Why has Canon the biggest share in DSLR market?

[Michael Fryd]

....

To the point that now it is sort of a giant snowball.. their cameras could be technologically average to their competitors yet...

Why does the comparison with the competition matter?

Once you exceed the quality needed, additional improvements don't make a difference.

Given the local speed limits, I have no need to go faster than 90 mph. I care that a car's top speed is at least 90 mph. If one car has a top speed of 120 and the other 180, there are essentially the same to me.

Today's bottom of the line DSLR can produce excellent quality images. The 24 megapixel Canon Rebel SL2 can produce stunning images. For the majority of photographers, all modern DSLR cameras far exceed the quality they need. If you're making your decision based on minute differences in quality, you are ignoring factors that will have far more impact on your day to day photography.

It's like buying a 2 seat sports car that does 180 mph, to drive your kid's morning carpool. While the sports car goes "faster", a minivan goes fast enough, and offers significant carpooling advantages over the sports car.

When buying a camera you should consider all your needs. These may include some combination ofL ease of use, weight, weatherproofing, cost, fps, auto-focus abilities, megapixels, lens availability, what gear you already have and what your friends shoot.

It's short sighted to think a camera system should be ruled out because it didn't make the top 10% of some metric (particularly when everything the top 50% is probably excellent)

 

[FrancoD]

In the first place , before getting ahead of anything , drop the ‘why’ from the title question :

has Canon the biggest share in DSLR market?

It’s good to start on a factual basis , rather than presumption .

 

[stevo23]

In the first place , before getting ahead of anything , drop the ‘why’ from the title question :

has Canon the biggest share in DSLR market?

It’s good to start on a factual basis , rather than presumption .

 

[caspianm]

The 24 megapixel Canon Rebel SL2 can produce stunning images. For the majority of photographers, all modern DSLR cameras far exceed the quality they need. If you're making your decision based on minute differences in quality, you are ignoring factors that will have far more impact on your day to day photography.

SL2 IQ is not stunning by any stretch. Perhaps to you. For $600+ it is a very average product overall and does not add up.

-People do brand shopping and canon has been on highest trending in DSLR for long time.

-DSLR market is not volatile and changes in trending is near impossible. The market is nearly dead except a few models.

-Canon knows how to take care of their pro customers better than any brand.

-Canon shooters are in it for pride rather than best equipment

-Canon shooters are in it to protect own investment b/c change means expenditure

-Canon shooters are waiting believing that canon will take lead in offering competitive products

It is nearly impossible to eradicate a long stablished co unless the co does something seriously wrong.

Having said that Canon will suffer sooner than later. Already loosing market share on new products. Pay close attention to their new offering. 6DII is flop and 5dIV is not selling as well as expected.

 

[Michael Fryd]

The 24 megapixel Canon Rebel SL2 can produce stunning images. For the majority of photographers, all modern DSLR cameras far exceed the quality they need. If you're making your decision based on minute differences in quality, you are ignoring factors that will have far more impact on your day to day photography.

SL2 IQ is not stunning by any stretch. Perhaps to you. For $600+ it is a very average product overall and does not add up.

I think you are confusing the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under good conditions with the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under challenging conditions.

Under good conditions the SL2 produces great results.

If you have bad lighting (i.e. bright highlights and very deep shadows), then there are cameras that can do a better job.

If you are shooting birds in flight, there are cameras that are better at tracking the subject.

If you are using auto exposure, there are cameras that will do a better job of getting the exposure right under extreme situations.

On the other hand if the light is good, and your lens is good, prints from the SL2 are excellent. Probably better than the original 1Ds, which also could produce excellent quality images.

 

[caspianm]

The 24 megapixel Canon Rebel SL2 can produce stunning images. For the majority of photographers, all modern DSLR cameras far exceed the quality they need. If you're making your decision based on minute differences in quality, you are ignoring factors that will have far more impact on your day to day photography.

SL2 IQ is not stunning by any stretch. Perhaps to you. For $600+ it is a very average product overall and does not add up.

I think you are confusing the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under good conditions with the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under challenging conditions.

NO you are by using "stunning image". It is a cheap looking, simple product at best.

Cell phones make excellent images in good light too.

 

[Pontoneer]

In the first place , before getting ahead of anything , drop the ‘why’ from the title question :

has Canon the biggest share in DSLR market?

It’s good to start on a factual basis , rather than presumption .

 

[Michael Fryd]

The 24 megapixel Canon Rebel SL2 can produce stunning images. For the majority of photographers, all modern DSLR cameras far exceed the quality they need. If you're making your decision based on minute differences in quality, you are ignoring factors that will have far more impact on your day to day photography.

SL2 IQ is not stunning by any stretch. Perhaps to you. For $600+ it is a very average product overall and does not add up.

I think you are confusing the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under good conditions with the ability of the camera to produce excellent images under challenging conditions.

NO you are by using "stunning image". It is a cheap looking, simple product at best.

Cell phones make excellent images in good light too.

Yes, they do. However the SL2 is capable of taking excellent images in situations where a cell phone can't.

There are certainly cameras that are capable of taking excellent images in situations where the SL2 phone can't.

The question arises as to just what conditions do you expect to meet. For some people, a cell phone actually will meet their needs. For others the SL2 will meet their needs. Others will need a more capable camera. And still others have needs that off the shelf cameras can't meet.

Of course image quality is not the only difference between cameras. Higher end cameras offer many convenience features such as optical zooms (not generally available on cellphones), weather proofing, wi-fi, gps, etc.

 

[dwalby]

My point was that we should make sure of the facts ( which may or may not be correct ) before debating further .

yeah, that would make this thread infinitely better.

All the random opinions thrown about would be so much more valuable if we had an undeniable fact as the basis of the thread.

 

[FrancoD]

My point was that we should make sure of the facts ( which may or may not be correct ) before debating further .

yeah, that would make this thread infinitely better.

All the random opinions thrown about would be so much more valuable if we had an undeniable fact as the basis of the thread.

I haven't seen any other camera brand challenging that claim.

 

[justmeMN]

caspianm wrote: Already loosing market share on new products.

Canon recently reported better than expected interchangeable-lens camera sales, and raised their ILC sales forecast for the year by an additional 200 thousand units.

Canon's worldwide ILC market share stands at 48% , compared to 23% for Nikon.

For the first nine months of this year, the Operating Profit of Canon's Imaging division increased by 26.1%.

 

[FrancoD]

caspianm wrote: Already loosing market share on new products.

Canon recently reported better than expected interchangeable-lens camera sales, and raised their ILC sales forecast for the year by an additional 200 thousand units.

Canon's worldwide ILC market share stands at 48% , compared to 23% for Nikon.

In DSLRs , the Canon market share is higher than that. It is higher than the rest combined.

Mind you the rest is Nikon and Pentax with some including the Sony SLT .

 

[IR1234]

Canon is #1 because it the #1 selling camera. That means Canon is entirely Sales & Profit driven rather than Geeky-Engineering Driven (like Nikon is). In the end, more People buy Canon because its Canon (the brand), instead of its poor DxO Scores.

I hate to say it, but Canon = "Apple" in the photography worlds, where the brand names sells themselves.

Still doesn't explain why Canon has the majority of the pro market also.

 

[Turkk]

We don't really understand consumer behavior. From Pro to Amateur when it comes to cameras all of the arguments above are valid, and speak to one point, we are human and we make decisions that are based on many things, and most are irrational.

I have no idea why the hell I choose some of the things I do. I drive a 4runner, car mags tell me I'm an idiot. I shoot Nikons, I don't know why, bought a Nikon because Minolta didn't make the jump to DSLR in any meaningful way at the time. I have been buying Nikons ever since. Once I got used to them I can shoot them blindfolded and even when I get my hands on a new iteration the menus and main buttons are right where they should be.

I use Mac computers, there is no "rational" reason for this insanity, I pay way more than I should for a computer that makes me think I'm better than my windows peers, there I admit it! Perhaps I stick with Nikon because they are closer to that boutique experience that Apple makes me think I am part of, after all Canon and Windows are the hands down market share winners, and maybe I want to think I am special, LOL (Trust me I am not, and know it). Since I have no rational reason for these insane behaviors of mine I cannot suppose why Canon rules the market. Good luck sorting this one out!

 

[FrancoD]

I have no idea why the hell I choose some of the things I do. I drive a 4runner, car mags tell me I'm an idiot. I shoot Nikons, I don't know why, bought a Nikon because Minolta didn't make the jump to DSLR in any meaningful way at the time. I have been buying Nikons ever since. Once I got used to them I can shoot them blindfolded and even when I get my hands on a new iteration the menus and main buttons are right where they should be.

I use Mac computers, there is no "rational" reason for this insanity, I pay way more than I should for a computer that makes me think I'm better than my windows peers, there I admit it! Perhaps I stick with Nikon because they are closer to that boutique experience that Apple makes me think I am part of, after all Canon and Windows are the hands down market share winners, and maybe I want to think I am special, LOL (Trust me I am not, and know it). Since I have no rational reason for these insane behaviors of mine I cannot suppose why Canon rules the market. Good luck sorting this one out!

There is a perfectly logical explanation. Keeping in mind your Toyota and your Tamron, you like the letters M,N and T.

Did someone buy that Panasonic for you or is it the exception ?

 

[bikinchris]

According to the DXO, 5D Mark IV (no replacement is waited until 2020) is eighteenth on the best sensors list, and the 1D X Mark II (the present flagship of the company) is twenty eighth on the same list.

https://www.dxomark.com/category/camera-reviews

On the best lenses list, more dramatically, there isn't even a single Canon lens among the first fourty.

https://www.dxomark.com/category/lens-reviews

Is there something wrong related with the DXO marks ... if not, that is, if these lists reflect the truths, why has Canon the biggest share in DSLR market?

Canon was way ahead for many years in the area of quick accurate focusing and sensor and therefore image quality. Even though today Nikon (the biggest competitor) has caught them, people are not going to lose tons of money on lenses they bought and swap systems. Most people can't take that kind of loss.

 

[caspianm]

caspianm wrote: Already loosing market share on new products.

Canon recently reported better than expected interchangeable-lens camera sales, and raised their ILC sales forecast for the year by an additional 200 thousand units.

Canon's worldwide ILC market share stands at 48% , compared to 23% for Nikon.

For the first nine months of this year, the Operating Profit of Canon's Imaging division increased by 26.1%.

That is not new product line. Its overall DSLR rather! Canon sells a lot of rebels.

 

[Turkk]

I have no idea why the hell I choose some of the things I do. I drive a 4runner, car mags tell me I'm an idiot. I shoot Nikons, I don't know why, bought a Nikon because Minolta didn't make the jump to DSLR in any meaningful way at the time. I have been buying Nikons ever since. Once I got used to them I can shoot them blindfolded and even when I get my hands on a new iteration the menus and main buttons are right where they should be.

I use Mac computers, there is no "rational" reason for this insanity, I pay way more than I should for a computer that makes me think I'm better than my windows peers, there I admit it! Perhaps I stick with Nikon because they are closer to that boutique experience that Apple makes me think I am part of, after all Canon and Windows are the hands down market share winners, and maybe I want to think I am special, LOL (Trust me I am not, and know it). Since I have no rational reason for these insane behaviors of mine I cannot suppose why Canon rules the market. Good luck sorting this one out!

There is a perfectly logical explanation. Keeping in mind your Toyota and your Tamron, you like the letters M,N and T.

Did someone buy that Panasonic for you or is it the exception ?

As logical and rational as anything I could come up with! Panasonic was an error in judgement! I thought it would be handy for travel, used it once, would rather lug a DSLR than figure out the trillion menus. Seriously I have been a hair away from switching on several occasion to Canon just because friends have them and swear by them.

Other friends have Nikon and swear by them. I really don't see much difference in our images when we shoot together from an IQ perspective so there that, also as others have stated cash being hard to come by switching has a financial impact to me at least.

 

[Rexgig0]

DxoMark examines a small part of the big picture. With a duty to produce important images, I need to consider the whole system, the whole big picture. (I do not claim to be a “professional” photographer, just a public servant with an obligation to produce accurate images as part of my official duties, and the personal need to shoot plenty of flowers, birds, puppies, and butterflies, in order to off-set what I do while at work.)

I use a pair of 7D Mark II cameras for evidentiary/forensic/crime scene photography. I have to upload properly-exposed OOC JPEGs, for official purposes, and the 7D Mark II does this very well. I must upload every image in a series, with no deletions, and no editing, so the flicker detection and sync capability is valuable for consistent WB and exposures.

My wife’s new Nikon D500 clearly “beats” my 7D Mark II cameras, in several ways, but the 7D and 7D Mark II ruled this category for a number of years. Until the D500 was introduced, and I then bought one for her, she had to be content with less-capable AF than I had with my Canons.

No one lens manufacturer owns the best-in-class title in every category, but Canon certainly has capable lenses for a variety of tasks. I use both Canon and Nikon cameras and lenses, and love individual lenses, made by each, too much to ever settle upon one brand, to the exclusion of the other. A macro lens of about 100mm being very important to me, I prefer the EF 100/2.8L Macro IS to its Nikkor 105mm counterpart. My Micro-Nikkor AF-S 60/2.8G is excellent, but see the next paragraph, regarding macro flash. (I also use two Zeiss lenses, and plan to acquire more, over time.)

I work at night, so flash is important. In my opinion, Canon’s 580EX II at least equaled its Nikon counterpart, and the 600EX-RT took another step forward. (I have experience with Speedlites and Speedlights, and neither are junk.) Canon’s Macro Ringlite allows me to work more quickly than does the multi-piece Nikon system.

Canon’s customer support/service has a very good reputation. I have been fortunate, in not yet needing quick support/service, but I did pay attention to this aspect when deciding upon a system.

It is “all about the system.”

 

[FrancoD]

Seriously this time, we do buy emotionally so we don't always know the reason why we buy a particular product and not another.

A couple of examples.

In a forum dealing with a totally different hobby , a guy was asking about a product he had fallen in love with.

I tried to explain that it was too small for his size and anyway not matching all that closely the other features he was after.

Still , asking about it, he also posted photos of the rest of is gear.

At that point I realised that the item in question matched exactly the colour (something like the Sony Alpha logo and not a common colour at all for those items) of a couple of other items he already had.

Well, he got upset with me about my "stupid comment" and he bought that item.

A few months later it was for sale. " Brand new, never used, too small for me "









Now, for a totally different item but just as silly, most supermarkets sell peppers (capsicum) in individual colour or a set of three, one red, one green and one yellow.

Check the price per kilo...

Red, yellow and green $3-4 per kg when in season.

The pack of three is $ 3.99 ( at about $7-8 per kg)

So why do people pay twice as much for the same thing ?

Because the price looks the same and is conveniently packaged.