What's happening to the camera industry . . .

[KVH]

Cam across this article yesterday and thought, for those of you who track such things, it's is a very interesting read. I believe the data is pretty accurate but still not sure about the conclusions myself. I do know this will be a vindication for some others here.

 

[OKW Lover]

Amazing the drop in camera sales over the years. Not that surprising when you think about it as I'd guess most of the peak camera sales were the point and shoot type of consumer cameras. With so many having smart phones with built in cameras, there's little need for the general public to also buy/carry a PnS camera.

 

[KVH]

Amazing the drop in camera sales over the years. Not that surprising when you think about it as I'd guess most of the peak camera sales were the point and shoot type of consumer cameras. With so many having smart phones with built in cameras, there's little need for the general public to also buy/carry a PnS camera.

Yeah, and I think the latest round of releases with body prices alone ranging anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 really shows the manufacturers are at least somewhat disconnected from reality. I could be totally wrong but I can't see the chips driving those kind of prices. Are they trying to tell us there's n more efficiencies of scale anymore and every new body requires way more investment for them to recoup their costs? For the price of some new Canon R models, I can get two D models (like a 5, 6 or 7) which are more than adequate for almost any job. There is very little that double the price camera does compared to cheaper models that justifies those prices. And that's just Canon.

What's worse is if the demand is dropping, and supply is dropping, we're going to run into pricing issues in the long run. All cameras, to one extent or another, will become more dear. Really not happy with that aspect.

 

[havoc315]

Yeah, and I think the latest round of releases with body prices alone ranging anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 really shows the manufacturers are at least somewhat disconnected from reality. I could be totally wrong but I can't see the chips driving those kind of prices. Are they trying to tell us there's n more efficiencies of scale anymore and every new body requires way more investment for them to recoup their costs? For the price of some new Canon R models, I can get two D models (like a 5, 6 or 7) which are more than adequate for almost any job. There is very little that double the price camera does compared to cheaper models that justifies those prices. And that's just Canon.

What's worse is if the demand is dropping, and supply is dropping, we're going to run into pricing issues in the long run. All cameras, to one extent or another, will become more dear. Really not happy with that aspect.

It’s not a disconnect from reality, it’s the only way to make a profit.
When they were selling 20 million dSLRs per year, you could make a profit selling a million $500 dSLRs at tiny margins.

But with only 3 million ILC cameras sold per year…you can’t make much profit selling 100,000 $500 cameras. They need to cater to the high end users.The pros and advanced enthusiasts are the only people who still want cameras. Few people want to spend $500 on a camera that’s worse than their phone.
So you cater to the advanced customer.

 

[KVH]

It’s not a disconnect from reality, it’s the only way to make a profit.
When they were selling 20 million dSLRs per year, you could make a profit selling a million $500 dSLRs at tiny margins.

But with only 3 million ILC cameras sold per year…you can’t make much profit selling 100,000 $500 cameras. They need to cater to the high end users. The pros and advanced enthusiasts are the only people who still want cameras. Few people want to spend $500 on a camera that’s worse than their phone.
So you cater to the advanced customer.

I totally get what you're saying. And while I haven't worked as a pro for 7+ years now, I feel I'm being forced into having to settle for some basic kit or adopt a new system (to me, a new mount counts as that) as the market around me evolves. Maybe I'm just being old. I don't need a 1DxM3 but the 5/6d series are now 5 years old w/o an update.<sigh>

<dramatic music starts>
Join me in my journey down the road to being a curmudgeon on the next episode of "Boomer's Camera" here on PBS . . .
<fade to black>

 

[havoc315]

I totally get what you're saying. And while I haven't worked as a pro for 7+ years now, I feel I'm being forced into having to settle for some basic kit or adopt a new system (to me, a new mount counts as that) as the market around me evolves. Maybe I'm just being old. I don't need a 1DxM3 but the 5/6d series are now 5 years old w/o an update.<sigh>

<dramatic music starts>
Join me in my journey down the road to being a curmudgeon on the next episode of "Boomer's Camera" here on PBS . . .
<fade to black>

The switch to mirrorless was inevitable. Just like the switch away from VCRs. Canon has basically admitted they are done with dSLRs.

The good news for you and Canon shooters in general — your EOS lenses will work perfectly on the R cameras with a cheap adapter.

 

[seashoreCM]

The switch to mirrorless was inevitable. ...

The whole purpose of a single lens reflex camera is so you can see the exact picture (picture framing) that you will get. Common digital cameras including the cheapest show you the exact picture on their viewfinder screens in back so there is no longer a need for a mirror system to connect the taking lens to an optical viewfinder.

When you have a good and correct adapter ring, you will still have all of the flexibility of an SLR, seeing all of the manual adjustments you make with your old lens on the the digital camera body viewfinder before you take the picture.

(Getting up there in years I no longer have the dexterity and I find most photo ops are too short for me to adjust settings and compose the picture on any kind of camera. So I end up using a plain point and shoot, and crop or adjust the picture later back at home.)