Is Canon taking a leadership position?

[shaan_c]

Looking at the new digital cameras released by Canon, it looks as

though they are taking a very interesting approach.

 

Canon seems to have categorised digital camera users in 5 segments:

 

1. Point and Shoot Photographers - where do I press to take the photo?

 

2. Point and Shoot with flexibility (limited manual controls) and

some high end features (long zoom)

 

3. Prosumers

 

4. Professionals

 

5. "Specification Buyers" - this is the "my camera has more features

than yours / my camera has 0.3 megapixel more than yours / my LCD is

0.2 inch bigger than yours / my LCD has 10,000 more pixels than

yours" group

 

Canon seems to be saying to buyers:

 

1. If you are in Segment 1 - buy the Ixus range / The Powershot A

range

 

2. If you are in Segment 2 - buy the Powershot S range

 

(There are models that lie in between the two segments to bridge the

aspirational gap - like the A 620)

 

3. If you are a prosumer - buy the entry level Dital SLRs

 

4. If you are a Pro - buy the top-end digital SLRs

 

(Again there are models like 5D to bridge the overlap between these

two segments)

 

5. As for Segment 5 - Canon's message to the customers seem to be -

if you want megapixels or numbers rather than picture quality, then

go somewhere else.

 

Canon seems to have done what a leader can afford to do - taken some

first steps in educating the market and to make some corrections -

best example of that is taking a stand on the Megapixel War and

refusing to go above 6 MP for Consumer P&S cameras.

 

What do others think?

[leslie_cheung]

I think you worry too much about categories. Get what you need and go...

[leslie_cheung]

Unless you are a canon rep surveying online forums. In this case, I apologize and suggest you get a R&D team on a digital RF in either M/SM mount. Make sure the cam is semi affordable i.e. south of 2k. and 1.3 crop would be great. That way not only will canon dominate the dslr market but also the DRF market as well:D

[shaan_c]

Leslie,

 

I wish I did (work for Canon).

 

No, I am simply someone interested in Photography and in my day job I have interests in marketing/strategy.

 

I have to ask, what is DRF?

 

Rgds

[leslie_cheung]

DRF = Digital Rangefinder

 

Canon is doing great market wise though I tend to find their ergonomic less than nikon. If money doesn't matter, I would shoot a 5d and a d200 combo. Good luck with your thread, I'm sure someone else will post here...I'm just not too interested in marketing.

[jcuknz]

I think it is sad that you omit the class of camera that some people call pro-sumers. ie quality cameras with superior lens to entry level DSLRs fitted with kit lens, with features only included in one late model DSLR which make them generally superior to basic DSLRs and affordable. Many are used by professionals as a relief from lugging around bags of heavy cameras and glass, or becuase they are superior to the DSLR. Even as a non-commercial photographer I know which bag I want to carry around.

 

There is room for improvement, such as organising manual focusing system which is finding a sharp image instead of judging between blurr and more blurr due to lack of resolution, and the sensor size needs to increase, or else have improvements to permit higher ISO use.

 

Altogether they are the best bang for your buck unless you really NEED what a DSLR offers you in the two features mentioned. Also if, as a pro, you are going to thrash your gear. The cheaper camera also means you can update more often, without trading in the old, so giving you back-up.

[GerrySiegel]

Before I shop for my next camera, I will also check the price earnings ratio of the manufacturer, assess their leadership strategy and stuff... Can you brief that category jazz down for us,Ace. Guess I was nodding off after Cat 2... How about the little guys,the innovators who dont get no respect,(like Vice Presidents,a bucket of warm spit and stuff.) The innovative fanatics who just leap over your alleged categories and smoosh them together. Don't answer. Canon was not always THE leader you know, and was once pretty respectable and even staid. Although the Canonet was a hot seller even then but had many competitors. True.

[afx]

Who cares?<p>

 

cheers<br>

afx

[ronald_smith2]

It's all about profit, plain and simple.

 

I am somewhat grieved there appears to be no direct replacement for the aging G6/Pro 1 models, cams which truly epitomized the prosumer market. Perhpas Canon simply could not top them, and that would be fair enough. I don't like the idea of a smaller/noisier sensor but many who use these cams won't be making big blow-ups so the 6 MP limit is ideal.

 

Let's face it, the *real* money is to be made off of DSLR's, and Canon are putting more efforts into that avenue. Typical compacts yield hardly any extras in sales and profits, so I can see why Canon turns them over almost every few months.

 

I will certainly more fully appreciate my G6 as it was the last of the great compacts that Canon made.

[GerrySiegel]

If Canon is the hot enchilada that Shaan is proposing,how come Sony is making headlines and garnering good reviews at that with their way too pricey and sure hard to categorize new RD model? It is a question of what the consumer feels is "cool." Today at the Bishop Museum I saw a young lady using a cel phone camera that was faster than my P and S to use. So what segment is that,Sean, and will it grow despite what you describe as "Megapixel War" That was last year's war. Now this year it may be convergence of media/ handheld devices/ games and other things. (My wife's IPAQ can be made into a multidevice remote I just noticed for about 20.00 program, and also a GPS for quite a bit more..I just find it tricky to nail the jello down,hope you analysts do better.)

[scott_eaton]

Too bad Canon is dumping all their R&D into cameras when they should be spending some of it on lenses.

[KenPapai]

Scott, what you say is incorrect. Canon spends a definite certain percentage of their R&D money on their lenses. What makes you say they spend no money on lens development? You sound like a person with no numbers or mathematical sense (a print journalist).

 

With a world icon you ought to know better, or not speak in such an overarching manner (because some newbs might take what you write as fact or insightful).

[peter_nelson1]

<I>Before I shop for my next camera, I will also check the price earnings ratio of the manufacturer, assess their leadership strategy and stuff... </I><P>

 

You joke but when I buy a DSLR I <B>definitely</B> check the company's financials and any news I could get about how well they were doing in the market. Buying a DSLR means buying into a <B>SYSTEM</B> and spending pots of money, so the last thing you want to have happen is for the company to sink beneath the waves or close their camera division right after you made that investment.<P>

 

Right now Canon and Nikon are the only two DSLR makers that I'm confident are committed to the serious side of the market for the longer term. And Nikon has some decisions to make: they are phasing out the film cameras but the majority of their lenses are still non-DX lenses and there's no indication they are planning a FF DSLR so that picture is still a bit out-of-focus.

[GerrySiegel]

Peter, if serious equals doing it for a living,sure, I totally and completely agree with your caution. (There was a time when one could say something like "I got a good Folmer-Graphic with a Schneider lens," and then not be concerned that it would get merged with a sewing machine company (Singer) which would then drop its photo line. I know,there is some crazy still shooting with a Speed Graphic,but still.)<p>Buying photo gear and especially lenses sometimes seems like playing the slots and trying to beat the house.Not really,but you know what I am saying. Well, one always has to be careful when spending real money. Canon has done some great stuff, and has earned my admiration (and money at times) with goodies like eye control focus, mass production aspherics. But there are other players, is all. Segments and stuff actually don't translate into anything I can see. But it gave a talking point for a discussion on the crazy and fascinating mishmash of products being tossed out these days. And the running to the "castle keep" when companies fall, and companies merge. And newer players like Samsung challenge the established ones.

[andrew robertson]

Have you been living in a cave since 1990?

 

Canon took and ran away with the leadership position. This isn't surprising - Canon is an

enormous company, larger than its competitors combined.

[GerrySiegel]

In point of fact, Canon was the biggest seller of consumer cameras way back into the 70s before it introduced, belatedly it was said, a full line SLR pro system with their F-1,my first real system splurge. So who is arguing that point ( i.e. that big counts in opportunity to innovate I mean-- but not to exclusion of others,eg the first Maxxum in '86 or so),noone around here. (We are further apprised that Canon's office equipment and optometric devices aint so bad either and help the financials.)Since we all agree and see no points of revealing discussion on the table ,we leave this one,still comrades. Bye.

[shaan_c]

Oh no, I posted a simple message trying to share my thoughts about what Canon seems to have done with the latest changes in their Digital Camera Portfolio - I did not intend to hurt anyone's emotions.

 

I am not trying to say that Canon is great or what they are doing is great or for that matter they are the market leaders or they deserve the leadership position (they do lead the market, regardless of what I write or don't).

 

Looking at their recent changes, I was intrigued and was trying to figure out where their thinking is headed. That's all.

 

Note to self - Do not post messages in a language that is not your primary language. You could be misunderstood.

 

Now to agree with some of the post above:

 

Yes many companies make "sexy" cameras and I am sure there will be an iPod or "wePod" in not so distant future, that will take photos, automatically edit them using Photoshop while cooking dinner for 20 people.

 

I have a suspicion that serious photographers will still carry their cameras and lenses.

 

Yes, my teenager daughter will buy a camera based on how big and how bright the LCD is or whether it has at least 20 MP resolution or whether it offers "DSLR features" at Copnsumer level prices. And yes, she will probably buy a camera made by one of the companies that cannot even dream of having a Digital SLR line because they have to get their lenses from others.

 

Yes Canon will lose some of these customers but probably they hope that there will be others who will value the quality of the picture more than the size of the LCD?

[shaan_c]

Have you been living in a cave since 1990?

Canon took and ran away with the leadership position. This isn't surprising - Canon is an enormous company, larger than its competitors combined.

 

There is a difference between being a market leader and behaving as a Leader.

 

Companies take Leadership Position when they use their market position to redefine the rules of the game, even if that means going against the tide.

 

Launching a new Digital Camera with 10 megapixel resolution, 4 inch LCD screen, IS, 28 -500 Zoom, records RAW and selling it for 350 USD would be trying to keep up with other companies.

 

Refusing to be part of the game and taking a stand that says optics and picture quality are more important than being one-up on features and specs is called leading the market.

[mark u]

Canon's recent announcements suggest that they are beating a strategic retreat from several sectors of the digital camera market - possibly in anticipation of severe price competition. There is nothing compelling about going back to using tinier 1/2.5" sensors in P&S cameras whose predecessors had 1/1.8" sensors - this is purely designing down to a price point. The lack of any new more serious digicam to replace the G6 and Pro 1 is also a retreat. I think the new 30D has also been designed down to a price in anticipation of competition - no new sensor saves having to amortise R&D, camera internals redesign seems to be mostly about cost saving, etc.

 

These may be smart business moves, in that it is designed to avoid lossmaking business in overly competitve market segments. However, I don't think you can call that leadership. The technical leadership in those market segments clearly belongs to others - e.g. Fuji for using larger sensors and placing importance on good high ISO performance in digicams rather than megapixels, Panasonic for large zoom ratio digicams (a sector they virtually invented)... It remains to be seen who the business leaders will turn out to be in those sectors (i.e. whether others will emulate them, whether they can set a profitable price). Canon has certainly opened a door to allow some competitors to make money in the segments they have downplayed/withdrawn from.

[leicaglow]

I wouldn't be so sure about putting all your eggs in the Canon basket. A recent article said Nikon quadrupled their sales revenue over last year through digital sales. They're running pretty strong from what I hear from my industry friends, I just think they haven't articulated their vision very well lately. Maybe there's too much money involved to worry about that.

[andrew robertson]

"Companies take Leadership Position when they use their market position to redefine the

rules of the game, even if that means going against the tide."

 

Canon has consistently been an innovator, forcing others to either follow or get out of the

way. Fluorite elements, replica aspherical technology, DO lenses, IS in photographic

lenses, USM, fully electronic non-mechanical mount technology, affordable DSLRs, and

their willingness to deploy these technologies in both their high end and consumer

products made Canon what it is today. Canon may not be concentrating as much on P&S

digicams, but I think that digicams are nearing a sort of market saturation - most of the

folks who want one already have one, and the only people who really care about higher

resolution and high ISO performance make up a small enough share of the market that

they are nearly irrelevant. Canon said last year that their DSLRs made most of their digital

camera profits, despite the small volume compared to digicams.

 

I do think the market is ripe for somebody to release the equivalent of the Rollei 35 - all

manual, all metal, with a big sensor, but this kind of camera will be expensive and

relatively low volume, making it more of a prestige product than a bread and butter profit

machine for the company that will (hopefully) make it. Sorry, the Ricoh GR Digital just

doesn't cut it, but it's close.