Collapse of digital camera sales is accelerating

[Skiff]

And I feel like I can count on Kodak CN films being around FAR more than I can any film from Fuji, I am not alone in this either.

I prefer trusting in facts more than in feelings.
Listen to the current Kodak CEO Jeff Clarke. He was very honest and clear on that: Kodak film production was not profitable and in 2014 they were close before stopping the whole film production at Kodak. It is getting a bit better now (fortunately; I wish them to stay), but fact is Kodak is currently by far the weakest film producer. Their current massive quality problems with their 120 films is another sign of that. Fuji has been in much better shape for years. That is why they offer a much bigger analogue product portfolio. And earn much more money with analogue.

Neither Fuji or Kodak makes silver gelatin paper and that is, as far as I am concerned, the only paper that matters when doing things like fine art from start to finish. Silver halide based papers that are used with a computer / digital file do not have the same panache as the full darkroom experience for me and others who adore the black and white film experience.

Sorry, that is wrong. Silver-gelatin and silver-halid are just two names for the same traditional photo paper. Both Fuji and Kodak Alaris are producing traditional RA-4 silver-gelatin/silver-halide photo paper. And huge amounts of it: This market is far bigger (concerning the produced volume) than the film market. And parts of it are even increasing (RA-4 paper for photo books). Fuji is market leader here and has even introduced new papers, and has increased their R&D budget.
Both offer excellent papers for fine-art work. I know, because I am using these papers.

So I have to ask....and I am not the only one who is thinking this I am sure, but....what purpose do you think it serves to post these provocative statements that for the most part usually only interest industry types...on a forum that is filled with people with a passion for either photographs, photographic equipment or both?

1. I have not made any provocative statement. I have just reported about the current market situation. This market situation is a fact. It is how it is. I've just given the link to the data.
If you think this situation is provocative, so well.....that is simply your feeling. I am not responsible for that.
2. I am an enthusiast photographer. I am also working semi-professionally. So I am affected by market developments.
3. These market developments will probably affect all of us or a majority of us sooner or later. Some in a negative way, some in a positive way.
Having an eye on it, being aware of it, making some preperations will certainly be a good idea.

 

[dct]

I agree slightly with both sides of the dispute in the last posts here. But I don't want to move the same discussion further: I am just one of the millions of camera users out there and I'm inclined to my personal view. Let me tell you my own thoughts on that, just looking at the compact camera market.

2007 was the year CIPA didn't show film camera statistics any more separately (in some slide sets there is saying the few film shipments are incorporated in the digital statistics). It was also the year I bought my first digital compact (Panasonic DMC-FX30) camera. Before (and up to 2011) I used film compact cameras too.
As an everyday everywhere camera it was a exciting experience, having always enough images "left", compared to the former film cameras. The downside was of course the battery: I became used to change and charge instead of changing film roll. Was this really that step forward?

Anyway: 2013 I had to change my first digital compact because of a technical defect. (Canon PowerShot S100).
It was a huge step forward in picture quality and manual settings. It was also the year I obtained by my employer my 1st smartphone (Apple iPhone 5). Did it change my compact camera usage? Not really. The handling was (and is) still cumbersome, hence the photographing experience I had with all compact cameras decades before was gone. (One of my fingers always touch inadvertently the display and strange things happens instead of the shot I aimed for...) And the image quality didn't reach that of the S100.

2015 was the year I (slightly) changed my mindset, regarding compact everyday cameras. For the same reason as years before the FX30, the S100 gave up to work (the filigree lens collapsing mechanism wasn't up to my requirements of a compact camera just thrown in a bag between a memo pad, business papers, notebook and other stuff). As I had to replace again my compact camera, I went for a rugged one. It is also good enough for beach and snorkelling: Never had a device before to take with me every day to the sea. (Panasonic DMC-FT5)
In the meantime I managed to use my smartphone a little better, at least for simple snapshots or a hard copy of a receipt. Being the FT5 somewhat bulky, there are summer days (without coat, just lightweight trousers) where I leave without a dedicated camera, just with the smartphone, now an Apple iPhone 6.

But - don't get me wrong - I would never go outside without a dedicated camera if I plan to take images of family, events, nature etc.

Let me summarize my personal attitude on the initial topic:
As long as the user interface of smartphones doesn't reach at least the grip and interface of a compact camera with dedicated knobs, buttons and some manual settings, I will still buy compact cameras. Despite all the gimmicks they add into these hybrid devices.

(I see this went a long rant: Highlighted the last sentence to summarize my thoughts)

 

[jarski]

Great Wall, Seagull, Phenix, Fotoman, Chamonix just to name a few

😎 these weren't exactly in my mind, but indeed a Chinese digital camera maker that competes globally.

 

[Skiff]

😎 these weren't exactly in my mind, but indeed a Chinese digital camera maker that competes globally.

There is no one.
And the fate of Samsung with their failure in the market demonstrates quite clearly how difficult it is for a relative new player, who is "late to the game", to compete against the established Japanese companies.
And to compete against a rapidly declining market.
And all that despite Samsung being a huge multi-billion $ tech company and a global player.

And, by the way, as this question also came along in one of the posts in this thread: The market for interchangeable lenses is also declining since 2013. But so far not as fast as the ILC camera market.

 

[Aristophanes]

There is no one.
And the fate of Samsung with their failure in the market demonstrates quite clearly how difficult it is for a relative new player, who is "late to the game", to compete against the established Japanese companies.
And to compete against a rapidly declining market.
And all that despite Samsung being a huge multi-billion $ tech company and a global player.

And, by the way, as this question also came along in one of the posts in this thread: The market for interchangeable lenses is also declining since 2013. But so far not as fast as the ILC camera market.

The problem with your assumptions is the use of the word "collapsing".

This implies there was a normal market that has somehow reduced.

Your agenda appears to be that people should reject digital for film and you keep prying at this as if there is some inherent flaw in digital and superiority of film that people will eventually realize.

The market is not collapsing. First, including smartphones as the new compacts, and their continual unit-by-unit sales increases worldwide (hitting saturation levels, but still growth room) digital imaging is still growing. We know this because of the massive investment in sensor fabs projected to actually triple capacity over the next decade.

So the "digital" market is far from "collapsing". Digital is still ascendant.

IN reality there is a no "digital" market. There is simply an imaging market. CIPA and other economic measures do not make a distinction between digital and analog because there is no longer an analog market to measure in appreciable terms. There is no alternative to digital in an economic sense.

Second, the market for dedicated camera (not smartphones) was a bubble production run over the last 10 years as the shift from analog to digital provided a one-off investment by both producers and consumers. This is a not a normal market to "collapse" from. Instead the market for dedicated cameras, purged of much of the compact market by smartphones, is reverting to a non-bubble, median sales range. We know this because of the way the optical companies (Samsung was never an optical company) invested in specialty markets like the Fuji X and Olympus systems.

We also see this with he wholesale move the medium format side towards new systems. Pentax/Ricoh, Hasselblad, and Mamiya all completely dropped fill models for digital and received substantial forward-looking capital infusions. Leica did this as well with the S-series.

All the companies with an optical pedigree have entirely (well...not quite Leica) switched to digital. This demonstrates the market normalizing around a consensus that there is no analog market to speak of save as a niche for hobbyists. The Samsung, Panasonic entrants did not fare so well primarily because they could not compete as well in the ILC camp as they have no optical engineering base, which drives margins.

The market is on no way "collapsing" in favour of any other medium. It is maturing as all tech markets do, like PCs have where their sales are at 2007 levels. We don't say that market is "collapsing". We simply say that it is saturated with maturity turnover and margins.

Imagine if someone said the smartphone market is "collapsing" because people prefer analog telephones. I miss dialling on a rotary phone.

 

[David_Manning]

A lot of what's posted in this thread is based upon personal preferences, as opposed to data, which is the point of the original poster, I think.

Look at where the growth in photography is...online places like Facebook, Instagram, and Flickr. Most popular camera to shoot photos? iPhone.

It's a fact that most photography is shared online, instead of sharing prints, regardless of the fact that everyone on photography forums says they make books. So until a large manufacturer builds a super-convenient camera with good-enough IQ and the ability to slide a GSM SIM card into it for instant uploads online (we're talking about instantly online, not wifi, bluetooth, or NFC to a phone THEN upload), the smartphone camera is the winner and industry killer.

I really love all my different cameras...too many of them to mention...but I'm hoping the new iPhone 7 with a dual-camera setup (rumored as of now) will have the ability to simulate DoF with a small sensor. Then it will truly have the flexibility of a "real" camera...simulate different focal lengths. Who cares if it actually has different focal lengths? The images end up online anyway.

 

[Skiff]

The problem with your assumptions is the use of the word "collapsing".

I've written that the digital camera sales are collapsing. And with a decline of 75% in only 6 years that is simply a correct description. Especially as all camera manufacturers (look at their outlooks) and market analysts have the same assessment that this development will continue for the next years. All explain that we are far away from a stabilisation of sales.
And whether you call it a massive decline or a collapse is just semantics. The situation is as it is.

Your agenda appears to be that people should reject digital for film and you keep prying at this as if there is some inherent flaw in digital and superiority of film that people will eventually realize.

I've never written that!!!
Why do you refuse to read my posts?

The market is not collapsing.

I've never written that!!
I've written that the digital camera sales are collapsing. And that is just a fact. The numbers tell the story.

Dear moderators, Aristophanes is permanently imputing things to me I've never said.
A constructive discussion is impossible with such a behaviour. Please tell him to stop that.
Thanks.

 

[Skiff]

A lot of what's posted in this thread is based upon personal preferences, as opposed to data, which is the point of the original poster, I think.

Thanks. Exactly that was my intention: Giving the link to the original data.
I am not responsible for the situation!
But lots of people here unfortunately like to shoot the messenger.

 

[KM-25]

I prefer trusting in facts more than in feelings.
Listen to the current Kodak CEO Jeff Clarke. He was very honest and clear on that: Kodak film production was not profitable and in 2014 they were close before stopping the whole film production at Kodak. It is getting a bit better now (fortunately; I wish them to stay), but fact is Kodak is currently by far the weakest film producer. Their current massive quality problems with their 120 films is another sign of that. Fuji has been in much better shape for years. That is why they offer a much bigger analogue product portfolio. And earn much more money with analogue.



Sorry, that is wrong. Silver-gelatin and silver-halid are just two names for the same traditional photo paper. Both Fuji and Kodak Alaris are producing traditional RA-4 silver-gelatin/silver-halide photo paper. And huge amounts of it: This market is far bigger (concerning the produced volume) than the film market. And parts of it are even increasing (RA-4 paper for photo books). Fuji is market leader here and has even introduced new papers, and has increased their R&D budget.
Both offer excellent papers for fine-art work. I know, because I am using these papers.



1. I have not made any provocative statement. I have just reported about the current market situation. This market situation is a fact. It is how it is. I've just given the link to the data.
If you think this situation is provocative, so well.....that is simply your feeling. I am not responsible for that.
2. I am an enthusiast photographer. I am also working semi-professionally. So I am affected by market developments.
3. These market developments will probably affect all of us or a majority of us sooner or later. Some in a negative way, some in a positive way.
Having an eye on it, being aware of it, making some preperations will certainly be a good idea.

I'm not sure you get what I said:

1. When I was talking about papers, I am talking about papers I can use in the darkroom with black and white film, neither Fuji or Kodak makes those nor will they. I said darkroom, not lightroom.

2. As weak as you may think Kodak is with film, they make the best out there, and yes, that includes the 150+ rolls of TMY2 I had them replace due to backing paper issues which are getting resolved. Nearly 30 years of pro use of Kodak films and that was the only issue I have ever seen with it and they dealt with it flawlessly. Fuji has very little to offer in black and white, Kodak and Ilford have MUCH more great film in that regard.

3. Just incase facts prove to be the demise of certain products, I have hedged my bets with a very large freezer filled with films I want to be able to rely on for years in terms of availability and pricing, it's insured for over 25K. I rotate stock on a regular basis and keep the companies who make these products in business.

4. I don't really care about your facts anymore because you beat people over the heads with them and no one likes that, even if they love film and possibly hate digital.

I'm done with this, there is a far more positive way to move the needle in the right direction that to play into the hands of someone who is constantly beating people over the heads with "facts".

 

[mani]

While I totally agree there's never going to be a return to film as a mass-market product, I'm encouraged to see it maintain and even increase its presence as a niche product. This makes me confident of being able to use film for the foreseeable future - with no worries either as to the availability of top-class cameras and labs locally (that have increased turnover massively over the last couple years - probably due to consolidation). But I'd be massively surprised if we see any new film cameras being mass-produced*.

In my opinion, the issue that Skiff is highlighting is really much more to do with how the collapse in camera sales is going to affect the hobby and semi-pro photography segment - the sort of people that hang around on RFF in other words - and simply what sort of equipment is gonna be generally available in the future.

Seems to me there's a lot of wishful thinking that everything's gonna coast along just fine, and that we're all gonna have innovative and exciting (and affordable) dedicated digital cameras in the future, and that the cameraphone revolution isn't really going to affect the higher end market - the sort of cameras this forum is about, for the most part.

In those terms it's irrelevant to point out that phones are 'also digital' - last I looked there wasn't a phone section on the forum, and I'm doubtful most of the members here would be satisfied pointing their phone at every chosen subject.

We'll have to wait and see - but as someone who switched from 100% digital to mostly film around six years ago, when people were generally saying that ‘film is dead’, it's gonna be interesting to watch which segment comes through the decade in better health.

* I can see some possibility of niche Kickstarter small-scale film camera production - the sort of thing that might include a body that could accept interchangeable lens mounts the way large-format cameras do, for instance.

 

[HHPhoto]

While I totally agree there's never going to be a return to film as a mass-market product, I'm encouraged to see it maintain and even increase its presence as a niche product. This makes me confident of being able to use film for the foreseeable future - with no worries either as to the availability of top-class cameras and labs locally (that have increased turnover massively over the last couple years - probably due to consolidation). But I'd be massively surprised if we see any new film cameras being mass-produced*.

The reality is: One film type is already again a mass market product: Fuji Instax instant film.
They sold about 5.5 million new cameras last year alone.
Is there a digital camera manufacturer like Nikon, Canon or Sony who has sold one of his models in such a volume?
No. Not one model was so successful.

Impossible has introduced their own first camera model just this spring.

And interestingly the whole "film is dead" crowd (also here in this forum) has told us for years that instant film will definitely be the first film type which will be killed by digital.
And now it is the film type which has got at first a very strong revival.

Cheers, Jan

 

[sepiareverb]

Just read this yesterday.

 

[jarski]

There is no one.

Yes that's why I asked when do we see first one? I got your point that never, but that's just opinion of one online armchair-CEO against another.

Am but surprised this old film vs digital debate has raised it's ugly head on RFF. Am also done this time, sure op starts another thread when next cipa results are published.

 

[Addy101]

I've written that the digital camera sales are collapsing.

Sigh. The CIPA numbers are about shipments, not sales.

Oh, don't take this all to personal. People disagree with you based on the same data - or maybe they didn't read the data - whatever, it isn't THAT important :angel:

 

[HHPhoto]

Am but surprised this old film vs digital debate has raised it's ugly head on RFF.

Yes, that is sad. But this debate was not raised by the original poster, but as always by the 'film is dead' group.
To quote the OP:
"Photographers who really care for photography will have the tools they need. Personally, I can comfortably live with all of these developments...🙂"

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

Sigh. The CIPA numbers are about shipments, not sales.

They are about production and shipments.
But that is all totally splitting hairs:
What is shipped and produced all was ordered by those who sell the stuff. So in the end: production = shipment = sales.

Cheers, Jan

 

[bobby_novatron]

I've heard that sales of the 'camera obscura' are booming. No sensor, no film! Just a pencil and paper! 🙂

 

[BillBingham2]

Sales of pencil sharpeners are up in the past week too.......

But then that could be the back to school rush.....

B2 (;->

 

[easyrider]

I think a lot of this is due to the maturity of the technology personally. My six year old D700 is a prime example .. aside from being 12 megapixel it's still as good as anything else I own.

I can say the same about my Nikon D300 and my walk around Canon S90.

 

[css9450]

Sales of pencil sharpeners are up in the past week too.......

Indeed!

I just ordered ten more rolls of Ilford XP2. I can see the headlines now: "Film sales way up for the year!"