Mirrorless shipments surge....

Started Nov 1, 2013 | Discussions
MichaelKJ
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,134Gear list
Like?
Re: Spreadsheet of units sold by region.
In reply to YouDidntDidYou, Nov 3, 2013

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

MichaelKJ wrote:

NancyP wrote:

That is pretty interesting. Japan has really gone wild for MILC.

-- hide signature --

NancyP

While it is true that MILCs are much more popular in Japan than elsewhere, they have failed to gain market share over the past two years (according to BCN data). CIPA separated mirrorless and DSLRs for the first time in January 2012. MILC shipments in Japan for the first seven months of this year were 36.9% of ILC shipments versus 39.7% for the first seven months of last year.

You really need to take into account how much the Nikon 1 and Canon EOS M fails skewed the 2012 mirrorless figures...

Your argument only makes sense if you assume that significantly more 1s and EOS Ms were shipped in 2012 than were shipped in 2013. However, a lot of 1s and EOS Ms were shipped and sold at fire sale prices this year.  In fact, the EOS M with double kit lens is currently the best selling mirrorless camera configuration in Japan, and the 8th best selling ILC.  Given how poorly they sold at retail last year, it wouldn't surprise me if 2013 shipments & sales of these models are higher this year than they were last year.  The fact Canon and Nikon have had to sell a lot of their mirrorless cameras at a steep discount indicates that the Japanese market share for the other mirrorless cameras could well be less than 30%.

http://bcnranking.jp/category/subcategory_0008.html

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Josh152
Senior MemberPosts: 1,258
Like?
Re: Didn't see many MILCs at B&H Photo the other day...
In reply to marike6, Nov 3, 2013

marike6 wrote:

If mirrorless shipments are up in the US, for example, I sure didn't see any evidence of it on Monday when I went down to B&H Photo in NYC. I had my new X-E1 with me. The overwhelming majority of people I saw (lots and lots of people) were carrying DSLRs both APS-C and FF, often with high end L or gold ring lenses.

And in the camera department at B&H, as usual, the most crowded (in fact the only crowded) kiosks were Canon and Nikon.

Olympus, Sony, Fujifilm, and Pentax, et al, had one or two people at most.

Then there was this guy whipping out his Speed Graphic to make a portrait of a local pro. Apparently none of them, including the passerby on the far right, got the memo that they were supposed to prefer teeny tiny cameras.

Getting ready to make portrait of local photographer with his awesome Speed Graphic kit

Of course this is just anecdotal evidence, but I did notice a ton of people happy walking around Manhattan with their DSLRs. Perhaps small size is not as important to most photographers as we think.

Small size is the main and probably only real advantage mirrorless has over DSLRs so it gets mentioned a lot on DPR where people like to debate cameras/formats endlessly so it seems like a lot of people are concerned with it. However one must remember that people posting on DPR is only a tiny portion of the total amount of people who buy enthusiast cameras like mirroless and DSLRS and so is not a representative sample.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Abrak
Senior MemberPosts: 1,541
Like?
Re: Spreadsheet of units sold by region.
In reply to MichaelKJ, Nov 3, 2013

One other observation I would make about the market.

The unit price of DSLRs shipped in Japan is 17% higher than those to the US. The average price of mirrorless shipped is almost identical. Now that obviously implies that in Japan, higher priced models - presumably FF - make up a greater percentage of DSLR sales. But as DSLR sales are a smaller percentage of the overall market, then FF could easily be roughly the same percentage in both markets.

This makes perfect sense to me. What seems to have happened is that mirrorless has replaced a fair proportion of the APS-C models in Japan while it has failed to do so in the US. Rather than a sensor war, as mirrorless is often viewed on this forum, it is more a competition of body preferences over roughly the same size sensor/IQ.

Japan/Asia has always valued smaller size and it was noticeable that Canon even mentioned last week at their results that their mini-DSLR the SL1 was selling well in Asia. It seems that the US and Europe actually prefer larger (and perhaps a viewfinder as well) and to this end Sony even introduced the A3000 - a mirrorless with the form factor of a DSLR.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JimPearce
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,406Gear list
Like?
No, dead as a dog in North America and Europe...
In reply to marike6, Nov 3, 2013

This is strictly an Asian bounce.

-- hide signature --

Jim

 JimPearce's gear list:JimPearce's gear list
Nikon D7100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YouDidntDidYou
Senior MemberPosts: 1,576
Like?
Re: Some real world experiences ...
In reply to Grevture, Nov 3, 2013

Grevture wrote:

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Do you not have real world experiences and aren't this real world experiences sometimes later confirmed by surveys/stats/findings etc...

Ok, my world experiences are specific to my local market (Sweden), and is almost a year old (December 2012) but comes from fairly extensive interviews with three managers from three of the largest camera retailers (stores) over here. If I make a rough average from what these three people said, some points stood out:

- the average buyer of a mirrorless camera bought about as many extra lenses as the average DSLR buyer did, but much, much cheaper lenses.

- every once in a while, they sell some really high margin lenses for DSLR's, like super-telephoto lenses (in the $7000 - $15000 range) for birders, enthusiast sports shooters an others. Those few lenses alone provide for more margin for these retailers the the entire mirrorless lens sales does combined.

- the average DSLR buyer spend a lot more money buying battery grips, flashes, tripods, camera bags, filters and other accessories then the average mirrorless buyer.

On of the retailers I talked to also deal extensively with second hand lenses and other accessories, and that market is (for pretty obvious reasons) orders of magnitude larger for DSLR then it is for mirrorless cameras.

Two of the three retailers I spoke to said they made more money (in terms of margins) selling high end compacts then they make from mirrorless which is very often sold with discounts.

From what I have seen, these real world experiences pretty well match with the little sales statistics I have seen.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

Fair and valid points although the large telephotos would

have very slow stock turn and high stock holding cost which would have to be factored into end of day profit on those

items...What's the micro four thirds and other mirrorless marketing like in the Nordic countries?

O-MD usersdon't have as much user for tripods and GH users would need different kinds of tripods and accessories that maybe aren't available in those stores?t

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YouDidntDidYou
Senior MemberPosts: 1,576
Like?
Nope, not dead as a dog in North America and Europe...
In reply to JimPearce, Nov 3, 2013

JimPearce wrote:

This is strictly an Asian bounce.

-- hide signature --

Jim

Thom Hogan seems to think mirrorless has now taken 16% market share from dslrs in North America and they already have at least 30% in the UK...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dual12
Regular MemberPosts: 352
Like?
Re: Spreadsheet of units sold by region.
In reply to amalric, Nov 3, 2013

amalric wrote:

Thank you for this. If true there is a remarkable progression in 9 months, even in the n Americas, almost a doubling in penetration.

Am.

If the numbers are shipments, then it's a doubling in shipments, not a doubling in penetration, or a doubling in retail sales.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 4,027
Like?
Re: Didn't see many MILCs at B&H Photo the other day...
In reply to marike6, Nov 3, 2013

marike6 wrote:

If mirrorless shipments are up in the US, for example, I sure didn't see any evidence of it on Monday when I went down to B&H Photo in NYC. I had my new X-E1 with me. The overwhelming majority of people I saw (lots and lots of people) were carrying DSLRs both APS-C and FF, often with high end L or gold ring lenses.

And in the camera department at B&H, as usual, the most crowded (in fact the only crowded) kiosks were Canon and Nikon.

Olympus, Sony, Fujifilm, and Pentax, et al, had one or two people at most.

Then there was this guy whipping out his Speed Graphic to make a portrait of a local pro. Apparently none of them, including the passerby on the far right, got the memo that they were supposed to prefer teeny tiny cameras.

Getting ready to make portrait of local photographer with his awesome Speed Graphic kit

Of course this is just anecdotal evidence, but I did notice a ton of people happy walking around Manhattan with their DSLRs. Perhaps small size is not as important to most photographers as we think.

Perhaps it's related to the size of the people?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Abrak
Senior MemberPosts: 1,541
Like?
Re: Didn't see many MILCs at B&H Photo the other day...
In reply to marike6, Nov 3, 2013

marike6 wrote:

If mirrorless shipments are up in the US, for example, I sure didn't see any evidence of it on Monday when I went down to B&H Photo in NYC. I had my new X-E1 with me.

I cant really quantify how totally insignificant your personal experience is in NYC - I have a problem with incredible small things, anything below an atom is beyond me.

But really I might berate people who turn personal observation into objective fact. But what I find extraordinary is the thought that people think that other people might be interested in what you think you know about what other people are thinking and that really makes my mind spin.

As far as format debates go I think simply this. I use M43, so it is natural to assume that I think M43 is 'better' than any other format because if I thought otherwise, I wouldnt use it. Now someone else uses FF - my assumption is that he uses it for exactly the same reasoning. So what are you arguing about..

If you happen to take your 'own reality' and think you should transpose it on other people who simply dont understand what you understand you are simply suffering from a very obvious fallacy akin to playing poker and not not knowing who the patsy is.

BTW even entering into the discussion of whether promoting your format as the best has any relevance is something contradictory. You end up being the mug who says that one format has advantages in certain circumstances while another has advantage in other circumstances which is so blindly obvious that stating it simply makes you appear moronic.

And M43ers are pretty bad about this. 90% seem to believe that if M43 spent more money on marketing it would be more successful. Really this is simply a projection of 'if people knew what I know they would buy M43'. If you examined the numbers you actually realize the opposite is true.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
What now?
In reply to Abrak, Nov 3, 2013

Abrak wrote:

marike6 wrote:

If mirrorless shipments are up in the US, for example, I sure didn't see any evidence of it on Monday when I went down to B&H Photo in NYC. I had my new X-E1 with me.

I cant really quantify how totally insignificant your personal experience is in NYC

But really I might berate people who turn personal observation into objective fact.

Perhaps you missed where I wrote:

"Of course this is just anecdotal evidence, but I did notice a ton of people happily walking around Manhattan with their DSLRs."

Anecdotal

adjective - (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research : while there was much anecdotal evidence there was little hard fact | these claims were purely anecdotal

The point is I think there is a tendency on some online forums to assume that everybody prioritizes small size in cameras, but outside of these forums in the real world there does seem to be a large segment of the population who grew up with SLRs and don't consider them burdensomely heavy.

I never said anything about facts.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Abrak
Senior MemberPosts: 1,541
Like?
Re: What now?
In reply to marike6, Nov 3, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Perhaps you missed where I wrote:

"Of course this is just anecdotal evidence, but I did notice a ton of people happily walking around Manhattan with their DSLRs."

Anecdotal

adjective - (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research : while there was much anecdotal evidence there was little hard fact | these claims were purely anecdotal

The point is I think there is a tendency on some online forums to assume that everybody prioritizes small size in cameras, but outside of these forums in the real world there does seem to be a large segment of the population who grew up with SLRs and don't consider them burdensomely heavy.

I never said anything about facts.

No I 100% did not miss what you wrote.

You gave your personal experience on the streets of NY and you qualified by saying that it was 'anecdotal' as in 'not particular significant' as in 'may not totally reflect the facts'. I get that.

But my point is that you dont realize how 'totally insignificant' your personal experience is in the greater scheme of things. If you realized that it is a millionth of a percentile you wouldnt actually mention it in the first place let alone repeat it twice.

And you wouldnt start implying that 'global aggregated data' is something generated on 'online forums' and that your experience represents 'outside of these forums in the real world'. No, you never said anything about 'facts', merely implied your 'real world' experience might actually be relevant.

And to put it very simply. If you think your real world experience is relevant in the context of the aggregated global data, I will guarantee you 100% that it is NOT.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Grevture
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,129Gear list
Like?
Re: Some real world experiences ...
In reply to YouDidntDidYou, Nov 3, 2013

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Grevture wrote:

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Do you not have real world experiences and aren't this real world experiences sometimes later confirmed by surveys/stats/findings etc...

Ok, my world experiences are specific to my local market (Sweden), and is almost a year old (December 2012) but comes from fairly extensive interviews with three managers from three of the largest camera retailers (stores) over here. If I make a rough average from what these three people said, some points stood out:

- the average buyer of a mirrorless camera bought about as many extra lenses as the average DSLR buyer did, but much, much cheaper lenses.

- every once in a while, they sell some really high margin lenses for DSLR's, like super-telephoto lenses (in the $7000 - $15000 range) for birders, enthusiast sports shooters an others. Those few lenses alone provide for more margin for these retailers the the entire mirrorless lens sales does combined.

- the average DSLR buyer spend a lot more money buying battery grips, flashes, tripods, camera bags, filters and other accessories then the average mirrorless buyer.

On of the retailers I talked to also deal extensively with second hand lenses and other accessories, and that market is (for pretty obvious reasons) orders of magnitude larger for DSLR then it is for mirrorless cameras.

Two of the three retailers I spoke to said they made more money (in terms of margins) selling high end compacts then they make from mirrorless which is very often sold with discounts.

From what I have seen, these real world experiences pretty well match with the little sales statistics I have seen.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

Fair and valid points although the large telephotos would

have very slow stock turn and high stock holding cost which would have to be factored into end of day profit on those

Most stores don't have them in stock at all; if you want one, you order one.

And here is the kicker: Lenses like 500/4 sell in surprising numbers, in spite of costing $8500 - $10000 - they are popular for birding and wildlife. And when you buy one of those brutes, you tend also to buy a large steady tripod (like a $1000 Gitzo) and a a large gimbal head (like a $500 Wimberly) just for good measure. And maybe a new large backpack to carry the stuff. A single order like that can provide more margins for a store then the mirrorless sales does in a couple of weeks.

Now, the big money earners in terms of lenses are not those big and rare items, but rather the intersection of good margins and high sales volumes - lenses like 70-200/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and the 100-400 (Canon) or 80-400 (Nikon) in the $1500 - $2500 price range who sell in good numbers and still have very decent margins both for retailers and manufacturers. Also prime lenses like 28/1.8, 35/2, 85/1.8, and all the various macro lenses etc who are attainable for many, but still carry a price tag which allows for some margins.

items...What's the micro four thirds and other mirrorless marketing like in the Nordic countries?

Nikon has made a bit of advertising, Sony a tiny amount, and as of late it evidently has been Samsungs turn to beat the drum - they have had a successful campaign of "but a NX, get a Galaxy Tab for free" which has propelled them to the number two spot among mirrorless here in Sweden (behind Sony). Advertising aside, I guess it is the usual stuff: They visit stores, have training for sales people on new models etc.

O-MD usersdon't have as much user for tripods

Why not? Every camera benefits from a tripod. Now I agree owners of smaller cameras tend not to use tripods as often (contradicts the idea of carrying around a small and light camera), but that does not make them any less useful.

and GH users would need different kinds of tripods and accessories that maybe aren't available in those stores?

Huh? What kind of "different tripods"? The screw mount for tripods is one of extremely few things with any notion of standardization in the photo world

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eamon Hickey
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,170
Like?
more on the gift of the yen's decline
In reply to Abrak, Nov 3, 2013

I noted elsewhere in this thread that the only saving grace for the camera companies this year is the sharp decline in the value of the yen, which has prevented a real profit disaster for them.

I just found a crystal clear illustration of this in Sony's recent Q2 financial presentation. In presenting their year-over-year results (i.e. last year compared to this year), Sony also presents what those results would have been in "constant currency" terms -- that is to say, what the results would have been if the yen's value had not changed at all.

For the first half of fiscal 2013 (1H FY13), Sony's imaging division is down 8.2% in sales by value compared to 2012. But if their profits had not been boosted by the yen's sharp decline, they would have been down 24%.

The division has made an operating profit of 6.8 billion yen in 1H FY2013. But if the yen had not declined in value, they would have suffered a 55 billion yen operating loss (assuming their costs were the same). That's a 62 billion yen (roughly $600 million) boost due just to currency effects.

Elsewhere in their presentation they reveal that unit sales for 1H FY13 are 5.9 million units (this is point-and-shoots + ILCs combined), down from 9 million units for the same period last year, a 34% decline in unit sales. (The majority of that decline, of course, is point-and-shoots.)

The report can be found here:

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/financial/fr/index.html

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
YouDidntDidYou
Senior MemberPosts: 1,576
Like?
Re: Some real world experiences ...
In reply to Grevture, Nov 3, 2013

Grevture wrote:

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Grevture wrote:

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Do you not have real world experiences and aren't this real world experiences sometimes later confirmed by surveys/stats/findings etc...

Ok, my world experiences are specific to my local market (Sweden), and is almost a year old (December 2012) but comes from fairly extensive interviews with three managers from three of the largest camera retailers (stores) over here. If I make a rough average from what these three people said, some points stood out:

- the average buyer of a mirrorless camera bought about as many extra lenses as the average DSLR buyer did, but much, much cheaper lenses.

- every once in a while, they sell some really high margin lenses for DSLR's, like super-telephoto lenses (in the $7000 - $15000 range) for birders, enthusiast sports shooters an others. Those few lenses alone provide for more margin for these retailers the the entire mirrorless lens sales does combined.

- the average DSLR buyer spend a lot more money buying battery grips, flashes, tripods, camera bags, filters and other accessories then the average mirrorless buyer.

On of the retailers I talked to also deal extensively with second hand lenses and other accessories, and that market is (for pretty obvious reasons) orders of magnitude larger for DSLR then it is for mirrorless cameras.

Two of the three retailers I spoke to said they made more money (in terms of margins) selling high end compacts then they make from mirrorless which is very often sold with discounts.

From what I have seen, these real world experiences pretty well match with the little sales statistics I have seen.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

Fair and valid points although the large telephotos would

have very slow stock turn and high stock holding cost which would have to be factored into end of day profit on those

Most stores don't have them in stock at all; if you want one, you order one.

And here is the kicker: Lenses like 500/4 sell in surprising numbers, in spite of costing $8500 - $10000 - they are popular for birding and wildlife. And when you buy one of those brutes, you tend also to buy a large steady tripod (like a $1000 Gitzo) and a a large gimbal head (like a $500 Wimberly) just for good measure. And maybe a new large backpack to carry the stuff. A single order like that can provide more margins for a store then the mirrorless sales does in a couple of weeks.

Now, the big money earners in terms of lenses are not those big and rare items, but rather the intersection of good margins and high sales volumes - lenses like 70-200/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and the 100-400 (Canon) or 80-400 (Nikon) in the $1500 - $2500 price range who sell in good numbers and still have very decent margins both for retailers and manufacturers. Also prime lenses like 28/1.8, 35/2, 85/1.8, and all the various macro lenses etc who are attainable for many, but still carry a price tag which allows for some margins.

items...What's the micro four thirds and other mirrorless marketing like in the Nordic countries?

Nikon has made a bit of advertising, Sony a tiny amount, and as of late it evidently has been Samsungs turn to beat the drum - they have had a successful campaign of "but a NX, get a Galaxy Tab for free" which has propelled them to the number two spot among mirrorless here in Sweden (behind Sony). Advertising aside, I guess it is the usual stuff: They visit stores, have training for sales people on new models etc.

O-MD usersdon't have as much user for tripods

Why not? Every camera benefits from a tripod. Now I agree owners of smaller cameras tend not to use tripods as often (contradicts the idea of carrying around a small and light camera), but that does not make them any less useful.

and GH users would need different kinds of tripods and accessories that maybe aren't available in those stores?

Huh? What kind of "different tripods"? The screw mount for tripods is one of extremely few things with any notion of standardization in the photo world

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

Video tripos are specifically designed for panning shots etc same screw mount...
I don't see many large telephotos in the UK unless it's among certain types of journalists or sports photographers on TV and I would imagine they are often bought second hand, very very rarely see them even at nature reserves...
Nordic photographers seem a bit under represented on Flickr, do they put their images online somewhere else?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Like?
Are you serious?
In reply to Abrak, Nov 3, 2013

Abrak wrote:

marike6 wrote:

Perhaps you missed where I wrote:

"Of course this is just anecdotal evidence, but I did notice a ton of people happily walking around Manhattan with their DSLRs."

Anecdotal

adjective - (of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research : while there was much anecdotal evidence there was little hard fact | these claims were purely anecdotal

The point is I think there is a tendency on some online forums to assume that everybody prioritizes small size in cameras, but outside of these forums in the real world there does seem to be a large segment of the population who grew up with SLRs and don't consider them burdensomely heavy.

I never said anything about facts.

No I 100% did not miss what you wrote.

You gave your personal experience on the streets of NY and you qualified by saying that it was 'anecdotal' as in 'not particular significant' as in 'may not totally reflect the facts'. I get that.

But my point is that you dont realize how 'totally insignificant' your personal experience is in the greater scheme of things. If you realized that it is a millionth of a percentile you wouldnt actually mention it in the first place let alone repeat it twice.

And you wouldnt start implying that 'global aggregated data' is something generated on 'online forums' and that your experience represents 'outside of these forums in the real world'. No, you never said anything about 'facts', merely implied your 'real world' experience might actually be relevant.

And to put it very simply. If you think your real world experience is relevant in the context of the aggregated global data, I will guarantee you 100% that it is NOT.

Are you serious?  I never said anything about global data. I gave an example from MY experience in NYC, one of the largest in the world, at THE largest camera store in the US.  That's all I did.  I NEVER said that because most people in NYC are carrying DSLRs it must be that way in the rest of the world.  I never said a single word about Europe, Asia or the grand scheme of things.

YOU are the one reading all kinds of things into my comments, talking about "facts", "global aggregate data" and "the big picture".  Not once did I mention any of those things.

We do know that DSLRs outsell MILCs in most regions, but it was not my intention to even enter into a debate over DSLRs vs MILCs because frankly I find it quite boring.

But there is a lot of talk in these forums about "large, heavy DSLRs" and about people using smaller cameras like MILCs.  And what I said was that here in the New York if they are I did not see them.   That's all I said.  Draw whatever conclusions you want, I quite honestly couldn't care less (no offense).

I'm guessing that if I had said "Wow, I was down at B&H Photo in New York yesterday and everybody I saw had either an OM-D, a PEN or an X100", your conclusion would have been "I just knew that mirrorless cameras were taking off".  Because that's not at all what happened, you are trying your best to dismiss my experience because it doesn't at all support the narrative that "mirrorless cameras are becoming more popular than DSLRs".

You say that you understand what "anecdotal evidence" means, but based on the rest of your comments above, clearly you do not.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Grevture
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,129Gear list
Like?
Re: Some real world experiences ...
In reply to YouDidntDidYou, Nov 3, 2013

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Grevture wrote:

YouDidntDidYou wrote:

Fair and valid points although the large telephotos would

have very slow stock turn and high stock holding cost which would have to be factored into end of day profit on those

Most stores don't have them in stock at all; if you want one, you order one.

And here is the kicker: Lenses like 500/4 sell in surprising numbers, in spite of costing $8500 - $10000 - they are popular for birding and wildlife. And when you buy one of those brutes, you tend also to buy a large steady tripod (like a $1000 Gitzo) and a a large gimbal head (like a $500 Wimberly) just for good measure. And maybe a new large backpack to carry the stuff. A single order like that can provide more margins for a store then the mirrorless sales does in a couple of weeks.

Now, the big money earners in terms of lenses are not those big and rare items, but rather the intersection of good margins and high sales volumes - lenses like 70-200/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and the 100-400 (Canon) or 80-400 (Nikon) in the $1500 - $2500 price range who sell in good numbers and still have very decent margins both for retailers and manufacturers. Also prime lenses like 28/1.8, 35/2, 85/1.8, and all the various macro lenses etc who are attainable for many, but still carry a price tag which allows for some margins.

items...What's the micro four thirds and other mirrorless marketing like in the Nordic countries?

Nikon has made a bit of advertising, Sony a tiny amount, and as of late it evidently has been Samsungs turn to beat the drum - they have had a successful campaign of "but a NX, get a Galaxy Tab for free" which has propelled them to the number two spot among mirrorless here in Sweden (behind Sony). Advertising aside, I guess it is the usual stuff: They visit stores, have training for sales people on new models etc.

O-MD usersdon't have as much user for tripods

Why not? Every camera benefits from a tripod. Now I agree owners of smaller cameras tend not to use tripods as often (contradicts the idea of carrying around a small and light camera), but that does not make them any less useful.

and GH users would need different kinds of tripods and accessories that maybe aren't available in those stores?

Huh? What kind of "different tripods"? The screw mount for tripods is one of extremely few things with any notion of standardization in the photo world

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

Video tripos are specifically designed for panning shots etc same screw mount...

Aha, video, that is a somewhat different story, yes. But very few of MILC buyers seem to for special equipment like that (shoulder mounts, steady rigs etc).

I don't see many large telephotos in the UK unless it's among certain types of journalists or sports photographers on TV and I would imagine they are often bought second hand, very very rarely see them even at nature reserves...

Up here in the cold Nordic they are relatively common, both among birders/wildlife people and among enthusiast sports/action shooters. It's not all that uncommon to see parents shooting kids playing soccer/hockey etc with a 6D/7D/D300/D600/D800 and a 70-200/2.0 for example. Or to meet a birder with a 500/4 over their shoulder. Lenses like 100-400 or 80-400 are downright common.

I interviewed a Tamron representative at last Photokina and he mentioned they had for a long time been confused by the Nordic market: Super zooms like their 18-270 hardly sold at all in the Nordic countries, while bigger lenses like their 200-500 did a little better.

Nordic photographers seem a bit under represented on Flickr, do they put their images online somewhere else?

Well a lot end up at www.fotosidan.se is kind of a Swedish/Nordic Dpreview - lots of forum activity, blogs, lots of images published, and they have a printed magazine largely based on member images.

I guess they absorb a lot of the photo enthusiasts in our region. Have a look at Galleri FS ("FS Gallery") which contain selected images from members.

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!
By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MichaelKJ
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,134Gear list
Like?
Re: Spreadsheet of units sold by region.
In reply to Abrak, Nov 3, 2013

Abrak wrote:

One other observation I would make about the market.

The unit price of DSLRs shipped in Japan is 17% higher than those to the US. The average price of mirrorless shipped is almost identical. Now that obviously implies that in Japan, higher priced models - presumably FF - make up a greater percentage of DSLR sales. But as DSLR sales are a smaller percentage of the overall market, then FF could easily be roughly the same percentage in both markets.

I also don't think you can necessarily assume that the difference is due to FF.  The difference in DSLR unit price could also reflect greater demand for enthusiast APS-C models relative to entry level APS-C in Japan.

Regarding differences in demand for FF, on AmazonUS, the 6D is currently the 5th best selling DSLR and 5D Mk III is 6th. The best selling FF configuration in Japan is currently the 6D in 14th place (I realize that both BCN and Amazon are far from perfect indicators of actual sales).

This makes perfect sense to me. What seems to have happened is that mirrorless has replaced a fair proportion of the APS-C models in Japan while it has failed to do so in the US. Rather than a sensor war, as mirrorless is often viewed on this forum, it is more a competition of body preferences over roughly the same size sensor/IQ.

Japan/Asia has always valued smaller size and it was noticeable that Canon even mentioned last week at their results that their mini-DSLR the SL1 was selling well in Asia. It seems that the US and Europe actually prefer larger (and perhaps a viewfinder as well) and to this end Sony even introduced the A3000 - a mirrorless with the form factor of a DSLR.

Are you referring to cameras or consumer items in general?  I've seen this stereotype voiced many times, but I wonder to what extent it is actually true.  If it is true, then I assume it would imply that Japan/Asia also prefers smaller smartphones, TVs, cars, etc. However, from what I've read, phablet phones are very popular in Eastern Asia and GM reported record sales in China for the past year, led by sales of large Buicks.  Perhaps, those with money are buying larger goods to tout their wealth.

The SL1 (Kiss X7 in Japan) is, indeed, selling very well (5th best selling ILC this week).  However, it is also doing fairly well in the US--currently the 15th best selling DSLR on AmazonUS.

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brownie314
Contributing MemberPosts: 965
Like?
Re: you're aimed at the wrong target
In reply to Eamon Hickey, Nov 4, 2013

Eamon Hickey wrote:

brownie314 wrote:

This never ceases to make me laugh. Because what is not said, but what is really motivating this thread is "hey man, can't you see how much better mirrorless is than stupid dslr's - look at the sales numbers".

If your comment is aimed at the OP, Abrak, you've completely misinterpreted his post. Abrak is interested in the business of cameras (in addition, I'm sure, to photography and many other interests), and posts very astute observations about the industry and about the financial reports of individual companies. If you bothered to read his other posts on this thread, it would be clear he's not trying to defend a preferred camera type. To my eye, he has an investor's sensibility.

It's possible to have an interest in rational evaluation of the camera industry, full stop. It's also possible to have an interest in the camera industry and the ability to rationally separate one's evaluation of the business results of particular companies from one's own camera brand or one's own favorite camera companies. There are several people who hang out on these forums who are capable of this. (Also many who are not.)

I am preferring mirrorless ILC cameras these days, but my interest in how the camera business will evolve is totally separate from that. It's business curiosity.

I own a Sony CSC and an Olympus DSLR, and I like a lot of things Olympus does in ILC camera design, but I'm also able to read a P&L statement and an annual report, and so I know that Olympus's camera division, despite designing many cameras that I like (and have reviewed quite favorably), has recorded dismal business results for years. This causes me absolutely no emotional disturbance or cognitive dissonance.

Yes, you are right.  Upon reading more posts, I realized that yes, this thread actually is about financial results from various companies in the imaging business.

I did not assume that at first because this is mind blowing.  Photographers on this website get annoyed with people who obsess over gear and DXO mark results and various minutia like that.  But this one takes the cake.  This is obsessing over financial results.  This is even one layer of abstraction further back than gear obsession.  Unless you people are investors, in which case maybe you should move to a financial website, then why would a photographer sit around and obsess over financial results from various companies.  This makes little sense to me.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
meland
Senior MemberPosts: 4,027
Like?
Re: you're aimed at the wrong target
In reply to brownie314, Nov 4, 2013

brownie314 wrote:

Eamon Hickey wrote:

brownie314 wrote:

This never ceases to make me laugh. Because what is not said, but what is really motivating this thread is "hey man, can't you see how much better mirrorless is than stupid dslr's - look at the sales numbers".

If your comment is aimed at the OP, Abrak, you've completely misinterpreted his post. Abrak is interested in the business of cameras (in addition, I'm sure, to photography and many other interests), and posts very astute observations about the industry and about the financial reports of individual companies. If you bothered to read his other posts on this thread, it would be clear he's not trying to defend a preferred camera type. To my eye, he has an investor's sensibility.

It's possible to have an interest in rational evaluation of the camera industry, full stop. It's also possible to have an interest in the camera industry and the ability to rationally separate one's evaluation of the business results of particular companies from one's own camera brand or one's own favorite camera companies. There are several people who hang out on these forums who are capable of this. (Also many who are not.)

I am preferring mirrorless ILC cameras these days, but my interest in how the camera business will evolve is totally separate from that. It's business curiosity.

I own a Sony CSC and an Olympus DSLR, and I like a lot of things Olympus does in ILC camera design, but I'm also able to read a P&L statement and an annual report, and so I know that Olympus's camera division, despite designing many cameras that I like (and have reviewed quite favorably), has recorded dismal business results for years. This causes me absolutely no emotional disturbance or cognitive dissonance.

Yes, you are right. Upon reading more posts, I realized that yes, this thread actually is about financial results from various companies in the imaging business.

I did not assume that at first because this is mind blowing. Photographers on this website get annoyed with people who obsess over gear and DXO mark results and various minutia like that. But this one takes the cake. This is obsessing over financial results. This is even one layer of abstraction further back than gear obsession. Unless you people are investors, in which case maybe you should move to a financial website, then why would a photographer sit around and obsess over financial results from various companies. This makes little sense to me.

I totally agree.  However no doubt some people do worry about whether their chosen camera system is likely to continue if results are bad.  Or perhaps somehow it confirms their personal self worth that they have made the 'right' choice?  Either way it's just a camera and hardly a life altering decision for most.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brownie314
Contributing MemberPosts: 965
Like?
Re: you're aimed at the wrong target
In reply to meland, Nov 4, 2013

meland wrote:

brownie314 wrote:

Eamon Hickey wrote:

brownie314 wrote:

This never ceases to make me laugh. Because what is not said, but what is really motivating this thread is "hey man, can't you see how much better mirrorless is than stupid dslr's - look at the sales numbers".

If your comment is aimed at the OP, Abrak, you've completely misinterpreted his post. Abrak is interested in the business of cameras (in addition, I'm sure, to photography and many other interests), and posts very astute observations about the industry and about the financial reports of individual companies. If you bothered to read his other posts on this thread, it would be clear he's not trying to defend a preferred camera type. To my eye, he has an investor's sensibility.

It's possible to have an interest in rational evaluation of the camera industry, full stop. It's also possible to have an interest in the camera industry and the ability to rationally separate one's evaluation of the business results of particular companies from one's own camera brand or one's own favorite camera companies. There are several people who hang out on these forums who are capable of this. (Also many who are not.)

I am preferring mirrorless ILC cameras these days, but my interest in how the camera business will evolve is totally separate from that. It's business curiosity.

I own a Sony CSC and an Olympus DSLR, and I like a lot of things Olympus does in ILC camera design, but I'm also able to read a P&L statement and an annual report, and so I know that Olympus's camera division, despite designing many cameras that I like (and have reviewed quite favorably), has recorded dismal business results for years. This causes me absolutely no emotional disturbance or cognitive dissonance.

Yes, you are right. Upon reading more posts, I realized that yes, this thread actually is about financial results from various companies in the imaging business.

I did not assume that at first because this is mind blowing. Photographers on this website get annoyed with people who obsess over gear and DXO mark results and various minutia like that. But this one takes the cake. This is obsessing over financial results. This is even one layer of abstraction further back than gear obsession. Unless you people are investors, in which case maybe you should move to a financial website, then why would a photographer sit around and obsess over financial results from various companies. This makes little sense to me.

I totally agree. However no doubt some people do worry about whether their chosen camera system is likely to continue if results are bad. Or perhaps somehow it confirms their personal self worth that they have made the 'right' choice? Either way it's just a camera and hardly a life altering decision for most.

Right, which was the idea of my original comment, which Eamon tried to refute.  All of this talk of financial results is to bolster someone's fragile sense that they chose the right camera system.  Any of these camera companies - ANY - could announce tomorrow that they are no longer financially solvent and go out of business.  So just choose the right system for you and go take some pictures.  Or just pose in a crowded area with a nice, expensive looking camera if that is what you like.  Either way, all of this financial obsession is taking to to whole new level.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads