Image courtesy: Personal View.
Well, if you look at that chart posted by Personal View you will notice a big change is going on in the system camera market. DSLR sales are dropping while mirrorles system camera are holding their ground. The data is based on the sales from Japanese camera manufacturers (Source: CIPA). It may explain why Sony is betting high on their mirrorless system and is a bit less “engaged” on the A-mount front. Still, there is a lot to do to make that mirrorless sales line make growth further…
via MirrorlessRumors.
0 Responses
A trend that’s likely to continue.
Oct. 2012 = NEX-6 selling
Sep. 2013 = A7/A7r selling
If this trend continues at this rate, it means by December 2015, A-mount will vanish from the marketplace.
I’m not making stuff up, i’m using ‘the numbers.’
No worry the a mount will survive but the half mirror design won’t
And what pray tell would the story have been if you used May or April or any month besides June? Problem is this is only one snap shot in time, and it happened to be when DSLR sales were down for the first time since January of this year… The reality is DSLR sales seem to have bottomed out in January and even at their lowest point on the chart they were still higher than the best month of mirrorless sales.
Considering the time it takes for a large company to make changes I seriously doubt that these types of sales figures have played into the decisions about what Sony is going to do with the A-mount. These figures might support a decision that was already made, but that decision was likely made when DSLR sales were still climbing probably before the big drop in November of 2012.
Get it the DSLRs are dying and it is good,they must die for good.
Actually it shows mirror-less sales are down which makes sense cause they are junk
DSLR hype is over. They will rightfully turn to being niche products for professionals in either sports or wildlife. Most of the general public still doesn’t even know what mirrorless is. As awareness grows my gut feeling is mass abandonment of DSLR. It won’t happen right away because most people are more than content with what they already have….before you factor in cell phone quality increasing. But, it will happen despite public delay.
Frankly, I don’t care one way or the other. For all I know a lytro camera along with computer software may one day replace every lens I’ve ever bought. What I have now works for me and thats all that matters.
The DSLR market was always been a niche market. It only became semi-main stream when Canon, and Nikon thought flooding the market with poor quality plastic, models in 2008 was a good idea, hoping they’d make back their money on aftermarket lens sales.
Well they did manage to flood the market with the crap, DSLRs. However they severely miscalculated this new group of DSLR users, most of them were satisfied with the performance of the kit lens, and their whole aftermarket lens sale theory evaporated.
So Nikon, and Canon have been loosing money segment of the market mirror-less is now entering, so its not a real win.
DSLRs will go back to selling for over a thousand, and $1199.99 cameras like the A77II, and 7D Mark II will likely become the entry point for the advanced amateurs/semi-pro/pro market.
I see mirror-less cameras gobbling up Canon, and Nikon sub-$500.00 Interchangeable Lens Camera market, and the transition will be quick as the change from Tube to LCD TV’s, because the consumers who tend to buy the low-end DSLRs are getting sick of the Canon, and Nikon’s yearly rehash of the same old stuff.
However in the performance segments (A77II, A99II, 7D, 5D, D800) of the market mirror-less isn’t going to play a major role for a very long time, because this is the segment where both camera, and lens performance play a critical role in the purchasers decisions. Support for legacy lenses is vital to the needs of these semi-pro/professionals.
Pretty sure we won’t see many mirror-less cameras attached to a 600mm f/4 ever.
This is also the segment where the compactness of mirror-less technology is seen as nothing more than a gimmick, and where the approx. 3cm difference in the flange focal distances isn’t decisive in camera purchases.
Most consumers give a XXX about new cameras, they buy a camera with one or two lenses and stay with it untill it breaks down or get very old (say 5-10 years old) and then go for a new camera. A freind still has its A200 DSLR, but when he swa my Nex 5 he said that that was the future and when he will look at a new camera he would go to mirrorless.
People on these forums think that their way of buying new cameras every two or three years is normal, but the mayn group of buyers owns their cameras for a much longer period (up to 10 years)
And about the 600mm lenses, well I don’t see many of them on a DSLR either. Most people are not interested in those FLs and prices that goes along with it.
And when looking at the cameras with those long lenses, no camera is realy in balance so there is no reason not to use a smaller mirrorless camera therea, as long as the focus system is up to the task.
Good grief, if DSLR is a niche market, I guess mirrorless is a micro-niche.
everything changes… the one may buy a coffee machine and drink his coffee home.
Look at the d810 sells figure ,as good as it is ,it is not selling well.
Why? Cause no rational people want the extra bulk and noisy mirror inherited from last century film analogue camera design.
Professionals do. They want the best image quality regardless of the price, and size. Only amateurs idealize the poorly performing mirror-less squeakier toys. The D810 is a professionals camera, and not meant to be used by children.
And I’m saying that as an devout A850, A99, A77, and A7 user
Are you serious?
I don’t agree. Folks who care for 36 MP have already bought something like D800 / D800E or the A7r. There’s nothing wrong with Nikon pimping a model a little bit but this is not a huge market in the first place. If I am not mistaken the D800s have helped Nikon significantly taking stealing market share from Canon.
I mostly use m43 for portability reasons but I will not ignore the higher number of DSLR cameras shipped.
BS
it is not selling well because it is too new and many judge the price not being worth for upgrading their existing gear.
Lets look at the D810 compared to Sony’s much cheaper A77II. The D810 tops the DSLR list the A77II is 46th .If you look at the all cameras list The D810 is still top with the hugely discounted NEX 6 the only mirrorless camera in the top 30
DSLR
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=lp_3017941_pg_2?rh=n%3A172282%2Cn%3A!493964%2Cn%3A502394%2Cn%3A281052%2Cn%3A3017941&page=2&ie=UTF8&qid=1407318812
all digital
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_hi_3?rh=n%3A172282%2Cn%3A!493964%2Cn%3A502394%2Cn%3A281052&ie=UTF8&qid=1407318878
Lets move away from a DSLR strong market and head for Japan the best country in the world for mirrorless .The D810 is number 30 on the list with 30 spots above the A6000, it is also above the A7 { A7r and A7s do not even make it on to the top 80}
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking
Though it does not seem to sink in Sony DSLR/SLT sales have crashed and burnt since SLT came along.
Confused. Sales look up and down for both in a similar matter…
They’re seeing the mirror-less market with rose coloured glasses again.
Honestly, without any additional information this graph just shows business as usual.
Major and Minor releases as well as special deal periods have to be set into context.
For sure the sales will break even between DSLR and ML in the near future. I would assume it not happen before 2016.
And even than the DSLR market will not be dead, it will “just” have lower sales. Impact is clear – less camera and lens releases.
Who cares?
I see mirror-less cameras ending Canon, and Nikon sub-$500.00 Interchangeable Lens Camera market, and the transition will be quick as the change from Tube to LCD TV’s, because the consumers who tend to buy the low-end DSLRs are getting sick of the Canon, and Nikon’s yearly rehash.
However in the performance segments (A77II, A99II, 7D, 5D, D800) of the market mirror-less isn’t going to play a major role for a very long time, because this is the segment where both camera, and lens performance play a critical role in the purchasers decisions. Support for legacy lenses is vital to the needs of these semi-pro/professionals.
This is also the segment where the compactness of mirror-less technology is seen as nothing more than a gimmick, and where the approx. 3cm difference in the flange focal distances isn’t decisive in camera purchases.
This graph shows that fewer are actually buying cameras.
Or have some moved to RX-10 (and alikes)?
Or are more just happy enough with their iPhone?
As a scientist, I do rely (sometimes 😉 ) on statistics. So, let’s do some very basic statistics! Let us calculate the mean value of bot, DSLR and CSC (I took the values out of the picture, so there might be a slightly different result if someone else does this again). I’ve also calculated the standard deviation (1 sigma) as a measure for the reliability. It’s the number behind the “+/-” and indicates an interval of roughly +/- 67% where all the values must be in (so it’s not a min /max, peak-to-peak,… thing)
DSLR: 1141667 units +/- 300024 units
CSC: 285000 units +/-101200 units
These figures shows us, that the CSC market has to grow 4 times before beeing equivalent with DSLR.
If one plots the numbers an calculates a simple linear trend, both sales figures are falling! These are the equations of the trend plot:
DSLR: y= -572,16x + 2E+07
CSC: y= -21,11x + 1E+06
That means, that they sell every month 572 DSLR’s less but also 21 CSC less. One can now easily calculate the intersection these of two lines: It’s at x=34479 (while x indicates the number of months from Jan 12)!!! This means, that it takes roughly 2873 years at the current speed ;-)….but as you might already expect: both, DLSR and CSC lines wont intersect in the positive y regime; meaning again, that CSC will be long times dead when DSLR is still alive!!!
… and on that bombshell it’s time to end! (Jeremy Clarkson, Top Gear UK)
This was an awesome respond!
Outstandingly entertaining…
I have just started to question the post titles in SAR recently which seem leaning towards tabloid news style, ready to excite or inflame sentiments.
I would rather just carry on enjoying whats on offer now.
I support CSC and the trend to pursue advancement in that and the newer RX style premium compacts, so I buy them.
Meaningless except as a purely mathematical joy ride. Its relevance to what is actually happening is limited.
Love it! Whatever the rationale, there are still 4x the DSLR sales vs mirrorless, although maybe not for Sony. The real question is when the two will merge, and it will all be mirrorless. Then the question will be how many buttons/dials you want, and what sort of form factor do you want them in. Small cameras are great in many ways, but handling them with big lenses is not fantastic.
The answer is never. Its as absurd as saying when will desktop PC and Laptops merge? When will tablets and smart phones merge.
They (DSLT, and CSC) are two different form factors, and designed for two different groups of people who have absolutely different needs.
A-Mount sales are actually growing faster than Sony E-Mount sales, which isn’t surprising, after all the. Sony DSLRs like the A77II are incredible performers.
I think you misunderstood my point. CSC and mirrorless are not the same. The former uses the latter, but the latter is not locked to the former. The chances of there being a mirror in any camera in 10 years is very small. As soon as on-sensor phase detect is good enough, everyone will move to EVF, and the mirror will not be needed. Then it will be about form factor… I suspect the coming round of A-mount will be SLT (I’m waiting for the, almost certainly SLT, A99II myself), but after this generation I suspect all A-mount will be mirrorless. Then it will be catchup for Canikon. Also, the numbers above support my point that Sony do not have 4x the SLR sales over mirorless. Looks like about 2x. These numbers are dominated by Canikon.
You assume that on-sensor phase detection will definitely catch up to traditional PDAF, which may not be the case. Those OSPDAF sensors are very small and therefore not very useful in low light, they lower the DR and may not be able to replace a separate PDAF module.
Actually I expect the next generation of Canon, and Nikons to begin adopting pellicle mirrors. They’ve proven the technology that Canon invented, years ago. They’ve already proven themselves to be faster focusing, and more capable then both mirror-less, and DSLR.
Read an A77II review, then let is sink in. SLT is proving to be the actual DSLR killer not mirror-less, because mirror-less cameras have’t managed to reach DSLR levels of performance yet.
SLT tech has already surpassed the DSLR, and its only going to get better, and better. Use an A77II for a day, and you’ll begin to see the real future for DSLR’s
Canon has already designed a true pellicle competitor to the A99, the design was patented a year ago. It’ll probably launch in a year to two.
Not disagreeing with either of you with today’s technology, but I still think in a few years things will change again. It’s not necessarily a matter of catching up completely, it’s a matter of good enough to no longer matter. It’s unlikely the on sensor version will ever be as good as the dedicated version, but beyond a certain level of performance it will be irrelevant, as the gains will not be noticeable. May take a few years, and both will improve in the meantime. I could be wrong, and something else entirely could come along instead. Who knows. Either way, I’m still looking forward to the (hopefully) upcoming A99II, almost certainly with SLT mirror.
Yet you are speaking about a single aspect of camera performance -autofocus. There isn’t much more left for DSLRs or DSLTs to be more capable of than mirror-less, so nicksnaps’ 10 year theory about form factor being the only relevant difference will quite probably be true for the majority of people.
Really?! Autofocus is kindof the big one… It’s the only one that needs to get between the lens and the sensor once you get away from optical viewfinders, which I’m convinced are a dying breed. There are not many aspects that affect a camera architecture in a meaningful way. Sensor size is arguably not architecture, so you’re down to physical shape, button/dial layout, lens and accessory (flash etc) inter-changeability. All of these are generally set by what sort of photographer the market is aiming for, rather than the architecture of how it actually works…
So what is left of A-mount that is not present on E-mount, other than form factor and the focusing mirror, that cannot go in E-mount? Image stabilisation… After that there’s not much left. I’m an A-mount fan, and I hope it stays around, but I think it is mainly about form factor once the autofocus can be done without a mirror. In that world I will happily buy a mirrorless A-mount with stabilisation.
Not sure what you are disagreeing with here, given that I am actually agreeing with you.
Yeah, now I read it again, I’m struggling to see it too! 🙂 I think the first sentence got me thinking you were going the other way. Must have misread something else later on…
SLT is what single handed almost killed the A mount despite the defenders of the faith claims. One need only look at even the most populous DSLR markets to see just how low down the ranks the A7711 is
on the DSLR list it is at number 47 .The DSLR market is owned by Canon and Nikon .Sony and Pentax are bit players with both below 10% market share
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_1?rh=n%3A172282%2Cn%3A!493964%2Cn%3A502394%2Cn%3A281052%2Cn%3A3017941&ie=UTF8&qid=1407324529&ajr=2
A-mount was never huge volume, and some people are scared away by not understanding SLT, making it harder to get people to buy in who weren’t already.
Interesting. What is the market share of this DSLR killer in the DSLR space?
That graph would indicate that mirrorles sales are growing relatively faster actually.
That graph that gets posted by one of the Sony fantards every other day is about the whole camera market not just Sony. This fact { I know facts are difficult for fantards to grasp} is also pointed out every other day , alas it does not seem to sink in
My A77ii is great and I couldn’t be happier with my lens selection, but the a7r offers a lightweight and more subtle package for trsvrl/street photography. Come upgrade time, I could see me going FE, assuming they can quieten the a7r shutter, add weather sealing and release some compelling primes with oss.
You just gotta love graphs and statistics!
This graph only goes to 100%, not #sold Items. It is not even clear if 100% is all of the market or all of Sony’s sale.
The fact that they show % tells me that the numbers aren’t that great, I mean, who would like to show increasing sales figures???
Diamond Award:)
Nice work. You just stumped every troll on SAR in a single blow.
You are currently working on your maths diploma?
🙂
Since you’re on the subject of statistics, I’m sure you are aware of the fact that trend lines can vary a lot depending on the interval chosen. You could have easily come to a different conclusion using a different (shorter or longer) interval.
Good one!
Though, as a scientist you will agree that making a linear fit to something as non-linear as consumer electronics development is asking for trouble 😉
Or, to quote someone:
“I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself”
I’m not sure I follow the logic – surely that assumes the overall camera market will expand to accommodate the expanding csc market, rather than csc taking a bigger slice of the pie (which seems like the more likely scenario) ?
Dunno, that graph shows little to support the notion of “the expanding csc market.” Looks pretty flat to me the last 3 years.
Fun to read, but flawed. Especially the conclusion.
I like it, but you’re forgetting your calculus. The derivative will show the accelerated rate of the volume declines. In other words, the rate of decline has been increasing, so please extrapolate out the increasing rate of decrease, and guaranteed it will be under 2873!
I am more interested in what happens between Oct 13 and Jun 14.
Did you forget what year this is?!
sorry, I meant Oct 13 and Jan 14. It should be the Xmas season but why the sales for both decrease.
those are shippments not sales, they peek in fall and decline over Christmas.
It is very simple: this chart gives you the number of shipped cameras not the sales numbers. So the companies ships their cameras in september and oktober to have them on time in the stores for the december sales
It is a bid misleding that the headline talks about Sales and the chart shows Camera shipped.
These charts tells us very little. What it tells for sure is the following:
At this moment DSLR shipments are about 4 times higher then mirrorless sales
Shipments numbers fluctuate in a way that you can’t predict the future based on the given numbers.
My personal prediction will be that it takes between 5-10 years from now for the mirrorless to catch up with DSLR why?
The big goup of DSLR users will advertise their system to freinds and famaly, so they will make that there is a larger group of people buying DSLRs
Then theprofessional users, the ones with the big and expensive lenses, will not switch to a new mount without very good reasons.
Then in some ocuntries bigger is better, so a smaller camera, how good it may be, can not be as good as my big DSLR..
The big two (canon and Nikon) are advertising their DLSRs as the top of the top, as those cameras are important for their cashflow.
First, it’s exactly a factor 3 between them in the last month available, not accounting for non Japanese manufacturers, for which Samsung would be the largest (and mainly mirrorless). So it’s more likely slightly less than a factor 3.
Second, your theory assumes that Canon and Nikon will not invest more heavily into mirrorless. I think they will and with their advertising campaigns, that could speed things up considerably (and not just for Canon and Nikon, as historically other makers benefit from efforts made by the big 2 as well).
I don’t expect that just because of a few months of sales numbers, but based on technological advancements made (on sensor PDAF finally starting to become effective and usable on larger sensors, EVF’s starting to mature, sensor read out speeds and processing speeds catching up with high quality LV demands, etc.) and the fact that mirrorless cameras potentially allow larger margins for a given class of camera, or at the very least lower production costs.
Well I was only telling what this shart is telling us. You may be right about Samsung, but that brand is not a big seller compared to Sony, Olympus and Panasonic.
I do not assume anything about Canon and Niokon. When those companies finaly see that mirrorless is the future for them too, they will try to step in, but they will be far away from the brands that we see now. And about brand loyalty, when people want to go from DSLR to mirrorless they have to buy new lenses, so they may go to the brand that has the lenses they need or want, not to the brand with the name. You see people going from Canon and Nikon to mirrorless now, seldom they choose the brand they allready owns, but most of the time they go to Sony, Olympus, Panasonic or Fuji…
Will Nikon and Canon in the near future enter the mirrorless market more serious then they did in the past? I do think so. Will it be on time? I doubt it. They both have a lot to catch up with the older mirrorless brands…
To be fair though its bodies were overpriced at launch the Nikon 1 system offers excellent performance [ AF.FPS, shot to shot etc}. It is only really with the very latest mirrorless cameras the A6000/GH4 etc that the Nikon 1 AF has been equaled /surpassed .
With the next gen of sensor tech I have a feeling that 1″ sensors have a good chance to dominate mirrorless as they will have enough image quality , while offering real possibilities for small high performance gear. The 1″ sensor cameras have already brought us , a fully underwater model, a fast F1.2 lens, excellent pocket sized RX100 series, the almost do it all RX10 and now Panasonic FZ1000
To be fair, when Nikon was realy serious about mirrorless they did not use those prices at launch, but they thougt that they could do that, based on their brand name only.
The AF performance of the Nikon 1 is exeptionaly good, but it did not show in the market. Why not? they were late in the market, they did not push it enough, maybe they were trying to save their DSLR line to much, maybe that is why they went with 1″instead of APS sensor.
About the next gen of sensors those will be for the 1″sensors, but at the same time for the APS and FF sensors (and the 1/1.7 sensor in the Q series). And you know what? The smaller sensors will allways be less good compared to the larger sensors. The larger sensors will give mre control over DOF too.
The Nikon 1 and the Samsung NX-mini gave us smoe nice options, the lens you mention cost $900,– and gives the DOF equivalent of an f2.8 lens on a FF camera. This will not be a real lifesafer for the 1 series, nor will be the underwater camera with just one underwater lens….
Why do you say Nikon 1 does not show in the market? In some markets Nikon and Canon mirrorless are right behind Sony, and way ahead of Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic.
“Samsung,… but that brand is not a big seller compared to Sony, Olympus and Panasonic.”
You will find that in some markets Samsung mirrorless definitely outsells Olympus and Panasonic.
Mirrorless is definitely being taken more seriously now – Sony has demonstrated that you can have a clear path from entry level apsc to pro spec full frame. The lenses might not be there yet, but I’ve no doubt we’ll see them in bigger numbers over the next year. It’s a safe bet that Fuji will launch a full frame model to compete. I’m really interested to see what happens to mft market share now, given the inherent compromises associated with the platform.
Too many variables there, but I expect them to catch up significantly faster than 10 years. Six years ago there were zero mirror-less and it should be more of a snowball effect than anything else, precisely from your first point about the majority of users. Professional users may indeed be slower or even unwilling to switch, but their numbers will simply be drowned in the market share. The idea that in “some countries bigger is better” is frankly quite the generalization, better to just leave that aside. Lastly, the big two will enter the mirror-less market (properly) at some point and then the last obstacle to mirror-less will be lifted.
I wonder if the A-mount fleet is accounted as DSLR or mirrorless in this graph.
Any watershed event is a result of a cascade of smaller events in a
more or less steady progression. But once the momentum of these smaller
events reaches a critical point, a cataclysmic event will be triggered,
which will then change the course of things. At the present, DSLR sells
a lot more than CSC. But that is just a statistic with no connection to
the real world. The real world is made up of advances in technology,
changes in the market size, emergence of newer markets, and appearance
of path breaking products. An iphone like product in the
mirrorless will change the face of the imaging industry.
So the fact that “DSLR sells a lot more than CSC” “is just a statistic with no connection to the real world” So DSLRs really sell a lot less than CSC in the real world?
And wouldn’t a magical iphone like product in a DSLR also change the face of the imaging industry?
If you ask me, even mirrorless sales are going down according to the whole graph. But no one should read too much in to these… there are lots of other factors.
Sony has been neglecting A mount camera introductions…only a few and those basically upgrades of existing models.
Meanwhile they have devoted a lot of resourses to new E mount cameras.
There is no other possible outcome to Sony’s actions than to see A mount sales drop.
Unfortunately there is a tendency to interpret this as A mount sales are dropping so Sony should make fewer new A mount cameras…when the correct interpretation should be…
Sony should make new A mount cameras with the very latest technology in order to increase and revitalize A mount sales.
The e-mount fanboys appear to be in a general funk when the graph shows DLSR sales still kicking mirrorless butt 4:1 and the trend line doesn’t show DSLRs as a line going straight down to 0 next year and the mirrorless heading straight up to the heavens. Worse, these numbers are from Japan and we all know mirrorless are most popular in Asia so this is about as good as it’ll get for the droolers.
Sony has struggled competing in ILCs. Their marketing fumbled the Minolta acquisition so they completely bombed here in North America. Some of the e-mount fanboys are lamenting people know nothing about mirrorless. Let me clue you in. Sony’s marketing post-Minolta (a brand with very high ILC recognition in America) is so incompetent I know a number of amateurs with thousands invested in Canikon which didn’t know Sony was compatible with Minolta lenses or even knew they made DSLRs. Seriously. Good luck finding an SLT on display within 100 miles of my house (I’d probably have to drive to a large metro area like Washington DC). Meanwhile, Canikon DSLRs are everywhere including cheap-o discounters like Target and Best Buy.
Sony’s attitude towards former Minolta SLR/DSLR owners is assuming they’re a loyal bunch so they’re not going to worry about them. They’ll dribble out gear, do zippo marketing, and not worry about attracting new blood. Clueless Sony marketing decided to compete in mirrorless assuming it would a fresh market thus easier to penetrate. Unfortunate for Sony, a lot of other also-rans against the Canikon DSLR goliath like Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, and Fuji are doing the same thing in cropped sensors. So Sony consolidates their APS-C line-up and brilliantly moves into FEs where there’s no competition and they can gain some real traction. Since FE lenses are obviously compatible with ILCE APS-Cs and carry fatter profit margins it’s nothing but good news as they milk their customers.
That’s why with Admin hinting a rangefinder style FE will be announced at Photokina I’m starting to expect Sony will bump the a99II off the stage entirely. I expect Photokina to be them pimping hard FEs. Expect some award-winning photographer to keynote the already released a7S over a new A-mount. We’ll have to put up with the inevitable cheers of “death of the A-mount” until Sony gets around to finally announcing an a99II separately in a low-key presser just in time for Christmas sales.
I’m hoping I’m wrong about the a99II and Photokina but the trendline of Admin rumor dribbling is leading to me to pessimism.
“Worse, these numbers are from Japan and we all know mirrorless are most popular in Asia so this is about as good as it’ll get for the droolers.”
The numbers are from Japan, but reflect worldwide numbers for Japanese makers. Which probably means it’s slightly less than the factor 3 shown here, for the simple fact that the largest non Japanese camera maker (Samsung) concentrates on mirrorless rather than DSLR’s too.
To be fair, mirror-less appeared 6 years ago and only have had a semblance of a system since less than 3 years ago. I’d say they are doing great. And this is worldwide data.
Sony might have been struggling, but now that they have half the mirror-less market, I wouldn’t be so sure. As to the marketing, I’d have to agree.
Sony made clear in the recent past that the A-mount would be more of an advanced amateur – (Semi-) pro range and the E-mount would be more the low end-advanced amateur range.
They are showing this fine with the release of the A77m2 A camera with a lot of new and a lot of old stuf in it. It is not a major update, but maybe that is not possible anymore… Maybe upgrades will be more inceremental, what is a good thing for us, as we can use our cameras longer without the “need” to buy a new one every two years…
And look at Canon what camera did they came out the last 3 years that was realy new and innovative? And Nikon? Inovation comes from the smaller brands (in cameras that is) like Sony, Olympus, Panasonic.
We still dont even have a 36mp A mount even thogh the sensor has been available for years.
We will get the tech eventually…but so far ‘ll ast.
Agree 100%, and a few lenses for A mount each year wouldn’t hurt, especially Minolta favorites like the 35 f/2, beercan series, 300 f/4, etc., all with weather sealing and SSM. You would think releasing even one a year wouldn’t take much, they have the Minolta designs.
I really want to see the return of the 200mm f/4 macro, and 400mm f/4.5.
Let’s see put the A6000 in a A7 body and lower price and increase availability of SEL 16-70 f/4 kit – would help.
At least in the West, dSLRs will stay dominant for quite a while longer. For these reasons:
1. Especially in the West, the perception is that larger dslrs are better cameras. I carry my big a99 with a large lens, I always get comments about ” wow, that must be a great camera.” Perceptions can take a long time to change, whether true or not.
2. Mirrorless cameras aren’t “better ” – at least not yet. Yes, they have rapidly caught up to the point where you can validly claim they are just as good as dslrs. But they aren’t inherently better– just a bit smaller. And not always that much smaller.
3. DSLR systems are still better systems– 4:3 cameras have a pretty good lens selection, but that’s a smaller sensor. For aps-c and ff mirrorless cameras, you simply don’t have the lens selection of dslrs and even Sony’s roadmap doesn’t include 2.8 zooms in the foreseeable future.
4. Systems are long term investments — momentum is hard to change. Easy to sell someone on a new lens to add to an existing body. Easy to sell someone on upgrading to a new body and keeping their lens collection. But take someone who has built up a Nikon lens collection over 20 years, and get them to switch to an entirely new system? For most such people, it would take more than a slight reduction in size, to make such a complete switch.
It’s not that difficult to let go of your lens collections. May be you are speaking through your perspective which is making your perception seem real to you. To start with, it’s not just about size savings. It’s about the speed a company trend sets and brings in new technology now, not two years later which is what Canikon have been doing lately.
Someone who has spent 20 years and thousands of dollars on a lens collection, will not so quickly dump it all just because a different brand has a few shiny new gadgety features.
If anything, you’ve given a reason against switching brands– A lack of commitment that the brand will continue to support the user. Sure, they may innovate something totally new, and leave their existing customers in the dust.
Camera systems are about a long term mutual commitment between the photographer and the brand.
Knowing that the brand will continue to provide update cameras bodies, continue to expand the lens selection.
I’ve shot a-mount for 20 years… Through ups and downs. I’ve mostly stayed with the brand because it’s where I started and where I had lenses. Truthfully, if I had started fresh anytime in the last 10 years, I probably wouldn’t even be shooting Sony.
1. Your example actually shows that people around you do not have big cameras.
2. They aren’t worse either and they feature technologies and possibilities currently unavailable to DSLR users.
3. Agreed.
4. Not for everyone. I bet that most own either kit lenses or a reasonable set of modern ones that can be easily sold. Also, I do not consider the switch to be solely based on size, when going mirror-less (see point 2).
When you look at when mirror-less appeared and when they actually started to look like systems, their future suddenly seems brighter. And that is without Canikon even being serious in the market.
1. The A99 with a 2.8 zoom lens isn’t small… But it still shows the perception. At least in the West, a large camera is thought to be better.
2. They aren’t worse. But “not worse” isn’t a compelling reason to switch. Do they offer technologies and possibilities unavailable to dSLR users? A bit, like focus peaking. EVfs instead of OVFs. But not features I would consider to be tide turning.
3. Yes, for people who want a complete system, dSLRs still offer fuller lineups.
4. I agree — not for everyone. High end users are more likely to be deeply invested into a system that cannot easily be replicated or replaced by mirrorless. But what about the more casual users who only have a couple basic lenses? Some of those users will still prefer a dSLR for the perception bias of bigger=better. But for others — Many of them may indeed find a mirrorless camera ideal. But the thing is, once you leave the large bulk of a dSLR and the completeness of the lens system, the buyer has lots of comparable choices — Smart phones, P&S, bridge cameras, etc. Most of them may not match a mirrorless for quality, but if they were sticking to kit lenses, these buyers already weren’t investing in the top quality. And a camera like the RX10/RX100 can match or surpass a mirrorless+kit lens combo. So yes, many casual users may indeed branch towards mirrorless, but they may also go to many non-system cameras.
I’m not saying there is no market for mirrorless — There certainly is. I’m not saying the market won’t grow — It surely will.
I’m not saying it will never surpass the dSLR market — Some day, it is likely.
I just don’t need it being right around the block. Sony may replace THEIR dSLRs with mirrorless– Goodbye A-mount. But for system cameras, dSLRs overall will retain their dominance for a while. And the ultimate transition may be CanNikon building mirrorless around their dSLR mounts.
1. That is a vast generalization based on anecdotal evidence.
2. I would consider an EVF to be tide turning. Focus peaking, better LV, able to adapt lenses. Overall, quite a few compelling reasons. Subjective, I guess, but surely the best solution for some specific uses.
3. Yes.
4. Based on my own anecdotal evidence, I see exactly the opposite – people moving away from bulky gear. You are also assuming that people are aware of all the available technology.
Imho, the reasons why mirror-less haven’t caught on yet in terms of market share are:
– they are very new and only recently started to look like systems
– the two biggest manufacturers aren’t even really in the game
Nothing else.
SLR cameras, have been part of western culture since the Italian Rectaflex was launched in 1948. The DSLR will remain a valued part of western culture for a very long time to come.
I think that Canon’s recently resurrected Pellix technology (Sony’s SLT) is really the way forward for the DSLRs, and apparently Canon does as well.
http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-patent-transparent-mirror/
Just in terms of fashionable consumption mirror less wins hands down. Put any Sony NEX or FE style camera next to a brick alpha and let consumers decide. That’s the problem, they’re not on display. It’s the same problem with Olympus and Fuji. If the public knew- hey, you can now get similar if not better quality in this smaller, slicker package and at a lesser price- bam. Nuff said.
Migration away from dedicated cameras in general is killing the mass transition over to mirrorless. That and no retail or marketing presence- although that’s slowly changing. I don’t think it’s a matter of perception either that DSLR’s are considered better cameras. I really think people just don’t know what mirrorless even is and therefore make the safer bet.
This is utter bulls**t. Sony is paying Best Buy here for display space of their APS-C ILCEs and choking in my area. They’ve been doing this since the NEX came out. I’ve seen 1 in the wild.
My Best Buy store has The A6000, NEX5T, and A7 in stock and on display, along with about 8 lenses. It also has the A58 and A77II on display. It’s Sony display is actually a lot larger than the Canikon display, and it’s on it’s own isle end.
That what you have to do to survive in retail.
Apple took it one step further in retail, and hired actual Apple sales staff to work in Bestbuy, and Futureshop stores to push their products.
It actually worked, and it’s computers went from less than 2% of North America’s market share to the third largest PC manufacturer in less than five years.
Hmmm, maybe Sony should eliminate their remaining stores, and emulate Apple’s formula, because it works.
If you want to get something done right you have to do it yourself.
It’s also successful because the best sales persons in each store are normally hired by Apple, earn higher wages, receive better benefits because they push allot more product than the average $10.00 per hour junk salesmen.
The rest of the sales persons then begin pushing Apple products hoping to get hired. As a result of this practice Macs, sales have increased 12x.
They could take it a step further and carry out all Sony PRO imaging support servicing on site, in order to take advantage these massive retail chains locations. Partnering with them would be a major win for both.
It’s actually 20x.
Well, what can I say. I remember a nice NEX display at my store well over a year ago. My local best buy has NOTHING now. No Sony NEX camera’s…definetly not any A77II’s or A58. And I checked again last week on their website to see if any local area stores had any. It’s not utter BS either- I included more than Sony in that list for mirrorless. When is the last time you saw olympus or fuji on display.
“similar if not better quality” from Olympus or Fuji? Against an Alpha 135? Did your parents have normal children as well?
I’ve shot them side by side. I say this as someone who ownes both the 135mm 1.8 zeiss and olympus 75mm 1.8. DOF is not the same obviously. Resolution is not the same as well. Sharpness? Can’t tell the difference. Both have noticable chroma wide open. In real world use, you’d be suprised how well they stack up. I’m not the only one who has commented on similarities like this.
Of Course DSLR Sales are down. There is nothing new on the market right now.
Everybody is waiting on the Nikon D400/D9300 and the Canon 7DII (And 6 or 7 people are waiting on the A99II) right now.
I’m not even considering a lens sale until after Photokina 2014. The last thing I want to do is pay full price for a lens or body with the risk of Sony launching the new model/version five weeks later.
I’m just hoping Sony announces a revised (weather-sealed SSM II) 24-70mm f/2.8, 16-35mm f/2.8 (A-Mount), and launches the rumoured/delayed 35mm f1/4 Zeiss (A-Mount)
I must be in the minority cause I really couldn’t care less about the A99II. I just want better lenses for the Full Frame cameras that I already own.
12fps Canon Rebels with OLED EVF “How Dare They”
There isn’t going to be this fabled migration, its just a fanboy fantasy. I doubt mirror-less cameras will even manage to become a major player in the amateur/novice interchangeable lens camera market.
SLR camera systems have been around since 1948, and they will remain the standard for professionals for decades to come.
Its more likely that we’ll see a shift to pellicle mirrors in the DSLR market well before a mass migration to mirror-less.
All Canon has to do is launch a body with a pellicle mirror, and the mirror-less market will be crushed in a single blow. They are the inventor of the pellicle mirror technology, and are probably better at it than Sony.
Ever hear of the EOS RT – it’s the original SLT. Canon produced the EOS RT for over 20 years and I’ll probably return sooner than later to finish off the mirror-less toehold in then professional segment.
http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/10/patent-a-pellicle-mirror-by-canon/
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2010/12/27/three-reasons-why-im-positive-canon-will-try-to-kill-the-sony-a55/#.U-MJelaTAwI
The EOS RT is the white elephant in the room. The return of the EOS RT would give both the EOS RT, and SLT technology the credibility, and mass acceptance both need going forward.
It would also be a camera that possesses all of the features the mirror-less community praises, and use Canon’s massive lens lineup.
We’ve already seen Canon deliver smaller DSLRs like the EOS Rebel SL1, a Full Frame RT (pellicle version) of this camera would prove devastating to the mirror-less community.
We’ll of course. Maybe if sony released some Alpha bodies then the numbers would be different. I’m not far away from selling my alpha gear. It’s obviously on its last leg.