Camera shipments continue to fall

The CIPA figures don't give a complete, global picture - only Japanese makers' shipments.

Their market erosion is coming from all directions:
smartphones with better than before image quality, Korean and chinese manufacturers (especially Samsung with it's NX line - surely they are putting a dent into the Japanese market share, something the Japs wouldn't like to envision).

Nikon-1 line takes customers for fools. MFT ast on their laurels, and didn't prepare for the future with new innovations.

However, we all start out with small sensor cameras, learn about photography and cameras, then want better, with larger sensors. While the smartphone is destroying sales of small sensor cameras, it's only a matter of time before people who use a smartphone for taking pictures want better, and start buying cameras again, to get that better image quality. (larger sensors, larger optics, cannot be crammed into a phone).

The only thing the manufacturers need to do is to give more discount. Simple economic law, more supply lower the price. I don't believe innovative products will bring any difference in mass market competition (not to mention a declining economy)

the only thing the manufacturers need to do is to give more discount. Simple economic law, more supply lower the price.

Much of this can be attributed to basic economics. When we enter the marketplace we are confronted with (1) our existing situation without making a purchse, (2) the perceived benefit/cost of all availabe alternatives, and (3) our available cash to make a purchase.

In this case, most consumers in the developed world already have some photographic device, be it an existing digital camera, a film camera, or increasingly a digital camera built into one's cell phone. As such many consumers do not register any sort of salient need to purchase another camera.

Even if a camera made better pictures, what qualities might a camera offer which are beyond their existing devices, and how much would those improvements cost? In a world where our photographic offerings are displayed on smart phone screens, there's not much need for better quality.

Last, in a tight economy, there's just not s much money left for non-essential photographic upgrades.

Digital cameras are a matured technology.

I have been playing with cameras since late 60's. After all these years and many different cameras this is what I think:
- Digital cameras have matured into a product which in most cases deliver a satisfying to excellent image quality. Mobile phones are evoluting into portable do everything computers with a basic camera function producing an image quality which is improving all the time.
- Time have changed, most people could not care less about quality and are carrying a mobile phone not a camera.
- Manufacturers are trying to create a need to upgrade by emphasizing the technological aspect of the new equipment so you can take "better pictures " which for most people is irrelevant as they don't really comprehend the basic principles of Photography but they understand technology.
- Current times are hard times financially and competition is fierce, there are very few reasons to justify a camera upgrade for most of us.
- Photography is reaching a turning point.

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The problem is nothing to do with smart phone sales or declining p&s or dslr sales. ...its basic photographic math. ....photography is all.about LIGHT the small lenses on the smartphone or p&s CANNOT REPLICATE THE LEVEL OF LIGHT of a dslr...period.....and second.....the sensors are physically smaller.....regardless of megapixel count....to get a three quarter size or full frame sensor in a phone or compact means drastic redesign.....as the sensors are LARGER.....they take up more real estate so LESS room for the other components.....yes you can argue mount adapters for the NEX or similar that allow LARGER DSLR LENSES.....but again.....the size of
the sensor is physically smaller...its oike trying to fit a v8 into a mini you might have the grunt (megapixels) but you dont have the handling (performance)......

The funny thing is that the only manufacturer who will be around in 20 years doing pretty much the same is Leica. It doesn't matter how much folk who can't afford their products pour out bile, there is a waiting list of at least 3-6 months for a M240 and there is no sign of any abatement.

I think that the best new kids on the block are Fuji and Sony, but both of them have loss making camera divisions ? how long can it go on

Canon turns out the same stuff but is at least profitable. It has a cash cow at the moment and lets see if it can pull out innovation before the cow dies.

The thing is to buy what you want and not worry about what others are doing. In some ways this is the best market ever for cameras. I never remember so much choice, and most of it extremely high quality.

Go around any tourist site and yes, you will see the ipads and iphones, but you also see loads of DSLRs and CSCs. There are those that will always want quality !!!

Some of you people are missing the point. Understand this: Increased Cell Phone Camera use = HIGHER prices for cameras...NOT lower. Thank You

I don't see how "smaller players" can stay in the camera business.

So, DSLR sales are 5 times higher than mirrorless ILCs. It's definitely not the near future when DSLRs disappear).

Don't forget, smartphone cameras are now hitting 10 to 13 megapixels and people think that just because their smartphone can hit high megapixels that it makes their smartphone camera as good as a regular camera so why bother buying a PS, let alone a DSLR. The only smartphone manufacture bucking the trend is HTC. I bought their HTC One which is a beautiful and fast all metal feature packed wonder but only 4 megapixel camera with a sensor that is bigger than most any other smartphone, image stabilizing and F2 lens. It isn't fantastic in all conditions and could use a few more megapixels but low light capabilities are pretty impressive. Some phone companies are catching on and are just eating the camera companies for lunch. The best thing they could do is find a phone vendor and design like a Canon or Nikon labeled phone with good camera feature set at a reasonable price.

The market has been "super saturated"- Those who can produce really better and innovative will survive. Others will re-direct their efforts in other directions. Cell phones will never truly take the place of a good digicam...didn't I say that before about film and digital???

That's probably because the manufacturers feel the daily pressure of the obligation to deliver something "new" rather than something "better".
Not that "better" isn't possible, but "new" seems to be more important.
Thus, whatever sells is declared "good", which is wrong.
"We don't want it good, we want it by Tuesday..." sort of attitude will surely cost them... so, it will also cost us. In the end, I hope quality regains its importance.

The times, they are a changing

Interchangeable lens cameras (the prosumer category) are for those of use who want a camera that is considerably better than the typical consumer P&S or smartphone cameras (the consumer category). The prosumer category sales dropped way less than in the consumer category. The dSLR group did the best. I personally think that the consumer category took a huge hit because most buyers for that category only want or need something to create social media photos, and every smartphone can do that now. Why pay for a P&S if you only have social media needs? It would be just one more device to carry around and not much better than the smartphone camera. Besides, smartphones make it extremely easy to take a photo and quickly add it to a social media site, whereas P&S cameras or a PITA at this. I think we will see the consumer category quickly transition into smartphones in the next few years leaving the prosumer category for Canon, Nikon, and the other big boys.

Perhaps it's just a coincidence but Trey Ratcliff, aka Mr. Extreme HDR has declared goodbye Nikon and hello Sony. I find his photos painful but the fact is, he's a great example of a highly successful young photographer who has no memory of struggling in the darkroom or messing with slide duping to produce a novel "special effect". His photography is not tied to traditional "realism" and he has no special attachment to SLRs. If he can get a blue sky to turn red using a cell phone, that's what he'll use.

"A little more surprising, though, are the year-on-year declines in shipments of DSLR and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras, both down around 18.5% in the first half of 2013 compared to last year. "

It should be understood that about half of the DSLR market (more in many countries) is Canon Rebel of verious generations. The latest generation in T5i and SL1 brought NOTHING worth upgrading over the previous 3 or so generations. Almost all of the rest of the market consists of Nikon D3xxx, Nikon D5x00 and Canon 60D, none of which was updated in the first half of 2013, so their sales taper off also. Basically, it is a very boring market, the rest of the DSLR cameras being in the noise in terms of shipments.

I'm sure the big guys (Nikon, Canon, ...) are working for the next generation of camera.
I see the next major improvement could be:
The sensor; it could be smaller but higher quality then the actual full size sensor. If per example the DVD changed to Blue Ray with multi-coating, a similar technology development could be applied to sensors!

Now in HD movies is move to Ultra-High-Definition 4D, cinemas, and telivisions will follow. And, could be in photography UHD photography!?

Consumers, get ready, compagnies are looking for your money... They won't die.

People reach a point where what they have does what they need and there is no reason to buy again and again. What passes for innovation these days is pretty thin. Cameras with fixed 35mm lenses. Cameras with AA filters removed (that probably shouldn't have been there in the first place). Cameras with 36 megapixels. Today, I see Sigma is re-inventing the interchangeable lens mount. Nothing wrong with any of this but it will be tough getting large numbers of people to open their wallets for this stuff.

(Part 2)

The cost of a decent DSLR and lens package is a significant consideration, too. On top of it, one usually has to spend a pretty penny to get Photoshop (legally) so as to fix the many problems that photographer inexperience leaves in a typical digital photo. In today's economy, one cannot justify spending all this money more than once every many years (or just once, period) unless one uses a camera to make a living with it.

(continued to part 3 of 3)

Most upscale smartphones do quite well when there is good lighting that does not require much skill (no contrasty light, no strong backlight, no dim light), and a smartphone is so much easier to carry around that a 1Ds Mark III with an upscale L zoom lens.

(continued to part 2 or 3)