[normhead]

Sony is at 20% market share. But from the numbers, it appears they've eaten Nikon's lunch, but barely affected Canon. I notice this anomaly barely mentioned above. Because it doesn't fit the MICL narrative.

Canon and Nikon chose not to open their mount to 3rd parties so it's an uphill battle to introduce your products for these mounts.

Then why isn't Canon suffering?

If my understanding is correct, Canon made adapters for their MILC offering that made using Canon glass on Sonys an archaic process. Not to mention that many I see interested n Sony are bottom of the market buyers looking at getting an FF for cheap. It would seem the resale value of OVF cameras holds up better. And that end of the market by itself own won't sustain any camera company.

Sony's biggest problem going forward might be no legacy glass. It will take a ton of 3rd party support to cover that. But that just helps them catch up. Sony will continue to be supported mostly by marketing. It's an expensive way to sell anything, and means higher prices for lower quality product. That's their glass ceiling.

With the glass Pentax is now releasing, And new product from Nikon and Canon We once again have a situation as it was 40 years ago, with OEM glass holding the upper echelons and 3rd party vendors producing cheaper product that isn't competitive quality wise. How many times have people come in here and declared their Sigma glass was as good as thee 31, only to have people look at the images and say "no it isn't, and here's why." There are very few customers who want 3rd party glass. They only buy cheaper 3rd party glass when they can't afford the top shelf items their own company makes. Every new lens Pentax introduces knocks another sigma Art lens off its pedestal. Maybe, Sigma stopped making Pentax glass because they weren't making money. But maybe it was because Pentax was about to eat their lunch and they saw the writing on the wall. They made money from high end product where Pentax wasn't competing, Now Pentax Is burying them.

Canon rules th roost in market share. Other companies are fighting for the leftover crumbs.

Let's keep things in perspective, 20% market does not threaten Canon, in any way shape or form. And it probably won't affect Pentax much either. Sony is in a really tight spot with the downfall of the market, with diminishing returns on their R&D and marketing expenses, that they absolutely have to continue with to stay afloat. Nikon's problem is too much reliance on a proliferation of cheap bodies in low end that can be replaced by cell phones. When a lot of what you sell is glitz and glitter, top notch marketing is absolutely essential. And it doesn't become cheaper as the market collapses. It just adds to the cost of individual cameras.

The glitz and glitter guys don't seem to understand, that's not the mind set of traditional camera users. I worry more about my cameras failing when I'm out on a 2 week trip than I do about photographic frills that make no difference to final IQ. They are different market. A market Pentax has wisely avoided.

---

Last edited by normhead; 08-17-2020 at 06:03 AM.

[mee]

I can only hope that Ricoh joins the L-mount with a mirrorless FF body.

I think that is the only way we'd see a Mirrorless system out of them at this point -- if it had the Ricoh name on it. Just make an OEM K adapter for it and let's roll.

[mlt]

Maybe these numbers aren’t what they really seem, or of much value. According to another web site, the latest numbers lumped all of a manufacturer’s digital cameras together, not just interchangeable lens models, in to one units shipped (not sold) number to get these percentages. Since Pentax doesn’t flood dealer shelves, they don’t register.

[mee]

Maybe these numbers aren’t what they really seem, or of much value. According to another web site, the latest numbers lumped all of a manufacturer’s digital cameras together, not just interchangeable lens models, in to one units shipped (not sold) number to get these percentages. Since Pentax doesn’t flood dealer shelves, they don’t register.

I think you may be right. It looks like non-ILCs may have been lumped into the figures. Which would explain some of the positions, since some brands had and cut more non-ILCs from their catalogs.


Not sure about the latter part of your statement though. Less demand means less shipped, but it also means less sold too. Just less all around. Pentax is tiny.


But again I didn't want to focus on Pentax because everyone knows Pentax is small. And whether they have 3% or 1% doesn't really matter imo.

I was more interested in the top 3 on that chart. I'd really like to see overall sales including 3rd party lenses and accessories by mount type. Seeing demand by 3rd parties could be interesting.

[Wheatfield]

Maybe these numbers aren’t what they really seem, or of much value. According to another web site, the latest numbers lumped all of a manufacturer’s digital cameras together, not just interchangeable lens models, in to one units shipped (not sold) number to get these percentages. Since Pentax doesn’t flood dealer shelves, they don’t register.

The numbers don't matter if market share isn't a necessary part of your business model. The nice thing about being a small niche player is that you can sit back and let the Goliaths punch each other in the face while you go about your business in relative peace.
As long as Ricoh sells enough gear to stay happy, market share isn't something that they need to worry about.

Large companies that have built their business model around market share are in a dangerous position now. In order to get market share, they have had to build massive supply chains backed by multiple factories and large R&D departments. Now their very life depends on selling large volumes of equipment into what has become a shrinking market to feed the beasts that they have created, lest the beasts eat the owners.

The camera divisions of Canon, Sony and Nikon are all in trouble because they they have a lot of mouths to feed. Olympus is in trouble because they got themselves involved with the Yakuza, and because, like Panasonic, got involved too heavily in a format that was doomed to fail.

Panasonic isn't in the L mount because they want to be, they are in it because the M4/3 format is a dead man walking, and they know it, and they want to stay in the business of making cameras because like Canon, Nikon and Sony, they have sizable R&D departments, many factories and large supply chains that need the financial backing of consumer sales to stay viable. Panasonic will likely be the also ran in the full frame wars, taking on the big three and failing.

Meanwhile, little old Pentax will keep trucking on, staying safely under the radar and making sufficient income to maintain a much smaller business model that isn't dependent on massive sales numbers.

As I've mentioned before, in the late 1980s into the late 1990s I ran a very small custom photo lab dedicated to B&W photography. Pretty much, I expanded a hobby darkroom in my house into a facility large enough to do small volume production, while keeping it compact enough to not require a separate facility. My "market share" wouldn't have even been a blip on anyone's radar, but I made enough at it to support myself and my family very comfortably. I didn't follow the "go big or go home" philosophy simply because I didn't want the hassles that go along with that.
And so, I just trucked along, working comfortably under the radar of the larger labs, making a satisfactory income while not having to worry about supporting a supply chain that would gobble my business up in lean times.
Meanwhile, the large companies were punching each other silly trying to buy enough market share to stay in business, some failing and falling by the wayside as their go big business model failed them.

I look at the business world and the supposed need to be the biggest fish in the pond with some amusement. I look at how General Motors and Chrysler needed to be bailed out to stay in business, how companies like Boeing need to have cushy and well padded defense contracts to keep them afloat, how Bombardier has been a leech since they expanded out of motorized snow sleds, etc, and I think to myself that it's better, as a consumer, to stay away from companies that depend on selling a lot of stuff into what will inevitably become a diminishing market.
As a consumer, there isn't much safety in backing corporate giants.

[mee]

That's also true, Wheatfield. I do think the ILC camera market shrinks even more over time and becomes more niche. And Ricoh/Pentax has simply chosen a DSLR niche. Also probably why they're not too bothered about launching lots of products. Just dropping crumbs here and there. If people leave, fine. They don't have to care about customers (to the same degree). Because they have such a small footprint that it doesn't seem to matter.

That said the other manufacturers are diversified into other pursuits, so it isn't like they'll all drop off the map either. They'll probably also shrink more though.

Only a few more things left to reach.. Global shutter, infinite burst rate (almost there), larger/faster video sizes/rates, and enhancing AF and high ISO image quality.

At some point the tool becomes so automated that it could no longer become fun. Much like driving.

[Wheatfield]

That's also true, Wheatfield. I do think the ILC camera market shrinks even more over time and becomes more niche. And Ricoh/Pentax has simply chosen a DSLR niche. Also probably why they're not too bothered about launching lots of products. Just dropping crumbs here and there. If people leave, fine. They don't have to care about customers (to the same degree). Because they have such a small footprint that it doesn't seem to matter.

That said the other manufacturers are diversified into other pursuits, so it isn't like they'll all drop off the map either. They'll probably also shrink more though.

Only a few more things left to reach.. Global shutter, infinite burst rate (almost there), larger/faster video sizes/rates, and enhancing AF and high ISO image quality.

At some point the tool becomes so automated that it could no longer become fun. Much like driving.

The ILC market is, I believe, returning to where it was before the 1980s AF bubble made it easy to be a photographer. The customer that wants easy results is turning more and more to cell phones, and those manufacturers are answering by loading up their devices with ever improving cameras.

Sony has always been a technology company, and is in the market as a consumer outlet for their tech. If the consumer market shrinks enough, I believe they will get out of the camera business entirely and retreat to B2B sales of technology to outside manufacturers. They have said as much in the recent past.
They have never stopped being a B2B company, witnessed by Sony sensors being used in cameras from many manufacturers.

Canon, of course, is a mega corp with it's fingers in many pies, especially business machines. In this, they are much like Ricoh. The problem Canon will have is that their camera division has really supersized itself, and has become a hungry animal demanding rather a lot of red meat to stay happy, a problem that Ricoh does not face with the Pentax brand.

Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi group, though I have never fully understood the concept of keiretsu, and so don't know if Nikon would be propped up by other members of the collective rather than being allowed to fail.

I can see all three companies having to shutter factories and lay off huge numbers of people to keep the shareholders happy, again, something that i don't think Ricoh needs to worry too much about, since the camera division barely registers on their financial reports.

Nikon and Canon are, IMO, getting into the mirrorless market late in the day as a Hail Mary to keep their camera divisions alive. It's no secret that mirrorless cameras are going to dominate going forwards the same way it was no secret in the early 1960s that SLR cameras were going to be the dominant technology over rangefinders.

What this means to a small player like Pentax is that staying the SLR course will be their way to stay in business, the same way Leica stayed alive making rangefinders in a predominantly SLR world. There will always be customers for the SLR, the same way there were always customers for ILC rangefinders, and with Pentax appearing to soon be the one of a very few, if not the only player in that market, they will be well positioned.

Sony will transition away from SLR cameras entirely, the A mount will go away, with those users having to move to EVF cameras to use their legacy lenses, Canon will do the same with the EF mount, forcing users into R mount cameras.

Nikon may or may not move entirely into mirrorless, though I expect not. I don't see them dropping the F mount entirely given their long history of maintaining compatibility for their user base. I can see them withdrawing substantially from SLRs and putting their new R&D into the Z mount, with whatever tech that can cross over to the F mount finding it's way into a very small SLR family.

[Winder]

Sony has always been a technology company, and is in the market as a consumer outlet for their tech. If the consumer market shrinks enough, I believe they will get out of the camera business entirely and retreat to B2B sales of technology to outside manufacturers. They have said as much in the recent past.
They have never stopped being a B2B company, witnessed by Sony sensors being used in cameras from many manufacturers.

That's not actually true. It might have been 20 years ago. Today Sony is a very much into media and content creation. They own Sony Music (Warner, Big Machine, BMI) and Sony Pictures (Columbia Pictures, TriStar, Universal). They make the Playstation which is wildly successful, but the money comes from the content that the PlayStation provides and the streaming media options over the PlayStation. Sony Interactive Entertainment is a huge part of Sony Corp. Sony has been pretty clear that they want to be in the market as a content creator and a content provider. They want to make the TVs and devises that content is displayed on and the cameras that it is captured on. They make the sensors, the EVFs, the memory cards and multiple components that go into the display and capture. They have transitioned their professional video cameras over to E-mount so the same lenses that fit an A7 also fit on a $12,000 FX9 body or the $40,000 VENICE . A lot of the technology that ends up in the professional line starts out in the consumer line. The E-mount is well integrated into the Sony system.

I don't see Sony leaving the professional/enthusiast segment of the market any time in the near future. They are already developing the all the technology and building all of the components to sell to other companies. They make the EVF in the Canon R5 and Panasonic S1 cameras. They make sensors and who knows what other components for numerous other camera and smartphone companies.

Sony isn't living and dying by A7III sales. They are having a lot of success and from a technology standpoint they are leading the industry. If they keep that up, the sales, market share, & money will follow. If Sony does happen to tank in the near future, that's fine too. For all I know my next professional camera might be made by Apple or some company that doesn't even make cameras today. Might even be made by Ricoh. Brand really doesn't matter that much. We are always going to have cameras.

[Wheatfield]

That's not actually true. It might have been 20 years ago. Today Sony is a very much into media and content creation. They own Sony Music (Warner, Big Machine, BMI) and Sony Pictures (Columbia Pictures, TriStar, Universal). They make the Playstation which is wildly successful, but the money comes from the content that the PlayStation provides and the streaming media options over the PlayStation. Sony Interactive Entertainment is a huge part of Sony Corp. Sony has been pretty clear that they want to be in the market as a content creator and a content provider. They want to make the TVs and devises that content is displayed on and the cameras that it is captured on. They make the sensors, the EVFs, the memory cards and multiple components that go into the display and capture. They have transitioned their professional video cameras over to E-mount so the same lenses that fit an A7 also fit on a $12,000 FX9 body or the $40,000 VENICE . A lot of the technology that ends up in the professional line starts out in the consumer line. The E-mount is well integrated into the Sony system.

I don't see Sony leaving the professional/enthusiast segment of the market any time in the near future. They are already developing the all the technology and building all of the components to sell to other companies. They make the EVF in the Canon R5 and Panasonic S1 cameras. They make sensors and who knows what other components for numerous other camera and smartphone companies.

Sony isn't living and dying by A7III sales. They are having a lot of success and from a technology standpoint they are leading the industry. If they keep that up, the sales, market share, & money will follow. If Sony does happen to tank in the near future, that's fine too. For all I know my next professional camera might be made by Apple or some company that doesn't even make cameras today. Might even be made by Ricoh. Brand really doesn't matter that much. We are always going to have cameras.

I was referring to hardware sales, not creative content ownership. I expect if they stop making money making movies, they will sell their production companies. It's all just business to them. I don't really think they care about what they are making as long as it is making them money.
If they stop making money in consumer cameras, they will stop making consumer cameras.
This doesn't imply they will stop making electronics for sale to other camera makers.

[mee]

None of these companies are primarily ILC manufacturers though. These are divisions of larger entities for each of them. The consumer imaging side could vaporize for any of them and they'd each still stand as a company (albeit smaller).

[Wheatfield]

None of these companies are primarily ILC manufacturers though. These are divisions of larger entities for each of them. The consumer imaging side could vaporize for any of them and they'd each still stand as a company (albeit smaller).

Absolutely. However, if Canon, for example, decides to get out of the EF mount the same way they got out of the FD mount, the company may as well cease to exist if you are tied in a big way to the EF system. The same with Sony. If you are an A mount user who prefers an SLR, your system becomes dead in the water if they drop SLRs.
I fully expect both companies to go full mirrorless within the next few years.
Nikon, I'm just not so sure about. Their dedication to their user base is pretty legendary, having kept the same mount, more or less, for some 6 decades.

[mee]

Absolutely. However, if Canon, for example, decides to get out of the EF mount the same way they got out of the FD mount, the company may as well cease to exist if you are tied in a big way to the EF system. The same with Sony. If you are an A mount user who prefers an SLR, your system becomes dead in the water if they drop SLRs.
I fully expect both companies to go full mirrorless within the next few years.
Nikon, I'm just not so sure about. Their dedication to their user base is pretty legendary, having kept the same mount, more or less, for some 6 decades.

Yeah Nikon spoke publicly (last week I think) and said they are sticking with F mount for a minimum of 5-7 more years. I think that's only if Z mount really picks up in sales. They seem to realize DSLRs are still more suited to certain applications (namely sports shooting) and a lot of people have decades in the system.


The next decade should be really interesting on how ILC systems are developed and are steered. I think someone(s) in the industry will probably say enough eventually, depending on just how low sales go (versus how lucrative other pursuits become).

[surfar]

if Canon, for example, decides to get out of the EF mount the same way they got out of the FD mount,

Wasn"t that a technological change?...they are selling more Dslrs that the other 2 producers,i cant see them exiting in the short term(3-5 years) and longer term,there could be a different tech that makes mirrors
/mirrorless( as we know them now)...obsolete?

---------- Post added 08-19-20 at 02:53 PM ----------

Nikon and Canon are, IMO, getting into the mirrorless market late in the day

Nikon got into ILC mirrorless in 2011,Canon the following year.

Nikon chose the wrong sensor size,Canon chose the right one..

[notacamerasnob]

I dont believe those numbers are accurate because Olympus isnt even listed and Panasonic is much more popular than that list suggests, imho.

This poll is probably no more accurate than the group of 2016 Presidential polls that had Hillary winning in a landslide.

And if Pentax really had such low marketshare, Amazon, Best Buy, B&H, Adorama and others wouldnt even offer the camera for sale, at all. But of course, they do because more than a blip of camera shooters buy it.

Just look at the used market for Pentax gear. In Canada, where I live, Pentax cameras are popular in the Legto, Kijiji online classified sites.

[normhead]

I dont believe those numbers are accurate because Olympus isnt even listed and Panasonic is much more popular than that list suggests, imho.

This poll is probably no more accurate than the group of 2016 Presidential polls that had Hillary winning in a landslide.

And if Pentax really had such low marketshare, Amazon, Best Buy, B&H, Adorama and others wouldnt even offer the camera for sale, at all. But of course, they do because more than a blip of camera shooters buy it.

Just look at the used market for Pentax gear. In Canada, where I live, Pentax cameras are popular in the Legto, Kijiji online classified sites.

Pentax appears to be just ahead of Lieca based on Flickr user totals, with approx. 270 users a day. The EOS 5D mk 3 hs close to 1000 all by itself. The top 5 Canon sellers have close to 4000 users. IN the same categories there are 1700 Sony shooters. Based on those numbers compared to Canon is about right, 42% on flicker 45% in the first post.

Based on the Panasonic market share 4.7% and that for their top 5 sellers (3 of which are ILCs) Panasonic have 345daily users.
Pentax with 270 daily users are only 27% behind Panasonic suggesting market share of suggests a market share of 3.69% for Ricoh/Pentax with Pentax product.

The math doesn't completely add up, and I don't have time to go into all the models for each company, but based on the top sellers that's what it means. And if you look at ILCs, Pentax is ahead of Panasonic. For ILC's Pansonic has slightly less shooters than Pentax at 250 day.

The stats in the first post are clearly not necessarily useful for strictly ILC shooters.

You can certainly argue with my methodology, but it remains true, the more sources you look at, the more accurate your conclusions are likely to be. I'm seeing Pentax hanging in at somewhere near 3.5% market share with numbers teased out of these two sources.

But just to show you how the sales numbers are misleading compared to actual use, the Top 5 Nikon users average 3000, the Top 5 Sony's 1700. The sales numbers reflect neither market share, nor usage. How many cameras they sold this month means what? Shooters buying new gear, it says nothing about how many users actually use the cameras, which is the true measure of a company's market share. A lot of Nikon users are still using D7100s. Many Pentax users are still using K-5s and K-50s. Only one Sony camera is more popular on Flickr than the Nikon #5 D7100, Both Canon and Nikon users for their top models are about 1000 users, Sony about half that. Pentax with the K-1 at 75 users, is 7.5% of either Canon and Nikon's most used cameras, and 15% of Sony's sales, or 3% the total of the top 3. It all washes out to somewhere between 3 and 3.5% market share, for Pentax ILCs.

Sony may be selling more cameras than Nikon, but they are also no where near Nikon's user base. It will be interesting to see if they actually catch up in user base.

I'm not sure are how many dollars 3% of the ILC market represents, but I'm guessing Pentax is making money.

I would like to see similar numbers for lenses. One has to remember, while market share can go up and down over years, the number of active users you have determines how many lenses you can sell. It will take Sony years to match the ability of Canon and Nikon to sell lenses, despite their current position, if it ever happens at all.