richardsaccount

I recently saw on Petapixel.com/ 1/30/2022 a post that Sony has added a fourth news agency to using
their cameras exclusively. The Canadian Press association. Prior agencies since 2020 are, The Associated Press,
PA Media Group in The U.K and Ireland and Garnet & USA Today. I wonder how many ordinary photo enthusiasts
will be influenced by any of this. If at all.

MDI Mainer

Some members of the Canon and Nikon tribes will doubtless say "Who cares?" but other, perhaps more perceptive, enthusiasts will at least try and understand why these entities saw sufficient advantages in Sony gear to make the change, and consider whether those advantages would benefit their own photography.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Let's remember context. We're awaiting the 2021 market numbers. But, as reported in 2020, of the 3.26 million mirrorless cameras sold worldwide, Sony sold a ratio of roughly 6 mirrorless cameras for every 5 sold by Canon, and Nikon only sold 1. Clearly, in 2021, Sony remains the leader in mirrorless by a slight margin.

But, in the global market of all digital cameras, Canon is still the leader, with a total market share larger than both Nikon and Sony combined.

1. Canon 47.9%
2. Sony 22.1%
3. Nikon 13.7%
4. Fujifilm 5.6%
5. Panasonic 4.4%

With all the top 3 releasing pro-targeted mirrorless bodies in 2021, and with Nikon winning many of the top industry design awards, let's see what the market had to say over the next few weeks as the final company and industry sales numbers are released and analyzed.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Well put Paul. People seem to be in a rush to pronounce Sony as the latest and greatest. In digital photography they are at least one-time failures and there is little to prove they have changed their colors. Mavica, just to refresh memories, was their first attempt and it was a total wash-out. They tried to get customers to pay for warranty work. Sony knows television and Sony knows movies. Boths area are illusionists playgrounds of forte. Buy a camera from Sony and buy a chance for failure, and that is their track record. Maybe they will try electric vehicles next, batteries and all.

Hip Coyote

And the market is shrinking. And I read the Olympus OMD was no 3 in Japan which has a different view of photography desires apparently. Go figure

When ever I have someone ask me what camera system to buy into I recommend Canon or Sony. Their fate seems brighter IMO. Both seem to be on the right track. I have hope for the others but am not as optimistic.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I could care less what News agencies use camera wise. I used to shoot for UPI (untied press international) back before dirt was invented.
Nikon worked hand in hand with us and always wanted to know what we thought of their camera's and suggestions we had to improve the line.
I doubt any manufacture does that anymore.
Anyway, like I said, I could care less who uses what camera. I am only concerned with what model will deliver the best images for the way I shoot, PERIOD, END OF STORY.

Canisdirus

Both Canon and Sony have staked out the majority of the professional news agencies.

Canon...to be expected.
Sony...I guess not surprising if you just look at it in the present tense (they have amazing gear and glass).
But as a whole...Sony is a wunderkind corporation...lol...what are they doing in this market anyways??
Basically a gadget company 20 years ago (good gadgets mind you)...now one of the top two dominating camera corps.

There's a movie in there somewhere...which will sell about 600 tickets.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I shoot with Olympus gear. No regrets.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Great points, Paul.

The good news is, they're all innovative and competing more enthusiastically (desperately?). Sony, and to a lesser extent, Fujifilm and Panasonic, lit a fire under Nikon's and Canon's hineys. We benefit as a result.

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

The ones requiring specific equipment couldn't tell the difference among the top gear of the top companies if their life depended on it most likely.

Hip Coyote

[quote=LDB415]The ones requiring specific equipment couldn't tell the difference among the top gear of the top companies if their life depended on it most likely.[/quote

I suspect that if we all shot with the gear we need vs the gear we want the market would be vastly different. I’m not sure I’d even be allowed to own a camera! Maybe a Poloroid or something. 😀

MDI Mainer

Related post with an interesting link to the Olympics and the support offered by the big camera companies.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-727639-1.html

StanMac Loc: Tennessee

Sony is an electronics and entertainment conglomerate. When digital camera sales cease to contribute to their bottom line what management and stock owners expect, the camera products will be sold sold off or discontinued. Remember Olympus . . .

Stan

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

There are definitely differences in the gear itself... the way it feels in the hand, ergonomically, the way the menus are structured, the unique features on the cameras and lenses from each brand.

Depending upon what you photograph, how, and why, you might find one system better suited to your work than another. I certainly have, over the years. I've used Canons, Nikons, Mamiyas, Bronicas, and several other brands of film and digital, and now use Panasonic Lumix. In every case, I had a compelling reason to use each system. Some of the reasons were more important than others, but they were all important at the time and in my then-current circumstances.

At the portrait company I worked for, we used Canons for the bulk of our work, mostly for their FREE tethering software interface features, and because we could more easily modify them to include proper portrait composition masks in their viewfinders. Skin tones looked warmer as well, from the JPEG engine. Frankly, I was a dedicated Nikon user when I tested digital cameras in 2004. But the Canon midrange blew Nikon out of the water, then. We ordered 330 EOS 20D bodies in early 2005. Would I do the same thing now? Who knows? I'd have to test what's available again. It's all changed extensively.

Now I'm using Lumix for the pro audio and video recording features combined with stills capabilities in the same bodies. It was the most sensible stuff available in 2015 for what I needed to do.

In some respects, most of the top brands in the same class of gear produce similar images in similar situations, but it's at the extreme margins of usability and specific function where we see the key differences.

LDB415 Loc: Houston south suburb

Yes, well said. From a user standpoint there are definite differences. From the consumers of the output, those requiring Brand X and nothing else, are the ones I doubt could tell the difference in similar quality work product from similar talent users. Probably not saying it well, but it works in my head.