Mirrorless camera choice and market share

I'm using a M43 camera and a Sony FF and APS-C

Any camera has his goods and bads but on Sony side is mostly love / hate relationship

Sony Ui is something that really hate and often I don't use some feature because I'm afraid of changing my setting and not being able to revert the camera as was before

NOW I decide is time to look around and understand where is going Sony and where are competitors, but I also think I should evaluate their financial position.

Nikon is in really bad waters and it just announced that is going to shut down some production.

I don't know about Canon but lately I don't really see that much Canon guys around... not sure

Panasonic for FF is way too expensive

Would you evaluate brand market share if you are going to move from a brand to another?

I would like to have: animal cognition, touch UI, real time DOF would be nice, stabilization, vertical flip screen not for selfie but for vertical shots would be nice. I guess that alternatives to A7iii would be Canon R6 and Nikon Z6 II

When considering a camera the brands market share has never been on my radar,never has never will.

• You can't ignore market share when choosing a system, but there are many more parameters one should take into consideration.

I would suggest specifications, price, UI, and lens availability should also be part of the equation.

I've left out IQ, because IMHO, it's not a big differentiator, which is good, but that leaves us with parameters that are more a question of individual preferences.

Even a small market share can be large enough, if it can sustain R&D and marketing to keep the company afloat.

I've made my own choices and believe I've chosen what suits me best, but I can't speak for anyone else.

You seem to have different systems, optimised for different use cases. I'll rather put together a system where all (or at least most of) the parts are within the same system, so there'll be no single point of failure.

Ultimately, I'm sure both approaches can work satisfactory.

I may add that IMHO, the reason you don't see Canon proselytes in large numbers is that Canon caters to so many different shooters' style and mode of operation, that we believe that unless you've actively chosen not to, you'd already have a Canon. In either case there's no point in preaching.

Good luck and good light.

al404 said:

I'm using a M43 camera and a Sony FF and APS-C

Any camera has his goods and bads but on Sony side is mostly love / hate relationship

Sony Ui is something that really hate and often I don't use some feature because I'm afraid of changing my setting and not being able to revert the camera as was before

NOW I decide is time to look around and understand where is going Sony and where are competitors, but I also think I should evaluate their financial position.

Nikon is in really bad waters and it just announced that is going to shut down some production.

Click to expand...

Yes.

al404 said:

I don't know about Canon but lately I don't really see that much Canon guys around... not sure

Click to expand...

Canon is the safest brand to buy into.

al404 said:

Panasonic for FF is way too expensive

Click to expand...

Not really.

Panasonic S5, 20-60mm kit lens, 85 f/1.8 are the cheapest in their category and they offer weather sealing and internal fast AF.

Canon RF STM lenses in comparison are more expensive, no weather sealing and worse AF.

The canon R6 doesn't have half the computation tricks of an S5, yet it's more expensive. Also the R6 has a plastic build vs full magnesium on the S5.

al404 said:

Would you evaluate brand market share if you are going to move from a brand to another?

Click to expand...

I would evaluate the company's history and ethic or reputation.

Panasonic seems quite reliable and they take their imaging division seriously despite the low market share. Panasonic is a japanese giant but will they keep their imaging division at all cost ? likely but not sure... But in the full frame market they're the most feature packed cameras for the price.

Canon treats its customers very bad, with severe product segmentation and crippling. And higher prices. But they're probably the safest brand.

Sony is too westernised and has lost its japanese pride. I think Sony will shut down their imaging division as soon as they don't make profit with it. They did it with VAIO and PSP recently and shut them down. I can totally see them doing it with their alpha cameras.

Nikon is already doomed according to rumors, as they're no longer the master of their destiny. Sony makes most of their sensors, and they're owned by Mitsubishi.

al404 said:

I would like to have: animal cognition, touch UI, real time DOF would be nice, stabilization, vertical flip screen not for selfie but for vertical shots would be nice. I guess that alternatives to A7iii would be Canon R6 and Nikon Z6 II

Click to expand...

And the Panasonic S5.

--
...

Funny Valentine said:

Nikon is already doomed according to rumors, as they're no longer the master of their destiny. Sony makes most of their sensors, and they're owned by Mitsubishi.

Click to expand...

I don't think Nikon brand is going to sink, some way or another I guess it will survive, is an historical brand

Panasonic seems to have huge lots in imaging not sure how safe it could be

I always consider brand market share when purchasing high value items. The reason I do is if I had to sell the item for whatever reason, I want to sell into a market where the demand for the brand is high.

I think evaluating financial condition makes sense but it may be challenging to accomplish. I don't know how readily available company financial roadmaps may be to allow for public evaluation. Also with SARS-CoV-2 all manufacturers have been impacted I expect causing some or all to rethink both strategic and operational roadmaps. But you have my full support to do the investigations!

While I always consider brand market share sometimes I purchase from a non-market leader.

Several years ago I purchased my Fuji X-T1. To my knowledge Fuji was not a market leader at the time nor are they now. I purchased the Fuji based upon performance for its size / form factor. I wanted a travel system and Fuji delivered.

I do not see myself moving to a new system at my age of 67. I do see myself possibly selling all my Canon gear to purchase a Fuji X-T4 body and a lens or two to go with it.

My 6D and L lenses were a great combination when I was doing portraits and headshots. Don't provide those services anymore. And the X-T4 with the right lenses could get the job done if I started up again.

As to Nikon I think they came late to the mirrorless party. What impact that will have to the once iconic brand going forward I have no idea but time will tell. Since I will not be moving to a new system Nikon and their future doesn't matter to me at the end of the day.

I do know Nikon is not a popular brand with YouTube creators (~ 31 million YouTube channels right now and increasing) and in my opinion video is the future.

Have fun with your decisions!

(Disclaimer: Everything I post on DPReview fora is my opinion and should be treated as such unless you believe in what my opinion states. In that case it may be fact and not opinion. The reader should decide appropriately.)

--

Mount: HEQ5 Pro / Scope: WO ZenithStar 61 II w/Z61A Field Flattener
Polar Scope: QHY Polemaster :: Camera: ZWO ASI294MM Pro
Guide Scope: UniGuide 32mm & ZWO ASI120MM Mini :: Bortle Class 8
N.I.N.A., PHD2, Cartes du Ciel, Astro Pixel Processor, Photoshop
https://www.youtube.com/astrovagabond
https://blog.astrovagabond.com

al404 said:

Nikon is in really bad waters and it just announced that is going to shut down some production.

Click to expand...

Nikon appears to be moving in the right direction:


Portion of recent Nikon financial document

al404 said:

Would you evaluate brand market share if you are going to move from a brand to another?

Click to expand...

No.

al404 said:

I don't know about Canon but lately I don't really see that much Canon guys around... not sure

Click to expand...

Canon has long been #1 in worldwide interchangeable-lens camera market share. My guess is that they are currently #2 in FF mirrorless market share.

"We also raised profitability significantly in the second half of the year, thanks to sales of the EOS R5 and EOS R6 that were launched in the third quarter."

- Recent Canon financial document

Depends on needs, but it is a big factor since it will impact pricing directly.

Besides each camera company competing with each other, you also have retailers trying to get your business.

The bigger the market share the more incentives these companies have to push products to at least maintain market share.

Market share also means availability for accessories and third-party options.

al404 said:

al404 said:

Nikon is already doomed according to rumors, as they're no longer the master of their destiny. Sony makes most of their sensors, and they're owned by Mitsubishi.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thom Hogan means no.

al404 said:

I don't think Nikon brand is going to sink, some way or another I guess it will survive, is an historical brand

Panasonic seems to have huge lots in imaging not sure how safe it could be

Click to expand...

History is no guaranty. Yaschica, Contax, Rollei, Konica, Minolta, Topcon, and Chinon are either extinct, trademarks for hire, or has disappeared from the photography consumer market.

If you had asked in 1990, I would have denied any chance of the fall of the Kodak empire. They had so many ressources and so much knowledge and patents, that it seemed impossible they would not survive the transition to digital.

Nikon may be luckier, but we'll see.

Sony has a long history of dropping unsuccessful products (EL cassettes, Betamax, MiniDisc, DAT, SLT cameras). Since they lead the mirrorless market (AFAIK), it seems impossible that they will also drop their Alpha mirrorless cameras in the foreseeable future.

Like Sony, Panasonic also has a large installed base within the broadcasting industry. There's some synergy between those sectors that shouldn't be underestimated.

Predicting the future is not easy.

Market share is not really important.
But if you expect to go beyong a simple P&S in ILC direction, then the financial stability and long term company viability is something to be concerned about. You can buy better lenses than your current body needs, because you know that these lenses will work with your next camera, for example. You will be able to sell easily your overgrown camera and lenses to finance the upgrade if they are made by a reputable brand.
If a company has 3% market share, and makes a miss or two, it may disappear, or abandon the photo market. But if the company has significant market share and makes a miss or is late to the 'next big thing' party, it still has enough resources to recover. See Nikon, for example. They lost a lot of ILC market share, and are behind both SONY and Canon not just in market share, but in current MILC offerings as well, but I am positive they will do a comeback, because they have enough resources to develop outstanding products, enough value in its brand recognition, and enough D800/850/6 users willing to wait for a next Nikon camera even if they believe that, say, Z7 II is not enough of upgrade.

--

Vlad

Klaus dk said:

al404 said:

Klaus dk said:

Nikon is already doomed according to rumors, as they're no longer the master of their destiny. Sony makes most of their sensors, and they're owned by Mitsubishi.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thom Hogan means no.

Klaus dk said:

I don't think Nikon brand is going to sink, some way or another I guess it will survive, is an historical brand

Panasonic seems to have huge lots in imaging not sure how safe it could be

Click to expand...

History is no guaranty. Yaschica, Contax, Rollei, Konica, Minolta, Topcon, and Chinon are either extinct, trademarks for hire, or has disappeared from the photography consumer market.

If you had asked in 1990, I would have denied any chance of the fall of the Kodak empire. They had so many ressources and so much knowledge and patents, that it seemed impossible they would not survive the transition to digital.

Nikon may be luckier, but we'll see.

Sony has a long history of dropping unsuccessful products (EL cassettes, Betamax, MiniDisc, DAT, SLT cameras). Since they lead the mirrorless market (AFAIK), it seems impossible that they will also drop their Alpha mirrorless cameras in the foreseeable future.

Click to expand...

Sony did kill the playstation portable (PSP) as soon as they had one single competitor (Nintendo) rising up against them.

That's why I'm afraid Sony may kill the alpha cameras overnight since many big competitors are showing up (Canon, Panasonic, Sigma) in the FF mirrorless market.

Also killing the alpha camera line is much much easier than killing the Playstation portable.

The alpha line cameras are managed in house by Sony. No third party partner involved.

The PSP was a shared venture with many third party software and game developers, and Sony's reputation and billions of Yen were on the line since they were still invested in the gaming industry with the playstation home console. Yet the killed the PSP just like that and risking their reputation as a reliable partner in long term software/game development.

Compared to that, killing the alpha cameras for Sony would be a child's play. It could literally happen overnight without warning.

Klaus dk said:

Like Sony, Panasonic also has a large installed base within the broadcasting industry. There's some synergy between those sectors that shouldn't be underestimated.

Predicting the future is not easy.

Click to expand...

--
...

Not so easy. SONY can, of course, kill E mount when it stops making profit on it, but even then this might not happen easily, because E mount utilizes SONY sensors, SONY optics and raw glass, which are also consumed by other SONY and third party businesses. Using them in E mount brings their R&D and production costs lower even if E mount become less profitable.
I remember SONY made a deal with Zeiss to get Zeiss on board to build lenses for e-mount when there was no high quality SONY glass available for it, and at the same time SONY still depends heavily on Zeiss glass for their camcorders. So even from business relationships point of view, abandoning E mount might be not a trivial task. We just don't know what deals SONY belongs to.

The single most important factor to me is the User Interface. Photography is how I release my tensions. It is what I do for enjoyment. If the User Interface is not good, I stop there. I have been enjoying photgraphy since I was 13 years old in 1957. The two User Interfaces that I enjoy the most are Panasonic and Canon. Over the years, I have used many cameras and I have found those two brands always to be the easiest for me to use. At the present time I have the Canon M6 Mark II and the Panasonic S5. They are a wonderful combo and it is my intention to keep them for many years. I love the ergonomics of both cameras, the colors, and most important the UI.

Hal

No, Nikon is not owned by Mitsubishi. It's not a subsidiary of any other company. This misunderstanding keeps being repeated by people who don't know what a keiretsu is. A keiretsu, like the Mitsubishi group, is basically a strategic partnership or alliance between formally independent companies, with mutual shareholding relations. There's no controlling parent company like in a Western conglomerate.

Also, all of the big Japanese camera makers are part of such groups, not just Nikon.

I don't like these doom & gloom threads. Someone gets a tiny bit of info, takes it out of context or infers something that may not be true, then spreads paranoia in threads like this. The site is big enough it could damage the company.

For all we know, the people starting these threads work for the competition and WANT to hurt the other companies by spreading rumors and passing off their judgments as fact.

I'm going to run it by my colleagues and admin and we'll see what happens.