# DSLR shipments down 10.9% in Second Quarter 2013



## brunerww (Oct 26, 2013)

Overall digital camera shipments down 36% in the same period: DSLR sales down for first time in a decade - AfterDawn

Andrew Reid at eoshd.com thinks consumer DSLRs will be dead in 5 years: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years" » EOSHD.com

It may take 10 years, and not 5, but the handwriting seems to be on the wall.  As for me, I'm starting a camera phone blog 

Bill


----------



## KmH (Oct 26, 2013)

The bottom line - 


> it&#8217;s consumer apathy which will finally close the lid.


 on consumer grade DSLR's.


----------



## rexbobcat (Oct 26, 2013)

"The internet places low demands on image quality in terms of optics and resolution. Consumers are far more interested in content, information and what you do with an image after you take it."  

So this is why people love to use $50 "all images on a CD and 30% of them are selective color" photographers. Lol

On a more serious note, why do we care so much about consumer DSLRs? Canon has been using the same sensor in its entry-level DSLRs for the past 20 years, so it's not like the camera industry is losing out on much if they stop producing them.


----------



## usayit (Oct 27, 2013)

FEATURES | GALAXY S4 zoom

Before DSLRs, small point and shoot cameras (film) outnumbered SLRs by a good margin.  When APS film came out Canon made a killing off of the Canon ELPH because of their tiny size and sharp looks; its what the consumer wanted.

Things have changed only a little... now its not only size and looks but 

Integrate.. integrate.. integrate..

Film SLRs did just fine back then.. DSLRs will also do just fine now.  Who are the big players in DSLR market may change.. depending on who has been keeping finances in check AND who is going to be innovative towards the more enthusiastic photography crowd.  The rest of the consumers are now realizing what "good enough" means to them in terms of picture quality.  They'll flock towards those type of products (camera phones).


----------



## cgw (Oct 27, 2013)

Some context on offer here:

Of Personal Computers and Cameras | Gearophile | Thom Hogan


----------



## gsgary (Oct 27, 2013)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...raditional-camera-film-makes-a-come-back.html

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2


----------



## amolitor (Oct 27, 2013)

Consumer gear drives the train. Without the amateur enthusiasts buying DSLRs, the professional gear is dead too.

In fact, this is as it has always been. Pros have been complaining about these damned amateurs ruining everything for 150 years, but without those damned amateurs driving progress the pros would still be flowing homemade collodion across glass plates.

Still, there's no reason to think the DSLR will be dead any time soon. It will be a decreasing niche for quite a while yet, for all we know there will be a viable business -- albeit one that looks nothing like the current DSLR business -- for the next 100 years.

The only photographic tech that seems to be legitimately dead is dry plate, and I'm not sure about that. Everything else is still with us, and shows no signs of vanishing.

ETA: Interesting that the article distinguishes between "Consumer" and "Enthusiast". I agree that Consumer demand is going to be zero for DSLRs. I'm not sure I really grasp the difference between a Consumer and an Enthusiast, although I do believe there's some sort of distinction to be made there. I know people who don't want a camera, they want pictures. Are those people Consumers?


----------



## Tailgunner (Oct 27, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Consumer gear drives the train. Without the amateur enthusiasts buying DSLRs, the professional gear is dead too.
> 
> In fact, this is as it has always been. Pros have been complaining about these damned amateurs ruining everything for 150 years, but without those damned amateurs driving progress the pros would still be flowing homemade collodion across glass plates.
> 
> ...




Agreed, consumer grade equipment supports the profession...more consumers buy POS and lower end DSLRs than Photographers buy Professional equipment. A decline in the Consumer end should be a little concerning. 

As for the difference between a Consumer and Enthusiast, a Consumer is happy taking snap shots with a POS or lower end DSLR while an Enthusiast is a person who enjoys photography as a hobby.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 27, 2013)

Tailgunner said:
			
		

> SNIP...more consumers buy *POS* and lower end DSLRs than Photographers buy Professional equipment. A decline in the Consumer end should be a little concerning.
> 
> As for the difference between a Consumer and Enthusiast, a Consumer is happy taking snap shots with *a POS* or lower end DSLR while an Enthusiast is a person who enjoys photography as a hobby.



Do you mean to say POS? Or did you mean P&S? POS traditionally means Piece Of S*i+....

Rich amateurs buy a lot of high-end professional cameras...over many decades, the top buying class for expensive Hasselblads, Rolleiflexs,Nikons,Leicas, and so on has always been the wealthy amateur, and NOT working professionals. The most-expensive cameras, the really high-end stuff, is bought by many people who want the so-called "best", and who want the status that comes from owning it.

I do not agree with the idea that the consumer d-slr will be dead in five years. I think it will still have status value, as well as actual consumer utility as a picture-taking device, and so it'll be around longer than five years.


----------



## amolitor (Oct 27, 2013)

I think the big market distinction is between people who want pictures, and people who want a camera.

People who want pictures mostly use phones now, and within 5 years there will no excuse for NOT using your phone, if what you want it pictures.
If you want a camera, well, you'll still be buying cameras.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 27, 2013)

amolitor said:


> I think the big market distinction is between people who want pictures, and people who want a camera.
> 
> People who want pictures mostly use phones now, and within 5 years there will no excuse for NOT using your phone, if what you want it pictures.
> If you want a camera, well, you'll still be buying cameras.



YES. The idea that the cellphone camera will cause the total cessation of d-slr's, or other "serious cameras" is an idea that some people seem to love to blog about. Bloggers and website writers like Michael Reichmann talking about Canon and Nikon "sleeping" during this so-called "*switch to mirrorless*"....uh...so far the "switch" is not really happening. 

The thing is, really wealthy people like Reichmann, the kind who have websites and blogs, and who own a digital MF system,a Canon system, a Leica System, a Sony NEX system, and a complete bunch of video cameras--those are the types of people who often buy and adopt new cameras and entire lens systems so easily, and so fast that* they confuse their rarified buying habits* with what the actual people of the world are doing. 

So far, the only market where mirrorless sales are strong is the JAPAN market...which is a camera-centric culture. The remainder of the entire world has not "switched" to mirrorless; in fact quite the opposite. I suspect yet another instance of Reichmann hitting the white wine a bit too heavily then banging out another column filled with typos. ;-)


----------



## amolitor (Oct 27, 2013)

I stole the 'wants pictures/wants cameras' terminology from Xerox. In the early days of photocopiers, Xerox decided (correctly, for the time, I think) that people didn't want photocopiers. They wanted copies.

So they started leasing the machines, essentially selling photocopies. Then things changed and their clients wanted the machine itself as it became more central to the business, and so on, and Xerox damn near lost it all failing to switch, but that's another story. This is now a parable in Marketing 101. Figure out what the customer actually WANTS and then SELL THEM THAT.


----------



## cgw (Oct 27, 2013)

Problem for Nikon is that DX is guesstimated to be 80%+ of their DSLR sales, many of them "consumer" grade cameras. Soft sales there could cause real pain.


----------



## Tailgunner (Oct 27, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



HAHA...I meant P&S...I think I did anyhow lol


----------



## Derrel (Oct 27, 2013)

cgw said:


> Problem for Nikon is that DX is guesstimated to be 80%+ of their DSLR sales, many of them "consumer" grade cameras. Soft sales there could cause real pain.



The market for d-slr cameras is now mature. After having undergone 10+ years of explosive growth in unit sales...the market is now mature, and the number of d-slr cameras in the world is higher than it has ever been. All that low-hanging fruit that the "original Digital Rebel" and the "original Nikon D70" represented is gone...picked clean. Both those two camera models represented the FIRST sub-$1,000 d-slr models, and both were big sellers. Fast forward a few years, and according to Nikon itself, their D40 was their BEST-selling camera model of all-time. That period, the period of explosive growth in d-slr sales, the period of more and more and more and more buyers--now the market has provided those millions of buyers with a d-slr. And, compared to that period of explosive growth--well, sales have slowed down.

It's amusing that so many people who blog don't provide any context whatsoever for sales figures, or overall market penetration, or, well ANYTHING. YES, d-slr sales have slowed....and yet--d-slr sales are, oh, let me guess, 10,000 times higher than the sales of 35mm film cameras. And 40,000 times the annual sales of medium format rollfilm cameras.

There are loads of idiot bloggers out there, predicting the demise of all sorts of things. For example, following the logic of some of these bloggers, I would report that, "BMW and Mercedes-Benz are headed for bankruptcy, since they each control less than 1.3 percent of the new car business world-wide." Uhhhhh...yeah....they do...neither has any major market share...look at the numbers.

Soft sales in d-slr CAMERAS represent only part of the business; there are also lenses, flashes, and accessories. Canon and Nikon also sell millions of lenses annually. Ask BMW and Mercedes-Benz how they're doing with those soft sales numbers...


----------



## robbins.photo (Oct 27, 2013)

brunerww said:


> Overall digital camera shipments down 36% in the same period: DSLR sales down for first time in a decade - AfterDawn
> 
> Andrew Reid at eoshd.com thinks consumer DSLRs will be dead in 5 years: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years" » EOSHD.com
> 
> ...



I'll believe it when I see it.  Personally I don't believe it one bit, I think it's a lot of nonsense from people who don't understand the market or market forces at all.  Also the fact that DSLR sales are down doesn't surprise me at all - but considering how bad the economy is right now that should be expected, not a surprise.

Will they eventually perfect mirrorless to the point where the reflex mirror system won't have any advantages over it?  That is a possibility.  Will the make it affordable enough that they can compete and produce cameras with the same capabilities at the same price points.. again, a possibility.  Will they do all that in 10 years.. a big, big maybe.  But you know what?  Even if they do they'll still end up producing cameras that look and act pretty much the same as DSLR's do now, because there is a big market for them and there always will be for a variety of reasons, ergonomics being at the top of that list.


----------



## minicoop1985 (Oct 28, 2013)

amolitor said:


> I stole the 'wants pictures/wants cameras' terminology from Xerox. In the early days of photocopiers, Xerox decided (correctly, for the time, I think) that people didn't want photocopiers. They wanted copies.
> 
> So they started leasing the machines, essentially selling photocopies. Then things changed and their clients wanted the machine itself as it became more central to the business, and so on, and Xerox damn near lost it all failing to switch, but that's another story. This is now a parable in Marketing 101. Figure out what the customer actually WANTS and then SELL THEM THAT.



Don't forget the other lesson in that: ADAPT to CHANGES in what the customer wants, or get left in the dust.


----------



## Biev (Oct 28, 2013)

While we wait for the DSLR to be killed off, I'll be listening to some recently bought CDs which were killed off by mp3 and online services.  CDs which of course I play on my desktop PC which was killed off by smartphones, tablets, and internet access on my TV set.  CDs which, by the way, are on display in my local music store right next to these strange large black things they call vinyl.  Some of these CDs are stored in my paperless office right next to all the books I still buy, together with my kindle.


----------



## cgw (Oct 28, 2013)

Derrel said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > Problem for Nikon is that DX is guesstimated to be 80%+ of their DSLR sales, many of them "consumer" grade cameras. Soft sales there could cause real pain.
> ...



OK, so where's *your *data? CIPA stats are the source for most informed observers. This article(did you track it back from the OP's comments?)sheds some light and provides some context:

Point, shoot, collapse: Why big camera companies are the next BlackBerry | Financial Post

Global recession and a slow N. American economy aren't exactly lifting sales of new DSLRs, either. You might glance at the Hogan article I linked upthread.


----------



## amolitor (Oct 28, 2013)

Forecasting with a straightedge is the best thing to do when you have't any other information, but if you're writing some prognostication piece about the industry, you should probably go get some more information.

The straightedge is manifestly wrong here. The sales will drop until the market of people who want pictures is gone, and then it will flatten out. The _interesting_ question is how large the remaining market it. How many enthusiasts and professionals are there? How often do those buyers purchase equipment? How large will the new, smaller, market for DSLRs (or whatever, film cameras, 4x5 cameras, Leicas, etc) be, and what kind of businesses can it support?

Can anyone be buggered to go work that out? Heavens no, that would be actual reporting, and would require labor. Tut tut, no way.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 28, 2013)

cgw said:


> OK, so where's *your *data? CIPA stats are the source for most informed observers. This article(did you track it back from the OP's comments?)sheds some light and provides some context:
> 
> Point, shoot, collapse: Why big camera companies are the next BlackBerry | Financial Post
> 
> Global recession and a slow N. American economy aren't exactly lifting sales of new DSLRs, either. You might glance at the Hogan article I linked upthread.




Nice try, but Thom Hogan already wrote an article detailing some of the holes in the Financial Times article...the Financial Times' writer, obviously largely ignorant of the camera industry and of CIPA reporting procedures, has created some so-called "data" that is riddled with errors and is basically, click-bait... his article is lame, and is factually...dubious. The Financial Times article you link to is a bunch of crap. But, it got a lot of clicks...

I don't need to glance at just a single Thom Hogan article...I have been following his ongoing series of CIPA results articles for two years now...mirrorless is NOT selling worth a damn anywhere, except in JAPAN. Mirrorless shipments swung wildly upwards some 18 months ago, as manufacturers made and shipped loads of them to dealers who HOPED the cameras would sell. Unfortunately, shipments of mirrorless cameras have largely tanked, as customers have voted with their dollars and pesos and pounds and Euro...they'd rather have a d-slr than an equally-priced mirrorless camera.

The Nikon 1 for example...premiering in the USA at $899...and sitting and sitting,and sitting on the shelves, until Target and Best Buy closed them out at ridiculous fire-sale prices of like $349 with lens...OUCH! Same with Canon's new toy...another sales DISASTER. Why? Because the products from Canon and Nikon, and to a large extent Sony, are brand-new, in the early stages of development, and have a lot of rough edges, and lack legacy ties, legacy equipment, and are basically new and unproven products with NO track record, and are prices too close to lower-end d-slrs.


----------



## cgw (Oct 28, 2013)

Derrel said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > OK, so where's *your *data? CIPA stats are the source for most informed observers. This article(did you track it back from the OP's comments?)sheds some light and provides some context:
> ...



OK, so what's *your *analysis of the CIPA data that explains your rejection of the DSLR trend reported by the OP? Nikon's stock price movements aren't subject to much interpretation. Seems you're just outgassing in the same way those effete bloggers you lambast supposedly do. FYI we're talking about DSLRs--not MILCs. Judging from your posts here, your views appear informed more by resentment than reason.


----------



## JacaRanda (Oct 28, 2013)




----------



## amolitor (Oct 28, 2013)

It's obvious to any thinking human being that DSLR sales had to go from growth to shrinkage eventually. After all, it's an object that is sold for money, and that's how sales of objects which are sold for money work.

However, to reason from the fact that we have passed over the top of the hill to "GONE COMPLETELY IN FIVE YEARS!!!!" is simply ridiculous. The right-hand side of the curve is almost always longer than the left side, for one thing, and they're been selling DSLRs for rather more than five years. There is no particular reason to suppose that the right side touches zero at any time in the foreseeable future. Pointing out that certain large segments of the former customer base have moved on is relevant industry analysis but, again, utterly fails to support a "GONE COMPLETELY IN GIVE YEARS!!!!!" conclusion.

There are other segments inside that customer base, who will still be in the market for DSLRs five years from now. Will there be enough to support a manufacturer at some level? I dunno, but the point is these pundits don't know either.

Will there be massive upheavals in the DSLR manufacturer business? That seems likely.

The only, literally THE ONLY, photographic technology I can think of that has passed on completely is dry plate. You can still buy everything else. Well, maybe not film on the flammable bases. But you can buy "safety" film which is arguably the same thing, just less, you know, explosive.

History of photography, history of "selling objects for money", and all the facts we have at our disposal seem to point firmly to a "DSLR sales will be smaller than they are today, in five years, but most likely not zero"


----------

