WTF! Canon not #1 in US digicam sales???

[GTaudiophile]

At last Kodak has some good news after it shipped only 10,000 fewer units in the US than the current number one seller of digital point and shoot cameras, Sony. According to market research firm IDC, Sony delivered 1 million consumer cameras in the third quarter, while third placed Canon shipped 800,000 followed by Olympus with 585,000. Kodak is clearly aiming for the top spot in US digital camera sales and its decision to concentrate on the burgeoning digital camera market in favor of film photography seems to be paying dividends.

Q3 2004 US Sales Rank:

1) Sony: 1 million
2) Kodak: 990K
3) Canon: 800K
4) Olympus: 585K

Source

 

[Colt45]

go figure.

 

[NFS4]

OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

 

[Mr N8]

I still love my Canon cameras.

Kodak will be a huge seller, because they make cameras that anybody can pick up and use, with little to no knowledge of dgital cameras.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: MogulMonster
I still love my Canon cameras.

Kodak will be a huge seller, because they make cameras that anybody can pick up and use, with little to no knowledge of dgital cameras.

And how does Canon not do that with their A-series line???

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Originally posted by: MogulMonster
I still love my Canon cameras.

Kodak will be a huge seller, because they make cameras that anybody can pick up and use, with little to no knowledge of dgital cameras.

And how does Canon not do that with their A-series line???

The A-series are good for beginners, but Kodak has simplified their cameras to the point where all you have to do is select "good, better, or best" resolution, and snap the picture. I'm not saying Canon's aren't easy to use, but Kodak markets themselves as the easy to use solution, whereas most of Canon's marketing goes into the EOS and Pro-sumer lines.

 

[Saulbadguy]

Kodaks are cheap.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I will admit that Kodak's "docking" station seems to make the transfer of photos even easier for beginners. Nothing is easier to me then to simply remove the CF card and plave it in a CF reader.

 

[Gibson486]

Originally posted by: Saulbadguy
Kodaks are cheap.

yup. they have a good presence in the budget market.

Plus, it's Kodak, the name alone will lure people....

Also, when was the last time you saw a canon digital camera in Walgreens?

 

[Kelemvor]

Anyone that hasn't used one of the current Kodak Camera (e.g. 7590) should really give them another glance over. THey have come leaps and bounds from where they were a year or two ago.

 

[toekramp]

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

maybe you should....canon >>>>>>>>>> sony

 

[ravana]

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

Hello F717 buddy...what are your fav features?

I got mine about a year ago and I feel I am not using it to it's full potential...any suggestions, tips?

 

[welst10]

Kodak prices are unbeatable, plus easy of use and good performance for non-professionals. I almost bought a kodak if not because of the circuit city a75 deal ($149).

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I will admit that Kodak's "docking" station seems to make the transfer of photos even easier for beginners. Nothing is easier to me then to simply remove the CF card and plave it in a CF reader.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

that's a little unfair... the a95 is a completely different class from the F7xx/F8xx.... that being said, canon doesn't have anything to particularly compete with that... cept maybe the newer s1 pro... maybe.. only on the optical level.. haven't looked much into it.


Regardless, the results aren't surprising.. I see soo many kodaks out there... it's sad The only thing I don't like about sony.. blasted memory sticks. why couldn't they just use SD... why do they have to be different.

 

[dartworth]

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

totally different cameras...you shouldn't even compare them.

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: lnguyen

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

that's a little unfair... the a95 is a completely different class from the F7xx/F8xx.... that being said, canon doesn't have anything to particularly compete with that... cept maybe the newer s1 pro... maybe.. only on the optical level.. haven't looked much into it.


Regardless, the results aren't surprising.. I see soo many kodaks out there... it's sad The only thing I don't like about sony.. blasted memory sticks. why couldn't they just use SD... why do they have to be different.

The G5 and G6 directly compete with the f series, and areright n par with them. Which is better depends a lot on personal tastes for controls, etc, but I like the feel and funtionality of my G5 better than an F717. I had an F717, and sold it to get the G5. I don't regret it one bit.

 

[NFS4]

n/t

 

[pyonir]

Of course. Those that are loyal to Canon don't need to buy another camera, because the one they have lasts. Anyone that buys Sony or Kodak has to replace the camera when they break and they usually stick with their brand.

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: pyonir
Of course. Those that are loyal to Canon don't need to buy another camera, because the one they have lasts. Anyone that buys Sony or Kodak has to replace the camera when they break and they usually stick with their brand.

Heh, my S110 is almost 4 years old, and it works as good as new. :thumbsup:


Yes, I'm a fanboy.

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: MogulMonster
Heh, my S110 is almost 4 years old, and it works as good as new. :thumbsup:


Yes, I'm a fanboy.

My S400 is only about a year old, but it is pretty worn. I carry it in my pocket all the time. Still works like new.

Seriously though, Kodak has the name, Sony is a quality product and has the name, generally Canon buyers have a loyalty to Canon already.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

Who wouldn't? That's like saying " I went from a DCS P72 to a Canon G5 and haven't looked back!" Of course the 717 is much better

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

Who wouldn't? That's like saying " I went from a DCS P72 to a Canon G5 and haven't looked back!" Of course the 717 is much better

What's your point? I could have gone from the A95 to another Canon digicam (I had an A70 previously) as I had been a Canon fanboy for years. But I decided to go with Sony.

My point was that I left Canon behind and went with Sony. It has nothing to do with the DSC-F717 being better than the A95:roll:

 

[zoiks]

I have the 717 as well as the Canon A70. They may be in different categories, but the Sony takes much better pics. The canon is great since thats my fishing camera and I can take it places easily.

 

[PhoenixOrion]

It's just not the branding/marketing, it has to be the quality also that consumers look for.

If we take Canon for an example, I believe they are the ones who put up the most $ for tv advertising, their cameras have very good (and lots of it) features but they are notorious for using glass/plastic combination lens systems and charges higher against comparable units.

Now if we look at Sony, a lot of people frown upon the proprietary media and battery, has pretty much comparable features at each price point but they are known to use highest quality Zeiss lens systems.

Some consumers are suaded by these and some are not. Other features are icing on the cake but image quality is high up there.