[johnmflores]

"The first day of photokina 2010 in Cologne, Germany has wrapped up and here's what we haven't seen so far at the world's largest imaging show: no new Canon 1Ds Mark IV or 5D Mark III; no replacement for the Nikon D700 (D800?); no compact mirrorless camera surprises from either of the big two; no big surprises in the pro photography market in general.

And here's what we have seen: a raft of compact, prosumer digital SLRs and digital SLR wannabes from consumer electronics companies and smaller photography companies. To paraphrase Bob Dylan: 'Something's happening here and we might know what it is.'

Call it the rise of the prosumer, the era of the enthusiast, or the dawn of digital SLR lite; the latest wave of camera releases has a distinctly advanced amateur look and feel to them. In truth this has been happening for some time. Remember PMA 2009 when Panasonic, Sony and Samsung stole the show from their photographic rivals? Remember PMA 2010 where Canon didn't even bother to show up?

Both Canon and Nikon are here at the biennial photokina show but the only 'new' camera products they're showing (so far) are the already-announced enthusiast Canon EOS 60D digital SLR; and the slightly more advanced Nikon D7000, a follow-up up to the distinctly enthusiast Nikon D90 which was the first DSLR to shoot HD video. Notice a pattern here?

Pro cameras have never been much of big money makers for Canon and Nikon thanks to some extremely thin margins. In the past though, they have served as significant 'halo' products for their less expensive consumer models. But that was back when consumers didn't give much of a hoot about what company's name was on their 2MP blister-packed compact point-and-shoot. As long as it 'worked' and was relatively inexpensive, they were happy.

That's changed thanks, in part, to the success of cameras like the Canon 5D Mark II and Nikon D3. Regular folks and aspiring enthusiast/prosumers now know the names Canon and Nikon stand for quality in the digital camera world and they might even be aware of some of the models pros use.

The names they don't know as much, when it comes to serious photography, are Panasonic, Sony, and Samsung. And yes, many consumers might not even know Pentax very well and they certainly have little clue what a Sigma is.

Like it or not professional photographers, those are the companies really trying to assert themselves in the photography space these days and photokina 2010 is more proof of it."

More here on PDN: Photokina 2010 Day 1: The Incredible Shrinking Pro Camera Market

Are these the market dynamics that are discouraging Pentax from pursuing the pro market and their own FF? Discuss...

[CWyatt]

Interesting thoughts posted here John.

I'm not sure it's new that enthusiast-type cameras are to the fore, check out 'Canon EOS Digital SLR timeline' right at the bottom of this page: Canon EOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flagships tend to last about twice the length of time as the lower-end models.

The film SLR timeline is even more extreme: 3 pro models in 20 years, which of course won't happen with digital because the technology moves too fast.

I'd definitely assume you're right that the high-end isn't where Canon and Nikon make their profit. But of course to attract pros, or those that just want to use high end gear now or in the future, they need to retain the name of top camera manufacturer. Especially when now it's considered pretty normal to upgrade a body every few years. I doubt we'll see either Canon or Nikon falling behind each other in the high-end camera stakes.

I think one thing to add is that in the age of digital, the pro-end bodies are BIG and this would put a lot of people off. Not many people who aren't photojournalists or similar want to carry around 1D beast. Even the FF compacts - 5Ds and D700s are whoppers compared to the compact APS-C cameras like the K-7. This strikes me as one difference from pre-digital days, when pro level didn't necessary mean big. I think we might see more emphasis on keeping sizes under control.

Not sure what it means for Pentax. The R&D for full frame and a host of compatible lenses would be a major issue for a company that has a very small market share, and has just released the 645D as well. Sony is interesting - of course a different kind of player - but I'm not sure how their full-frames are going?

If Pentax releases a full frame M9-size, I'm buying it.

[stanleyk]

I think you might also be seeing some of the effects of the world economic situation. Not everyone has $2500 for a camera body these days. It would be hard to argue that the 645D is not a professional camera, but I think the likelihood of Pentax entering the Full Frame market anytime soon is not good. It

I would expect to see mirrorless cameras from Nikon and Canon soon though. That seems to be a growth market for camera sales. For some reason I can't explain I just don't see Pentax making a mirrorless camera. I think they will stick with small body ASP-C cameras.

[stanleyk]

Interesting thoughts posted here John.

I'm not sure it's new that enthusiast-type cameras are to the fore, check out 'Canon EOS Digital SLR timeline' right at the bottom of this page: Canon EOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flagships tend to last about twice the length of time as the lower-end models.

The film SLR timeline is even more extreme: 3 pro models in 20 years, which of course won't happen with digital because the technology moves too fast.

I'd definitely assume you're right that the high-end isn't where Canon and Nikon make their profit. But of course to attract pros, or those that just want to use high end gear now or in the future, they need to retain the name of top camera manufacturer. Especially when now it's considered pretty normal to upgrade a body every few years. I doubt we'll see either Canon or Nikon falling behind each other in the high-end camera stakes.

I think one thing to add is that in the age of digital, the pro-end bodies are BIG and this would put a lot of people off. Not many people who aren't photojournalists or similar want to carry around 1D beast. Even the FF compacts - 5Ds and D700s are whoppers compared to the compact APS-C cameras like the K-7. This strikes me as one difference from pre-digital days, when pro level didn't necessary mean big. I think we might see more emphasis on keeping sizes under control.

If Pentax releases a full frame M9 copy, I'm buying it.

Not sure what it means for Pentax. The R&D for full frame and a host of compatible lenses would be a major issue for a company that has a very small market share, and has just released the 645D as well. Sony is interesting - of course a different kind of player - but I'm not sure how their full-frames are going?

I think your are correct about the size of the cameras. On this I agree completely. That's the main reason I wouldn't buy one and love the E-P2.

[CWyatt]

I think your are correct about the size of the cameras. On this I agree completely. That's the main reason I wouldn't buy one and love the E-P2.

That Fujifilm X100 really has people talking. Size is important for many, and when combined with IQ and control, it sounds like a winner.

[stanleyk]

That Fujifilm X100 really has people talking. Size is important for many, and when combined with IQ and control, it sounds like a winner.

I am very interested in that camera. That said, I like small cameras and am a prime lens user. I don't really use anything above 70mm either so it's a good fit for me if it's a good camera. I do think they will sell a lot of them. Of course one has to qualify what a lot is, but I think the camera will do very well especially among people like myself who have a DSLR but just want a camera they can take out and shoot without having to load up a bunch of gear and worry about coverage, ect. The responses to it on The Online Photographer were incredibly positive. It's not going to be a camera for the point and shoot crowd. Interestingly some really good photographers use the E-P2. They see if for what it is. It's not a replacement for the DSLR but a compliment when you just want to enjoy photography.

I have been thoroughly satisfied with the E-P2. It has some "warts" but it's such a fun camera to use that it makes up for it. The prints from it are very good.

[CWyatt]

Yes I know at least one Magnum photographer is planning to pick up the X100, as a compliment to his Leica set up.

[adwb]

The staggering thing is the zoom ranges and the ever improving image IQ on these"pro-sumer" units ,my wife recently bought a canon G11 and the IQ is unbelievably good.

Providing she did not blur by movement the ability to crop out what is for all intents and purposes high zoom image is brilliant .

look at the new canon sx30 what a zoom range, I wonder what the IQ is going to be like on that. I think the time is not so far away when the days of changing lenses will be a thing of the past.
Alistair

[lithos]

Yes I know at least one Magnum photographer is planning to pick up the X100, as a compliment to his Leica set up.

I thought Magnum keelhauled people for that.

[CWyatt]

I think the time is not so far away when the days of changing lenses will be a thing of the past.
Alistair

I don't think so - aperture still matters.

[Nass]

Seems to me that one of the aspects that's interesting is that the market for 35mm slr type bodies is decreasing so much is because so many people now have their camera on their phone, so don't need a seperate big old body with lenses system anymore. This means less economies of scale and that dslrs being mainly for enthusiasts and mid-level pros. Top level I assume needs stuff like the 645, except the photojourno crowd can't work with the bulk I think. I don't know where the big boys Canon etc make their money but I assume lenses is where it's at. P&S etc have really small margin as far as I know, they're just commodities I think.

ps. The most popular camera on Flickr is the iPhone.

[Rory]

Did you mean, "There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear?" paraphrase? Cause that's Buffalo Springfield, not Dylan.

Maybe Pentax is just shrugging off the FF market because of these same assumptions. Maybe they think it's a dinosaur, or a growingly specialized market. I hope not, personally.

[johnmflores]

Did you mean, "There's something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear?" paraphrase? Cause that's Buffalo Springfield, not Dylan.

Maybe Pentax is just shrugging off the FF market because of these same assumptions. Maybe they think it's a dinosaur, or a growingly specialized market. I hope not, personally.

Compare the situation* now to just 10 years ago:

2000 - % of FF cameras was close to 100%. The majority of photos ended up as 3" x 5" or 4" x 6" snapshots.

2010 - % of FF cameras is probably in the single digits. The majority of photos end up sitting on a hard drive, never printed, or shared via Facebook, Flickr, etc.

For the vast majority of picture takers, there's little compelling reason to go FF. The irony is that it started life as a populist compromise and now it's become a benchmark for quality....




* Note the lowercase. I am not talking about the buffoon on Jersey Shore.

[TaoMaas]

...so many people now have their camera on their phone, so don't need a seperate big old body with lenses system anymore. This means less economies of scale and that dslrs being mainly for enthusiasts and mid-level pros.

SLRs have never been the choice of the majority of people. LOTS of people took pictures...only a fraction of them used SLRs. Most people had Instamatics or P&S cameras in the past. But, you're right, those folks are using their cellphones as their snapshot cameras now.