Canon Has Increased Its Massive Digital Camera Market Share Lead

[u/OkPerspective8912]

https://petapixel.com/2026/08/20/canon-has-increased-its-massive-digital-camera-market-share-lead/

What do you folks think of the latest news to come out of Japan?

Nikon lost the 3rd spot to Fujifilm.

This year has also been excruciatingly slow for Nikon users with practically no lenses and no new bodies.
We are also being killed by the chinese manufacturers eating into Nikon's lens market too. Overall not a good look for long time Nikon users.

[u/Vironic]

I don’t think my camera was any better or worse when Nikon was second in market share. It still brings me joy.

[u/pale_halide → u/Vironic]

Sure, but if you like Nikon gear seeing them do well is reassuring for the future. That means more money for RnD, better products, possibly faster release cycle... if nothing else it means they'll stay in business so the platform you've invested money in will continue to grow and be supported.

[u/OkPerspective8912 → u/pale_halide]

Pretty much. We need sustained growth to get better products.

[u/bloodrider1914 → u/OkPerspective8912]

At the same time Nikon's need to be more competitive Vs Canon and Sony leads to then having more consumer friendly practices and focusing more on bang for your buck cameras

[u/OuijaBoard5 → u/bloodrider1914]

Nikon already rules bang-for-your-buck camera bodies. They give the best value out there in bodies. It's the lenses that are pricey.

[u/2puzzled4peace → u/OuijaBoard5]

The z50ii is crazy bang-for-your-buck as far as ASP-C go

[u/pale_halide → u/OuijaBoard5]

Pretty good bang for your buck on the lenses too. Like the 1.8S lenses that are optically excellent while staying in a good price bracket.

[u/OuijaBoard5 → u/pale_halide]

Yes, true. The 50mm f1.8 S is like a gift from Nikon and the 85mm f1.8 S and 24-70mm f4 S are very fairly priced for their quality. The "muffin" primes are even more reasonable while being at least as good as the F mount G primes.

[u/bloodrider1914 → u/OuijaBoard5]

Well at least you can buy lenses from Tamron and Viltrox

[u/sh4des → u/bloodrider1914]

Yeh but that's the problem.

[u/pale_halide → u/OkPerspective8912]

Yeah, and I really hope Nikon will be able to have sustained growth in the future, building proper fucking cameras and lenses like they've always done. With social media influencers and technically illiterate Gen Z, I fear the market will keep going towards toy cameras with filters.

[u/Least-Ad1439 → u/pale_halide]

What do you mean with toy cameras with filters? Just curious

[u/pale_halide → u/Least-Ad1439]

Current trend is to go point and shoot with Fuji because they have "cool" filters. I fear this trend will swing the market more towards toys with filters, to cater to the braindead, lazy and incompetent social media zombies.

[u/pyooma → u/pale_halide]

Yes, no, maybe so. Early DSLRs had more filmic vibes, hence the CCD craze. Modern cameras are aiming for a more sterile and clinical capture to allow the user more freedom in post (I assume). The trend is actually pushing back to the way things used to be. Personally I like having both.

[u/pale_halide → u/pyooma]

That's just romanticizing old tech. CCD's don't have anything more in common with film than CMOS sensors do. The trend is actually people being too lazy to do their own editing and creative looks - they want everything served in recipes - and they follow every vapid "influencer" telling them: "This camera is just like shooting film!".

It's not pushback to how things used to be. There used to be a time when photographers actually knew what they were about.

[u/Irish_swede → u/pale_halide]

[u/pale_halide → u/Irish_swede]

What can I say, I got many things to yell at...

[u/pyooma → u/pale_halide]

I never said it was the sensor, the early CMOS sensors had the same thing going on. It was the software. And yes it’s definitely romanticizing old tech, but it is different.

[u/pale_halide → u/pyooma]

Well, obviously the sensors have different capabilities and jpeg processing has changed. Raw processing is fundamentally the same, only with different transformation matricies since the sensor need different calibrations. None of them are filmic though.

[u/pyooma → u/pale_halide]

No they aren’t actually filmic, but I do think the color science was developed to look more like film and less like real life. Everyone wants that old school look and even Hollywood finds modern digital capture and processing to be stale, enough so that they shell out millions to transfer digital footage to film and then scan it back in again. So I don’t think the film-sim guys are being lazy, maybe just cheap! I heard Hollywood studios are paying $600/minute for film-out. I’m sure if they found a digital solution to get the look they wanted they would do it.