The Japanese agency Cipa published the full Digital Camera Market sales analysis for 2012. The report is available in Japanese only but here are some key info:
. Japanese Companies produced 44% less cameras (14,4 Million cameras).
– The compact camera production declined by 50% (11,2 Million cameras produced).
– The DSLR and the Mirrorless production declined by 25% (3,1 Million cameras produced).
– Only High End Camera and Lens sales saw a small growth. There is a growth of 14,1% in the Full Frame Lens production while APS-C lens production felt by 21 %.
– In the Japanese DSLR segment Sony has a 6,1% share. In 2010 Sony had 7,8%. Canon (52,2%) and Nikon (33,6%) are the leaders.
Summary: Smartphones are eating up the compact camera market and the System Camera market is saturated. The good news for Sony is that they produce most of the imaging sensors for smartphones (for Apple iPhone’s for example). The bad news is that Sony is still not an important player in the only camera segment that is growing. The High End Full Frame system. That’s where Sony has to put their efforts. The new NEX-FF is a step into the right direction but I hope cheap FF A-mount cameras will come in early 2014 too!
Click on these two thumbnails to see the most sold Mirrorless and DSLR cameras:
found via Photoscala.
Amazon camera market rankings:
US ranking (Click here).
DE ranking (Click here).
UK ranking (Click here).
FR ranking (Click here).
86 Responses
WOW,
What a report.
Just Amazing.
When SONY could excel at a
growing market segment.
HIGH END DSLR
They choose NOT to deliver.
Canon and Nikon certainly continues to keep market share,
WOW.
We sit here awaiting a meager firmware update
to help make our product functional.
Canon Bundles everything (printers flash everything)
even though their products are terrible they SELL
So Canon continues to hold 50 Marketshare, Amazing.
Nikon delivers value with
7 Days a week of support and
Five Year long lens warranty. Nice.
Yet SONY despite all this Innovation can’t get above 10%
WOW
Great report admin – Thanks for sharing it.
At some point do you think Japanese companies will get creative with how they sell their cameras- maybe start offering a decent prime as the kit lens instead of a zoom? Like a 35mm equivalent? I remember when a 50mm 1.8 was the cheapest lens you could buy and the zoom kit always cost more.
Don’t forget: A99 appeared only at the 4th quarter of 2012, later than 5D3 and D800. New FFs of Canon and Nikon were the reason of growing that segment. I’m not sure that We’ll see the same growth this year.
SONY is not even in the game. Did they not foresee D600 and 6D? They produced a A99 that’s overmatched by D800 and 5D3 and don’t have anything lower to compete with D600 and 6D.
They are done with price war for high end product. Don’t you remember the A850? It’s still the cheapest DSLR(MSRP) and did it sell well? 6D and D600 sell well because of the brand recognition. Higher priced product like 5Dmk3 and D800 also sell well.
Regardless of price, A99 arrived too late, and gap with no A-mount FF body in production was too large
I don’t see how the A99 is “overmatched” by the D800 and 5D3, but not having a lower priced FF body is a problem for sure.
as Pei said..the a99 isn’t well planned against the lower tier D600/6D and same tier D800/5D3. They had to make the a99 as a85 (6fps continous shooting and video with just 1080p30 or 1080p24) and release it at 1999USD and then release a proper flagship with 10fps continous shooting JUST as every top SLT camera is able to do (and if they want to differentiate cameras, release it with 1080p60).
But no, they failed at doing a proper research. But maybe they learned from it, and that’s why the rumors comes in, and is telling us it’s possible to see Sony focused on Full-frame for next year. Because people has enough APS-C options and the market is saturated and there is only a place to fill up with Full-frame cameras (from Mirrorless to Full size cameras).
This is just for Japan but I’m sure the situation in the rest of the world isn’t that far from the japanese market actual condition.
This data is not clear enough to be useful. It is not clear if “sales share” in the first chart is dollars or units and if dollars is it net or gross. Also, by dividing the chart into two parts it is not possible to tell the relationship of the size of any sales. Sony has camera 3, 10 and 11 in the first chart. Canon has camera 15. Depending on the relative scale of the two charts, Sony may be trouncing Canon. This data just doesn’t tell us.
My thoughts exactly.
Market share is always about number of units sold, not revenue or profit.
Sony does not have a larger market share than Canon in the total camera market. They indeed have a larger share in the mirrorless ILC market, but that market is still much smaller than the DSLR and compact camera markets, where Canon dominates. Canon alone, with their approx. 50% share of the global DSLR market, sells about twice as many DSLRs as the total number of mirrorless ILCs sold by all manufacturers worldwide.
Global sales figures for 2012:
ca 78 million compact cameras
ca 16 million DSLRs
ca 4 million mirrorless ILCs
Link to source? Sony compact in Japan is popular. It is 2nd in market share according to canon watch rumors.
Like mentioned before we need hard numbers to make any assessment.
at this point I’m not sure what else sony can do.
1) they tried to compete with the A77, going head to head with the Nikon D7000, and Canon 7D. this didn’t work out too well haha.
2) they tried to avoid the Canon 5D Mk3 and 6D, and also the D600/D800 by putting the A99 right smack in the middle, this didn’t work out too well either haha.
I have to say the A77 probably had more supporter than the A99, and there are people who actually gave some thought about moving to sony for the A77, but the A99 is a lost cost, not many even entertain the idea of moving to alpha mount for the A99.
I really believe sony should just clash it with canon/nikon, same price range but a better product, this will naturally draw user, it’s super simple. What they have done so far is providing similar product at similar price range, that’s not going to draw more user, it’s a fact.
These are Japanese only market share. Sony cameras do much better in SouthEast Asia and Russia.
Sony cameras do much better in Russia? Who told you such a nonsense?
Only canon and nikon do well here, others suck.
Japanese companies only care about how they perform locally. What happens in Japan determines their global strategy.
If that were true, they would have sold the A850 and A580 in Japan before anywhere else. But neither ever saw the Japanese market.
The slt design was stepping stone to perfect the technologies and manufacturing processes for the cameras Sony really thinks we should have, I.e. Ergonomic live view sensors with attachable lenses. Sony put out these products to wet the professionals and consumer appetites and earn a few dollars to prefect their PDAF system, EVF, articulating screens, sweep/auto functions, live view, and gather information on what professionals and consumers really want. Each generation slt adds a new peice of tech, if you look closely you’ll see the pattern of improvement held back by the mirror technology; it was the only way to phase out the mirror tech and they are the only company willing to take the hit. Next year we are gonna see some powerful full frame options, for every price point.
However keep in mind, sony knows they can sell a powerful sensor in a cheap body but why do that when Nikon will? Sony only has sell one a99 while Nikon will sell two-five d600s then pay Sony $400 dollars for each sensor… That’ll pay to produce another a99… Sony can only win right now. They have the best tech. Imagine an a99 with no mirror, better and Bigger evf, and phase detection autofocus that covers the whole sensor… I could easily see that in a weather sealed body, wifi, gps, and a built in grip for $3000.
Where did you get the figure of $400 for each sensor? I think it is much too high. Anyway, this revenue goes to completely different Sony division.
You also forget that every sale of a FF DSLR creates in time a stream of lens and accessory sales. This is where the money is.
Andrea, any news about 70-200 gII ?
coming end of this year.
ok thx
I’d bet a plucked chicken that the new a78 will be a Full Frame camera. Soon thereafter, an a88 will appear, with nearly identical specs to a99, for lower price. Then we’ll see an a99E, and hopefully, and a99Ti.
The year after we get the A0… (Alpha Omega). A more affordable version of the Lecia S2 Medium Format. It will accept Alpha lenses in crop mode 35, just as FF Alphas can accept APS-C lenses in crop mode.
NEX will become the APS-C line. Alpha soon to be all Full Frame.
There will still be no useable flash system that doesn’t overheat. No third party offerings for it either. And still no locking iISO to MIS adapter. CaNikon will continue to rule simply because of their efforts spent on lighting.
You should run Sony, it sounds exactly like what they would do.
It is units!!!
This might be a tough year with no new A cameras, most of us are waiting for the a78 mirrorless or a surprisive heavy price reduction on a99
How about the RX200 rumor from photorumors.com?
fake.
The Japanese market is an odd one and the most interesting releases for Sony (read: available products) were in the last quarter.
There is all kinds of interesting information here. One is that advertising obviously works and is more important than quality. For example look at the Nikon 1 J1 being the top seller. Sony should learn from that.
One other bit of fascinating information is that the a65 outsold the a77. Considering that you rarely see any discussion of the a65, and the a77 gets all of the press, there is interest in a relatively inexpensive camera that can turn out a quality image without a lot of bells and whistles.
@Wheelus
The Nikon 1 including the J1 would have made a loss and the system has no future…
“…but I hope cheap FF A-mount cameras will come in early 2014…”
Is that a hint? 😉
In my opinion A99 is camera that killed A system. It is:
– too expensive (especially in Europe)
– it is the only one FF A camera in production
– it was too late, with months of FF gap in Sony offer
– it has terrible video, SLT was said to be superior video and it sucks so much (A77 has 720 like quality, and A99 compression effects in mobile phone quality)
– it is obsolete technology that doesn’t solve video and AF issues with premium price
The main problem is Sony dreaming about future technologies again. Instead of focus on details and accessories they destroy SLT line and postpone products for “next big technology change”. So far it never worked in A line, and such delays and system holes kill A mount.
I would consider A99 if it was priced below D600. Here D600 is 40% cheaper or in other words A99 is 66% more.
A99 is a superb camera for video. Dont buy it!
Nobody tells you “buy Sony, buy Sony, buy Sony”. If you think Sony sucks so much (A99 I mean) just go out and spend money on the majestic, beautiful, plasticky, oily, dusty D600. So at least your complains will have a solid base. 😀
Quality comes at a price and the real contenders like D800 (which has horrible colors, green cast on the LCD and kinda sucky at high ISO) and the 5DMKIII are not that far off with price and soon A99 will be price at the same level if not lower.
Again: nobody will sell you a Ferrari for the price of a Smart. (just an example)
Happy shooting
“kinda sucky at high ISO”: this sentence sets a new benchmark in fanboyistic nonsense, congrats…
It’s not sucky in terms of noise, but it does suffer from amp glow quite a bit as you climb the ISO stairs, more so than the A99.
I can be be fixed with an extra bias frame, but that’s still less than ideal.
Well, if you just take a picture at 1600/3200 iOS with a d800, it will turn out just fine.
A picture from A900 at iso 100 will be better image quality. So why wait years and spend more money on a Nikon camera? People don’t buy FF camera for low iso.
I’m not a fanboy, sorry. It’s not the best, that’s all. 36MP packed up there and you have more noise than the A99: you can fix it but it’s there. Still a nice camera but it’s not perfect.
So true. D800 is a niche, not a universal camera. I know people that bring along their D700 for a backup, when the D800 underperforms.
Noise is dependant on sensor size, not number of mpx.
So at high ISO D800 has both: less noise and more resolution.
2 Peter:
Nikon has sold about as much D800 units as typical Sony’s APS-C NEX or SLT (or course, more in money), so it’s not niche…
>when the D800 underperforms.
LOL.
I am really curious why a99 is pitted against D600. D600 is a budget ff, a99 isn’t.
Couple a99 with a zeiss and you have a monster of a system. Sensor aside u hv 100% fov, phase detect liveview, af-d,in body is, 11 cross type sensor vs 9, flip out screen.
Sure there are gripes too but a99 ain’t a budget cam. I hope sony ups it’s game further cos I will get another sony ff with a99 as secondary cam.
Looks like Sony isn’t doing well in the dSLR/SLT market. Despite al the innovation…
In the mirror less market the are not even close to m4/3. Only 18.4% against 50.2%. I wasn’t expecting that the E-Mount did so bad…
e-mount 18% against m4/3 50% isn’t that bad considering that m4/3 has more than 5 companies using the same format while Sony is going their way alone.
Who are you kidding? 18% is by far not good enough in a relatively small market like the mirrorless market. Sony has to step up of they will suffer the same faith as in the dSLR market. M4/3 is primarily a Panasonic/Olympus thing. Only they have made consumer body’s. Kodak still hasn’t and the one Blackmagic isn’t targeted at the consumers and the other isn’t on the market yet.
It’s not sucky in terms of noise, but it does suffer from amp glow quite a bit as you climb the ISO stairs, more so than the A99.
Can be fixed with a bias frame, but still less than ideal.
What & does CaNikon have in the mirrorless market?
For all the droning on about so called full frame cameras being so important, they only have a 6.2% share of this market (however it is defined). So far as I am concerned and I do not claim to speak for anybody else, “full frame” is a small flash in the pan which will quickly be made redundant by sensor developments in the smaller size camera marketplace.
DSLRs are too big and too heavy and a throwback to the old film camera.
“DSLRs are too big and too heavy and a throwback to the old film camera.”
Good luck with a 400mm on a compact body. dSLRs work because of ergonomics and AF.
At 400mm, presumably it is the lens that is mounted to the tripod, not the camera. But AF does need to catch up with mirror cameras, and IBIS would be good, even, in addition to in lens stabilization.
The Nikon J1 was the best seller!??? WTF, the world has gone bonkers
Exactly what I was trying to say above. The only reason that I can see for its success is very heavy marketing by Nikon. Yesterday, May 5, 2013 my Seattle Times newspaper had an eight page glossy full color advertisement for Nikon cameras for Mother’s Day. It included approximately 20 cameras from a $100 Coolpix up to the $2800 D800. I see this type of advertisement for Canon and Nikon regularly in my Seattle Times but seldom for Sony.
I thought that it was an established fact that marketing is everything in the success of a product. Sony’s products are not a huge success, not because they lack quality, but because most people don’t know that they exist. Who, in his right mind, would pay $150 more for a Nikon J1 V1 over a NEX C3 other than the hyper-advertising that Nikon has done.
So Sony, my challenge to you is to step up the marketing, educate the public, and if necessary, stoop to the level of the competition and produce some higher end cameras in pink, red, beige, blue and khaki.
>The only reason that I can see for its success is very heavy marketing by Nikon
“Heavy discounts” would be another candidate.
The J1 with kit lens has been selling for <$250 in Japan for a while now — they better be moving a lot more units than anything else out there.
Sorry but you are reading the numbers wrong!
Nikon had just two ILC’s on the market. People who wanted Nikon had to buy the J1 or V1, nothing else to choose from, total Marketshare in Japan for Nikon 13.3%.
When looking at the Nex you can see that Sony has 4 cameras people can choose from. giving Sony a 18.4% market share
Looking at the other brands; Olympus is the best seller; 29%
Then Panasonic: 21.4%
Then Sony 18.4%
Then Nikon 13.3%
Then Pentax 7.3%
And last Canon: 2.1%
Cameras not in the top 20 have a total share of 8.4%
The brands that should be worried are Canon and Fuji and probably Pentax. The rest will have a nice part of the cake
However one does not choose a brand. One chooses a camera. If there were a Nikon badge on my Nex camera, I would have bought it anyway.
People choose mount. If you are looking for a upgrade of your mirrorless and you have some lenses than the change is hight that you will stay within the mount.
No they don’t. People buy mirrorless camera including a kit lens and then do nothing. They don’t have couple of lenses. These customers differ from DSLR system users.
This supports what I keep saying.
Sony needs a new super high res camera 54mp or greater. This should be stacked sensor, which would make higher resolution easy to achieve.
This must ne donr! Sony must prove to consumers thst they can make a camera with SUBSTANTIALLY higher resolution yhan any of thier competitors.
Sony should also produce an extremely low light camer.
Once again the high res model is essential so Sony can claim the WORLD HIGHEST RESOLUTION CONSUMER CAMERA.
And the 3% of the market that are interested and can afford such a camera will love it
😉
An additional 3% of the market would increase Sonys current 6% market share by 150%.
I do not however agree that only 3% of high end camera owners would want the worlds highest resolution camera. As higher res becomes the norm the demand for high res will increase and new tech will also make higher iq possible.
Of course phony Sony fans who want Canon or Nikon to rule will continue to ask Sony not to do it.
Which one are you?
You math sucks!
typo: Your
Show me your math.
Note i did round off the 6.1% to 6% so the exact number is 149.1803279%.
Additional 3% compared to 6% is 50% increase.
You are so right, look at the numbers the camera with the higest pixelcount is the number 1 seller is it? Well look again, the mirrorless camera with the higest pixelcount (Nex 7) is on number 11, the camera with the lowest pixelcount is on number 1 (the Nikon 1), so there goes your very good plan…
Im sure your friends at canon snd nikon will be very happy if sony took your advice and only made the lowest resolution cameras.
Sony of course would be a total fool to take your advice.
They would also be very foolish if they did not realize that your comments are solely indended to jurt sony and benefit canon/nikon.
Also note Sony currently does not have a high resolution camera.
Nothing above 24mp. So your comparison of current camera sales would be meaningless even if they were accurate
Why are you so negative when someone does not support your opinion? I’m not advising Sony or any other company, but I do know that 24 MP is the highest resolution for an APS-C sensor at the moment. I don’t think that Nex lenses can outresolve a sensor with a higer resolution as most Nex lenses have troube to outresolve the 24 MP sensor. So before comming with a more pixels they should design lenses that can bennefit from the high resolution.
and let me ask you an other question:why do we need that high resolution? How many people are enlarging their pictures to building size posters?
And what about the size of the files? How many Raw pictures can go on a 64 GB card? What computing power do we need to PP our pictures?
You are advicing Sony that thy should go for crazy high Mp on their cameras, why? Are you from Canon or Nikon, so when Sony is following your advice you can claim that the chip is too noisy, or the files are to big, or that they should go for more lenses instead of that crazy pixelcount?
I think that there are some important points that Sony should change, like AF speed, and their JPEG engine and their lenses, more and better lenses would be far more important, and a better sellingpoint then that crazy pixel war…
And for the record, I own an A700 and a Nex 5, both Sony cameras.
One
Based on current industry standard of 300ppi 24mp will only enlarge to 13.3″x20″.
Two
Using a stacked full frame sensor current lenses will resolve over 200mp.(that is for a high quality prime bearing in mind 4 stacked pixels will fit the space of one Bayer pixel.
Three
Both 4k and 8k video formats have been approved. Thats 33mp on your tv screen.
We have been getting by without higher resolution ONLY because of technolgy limitations.
Those limitations are gradually going away.
I have always asked that Sony make ONE super high res camera for those that want it and whatever else you guys want for everyone else.
If Sony ever intends to be a more major player in this market having the highest resolution consumer camera made will not only prived direct sales but also provide the CREDIBILITY. Sony needs to sell the rest of thier line.
This CREDIBILITY is essential if they EVER hope to be a LEADER.
Note also memory is plentiful and cheap and getting more so.
Subjects such as landscapes, animals, art reproductions and many others would benefit from much higher resolution than we currently have.
Processing times sre decreasing as computers get faster.
Most importantly consumers are demanding more and the old ways will not be good enough any more.
Oh wow!
NEX sales is terrible at only 18%!
Sony is losing money on NEX and e-mount!
Time to drop NEX or kill off e-mount!
Does that sound all too familiar?
LOL
The Japanese market is an oddball. They tend to jump out in front an pick their players early and stay loyal to it. Mirrorless developed later in other markets. Sony E mount is in fact #1 world wide according to SAR.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-is-leading-the-mirrorless-worldwide-market/
This is more believable since, here in the US, I have hardly ever seen anyone use m43 even though you hear it’s selling well. I mostly see NEX.
Also, marketshare tends to change, depending on camera releases. Last year was a huge year for Olympus and Panasonic. Sony was busy with A-mount so the releases in NEX weren’t as significant. I’m afraid this year will be even worst as Sony will only have 1 camera releasing. Let’s hope it’s significant instead of a minor release as SAR has predicted. It’s not so bad. I see 2013 as the year where NEX E is building their lens base. We’re finally getting awesome primes. We just now need an awesome zoom or two. One step back to take two steps forward.
According to SAR/Sony the A-Mount and E-Mount are the best in the world with the biggest marketshare. But all independent sources show that Sony’s marketshare isn’t to write home about. No problem, it don’t have to be the biggest mount to be successful or to be nice to use. But let’s keep it realistic.
I think you’re mischaracterizing something. The actual total camera sales numbers from CIPA for 2012 are:
77.98 million compact cameras
16.2 million DSLRs
3.96 million mirrorless cameras
The numbers you’re citing I believe are for the Japanese market only. The reason this is important is because the Japanese market looks very different than the US or Europe markets in terms of sales, and the market shares shift when you look at worldwide numbers. Someone reading Japan-only sales would think that Olympus had a bigger market share than they actually do across all sales, for example. Ditto Panasonic.
I think Sony with the a99 and not making a stripped down cheaper version to put it versus the Nikon d600, made a stance like Apple vs Dell’s 600$ laptop: “We cannot make that kind of junk.”
I don’t hate a Ferrari (any model) because I cannot afford one. I e the feeling a lot of people on this board hate the a99 because it costs more than he or she wishes to spend on a camera. I can understand the argument that it is perhaps not the best value. however, many just rant that it’s video sucks or it is too slow or dxomark is lower than such-and-such while in the same breath saying they would buy it if it cost 60% less. I’d buy a Red camera if it cost 60% less but that does not make it any worse of a camera. In 2014 when the newer models arrive, you may be able to get an a99 for 40 to 50% less, all you have to do is wait…but then there will be new expensive cameras to complain about.
I’m not sure why people hate the A99. I haven’t figured that out yet either. I hate the A-mount altogether because of lack of lens, 3rd party support, and stealing R&D budget from the E-mount. I think, in general, FF DSLR buyers are not that price sensitive. The fact that Sony fans are angry at the A99 tells me they are more in the category of D600 or 6D buyers, budget FF buyers. Sony needs to focus on the fundamentals before trying to revolutionize through gimmicks. With all the gimmicks they have pushed through the years, they are still far behind, in terms of basic photography. I’m getting fed up with hearing about rumors of new gimmicks and hype about this and that gimmick from Sony. I use camera for photography not gadget lust. I think it’s time to move on from the hype rumor sites to sites focused on photography.
Most likely because of a wasted potential. After 4+ year wait for A900 replacement, which was considered great photographers camera, unfortunately with low sensitivity sensor, they got a gizmos loaded box that is not really that still photographers friendly. And the video part apparently sucks as per recent reviews. So this is perceived as a waste of a good sensor especially if one contrasts it with the same sensor as applied in D600. And the price of A99.
They don’t. It is an excellent camera. Video is a lot better than competing camera’s. Some people can’t afford it and they behave jealous. Don’t become one of them.
Sounds like an A1X would have been a good idea…
My perspective as a professional who uses cameras at work (but not a professional photographer or video). I used Nikon D600, Canon APS like 60D, Panasonic GH2, GH1, Sony cameras.
The major advantage of GH2 is focusing speed during video. On some Olympus (older models) I tried, they focused too slowly. However, the Nikon D600 focuses fast x photos, adequate x videos. The size and weight of the D600 is not substantially greater than the GH2. But it has about 4x sensitivity. It is critical because it makes the difference in indoor shots where the D600 gets great, GH2 so so.
I realized I rather have a D600 than a GH2 x most situations (if I did not own it, I would rarely use the GH2). The price difference is not substantial (many professionals can take it as a tax deduction, which means a saving of about 40% of the price difference). The price difference in the US is about $1000 with 2 lenses (see Costco) or about $600 net. The qualify of photos and easier and better photos in low light makes it a better camera. For Sony or Panasonic to succeed they need to have far better low light sensitivity (score over 2000 on dxomark sensor score). Ability to control via app on android, iPAD, PC. Fast focus x video. 20 M pixels are enough, make the pixels big, not more. Good lenses, 20mm to 100 mm f 3.5 (roughly). SONY apparently fails on low light sensor score, a wide range of fairly common features on Nikon (remove control, control by PC, Apps, accessories inexpensive, etc.).
Another thing
Look around you how many images do you see that are bigger than 20″?
Someone has to shoot them they dont just magically appear.