View Full Version : New Mirrorless Market Share "surprises" on the way..
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7101/7374207456_25f9ff89f7.jpg
This chart shows the interchangeable lens camera sales in the last quarter of 2011, from CIPA. The dark blue ones are the mirrorless and the light blue for the DSLRs.
According to CIPA the mirrorless interchangeable camera sales is expected to reach 5 million units this year, more than two times for the year 2010; a rapid growing market (actually the fastest growing branch in photographic industry.)
The trend in Japan has always been decisive for the rest of the countries, at least for being a reliable indicator for "what's going to happen two years from now". This trend is indicative for what's being cooked now.. Probably in two years we will observe the 50% share of the mirrorless all over the world.
I think we are going to see some very interesting cameras in the oncoming Photokina in September, especially some models to interest us rangefinder users. I will not be surprised if Canon and Nikon had decided to "break their silence" to get their share in this 50% market to reach some 5 million cameras this year.
FYI, 5 million was the total sales of interchangeable lens digital cameras in 1999..
With figures like that obviously Canikon aren't going to be sitting on their hands for too much longer!
Bring it on! :D
Nikon already released the V1, so it's only Canon left standing at the side line
Nikon already released the V1, so it's only Canon left standing at the side line
The V1's a toy IMO ... they'll need to do better than that! :D
I was asking the salesman at the shop where I got my OMD how the Nikon V1 was selling and he said it was slow!
I mentioned I thought it seemed like a handbag camera and he smiled and nodded. :p
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
The V1's a toy IMO ... they'll need to do better than that! :D
I was asking the salesman at the shop where I got my OMD how the Nikon V1 was selling and he said it was slow!
Nikon 1 probably makes up a pretty significant part of the Japanese mirrorless sales, though. This is purely based on observing the cameras Japanese tourists carry. Japanese women seem to really like the Nikon J1, while the men are more in the traditional DSLR/bigger-sensor-mirrorless camp. Year or two and US/Europe should catch up.
jsrockit
06-15-2012, 03:46
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
Who said it was?
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
Bear in mind most of those cameras will survive another 40-50 years by delivering quality results, maybe thru some CLA.... however I wonder what will happen with our digitals.
(I'm serious, the services keep spares for them longest 10 years, voice of experience after writing off 150 professional recorders due to not available spares from a most prominent factory: Panasonic.)
Bear in mind most of those cameras will survive another 40-50 years by delivering quality results, maybe thru some CLA.... however I wonder what will happen with our digitals.
(I'm serious, the services keep spares for them longest 10 years, voice of experience after writing off 150 professional recorders due to not available spares from a most prominent factory: Panasonic.)
A "film vs. digital" or "1960s cameras vs. new cameras" argument isn't exactly original around here.
The spare parts argument is getting tired. The problem is hardly limited to electronic gear, low-end gear, Japanese gear, or digital gear for that matter. Ask Leica about how they expect to replenish their supply of mechanical R6 shutter assemblies, for example.
A "film vs. digital" or "1960s cameras vs. new cameras" argument isn't exactly original around here.
The spare parts argument is getting tired. The problem is hardly limited to electronic gear, low-end gear, Japanese gear, or digital gear for that matter. Ask Leica about how they expect to replenish their supply of mechanical R6 shutter assemblies, for example.
The majority of the mechanical cameras are serviceable today. For such cameras one does not need factory authorized services and their service is not dependent on exclusively the parts supplied by the manufacturer. For example, any M body can be repaired –possibly- by over 30 technicians/services located in USA and Europe and I know that a large portion of them are not factory trained persons.. The same is true for the mechanical Nikons, Canons too.
Such services can replace the worn or broken parts easily, either with few NOS parts remained from the Jurassic era or most frequently salvaged from bodies dismantled to be used for spares. No M-Leica in their hands goes to trash no matter if it fell from the 8th floor down, they find many parts to reuse.
Such service and parts are generally for bodies sold in large quantities or those sold not much but sharing parts with the more popular ones.
The worst thing with digital: Service & Parts replacement require also sophisticated test/measuring devices. FYI, Nikon stopped sales of any digital parts to any service other than their own Authorized Service Stations. They use ONLY the parts supplied by the manufacturer. (BTW, did you see the desk and equipment of our beloved Youxin Ye for example? I can dismantle and put back my M-Leicas on a surface of two sq.ft with tools to not fill even a shoe box.)
As for the R6: Not a popular model but I am sure either in the States or in EU, especially in Germany there should be one or two technicians who can service it too.. Also there is no such rule that each and every camera will live on..
Aristophanes
06-15-2012, 06:56
The V1's a toy IMO ... they'll need to do better than that! :D
I was asking the salesman at the shop where I got my OMD how the Nikon V1 was selling and he said it was slow!
I mentioned I thought it seemed like a handbag camera and he smiled and nodded. :p
It's a price issue.
They are simply too expensive.
To tease sales from DSLR champs looking for a 2nd ILC camera, you need to price it like an accessory camera, not your "main" or "serious" camera.
So it has to be cheaper than a 5100 and a GF series. It is not, so it is not selling well.
The premium compact market for digital is not the same as it was for film. Film itself levelled the playing field, so the competition could be on size vs. features. That dynamic doesn't work on digital so premium priced compacts even with ILC's have trouble charging a "small tax".
Japanese simply are smart. When I see Japanese tourists going through city, all the day, by all nice buildings and monuments, it's clear it takes to be extremely trained to lug DSLR kit around. Mirrorless take same pictures for less money and with less stress on skeleton.
The V1's a toy IMO ... they'll need to do better than that! :D
I was asking the salesman at the shop where I got my OMD how the Nikon V1 was selling and he said it was slow!
I mentioned I thought it seemed like a handbag camera and he smiled and nodded. :p
Wait wait, V1 is a toy but OMD with M43 sensor is not?
emraphoto
06-15-2012, 13:01
Wait wait, V1 is a toy but OMD with M43 sensor is not?
i toyed around with the V1... kind of liked it actually. a fast prime in my preferred focal length would have sealed the deal for me.
I believe that in ten years DSLRs will be fully replaced by mirrorless systems. With the advances in EVFs, DSLRs have no advantage. The advantages of mirrorless, however, are well-known to rangefinder user's.
Before digital, there was no technical way to bridge the gap between SLRs and RFs. Mirrorless systems do exactly that.
i toyed around with the V1... kind of liked it actually. a fast prime in my preferred focal length would have sealed the deal for me.
Yes, I think that if Nikon comes out with faster lenses for the V1, it will take off - great viewfinder, very fast focus, many handy features.
Wait wait, V1 is a toy but OMD with M43 sensor is not?
I suppose if your talking full frame they are both toys in comparison. The asthetics of the Nikon is what makes it that way for me ... not it's performance!
Ronald_H
06-15-2012, 16:00
What makes the Nikon 1 a toy is two things:
- UI based on the idea that it is for compact camera upgraders. In that sense the OM-D is a real camera.
- Crop factor that makes using legacy glass all but pointless, makes DOF control much harder and brings a disadvantage in image quality compared to m4/3rds and APS-C
That's why I have a NEX and why I strongly dissuade young women to buy a Nikon 1, no matter how 'cute' it may be.
pdexposures
06-16-2012, 10:07
Interesting, I knew the market was growing but I had no idea by how much!
CK Dexter Haven
06-16-2012, 10:18
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
I presume those 'old' cameras are full-frame (35mm) or larger.... You should expect different results with small sensors. Whether or not you can get 'sharp' pictures from the small sensor digitals is one thing. Getting the specific kinds of results you want from them is another matter.
This is like telling the 8x10 shooter you get 'high quality results' from your Leica. So what.
back alley
06-16-2012, 10:27
this thread is indicative of rff of late...everyone is trying to prove they have the biggest d..k..we gotta stop this fast or this place is going to hit dirt quick.
I believe that in ten years DSLRs will be fully replaced by mirrorless systems.
Six years. Within three years DSLRs will be an "old people" thing, if they aren't already. The D5 will be the last Nikon pro DSLR with a pentaprism.
why I strongly dissuade young women to buy a Nikon 1, no matter how 'cute' it may be.
Most men, shorty after puberty, or late teens have learned that trying to dissuade or persuade a woman to anything is a true waste of time. Spend that time more productively. Do something to benefit humanity. Convincing women to do or not do anything is counter productive in the most negative sense of the words. :mad::bang:
MaxElmar
06-25-2012, 13:08
I don't really care what the fashion is, or who has the fastest growing market share. That's all BS. Make a better camera. I'll buy it.
We have a lot of really nice mirrorless cameras available now -- too bad none of 'em can track focus in 3 dimensions for beans.... Oh, except for that little Nikon of which you like to make fun. Still waiting for the good stuff.
.....We have a lot of really nice mirrorless cameras available now -- too bad none of 'em can track focus in 3 dimensions for beans....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipfO_JE8EB4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlnzPjWg0JM&feature=related
NickTrop
06-25-2012, 14:40
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. The viewfinder comes attached - not an expensive extra. Comes with a grip! Not a 3rd-party add-on. Neither are pocketable, and entry-level DSLRs like, say, a D5100 or a Canon Rebel cost less. Camera companies will market the hell out of them because they're cheaper to produce (presumably). Less (features/"camera") is more (price-wise and margin). A boom for the electronics manufacturers.
These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
Speedfreak
06-25-2012, 15:02
Bear in mind most of those cameras will survive another 40-50 years by delivering quality results, maybe thru some CLA....
If there is anyone left offering a reliable service...
however I wonder what will happen with our digitals.
Trash, move on to the next model.
Speedfreak
06-25-2012, 15:07
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. (...)
These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I can use all sorts of manual lenses on my NEX and I have permanent live view through either LCD or EVF. The sensors (at least in the NEX) are high end APS-C. And all are much more compact than competing DSLRs.
I have a NEX-7 and wouldnt want a D300s or EOS 7D instead.
Of course, if you are going "kit zoom only" like many buyers and dont care for bulk, then an entry level DSLR is better value, yes.
cosmonaut
06-25-2012, 15:15
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. The viewfinder comes attached - not an expensive extra. Comes with a grip! Not a 3rd-party add-on. Neither are pocketable, and entry-level DSLRs like, say, a D5100 or a Canon Rebel cost less. Camera companies will market the hell out of them because they're cheaper to produce (presumably). Less (features/"camera") is more (price-wise and margin). A boom for the electronics manufacturers.
These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.
Harry Caul
06-25-2012, 15:15
We have a lot of really nice mirrorless cameras available now -- too bad none of 'em can track focus in 3 dimensions for beans.... Oh, except for that little Nikon of which you like to make fun. Still waiting for the good stuff.
Well, with slow lenses and a small sensor (1/2 size of m43, 1/3 size of APS-C)... everything is almost always in focus. You are correct, the "tracking" performance is amazing ;)
And I might add, at least the current gen, is no more pocketable than the small m43 cameras.
loquax ludens
06-25-2012, 15:20
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.
I can't imagine a real photo journalist ever using anything but a Leica M camera either.
^---- Bwahahaha.
Bill Allard and David Alan Harvey have been making extensive use of the GF1 for probably couple of years now. Many others are also using GF1's, X-100s, etc. Apparently these National Geographic and Magnum photographers are not "hard-nosed pros." Comments like that will look so quaint three years from now.
cosmonaut
06-25-2012, 15:37
I can't imagine a real photo journalist ever using anything but a Leica M camera either.
LOL. You got me there. Another down side to the compacts right now is high end glass. Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality and a far cry from Carl Zeiss lenses.
charjohncarter
06-25-2012, 16:19
I agree. I am not sure hard nose pros will ever shoot mirrorless cameras. I think they will always be a market for cameras like the D800.
I couldn't imaging a real pro showing up to an expensive wedding or huge event with a compact system camera.
But if they say, like all jerk off artists: this is the best and newest camera ever made. They will get the job. And soon we will be done with DSLRs: finally.
Harry Caul
06-25-2012, 16:38
Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality...
They may not be up to Zeiss or Leica standards (or pricing!), but I think most here would disagree with the first part of your statement. Have you ever used the following:
Panny 7-14
Olympus 12mm/2
Voightlander 17.5mm/0.95
Panny 20mm/1.7
Panny/Leica 25mm/1.4
Voightlander 25mm/0.95
Olympus 45/1.8
Most of the above can be used wide open while remaining very sharp. And both the soon-to-be released Olympus 75/1.8 and Panny 12-35mm/2.8 (constant aperture) are reported to be of very good quality.
If you call those kit lens quality I'd like to hear what kit you are using!
celluloidprop
06-25-2012, 16:47
The Nikon V1 is an excellent camera - given that 99.99% of photos taken with even 'enthusiast' cameras are never going to be printed, much less large, its small sensor performs quite well. Good VF, fast AF. There are compromises at high-ISO compared to m43/APS/35, but if you play to the camera's strengths (ie daylight) then that's less relevant.
If the 10mm were f/2 (f/1.4 is probably stretching things), I think it would get a lot of love from street/doc/etc. shooters. Tiny body, v. good sensor, 28mm f/2? SOLD
celluloidprop
06-25-2012, 16:48
I - for the life of me, don't get "CEVIL" cameras. Entry-level DSLRs are a much better value. The viewfinder comes attached - not an expensive extra. Comes with a grip! Not a 3rd-party add-on. Neither are pocketable, and entry-level DSLRs like, say, a D5100 or a Canon Rebel cost less. Camera companies will market the hell out of them because they're cheaper to produce (presumably). Less (features/"camera") is more (price-wise and margin). A boom for the electronics manufacturers.
These cameras aren't "interesting" at all - except, perhaps, to the CFO of an electronics company.
I'm not sure how to detach the EVF from my OM-D.
I've spent time with the crop-sensor SLR bodies. The viewfinders are tiny and dark compared to the OM-D/NEX-7 or even the Fujis.
The Leica Summilux 25mm 1.4 DG is a super lens. I use it on the GF1. Great fast prime lens for the m4/3 cameras.
LOL. You got me there. Another down side to the compacts right now is high end glass. Most all of Olympus m4/3rd lenses are kit quality and a far cry from Carl Zeiss lenses.
Then get some Zeiss glass and put it on the OM-D or other m4/3 body.
vidgamer
07-06-2012, 19:36
I'm using cameras made in the 1960s and 70s and having zero problems achieving high quality results from them. It's not the gear.
Of course, you've got a bigger "sensor" on those cameras. ;-)
I bought some older cameras, and I'm surprised at how well most of them work. One camera in particular has been in our family for about 40 years and I think it's working fine, once I fixed the light leaks. Hmm, I need to finish running another roll through it....
Meanwhile, my first digital camera died a long time ago. When these electronics go out, it might be possible to fix by swapping circuit boards in a similar way mechanical parts were swapped on old cameras, but I dunno. In my case, a 3mp camera is not worth repairing. :-) Maybe with current cameras they will be worth saving, but will they be repaired?
As for entry-level DSLRs being better, that's a personal opinion. If you prefer a DSLR, by all means, get one! I really enjoy the smaller, lighter camera. I only got a DSLR because I wanted the higher quality of a larger sensor. I'll suffer some compromises to reduce the weight. And I can stick my camera into a pocket.... a big pocket, but yeah. :D
loquax ludens
07-06-2012, 19:53
I got rid of my DSLR after I bought my X-Pro1. It was clear to me after one afternoon of shooting the X-Pro1 that I'd never use my 20D again. I never used it much anyway. I see myself using the X-Pro1 a lot more. In fact, in one month, I'm sure I've used it more than I used my 20D in a year.
this thread is indicative of rff of late...everyone is trying to prove they have the biggest d..k..we gotta stop this fast or this place is going to hit dirt quick.
My old d..k..hit the dirt a long time ago.
Actually, my wife bought a Nikon 1 a short while back and simply loves it. I can't imagine a better kit for her-a fashionable red, small/light, easy to use, and fine color images for flickr/here. She uses the 10mm and the 30-110mm zoom. She's hit a home run w/ it.
A flapping mirror is obsolete for a bunch of obvious reasons, no?
The question is when will Canon and Nikon come out with a system for pros? By "system", a full range of lenses from ultra-wide to super tele and accessories to handle just about any job, hung on a ruggedized body that will survive a couple years of hard, commercial use (e.g. to replace the D4/D800). It will be nice to have full-frame cameras that are smaller than a Bronica ETRS again.
Removing the mirror box allow the opportunity/justification for a new line of lenses that are smaller - a clean slate. Camera makers might like that. I would reckon that they will add an adapter to space to the old F-mount to maintain backward compatibility and provide a transition for those with an investment in the old SLR lenses.
-Charlie
vidgamer
07-08-2012, 11:58
To your point about a professional line, I don't think anyone is looking at mirrorless cameras that way right now. I think if you really need all of the tools that are in the older mounts, you need to stick with that. For some jobs, a DSLR is just going to work better. If you don't need all of the aspects of a full system and just want a smaller system, that's here now, which I think is exciting.
I think you're right that camera manufacturers shouldn't mind selling new lenses all over again, but once they do that, they are allowing people to consider jumping into any other system, so I expect they'll resist that for a while.
I got rid of my DSLR after I bought my X-Pro1. It was clear to me after one afternoon of shooting the X-Pro1 that I'd never use my 20D again. I never used it much anyway. I see myself using the X-Pro1 a lot more. In fact, in one month, I'm sure I've used it more than I used my 20D in a year.
Since I have the X-Pro1, I seem to use the 5DMkII mostly with the 70-200.... if I use it at all.
My 20D has been taking dust since I upgraded to the 5DMkII. Cropping in Aperture gave me more pixel than the 20D anyway :-)
My wife has a Nikon 1. I originally thought she had better options (based on my malformed opinions) but I didn't want to try to change her mind because 1. anything she likes is good with me if it means it encourages her photography interests, and 2. I can't change her mind.
She originally thought she wanted a J1 but went with the V1 because the J1 seemed like a toy to her when she saw it in person. I asked the salesperson almost all of questions about it because I knew I'd end up being her tech support. I was sold on it before she bought it and she also got a great deal on it. The V1 is very slick. If they put it in a melted blob that was 2X larger and heavier, people would probably love it.
Don't knock it until you try it. I'd easily dump all my DSLR gear for something like the Nikon 1 if the lenses get better.
jsrockit
07-25-2012, 03:57
Six years. Within three years DSLRs will be an "old people" thing, if they aren't already.
Woohoo, new DSLR user here! :o
MaxElmar
08-10-2012, 06:24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipfO_JE8EB4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlnzPjWg0JM&feature=related
Yes, it's all true - like those bogus financial statements they gave the Olympus stockholders. Like I tell my little boy, don't believe everything you see on YT.
Mind you - I'm not saying it's impossible - or even that it won't happen someday soon. Just not yet.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.