We've got lots to talk about, but lets start with a basic trend for mirrorless cameras over the past several years:
The average selling price (left axis) of a mirrorless camera went up 200% in five years (bottom axis) according to CIPA. That probably reflects that the serious users who buy more expensive equipment have been transitioning from DSLR to mirrorless. The plateau of average selling price for the past three years is troublesome, though, as it hints that the primary buying spree for the highest end cameras may be over.
Still, as I pointed out in my recent article on zsystemuser, a lot of the dollars Nikon took in recent years came from just the Z8 and Z9, the two highest priced cameras in their lineup. More dollars from those two products than from any other line Nikon makes. For instance, the Z8/Z9 take has been about double the dollars that the Z6 lineup produced in its entire history in the US. The problem with this is the self-fulfilling prophecy that gets built in: to entice all those Z8/Z9 purchasers to buy again means you need something even higher end (new models and existing model iteration), and as you push more and more on high-priced products, you begin seeing volume drop-off. Let's face it, I have two Z9 bodies as my primary cameras. Is there anything they can't do? No. Getting me to replace them will be tough.
The camera companies are going to want more revenue in the future, so how do they get it? Some combination of: (1) push lower level camera users into higher end products; (2) sell subscriptions/features; (3) make more enticing, even higher priced cameras; (4) sell lenses, accessories, and services; (5) find new potential users; and (6) raise prices.
The Fujifilm X100VI turned out to be an almost perfect combo of #1, #3, and #5, but how many companies can replicate that kind of success (and how much of the X100VI’s success was luck in timing and viral hyping)? And can you do it with more than one product (i.e. across your entire lineup)?
We've seen the 24-33mp full frame sweet spot camera (R6, Z6, A7) slowly rising in price (not accounting for inflation), and I believe that the camera companies are hoping that they can do the same for their entire lineup, though that seems to be failing at the low end, where that US$1000 boundary is tough to push entry cameras above.
I just mentioned inflation. We're just now finding out that the camera companies were all hit with significantly higher semiconductor costs coming out of the pandemic, and that's slowed their development and delivery cycles as they try to adjust. I'm told by one insider that some inflation-caused costs haven't yet materialized in the final product cost, but probably will.
But throw into this the possibility of tariffs here in the US. The campaign promise was a 20% tariff on all foreign products—which would include all cameras and lenses, as none are made in the US—with the potential for higher tariffs on products coming out of certain countries, such as China (16 of Nikon's Z-mount lenses are made in China, for example, as are all of Tamron's).
Tariffs are effectively another form sales tax. It's possible (but not likely) that the camera makers would eat that tax themselves, much as B&H eats the state sales taxes via its PayBoo credit card, but I wouldn't count on it.
The combination of all the above factors makes me think that #6 (raise prices) is coming. We've already seen that in countries where the currency has declined against the dollar, but price bumps will eventually make their way to the US, as well (unless, of course, the yen somehow gets dramatically devalued for some reason).
Thus, if you're trying to stay current with your camera gear it's likely that you've already bought a higher-priced camera, or you will in the future. Photography's getting more expensive #1.
Meanwhile, you want to do something with the photos you took from that high end camera. That impacts computers and software. You probably have already heard that Adobe is raising their Photography Plan prices by 25 to 50% (unless you opt for a full year at a time). I hinted at this last fall when I first heard the rumblings, and now it's officially here: no 20GB Photography Plan for new customers, and price increases for the 1TB Lightroom and 20GB Photography Plan users.
Couple that with Photo Mechanic, TopazLabs, and others emphasizing full subscription, and now the software side of photography is tracking more as a on-going fixed expense instead of one you can cost manage by not buying updates when you don't have the money for them. Photography's getting more expensive #2.
But that's not all. As you moved up with your camera, you probably went to a higher pixel count (e.g. 24mp to 45mp). Your files are larger so you need new, larger cards and more storage for the resulting images. Because it takes longer to process the larger files, you need to upgrade your computer. Because new software is using AI and machine learning features more than ever before, you also need a new computer that has better GPU/NPU capabilities. Photography's getting more expensive #3.
Into this mix we have a lot happening behind the scene that hasn't fully surfaced yet. The Web sites that you go to learn about photography and the products you use are finding it more and more difficult to use the old ad-based and affiliate-driven revenue models to deliver "free" content. If they try to push more ads or links, they dilute their content and their user base goes away because readers don't want to have to sift through all that. Meanwhile, the amount the sites get from an individual ad keeps going down.
You've already seen Petapixel and CanonRumors push new membership models that remove the banner ads. I can tell you that in my discussions with every one of the big and serious photography sites, they're all talking about how to build new revenue streams they can rely upon. So either these sites go away due to declining revenue, or they find a way to charge you money. Photography's getting more expensive #4.
Hobbies have always been expensive. Going pro at anything always incurs significant expense, too. So in one way there's nothing really new in all the above. It does seem, however, that we currently have multiple factors simultaneously in play that are pushing harder at nibbling away your dollars, though.
I believe that 2025 will be a year where many more people start realizing just how much their costs are rising and start making significant changes in their habits to combat the money drain. The primary way that tends to happen is that the dedicated camera goes in the closet not to be used and, if the person still wants to take some photos, they just rely on their smartphone, because it's now competent at many things photography-wise.
_________
Bonus: lest the "creator" community think they're immune from the above because they can just use their smartphone, they need to think again. Sure, the smartphone-to-social-media thing seems free, because you need a phone anyway and the social media sites don't charge you anything to post. But it isn't free if you want to stand out in any way. I've watched the influencer/creator folk scramble more and more to function in that social media free-for-all; if they actually want to make money off spending all their time posting short form content and generating followers, they actually start buying more gear, spending more time processing, doing more elaborate staging, and putting in more marketing and promotion efforts so that they can get to user base numbers where companies like YouTube and others will actually pay them. It's pay to play, baby.
