+1
This interview with Fujio Mitarai (Canon CEO/Chairman) can be interpreted in exactly the way you just wrote above:
Being the leader can be costly. In some cases it is better to follow and optimize financials for the long run.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
PR: Canon #1 in FF, #1 in APS-C, and...
- Thread starter justmeMN
- Start date
This interview with Fujio Mitarai (Canon CEO/Chairman) can be interpreted in exactly the way you just wrote above:
Canon has a big advantage because of their large collection of lens, when I started buying equipment long ago, that was what swayed me to Canon. I felt like Nikon and canon were about equal as far as quality but I thought that someday I might pursue photography as a career and wanted to be with the leader.
I have always said that Canon's lens catalog sells far more cameras than the cameras sell lenses. I have been reminded of this lately when I bought the SL2. I found that Canon's new EF-S/EF STM lenses are phenomenal values and this will keep me in the Canon camp for at least another 2-3 years as I don't have the pressure to buy a MILC that I don't feel has matured enough to meet my needs.
Abbas Rafey
Member
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 7
In these days almost all the cameras which are available are well and good for photographers but may not be good for camera collectors. All these advertisement that are comming up by some photographers about switching diffirent brands are not done for free. They are paied to agetate the market.
Rick Knepper
Forum Pro
But it is 2nd best out of the ones I own. I doubt any 35mm camera will ever take over first place again in my bag.
That's a pretty good example actually. Toyota used to be great in reliability (not the performance) and it's defenitely not anymore. Howerver the people continue to buy it anyhow. The same story for Canon new buyers with no commitment...
If you look at the offerings of the entry level cameras for d-slr and mirrorless, it become immediately apparent why most new users of entry level camera will choose for Canon. The cheapest mirrorless is a Canon EOS m10 and the cheapest D-slr is another eos camera. The cheapest Sony is 200€ more expensive.
They have all really antiquated hardware but if you want to start an don't want to spend lots of money, you will buy them. They are really, really cheap and I know the dealers keep pushing them probably because they get a bonus.
--
No life without a camera.
They have all really antiquated hardware but if you want to start an don't want to spend lots of money, you will buy them. They are really, really cheap and I know the dealers keep pushing them probably because they get a bonus.
--
No life without a camera.
Rick Knepper
Forum Pro
How so?
but if you want to start an don't want to spend lots of money, you will buy them. They are really, really cheap and I know the dealers keep pushing them probably because they get a bonus.
--
No life without a camera.
--
Once you've done fifty, everything else is iffy.
I am no Canon fanboy but they offer tremendous value in their lower end models. Then let's not overlook the value in their lens catalog. Sony can't touch Canon for value or lens selection. I use the SL2 and it is a tremendous camera. Especially when matched with the excellent, affordable STM lenses. The M100 is another tremendous value camera.
While you say cheap, I say inexpensive and a tremendous value for the money spent. This is one reason Canon is the undisputed market leader.
While you say cheap, I say inexpensive and a tremendous value for the money spent. This is one reason Canon is the undisputed market leader.
peripheralfocus
Veteran Member
FrancoD was talking about profit margins for the retailer, not for Canon. Canon makes much higher profit margins on its camera business than any other major manufacturer. This can be established from the financial reports of the various manufacturers.
Canon has had by far the most profitable consumer camera business in the world every year for more than 30 years. Again, this can be fairly easily established from public financial reports.
As for when Kodak was selling cameras well, I'm not sure what you're referring to. Kodak had a large and interesting camera business, with models from entry-level to top-end enthusiast, from around 1900 to the 1950s. From the 1960s on, they concentrated on low-end snapshot cameras all the way through their very large and profitable disposable camera business in the 1990s. All of those businesses were profitable overall for many years.
It seems like you may be referring to the company's professional digital cameras, however. It's true that those were not profitable, but it was a tiny, tiny business in a very small niche. Experimental, really.
Well, another truth is that camera technology and camera sales success are two different things, and not very strongly correlated with each other. Whatever you may think of Canon's technological skills, there's simply no doubt that they are the best at selling cameras for a profit. Their business skills are top-notch. They've proven it year after year for decades.
I don't think the Kodak analogy is apt here, at least not in the way you are framing it. Kodak's sharp decline had nothing to do with its camera business, one way or the other. It was all about the evaporation of its chemical business — i.e. photographic film and paper.
MILC technology is a small step in the evolution of cameras — one that Canon is more than equipped to handle easily (in fact, have already handled). The transition from film to digital was, for film manufacturing companies, a true revolution — 100X more significant than the change from optical viewing to electronic viewing in ILC cameras.
That said, there is another true revolution coming to photography that definitely threatens all the current camera companies, including Canon. It's computational photography, which will completely change the basic technology of cameras, and which relies on fields of knowledge and expertise that are quite different than those that the traditional optical companies possess. Companies like Apple, Google, and Samsung may be leading that charge, and they are extremely formidable competitors, on a totally different level than old-line camera companies.
Last edited:
peripheralfocus
Veteran Member
Yes, this is clearly Canon's global approach. (I'm not sure where you are FrancoD — Australia? — but I'm in the U.S., and have worked in camera retailing and also for a camera manufacturer.)
Historically, Canon's basic sales strategy here has been to drive customers into the store already intending to buy a Canon. To execute that strategy well is extremely expensive — it depends on putting out huge volumes of consumer advertising (TV commercials, event sponsorships, celebrity endorsements etc.). But it does work, as has been proven by brand after brand.
This strategy began for Canon in the 1970s with the AE-1 camera and the ad campaign starring the tennis player, John Newcombe, that was used to sell it. It quickly made Canon the largest camera company in the world, a position they have held ever since, apart from several years in the 1980s.
Contrast that strategy with a brand like Pentax. Here in the U.S., Pentax historically pursued a strategy that depended on the camera store sales personnel steering customers to Pentax products when they came into the store to shop. Pentax supported this strategy with quasi-hidden financial incentives to the store itself and also to the individual sales people, if the store permitted that (not all would). These store and sales people incentives are much, much cheaper than Canon's consumer advertising approach, but also much less effective.
Just FYI, Canon has historically been the least profitable camera brand for retailers to sell in the U.S., too (along with Nikon). But, as you said, stores have to stock Canon and sell it because customers want it. And they come into the store asking for it. Sometimes you can switch them to something else — a Pentax, maybe — but many times they will turn around and leave if you don't have what they already decided they wanted.
Last edited:
Thanks Eamon.
Yes I am in Australia but it was the same in New Zealand when Canon took over from the previous agents, the company I worked for over there.
Nice to see comments from people that are not just writing what they think it happens but do know what does happen.
Yes I am in Australia but it was the same in New Zealand when Canon took over from the previous agents, the company I worked for over there.
Nice to see comments from people that are not just writing what they think it happens but do know what does happen.
Wayne Larmon
Forum Pro
Yes. I just ordered a Google Pixel 2 to partially replace the Canon M6 system I bought about six weeks ago (along with my 6D, L lenses, etc.) Based on the recent DPReview review of the Pixel 2 , and from information I learned in a flurry of posts this week, mostly on the DPR Mobile Photography Talk forum.
The ground is shifting rapidly. DPReview is working to revise their testing system to deal with computational photography (see the comments that DPReview staff posted in the comments below the DPR Pixel 2 review.) One example, "sensor size" is rapidly losing its meaning as a comparison metric. (ibid.)
The winds are changing.
Wayne.
RubberDials
Senior Member
No it isn't. If I said my holiday last year was a roller coaster ride, it doesn't mean I went to a fairground. It means that the holiday was as exciting as a rollercoaster ride.Yes it is. Try a more relevant comparisona camera is not actually being compared to a hamburger, redfox, it's a metaphor.
In the McDonalds comparison - which is quite apposite - what is being highlighted is that Canon is ubiquitous - like McDonalds, and very popular - like McDonalds - but not the best food product - like McDonalds.
captura
Forum Pro
Oh Lawdy, how can it be?
captura
Forum Pro
I agree. I use Olympus, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic and Canon. The value is definitely there, especially the STM lenses.
carlgorski
Leading Member
- Messages
- 797
- Reaction score
- 310
all without 4K
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum