Canon Forecast Falls Short of Expectations

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/technology/canon-forecast-falls-short-of-expectations.html?smid=li-share">Canon Forecast Falls Short of Expectations</a><br>

By REUTERS<br />Published: January 30, 2013<br /><br />TOKYO: Canon expects a 26.6 percent increase in operating profit this year as it cuts costs and increases revenue -- but the projection Wednesday still fell short of analysts’ expectations.<br>

Henry Posner<br /><strong>B&H Photo-Video</strong></p>

<p>Of course, they don't deliver. 5dMiii is a fail when compared to d800 (22mp vs 36).<br>

Canon N, it's also a fail when compared to Sony or Fuji.<br>

New new feature in the S line, compared to Samsung, Polaroid and Nikon new android camera<br>

no new faster and better lens, compared to Sony and Nikon.<br>

Canon sleep during the last 2 years, they have to wake up, or they will be the next Kodak.</p>

<p>Guess you didn't read the article.</p>

<p>Gee, it's certainly nice to have such an unbiased assessment as Denis's of Canon's latest products.~</p>

<p><em>..."increase in operating profit"...</em> by cutting costs. Same old <em>song & dance</em>. But how..? Moving manufacturing and service depts. to countries with lower labor costs..? I hope not. Not for them and not for me. Returned quite a bunch o'items from Sony the other day because the maker had shifted its C.S. to Asia. After talking to 2 of these reps. I threw in the towel. When I call, I do so because I need help and/or advice. They didn't have a clue, constantly apologizing. Canon still has knowledgeable HELP here in the US. But for how long..?</p>

<p>Hey Denis I assume you shoot Nikon or will soon be selling all of your Canon gear to buy some of those better products from Fuji or Polaroid.</p>

<p>Sorry I shoot with 5dMKII and have 5D has a backup, and have mostly every L lens.<br>

IRTFA, and FTFA : " Canon expects a 26.6 percent increase in operating profit this year as it cuts costs and increases revenue —<strong> but the projection</strong> Wednesday<strong> still fell shor</strong>t of analysts’ expectations." Emphasi it's from me.<br>

We See What We Want.<br>

In the camera market, Canon lost it this 2 last years. period.<br>

If you RTFA, you will see that Canon predict his good performence from : " Canon expects a 26.6 percent increase in operating profit this year as it cuts costs"<br>

You don't innovate when you cut development and research.<br>

When everyone is going more pixel, more, vintage look, more af, more lens, more "everyone need a camera better than a phone"... what canon give, small plastic camera without innovation. <br>

Where is the 200-400 f4, the Full Frame with 36 or 42 mp<br>

where is the contender of the Fuji x-pro-1 and the Sony NEX-7. Canon had 2 years to take the train, and they don't get it.<br>

They made a cheap M camera without nothing out-of-the-crowd, just a copy with less feature than any other camera maker doesn't. </p>

<p>Amazon lists its 10 top selling DLSRs and the top 4 are all Canon Rebels. So clearly success isn't tied to innovation or mega sized CMOS, but market hare and value. If Canon's success depended on sales of the tiny markets for 1DX or 5D3 class of cameras they'd be in deep sh!t, but their core market is all about Rebels, semiconductors, medical tech, office tech, etc.</p>

<p>Guess Dennis still didn't read the article.</p>

<p>Why should he let facts get in the way of his opinion?</p>

<p>This really has more to do with global currency fluctuations and Canon as a multi-faceted global company than it does about any specifics of Canon cameras and camera features (e.g., 22mp 5DIII versus 36mp of D800).</p>

<p>According to the Article currency fluctuations are only one issue. Falling compact camera sales, absence from mirror-less market, and European economy are also factors.</p>

<p>Don't go by the Amazon sales rank, a company the size of Canon, needs to be at the top of its game to maintain the momentum, specially with its stock price which already factored in strong growth. </p>

 

Not To mention Canon makes printers, binoculars, projectors, copiers, calculators etc. All that factors into the bottom

line.

<p>26.6% increase in profit doesn't sound bad to me. Who around here got a pay rise in that vicinity last year? I bet not many!</p>

<p>The problem to me appear to be unrealistic expectations by stockholders, and a shortsighted overemphasis on profits. It used to be a 5% return on investment was considered good, 10% was awesome. Give your stockholders that as their fair share, pay your employees decent wages, and invest any remaining money into the development of new products. That way you can sustain a healthy company for decades - maybe generations. By squeezing every last penny out of it, you can bankrupt even the healthiest business. Of course if selling patents, trademarks and other offal means good profits for shareholders, butchering any company is fair game these days. Just my 2c.</p>

<p>Who really cares anyway. The entry and mid range market is where the profit is and Canon, like Nikon will be good in some areas and not so good in others.<br>

Some of the comments are interesting. Where is the bleating about why Fuji has not produced a full frame DSLR? It cuts both ways. It is impossible for a camera company to excel in all sectors. And don't forget that Canon is a printer/copier company, with cameras as just a division. Nikon, Olympus and Leica are scientific and industrial imaging companies where cameras have a bigger chunk but its not as big as the other divisions.<br>

Everyone wants the latest and greatest for less money. Personally, and having been with Canon and Nikon all my life, my prediction is that Panasonic and Sony will be the new kids on the block in the next couple of years. They have the revenue and innovation factor in their favour. I do think that the days of the consumer DLSR's are numbered. The $400-$900 sector is getting very cluttered and there are some great new entrants, like Fuji.<br>

But its all exciting so my only advice is for non professionals to limit their collection of big fat AFS zoom lenses because the small lenses that are coming from Sony and Olympus are exquisite and really well made.</p>

 

<p>While it appears Dennis may not have read the article I have to agree that Cannon seems to have entered a phase where they are not pushing the envelope. At least in cameras - obviously cameras are only part of their business. In general companies can take high profits due to business momentum but in the end lack of innovation does catch up with them. We saw this over the last few years with Nikon where Canon moved to a position of leadership with the EOS mount, aggressive entry into the DSLR market (e.g. first DSLR under $1000 when the Rebel was launched) and the construction of lower cost full frame bodies (the 5D series). <br>

Unfortunately I think they have entered a phase where they are consolidating previous gains rather than continuing to evolve their products. Most of there recent launches have been rather evolutionary (5DIII, 6D, G1X) or uninspired (EOS-M). In the lens category they seem to have focused on adding IS to primes (I assume for video use) while increasing the price about 3x. Hopefully this is just a temporary blip and they will return to form shortly. In the past the Rebel, the 5D, the 5DII and the 7D all defined a new price / performance threshold than Nikon and others had to follow. Of late my sense is that (for DSLRs at least) Nikon has been defining price performance (5200,800 etc...). Similarly in the non DSLR category Sony and Panasonic appear to be more innovative.</p>

<p>I must be the odd one around here, because I really like the way that Canon is going with the EOS system. For example, regarding the 5DMKIII, of course it's evolutionary, as the 5DMKII was a truly great camera. So the MKIII went up a notch, borrowing some of the goodness from the 1DX (AF and build quality).<br>

The 6D is the perfect EOS full frame for people more on a budget (like me, I bought one), and that only want a camera that may be simpler, but what it does, it does very well. Want innovation? How about GPS and Wifi?<br>

The G1X was a revolution: a truly large sensor compact with a fixed zoom lens, the first of its class.<br>

As for the EOS M, again, I seem to be the odd one out, for it is simply superb for travel and documentary photography, with the little 22mm lens. Have you guys actually used the thing? Set in Av mode, place the AF point where you want it with your finger, and shoot. Couildn´t be simpler. I bought one too.<br>

Lenses? Canon now has the most useful and high quality set up of wide angle prime lenses that they ever had. 24, 28, and 35mm primes with IS, all with very good image quality. Again, that is innovation in my book. They now have probably the best 24-70 zoom ever; don't take my word for it, go and read reputable reviews such as the one from Chasseur D'Images (they say is the best zoom they ever tested). They have updated the bread and butter zoom trio of professional photographers: 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 all f/2.8. They have the best T/S lenses; I could go on...<br>

So, after all this, we still complain?</p>

<p>I still believe they should have released a 1DS MKIV to be their top of the line. Or release a 1D MKV and a 1DS MKV pair as they did in the past. This would allow a better choice for studio and sports photographers. To me this is where Canon had Nikon beat. No longer.</p>

<p>Sony may be "innovators" but the company is in poor shape - they are scrabbling for market in a cut throat business. At least Canon is nicely solvent - as others have said that is pretty good in today's business environment.</p>

<p>Wow. Curious reactions here to a tiny bit of stock market news.</p>

<p>Don't mix up stock market expectations with real world performance. Projecting a 26+% increase in profits is stout performance in almost any market. Also keep in mind that Canon is a leader in all types of imaging, particularly printing, and not just photos, but business printing. They've kicked Kodak and Xerox into the weeds with continuous improvement of their products and serving diverse markets.</p>

<p>Nikon is a fine company in its own right, but Canon is a juggernaut in its sector of world markets. Looking at one small sector of a very broad product base is a sure way to make poor stock buying decisions.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Don't mix up stock market expectations with real world performance.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Exactly. But don't mix up forums and actually reading.</p>

To be clear they are projecting a 26.6% operating income growth and 9.5% revenue growth BUT delivered a 14.3%

Operating income growth and 2.2% revenue growth. The imaging systems division grew revenue by 7.2% but operating

income by only 0.5%. For reference Nikon grew 17.2% revenue (year on year) in their imaging products division.

<p>Nikon is growing on a lower baseline.</p>

<p>What do you expect, the prices for Canon lenses went up so much in the past copuple of years that allot of buyers were plain scared-off or dissapointed. Plus their lens line-up was mired in cut-costing /cutting corners measures that it eventually turned alot of people off.<br>

The 5D III was not as popular as people expected with a wopping price of $3500 and the 7D never reached the popularity level of the 5D classic or the 5D II. Sometimes in business you got to give inorder to get. Loyalty cuts both ways...</p>

<p>If you google 2012 DSLR sales you will find that sales continue to be strong for both Canon and Nikon, and one of the sites quotes a significant increase in Canon DSLR sales. The OP's article discusses currency fluctations and a nascent mirrorless market as potential reasons Canon didn't hit their targets, but attributing a decline to personal annoyance with a high-end, low-volume model is a little bit opportunistic, and likely quite irrelevant.</p>