CIPA data 2016: Another horror year for digital camera production

[jarski]

Most consumers don't care about details, they want punchy colour and contrast, the iPhone 7 is the perfect camera for them.

I'd say most consumers don't understand difference of wide and tele lens, nor flexibility of good zoom range and when it can become useful. dual camera phones alleviate this a bit, but its still far cry from good optical lens (and bigger sensor as well).

but as mentioned, those things don't matter much if someone is already happy for their smartphone snaps.

 

[user237428934]

And film is making a comeback...these headlines are just there to grab eyeballs.

The last few generations of smartphones give the average person better photographs than they ever got with the amateur junk that the camera makers dumped on the market to sell film like the Instamatics and discs and 110s. Even better, rather than mediate the photos through their laptop or desktop, because who can afford Photoshop or Lightroom, they just use whatever filters or basic editing functions are built into the phone or app and post it on the Internet.

It's pretty amazing, that although people are ultimately still paying hundreds of dollars for a camera, the device the camera is attached to does so much more than we could have dreamed of. Combined with the fact that a phone, or even a smartphone is something that people don't think they could live (or live well) without, it's no surprise that the bottom of the digital camera market basically fell off. What $150 point and shoot or bridge camera can compete with the latest iPhone?

This is so funny. We are a forum for highend equipment or strange cameras, nothing mainstream. And every year we descuss the downturn of shi**y low end cameras and a shift to shi**y phone cameras. I don't cara about this mainstream.

 

[Skiff]

I don't understand the table that was linked. What are the units - number of cameras, or the total value in Yen?
Also, they report ''Year over Year growth" as +67.7%, not -32.3%.

So, if I take this table at face value, the digital camera industry is growing tremendously.

You have completely misunderstood the data:
1. In 2016 the total production volume was only 67.7% of the total production volume of 2015. That is a decline of - 32.3%.
2. Here you have the data on all last years. You immediately see that the camera production is in a severe decline since 2010:

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

 

[Skiff]

This is so funny. We are a forum for highend equipment or strange cameras, nothing mainstream. And every year we descuss the downturn of shi**y low end cameras and a shift to shi**y phone cameras. I don't cara about this mainstream.

That is not the point, because in the last five years the market for high(er) end interchangeable lens cameras (ILC = DSLRs and mirrorless) decreased by 46% as well.
Samsung already quit this market.

 

[Spanik]

What $150 point and shoot or bridge camera can compete with the latest iPhone?

And how much is that iPhone? About 600-700 (*) I thought (too lazy to look it up). Maybe you need to compare it to a 650 dslr instead and just buy a 50 cell phone. Both will deliver a better experience... I know my 50 euro cell phone get along a week on a single charge and has better reception and voice quality than the smartphone I have from work that needs a recharge at least once a day. Likewise the 650 dslr will make better photos, go along longer on a charge and probably have a longer lifetime.

(*) substitue your prefered currency.

 

[MikeMGB]

And how much is that iPhone? About 600-700 (*) I thought (too lazy to look it up). Maybe you need to compare it to a 650 dslr instead and just buy a 50 cell phone. Both will deliver a better experience... I know my 50 euro cell phone get along a week on a single charge and has better reception and voice quality than the smartphone I have from work that needs a recharge at least once a day. Likewise the 650 dslr will make better photos, go along longer on a charge and probably have a longer lifetime.

(*) substitue your prefered currency.

Most people consider the camera is free. They bundle the cost of the phone into their bill and never notice it.

 

[Huss]

Yup, they need the phone and get a free camera with it. If you are getting a free camera (that is getting better all the time), why buy a separate one?
99% of the population could not care less that a 'real' camera can take better pics. If they remember to take it with them. The phone is always with them.

 

[user237428934]

That is not the point, because in the last five years the market for high(er) end interchangeable lens cameras (ILC = DSLRs and mirrorless) decreased by 46% as well.
Samsung already quit this market.

I'm amazed every time you post this, what details you find in those meagre figures. There are shi**y low end DSLRs in the DSLR segment and there is high end stuff all together in the same figure.

 

[Skiff]

I'm amazed every time you post this, what details you find in those meagre figures. There are shi**y low end DSLRs in the DSLR segment and there is high end stuff all together in the same figure.

I find that in the detailed statistics of the manufacturers and distributors. And I regularly talk to big distributors worldwide. All segments are affected.
There is a reason why lots of big distributors have significantly reduced their staff, and some online distributors and local camera shops have completely left the market.

 

[venchka]

Yet folks like Sony are up to the RX100 V and a6500. And the RX100 versions 1-4 are still on the market. Go figure.
Get back to me when I get one of each on closeout for $100 at WorstBuy.
Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HHPhoto]

Hi,

so the data is clear: The market shrinking has accelerated.
The brutal competition between the manufacturers will increase as a consequence.
The thrilling question will be:
Which camera lines and / or manufacturers will survive the next years?
I really don't know.
But for me the most vulnerable (weakest position in the market) are the Sony A-mount line, which is significantly loosing market share for years.
And m4/3. Because it does not really have any significant advantages compared to APS-C mirrorless cameras.
And in the m4/3 segment Panasonic is probably the weakest player. And Panasonic simply does not need camera production for being a successful company (same case as with Samsung).

Cheers, Jan

 

[jarski]

The brutal competition between the manufacturers will increase as a consequence.

It's also the innovation has to increase, to remain in the game. Good for us customers.

 

[HHPhoto]

It's also the innovation has to increase, to remain in the game. Good for us customers.

Generally that is right, at least in normal situations.
But for R&D you also need sufficient funds, enough capital.
And that is becoming more difficult in a declining market with the margins being under big pressure.
Some companies already have this problem now. E.g. look at Nikon with their cost reduction programmes and reduced customer service (for more details look at Thom Hogans page where he has analysed that several times in a very detailed way).
And because of this cost reduction often cameras are introduced with severe flaws, they are introduced too early to the market, not fully developed (Nikon customers can sing that song 🙄).
Customers are then misused as test personal.

Cheers, Jan

 

[icebear]

...yawn.
Every year the same statistics message. Who cares? Is anyone of us a camera manufacturer?
Are the camera's of today still not good enough?
Is the camera that you have in your bag limiting your abilities to take great photos?
What more can you possibly ask for? ISO 2.000.000, 25 fps with constant auto focus?
When is enough enough? Built in 4k Ultra HD video?

How much bigger can the big ass TV really get until you need a bigger house because the living room is just too small?
There is not a lot of room left for true innovation. Marginal improvement over the last model but something truly new? People buy the latest and greatest phone not because it is truly new but because of marketing and social media hype and the desire to have a shiny new toy. And for at least 90% of people the IQ of their phone is plenty good enough for their purpose which is sharing with some friends group or network to show off what interesting stuff they have, see, live. And 5 minutes later they are off to the next thing, the next post. The photo doesn't have any lasting value anymore, it's just a file.

So what's the purpose of the dedicated high quality camera for the mass consumer ... right, the purpose is gone for the majority.
Consequently the market is diminishing and not coming back. Is there any surprise here?
Rant mode off🙄

 

[jarski]

What more can you possibly ask for? ISO 2.000.000, 25 fps with constant auto focus?
When is enough enough? Built in 4k Ultra HD video?

It's never enough 🙂 innovation means also new designs, features and uses we cannot even fantasize at the moment.

As for being subject of a free beta tester for companies (HHPhoto). Information about new products spread fast. Nobody has to be early adopter unless they choose to.

 

[willie_901]

Still Photography Is a Niche Market

Still Photography Is a Niche Market

Markets don't grow forever. The still digital camera market is mature. Yes, phones have a significant impact. As others pointed out, phones are a replacement for fully-automated P&S cameras... nothing more.

"High-end photographic gear" includes more diversity than Leica's current product line. I agree that Leica is smart to focus on the provides the very top end of hat market. By the way, do they have any other option? This is hardly an example of marketing genius.

At the same time, Leica's prices are at the very pinnacle of the "High-end photographic gear" market. I will arbitrarily suggest the high-end market starts at twice the price of an iPhone or equivalent Android device.

Clearly there are profits to be made selling still photography gear that appeals to people who would spend $1,200 to $4,000 on new still photography gear. Leica may eventually benefit from a small subset of these consumers.

For film users, the film camera story is nothing but good news. But realistically the growth in film interest is a minuscule economic event. Except for a relatively small number of highly valued lenses and bodies, have used film-gear prices increased recently? What percentage of used lens purchases are used primarily on digital bodies?

There is growth in new low-end film cameras. The 'best' Instax camera, Fujifilm Instax Mini 90 Neo Classic, costs $125. 60 frames of film costs $36. 10 monochome frames costs $10.

Despite Instax's current popularity, I wonder how Instax gross profits compare to X-Series gross profits. Many will contend the X-Series has never made a profit. Fujifilm Imaging Solutions Group does not publish these details. But I wouldn't be surprised if still camera sales has no impact whatsoever on FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation's economic health.

 

[robert blu]

...yawn...
Are the camera's of today still not good enough?
Is the camera that you have in your bag limiting your abilities to take great photos?
...
Marginal improvement over the last model but something truly new?
...

My wife D-5100 a few years old still makes good photos (when used in a proper way 😀)

My 6 years old Leica x-1 (not a perfect camera) still works well and makes reasonably good photos (in my hands 😀)

Joking a little but just to say that we do not need a new camera each few years...market cannot grow forever as willie says...

robert

PS: now that M....is so tempting...🙂 but that is a desire, not a need...

 

[HHPhoto]

Hi Willie,

For film users, the film camera story is nothing but good news. But realistically the growth in film interest is a minuscule economic event. Except for a relatively small number of highly valued lenses and bodies, have used film-gear prices increased recently?

Yes, at least for certain models. For example Contax 645, all Hasselblad V-series cameras, some 6x7 Mamiyas, Mamiya 645 AF Models, Pentax 645, Hasselblad X-Pan / Fuji XT-1, Nikon FM3a, FM2, FE2, Canon F1, Canon AE-1, Linhof Technika.
Just to name some which are on my own personal "radar". There are certainly more used camears with increasing prices.

The stronger the film revival will become in the next years, the more used cameras will increase in price. The smaller the price gap between used and potential new gear, the more attractive it will be for camera manufacturers to introduce new film cameras.

Despite Instax's current popularity, I wonder how Instax gross profits compare to X-Series gross profits. Many will contend the X-Series has never made a profit. Fujifilm Imaging Solutions Group does not publish these details.

Some time ago in Germany the Fujifilm numbers were published as aggregated data:
All silver-halide related products (Instax cameras and film, standard films, archival films, silver-halide RA-4 photo paper, chemistry, professional lab operation, lab equipment) were more than 2 billion $ revenue.
And their digital cameras were less than 900 million $ (and shrinking).

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

Hi,

so the data is clear: The market shrinking has accelerated.
The brutal competition between the manufacturers will increase as a consequence.
The thrilling question will be:
Which camera lines and / or manufacturers will survive the next years?
.........
Cheers, Jan

Hi,

looks like I've been spot on:
Next victim of the brutally declining digital camera market:
Nikon is completely cancelling its planned DL line:

http://www.photoscala.de/2017/02/13/abgesagt-nikon-dl-serie-kommt-nicht-auf-den-markt/

They say development costs are too high, market is shrinking too strongly, and they expect not getting any return on investment.
So all R&D costs they had so far are burned. Big loss.

Cheers, Jan

 

[jsrockit]

They say development costs are too high, market is shrinking too strongly, and they expect not getting any return on investment.
So all R&D costs they had so far are burned. Big loss.

How much of this is bad management as well though?