Interchangeable Lens Camera sales are declining

<p>A column just posted by Thom Hogen:</p>

<p>http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/how-bad-is-it.html</p>

<p>His last two sentences: "The question is this: what breaks the on-going decline? Nothing so far. Nothing currently foreseeable."</p>

<p>(The decline is true of both DSLRs and mirrorless.)</p>

<p>The fun part, probably all opinion, as I don't know of any facts, is WHY. Phones are part of it, of course, but I'd guess that's not the entire explanation.</p>

Of course phone cameras is a contributing factor. Also DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are so good that people don't

need to upgrade that often any more. They are far more mature as products compared to the way they were 5, 10 years

ago.

<p>This kind of info used to be called crepe hanging. Coincidentally, sorting stuff to toss and donate in the box room / junk room, I came across Destination Nikon Full Line Product Guide Volume 5, 1999. You had to go to page 88 of 118 before you got to the first of two digital cameras -- each with a smoking 2.1 MP. The Digital section ended on page 94 -- six pages. Things come and go, but photography and photographers manage!</p>

<p>I blame two other things. NO more local camera stores and older digital cameras having next to no trade-in value. My beautiful Nikon D300 is worth about eighty bucks! I recently needed a Domke strap and had to order it from B&H. </p>

<p>Looking at those figures, I would exclude mirrorless from the drastic fall of DSLRs. Apart from a 10 or 15% stronger year in 2012, sales of mirrorless have been pretty constant in the succeeding 4 years, despite cellphone inroads. Mirrorless, a more recent trend (if we exclude Leica) than the DSLR, is still gaining adepts day be day. The Sony FF line, for instance, has received many new optics from in-house and Zeiss over the past year or so. I would put my money on them in the coming years. More advanced photographers still need the highest quality possible and cellphones are not there and may well not be in the foreseeable future.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking at those figures, I would exclude mirrorless from the drastic fall of DSLRs. Apart from a 10 or 15% stronger year in 2012, sales of mirrorless have been pretty constant in the succeeding 4 years, despite cellphone inroads.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

According to the numbers in the article, mirrorless dropped 11.4% from 2015 to 2016. How is that "constant sales?"</p>

<p>The cell phone is the King these days. </p>

<p>I think there used to be a LOT of people who got a dSLR because those were the good cameras, not because they needed them in particular. These were the people I'd see wandering around with just the kit zoom. As the better smartphone cameras have increasingly gotten passable in more and more use cases I think those people are probably no longer buying separate cameras period.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>mirrorless dropped 11.4% from 2015 to 2016. How is that "constant sales?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Taking figures from one year to the next is not completely representative and simply shows shorter term blips. However, From 2013 to 2016 the figures vary much less about a "pretty constant" mean value (and certainly compared to the great variations in the similar period DSLR figures). <br /> <br>

What is more important in the data shown is the very much more significant variation and drastic fall in DSLR sales. Those figures are more revealing, unless the source of the data is somehow flawed.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The cell phone is the King these days<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Different tools for different needs....<br>

<br>

And a purchase of a versatile and more complex DSLR was overkill for the need of some persons, until the cellphone more closely responded to that less extended need.<br>

</p>

<p>Cell phones, more specifically smart phones, are a potent destructive technology. They're not only contributing to the decline in interchangeable lens camera sales but are playing a big role in the decline in PC and tablet sales worldwide. Times are a changin'. To me, quick, easy and affordable seem to be the things younger people look for in technology. My sons both consider cameras unnecessary. And while they might work on PCs on the job, they don't have desktops waiting for them at home as I've always had. They just don't see the need. All thanks to the smart phone. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are so good that people don't need to upgrade that often any more.</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>I think there used to be a LOT of people who got a dSLR because those were the good cameras, not because they needed them in particular. These were the people I'd see wandering around with just the kit zoom.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Based on my admittedly rather limited observations, I think both of these factors are contributing factors in the decline of DSLR sales. I still see a lot of people using DSLR's, but they're the <em>same </em>DSLR's they've been using for years, still equipped with the same original kit lenses. And the fact that most of these people will eventually replace their DSLR's with smart phones suggests that the interchangeable lens camera is more than sufficient for their needs.</p>

<p>On the other hand, there are people such as myself who regularly interchange their lenses and use more of their camera's features, but just don't feel the need to upgrade all that often. I've been using a Canon 5DII since it was released years ago, as well as a contemporaneous 7D, and have only felt a tinge of an urge to "upgrade" now that Canon has (finally) improved the low ISO DR of their sensors. But will I upgrade? Certainly not anytime soon, since the new EOS bodies are so dearly priced. So my satisfaction with my older bodies is contributing to the declining sales of new bodies.</p>

<p>I have 2 Dslr. A Canon and a Sony. I have 2 point and shoots. Fuji X10 and X20. Which do I lug around my aging neck?</p>

<p>I would agree that DSLRs and mirrorless appear to have plateau-ed in features and image quality in the past few years, so a lot of us will think twice about trading up to the latest greatest.<br>

I admit I traded up this year, selling my trusty Panny GF1 and buying a GX7. I noticed this had been on the market 3 years when I bought it, but I did not consider it to be out of date.<br>

So I've done my bit to keep the market afloat, but if the Panasonic executives are watching me they're probably not exactly cheering.</p>

<p>As others say, I am not surprised, there is truly little need to buy a new camera now. I also think that cameras and photography experienced a shot in the arm when digital imaging arrived, but for many early adopters and other techy-folk, the novelty has begun to wear off, and they have moved onto to other things ("life experiences" I am told). The growth was clearly unsustainable. I predict it will decline further, much as Hi-Fi/audiophilia died down in the 1980s. The interesting thing to me is what this will mean for pricing. Up or down?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Cell phones, more specifically smart phones, are a potent destructive technology. They're not only contributing to the decline in interchangeable lens camera sales but are playing a big role in the decline in PC and tablet sales worldwide. Times are a changin'. To me, quick, easy and affordable seem to be the things younger people look for in technology. My sons both consider cameras unnecessary. And while they might work on PCs on the job, they don't have desktops waiting for them at home as I've always had. They just don't see the need. All thanks to the smart phone.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree with all of that. Young people for the most part are happy with the cell phone. It's handy, everyone is holding one and you can take photos without complaint in almost any situation. It also replaces as you said many of the other gadgets.</p>

<p>Myself I shoot 35mm. I went back after losing interest with digital. I am not going to purhcase another digital camera of any type. Except the cell phone of course. </p>

<p>The mostly lacking or at best challenged ability among DSLRs and MILCs to share photos was a huge brake on sales as smartphones' imaging capabilities improved in the period covered. Camera systems( along with computers, software, storage) aren't cheap and seem a money pit to many who don't seem to mind what an iPhone actually costs on many current plans. With so few actually printing files--regardless of capture means--older digital cameras just aren't worth upgrading to owners other than photographers who fear dying in their sleep not owning Nikon/Canon's latest. Why "upgrade" a working D300 when the pleasing jpgs it produces suffice for online posting?</p>

<p>Because the D300 is way to heavy these days.</p>

<p>That's a good news!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The growth [in digital camera sales] was clearly unsustainable. I predict it will decline further, much as Hi-Fi/audiophilia died down in the 1980s.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Having just spent a small fortune on upgrading my stereo, it hasn't died down for me. Call it the Audiophile Blues. :-(</p>

<p>A dream of the amateur photographer is the potential to make money with their DSLR. Unfortunately, earning significant money from stock sales and selling prints is getting extremely difficult. There is simply too much supply. Even talented professionals now give travel and photo tours and classes in order to enhance their income from photography. Making money from photography has become really hard work and without the carrot to attract potential serious amateur DSLR buyers, DSLR sales will continue to drop. </p>

<p>I think that C Watson has the most pertinent point--my wife needs photographs of the flame worked glass pieces that she makes, which I do for her catalogs and images intended for large prints, etc., but sometimes she needs a quick image to send to a client and for that she uses her iPad. I have offered to let her have one of my older DSLRs with a lens for improved results, but the iPad allows her to instantly e-mail the picture and convenience wins out, despite the quality limitations of the iPad for extreme closeups of small objects.</p>

<p>I'm a freelance wedding photographer, working for a few different studios during high season May to October. I work a full time job so shooting weddings is my "side hustle" and I do love it. Over the past years though, it's been quite obvious that, if I go by wedding guests preferences, the cell phone camera is by and large the camera of choice for most people these days. The decline in camera sales should come as no surprise to any photographer. Even for me, I'm not upgrading my Canons until one of them gives up the ghost.<br>

<br />I tell the shooters I work with that the pictures we produce for all the B&G's we shoot MUST be really, really, really good, or else eventually, weddings will be shot with cell phone cameras as well. The dSLR's days are probably numbered anyway, the only guys left using them with be professional sports photographers. When I go on vacation, I only bring a 35mm Canon film camera and a 24mm and 50mm lens. I use my iPhone for a majority of my casual shots. </p>

 

Phones are really as you say, a big part of it. If one's goal is to just send a photo on the net, a quickie with a phone is all the stuff one needs. As a percentage of the population, the likes of us who enjoy the art and craft of photography writ large is a small percentage of the crowd. But still enough to keep the fires warm for a good many years. How about those glasses with little video cameras that film your life as it happens? And here we still craftsmen hobbyists saying ' I have not interest in video.' A shift is coming. Not all towards the more refined approach. It is a utility more and more. A carry cam as a toaster oven.

<blockquote>

<p>Taking figures from one year to the next is not completely representative and simply shows shorter term blips. However, From 2013 to 2016 the figures vary much less about a "pretty constant" mean value (and certainly compared to the great variations in the similar period DSLR figures).</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> Terrible misuse of statistics here. Check out the graph of mirrorless year over year sales (percentage.) One could easily interpret the one year of growth as the aberration. </p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>A dream of the amateur photographer is the potential to make money with their DSLR.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Being an amateur I don't want to make money from photography. That's the meaning of an amateur. Being an amateur doesn't mean one do not create as good work as a professional it's only because the amateur does it for the love of it and the pro does it for the money.</p>