies and lenses in year one or year two to recover the initial R&D costs. It will take 5+ years to build the customer base and lens line up for FF to really be profitable.

Yeah, same as they will never recover the cost or R&D by selling the 645Z for $8500, which is 1/3 of the price of their competitors.
Lots of nonsense around.
FF when it comes out, it's already been paid out for all R&D. How so?
Read Jim Malcolm's interview.

[RonHendriks1966]

Yeah, same as they will never recover the cost or R&D by selling the 645Z for $8500, which is 1/3 of the price of their competitors.
Lots of nonsense around.
FF when it comes out, it's already been paid out for all R&D. How so?
Read Jim Malcolm's interview.

Sharing technology over more platforms makes it cheaper. Lots of tech in the 645Z is also in the K-3 and will be later on in the lower tier K-mount camera's.

[Clavius]

For a company that's doing so terrible, Sony sure develops a lot of high end stuff. A7RII and additional lenses coming. Pro level FE mount camera also coming within months. Should we blame some magical dark forces of a wicked conspiracy? Come on, they know where the market is going. Jumping in fully (head first!) involves having some balls, making some investments and taking some beating. The reward is obvious: When the rest of the manufacturers finally start their reluctant change the pioneering manufacturers are already fully established, with full lens lineups, support, experience and they will have aquired a supportive usebase.

[Kunzite]

FF when it comes out, it's already been paid out for all R&D. How so?
Read Jim Malcolm's interview.

That's not true. There are many components which have to be specifically developed for the FF (new mirror+shutter mechanism, new SR, viewfinder), and even for what could be "common" components, I don't think they would reuse 2013-level technology.
And if you're talking about this interview...
Pentax President on Medium Format, Full Frame Future