Sony a7 III sales beat combined efforts of Canon and Nikon in Japan

chunk: "Who cares!?!?!"
Well, you seem to care posting another useless reply (nr. 1500) :)

Im wayyyy more amused and intrigued by the Sony fanatics than I am an sales reports. I dont own stock in any of these companies, and given that no one gave major stock holdings as their reason, Im going to assume these guys dont either. I do, however, have some interest in the divisive nature of these guys within the photog community whether its Canon, Sony, Nikon, Oly, Pan, Leica etc. Unfortunately, for the last couple years its been Sony fans, but Ive gotten on Canon fans, m43 fans, "Iphones are just as good as DSLR" fans, etc. Who cares what whos shooting? If someone is happy with their camera and its images, be happy for them. Period. There is not one camera that will outperform another in terms of results for all genres. That is especially true for a camera that doesnt even have a lens longer than 400mm available, and it also doesnt have any super fast glass and likely never will.

People need to consider that analog sales are UP and they keep going UP with huge profit margins. It's a product and service that more and more people are willing to pay for.

Interesting topic. My mission at this time is to make room for, and learn wet plate photography. Its a beautiful medium. Im also making room to build a darkroom for film as getting it developed isnt as easy as it used to be.

@Chunk

"People still CHOOSE DSLRs over mirrorless."

But they don't choose FF DSLRs over mirrorless, and that's the key. All of the innovation and progress is in FF and although there are lots of DSLR sales they are of consumer-level cameras like the D5300 and the Kiss x9i that will vanish overnight when the mirrorless-awareness tipping point comes.

I would say the majority of people who buy these cameras would actually rather have a Canon M5 or other cheap mirrorless, they just don't know what they are.

See above, genius

Because people like you are a cancer - not just within photography communities, but in our culture in general. Tribalism, whether for a political party, a sports team (though that can at least be fun), a type of car or car brand, clothing brands, and ESPECIALLY tech products is a net loss. Being part of a club is great. Being a fan of even a product - fine. Going tribal and ranting about your tech product, clothing, car etc being better than everyones, getting emotional about your brand or taking it personal is unhealthy - not just for you, but within the entire community.

Try it:
We live in a great time for photography. Sony has carve out their place and earned a customer base by contributing incredible innovation. Eye AF is a game changer, and is quickly becoming the standard. Canon and Nikon have also recently delivered on their VERY FIRST entries in to FF mirrorless with cameras that are capable of making top level images and can use the lenses their users have collected and value. DSLRs have managed to stay mostly stable in a challenged market for now and remain the option for most pro and serious journalists, and sports and wildlife photographers. Options are on the table for those new to cameras as well as long term battle hardened professionals. M4/3 cameras have also gained a loyal following with high quality performance in a convenient and small form factor. No one option is best for everyone, but whether a DSLR, a m4/3, an APSC mirrorless or one of the high performing full frame mirrorless, there is certainly an option for everyone.

the biggest "cancer" that I see in these forums is dslr owners like you, who constantly post false claims about sony and the state of photography, *like you just did in your post above*

see how you can't admit that you were wrong.

and how you claim to "not care", but here you are now with over two dozen mindless rants about nothing in this comment section, lol

your dslr world is changing, and crying out here about "a hyperbolic DPR article" won't make a bit of difference.

@Chunk

It is not acceptable to call posters to this forum 'a cancer.' That remark shows who you are as a person in the clearest possible light.

The website you linked to - Canon News - is owned and run by a regular Canon forum poster - rrccad - now calling himself rrc1967. I don't believe he would post information he knew to be untrue but his spin on the story is that of a Canon user like yourself.

His main argument is that the numbers of cameras shipped is small. I have no idea if his calculation is correct but I do know that is sidestepping the argument. The key is ratio. If Sony sold 5 cameras and Canon 1, the conclusion is the same.

You simply can't get away from the fact that the A7III outsells every FF camera - by a very wide margin. It is #15 and #18 for April after being on the market for over a year. It is the highest selling FF camera, milc or DSLR and the RP, just a month after launch, is not even in the top #50 cameras. The RP is selling worse than the 5DIV in Japan.

Last comment, and Im done. Very clearly a couple shills itt. Hopefully you guys get some sort of compensation from Sony. Wrong about what? Sigma/Tamron support? Sigma just starting? They have 11 emount lenses on site. Canon and Nikon are close to 40 each. As said a ton, I could care less outside of my interest in fanaticism. I guess 11 is fine since they just recently seemed to have cemented a spot for the next few years. They are a strong 3rd for future proofing I guess. Sony is still a small player in total market share. Fact. This article literally represents less than 2% of ILC sales, so no clue why anyone is so ecstatic, or booing it
either. Personally, I hope they do great. Just like I hope for Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Panasonic, Oly, Phaseone, Leica...What people fail to realize is that it isnt a zero sum game for us. Theyre multi billion dollar companies and some are much more diversified than just cameras. Last words all yours.

Youre right. I shouldnt have called posters a cancer. Sorry. Their behavior on these matters is a cancer. It is.

@Chunk

Funny that you call Sony users shills for defending a factual sales report that you and others appear to be unable to accept.

The article says only 1 thing, that in April the A7III outsold it's competitors combined. If you want to contest that, prove it's not true. If you think it's not significant, explain how a camera on the market for a year outselling all other FF cameras is not remarkable. Explain how it's not significant that the Canon RP, a supposed break-through camera in terms of price and value is not in the top 50 cameras sold only one month after release.

You clearly don't know much about e-mount. A Canon user can choose between the Sigma 135/1.8 and the ageing EF 135/2. An e-mount user can choose between BOTH those lenses AND the outstanding Sony 135/1.8 and the Zeiss Batis 135/2.8. This choice is replicated at many FLs.

Sony isn't a small player, they are driving the market in both technology and in FF sales, which is what most of their ILC business is.

Both companies received an invite to the FF mirrorless party they just decided to go to the aps-c and DSLR party on the other block.

Not Sony's fault that they ran out of booze and the music was crap...

I think Canikon made a huge mistake not jumping into FF mirrorless early on. Canon is so big I think they will make up for lost time very quickly. It is Nikon who I think should be worried. Panasonic I see doing OK with the Leica/Sigma alliance and Olympus I predict will be out of the camera business in less then 5 years.

judging by the lack of profitable quarters that the Olympus camera division has had, they should have been out of business five years ago, not five years from now.

nikon is the only company on the market, besides sony, that is making sensible ff milc gear.

canon put out halo glass with weak sauce milc bodies, and Panasonic made a major mistake with that silly proprietary dfd af, that doesn't even support af-c with the adapter.

so nikon is better positioned than the rest of the laggards, and they may have finally gotten a handle on their long history of terrible q.c. issues.

@Clint Dunn - "I think Canikon made a huge mistake not jumping into FF mirrorless early on."

Two other possibly huge mistakes:
- Nikon has no APS-C mirrorless to capture lower-end users wanting to get into mirrorless
- Canon has made their APS-C and FF mirrorless systems incompatible with one another.

So neither Canon nor Nikon benefit from the combined/continuous APS-C/FF ecosystems that served them so well in the DSLR era:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sDkcvPL35PA/UsH9xlti3hI/AAAAAAAAIB8/YjYUQX2hWJs/s1600/Canon-DSLR-Lineup.jpg

https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-wubgBRa2PVo/Vrxfc61lUHI/AAAAAAAAACw/yZ-re6FnUPI/s1600/Nikon-Line-up.jpg
Out of all the mirrorless brands, only Sony offers APS-C and FF mirrorless in one cross-compatible ecosystem. Nikon has FF mirrorless but no APS-C mirrorless. Fuji has APS-C mirrorless but no FF mirrorless. Canon has APS-C and FF mirrorless but they aren't cross-compatible systems.

I think the same as Clint. Olympus will be gone in a few years, betting on $3000 bodies when there are new full framers around a grand and neglecting the enthusiast EM5iii possible market, are not the smartest moves.

@T3

> Two other possibly huge mistakes...

The third mistake, going with a closed mount, is IMO even bigger.

In the past, during the duopoly rivalry, it worked fine for them, since each of them had closed mounts. This time, they are competing against Sony who made their mount protocol available to third-parties, and now it (and its users!) is reaping the benefits.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in mid- and long-term...

what do you wanna prove Zed Man? That people are morons, misinformed, and actually prefer worst, and more expensive? Yeah!!! That's true... that's why dated Canon gear still sells... everybody knows that the Canon logo sells any crap... what can one say about it??!?! well, we live in a world of deception... and status quo... when someone chooses the Canon EOS R, over the vastly superior Sony A7III, I can only conclude that that person is nuts, or really uninformed...

@ZedMan

'It shows FF mirrorless sales for everyone are near non existent".

Nope. It shows that FF mirrorless sales for Canon and Nikon are 'near non existent'. The RP and the z6 and z7 (as well as A7rIII) do not appear in the top 50.

https://www.bcnretail.com/research/ranking/monthly/list/contents_type=101H

The A7III on the other hand is the best selling FF camera @ #15 and #18

The only other FF cameras in the list are:

EOS R - #29
6DII - #31
5D4 -#42
D850 -#44

@ZedMan

"Canon has the best selling FF body at 19th.
The A7III is out of the top 20."

Typical misrepresentation from you. That is one week's data, not the month and you fail to mention that the A7III is at #21 and #23 - ie it appears TWICE - as a body and lens kit. It is the only FF camera in the top 50 that does so. You have to combine both sets of sales to get it's overall ranking.

@Magnar W,
Probably closer to 90%!

Z=man wrote: "Sony has the WORST ergonomics those big lenses torque your wrist"

If that is the case you don't know how to properly hold a camera/lens combination.

@Zed yes, and Sony also has a sensor 4X the size on those "compact" m43s.

@ZedMan

"Sony FF lens are still giant."

Actually of all the Sony FF e-mount lenses that exist in other mirrorless mounts only one Sony lens is larger - the 24-70/2.8GM which is 1cm longer than the Nikon Z-mount 24-70/2.8. ALL the others are smaller. ALL are cheaper.

Usual misinformation from you.

@Athonline

"Note, I really don't care who 'won'"

You so obviously do.

@cbphoto

It's quite hilarious that you claim 'facts matter' and then you group my posts with two other posters to produce a made up, irrelevant and unrepresentative number.

I've made 64 posts in this thread of 1458 posts which is 4.3% of the total. I wasn't aware there was posting limit or that I had to obtain your approval before I posted.

You've managed to write 10% of my total saying nothing at all except that the article is clickbait, an 'advertorial' and 'misleading'. You've given no justification or explanation for these stupid claims (how is reporting sales figures an 'advertorial'?) and your agenda is obvious.

@cbphoto123 - "Facts matter."

a fake account telling us that "facts matter"?? lmao, how typical of you.

@Athonline - "2) Why did you focus only on FF mirrorless?"

probably because they know more about the industry than you do... as the tamron employee stated:

"The APS-C market is shrinking quite fast..."
https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/0358644487/cp-plus-2019-tamron-interview

@Robertdials: no, I really don't. I have little interest in 35mm cameras and even less at picking which one to get based on sales. My question is about its timing and if this is a regular or one off article. Who is on top in the sales is irrelevant to answer this question. Especially, when similar "feats" by both Sony and others didn't get an article in the past.

@MILC: sure, but at the same time at BCN (which is what this article is about) the top selling cameras are APS-C and m4/3. The 35mm market in Japan (and generally Asia) is significantly smaller than the "crop-sensor" one. Shrinking or not, this matters when it comes to any such articles and this information is missing - at least at the present time.

@athonline - so what is your point?

are you claiming that bcn knows more about the market than tamron? I think not.

this article is about trends, and as far as sensor size trends go, it's backed up by the tamron interview... I get the part where you as an m4/3 owner feel insecure, but calling out dpr for imagined slights on small sensor formats won't change market realities.

That if you make any article about BCN sales, then you need to include all the picture and not part of the picture. BCN and Tamron probably have the same knowledge for the Japanese market, which again is the scope of the article.

I don't get how anyone can feel insecure for a camera. Maybe, I feel insecure at posting photos at competition, but not about the gear I picked and decided to keep. :-)

You're really getting desperate, aren't you? Even the poster who made that comment stated: "Granted MAP Camera is one large camera store in Japan, it's not exactly a good indicator of a market".

MAP Camera is literally just one store. https://www.mapcamera.com/html/worldguide/english_page.html

We have no idea how many used cameras they are talking about at this one store. How ironic that you think this "is a problem for Sony", while you choose to dismiss the BCN sales data which encompasses MANY stores in Japan. Furthermore, in previous posts you have said about BCN's data: "Without the sales numbers [ie, unit quantities] this has far less meaning", but you find great meaning in the used camera sales rankings of a *single* store in Japan, with *no* unit quantities listed? It just goes to show what a hypocrite you are. With every passing month, you seem to get more desperate.

Of course this is speculative; just like most analysis of this type of data, because we don't get hard sales figures for comparison.

But it is interesting. You can join that discussion and debate the arcane details. And it may be right.

And ultimately the only true guide, as snookum8 notes, is going to come from earnings reports. And we know that Sony had a bad last quarter in their Imaging area, like all camera companies. Imaging Division operating profit down 73%, no guidance going forward.

@Thoughts R Us - BTW, MAP Camera sales rankings for December-March show that the A7III consistently outsells the EOS R and Z6. In fact, it is the top selling FF ILC for all months except March where the EOS RP outsells it. (But March is the first month that the RP went on sale, so it got a new-release sales bump.) Interestingly, the MAP Camera sales rankings even show the A7III outselling *every* other camera (mirrorless or DSLR, APS-C or FF) in December, January, and February.

December:
https://news.mapcamera.com/maptimes.php?itemid=31959

January:
https://news.mapcamera.com/maptimes.php?itemid=32024

February:
https://news.mapcamera.com/maptimes.php?itemid=32115

March:
https://news.mapcamera.com/maptimes.php?itemid=32214

So basically your post simply shows how strong A7III sales are and that these strong sales aren't just isolated to a single month (at least at MAP Camera). It also shows how poorly DSLRs are selling, "which actually is a problem for"...Canon and Nikon! Ouch.

Thoughts R Us failed claims, lmao:

"Those mirrorless cameras are a small market niche and going nowhere fast." https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=8592146788

"Some people may be leaving dslr's but they are not going to mirrorless."
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=6762429376

"There is this myth that Canon has failed to innovate." https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=3541617781

"You can't even find most mirrorless cameras in any Best Buy, Target, etc. Most people don't know about mirrorless and don't care. It's taken as an article of faith among mirrorless "converts" that mirrorless is rising, but the numbers don't bear that out at all." https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=5752885364

A new day, a new theory but oddly the same stench. This really is getting ridiculous.

@Thoughts: "And we know that Sony had a bad last quarter in their Imaging area, like all camera companies. Imaging Division operating profit down 73%"

I think this stat comes from Thom Hogan's pages... Thom also says that Sony's profits were up 12% for the whole year (including that 'difficult' 4th quarter), even though unit sales were down 18%. Remember also that that is a 73% drop in operating profit (so still in profit) compared with the same quarter last year - and that quarter covered the early days of the a9 and a7riii and the release of the a7iii - waves that big don't come in every year - and as you would probably point out, theer was very little full-frame mirrorless competition.

The market is contracting, the key thing is for it to remain profitable enough to keep all the players at the table - it would be to the detriment of the consumer if any more variety or choice was lost from the camera market - Samsung, Minolta, Kyocera and oldies such as Bronica are still missed.

@Thoughts R Us

""There's an interesting analysis going on here:https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62635650""

When you said 'interesting' did you mean 'hilarious'? Sony users took a pasting on here for daring to suggest that the A7II was a good competitor for the RP when it was announced.

Now in that article we have:

"Also I'm not sure that the A7 III is the natural competitor for the RP, Canon may have created it to go against Sony's continual selling of the A7 II and A7 which they felt was easier low hanging fruit to capture." (page 1)

Also just to save everyone the bother - the argument about secondhand bodies comes from Phozo Kosmos / SDaniela!

Yes that's right, someone actually read a Phozo Kosmos post. Surely a first.

@Thoughts R Us

I wondered why my ears were ringing, I can't believe this article is still going.

MAPCamera results are curious. Just that curious. I'm sure people will put whatever spin on them as they so deem, however, the point is that it shows something that's never happened before where one of the top selling cameras is also one of the top selling used cameras for this company.

While there are A7 III's being sold, there's also a lot of them being returned to the store to be sold again as used which is a curious statistic.

While it could be those that purchase the A7III are liking it so much and upgrading to the A7R III, neither the A7RIII or the A9 appear to be selling in quantity.

@rrccad

The A7III is now 14 months old. It's old enough to be seeing second hand sales.

Since they are sales to a camera shop most are probably from users who part-exchanged for different equipment since camera shops don't tend to pay much in terms of cash.

Since Nikon, Canon and Panasonic have released FF milcs since the A7III launched it seems fairly safe to assume that probably most of the sales were to users who switched to those systems.

Man, o man, milk man. I hope Sony is paying you. You have commented in paragraphs over and over cheering for tour team. I havent even ever seen a sports fanatic quite like you

@chunk

Funny how you criticise MILC but not Thoughts R Us, who spreads more crap than a farmer with amnesia.

@RubberDials: hahaha...first, compared to many, including MILC, my commentary is fair and balanced. But I am surely always more polite, as evidenced by your language in your post.

historical examples of Thoughts R Us mindless bloviating:

"Dslr market share is holding firm, mirrorless is stagnant." https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=9377735990

"The Sony hype is more hype than reality. And when Canon/Nikon release their FF mirrorless solutions than Sony will be hurt hard. Canon especially will crush Sony." https://www.dpreview.com/news/1547861226/canon-and-sony-dominate-lensrentals-most-rented-gear-of-2017-list?comment=7773179851

"Mirrorless is not the holy grail or salvation of the camera industry. Mirrorless has stalled. If there does a come a shift, then my guess is that Canon and Nikon will have mirrorless products ready to go and will swoop in and take most of the market share, just like they do with dslr's."
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5301008561/cp-2015-canon-interview-every-day-im-saying-speed-up?comment=2229295947

@MILC ... funny ... why would you take your time to pass through someone's post history just to discredit him, by an opinion he had in 2015 ?!?!

Don't care who sells more cameras, don't care about your point or his, but that's ... strange behavior, to say the least. For sure Canon and Nikon were thinking exactly the same back then.

@badi - if you don't care about anything, why did you read this dpr article, and all of the comments? why are you out here spouting off opinions? strange behavior, to say the least.

funny that you would admit that canon and Nikon had the exact same failed mentality that Thoughts R Us is constantly posting, but then question the need for proving how wrong it was.

you missed the part where canikon is attempting to correct past mistakes by releasing milc, but Thoughts R Us is obviously still trying to trash milc out here.

false claims like he posts should always be corrected.

Another factor that is important isn't just the fact that Sony has such a big head start on their E-mount lens system, but also the fact that Sony has very strong 3rd party support for E-mount. Both of Canon's and Nikon's mounts are closed, which means Canon and Nikon don't share their lens protocols and spec with 3rd parties in an effort to discourage or inhibit 3rd party lenses. Sony, on the other hand, shares their lens spec and charges no licensing fee. As a result, the Sony E-mount has very strong 3rd party lens support.

T3 - Whaaaat in the world are you even talking about??? Man, Ive never seen stuff like this. "Strong 3rd party support"? Have you lost your mind??? Tamron and Sigma literally just started making Sony mount lenses. They still dont have the vast majority that really matter for the EF and Nikon mount. Like, where is the popular 150-600? All the Art lenses, and many of the G2 lenses. Stop making crap up just to root for your team. Its creepy

No, hes right. Its weird MILC would spend all of his free time writing adverts for Sony in comment threads. Even stranger....wayyyy stranger to stalk somones history and write a paragraph about them. Wonder if T3 (That is an old Canon Rebel, btw) and milkman are the same person

@c h u n k - Companies currently making interfaced E-mount lenses: Tamron, Sigma, Carl Zeiss, Cosina, Tokina, Samyang/Rokinon, Viltrox, etc.

These are just some of the AF E-mount lenses:
Sigma makes 5 APS-C, 9 FF E-mount lenses. Tamron makes three E-mount lenses-- 18-200mm APS-C, 17-28/2.8 FF, 27-75/2.8 FF, with more on the way.
https://www.sonyrumors.co/tamron-confirmed-telephoto-zoom-fe-lens-coming-and-consider-pirme-fe-lenses-in-near-future/
Tokina has two E-mount lenses including the recently introduced 100/2.8:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/7801373680/tokina-announces-new-10mm-f2-8-1-1-macro-lens-for-sony-e-mount-cameras
Viltrox recently introduced an 85/1.8:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/9018274882/viltrox-announces-85mm-f1-8-autofocus-lens-for-sony-e-mount-cameras
Samyang has six E-mount lenses (14/2.8, 50/1.4, 35/2.8, 35/1.4, 85/1.4, 45/1.8):
http://rokinon.com/lenses/auto-focus/searchby/mount/sony-e

Any reasonable person would consider this to be strong 3rd party support.

@c h u n k - "Sigma literally just started making Sony mount lenses."

wrong again, as usual for you.

sigma first released e-mount primes way back in 2012 and 2013.

@c h u n k - Learn the facts. Sony has more third-party autofocus E-mount lenses than both Canon and Nikon's RF and Z mount lenses combined, even if we included all the RF and Z mount lenses currently listed on Canon's and Nikon's lens road maps.

As for your comment "Sigma literally just started making Sony mount lenses", that's wrong too. Sigma's first E-mount lens was introduced in January 2012 when they released the Sigma 19/2.8 EX DN and 30/2.8 EX DN APS-C E-mount lenses.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma_19mm_F2.8_EX_DN

Like I said, learn the facts.

Maybe it's you who has lost your mind.

Nikon Z and Canon RF are a year old. Look at the lenses made for Canon and Nikon DSLRs over the time Sonys e.mount existed. Its not even close. You guys have this weird, distorted view of Sony being the center of the world. Its disturbing. Its a camera and a corporation. Fanboyism at a whole new level.

c h u n k, you're wrong again. It's not about fanboyism. It's about dealing with facts and reality. For example, your comment regarding the age of the E-mount doesn't hold water because the Canon EF-M mount has been around since 2012, and it has virtually no 3rd party lens support-- in spite of it's age and popularity. For example, Sigma currently offers six APS-C mirrorless lenses (16/1.4, 19/2.8, 30/2.8, 30/1.4, 56/1.4, 60/2.8) which are available for m4/3 mount and E mount but *not* for EF-M mount. m4/3 and E are open mounts while EF-M is not. So Sigma won't offer these lenses in EF-M mount, in spite of EOS M's popularity. I think the RF and Z mounts are going to encounter the same problem. Especially if their sales continue to be so low.

Sony has an open mount configuration which invites 3rd party participation. They then compete with those 3rd party lenses which is a win-win for consumers, and also a win for Sony because it bolsters their ecosystem.

Canon on the other hand keeps their mount proprietary which forces the consumer to buy their lenses. Canon looks out for Canon and seems to put their customers last. That's one of the reasons I finally switched brands.

And how much does a McD burger cost compared to a really good burger? Does it have the same or even more "features"?
That's the problem with your comparison: the Sony A7 III is more expensive as the RP and at around the same price point as the EOS R and Z6. Besides the price: it has more features and as many reviewers can tell (also here on DPReview): they do a great job.
So no, the A7III isn't junk.

There's obviously a huge difference between spending a couple bucks on a hamburger versus spending a couple thousand bucks on a FF mirrorless body. One purchase obviously entails a considerably greater amount of thought and consideration than the other due to the fact that it costs a lot more money. Obviously, if you're spending that kind of money on a FF MILC, you are shopping to get the best choice for your *significant* expenditure.

Mac quarter-pounders are on the menu at the White House. That's a pretty good testimonial. Incidentally, MILC cameras with silent shutters are soon to be de rigueur there too, as well as in US courtrooms.

@Avatar480234 not hinting about any brand, but i do recognize quality when i see it. I had a play with a A73 recently, couldn't even get my hand round the grip, you need a pair of tweezers to control that thing. The build quality seemed extremely poor. Each to his own priorities, some go for fancy spec sheets. Others look for durability and ergonomics..

@Ed Ingold it would seem that here in Europe we appreciate "real" food a bit more. 😙

I thought Nikon 1 was nomore in production ??

The article is true for a month, period. If you think that you can extrapolate anything from such a small data, it can only be down to a vigorous imagination.

Painful awakening.

What’s painful? Given folk can buy one of a number of different cameras, why would any one care about how well another brand is doing ? It would only be painful if one was foolish enough to buy into camera tribalism, which most will understand has nothing to do with a cameras or photography.

@George1958

Actually you have to perform mental gymnastics, finishing with your head in the sand not to be able to draw a number of very obvious conclusions from the data. And of course it's not the only data we have.

Here's the weekly sales numbers from BCN:

https://www.bcnretail.com/research/ranking/monthly/list/contents_type=101

You can see that the A7III is the only FF camera in the top 25 sellers at #15 and #18.

The next FF camera is the EOS R at #29. The first FF DSLR doesn't register till #42 (5DIV). The D850 is at #44.

Rubberdials I fear it’s yourself doing the gymnastics, clearly there is some data that at best is inferential, it’s a snap shot of a relatively short period of time in a particular country. It’s extravagant to make big claims and premature to claim trends.
As for me, I have just looked at second hand cameras on Wex photo, quite a number are OB A7 mkiii and A9s, the irresistible brand as you see it. Unlike you I don’t overgeneralise, clearly the purchasers had their head in the sand when they returned them as unwanted.

@George

With great respect George, your reply is rather stupid and should be called out as such. What has the handful of open box cameras on WEX (a UK sales website) got to do with sales in Japan?

The chart shows that a camera that has been on the market for over a year is the best selling mirrorless camera. By a margin greater than the combined sales of it's competitors. (The link I provided also shows that the A7III is the best selling FF camera including DSLRs).

Do you think the chart is an anomaly? Are you suggesting that the A7III has only recently started selling this well?

The chart cannot be parsed in any positive light for Nikon or Canon unless you believe the sales of the A7III for the period covered are untypical.

If you do think they are untypical - give a reason.

@George1958 - "The article is true for a month, period."

In November, BCN reported that the EOS R had 22.1%. This recent data shows that for March and April the EOS R was at 10-12%

In November, BCN reported that Nikon had 10.4%. But at that time, Nikon only had released the Z7. Now we see the Z6 numbers. It's at 6-9%. There's no "vigorous imagination" needed here. The data is the data. And we can take a look at the data beyond this one month.

We don't know where the Z7 stands now, but given that it's a lot more expensive than the Z6, it's probably doing worse.

The whole point is that Canon and Nikon have not made much gains since November with these recent bodies. Maybe they'll do better when these bodies are replaced in the 2nd gen. But when will the EOS R MKII and Z6 MKII be released? Probably not for another 2-3 years.

Rubberdials - this whole thread started out as click bait, it’s still a snap shot, it’s still a short period. I was being ironic about Wex, I would hardly be serious given what I had previously said.
There is clearly something going on in the marketplace, but there are no forgone conclusions yet.

T3- there you go again with your selective data and confirmation bias

@George1958 - Selective data? I was using the last data that was reported by BCN in November. And I'm comparing it to the data they released now. And in a few months, I'll compare it to the data that is released at that time. Your "selective data" claim is nonsense. What's really going on with you is that you don't want anyone to talk about the data at all, because you don't like what the data shows.

it's always "selective data", when it proves that they are wrong ;-)

George, a click bait article is one where the clickable link bears no relation to the article.

The article and the data shown here exactly match the title of the article. The article is not click bait, you just don't like what it says.

@T3

The z7 is not in the top 50 BCN cameras so it's selling worse than the D850, which is #44.

T3 - the numbers don’t explain the narrative , you supply your own narrative . There are several ways of reading that data . As for what is going on, now you are developing your own hypothesis on my motives, again to support your evident bias.

@George1958 - Why don't we take this conversation up the next time BCN releases numbers? In the meantime, BCN stats aren't the only stats to consider. Take a look at how Canon and Nikon's FF entrants are doing against the A7III at Amazon and B&H:

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Mirrorless-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Mirrorless-System-Cameras/ci/16158/N/4288586281

All these data points support the same conclusion: A7III continues to outsell the competition.

T3- predictably amazon again. It’s not the next level, it’s sales data, just numbers. The narrative is the A7 mkiii is selling better than its competitors, in a shrinking market with falling demand. Where it’s heading, how it will pan out is less certain.

@George1958 - So you're basically saying that it doesn't matter that Sony is outselling the competition because the market is dying so it doesn't matter anyway. LOL. And no, it's not just "Amazon again." Take a look at BCN, Amazon, and B&H. Amazon and B&H are the two biggest camera sellers in the US. The BCN data covers all of Japan. Between Japan and the US, that's a huge chunk of the market!

BTW, regardless of whether the market is shrinking, Canon and Nikon are still going to be investing millions of dollars in the next few years into mirrorless. I guess your argument is that they should just sit this one out?

@George

"There are several ways of reading that data."

Go on then.

T3- you are lousy at paraphrasing , I did not say it does not matter, I did say that today’s data is not necessarily a reliable predictor for what is to come.
I don’t take you or the numbers that seriously, looking at the responses you get few do. You are at best another opinion and fair play as a commentator, but whether your right or wrong is not visible in your wild confabulations. Your arguments are circular, incoherent and contradictory at best. Read them sometime, perhaps from a third party perspective and you will see what others see, that is were it not for your own sense of grandiloquence. Most would have a deal more respect for what you say if you were not so polemic and dogmatic.

Rubberdials - you need a re-tread. You are the person who was making extravagant claims on knowing the future based on a few bits of selected data and some weird ego trip by association, oh and having insight into the corresponding emotional inner life of non Sony fans. Go on then, explain that?

Market share is always a snap shot.
I remember, when Sony overtook Nikon in FF. And people just said... that's only for that specific time frame. And then Sony overtook Canon in FF... And 2018 Sony sold more FF cameras than Canon or Nikon... including DSLR worldwide, and that is a fact.

Interesting would be to see, how the DSLR FF market is doing. If the gain in mirrorless FF for Canon or Nikon was from DSLR or newcomers.

@George

Now we get to the nub. You say my reading of the data is wrong and there are other readings but you don't offer any of those readings.

So you can't back up your claim and have wasted everyone's time.

Rubberdials - I suppose we shouldn't be surprised, arguing that the A7III isn't selling more isn't that different from arguing that it's a 'toy' or Sony 'isn't a camera manufacturer '- both positions are rooted in wish-fulfilment and fantasy.

Look, I found the nub, please discuss

@George1958 - Let's keep looking at the data throughout the year, shall we? The data will speak for itself. But I get the feeling you'll ignore the data anyways. You'll argue that it's just data from one quarter, or one half-year, or one year, etc. I think the only thing that will satisfy you is a decade's worth of data. It's like someone denying the rise of Canon EOS in 1990 and refusing to accept it until 1999, in spite of plenty of evidence over that time span.

Canon EOS was launched in 1987. But it wasn't really until after they launched the EOS 1N in 1994 that EOS really took off. Sony launched their FF mirrorless system in 2013. But it wasn't really until after they launched the A9 in 2017 that the Sony FF system really started taking off (which we are beginning to see now). Many of us didn't need to wait a full decade to see what was happening.

T3 - i think that a reasonable position. A year is plenty long enough for me and I am dispassionate what ever the outcome as long as it’s fairly derived.

Thoughts R Us is well known for having false information such as Leica lenses lol

@MarshallG - Don't underestimate how quickly electronics can drop in cost compared to complex mechanical devices and physical optical pentaprism. Large pentaprisms are large chunks of optical glass, and they aren't as inexpensive as you might think. Complex, high-speed mirror mechanisms aren't cheap either. Then there's the additional cost of having separate PDAF focus modules, separate metering modules, separate viewfinder display modules. etc. All these components have a cost. That's probably why a 7D MKII, introduced in 2014, is still $1029, while a newly introduced A6400 is only $898.

https://www.amazon.com/Canon-Mark-Digital-Camera-Body/dp/B00NEWZDRG

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-Alpha-a6400-Mirrorless-Camera/dp/B07MV3P7M8

You can bet that four years from now, the A6400 isn't still going to be $898, let along $1029. It'll probably be around $600. Fewer parts means lower cost.

Not to mention all those additional parts in DSLR's also need precision assembly, alignment, which adds to higher production costs.

@MarshallG - Low cost DSLRs have small, dim pentamirror viewfinder which are obviously much cheaper than a high quality glass pentaprism. Low cost DSLRs also have slower/smaller mirror mechanisms that are also cheaper.

Canon has just changed it's lens mount. It doesn't want people to be 'happy with their DSLRs', it wants to sell new cameras.

"look at the shooters on the sidelines at any professional sporting event"

I was at the u.s. pro cup of beach soccer yesterday... one guy with a sony ff rig and another with a red camera, both shooting video... I had the a9, and I saw three canon bodies and one Nikon guy, with a couple of unknowns.

you need to get out more.

You Americans would be surprised to see world outside your borders/culture... In major sports events trough out Europe, Sony becomes very visible in last two years. I know dozen full time working pros who switched from Canon/Nikon to Sony in last two, three years. Reason is always the same, most capable gear for bucks. Also, many becomes hybrid shooters, that's very important aspect of switching.

Milc....so there were four times as many DSLRs as Sonys?

Seriously, I don't need to get out more. The A9 is a wonderful camera, but still vastly outnumbered on the sidelines of NFL games, for example.

See how many of these guys shoot Sony: http://www.sportsshooter.com

Who cares? Pros = approx. 1 % of all buyers

dmanthree, you are completely out of touch with modern photography, and you obviously don't shoot sports, as proven by your failed reference to a dead website, lol

so don't come out here trying to tell us what cameras are best for shooting sports these days... your blind adherence to dslrs is a sheep mentality, that is following the dslr herd right off of the performance cliff.

the d500 guy that I was standing next to on sunday remarked that 10fps felt too slow, and he asked me what fps I was at, which was also too slow, at about 13fps with the adapted sigma lens... if I had native glass, i'd have been at 15-20fps.

he understood, you don't.

and no, dslr sports shooters would be foolish to put dslr lenses on milc, because dslr lenses can't deliver 15-20fps af-c... serious shooters will dump most of their obsolete dslr lenses.

@dmanthree

Sony only has the 400/2.8 at the moment. If the rumours are true, by the Tokyo games they'll also have a 500/4, 600/4 and a 200-600. These are only rumours in terms of FL, they have confirmed they are working on more fast teles.

These lenses will combine with the A9II to give at least 20fps, blackout free, silent shooting and I can assure you the gear will be bought or loaned by lots of agencies and photographers.

Canon takes Sony so seriously in this segment that have followed Sony's idea with the 400 of shifting most of the optical train to the rear of the lens, leaving a large airspace at the front to reduce weight and improve balance.

If you still doubt it, imagine the A9 was a Canon product with an EF mount. It would already be in use at every touchline and in every press pit. They only need the lenses. The camera and technology sells itself.

@dmanthree - I didn't make the first post there, so it's not my claim to prove.

i'm only addressing your ridiculous claims regarding milc.

@dmanthree - how about we start with your failed reference to the dead sportsshooter.com website?

you clearly don't shoot sports, and you don't have any idea what kind of gear sports shooters use.

YOU claimed a dead website as a good source of info, lol

stop trying to deny your own failures, and your lack of knowledge and experience with sports shooting.

marc apparently doesn't care if his camera platform dies, like what happened with the nikon v1 series.

or that he won't have any lens choices, no decent camera bodies in the future, etc.

100% valid sentiment in the context of a single camera body and a (kit?) lens. Those sales figures, however, are THE ONLY THING that enable engineering departments to come up with interesting niche optics to be sold at reasonable prices.

For instance, looking back a few years, it wasn't Nikon's or Minolta's engineers' inability to come up with their own equivalents of Canon's 85mm f/1.2 AF lens that prevented them from doing so. Laws of optics are the same for everyone. It was almost entirely due to the fact that back then Canon sold the most AF bodies of the type whose owners would be likely buyers of this lens, and consequently the bean counters had green-lit the project for the engineers.

Overall volume justifies production of diverse and interesting lenses, even with some of them being priced as loss leaders.

MILC: Canikon won't die - even *if* Sony would outsell them 3x! And you know that, because that is only into Asia, and only A7 III being related. And you Folks know what? Nikon 1 is being orphaned now, as well as Konica-Minolta/Sony A-Mount, Samsung NX, and various other Systems.

I do have only 2 Lenses for my V1 Nikon 1, 18.5/1.8 and PZ 10-30 Lens, and both work like a charm. Who really cares about it? The 2nd Hand market is big enough - one can even get a lot of excellent Minolta A-Mount lenses, still today.

Which means, even your System might being orphaned someday - one can get these Lenses still onto the 2nd Hand Market, which is worldwide. :) I have invested into some EF lenses, even a few "L" Series, and would still use them into 1-2 Decades, why not? Perhaps adapted to brand/camera xy, anyway. ;)

There are mostly these types of Photographers:

...continued, space was too little:

1) Gear Heads with G.A.S. Syndrome, buying everything new and playing, toying around with it - then selling the whole she-bang, and hop to the next exiciting, latest Gear from brand xyz.
2) Users who have invested into a System, and growing it over the years
3) People who don't give a BS about the camera, just doing pictures
4) Pro Photog which earn their money from it.
5) Into the middle, advanced amateurs, enthusiasts, who take pictures, and also like to try new systems. (Gear, Lenses, etc)
6) Amateurs, Enthusiasts, Hobbists, who don't give much about the Gear, but trying to evolve, to get better over the years....
7) Smartphone Photographers, who shoot everything with their Cellphones

Even i've had every couple years ago G.A.S. and bought some stuff over the years, i don't care much about the Gear, as long as it simply works, and doesn't get into my way....FYI, i use my A7 95% with adapted lenses, only native is FE 35/2.8 Samyang.

Good Light.

I'm with Marc on this one. If you're going to invest all your money in one system, and especially if your income depends on it, yes, you have to think it through before trying a new system. Otherwise, well, nobody forces you to sell all your current gear and go Canon or whatever. And one can also wait until those new cameras arrive on the used market to give it a try without losing too much money.

MLC - "The M is dying"
Based on what data? You are purely making stuff up. Its literally the top selling mirrorless camera and it got there with less lenses than it has now.

If Sony is "making crop work", but Canon m is failing, what is that based on? The m is the top selling apsc mirrorless camera.

already addressed that question.

ef-m is dying, with little 3rd-party lens support.

@c h u n k - The problem with Canon M APS-C mirrorless is that all those M purchases do nothing for Canon's RF system since EF-M and RF are two separate, incompatible mirrorless systems. It may be "top selling" but it's not necessarily "top strategy" in the long run. Sony's APS-C mirrorless strategy is quite different. Every Sony APS-C mirrorless sales feeds one more users into Sony's E-mount ecosystem which encompasses both APS-C and FF mirrorless. This strategy is not particularly unique because DSLR systems have used this strategy successfully for years. Pentax, Canon, Nikon, and Sony APS-C/FF DSLR systems all do this.

Sony's mirrorless system is the only system that encompasses both APS-C and FF under one compatibility umbrella. Fujifilm only has APS-C, Nikon only has FF. Canon has APS-C and FF, but as two separate, incompatible systems.

I get that. Believe me. I do. The whole reason I still havent bought the R and may not buy the 2nd generation is because I use both APSC and full frame as each are better suited to different work. However, I wont buy 2 completely different lines of lenses. Once there is an RF APSC, Im in the market. With that said, there is no arguing that the M is outselling Sonys apsc - The A6xxx, I think, is Sonys only APSC line? Given that the M was introduced after, not just Sonys apsc, but several others as well, I dont see why you wouldnt understand that even if the M is eventually abandoned, the same sales will translate to the RF apsc (if that happens and I hope it does). Canon had an FD mount which was completely abandoned for the EF, and Canon ended up dominating the market with the EF mount. Either way, as of now, and for the foreseeable future given that Canon implied the M is staying as its small form option, the M is here and it outsells Sony.

MLC - "The M is dying"
Based on what data? You are purely making stuff up. Its literally the top selling mirrorless camera and it got there with less lenses than it has now.

@c h u n k - "Outsells", but outsells by how much. Sony has clearly closed the gap:

https://www.canonrumors.com/the-canon-eos-m50-leads-mirrorless-camera-sales-in-japan-for-march-2019/

In the US, Sony A6XXX arguably outsells EOS M, if Amazon and B&H sales rankings are any indicator:

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Mirrorless-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3109924011

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Mirrorless-System-Cameras/ci/16158/N/4288586281

As for APS-C coming to RF bodies, I do think that is what will happen. Once that happens, EOS M will be phased out.

@c h u n k - what part of ef-m lousy 3rd-party lens support did you not get?

lens manufacturers aren't making glass for ef-m, because nobody wants it! the ef-m market is dismal.

@Chunk

The M series makes money for Canon. From what I know about Canon they will continue to sell it but are unlikely to invest much more in it than they have already.

The M mount is only two years younger than e-mount but there are only 9 EF-M lenses and their are 50 e-mount Sony lenses.

It's unlikely Canon will make an aps-c camera. Look at the lens road map: There isn't even a non-L kit lens, let alone affordable lenses for aps-c.

@chunk
Best to ignore these guys - in reality there are only a few of them - maybe even the same person ?😁

Lol. The efm marker is dismal? We know its the top seller in Japan...and its listed at number one on Amazon. You have odd interpretations of things. Its like delusion to root for your camera brand and boo their competition. You are a strange cat

Rubbersmiles - "not even a non L kit" for rf - errrr, wrong! Makin stuff up again

"Canon wont be making APSC" errrr, wrong again. Your thoughts arent onky contrary to all rumor sites, but also not in line with what Canon suggested directly during an interview

Rubber smiles, milk man, and (I wish I could own a) T3 - Have been running up and down this thread cheering with pom poms and all. I never saw so much extreme brand tribalism, brand hating, and straight up conjecture. This should be a case study for marketing psychologists.

c h u n k is on the defensive about his canon gear, lol, and in full delusional mode... he's made over a dozen posts to this thread, talk about tribalism!

go count the ef-m lenses that are for sale at b&h, it's the worst-supported crop format there is.

canon didn't even bother to make ef-m compatible with eos-r; not even an adapter! it's obviously headed for the dustbin of history.

Apsc mirrorrless are too expensive and today I still do not understand why canon M is selling so well considering all negative pointed out here by DPR. This is a mystery for me, would’ that mean people are buying a name and have lost all common sense ?

Maybe it would be best to look at something that made the best curves for my own brand ... many of these in this tread. :-)

Without the sales numbers this has far less meaning. What if we are talking a handful of units separating the two? And keep in mind this is only for FF MILC, which in itself is a small fraction the market. So indeed the differences in units could be very small.

@ lotzi
Everything I buy from any company and any product is "intentionally feature crippled" unless I buy the most expensive version. Name one camera manufacturer where their cheapest product has all the features of their most expensive one. Wouldn't you expect a camera's features and performance to depend on the model you buy and the price you pay?

X-T30 is a crippled version of X-T3 for instance, Olympus E-M10 line is a crippled version of E-M5 (and E-PL is even more limited). Panasonic G95 is a crippled version of G9. In some ways A7 II is a crippled (or beta) version of A7r II (some options don't exist).

I think there is nothing wrong with that, as long as we know what we're paying for. Also, it really depends on the strategy: Sony is not making any entry-level camera anymore, they just keep the old ones a bit cheaper. You'll never feel that there is a "crippled" camera because of that (unless you consider the lack of IBIS on A6400). Other manufacturers are releasing their flagship first, and then cheaper models. Then depending on how much they give us, and how much we expect, we will feel like the camera is crippled or not.

I won't defend Canon's strategy, they have an habit to sell good but not great cameras, but then again nobody released a new FF camera for $1300.

The mirrorless that most people are using is their smartphone. The camera market is dramatically shrinking. Less and less new entrants. Most of the people buying cameras are already invested in a brand system. And most of those will not change brands.

There are many Canon/Nikon DSLR owners who are perfectly happy with what they have, and are waiting for their respective brands mirrorless options to mature before making the jump.

Yes, most people buying the Sony A7III are existing owners of an earlier A7 / A7r/ A7s series model who can now move into a mature product.

In a way, it's like the Nikon D850: it has sold very well, but most people buying it are those who already had Nikon D800 series models, or other Nikon DSLRs.

Once Canon and Nikon fill out their mirrorless lineup more, with newer cameras and more lenses, you will see quite a few of their users making the move to mirrorless.

@Thoughts R Us
I am not entire sure you are correct:
1) I personally know several people jumping ship, some just cannot wait any longer and need to buy something now. New Sony cameras handle Canon glass as well as Canon bodies if not better: why not then? Adapters are not expensive.
2) You are ignoring new generations of photographers entering the market now

@Thoughts R Us - "Most of the people buying cameras are already invested in a brand system. And most of those will not change brands."

People said the exact same thing back in the 1990s. But Canon EOS was still able to go from zero market share in 1987 to overtaking Nikon by the mid to late 1990s. Sorry, but people do jump ship. And these days it's easier than ever thanks to smart adapters which still allow you to make use of your existing DSLR lenses.

You're also completely ignore the younger generation of photographers who have no attachment to brands such as Canon and Nikon. Among the younger generation of photographers entering the market, Sony is far more popular. Like it or not, there are still budding photographers rising up through the ILC market. Many caught the photography bug with smartphones and want to get more serious into photography. And for this tech-savvy generation, Sony is more popular.

But even the older generation of photographers is switching over to Sony:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4714207/doug-mills-switches-sony-a9

https://petapixel.com/2018/01/23/photographer-david-burnett-switches-sony-40-years-shooting-canon/

https://www.canonwatch.com/instagrammer-with-5-4m-followers-decided-to-switch-from-canon-to-sony-here-is-why/

However, this should not be surprising. After all, plenty of Nikon users switched over to Canon EOS, which allowed Canon to overtake Nikon in the market, even though people like yourself constantly said, "Nikon users won't switch. They'll never switch. They will just wait until Nikon gets the same technology that Canon EOS has."

@armandino: "You are ignoring new generations of photographers entering the market now"

By the looks of it, there are far more people leaving the market then entering it. That being said, if we talk about brands, I'm guessing Sony has way more visibility, starting by products like PS4 or even TVs, than Canon.

T3 - there you go again with your selective arguments that confirm your own hypothesis. A balanced perspective would include noting those who don't buy Sony and those who have left Sony, take a look on utube etc, they do exist. I found several in minutes. I am afraid its the usual Sony propaganda from you once again

Owning SONY A7 w/ 35mm f2,8 since 2015 but not that impressed in terms of image quality and short battery life for such an expensive camera and Zeiss lens; at that time. LEICA as the benchmark hence the success of Q with fixed 28mm lens but again too expensive for me. Later on owning FUJI XT-2 and XT-3 which deliver in all departments. FF offers no great advantages. In the future might consider OLYMPUS E-M1X for its handling capabilities. SONY more of a marketing company and playing on the ZEISS name?

@George1958 - "A balanced perspective would include noting those who don't buy Sony and those who have left Sony"

The same thing would have been said back in the 1990s by Nikon users: "there are those who don't by Canon and those who have left Canon." Obviously that's true-- not *everyone* left Nikon for Canon. Not even close. But it was enough people to give Canon the momentum to overtake Nikon in the autofocus SLR market. And Canon was also better at capturing a new generation of users. This applied to Canon in the 1990s, and it applies to Sony today. And of course, back then Nikon uses said that Nikon would come roaring back and take back everything that Canon EOS had gained, much like people are saying today about the gains Sony has made. We'll see if that actually happens. But so far it doesn't look like it. Times are changing. Sony has a lot of momentum, a strong head start, and the technological superiority, much like Canon EOS had when it entered the autofocus SLR market.

@T3: the fact that you have to cite the the same few photographers who went to Sony tells the whole story. These are the exception that proves the rule.

And if you want an analogy with the past, here's one for you: when Canon started their EF mount and Nikon was the clear market leader, they started by releasing high end lenses and a mid range body that wasn't seen as all that exciting. Sound familiar? But then they released their pro body and it was off to the races.

@Thoughts R Us-

Same can be said about Sony. The first few years of Sony's FF systems "wasn't seen as all that exciting." Sound familiar? Then Sony introduced their pro body, the A9, and "it was off to the races." Then came the top-selling A7III. And away they go!

The first few years of the Sony system really were rather quiet. But it allowed Sony to quietly build out their system and continue to develop their technological edge. It wasn't until the A9 came along that Sony's mirrorless system hit a tipping point of maturity. Then they followed up with the A7III, and we can see where all those years of development and building really start to pay off for Sony in sales.

So in reality, your comment merely highlights the similarities between the rise of Canon EOS (then) and Sony mirrorless (now). Was that what you were trying to do? I guess you're finally starting to get it. It's about time!

why should history repeat itself? it's a different market, different players than it was back then. For a while now the market has been shrinking, there is less money to be made, and Sony was lucky enough to make their tech prosper at the right moment. Is it really a good sign that the RX100 Mark I is still being sold? I don't think so, just nobody has the resources to develop new sensors for camera that they won't sell well enough of.
Does it matter that one is using the market leader stuff, and another isn't? and so much can happen... Sony is selling sensors to everyone but can't breakthrough with its mobile phones while Huawei within a few years becomes some kind of reference in smartphone photography. What happened? I don't care, really, point is things can move fast. I think people are more or less satisfied with the current tech, what will be next?

@larkhon
"By the looks of it, there are far more people leaving the market then entering it." That is true, but the new comers have a fresh look with no legacy gear attachment.

T3 - your argument assumes that nothing other than time has changed, and that people are going to change to Sony because, you and a few others obsess about tech as the only value in photography. Your (unspecified, unquantified) claims that people moved from Nikon omits all of the other competitors of the day. As I recall people (in the UK) had less disposable income through the 80s and 90s an cameras were a luxury item that comparatively few could afford. Of course there were the film equivalents of compacts and their successors, digital compacts, which were, as I recall hugely expensive. I had a canon S45 that cost me £500. To put that in context a new A6000 and kit lens can be had for £400 today, and that is not allowing for inflation effects. The S45 was 60% of my monthly income on the day. Dubious histories that lead to the same conclusions as you always make about Sony are far from robust. Also we now have smartphones, its a very different environment today than the 90s.

@George1958 - "Also we now have smartphones, its a very different environment today than the 90s."

Today's smartphones have replaced point-and-shoot cameras and bridge cameras of the past. But the ILC market continues to exist and always will.

People have to remember that the ILC market was very small back in the film SLR era. For example, Canon's best selling manual film SLR, the AE-1, sold approximately 1 million units during its *entire* lifespan. Today's ILC market is returning to the smaller unit volumes of the film ILC era. Sure, some companies might decide to bail out because they don't want to return to film-era ILC sales volumes. Some companies will also probably try to knock weaker competitors out of the market, leaving more sales for themselves.

T3 - not sure what your point is any more, one the one hand you appear to strongly suggest that Sony will win out, you have canon under the sword of Damocles, Nikon dying, and others accuse you of being a Sony hater. To be honest the more I read , the more I wonder that you just like to debate in any direction but have no durable opinion of your own?

Notes on ILC - I hope they do survive, and I agree it will likely be an expensive minority pursuit, maybe like the Leica business model? They might well be the last man standing in camera companies. It seems there is a market for very premium gear and its more than about price alone.

First thing I do with a new camera is buy an unbranded strap and tape over the logo. They got my money, they don't get free advertising or shilling services. For that they pay me ;-)

I think guys around here actually get teeshirts and everything.

This sort of fierce loyalty is also exhibited in sports, where fans of one team must, for some reason, hate another team, or a fan of Kobe (or LeBron) must go all out to denounce the accomplishments of any rival player. I argue that we should be able to be loyal to our team and appreciate another team or player's great play at the same time. Life is too short to only enjoy one team/player/camera brand.

People are defensive of their own choices, because your taste goes some way to defining your self image. It's not unique to some individuals, it's in everyone. It may be that you don't care what cameras you use, but you'll justify your choices in wine, or clothes or movies or something else.

Camera brands also have cultural associations that the companies foster. If you have a collecting mentality you'll become a Canon user and buy as many 'L' lenses as you can afford. If you enjoy the engineering and nostalgia side of photography you'll buy Leica or Fuji. If you're impressed by technology and the upstart mentality you'll pick Sony. If you're a conformist you'll buy Nikon or Canon, if you see yourself as an outsider you'll choose Pentax or Olympus etc..

Rubberdials, Ive been reading your comments in this thread and you continually just make stuff up. People can be partial to brands for a number of reasons without chanting how they are the best, and other brands suck. The bottom line is every major brand of cameras that even get discussed, make GREAT cameras with the ability to deliver top of the line images. The camera is the least important part of the process outside of some accessories. For some photographers, the strobes they get will make more of a difference than the camera today. Id be willing to bet that most of these people going on about their A7Riii being so great and The R or Z "trash", cant eek out the abilities of a Canon Rebel T4i, or a Nikon D3500. The value people put on their camera bodies is mass delusion...and if you feel personal emotion about peoples camera choices, self reflect...or at least go out and actually shoot

Oh, and me choosing Canon has literally nothing to.do with my self image. It was all about what happened to be the least expensive with good reviews when I started, and then the lenses etc that kept me there. Its still about the glass for me. Sony glass is out of reach $ and it isnt justified by quality. Hopefully that will change for Sony shooters now that Tamron and Sigma are supporting their mount. They are making awesome bodies, but all hype aside, its marginally better than the competition. Everyone needs to chill with the cheerleading

The problem is that many are analyzing this like it's Coke vs Pepsi and that everyone can and will change so easily on a whim. Or like there's this huge amount of new buyers to the market. Neither is true.

A Sony buyer is generally not the same as a Canon buyer. The name of the game in today's market is to move your existing users to a new model. With Sony their A7III hit a point of product maturity to induce a lot of its existing owners to upgrade. We also saw this with Nikon's D850 where a lot of existing Nikon DSLR users upgraded.

With Canon and Nikon, most of their users are happily using their DSLR's while waiting for these companies mirrorless product lines to hit a point of greater maturity.

@Thoughts, that's a great evaluation of different user bases. I agree that Canikon users such as myself are just fine with DSLRs and aren't in a hurry to move on to mirrorless.

Another fantasy, why would you envy Sony if you don’t use Sony. They real enigma is why a few errant and unrepresentative Sony users have this fantasy that the rest of the non Sony user community must envy Sony. I can afford to buy any Sony camera I wished to, but I don’t. Sony make excellent cameras but what matters to a given individual is something different. An EOS R or RP, or a Nikon Z or even a Leica SL would be my preference ahead of any Sony. Different strokes, but get off the world is full of others that envy Sony trip. They don’t.

I envy Sony, I've always wanted to be a Japanese multinational conglomerate corporation headquartered in Kōnan, Minato, Tokyo.

Envy Sony? For what?

@NOWHITELENS, for all of the great cameras and lenses they have given us in the past 5 year. Have you not seen they way they have totaly dominated the MICL market since then?!

@snapa:
What is a MICL market?

I agree with George: the problem is with a few Sony users who don't want anyone else to use or enjoy any other brand.

It's like someone wanting to push their religion onto you, when you're perfectly happy where you are.

Wait a year or two for filling in the product lines such as: for Canon to put out its pro mirrorless body and fill in their lens lineup in RF, and also Nikon to fill in some more lenses and/or a second generation release will more features. Give it a year and there will be more buyers in Canon and Nikon than there is now, in FF mirrorless and then, should be closer to Sony. Canon and Nikon have their core loyal brand followers and buyers in pro DSLRs who will most likely buy mirrorless in next upgrade.

@Adrian-Van
Many people are not waiting anymore, and by the time there's a good solution from CaNikon, those users will have already switched, and worse, there will be other, more advanced Sony cameras too. Don't assume Sony is standing still.

pollup - why would you think that? Sony has been boasting great this and that for years, yet Canon still outsells Sony save FF mirrorless. I guess may people are not the sheep you think they are, and realise that gear in isolation is not the most important thing when it comes to photography.

@Thoughts R Us - "in that it too is seeing its market erode by, guess what, the iPhones and the Galaxies!"

But unlike other camera companies, Sony actually benefits from smartphone sales because Sony provides the image sensors to most of the world's smartphones.

http://fortune.com/2015/04/29/sony-iphone/

https://wccftech.com/sony-20-iphone-6-sold/

Back in 2015 it was reported that Sony made $20 off of every iPhone 6 sold. During its lifespan, 220 million iPhone 6's were sold. Sony also supplies sensors to other smartphones as well, including Samsung Galaxies.

https://www.androidauthority.com/samsung-galaxy-s9-camera-sensors-teardown-854335/

These days with smartphones moving to multiple sensors, Sony stands to make even more money. So if all stand-alone camera sales were driven into extinction by smartphone cameras, Sony is the only one who would benefit from that. Sony might be on the Titanic (along with every other camera manufacturer), but unlike others they have a lifeboat!

@Thoughts R Us - By the way, the shrinking camera market isn't going to stop Canon and Nikon from pouring millions of dollars into mirrorless camera and lens development in the coming years in an attempt to catch up to Sony. They have to, otherwise they will simply hasten their demise in the camera market. And if they retreat from the market, that will simply leave more sales to the remaining camera companies.

@T3: I fully agree with you that Sony Semiconductor, a separate Sony division from imaging, is in a great position with its image sensor business. And yes, Sony benefits greatly from sales of smartphones by other brands because of that. Kudos to Sony. I also believe Sony makes wonderful image sensors.

My remarks about being on the Titanic only apply to the Sony camera division...Sony Imaging. But speaking of smartphones, Sony needs to dump its smartphone business...Sony's own brand of smartphones is going nowhere and is bleeding money.

Sony as a company will continue to survive and thrive, and I am glad about that. I even want their imaging business to do well...that may surprise you. But I don't like it when some Sony fans try to bring down other brands to push Sony up. Sony's products don't need that.

@Thoughts R Us - "But I don't like it when some Sony fans try to bring down other brands to push Sony up."

Uh-huh, sure. You're a two-faced hypocrite, TRS. This is what you wrote last year before Canon even released the EOS R:

"The real loser is Sony. Canon will crush Sony from here on out. And Sony gets no more converts from Canon or Nikon. Maybe a few switching back. To new users, they will no longer see Sony as the only game in town if you want smaller high quality FF mirrorless. They will see the names of the giants and many will choose them over Sony.

Nikon will outsell Sony. I can guarantee you that Canon will outsell Sony by a very wide margin. Sony will be consigned to small share of the FF mirrorless market; they've had 100% with no competition. Now they will are going to get besieged by all sides. Even Panasonic will swoop in and take away the video shooters from Sony."

All this based on nothing but your desire to push down a company that threatened your ideal status quo.

@dash2k8
I am just emphasizing that RP forum, and actually many other sites including DPR, insisted on comparing the RP to the first Rebel in terms of introducing a groundbreaking budget camera. Many insisted that the the RP will disrupt the FF market as it is. I honestly do not care, but it seemed to me that the camera landscape at the introduction of the Rebel was different. My opinion was trashed by many. Maybe I was not that wrong after all looking at this trend. RP can make the impact some expected but it needs to be at a much lower price point. Too many good FF camera new and used to compete with such a crippled spec sheet.

Sony did not "beat" Olympus in FF MILC in Japan; Olympus did not enter the contest.

I get what you are trying to say, but it would be like saying that Toyota "beat" Sony at selling cars in Japan. It's just an absurd statement with no real meaning.

Another analogy: saying that because Tom Brady won the Super Bowl, he has beaten Lebron James in football.

@Thoughts he was answering already an absurd question.

If someone asks you whether toyota beat sony at selling cars then by all means reply anything you wish as the question itself is absurd.

Olympus without any real new releases last year (1 minor refresh) outsold Sony despite their 2 major new releases.

Olympus with just one format, outsold Sony, FF mirrorless, APSC mirrorless, and Sony A mount combined.

Its been the same story this year too. Sony is back in 4th place in their home country.

i beat general motors three years running , in sarcastic posts at dpr .....so there's that .........

For those asking, YES every year Olympus beats Sony in mirrorless sales, and Canon beats both of them.

Sony is 4th in ILC sales in Japan.

For Canon and Nikon, they will forever remain off-brand, with all the consequences (including, but by no means limited to, lack of in-camera corrections) -- at best. At worst, at least Nikon, having developed new protocol with patent protection in mind, will be shooting them down.

Finally, [F]E mount is universal: shared between FF and crop cameras, as well as Sony camcoders. Canon MILC mount... is a mess; not only R and M lenses not interchangeble, but EOS Cinema is very likely to stick with EF mount, hence video lenses will only be available on R cameras with adapters -- for foreseeable future. Nikon APS-C is currently a unicorn, so no D500 for the faithful. Bigger mount diameter? It only guarantees two things: Canon and Nikon lenses will be a) bigger and b) heavier than they could have been. Maybe it will be easier for lens *designers* to design great lenses, but whether is will translate to any tangible benefits for *consumers* is debatable. Proof will be in the pudding.

(TBC)

Q1 saw massive drop in camera sales. Again, why is anyone surprised? Canon and Nikon have largest DSLR used base. Their users are apparently hesitant to convert to the dark side of MILC because... well, lenses. Not too fond of adapters, even less keep to start from scratch and pay premium for R and Z mount lenses (and even if they were, there isn't much to pay for, right?) The downward line of the RP sales on the chart in the article are, I think, mostly those DSLR users who did take the MILC plunge, but there wasn't many of them for the aforementioned reasons.

Market was caught in transition in the worst possible manner: Canon and Nikon users might see that Sony option (the system, not necessarily the cameras -- for them!) is better, and they must be waiting till their chosen manufacturers catch up. Many would rather die than buy a Sony. To buy a new DSLR body makes even less sense, not that mass transition to MILC *is* happening. Bummer!

(TBC)

BTW, it's a valid observation that Canon is doing way better with their M line. Why? Most APS-C users are content with standard zoom that comes with the camera; maybe they also get a nifty-fifty as a portrait lens. In other words, lens selection is not a big deal for them... for most of them, anyway. FF crowd is a different matter.

Now <ahem...> the "About the author" part.

I have no stake in any of this. I was done with FF long ago, and never looked back. Yes, I currently shoot Sony ASP-C cameras, but I looked towards MFT many times, and might as well buy into MFT rather sooner than later (I wrote "buy" and not "switch" because I never sell my old gear) -- if only sombody releases an MFT camera with GPS and great integration with a mobile phone. That is why I think Olympus went nuts when they released E-M1X -- instead, they should should be making cameras for me and people like me! :-)

(TBC)

But I digress... I by no means consider Sony an ideal system; they make mistake after mistake in the areas that are important to *me*, to the point I constantly keep looking "elsewhere". The unanswered "how to I share/transfer my images *conveniently*" question keeps bugging me, and I find myself shooting with my Huewei Mate 20X more and more, and leave my a6500 at home. Not all is well with Sony APS-C lineup, too! 10-22/4 used to give me UVA option I didn't have with my phone -- not anymore with Mate 20X and its 16mm equivalent, very decent lens! Which is *instantly* available, BTW. So Sony might as well lose the battle for my wallet -- to a next mobile phone, or to an MFT camera... but not to Canon or Nikon, who were asleep at the wheel for much longer than they could afford.

That's all, folks. Sorry for the long rant ;-)

@Thoughts R Us

> these comparisons often don't tell the whole
> story because they assume everyone starts from
> scratch. The reality is the opposite.

The "reality" rarely fits any scheme... I'll tell you about my three closest friends:

1) First shoots with his iPhone. His last dedicated camera was film.

2) Second friend shot Canon 450(?)D. He has a hobby: small metal workshop at home, with lathes etc. Most of his work is... delicate, close to jewelry. He also runs a blog, documenting his work. Bought Canon 100/2.8 L macro for that, and used it... for a while. A bit more than a year ago he got a Huawei phone, and since then uses it instead.

3) Third friend shot Nikon D750, then switched to Olympus (E-M5), now he's about to switch to Sony FF (A7m3). Needless to say, every switch was/will be such that use of old lenses is out of question.

> don't worry, both Canon and Nikon have aggressive plans

If you think that I "worry" about anything, you completely misinterpreted my posts...

This is what Thoughts R Us wrote last year just before the EOS R was launched:

"The real loser is Sony. Canon will crush Sony from here on out. And Sony gets no more converts from Canon or Nikon. Maybe a few switching back. To new users, they will no longer see Sony as the only game in town if you want smaller high quality FF mirrorless. They will see the names of the giants and many will choose them over Sony.

Nikon will outsell Sony. I can guarantee you that Canon will outsell Sony by a very wide margin. Sony will be consigned to small share of the FF mirrorless market; they've had 100% with no competition. Now they will are going to get besieged by all sides. Even Panasonic will swoop in and take away the video shooters from Sony."

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8428210001/rumors-point-to-imminent-canon-full-frame-mirrorless-system-launch?comment=1889035938

He's nothing but a desperate and rabid Sony hater who spouts off totally wrong predictions.

@filmluvr

> All Canon EF lenses work just fine on the R bodies.

Been there, done that. And BTW never said they do not "work just fine".

I retained all my Canon glass, and tried to use it with a6000 (via Metabones). It was awkward; at best -- inconvenient. Thought I'd use EF 50/1.4 as portrait lens, but quickly dropped the idea and just bought Sony E 50/1.8.

So, in the end, the adapter lives permanently on my Canon 70-300 DO, being essentially part of that lens. Even with attached adapter, the DO is roughly the size of Sony 70-300, so I'm in no hurry to replace it.

For someone like me, who shoots for fun and not as a job, adapters are not something I'm willing to cope with. Sounds great on paper, but in reality they are a hassle, and largely negate size advantages of MILCs, esp. with small lenses.

Besides, like I said, they are of no use for newcomers not having Canon glass. That's what matters when somebody asks questions like "Who is RP for?"

@T3

> https://www.dpreview.com/news/8428210001/rumors-point-to-imminent-canon-full-frame-mirrorless-system-launch?comment=1889035938

The link you posted leads to comment of Spectro, in a different thread.

Correct link to Thoughts R Us' comment that you quoted is https://www.dpreview.com/news/8428210001/rumors-point-to-imminent-canon-full-frame-mirrorless-system-launch?comment=2677548079

@vadims - Thanks

@T3 and @vadims: I'm honored that you think so highly of me to research past comments of mine from last year.

First, I still maintain that Canon will end up overtaking Sony in the FF MILC market. Remember with their EOS M? The first model most people ignored and insulted. Now in APS-C MILC they lead or challenge Sony across the board. The same thing will happen in FF.

I also maintain that Sony will get very few converts from Canon/Nikon from here on out. That's one reason why Sony's sales are dipping and their last quarter was horrible.

Yes, perhaps my comment was a bit over enthusiastic with regards to timing, but I really don't want to take the time to research all of your old mistaken comments; it's not important enough to me. Or are you saying that if someone isn't 100% perfect then they will never be right? Because that is the essence of your smear. We see this in politics all of the time.

I freely admit that I make mistakes; lots of them. Do you admit the same?

@Thoughts R Us

> I'm honored that you think so highly of me to research past comments of mine from last year

T3 posted a link, I clicked, got to wrong message, grabbed first line of the quote, searched same page for it. Hardly a "research"; would do it with a link to anyone's post. Got sarcastic reply from you. OK.

> Now in APS-C MILC they lead or challenge Sony across the board

Above I wrote: "it's a valid observation that Canon is doing way better with their M line. Why? Most APS-C users are content with standard zoom that comes with the camera <> In other words, lens selection is not a big deal for them".

> perhaps my comment was a bit over enthusiastic with regards to timing

IMHO your current comments still are.

I might even agree that in [very] short term leaks will subside. But then, when, say, ramifications of the closed mount protocols will sink in... Why do you think Sigma joined L alliance so readily?

More importantly, Sony is a more viable system for new users now.

@Thoughts R Us

> I freely admit that I make mistakes; lots of them. Do you admit the same?

Of course I do. I do not expect you to do a "research", but if you're really interested, search for, say, "I stand corrected" in my messages.

Everyone makes mistakes, even big companies.

What's "wrong" with your relentless defense of Canon and Nikon, if I may, is that your arguments boil down to "But they are Canon and Nikon, market leaders!" As if it's some magic spell.

Sony did manage to put them into "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation 5 years ago, and they apparently chose to watch each other rather than Sony. Big mistake, as it turned out.

How far are we from sport/PJ pro shooters starting to switch to A9? The writing is on the wall: AI AF (MILC-only!) trumps *everything*. So, will next big leak start with A9m2? A9m3? What super-telephoto glass will then be available for FE and what for R/Z? And how will the "masses" react when pros will start switching to Sony en masse?

vadims, I was referring to your statement that the EOS R is deficient due to its limited selection of lenses. It's not. And as for adapters from one system to another (which does NOT include EF to R, because the adapter can remain on the body and works perfectly with EF lenses, unlike lenses adapted to Sony) I agree that's more troublesome. I wold never buy a Sony thinking it would be useful going forward with EF lenses.

I actually have a sony alarm clock radio, the cube one, it really sucks and is already broken with a year. Other sony stuff are fine, but that clock radio was a junker. Well their blu-ray burner did die on me as well as a PS3 while watching a movie, not even gaming.

I have yet to have a sony product fail on me in less than 5 years of use. (Most survived more than 10 or 20 years).

Same here. All my sony products are still around, laptops outlasted their technology and I disposed of them when they were still functioning after 10-15years.

The other downside of the RP is that it's cannibalizing EOS R sales. In November, BCN reported that EOS R's market share was 22.1%. Based on the latest data, after the release of the RP, EOS R's market share is now around 12% while EOS RP's market share is now around 14%. Combined, that's 26%. So the RP did bump up Canon's total sales share slightly, but at the expense of R sales as many Canon buyers are now opting for the much less expensive RP ($1000 less)! Given the huge price differential between the R and RP, that likely means less profit for Canon. Canon probably should have held off on the RP for a while longer, to give them more time to sell more EOS R's before giving customers a MUCH less expensive camera to buy instead. But Canon was probably betting that the RP would sell at much higher sustained sales volumes to make up for its lower profit and potential cannibalizing of EOS R sales. Sometimes, a bet doesn't go your way, as is apparently the case with Canon's RP bet.

Just because Canon stopped innovating doesn’t mean Sony has to do the same. Maturity is relative to a perceived need and to offered values. If you innovate you creste new values.

@ffking - The Sony A7III was introduced at $1999. The Canon 6D MKII was introduced at $1999. The Z6 was introduced at $1999. The EOS RP was introduced at $1299. It's really the EOS RP that is the low-profit introduction.

@Thoughts R Us - "Speaking of cannibalization, the Sony A7III has totally taken away sales from the A7RIII and A9. Those two cameras are discounted heavily."

Those other two cameras are totally different classes of cameras which have always sold in lower volumes because they are more "specialty" cameras. The A7RIII is Sony's high rez body, the A9 is Sony's high speed sports body. Besides, Canon has implemented its own discounts:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1445207-REG/canon_eos_r_mirrorless_digital.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=canon%201DX%20II&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274705-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iv.html

So, no, A7III is not really taking away sales from A7RIII and A9 because what those two cameras offer are quite different from A7III. Sony has always offered various classes of bodies: A7 (base model), A7R (resolution), A7S (sensitivity), A9 (sports and speed).

@ffking - To put the A7 MKIII's $1999 pricing further into context, the A7 MKII was introduced at $1700 when it was introduced. And before that, Sony had introduce the A7 MKI at $1700 when it was introduced. So Sony actually upped the price on their latest A7-series body.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7-ii

It helps to know the facts and historical context.

> the Sony A7III has totally taken away sales from the A7RIII and A9.

Is it? Well, some people need/want a sports camera and some people need/want high resolution. If that is what you want, that is what you get.

> Those two cameras are discounted heavily.

The A7R3 is 1.5 years old and discounted about 13%.

The A9 is two years old, it is heavily discounted from its original price. As it is, for all purposes, the same camera as the A7R3 with different electronics, one would assume that they are still making a healthy profit on it. There is nothing quite like that on the market - if you are a sports photographer, you are definitely looking at it.

This is valid point, in 2 years Sony will loose next 40-50% of the FF MILC market and soon it will take same place as it was in DSLR market.

This is what Thoughts R Us wrote last year just before the EOS R was launched:

"The real loser is Sony. Canon will crush Sony from here on out. And Sony gets no more converts from Canon or Nikon. Maybe a few switching back. To new users, they will no longer see Sony as the only game in town if you want smaller high quality FF mirrorless. They will see the names of the giants and many will choose them over Sony.

Nikon will outsell Sony. I can guarantee you that Canon will outsell Sony by a very wide margin. Sony will be consigned to small share of the FF mirrorless market; they've had 100% with no competition. Now they will are going to get besieged by all sides. Even Panasonic will swoop in and take away the video shooters from Sony."

https://www.dpreview.com/news/8428210001/rumors-point-to-imminent-canon-full-frame-mirrorless-system-launch?comment=1889035938

He's nothing but a desperate and rabid Sony hater who spouts off totally wrong predictions.

I agree with you that there are many aspects impacting every persons choice. I am just pointing at global trends. It is not 6 months into a ”battle”. The FF battle has been going on for a long time and in recent years a major shift can be seen statistically in that Sony FF sells most and gets most 3rd party lens investment. You may like or dislike the statistics, but they are factual.

Canon leads the FF sales with Nikon and as second.
Sony hasn’t ”been leading the sales for quite a while”
If you mean FF ML , there haven’t been much competition until now.

Sorry Yxa but you are wrong. Canon and Nikon has larger FF installed base. But Sony sold more FF cameras than either of them last year. This is the large change in the industry that we are discussing.

The problem is that we see only percentages in one country for one month. If we would see the numbers - maybe 100 or 500 bodies per percent - we would deduce that selling FF bodies doesn't make the large profits.
FF is not always necessary to get good photographic results - just for me: For what I do a set of very good lenses and two APS-C bodies are sufficient.

You are right of course that we could understand more if we were given all data in absolute numbers. But the fact that all the big camera companies invest most in FF cameras and FF lenses should be a clue. Its normal practice in product management to invest where you see the biggest profits and the biggest potential.
This doesnt mean you cant take pictures or movies with smaller formats than FF. But it tells you where the most innovation investment and new products are likely to turn up onwards - FF.

@Duncan M - "Market also says 3 out of 5 cameras sold are still DSLR, not Sony's."

Is that really something to brag about? It used to be 5 out of 5. Then it became 4 out of 5. Now it's only 3 out of 5. Soon it will only be 2 out of 5. It's a very bad trend for those companies that are still very dependent on DSLR sales. What's even worse for the DSLR market is that the mid to higher-end DSLR market has practically evaporated. These days, the only DSLRs that are still selling are low-margin, low-profit DSLRs. So not only is the DSLR market shrinking very rapidly, overall profit margins in the DSLR market are rapidly shrinking too because people who normally would have bought higher-priced, higher-profit DSLRs are now investing in mirrorless instead.

@Yxa
I think most people do not realize what cameras are going to be in the near future: devices closer to what smartphones are today than current cameras. All it will matter is the processing power and sensor. No moving parts. I would like to see in which way Canon and Nikon have a lead over Sony in this area. Sony is so much closer to this with the A9 and once Sony will drop a global shutter with really fast readout (I would not exclude that the soon to come A9II will not have that) in their bodies it will be game over for old school cameras. To make it short in my opinion Sony is ahead of the game more than what it seems. The A9 was released 2 years ago and in terms of technology advancements nothing still touches it.

@Yxa
your response is just as incompetent as expected. Thank you for just making sure. I recommend practicing more actual photography than engineering specifications mental gymnastics (yes, I did ready your non-existent profile, the engineering reference is not casual).

@Yxa

The A9 doesn't exhibit any 'jello' effect with it's e-shutter - it's only one stop slower than a mechanical shutter. So about 1/125 compared to the 1/250 of your D850 mechanical. Your D850 does have a 'jelly shutter' in e-mode, running at 1/15.

As for the 12bit files - they contain all of the DR of the A9 sensor which is not one of the best in DR so there is no penalty. Incidentally the D5 sensor has even less dynamic range than the A9 up to 2500 ISO where it about two tenths of a stop better at about 7.5 EV.

At no point does the D5 sensor ever exhibit more than 9.5 EV so doesn't need 14 bits either.
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

Since the A9 has been out for more than two years and there is no FF camera, mirrorless or DSLR that shoots at 20fps silently and without blackout other than it, it a simple factual statement to say it was ahead of it's time.

@armadino

Yxa has been trolling me and Sony for years. He always makes very short posts in Sony threads - usually snide 'jokes' about 'playstations' or 'smile shutter'.

You can't have a 'civilised conversation' with him because he posts in bad faith. He is not actually interested in any thread that he posts in, just wants to make a dig at Sony.

Yes, his profile says he is an engineer. I suppose it's possible, but he sounds more like a teenager.

@Duncan M - "It is easy to claim a pyrus victory for Sony. But this chart doesn't say much. Let's see how this market evolves over the next 5 years and see if Sony will be able to maintain its 55% market share - I'll guess not."

Nikon users said similar things about the rise of Canon EOS back in the 1990s. They said that Canon had the temporary advantage of USM and IS, but as soon as Nikon got those same features (AF-S and VR), Canon would lose their lead. Well, Nikon did catch up to Canon in technology, but they never regained their lead over Canon.

As history has shown in multiple industries, once a company loses its edge and loses its lead, it's really tough to ever get it back. We saw that with Nikon going up against faster-moving, more technologically advanced Canon. Now we are seeing it today with CaNikon going up against faster-moving, more technologically advanced Sony. And the next 5 years will continue to be rough for CaNikon because Sony isn't slowing down.