Canon must make mirrorless camera or else it's compacts will be 2nd tier

The Micro 4/3 cameras must be seriously hurting the Canon compact sales especially the G11 type. Advanced photographers looking for a quality compact to replace the DSLR have been buying the micro 4/3s. Will canon catch up by making a mirrorless camera like the samsung NX10? - only then can it recoup the lost sales. What's your thought?

I'm already seriously thinking of getting the Panasonic G2 for my everyday camera.

I haven't seen a mirrorless camera yet that compares with the G11. They can take fine pictures, but are completely different animals compared to the G11.

According to 1001noisycameras' top 25 selling DSLR list (which includes mirrorless IL cams) mirrorless cameras sales are not that good compared to the popular DSLRs. The Panasonic G2 and GF-1 are on the list at 13, 23, and 25. Canons, Nikons, and a couple of Pentax K-x cameras are taking all the other spots.

On their list of current top selling cameras (regardless of type) there isn't a single mirrorless IL camera. There are lots of Canons, including DSLRs, G11, S90, and others. There are also several Nikons.

Where are all these lost sales you're talking about?

.

I basically agree. Ya know, all compacts are mirrorless, they just don't have interchangeable lenses. I'd like to see more big-sensor, integrated lens cameras like the (hopelessly overpriced) Leica. How about a g12 with a 1/1" sensor and a fast 28-85 (35 eqiv) lens? Integrated lenses can be more compact for a given f and f/stop.
--
Chris in Red Stick

ELTY4 said:

The Micro 4/3 cameras must be seriously hurting the Canon compact sales especially the G11 type. Advanced photographers looking for a quality compact to replace the DSLR have been buying the micro 4/3s. Will canon catch up by making a mirrorless camera like the samsung NX10? - only then can it recoup the lost sales. What's your thought?

I'm already seriously thinking of getting the Panasonic G2 for my everyday camera.

Click to expand...

So, Canon should do what you say because you're thinking of getting another type of camera. Well, that seals the deal then! "Hello, Canon Japan, yes, ELTY4 on some forum says you have to change your business plan. Yes...no, he's threatening to switch brands....oh yes. Thank you."

What sales stats are you quoting to base your whole post on?

I wish they'd sell something like the S90 with an optical viewfinder. Yes, I know the G11 still has one, but it is a little bigger than I want for a pocket P&S. Meanwhile, I'll keep carrying my SD800 in my pocket every day.
--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentionalal. Sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/jeffp25
http://www.jeffp25.smugmug.com

Why would you buy a G11 with noisy sensor and an optical viewfinder that's practically useless ie. not accurate by a mile when for a bit more you can get a cracking GF1 with the largish sensor?

The G11 can be bought for $450 US whereas the GF1 with a 3X zoom lens is $750 US. That doesn't sound like "a bit more" to me.That sounds like over 50% more to me -- and if you buy a zoom lens that covers the same field of view as the G11 it will be around $1000.

The fact is that these two cameras are in different classes and it is foolish to compare them. If I were going to spend $1000 on a camera and lens, it would certainly not be the Panasonic. As nice as it is, it is grossly overpriced compared to almost any entry level DSLR and underperforms most of them in most respects..

Pricing must be greatly different where you live. The way I see it is with comparable lens it's double and then it isn't nearly as compact, so I would surely go for a small dslr that has a great optical viewfinder instead of none and the G11 optical viewfinder is certainly better than none also.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Canon come out with a compact that has an APS-C sensor and a fixed zoom lens.

Something about the size of the Olympus EPL1.

I'm probably wrong but it wouldn't surprise me if micro four thirds went away very soon.

Sony has already shown that a larger sensor can be put in a small camera.

Canon could recapture more lost sales right in an easier way. Their own over aged, and no long relevant Compact Camera Line, is screaming for a much needed overhaul. That is a much great potential danger to Canon than Canon's lack of an EVIL cameras specifically.

If you really look rather closely, the EVIL market is over priced and almost stagnant. The P+S/Compact Camera line is a much larger "hole in the boat" than the lack of a Canon EVIL camera.

The S-90 and G-11 are good cameras but fast becoming ready for replacement. The SX-210 was Canon's shot at the compact zoom class of cameras, and it was a poor design that resulted in more than a few "design warts" that are not easily overcome. Therefore sales have lagged precariously on the SX-210.

The new SD-4000 has wonderful potential, but it too has "design warts." It is another "not fully planned out" design that has been forced into a let than perfect introduction time window. It has soft images, less than perfect, high ISO capability, which was supposed to be its key selling point, and popped up with no introduction. It just suddenly was on the market.

The Canon super zoom, the Sx-20 is over due for replacement, and the SX-1 has been discontinued. The best options out there are the Fuji HS-10 and the panasonic FZ-35/38.

With the S-90, G-11, SX-210, and Sd-4000 selling at the around $300 price point and above, one has to ask what what Canon cameras fill the market below the $300 and $400 price point? All canon has is the overly aged Sx-120 which is now selling for just $179, and a group of equally over aged SD series cameras.

Shoppers in the under $300 market are walking over to the Panasonic camp with great regularity.

Sarah Joyce

Anchor72 said:

Canon could recapture more lost sales right in an easier way.

Click to expand...

WHAT LOST SALES???

.

I agree... the m43 concept is good as a pricey compact until you try to extend the FL range, a entry APS dslr is near enough size wise and cheaper...plus many mores lenses.
There is a strong market for quality 10mp pocket cameras with
--
Fred, KM A2, Canon S90.
'Your best Photo should be viewed with a biased eye'
http://coolsiggy.smugmug.com/

Graystar said:

Anchor72 said:

Canon could recapture more lost sales right in an easier way.

Click to expand...

WHAT LOST SALES???

Click to expand...

Like, you know, people who buy EVIL cameras?

Radu P said:

Graystar said:

Anchor72 said:

Canon could recapture more lost sales right in an easier way.

Click to expand...

WHAT LOST SALES???

Click to expand...

Like, you know, people who buy EVIL cameras?

Click to expand...

And how do you know those are P&S loses and not DSLR losses?

It's more likely that the loss suffered was by the smallest DSLR, which is an Olympus. Despite the availability of m4/3 cameras for nearly two years now, Canon and Nikon still have the best selling DSLRs, and Canon still has the best selling compacts (along with Panasonic.) Right now, Canon has nothing to fear from m4/3 cameras...and considering the price and image quality of 4/3rds, I doubt they ever will.

.

It doesn't matter what market they bite from, what matters is that Canon is losing sales, since people that buy EVIL cameras buy them from other manufacturers.

Radu P said:

It doesn't matter what market they bite from, what matters is that Canon is losing sales, since people that buy EVIL cameras buy them from other manufacturers.

Click to expand...

That's meaningless because it also applies to Nikon and Pentax and others who don't make such cameras. That's no different than saying people are buy non-Canon cameras...regardless of the type. Mirrorless IL cameras hold no special distinction.

You've also presumed that these buyers aren't also going to buy a compact or DSLR. I would dare speculate that all buyers of such cameras still have a small compact that fits in their pockets (because the mirrorless IL cameras are far from pocketable.)

Canon is in the business of selling cameras. But camera sales have to be profitable, and Canon won't introduce a camera unless they think they can make money on it. Note that there's no TX2. When Canon thinks they can make money on a mirrorless IL camera then we might see one. But the way things are going now for mirrorless IL cameras, I doubt we'll see a Canon version any time soon.

.

Because up to AND including iso1600 and with proper (and minimal) raw PP, it comes to an inch of what GF1 can produce in jpg and raw, if you do not intend printing A1 and larger ..

I would agree if you would have used X1 for comparison instead i guess ..

ELTY4 said:

Why would you buy a G11 with noisy sensor and an optical viewfinder that's practically useless ie. not accurate by a mile when for a bit more you can get a cracking GF1 with the largish sensor?

Click to expand...

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ii

http://nightlight.zenfolio.com
http://photomoment.bg/user/show/3132

Can you remind again why it matters ?


if they loose more sales will the world stop turning around , or will they try to come up with a better offering, whatever that might be?

If you need to buy a camera this year, buy what's best for you and available now, be it nikon,canon , Pana, Oly ,Samsung, or Sony ...

What would worry me is if Canon got all the sales and "killed" the smaller competitors like olympus, because I think what we need is competition!

Radu P said:

It doesn't matter what market they bite from, what matters is that Canon is losing sales, since people that buy EVIL cameras buy them from other manufacturers.

Click to expand...

--
Yves

Could be they are waiting to see how things shake out with the mirrorless cameras. In the past Canon's pellicle SLRs got wide acclaim but not a lot of sales. I had the 10 frame per second F1 back in the 70s. Once at the NCAA track meet Heinz Kluetmeier of Sports Illustrated borrowed it from me....otherwise, no big deal.