The market share leaders within the mirrorless system camera category
In Japan for DSLR and Mirrorless system cameras are equally strong. But that said Olympus just lost the leadership in favour of Sony which now holds 34.3% of the market share. Olympus had a 6% drop while Panasonic had a 2% drop. Of course this was a bit inevitable seeing that more and more players are competing within the market. Still, the Sony A7 series seems to be very successful there and it raises the always returning question if Olympus and Panasonic should also offer a second and new mirrorless system with larger sensor…
120 Responses
I don’t want FF, I want more lenses 🙂 !
The system is already very mature, but there are a few specialties that are needed, for example wide-angle perspective correcting lenses. Something like 12mm f/2 or 17mm f/2 with shift and tilt would be great. I would also like to see m4/3 native re-makes of the 4/3 system teleprimes, like the 150mm f/2.0.
m43 is as good as dead.. who needs tiny senwor cameras..? only weaklings who can not carry 1.3 kg……
Senwor? I don’t think Oly and Pana use senwors!
Only morons drag unnecessary weight around…
The old opposition of muscles vs. brains 😉
Hehe… have fun lugging 1.3 kg for no image quality advantage….
thats why the winner of world press photo used an tiny sensor
the market share of sony in Japan it’s not lead by the a7 FF camera but from the very cheap sony nex3….please wake up Admin…no need all the time to ask for bigger sensor..
Yes, a new FF system. Lets start with one lens and then add one more every 1-2 years…
Hope Oly and Pana will not rush into FF. This would be suicidal. Competition is too tight there already, so chances of grabbing Sony’s share of FF market are low, chances of ousting Canon/Nikon are zero. Too much risk involved. Hope they’re gonna be wise not to waste their resources on FF and will focus on developing M43.
I don’t care about FF. I need better IQ, better cameras with more features and more high quality lenses at affordable price while keeping the size small. That’s M43’s major selling point.
Agreed on the ILC front. But I wouldn’t mind Olympus making an FF fixed lens camera. A true rangefinder for example. Not a glorified compact camera like Sony RX1. Something more unique.
That might be nice thing to celebrate company’s anniversary. Would take some serious balls to pull it off, thought, so not holding my breath. And Olympus is not Leica nor Fuji, so there’s that as well.
We’ll see once EM5-MKII, and EM1-MKII with new m43 sensor that beats current FF arrives, with hand holdable hi-rez shots.
Common guys. The reality is that m43 is loosing. Why ? Because competition is becoming stronger and stronger. Once Canon joins mirrorless market Panasonic and Olympus will have extremely hard time to stay in a mirrorless game. I think that Olympus should come with a larger sensor. Not now but within 2 or maybe 3 years. The most important feature should be a possibility to mount m43 glass on that camera in a crop mode or something like that.
I highly doubt that even a tenth of the market share involves FF cameras, you know…
Last figures I read FF had 7% of the interchangeable lens market. Not sure why so many people on here want Panny and Olympus to bring out a system in such a limited market.
Just look at Sony. They have entry level aps-c cameras and expensive FF ones…
Sony have a full line up of AF lenses that can work on the A7 with an adapter
And they will be losing money spectacularly on their FF cameras. They are being sold cheaply to try and get people to buy into the system.
Probably 1 in 10 of their camera sales will be FF.
They are taking an expensive gamble which is being subsidised by other parts of their imaging business.
Look at the history of photography to see where sensor sizes are going. Over time film sizes always got smaller as quality improved.
The same will / is happening with digital despite Canikon’s best attempts to ‘encourage’ people to move to FF.
Nikon and Canon have twice as many FF cameras as a few years ago yet FF cameras share of the interchangeable lens camera market has only risen about 50%. And their actual sales numbers will almost certainly have fallen.
And they both have a massive user base sitting on a pile of FF lenses.
Canon has already joined the mirrorless market.
Yup but as for now it’s just a fun. But once they start pushing more profesional stuff we can expect interesting changes.
Given the bust the EOS M has been it probably hasn’t been much fun for Canon. But I agree their (and Nikon’s) FF mirrorless entry should be interesting.
M43 is losing momentum. I can see its market share dropping even more because it still has not advanced in its sensor IQ since the E-M5 was released 3 years. People have been waiting for the E-M5 II for so long but without any improvement in sensor IQ, Olympus sales will drop quicker in the coming months.
I agree. The most important thing in a camera is its imaage quality, and Olympus neglected it for too long. Panasonic also did not do anything about it. The E-M5 was the game changer and was clearly ahead of other competing models when released 3 years ago. The new E-M5 II is too late, too little (IQ). What’s the use of all those pro lenses if sensors are so old. Panasonic did not do anything either to improve its IQ, and in fact has nothing to show in CP+. Not updating the GX7 is a serious mistake. It seems to be trying to move out and become mainly a video camera company.
Oh cry babies…. go out and shoot… too much me me me…. “iq this, iq that…. i want ‘new’ every two years”… come on!!
Still the same complaint about IQ… Guys, IQ is way more needed in your brains than in your cameras…
When IQ has passed the threshold of being ‘good enough’ for someone, then the most important thing in a camera is no longer IQ, but other things, depending on the person in question. It could be ergonomics, user interface, AF, burst speed or something else.
Sensor is only part of the equation for IQ. IBIS gives us at least 3 stops extra for most subject matters. I shoot both ff and m43 formats. M43 gives me more flexibility, which allows me to be more creative and to shoot better photos.
500px.com/yatbond
Again and again and again…
Please keep calm at Oly/Pana – if I want useless FF cameras and heavy lenses, I would return to Canon.
But I don’t want that!.
Quality of m43 sensors is more than enough at the moment
Enough with the Pana/Olympus FF-bullsh*t!!! There’s plenty of fullframes already and they have nothing new to offer in that field. Stick with more usable format that is called m4/3.
Sony have restrained from churning out crap-a-month to being a bit selective. Good change! 🙂
Jacta est alia
Here comes the fix:
Announce asap: 10mm/2.8 pancake (20mm/1.7 I quality); 150mm f/2.8 very expensive and optically best macro lens ever; put GH4 guts into GX7, announce GH5.
What? FF? I print billboards with my E-P1! Jus give me 4K!
I’ve always wondered how much those mirror sites overlap. They’re obviously affiliated, part of the same network, often running the same stories but weeks apart (like this latest one about the rankings), the spin differs depending on their audience but I think in this case the admin betrayed himself. There’s obviously FF envy, perhaps he’s the same guy running Alpharumors. It’s kind of amazing he keeps posting about those deals yet only owns something like an EPL1. 🙂
I have always assumed the admin of 43rumors, SAR and MirrorlessRumors is the same guy. Maybe I am wrong, though.
People should compare their photos or the money they made shooting photos – instead of sensors . Does sensors fanboy get paid every time some of buy the particular sensors? Sensor fanboy = Football fan.
The A6000 was Sony’s most important camera this year, not the A7. And it’s most important quality was its price.
Oly+Pana market share is still as good as Sony’s one. How can we consider that M43 is dead?
Why should mirrorless goes to FF? For which benefits? Size and weight of FF lenses is almost egal between DSLR and mirrorless. Just the gear itself is smaller and lighter but what’s about handling?? I have both: a FF DSLR and a M43. Both have pros and cons. I have also a car and a motorbike. Each one have pros and cons. I simple don’t use them for the same needs. But why should I ask for a Side-car? In fact, for me a side-car adds much more the cons from car and motorbike together rather than adds the pros. And so is it with FF mirrorless…
“Oly+Pana market share is still as good as Sony’s one.”
That’s irrelevant, because the two companies are rivals in the market. They don’t share their profits, so lost sales for one company, means less profit for that company.
Agree with you! In my mind, oly+pana = m43. Compairing M43 to Sony’s market share is not irrelevant at all. Considering, like the author, that oly and pana have to propose a bigger sensor is wrong, imho
By the way, I like to apologize for my bad english. I’m not a native speaker…
Yes, the m4/3 system as a whole is comparable to Sony, but the health of the system depends on the health of the companies that make the system. And if one of them disappears, then the system might be in danger. That’s why I don’t think we should focus only on the market share of Oly+Pana, but on their individual market shares, too.
No need to apologize, I’m not a native speaker, either. 🙂
Sony has a far better product strategy, Olympus and Pana have been disappointing it is not a failure of M43 itself it is the companies product strategy. Sony also has the best sensors.
You mean little or no marketing.
I think all of the people talking about “marketing” need to go to Japan and see how cameras are actually marketed in the home market. You’re basing “marketing” on what you see in the US or Europe or somewhere else. The BCN numbers and the numbers I’ve cited above are solely for the Japanese market, thus you need to look at the marketing IN Japan.
Sony’s product strategy isn’t stellar by any stretch.
Olympus failed to capitalize on their stabilization technology by ignoring or paying little attention to a large segment of the market. And like jeffharris says below: “little or no marketing.”
Oly market share is the story? Look at Pannys: dropping in the following order:
Panny is:
38%, 29%, 23%, 14%, 12%. Ouch!
Olys is
29%, 37%, 30%, 29%, 22%
Sony is
32%, 27%, 20%, 26%, 34%
Oly went up then dropped
Sony started high, dropped, and has recovered
Panny has only dropped
These measures, I’m assuming, are in bodies?? Does it reflect lens sales?
Many (most?) m43 shooters I know have at least one Panny lens, and many have mostly Panny lenses. Sony has a far narrower selection of good, quality lenses. It would be interesting to know lens sales.
Sony’s promise of their quality sensors was also held back by horrible little bodies in terms of controls (think NEX 3, 5, even 6 to some extent). The most recent Sony body releases demanded a purchase — a6000 if you want cheaper, and a7 to try FF mirrorless — just to get away from the older models, and to get better AF (in terms of the a6000 at least).
Doesn’t mean it’s sustainable, nor are body sales the whole story.
But that’s still kind of weak for Panny. I really like my GX7, so I’m not sure if the issue is reputation of weakest sensor/jog processing, poor distribution, or too high price points (if the GX8 could come out 20% cheaper, I think that could help unit sales).
“I really like my GX7, so I’m not sure if the issue is reputation of weakest sensor/jog processing”
“jog” was meant to be “jpg”
These are camera market shares, so lenses aren’t included.
I think Olympus has maintained market share mostly by selling older models really cheap. Maybe Panasonic has run out of stock of older GF and G models, and now only sell ‘premium’ GH, GM and GX models.
All of them dropped in percent as more manufacturers (Fuji, Canon, Nikon, etc) entered the market – notice your first figure adds up to 100% and none of the others do, each year dropping in the sum total?
It’s worse than that. You have to look at actual shipments into the market versus sales in the market to get the full picture.
2012: Olympus 244k units, Sony 162k units
2014: Olympus 159k units, Sony 246k units
Basically, in two years, Olympus and Sony have completely swapped positions. And that’s in Olympus’ strongest market.
As for body sales, you can basically take that number and multiply by 1.5x to get lens sales. That’s been pretty much the formula for decades.
Factor in that Olympus has increased the average selling price of units sold ( no longer PENs but now E-M’s) in those 2 year can Sony say the same or are they just mainly selling NEX’s?
Unfortunately, BCN no longer releases the data we’d need to assess that. But I think the answer could be the opposite of what you suggest.
Perhaps this should be compared with camera releases.
Particularly the smaller cameras favoured in Japan, a country that tends to include a lot of ‘latest and greatest’ consumers.
I suspect if Olympus brought out an advanced Pen to compete with the A6000 then sales would increase in Japan. Not sure about the rest of the world though.
What I do find surprising is how much Panasonic’s sales % has decreased over the last few years. Particularly as they’ve brought out cameras like the GM range which I would consider would be popular in Japan.
Larger sensor is not require , just need Oly & Pana to further improve their sensors respectively .
If APSC & FF ( Sony ) can come out improvement in sensor tech , I don’t see why m43 can’t do the same .
The current latest m43 sensor is quite nice but that was 2 years ago , we have the same thing .
Need new generation sensor ahead to stay relevant & keep out the pace .
I’m guessing we will see a new improved sensor in the E-M1mk2. Judging by the current trend they will probably increase the resolution, maybe to 24MP. Perhaps they will consider making it in both 16MP and 24MP versions, who knows.
Maybe you could explain to us all what kind of improvement you’re waiting for, or detail the “major 2-years improvements” FF and APS-C sensors have on m4/3… Increasing resolution is no answer : 16 Mpx on a m4/3 sensor is approx. equivalent, density-wise, to 60 Mpx on FF…
The RX100 has 20MP on 1″ sensor, so clearly the pixel density can be achieved. What it does to dynamic range and ISO capabilities is another matter.
There’s no doubt it can be achieved : it is for long on compact camera’s ! Still, I can’t see the “major improvements” on APS-C and FF sensors that m4/3 needs… The real improvements on sensors come either from Fuji (X-Trans) or Sigma (Foveon). And, as said before, 1° Olympus is not involved in developing sensor tech, so there’s no point waiting for them to bring a “new generation sensor”, and 2° Pana is unfortunately focused on 4K instead of its own sensor tech…
Really!! Who needs FF… http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/02/19/olympus-e-m1-with-40-150-f2-8-vs-sony-a7s-with-70-200-f4/
Sony is gaining ground on the back of their cheap garbage FF bodies that have been basically on firesale for a while ($500+ price drops for the original A7 and A7R), and the low-priced A6000. It won’t last much, though. Other FF makers have been lowering their prices too, and new buyers into the A6000 system will realize they’re kind of screwed – the APS-C lens line-up is very weak and Sony isn’t even developing any new ones. And the FF lenses are huge and an awful fit for the A6000.
I think sony strategy is capturing mindshare first and getting people into E mount. Once they do and start investing in e mount lens (that is why there aren’t many apsc as people will have to buy FE lens), they will upgrade to better and more expensive sony cameras in the future.
I like discount, stupid, do you like to be robbed every 6 month by the Japanese fast camera consumption concept.
I wonder if that aggressive pricing strategy and insane pace of iteration won’t backfire on them. If I had bought A7 six months ago, I’m not sure if I would be happy to see a replacement released merely 13 months after the original A7. And rumors are that A7R may be replaced soon as well.
So they lure a lot of people with cheap but capable bodies like A6000. But once you want to up your game and get some more lenses, you just find gaping holes in the lineup. And no new APS-C lenses on the horizon. You’re gonna be in the same situation as APS-C DSLR owners, with very few dedicated lenses. Meaning you get all the disadvantages of APS-C sensor, without any gains.
I don’t think that strategy will work out for Sony in the long term. First of all, I don’t see them building a reasonable system. There’s no clear vision of the future Sony E system, that I can see. From the looks of it, APS-C is abandoned, and with faster FE glass, the system will be almost as bulky as any FF DSLR system. Just look how much A7II grew.
It’s pretty clear gaining market share is their main goal, and not necessarily building a competitive and complete system.
If we look back at the early years of television, marketing had one mission: to put one TV in every home. Is this the case today? They want to put a TV in every room.
Maybe a similar path is required in photography?
One camera in every pocket!
One camera in *each pocket
we already have one camera in every pocket (cell phones) – what we need is one GOOD camera in every pocket.
Sony leading the Mirrorless market? No surprise there. Panasonic/Olympus need to bring out a larger format soon. APS-H or FF. Otherwise they are done for.
Yes indeed. More bulky stuff nobody needs.
Clever strategy indeed.
Good thing Olympus isn’t worried about Full Frame mirrorless getting cheaper. Next up, no worries about that 4K fad that is just pushed to sell TVs.
4k is a standard not a fad. Let me guess, you think HD is a fad too?
He was referring to Olympus’s own comments about 4K. Please try to keep up.
Is this market share in numbers of cameras or revenue?
Is it cameras only or total system revenue?
What was the market volume?
Is 29.1% in 2011 more or less compared to 22.3% in 2015?
In 2011 Oly, Pana and Sony had together 100% – now it is 68.5% but the market is
larger. How much is it?
This numbers are worthless without the rest of the story.
Rest of the story:
http://bcnranking.jp/award/gallery/2015/hard/p2.html
Market share is measured in number of cameras sold.
The mirrorless market hasn’t changed in volume that much, but more players have entered the market. Therefore, the combined market share of the three companies is no longer 100%.
I hope the success of the Sony A6000 and A5100, would finally O&P to introduce the PDAF/DFD on the low-end models.
What in these figures makes you assume that Sony’s gains are from their nostalgia-format (36x24mm) mirrorless cameras? These cameras are quite expensive, and their lens line is still extremely limited. I suspect most of Sony’s sales are from popularly-priced cameras such as the A6000.
Those Olympus users, Pentax users, Canon users, Nikon users bought Sony A7, A7R, A7s in 2014, don’t you think that is a gain for Sony?
I am thinking of selling EM1 and getting A7r II. Lens selection is holding me back. Where can I find quality e mount lens which are smaller like m43 lens and Olympus, Pany/Leica quality?
FF Sony A7 is cheaper than the EM1, is thinner, weighs less, and produces far better images.
Oh yeah, it is so much better, especially with all those light, fast, high quality lenses… Oh, wait, nevermind :p
Keep your delusion and keep telling yourself you’re shooting at f1.8 even though you’re really shooting at f3.6
LOL
Oh, I’m sure you will show me some superb, bokehlicious photos shot with all of those fantastic full-frame lenses faster than f/4. All two of them 🙂
Even Pentax has more full frame glass, and they don’t even have FF body on the market (yet) 🙂
I remember when m43 was new, all m43 users were all about using legacy glass until the lens lineup filled out. It’s the exact same situation now with Sony. Just give it time, like people used to do with m43. And then you will have nothing to LOL about.
On a serious note now.
Yeah, I agree. Sony E is still young, especially FE. But I’m not so sure about its bright future as you are. APS-C looks abandoned, so no future there. FE is very incomplete for now and frankly, I kinda don’t see where it’s going.
And once the gaps in lens lineup get filled eventually, you’ll end up with a system that is as large and bulky as any current DSLR system (can’t cheat physics). Small bodies are only gonna be a hindrance with large, heavy lenses. And it starts growing already, A7II is significantly more bulky than A7.
And what’s up with that insane pace of iteration? It’s almost like in smartphone world, where there’s a replacement each year. It just boggles my mind that I could buy a $2k camera only to find that it’s value got halved just mere 12 months later because it was replaced by a new model.
So frankly, I have doubts if Sony can create a complete and coherent mirrorless system.
And look at Fuji. Their system is even younger than Sony E, yet its lens lineup looks not shabby at all, and even more interesting stuff is on the horizon. I’d say they are doing much better job than Sony.
The FF cameras are very good and very small, compared to the other FF cameras. Sony started their FF line with high quality glass, not cheap or small, it looks like they learned from the APS E-mount. And look at the size of the 55mm lens and compare it to the Otus lens, that is just a very little bit better, and you understand how small the Sony lens is….
And about Fuji, did you see them anywhere near the top 3? So how well did all that great glass do for them?
How well it did them you ask? Well, they are profitable from what I’ve heard. And apart from MFT, it’s the second most attractive and coherent mirrorless system and it’s future looks bright.
And you will probably never see Fuji battling for the top spot. They don’t even bother with entry level mass market (Olympus seems to be shifting away from it as well). They don’t seem to be interested as much in gaining market share, as in creating a coherent system that will bring in new users and generate profit. And it seems to be working.
No surprise, when market is demand for full frame, sony answered the call, so Sony is moving up. Olympus rejected with full frame has no use, so Olympus has less sales. Another company has regretted a great deal, that is Fuji-film.
Fiji-film thought it could use apsc format to Year 2020 and was about half way in APSC lens development when Sony introduced full frame A7 cameras. Fujifilm has the biggest damaged in apsc x-series camera sales.
Sony is very aggressive with pricing lately. And I would guess this is the reason for increased market share. The A7 series, while successful and well received, could probably not elevate Sony to first place.
We’ll see what will those A6000 buyers do once they realise how limited the lens selection is. And that all new lenses are bulky full-frame glass for A7 series. It kinda looks like Sony APS-C shooters may face the same fate as Canon and Nikon APS-C shooters.
And look how many Canon and Nikon APS cameras are sold. Probably more units then all mirrorless cameras together.
And look how small the newbOly pro lenses are, are yoy sure they are not ff lenses with a mft badge?
As much as I like electric cars, I can buy a lot of gas with the money saved by going for a car. The price/performance ratio is just not there yet. Same thing with mirrorless FF. In the mean time, all we have to do is to improvise.
The Sony A6000 should be very instructive to Olympus for what the next PEN should be:
* Fast PDAF autofocus
* Integrated, left side EVF
* Affordable/ aggressive price
* Excellent grip
* Sony vastly improved their menus, dumping NEX for Alpha. Time for Olympus to redesign too.
Olympus can make a better looking camera and has a better lens lineup. Pen could have had some of the gains that Sony made with the A6000 but chose not to do so.
If Oly is going to narrow their offering to just the OM lineup and great glass, it seems unlikely that they’re in a position to do FF too. What is most needed to help sell cameras is a jump in 43 sensor tech, but that’s out of Olympus’ control.
You forgot larger sensor that actually produces a quality image….
This graph should help put this in perspective. I would be worried if I were Panasonic.
Yea, Panasonic’s drop has been alarming, despite being the first and having lots of advantages. Remember many of the early mirrorless cameras? Most of them couldn’t AF quickly, only the Panasonics did.
For me I hope Olympus and Panasonic stay on course with MFT sensors and technology with emphasis on making the MFT sensors as good as FF sensors. Admittedly, FF will also improve but if we could get the quality of FF in and MFT, I believe Olympus and Panasonic would not need to create another camera with FF sensor technology. If they do join the FF game it will be the same old horse race since we all know Canon and Nikon will join the serious mirrorless revolution soon. The only way for Olympus and Panasoinc to stay in the game is to better what they have, MFT which is smaller and lighter than FF. Give us better image quality in the current MFT package and they will have a huge piece of the photo pie.
Daniel J. Cox
http://www.naturalexposures.com
Mirrorless may be the future, but m43 sure ain’t.
Which is why I believe Panasonic should broaden it’s camera division, by joining either Leica or Fujifilm and the APS-C sized sensor.
Full Frame is getting smaller, and APS-C even smaller, with decent sized lenses. Even Fuji is making a small 50mm equivalent lens: http://4.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS589x442~articles/2575482925/tamron1530_06.jpeg
If Panasonic could deliver a APS-C sensor camera, with the Ergonomics of a GX7/X-E2 and Video Quality that Panasonic is known for, it would be a killer camera!
But Panasonic made it to #3 with only 11.9% market share while Fuji doesn’t even show up so how low is their market share?
BUT, Mr ALLICANTALKISCRAP 24/7, it would still be no of use to you and nor would any other camera of whatever format.
And Micro Four Turds moves closer to extiction! Good ridance to a abomination and insult to photography.
It would seem that PANASONIC WILL DIE AN UGLY DEATH. Not even their so-called advanced 4K cameras seemed to have spurred sales.
In fact Sony and Oly (who’s line of mirrorless cams HARDLY support 4K) are leading the pack!
It just goes to show, and proven sales (as shown by smart consumers not taken by IDIOTIC 4K HYPE), that Panasonic’s gimmicky campaign to sell a camcorder in a camera… SERIOUSLY FAILED.
Sony sensors gets it done. Oly’s IBIS is supreme.
Panny’s 4K is doomed.
Note that this is in Japan only…
You’re Funny, but here’s a fact: Panasonic could drop ALL it’s camera division and STILL be in business, in FACT, would probably increase Profits in doing so.
Olympus only has it’s medical and Imaging division… And the STILL can’t make a profit with their camera division.
Panasonic is worth around 12 Billion. Olympus won’t even show their net worth, because it’s embarrassing. But here, read it and weep:
http://www.gurufocus.com/term/deb2equity/OCPNY/Debt%2Bto%2BEquity%2B%2528%2525%2529/Olympus%2BCorp
Sony also owns 12% of Olympus and Mitsubishi (Nikon) owns 5%. How long will Olympus last? They can’t last as long as panasonic can, THAT’S for sure!
Panny is Doomed? HAHAHA!!!!
Yes, thank you for suggesting that Panasonic should drop ALL it’s camera division to make a profit.
Smart rebuttal DUMB@$$.
Didn’t say that… I said THEY CAN, “IF” they wanted to.
Reading IS Fundamental.
A-HA.
Most of commenters here are chatting shallowly without a serious analysis of the news.They should argue how much the mirrorless market grinded to the DLSR, and what has been the role, and the weight, of Sony in this strategy. That said, I think that m43 has his sense and his followers. I won’t ever get back to a bulky, heavier and more expensive system, as well as I have expectation in quality increasing.
What did you expect? Terrible, noisy sensor that performs worse than a 2011 Nikon entry-level APS-C camera, yet it costs three times as much. To a person serious about this hobby or career, size and weight aren’t the huge deal that the m43 zealots make it out to be. Sony and Nikon FF keeps getting cheaper and lighter anyway. Who would invest in this system now?
And again with the total BS. I used to have a nikon d7100. The noise of the sensor on my em-5 is the same or less then the Nikon. I have not invested or have stock options in m43, I am just a person who likes to take pictures, and using a smaller system (for portability) that give me great quality. Of course there are cameras with better iq. There is always cameras with better iq, but what is the problem with some ppl to accept that m43 is a good system…? You, sir, have no clue what you are talking about, and probably just wank away to specs without actually using any gear. I promise you that you could not at normal sizes (A4, A3) see any difference between a d7100 aps-c and the latest offerings from olympus. And the price is similar (since d7100 is not “entry” and to get good glass for aps-c is also quite expensive). But hey, why do I bother, since you “know” already. These comments will always be there to stir up emotions, or due to lack of experience from some yours, but do you know what: It only makes you look like the small minded idiot.
Too bad for your camera division Panny.
Hey, at least you still make my rice fluffy! Unless, of course… You F*** that up, as well.
Is your rice supposed to be green…
So Olympus is the rice represented being cooked in a Panasonic device in this picture? This doesn’t tell the whole picture from world-wide sales. Panasonic can absorb the blow because it makes ricemakers and other equipment.
That’s weird. Just recently we had a chart showing that Sony dropped from 41 to just over 30 percent in Japan’s mirrorless market while Olympus were on an upward trend and moving up to somthing around 28 percent. Wasn’t this chart also shoen here at FT rumours. I don’t know what’s wromg and right but I’d really like to know what is going on, here.
these are annual averages versus the chart.
Thanks. Still strange, isn’t it?
If you want to read more about Olympus’ plan and forecasts for 2015 and beyond:
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/ar2014/pdf/ar2014e_07_Imaging.pdf
As figured, Olympus and probably others plan to dump smaller cameras because we know the smartphone has taken over. They want to focus on the OMD and high end sales yet they are cutting R&D. This means that they simply plan to give us incremental upgrades and likely technology they already are sitting on (4k firmware). Pipeline of incremental part upgrades and simply modifying design and firmware to support. Push new lenses that keep you coming back. We see the first salvo with the E-M5 mark II for video and previous with Pro lenses and E-M1 for IQ.
I suspect 4k will come in 2017 by their growth outlook. The US being the smaller percent of their market is probably why they don’t care to compete here since we are used to more features or we have the lesser opinion from the world-wide market sales. If they were to compete, it would just mean adding more R&D and accelerating technical features where they now can just drip them out to us slowly.
With the push for the OMD, they have to come back to the core consumers and push us to incrementally upgrade like we’re cash cows. First they plan to dry-up inventories and then do a push again for sales against smaller inventories which keeps the prices higher. They want to pull away some DLSR sales which means another E-M1 version likely and threw us a bone with the E-M5 MII for video. However, increasing the price, I don’t see how this will result in what they want? We’re not buying iPhones here. So not sure where new customers where materialize
It is so evidentially impossible to please everyone.
Nothing is holding back photographers from taking good photos more than their own skill. All this sensor size talk is phenomenally biased & unfoundered.
Buy the gear you like best & stop trash talking the rest.
I would love a ferrari with the abilities of a hummer but I (along with everyone else) can plainly see they have a similar purpose (transport) however designed for said purpose under different conditions.
Take a refreshed look at cameras and realise they’re never going to be a single amalgamated unit with the best specifications for EVERY situation. Realise that one cameras the trade-offs are the reason for that cameras best aspects.
If you find a limitation try find away around it yourself.
not sure on your math about this statement: “In Japan for DSLR and Mirrorless system cameras are equally strong.”. according to cipa; DLSR had a 60% marketshare, in MILC’s most strongest segment. 1082K versus 724K.
also not sure where you are getting your data on what’s popular, according to bcn, hardly ever see the A7 in the top 10,20 or even 50 of cameras sold in Japan, and see NEX-5 and smaller cameras as the main sellers. heck this week, bcn shows that just about every other full frame camera in the market today is outselling the A7 series.
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking
Perhaps a little bit of facts to back up the statements would be a great idea.
a6000 was a huge hit everywhere. The decision of Olympus to keep OSPDAF only for E-M1, out of E-M10 and E-PL7 costed them market share. Also, the unexplainable delay of 40-150 and especially 7-14/2.8, and their outlandish prices.
No, used both, too, for quite some time. Em5 is a fine camera but the D7100 is better in IQ i my opinion and many measurements back that up. You are really rude with your comment.