Updated: see bottom.
"I don’t know if the GFK data is for France or Europe only, or if it is about worldwide data. But 40% market share outside of Full Frame might not be a horrible position to be in." -- FujiRumors in reference to interview in Phototrend that Fujifilm's share of the non full frame market is 40%.
"Fujifilm Says it Owns 40% of the Non-Full Frame Camera Market" — Petapixel headline referencing the same interview
----------------
First off, let me say that I don't think that the 40% claim is worldwide. It's not even clear if it's anything other than in France (e.g. not a Europe claim).
But let's assume for a moment that it is a worldwide claim. For the last full year mirrorless sales we have a total of 4.76m units, and Fujifilm was 380k of that. If you run the math, this claim would further assert that full frame is 80% of the sales in mirrorless. Fujifilm would thus have a 40% share of 20% of the market, not exactly a claim I'd want to be making. Indeed, if you're missing 80% of the market, you're basically just missing.
Again, I don't believe the claim is usable in order to assess what is really going on in the mirrorless market. Most certainly, Canon didn't sell 1.57m full frame units to Fujifilm's 380k!
So just like with the NPD numbers in the US, the TSR numbers from Japan, the GFK numbers in (probably part of) Europe are mostly being used these days as limited bragging rights. They continue to be sliced in ways that favor the bragger. Because these marketing research firms—NPD, TSR, GFK—sell their data to the companies they cover, every company then looks for ways they can "cleave" that data to make a claim of dominance or success. The public can't see the data upon which those claims are based, thus should be skeptical of them.
The data I'm looking at closely these days is the detail in each company's quarterly/annual financial results and other disclosures. Nikon is the most transparent in that, but with some deeper sleuthing you can get reasonable handles on the top four makers (Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, and Sony). What I'm looking mostly at are two figures: unit volume growth and total revenue growth. Right now, those have been growing in strongly positive ways for the middle two companies just mentioned, not as strongly for the outer two, though growing. This coming year (2025) is critical for Canon and Nikon, as they will have essentially jettisoned their DSLR lines. Nikon seems to be predicting little future unit growth and lower future revenue growth.
As I've been pointing out, I'm having a difficult time believing that 2025 is going to be a growth year for interchangeable lens cameras at all. I don't currently believe that mirrorless will fully make up for the coming lack of DSLR sales. Which means that the overall market has once again has "peaked", and either will be on a plateau or on a downslope in the near future.
We can debate what that would mean. And it likely will mean something a bit different for each company. For example, a flat or declining ILC market has these company-by-company implications, in my opinion:
- Canon — Canon has been pursuing the "biggest market share" approach for decades now. Their target seems to be 50% of unit volume. The problem for Canon is that they will have to be the price leader across a very broad product line to continue to accomplish that, which means they have to either (1) accept lower margins or (2) take more cost out of their product. I'd bet both will happen. I personally believe that Canon is pursuing more of a bolster-our-ego strategy than a maximize-our-return strategy. Only 21% of Canon's most recent sales came from Imaging, though it was their second highest profit center. Do remember, though, that Canon's imaging group contains far more than just the cameras you and I buy, including what Canon calls networking cameras. Prediction: R officially starts at US$399 or less, and more instant sales are used to goose volume. No ILC market share gain in 2025, possibly a small loss.
- Fujifilm — I used to write that cameras were somewhat of a hobby business for Fujifilm. With the popularity of the Instax system, that's no longer true (Fujifilm has more revenue from instant photo products than digital). The forecast for their current fiscal year is that "imaging" will be about 16% of their sales and over a third of their profit (operating income). That level in a company as big as Fujifilm means that they're now exposed to changes in the camera market. That said, digital cameras, mostly mirrorless, are only 43% of their current "imaging" sales, so modest changes in market volume probably won't impact them terribly. However, model proliferation would be a problem for them in a flat or declining market, as it lowers margins. Noticeably, Fujifilm doesn't call out profit from digital versus the Instax/film side. Everyone's suspicion is that there's a mismatch in gross profit margin between the two. Prediction: they continue to iterate APS-C models, though the returns in doing so are minimal. Minimal market share gain, if any, in 2025.
- Nikon — Their cautious, mostly top end approach has netted them real mirrorless growth, both in units and profits. A flat or declining market will make that unsustainable with just the Z System (DSLRs and compacts gone), which partly explains the RED acquisition. Nikon wants to be a broad, diverse company, and has in recent years invested in and expanded into many other areas. How's that worked out? In their most recent quarterly results the Imaging group provided 51% of the sales, and was the only one of their six businesses to make an operating profit. Oops. (Full disclosure: for the full fiscal year, they expect all but one of their businesses to be profitable.) Prediction: RED will be a bit of a distraction (video lenses are needed, where the product lines meet needs to be determined), so we're likely still on the one or maybe two new cameras a year with a little fill in on lenses stream now. Minimal market share gain, if any, in 2025, and to do that will necessitate more aggressive sales.
- OM Digital Systems — Reliable financial information leaked out of Japan this year about OMDS: not profitable, though the annual loss has reduced. Coupled with their continued loss of market share (now down to about 3% of the mirrorless market), it's difficult to see how OMDS manages to bail all the water out of their sinking boat. 2024 for them, so far, has been revealing: a firmware-like update to their major camera, a rebadged lens, and a lens designed and built by Sigma moved to the m4/3 mount. I don't see how OMDS gets any additional investment/capital until they fix the leaks and get to at least minimal profitability, even in Japan's liberal investment community. No significant new products means no growth, so we're now seeing the Pentaxification of the Olympus cameras. Prediction: the R&D dollars for breakthrough products probably isn't there, so modest new offerings, if any. And that's best case. Market share loss in 2025.
- Panasonic — I'm more than a little surprised at Panasonic. After getting a clear ROI goal many years ago by their corporate president, they don't seem to have truly fixed and clarified their lineup to meet that goal. It's possible that they're getting by with very regional targeting. Panasonic is a hugely diverse company, making everything from batteries to air conditioners, with a lot of mostly consumer products in between. Their loyalty to a lens mount across their digital camera offerings (still and video) is just as diverse—EF, PL, B4, L, m4/3—which I pointed out was going to be a problem for them over a decade ago (because Sony went all in on a single mount). That I can still buy a US$7000 Super35 camera from Panasonic with a Canon EF lens mount just seems mind-boggling. Where the L-mount replacement for that EVA1 is, who knows? In the highly competitive mirrorless game, Panasonic is currently paddling in place while watching their former partner slowly sinking alongside them (see previous). Can they keep that up in a flat or declining market? Difficult to say, but if Canon goes to spot sales to keep their market share, that increases the difficulty. That said, I should note that Panasonic just made the claim to be third in mirrorless in the French market to Phototrend's interviewer. My guess is that, if examined closely, that would be for a time period following recent product introductions (e.g. S9, S5D, and GH7 intros). Prediction: more of the same, which will seem scattered. No market share gain in 2025; possible loss.
- Sony — If Panasonic is diversified, Sony is even more diversified. "Still and Video Cameras" (of all types) were less than 8% of their overall sales in the most recent quarter. To put that in context, sales of image sensors and semiconductors is something like 14% of Sony's overall sales. I'm not one to think that Sony will pull out of a declining camera market (as they did with laptops, for instance). First, they've been growing overall in their group, and second there are too many synergies that cross over into their other divisions. But a flat or declining ILC category does raise a question that I don't know the answer to. Does Sony (a) seize the opportunity to take over first place in market share, (b) manage things as they have been, or (c) carefully manage and whittle product line to ROI as volume declines? I don't know. I'm not sure Sony has a clear answer to that. At the moment, it appears that (b) is their answer, as that's been working for them as DSLRs disappear. Prediction: Sony will start picking sub-categories they want to win, and start rationalizing their lineup more. Minimal market share gain in 2025.
Regardless of the above, nothing has basically changed about all the market share talk. Once the full 2024 numbers are in, we'll see another full round of brag claims, each of which is difficult to verify and specific to a particular time frame, region, narrow category, and/or other unspecified limitation. This is what I call Kindergarten Marketing; my toy's better than yours.
Update: It struck me that Fujifilm was vague on what they meant by 40% market share. It's possible that they meant "by value" instead of "by unit," which would be quite disingenuous since the GFX bodies would distort the results. Then BCN published their "top 50 sellers" in the Japanese market for September. Hmm. 40 non-full frame cameras, of which Fujifilm could claim #19, #26, #34, and #44. So in Japan it's inconceivable that Fujifilm's claim would be even remotely accurate for volume. That leaves me with two possibilities: Fujifilm is doing really well against full frame in volume in France, or Fujifilm didn't disclose that they meant "by value."
