Nikon 70-200 f4: one of the last advantages Canon had

Canon has been bleeding money (stock wise) and market share for the last few years. What's new?

Interesting info from all. I have been a canon user since 1982, and have never looked at Nikon. For a while, the AF system in the Canon was always above the Nikon system (pre-digital, of course). Now, it seems everyone is more concerned with higher MP than total quality of the equipment, as well as affordability. I am shocked at the amount of money it has taken to get good quality gear (even used), when in the old film days my A2 and assorted lenses were just fine for the weddings and other photography i did. I cannot believe that we all have decided that the new lens at $1,000 more than the old one is actually justified. If this had occurred back when i was first starting out in my career, i would not have even benn able to really consider photography at all! Just my 2 cents.

dmead516 wrote in post #15179356
Interesting info from all. I have been a canon user since 1982, and have never looked at Nikon. For a while, the AF system in the Canon was always above the Nikon system (pre-digital, of course). Now, it seems everyone is more concerned with higher MP than total quality of the equipment, as well as affordability. I am shocked at the amount of money it has taken to get good quality gear (even used), when in the old film days my A2 and assorted lenses were just fine for the weddings and other photography i did. I cannot believe that we all have decided that the new lens at $1,000 more than the old one is actually justified. If this had occurred back when i was first starting out in my career, i would not have even benn able to really consider photography at all! Just my 2 cents.

I am as shocked as you are. I do not want to offend anyone, but I think it is more the trend in Northern America. Everything Apple is going to produce people will anyway purchase and will justify paying premium. Same with gear and everything else. Not sure why.

light_pilgrim wrote in post #15179450
I am as shocked as you are. I do not want to offend anyone, but I think it is more the trend in Northern America. Everything Apple is going to produce people will anyway purchase and will justify paying premium. Same with gear and everything else. Not sure why.

It's probably related to the divergence in incomes over the past 40 years. The top and bottom quintiles of income in the US are ever further apart.

For a company like Canon or Nikon, this presents an opportunity. The top ten percent (Americans making over $140,000 as of 2011) have more money than ever and now you can convince photo enthusiast hobbiests in this group to purchase equipment than only 20 years ago would be strictly within the realm of professionals who needed the gear for their jobs. There are a number of well off people who can simply afford it.

You might think the top ten percent of households represents too small of a market, but for items like a 1DX, 5D3, 200-400/4 IS etc. This is a much bigger opportunity market than the now Dodo-like professional photographer market.

JeffreyG wrote in post #15179578
It's probably related to the divergence in incomes over the past 40 years. The top and bottom quintiles of income in the US are ever further apart.

For a company like Canon or Nikon, this presents an opportunity. The top ten percent (Americans making over $109,000 as of 2011) have more money than ever and now you can convince photo enthusiast hobbiests in this group to purchase equipment than only 20 years ago would be strictly within the realm of professionals who needed the gear for their jobs. There are a number of well off people who can simply afford it.

You might think the top ten percent of households represents too small of a market, but for items like a 1DX, 5D3, 200-400/4 IS etc. This is a much bigger opportunity market than the now Dodo-like professional photographer market.

OK, but let's talk. if you make 109.000 USD per year, it means 9000 USD per month. Would you still buy a 10.000 worth gear?

light_pilgrim wrote in post #15179754
OK, but let's talk. if you make 109.000 USD per year, it means 9000 USD per month. Would you still buy a 10.000 worth gear?

I have accumulated well over that much gear over approximately a seven year period. And I am pretty much strictly an enthusiast, so yes. Note that to have a $10000 to $20000 kit does not require one to lay out that much all at once. But you are going to have to spend $2000 to $4000 a year, depending on how prone you are to 'upgrading' every time something shiny and new comes along.

But I do think you are grasping what I mean. Let's look at this from the viewpoint of two hypothetical households. Both consist of a married couple with two children.

The median household income in 2011 was about 50,000 per year. By the time this household has covered food, insurance, transportation, shelter, clothing, utilities etc. they only have so much left. Unless they are willing to skip saving for retirement and their childrens education, the idea of spending $2000+ per year (4% of their gross income) on a hobby probably seems ludicrous. This couple looks at high end cameras and lenses and thinks "Who the heck buys this stuff, anyways?"

But now jump to that hypothetical top 10% household at $140,000. This household can own everything that the first one does, and still have $90,000 left for whatever else they desire. This could be a nicer car, a bigger house, a better funded retirement or a nice camera. And they will probably spend the money on all of those things. How much does $2000 per year in camera stuff look like against $90,000 in 'fun' money.

Obviously this is simplified, but these statistical groups do exist. For the median household high end camera gear has become ever further out of reach (it was never really in reach). For the top ten percent, the high end stuff actually is more affordable every year because the top ten percent are seeing their incomes rise at a much faster clip than the median.

I think this phenomenon is where Canon (and Nikon etc) are finding a way to sell a lot more high end gear than they used to. They used to mostly sell it to professionals and really, really dedicated enthusiasts. I look around the youth soccer field these days and I can tell you that they sell a lot of really expensive gear to well-heeled enthusiasts.

Basically, if you are selling Rebels and Timex watches then you need to hold prices flat or lose market share. If you are selling 1DX bodies and Rolex's, then you can and should be raising prices.

edit - sorry to have changed the 90th percentile number, but I feel the $140k number is a better representation as it includes all 'households' as reported by the IRS.

It doesn`t make any sense to negate the strong yen issue: every single piece of Canon kit I have is made in Japan (unlike Toyota, or Nikon). So Canon can only cut their profits or raise their prices globally to maintain their overheads.

Great points of view here otherwise.