Reading mode: Light Dark

Only 8% market share? Is Fuji slipping?

Go to last post
**** Ginkowski said:
Interesting comments.

Again, I was very surprised at Canon's market share. In the earlier days of mirrorless I was considering, as a Canon shooter, buying a Canon mirrorless body and a friend of mine who worked for Canon talked me out of it. They really didn't do much in mirrorless for years and even the new crop of mirrorless cameras look like their old DSLRs. That said, they must be doing something right -- and to be outselling Nikon three-to-one as well.
Click to expand...
I can't dispute that you were very surprised. But you shouldn't have been. Canon is huge. Nikon futzed up their first mirrorless models. Before the beginning of the DSLR demise Canon was outselling Nikon at roughly a 40% to 25% market share. Canon's R5 and R6 were superior to Nikon's offerings back then. Nikon needed to nail the cutover to mirrorless and they didn't. Nikon's current offerings are arguably better than Canon's in full frame. But when you screw up it can take quite a bit of time to recover, if ever.

I like Fujifilm cameras quite a bit and continue to use them from time to time. But I prefer Bayer to X-Trans and I prefer full frame to APS-C. Fujifilm will never rise to more than 10% of the market. I don't think they need to and I don't know that Fujifilm cares either.
 
michaeladawson said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Erik Baumgartner said:
Well, their market share might improve if they actually made some cameras to sell.
Click to expand...
I think Patrick said the same thing.

Could they have spread themselves too thin?
Click to expand...
They are a huge company. That's not to say that their imaging division is huge. Only to say that Fujifilm could be bigger if they wanted to. If they're spread too thin it is their own planning mismanagement.
Click to expand...
They could just be as big as they are comfortable being.
 
A few thoughts:

1. 8% is low compared to what? Was it larger in the past?

2. For a decade, companies have been implementing the strategy of "the market is shrinking, so we sell less but we charge more". As long term strategy, I doubt it will sustain itself. The bubble will burst. Because "we charge more" will lead to "we sell less, so we charge more", in a downward spiral. Fuji seems to have boarded this train.

3. Canon are laying off people globally due to decrease in profits and sales. So are they already under the effect of this spiral?

The number of people that can buy cameras in the range of 2000 - 5000 $ is limited. I mean, the new R5II costs more than 4000 $; sell few, but more expensive...
 
michaeladawson said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Interesting comments.

Again, I was very surprised at Canon's market share. In the earlier days of mirrorless I was considering, as a Canon shooter, buying a Canon mirrorless body and a friend of mine who worked for Canon talked me out of it. They really didn't do much in mirrorless for years and even the new crop of mirrorless cameras look like their old DSLRs. That said, they must be doing something right -- and to be outselling Nikon three-to-one as well.
Click to expand...
I can't dispute that you were very surprised. But you shouldn't have been. Canon is huge. Nikon futzed up their first mirrorless models. Before the beginning of the DSLR demise Canon was outselling Nikon at roughly a 40% to 25% market share. Canon's R5 and R6 were superior to Nikon's offerings back then. Nikon needed to nail the cutover to mirrorless and they didn't. Nikon's current offerings are arguably better than Canon's in full frame. But when you screw up it can take quite a bit of time to recover, if ever.

I like Fujifilm cameras quite a bit and continue to use them from time to time. But I prefer Bayer to X-Trans and I prefer full frame to APS-C. Fujifilm will never rise to more than 10% of the market. I don't think they need to and I don't know that Fujifilm cares either.
Click to expand...
 
michaeladawson said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Interesting comments.

Again, I was very surprised at Canon's market share. In the earlier days of mirrorless I was considering, as a Canon shooter, buying a Canon mirrorless body and a friend of mine who worked for Canon talked me out of it. They really didn't do much in mirrorless for years and even the new crop of mirrorless cameras look like their old DSLRs. That said, they must be doing something right -- and to be outselling Nikon three-to-one as well.
Click to expand...
I can't dispute that you were very surprised. But you shouldn't have been. Canon is huge. Nikon futzed up their first mirrorless models. Before the beginning of the DSLR demise Canon was outselling Nikon at roughly a 40% to 25% market share. Canon's R5 and R6 were superior to Nikon's offerings back then. Nikon needed to nail the cutover to mirrorless and they didn't. Nikon's current offerings are arguably better than Canon's in full frame. But when you screw up it can take quite a bit of time to recover, if ever.

I like Fujifilm cameras quite a bit and continue to use them from time to time. But I prefer Bayer to X-Trans and I prefer full frame to APS-C. Fujifilm will never rise to more than 10% of the market. I don't think they need to and I don't know that Fujifilm cares either.
Click to expand...
Fujifim imaging is about 15% of Fujifilm Global. Kind of like a hobby business that keeps those with fond memories of the film era happy.
 
**** Ginkowski said:
Interesting comments.

Again, I was very surprised at Canon's market share. In the earlier days of mirrorless I was considering, as a Canon shooter, buying a Canon mirrorless body and a friend of mine who worked for Canon talked me out of it. They really didn't do much in mirrorless for years and even the new crop of mirrorless cameras look like their old DSLRs. That said, they must be doing something right -- and to be outselling Nikon three-to-one as well.
Click to expand...
I am not that surprised. While exploring Flickr I always check the gear and a huge percentage is Canon!
 
didole said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023. Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).

This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size. Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume Fuji’s share is “slipping”? Has it ever been higher? Do you think they should value market share over profit?

taking into account that Fuji seems to sell every camera they produce, 8% market share seems to be pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
According to another poster it was 12% four years ago. But it also depends on Fuji's strategy and where they want to be in this market. I don't think Fuji has been clear to consumers about this, so we can all guess right now...
 
MarkJ59 said:
Fuji doesn’t give two hoots about market share, its focus is on hitting sales targets for each of its products. Supply shortages? Nobody at Fuji cares, and won’t unless and until the shortages prevent sales targets from being achieved, e.g. through mass cancellation of unfulfilled orders. Which seems unlikely, given that Fuji’s ‘strategy’ of deliberately created scarcity doesn’t seem to be putting customers off buying and then waiting. And waiting. And waiting.
Click to expand...
This is what we assume based on their behavior, but can't believe they don't care about supply shortages and lost sales. Their brand name is suffering due to those supply/production issues and the perceived lack of modern AF.
 
Yannis1976 said:
didole said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023. Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).

This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size. Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume Fuji’s share is “slipping”? Has it ever been higher? Do you think they should value market share over profit?

taking into account that Fuji seems to sell every camera they produce, 8% market share seems to be pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
According to another poster it was 12% four years ago. But it also depends on Fuji's strategy and where they want to be in this market. I don't think Fuji has been clear to consumers about this, so we can all guess right now...
Click to expand...
As others have said, it’s important not to confuse market share % with absolute sales in units. The limited information available from different sources suggests that Fujifilm is selling more cameras than in the past, with more customers wanting them than they can produce, but their % share of the mirrorless market has declined as that market as a whole has grown. The big players have sold more mirrorless bodies iso DSLRs.


Where Fujifilm wants to be in this market is indeed fun to guess at. They will never aim for a dominant position I’m sure, and would fail if they did. I support the idea that they are playing in their intended space, and providing they achieve their sales targets for new products, they will be content. Being a somewhat niche, or specialised player in a market is not a bad place to be and has more freedom than market leadership.
 
Last edited:
Night Pixel said:
michaeladawson said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Interesting comments.

Again, I was very surprised at Canon's market share. In the earlier days of mirrorless I was considering, as a Canon shooter, buying a Canon mirrorless body and a friend of mine who worked for Canon talked me out of it. They really didn't do much in mirrorless for years and even the new crop of mirrorless cameras look like their old DSLRs. That said, they must be doing something right -- and to be outselling Nikon three-to-one as well.
Click to expand...
I can't dispute that you were very surprised. But you shouldn't have been. Canon is huge. Nikon futzed up their first mirrorless models. Before the beginning of the DSLR demise Canon was outselling Nikon at roughly a 40% to 25% market share. Canon's R5 and R6 were superior to Nikon's offerings back then. Nikon needed to nail the cutover to mirrorless and they didn't. Nikon's current offerings are arguably better than Canon's in full frame. But when you screw up it can take quite a bit of time to recover, if ever.

I like Fujifilm cameras quite a bit and continue to use them from time to time. But I prefer Bayer to X-Trans and I prefer full frame to APS-C. Fujifilm will never rise to more than 10% of the market. I don't think they need to and I don't know that Fujifilm cares either.
Click to expand...
Fujifim imaging is about 15% of Fujifilm Global. Kind of like a hobby business that keeps those with fond memories of the film era happy.
Click to expand...
That's the scary part if they decide they don't sell enough and quit.
 
RobRoy22 said:
Yannis1976 said:
didole said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023. Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).

This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size. Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume Fuji’s share is “slipping”? Has it ever been higher? Do you think they should value market share over profit?

taking into account that Fuji seems to sell every camera they produce, 8% market share seems to be pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
According to another poster it was 12% four years ago. But it also depends on Fuji's strategy and where they want to be in this market. I don't think Fuji has been clear to consumers about this, so we can all guess right now...
Click to expand...
As others have said, it’s important not to confuse market share % with absolute sales in units. The limited information available from different sources suggests that Fujifilm is selling more cameras than in the past, with more customers wanting them than they can produce, but their % share of the mirrorless market has declined as that market as a whole has grown. The big players have sold more mirrorless bodies iso DSLRs.
Click to expand...
Nothing confusing here (this has been my main job since 2004). My question was whether the overall mirrorless market is indeed growing or shrinking similarly to the total camera market. If both total market and your market share are shrinking then you simply sell less.
RobRoy22 said:
Where Fujifilm wants to be in this market is indeed fun to guess at. They will never aim for a dominant position I’m sure, and would fail if they did. I support the idea that they are playing in their intended space, and providing they achieve their sales targets for new products, they will be content. Being a somewhat niche, or specialised player in a market is not a bad place to be and has more freedom than market leadership.
Click to expand...
Agree, but still their brand is suffering from the supply issues.
 
Yannis1976 said:
RobRoy22 said:
Yannis1976 said:
didole said:
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023. Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).

This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size. Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
Why do you assume Fuji’s share is “slipping”? Has it ever been higher? Do you think they should value market share over profit?

taking into account that Fuji seems to sell every camera they produce, 8% market share seems to be pretty good to me.
Click to expand...
According to another poster it was 12% four years ago. But it also depends on Fuji's strategy and where they want to be in this market. I don't think Fuji has been clear to consumers about this, so we can all guess right now...
Click to expand...
As others have said, it’s important not to confuse market share % with absolute sales in units. The limited information available from different sources suggests that Fujifilm is selling more cameras than in the past, with more customers wanting them than they can produce, but their % share of the mirrorless market has declined as that market as a whole has grown. The big players have sold more mirrorless bodies iso DSLRs.
Click to expand...
Nothing confusing here (this has been my main job since 2004). My question was whether the overall mirrorless market is indeed growing or shrinking similarly to the total camera market. If both total market and your market share are shrinking then you simply sell less.
Click to expand...
Are you disputing the X100VI phenomenon? Highest level of pre-orders for any camera? Doubled production vs V, and further increased and still a backlog. Not much stock to be found of X-T5 and X-T50.

I cannot prove it, but I’m confident they are not selling fewer cameras than before. And IF their sales were declining like you appear to be suggesting, WHY would they continue launching new products? Investing in a declining share of a declining market would be really stupid, and I don’t believe Fujifilm are that.

I have the idea that sometimes people’s frustration over the lack of readily available kit (from Fuji) clouds their judgement and they make statements accordingly.
Yannis1976 said:
Yannis1976 said:
Where Fujifilm wants to be in this market is indeed fun to guess at. They will never aim for a dominant position I’m sure, and would fail if they did. I support the idea that they are playing in their intended space, and providing they achieve their sales targets for new products, they will be content. Being a somewhat niche, or specialised player in a market is not a bad place to be and has more freedom than market leadership.
Click to expand...
Agree, but still their brand is suffering from the supply issues.
Click to expand...
So you and others say. One would have to be a Fujifilm insider to know how much their situation, and especially hostile Internet chatter, torments them. But if they can sell every camera they make, I suggest they are not so distressed. Nobody will get fired.

As I’ve remarked before, Fujifilm Imaging business is judged internally against their business performance targets. If they are achieving these, the managing board will be happy. Those directors probably have no knowledge of DPReview or like forums. If the Imaging business exceeds their targets, will the corporate strategy change towards greater growth? Probably not because the strategy is already ‘baked in’ and there are other business units within Fujifilm which are more important.
 
Last edited:
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023.
Click to expand...
And that is a great number for Fuji.
**** Ginkowski said:
Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).
Click to expand...
Poor Nikon is what I'd be thinking...
**** Ginkowski said:
This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size.
Click to expand...
Canon has always sold the most cameras. This is nothing new.
**** Ginkowski said:
Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
It used to be lower...
 
DJ STU-C said:
Wasn’t it 5% previously? So it’s gained 3%.
Click to expand...
Exactly. What people need to understand is that Fujifilm isn't only a camera company.

"Fujifilm products include document solutions, medical imaging and diagnostics equipment, cosmetics, pharmaceutical drugs, regenerative medicine, stem cells, biologics manufacturing, magnetic tape data storage, optical films for flat-panel displays, optical devices, photocopiers, printers, digital cameras, color films, color paper, photofinishing and graphic arts equipment and materials."
 
DJ STU-C said:
Wasn’t it 5% previously? So it’s gained 3%.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Not if you compare apples to apples. I believe it was 5% when you did total market share that included both DSLR and mirrorless. Back in 2020, a long time ago, it was 12% of all mirrorless cameras.
 
michaeladawson said:
DJ STU-C said:
Wasn’t it 5% previously? So it’s gained 3%.
Click to expand...
I don't think so. Not if you compare apples to apples. I believe it was 5% when you did total market share that included both DSLR and mirrorless. Back in 2020, a long time ago, it was 12% of all mirrorless cameras.
Click to expand...
Ah ok, that makes sense. I was never overly interested in the subject so I just seem to remember this 5% figure being banded around for years and never paid much notice to what part of the market it was actually referring to.
 
**** Ginkowski said:
Patrick at Fuji Rumors reports Fuji had 8% of the mirrorless market in 2023. Canon led with 41%, followed by Sony (32%) and Nikon (13%).

This is interesting. Canon entered the mirrorless game late, their mirrorless offerings are clunky in size. Nikon is also a late entrant. Sony was serious about it and its market share shows that. Canon's share is surprising. But I'm surprised Fuji's share is so low. They were an early entrant with a diverse camera line and quality glass.
Click to expand...
Canon has dominated market share for the better part of the last three decades. Their name and brand recognition in imaging is second to none. That they have a dominant market share position in the mirrorless segment isn't at all surprising.

Sony's story is impressive. They were foundering as a manufacturer of DSLR bodies. Then, they stopped midstream, embraced mirrorless, introduced the A7 variants, and refreshed or upgraded systems every 12 months or so for 2-3 years. It's a strategy that established Sony's brand as a manufacturer that innovates new technology. It also catapulted Sony over Nikon as the second of two major players in the digital imaging duopoly.

Fujifilm was on the brink of leaving digital imaging when they rolled the dice on retro-styled compact APS-C cameras that anyone can carry around all day. They made the decision to forego full-frame to not compete with Canon and Nikon (this was before Sony's rise) for market share dominance. Their gambit was successful and Fuji has happily remained profitable developing niche products for specific audiences of photographers.

Fujifilm's market share isn't an indication of product quality so much as user experience. Fujifilm cameras are for the photographer who wants to travel and pack light, whose personal aesthetic stands out as not blending in with the pack, as being a bit quirky, and not in a hurry to make a photo.

They know their audience and serve them, well.

If anything, the successful entry into medium format diversifies Fujifilm's position in digital imaging. I'd say they're better positioned than ever for the next 5-10 years.

--
Bill Ferris Photography
Flagstaff, AZ
 
Last edited:
Yannis1976 said:
MarkJ59 said:
Fuji doesn’t give two hoots about market share, its focus is on hitting sales targets for each of its products. Supply shortages? Nobody at Fuji cares, and won’t unless and until the shortages prevent sales targets from being achieved, e.g. through mass cancellation of unfulfilled orders. Which seems unlikely, given that Fuji’s ‘strategy’ of deliberately created scarcity doesn’t seem to be putting customers off buying and then waiting. And waiting. And waiting.
Click to expand...
This is what we assume based on their behavior, but can't believe they don't care about supply shortages and lost sales. Their brand name is suffering due to those supply/production issues and the perceived lack of modern AF.
Click to expand...
As far as Fuji is concerned, the supply shortages aren’t adversely affecting the only performance measure that matters at board level - sales targets. Indeed Fuji’s CEO recently alluded to a strategy of creating brand cachet through scarcity. This isn’t the behaviour of a company remotely concerned with supply issues.
 
Market share is relative to the size of the market. Many years ago, Fuji achieved 20% market share in the mirrorless market, but that was a market without any presence from either Nikon or Canon.

Once Nikon and Canon fully embraced mirrorless, the market increased in size many times. Fuji must be selling many more cameras today, even if their market share is now smaller.

Also, it's important to note that from the point of view of an enthusiast, it's more natural to think of adoption rates than market share in the business sense. We think about how many people use Fuji rather than Canon or Nikon for example. Market share is different, because it's about how many cameras were sold in the period in question, and for how much. One reason Canon and Nikon have such large market share compared to Sony and Fuji is that Sony and Fuji have mature mirrorless systems, whereas many historic Canon and Nikon users are only switching to mirrorless now.

I think market share is an important metric because it's better to be part of a thriving and growing system than a static one with an uncertain future. However, Fuji has done very well to sell at least 50% more cameras than Panasonic and OM Systems put together, which is what this chart implies.

In my view, the disparity between Nikon and Canon is the most interesting, as this is much larger than in the DSLR era. Of course, this reflects the fact they have adopted very different strategies of late. Canon is still targeting the mass market with lots of models aimed at lot price points across APSC and full frame. Nikon is very much focused on selling higher margin products.
 
Interesting observation.



Fijirumors 2 most recent articles have been about market share on one and AF issues on another.



Does nobody else find it extremely weird that the same people on one article can argue how Fuji is a small time player on the camera market, a niche somewhat… yet another article decry the fact their AF isn’t up to the level of the big time players that are Canon and Sony?



Surely even the most lacking in common sense individuals can put 2+2 together on this one and come to the correct conclusion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrAndreas
TTArtisan AF 75mm F2 and Samyang 75mm F1.8
Replies
18
Views
14K
MrAndreas
MrAndreas
MustAg
Share your story, how did you get into photography/videography?
2 3
Replies
55
Views
2K
Plankowner110
P
G
Need advice on 3 good full frame alternatives from Canon, Nikon and Sony
Replies
19
Views
5K
Ruedon
R
BeatX
List of lenses for Fuji X, that makes this system unique
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
25K
BruceBanner
BruceBanner
S
Canon has almost 50% market share in 2023
Replies
8
Views
723
Otaraka
O

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top