Canon Says the Camera Market Is Looking Up, Shares Plan for DSLRs

Canon Says the Camera Market Is Looking Up, Shares Plan for DSLRs

It's no secret that the smartphone has decimated the camera industry for the past decade, but according to Canon, the market may have finally bottomed out, and there might now be reason to look up. It turns out even DSLRs aren't dead just yet. 

Canon recently released their Q2 2022 financial report, and in it, there appears to be some good news. In the report, the company says that the overall camera market has:

...largely bottomed out at its current size. Going forward, we expect the professional and advanced amateur segment to expand further and that products will become more highly developed. Accordingly, we expect the overall market to grow from now on.

This is certainly excellent news, as demand has been on a long and often steep decline, and some have worried that it would hit so low a level as to fundamentally reshape the industry. While smartphones have reached quite advanced levels, it seems that Canon sees them as a gateway to more advanced equipment for many users. Other brands have shown similar thoughts in the last few years, as we have seen an increasing number of lower-level products focused on integrating social media features and increasing the ease of creating ready-to-post content. 

Furthermore, Canon says they will continue to supply DSLRs as long as demand exists. It's important to distinguish this from saying that new DSLRs will be developed and released. I would be extraordinarily surprised to see a new DSLR from the company, but many pros continue to use cameras like the 1D X Mark III, and I suspect demand for such cameras will remain relatively high for at least a few more years. 

Log in or register to post comments
12 Comments
Benoit .'s picture

Could be that phones have reached the top. I mean their only big selling point is the camera part because apps don't care (Shingles either by the way) but for $1200, according to the manufacturers, you get a top of the line made to last max 24 month if that much. After that they tell you that that thing is trash and basically retarded so go get a new one. That’s not an investment and after 4 years you see the entire phone starting to slowdown, do weird things and of course, no more software upgrade because that 48 month item is viewed as prehistorical tool you would use in a cave. Always the client’s fault, so pay and you’ll be cool and feel cool. How superficial!
On the other end, the fall to pre-degital sales numbers of camera has made the manufacturers invest more and make jumps in increments they didn’t have to, therefore didn’t, when the cash was coming like gold running out like a stream you couldn’t stop flowing.
Kind of weird that Canon talks about DSLR as a present thing, but I know there is a bunch of us they haven’t reached yet so I don’t see their ML masterplan being as big as a success as some think it is.

Timothy Linn's picture

Not sure what you're trying to say here. If you're arguing that people don't need to replace their smartphones on a two year cycle, I certainly agree. My 5 year old iPhone X still works exceptionally well. The 7 year old iPhone 6S still runs Apple's most recent iOS. My mother is using my 8 year old iPhone 6 Plus and, with a new battery, has no complaints other than wishing the camera was better.

That said, there is no question that advancements in hardware are happening quickly enough that older phones can't take advantage of many of the newest features. For creators, replacing a phone more often that is used for content creation (and not just a tool for running apps) probably makes some sense.

Most people that approach Canon's latest mirrorless bodies with an open mind will find the experience a step up from a DSLR. The shooting experience is generally much better. AF is impressive. The new RF glass is a step up. But the question of whether the improvement is worth the cost of upgrading is a harder one. To this point though, it is hard to argue that the move to mirrorless hasn't been a financial success for Canon.

Benoit .'s picture

I don't know what you mean by approaching mirrorless with an open mind. It's Canon that hasn't delivered yet due to blind sided focus on video. And it's an oops! Oh you bought an R5 for video, well, guess what we have the new one that actually works. Reminds you of the 24month phone life cycle expectation of the phone industry? Not that it was planned that way, but if you are in the market for a still camera you have to wonder what they are doing and you keep the cash in the bank. Their stupid mistake was to make a small sensor on the R6 and overlook the heat issue on the R5 at once. People are ready to buy mirrorless that's not the issue, but I can't say that I would trust Canon right now, otherwise I would have two R6 with a larger sensor and a bunch of new lenses.

David Pavlich's picture

Just bought an R5 for stills and would highly recommend it. I shoot no video, so that's a meh. The best part is that the third party lenses I have that worked well with my 5DIV work even better with the R5. Terrific camera!

Benoit .'s picture

I shoot product photography most of the time all manual and have extremely very, very little to gain from mirrorless. If the need comes, I can buy one locally any day, but I am not looking to expand to other fields in photography. Eventually, I'll need newer bodies. I want bigger pixel count, don't care about frame rate, AF speed or any sort of super advanced tracking and zero video. I've got time.

David Pavlich's picture

I can't argue your point. I'd probably be the same way shooting in a controlled environment. But most of my shooting is really aided by the R5's terrific focusing ability and its frame rate.

Were I a busy wedding/event shooter, I'd more than likely have jumped all over the R3. That kind of shooting doesn't require high MP count, but it does love low light capability and that blistering frame rate isn't so bad with a 24mp sensor.

Really, this is sure a fun time to be a photographer that's also gizmo oriented. :-)

Richard Priebe's picture

When you basically shoot in a studio environment, virtually any camera/lens combo will get the job done, since you control the light.

I'm not a pro, but a long time amateur (started with film in the 70's), and I will shoot just about anything that interests me. I'm with David on this... the R5 is a game changer - the autofocus is almost magical. I don't do video, so the overheating is irrelevant. I use my kit of 4 L series lenses with the control ring adapter, so I still have my connection to the DSLR line (still use my 6DII). Good to hear that Canon is keeping those who love their DSLR's in mind.

Timothy Linn's picture

I would argue the opposite—and so would most people. The R5 came out of the gate as an excellent stills camera. It was the video functionality that was a bit crippled due to heat issues and the 30 minute record limit. Canon has done a good job mitigating the heat issue but the record limit remains. In general, Canon has done a good job with improvements for both stills and video, though I use my R5 exclusively for stills.

Benoit .'s picture

Oh sure, there is nothing wrong with stills on the R5 that I have read about but the video is clearly useless to me and you shouldn't be satisfied with 3rd leg fixes from a brand like Canon even if you don't use the video, especially when it was the big deal they advertised when the R5 came out. I heard some cars don't come with a donut wheel and those are not for me either.

Zdenek Malich's picture

So I hope you are shooting 5DS R in your studio? Well for me as I outrun the performance of 6D mk1 the R6 is finally an upgrade I was waiting for as 6D mk2 was downgrade for photography . I had a7 3 and hated the camera, then went for 5D mk4 just to wait for something like R6 to come out. Why do you think you need 35+ megapixel unless you are selling your photos online and bigger size equals bigger paycheck? 20 megapixel is plenty. Canon is not going to created ultimate video camera with low price tag on photography based body for one reason C100, C200, C300, C500 and C700.. So apologies.. Its actually 5 reasons.. If you in market for video based camera then why to buy R5 in first place if there are so many Canon Cine cameras to choose from. And for a photo based camera R5 is still doing more than well... Buy athmos for even better output and features.. Btw Canon DSLRs are past... Dont see canon producing new DSLR at all... They will only continue to produce existing models until people are mirrorless friendly, then close the book on DSLR for ones and all. Support of loads of EF lenses is done and dusted and only thing keeping them alive is the fact that some people don't need mirrors at all... Loads of people are not even able to produce photos using the full potential of cameras like 5D mk3... They are upgrading only because they think that new camera will help them to get better photos. And then we see 16y old students who shoot 80D with oustending images outperforming all the smart guys with latest gear...

toni 2's picture

I'm amateur and I like photography. I'm between a smartphone user and a professional camera and lens user.
It seems that Canon only think in pro ($$$$$) users. It's in this manner on all other Canon products (printers...)? In fact, rebel DLSR were big in sales.
Perhaps the way is a mirrorless rebel with a "good" lens. Because without a relatively good lens it's impossible to compete with smartphone's lens.

Harry lener's picture

Love shooting w Cellphone Also I have 2 Canon DSLR's for serious projects. I want to say that Im not in to Mirrorless Yet. But Im exited by monitor the progress of Cellphones cameras. Still very Happy:)