Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Digital camera shipments beat out film-based rivals
The Asahi Shimbun ^ | 2003-01-27

Posted on 01/26/2003 8:51:58 PM PST by Lessismore

According to data compiled by the Camera and Imaging Products Association, digital cameras have finally moved ahead of traditional film cameras in the race for photography supremacy.

In 2002, 24.55 million digital cameras and 23.66 million film cameras were shipped, giving the lead to the binary brethren for the first time. The figures include products manufactured outside Japan.

Vast improvements in the quality of digital cameras and falling prices are clear pointers as to why sales are up, but there are social factors at work too.

According to the association, one factor influencing the market is that in Japan, ``young women in particular, who are buying compact cameras, have opted for digital models.''

The number of digital cameras shipped domestically previously exceeded that of film cameras in 2001, but last year, the total number shipped-including those going to overseas markets, such as Europe and the United States-was above that of film cameras for the first time.

The total number of cameras shipped to domestic and international markets in 2002 was 48.21 million, an increase of 13.8 percent from the previous year.

This favorable result featured a 66.4 percent increase in digital camera shipments.

The breakdown of this increase was a 35.6 percent increase in domestic market shipments, to 6.55 million, and an increase of 81.4 percent in international market shipments, to 18 million units.

In contrast, the number of film-based cameras shipped in 2002 declined by 14.3 percent from a year earlier.

Domestic numbers fell by 25.7 percent, to 2.24 million, while international shipments dropped by 12.9 percent, to 21.42 million.

In 2003, as a result of such factors as product diversification, the association is projecting an increase of 27.8 percent in shipments of digital cameras to 31.45 million.

The projected breakdown of this is a 17.4 percent increase in the domestic market and a 31.9 percent increase in international shipments.

On the other hand, the association projects a decrease of 15 percent in shipments of film cameras, to a total of 20.17 million.

The association's projection of total camera shipments during 2003 is for a year-on-year increase of 7.1 percent, to a total of 51.62 million units.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last
Kodak is dead.
1 posted on 01/26/2003 8:51:58 PM PST by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
Kodak is dead.

Good riddence. They are an arrogant PC company.

2 posted on 01/26/2003 8:55:49 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
KOdak moved into the digital camera market ages ago. Its EasyShare line of cameras are no brainers for newbies to use. All you have to do is push a button on the EasyShare Dock to upload the pictures to the computer. Its all in keeping with George Eastman's original philosophy of photography, which can now be rephrased as "you push the button and the camera dock does the rest."
3 posted on 01/26/2003 8:58:10 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
Not to mention the photo copying and printing booths, commercial printers, and such. Kodak invented the photo-cd ten years ago. If they don't make it, it won't be because they weren't trying.
4 posted on 01/26/2003 9:04:56 PM PST by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
The money is in the consumables. Other companies, such as HP, Canon, Epson, Lexmark, etc. have the market for printer inks and papers. Still others have the market for writable CDs and big hard drives.

Kodak can't make up its revenue losses from photographic film, papers, and developing chemicals.

5 posted on 01/26/2003 9:12:42 PM PST by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Kodak invented the photo-cd ten years ago. If they don't make it, it won't be because they weren't trying.

Why is it that nowadays DVD players all support playback of Kodak proprietary PictureCD format but they don't support anything useful like JPEGs on ISO CD's? Especially since all of the FAQ's I've seen on the subject indicate there is no software available to the general public to make PictureCD-compatible disks?

6 posted on 01/26/2003 9:12:43 PM PST by supercat (TAG--you're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
You can upload your digital photos to Kodak and have the prints delivered to your door or to your local Target photo department for pickup. You can get from wallet size to 11x20's made. Sweet. Check the Target or Kodak websites.
7 posted on 01/26/2003 9:13:21 PM PST by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
In 2002...23.66 million film cameras were shipped

How are disposable cameras counted? Are they counted as one per film-pack sold, one for each film-pack sold with a "virgin" camera, or are they not figured in the totals?

8 posted on 01/26/2003 9:14:11 PM PST by supercat (TAG--you're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
err, 16x20's.
9 posted on 01/26/2003 9:14:41 PM PST by jlogajan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: supercat
I think the 35mm film format still has something going for it. The APS film market is somewhat softer and while purists will always insist on shooting with film, digital photography has finally come of a age. A good 3.0 to 4.0 megapixel camera is all most people will ever need for day to day photography.
10 posted on 01/26/2003 9:17:38 PM PST by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
Don't count on it, Kodak makes some of the best digital cameras
11 posted on 01/26/2003 9:19:18 PM PST by ContentiousObjector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ContentiousObjector
We're looking for a digital camera (a little behind the curve, LOL).....suggestions welcome.
12 posted on 01/26/2003 9:21:54 PM PST by goodnesswins ("You're either with us, or against us!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
A good 3.0 to 4.0 megapixel camera is all most people will ever need for day to day photography.

Are there any reasonably-priced high-resolution cameras nowadays that can manage anything near the 'practical' speed of a 35mm? Most digitals I've seen have at least a quarter-second delay between clicking the shutter and taking the picture, if prefocused, and longer than that if not pre-focused. Further, most of them have a very long lag (many seconds) between consecutive pictures.

The only digital camera I've seen which didn't have an annoying lag between clicking the shutter and getting the picture was my Casio QV-770. That one only had 640x480 resolution [pitiful by today's standards] but had a mode in which it would take four pictures at 0.05-second intervals, starting about 0.15 seconds before the shutter button was pushed. Unfortunately, I know of no cameras today that offer anything remotely similar.

13 posted on 01/26/2003 9:23:13 PM PST by supercat (TAG--you're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
digital cameras have finally moved ahead of traditional film cameras in the race for photography supremacy.
In 2002, 24.55 million digital cameras and 23.66 million film cameras were shipped

This is enough for "supremacy"? More sales, yes. Supremacy? Hardly.

14 posted on 01/26/2003 9:26:20 PM PST by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat
"which it would take four pictures at 0.05-second intervals, starting about 0.15 seconds before the shutter button was pushed"

-0.15 seconds before-

That's a neat trick. How's it accomplished? Mind meld?
15 posted on 01/26/2003 9:28:01 PM PST by chaosagent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
This is probably the best of the basic consumer level ones, I bought it for one of my girls for Christmas.

Review: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/cx4230.html

Photo Samples: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2002_reviews/cx4230_samples.html

16 posted on 01/26/2003 9:28:56 PM PST by ContentiousObjector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
your kidding right?

Unless your a photo journalist no one needs a 4.0 megapixel camera, even alot of 3.0 megapixles are over-kill for day-to-day photography, a good quality 2.0 seems to be better than a low end 3.0

17 posted on 01/26/2003 9:32:16 PM PST by ContentiousObjector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: chaosagent
I presume that the camera is continually sampling, filling its frame buffer as fast as it possibly can and it retains the last frame it filled prior to the button making contact. Hence you get a frame before the button was actually pushed, but not before the camera was powered on and sampling.
18 posted on 01/26/2003 9:35:44 PM PST by Lurkus Maximus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
We're looking for a digital camera (a little behind the curve, LOL).....suggestions welcome.

I've been really impressed with the Fujifilm models (I own a FinePix 2400Z that I've had about 2 years )- they're reasonably priced, take good photos, and you get a lot of pics per set of batteries.

19 posted on 01/26/2003 9:40:28 PM PST by CFC__VRWC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
I bought my daughter a Canon A40 for < $250. 2 Mpixel, 3x optical zoom, 4 AA batteries, Compact Flash memory, USB port for downloading to PC. It was used heavily over the holidays and performed well.
20 posted on 01/26/2003 9:41:02 PM PST by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-47 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson