I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
NJani
Regular MemberPosts: 133Gear list
Like?
I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
8 months ago

Until some years ago around the Nikon cameras everything was clear, we all could imagine the Nikon vision of the future and we all thought we know where the Nikon is going. There were DX and FX lines and each line offered cameras for beginner through enthusiat for professionals.

And then Nikon added a new line, the mirrorless CX which is OK. Also started to upgrade the DX line cameras which is OK too and we were waiting -and still wait- for the upgrade of D300 but nothing is happening for years. And then Nikon started to mix the FX line, only the D4 is the camera I can position as the successor to D3. But what about the others ? The D800 is not an upgrade to D700, it is something like a successor to both D700 and D3x. The D600 is an entry level DSLR so it is positioned below D700. The DF simply seems a new line in FX line, I don't know what group of users is targeted.

The D300 and D700 were the most beloved cameras and they were selled well. I have both but I can't change them still there are no successors.

Why Nikon is makeing experiments with such dead-born ideas ?

-- hide signature --

Cheers János

 NJani's gear list:NJani's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF Nikkor 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF +3 more
Nikon D3 Nikon D300 Nikon D3X Nikon D4 Nikon D600 Nikon D700 Nikon D800 Nikon Df
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Alpha Tech
Regular MemberPosts: 406Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

Why Nikon is makeing experiments with such dead-born ideas ?

Because consumer activity is neither linear nor continuous. Phone cameras continue to have an impact on traditional camera sales. As better phone cameras and more apps become available customers are being pulled away from the traditional camera line at varying rates in each market segment for traditional cameras. Nikon has adapted to changing trends. Unfortunately, the company still does not understand that they can earn more revenue through large sales of lower profit cameras than through small sales of an overpriced niche camera.

 Alpha Tech's gear list:Alpha Tech's gear list
Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Special Edition
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Nikonparrothead
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,937Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

And the D70 once begat the D70S and the D50, which in turn led t the D80 and D90 in DX. But remember Nikon also chimed in with the D40, D40x and D60, all DX cameras without an internal motor.

Those "lines" we're arbitrarily orphaned as well, with the D3000, D5000 and D7000 lines coming in (though the D90 is still there).

Things change and cameras come and go.

-- hide signature --

'Nice pen, bet you write good stories with it.'

 Nikonparrothead's gear list:Nikonparrothead's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ1 Canon PowerShot S95 Fujifilm FinePix X100 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Nikon D3S +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ronan_M
Contributing MemberPosts: 781
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Alpha Tech, 8 months ago

Alpha Tech wrote:

. Unfortunately, the company still does not understand that they can earn more revenue through large sales of lower profit cameras than through small sales of an overpriced niche camera.

Do you honestly believe that Nikon is run by a bunch of 22 y.o. fresh from marketing school and that they dont know where their main revenue is coming from?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Truman Prevatt
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,622Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

Nikon's FF line up is fine.  No company is going to be able to satisfy everyone all the time.  There are 2 high end cameras D4/D800 and the DF which is a scaled down version of the D4 with some different operational characteristics and the entry level D610.  Nikon has three FX sensors and have wrapped cameras around these sensors.

FX sensors are fairly mature now and adding addition pixels is getting close if not already at the point of out resolving the lenses.  It seems that the trend today is very expensive lenses with marginally better resolution from both the camera companies and the third parties, e.g., the Sigma Art lenses.

I really don't see a lot of chumming in the FF DSLR market place with significant upgrades in the near future. The D4 is a specialty camera and is quite large and heavy.  The D800 is a high end general purpose camera as is the DF and the D610 is an entry level camera.  Now you see the new lenses coming out, e.g. the new 58 mm.

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

 Truman Prevatt's gear list:Truman Prevatt's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
panos_m
Senior MemberPosts: 1,211
Like?
Useful commentary in this article:
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

Tough Camera Questions Answered by Thom Hogan

-- hide signature --

Panagiotis

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
falconeyes
Contributing MemberPosts: 764
Like?
Better experiment than hit the wall (nt)
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago
-- hide signature --

Falk Lumo

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jogger
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,385Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

I always saw the D700 as a one-off camera. It was basically Nikon's entry FX body.. at the time they only had one sensor option (the 12mp) and really only one AF module that could be considered in a $3000 body.The D700 was the natural result of the technology at the time.

The market is much different now.. there are many more FF sensor options and the 39pt AF module is adequate for a lot of people. So, i dont see why Nikon is compelled to make a D700 successor. That said, i think a high spec body in the $4000-4500 makes a lot of sense.

NJani wrote:

Until some years ago around the Nikon cameras everything was clear, we all could imagine the Nikon vision of the future and we all thought we know where the Nikon is going. There were DX and FX lines and each line offered cameras for beginner through enthusiat for professionals.

And then Nikon added a new line, the mirrorless CX which is OK. Also started to upgrade the DX line cameras which is OK too and we were waiting -and still wait- for the upgrade of D300 but nothing is happening for years. And then Nikon started to mix the FX line, only the D4 is the camera I can position as the successor to D3. But what about the others ? The D800 is not an upgrade to D700, it is something like a successor to both D700 and D3x. The D600 is an entry level DSLR so it is positioned below D700. The DF simply seems a new line in FX line, I don't know what group of users is targeted.

The D300 and D700 were the most beloved cameras and they were selled well. I have both but I can't change them still there are no successors.

Why Nikon is makeing experiments with such dead-born ideas ?

-- hide signature --

Cheers János

 Jogger's gear list:Jogger's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Nikon D700 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim Keye
Senior MemberPosts: 1,552
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Jogger, 8 months ago

Jogger wrote:

I always saw the D700 as a one-off camera. It was basically Nikon's entry FX body.. at the time they only had one sensor option (the 12mp) and really only one AF module that could be considered in a $3000 body.The D700 was the natural result of the technology at the time.

But it's popularity should have made Nikon think differently about the one-off'ness.

The market is much different now.. there are many more FF sensor options and the 39pt AF module is adequate for a lot of people. So, i dont see why Nikon is compelled to make a D700 successor. That said, i think a high spec body in the $4000-4500 makes a lot of sense.

IMO, obviously: Nikon's mistake was with the D800, which didn't make the D700 people happy and didn't make them as much money as it should have. It should have been the 4k body, and I could have been.

D600/10: 24 MPs, advanced feature set; somewhere around 2k or 2.2k.

D800: 24 MPs, fully pro feature set (basically what it currently has), higher fps, especially with grip, like the D700; priced around 3k.

D800e: 36 MPs, fully pro set/no AA filter, priced around 4K.

Want 36 MPs? You can still have them. Want a pro feature set and fps w/ more reasonable file sizes? You can have that too. Want affordable FX? Got that too.

I'm sure the D800's 36 MPs (non-e) price sold Nikon a lot of bodies, but they missed a chunk of working photogs by not offering a more direct replacement to the d700.

NJani wrote:

Until some years ago around the Nikon cameras everything was clear, we all could imagine the Nikon vision of the future and we all thought we know where the Nikon is going. There were DX and FX lines and each line offered cameras for beginner through enthusiat for professionals.

And then Nikon added a new line, the mirrorless CX which is OK. Also started to upgrade the DX line cameras which is OK too and we were waiting -and still wait- for the upgrade of D300 but nothing is happening for years. And then Nikon started to mix the FX line, only the D4 is the camera I can position as the successor to D3. But what about the others ? The D800 is not an upgrade to D700, it is something like a successor to both D700 and D3x. The D600 is an entry level DSLR so it is positioned below D700. The DF simply seems a new line in FX line, I don't know what group of users is targeted.

The D300 and D700 were the most beloved cameras and they were selled well. I have both but I can't change them still there are no successors.

Why Nikon is makeing experiments with such dead-born ideas ?

-- hide signature --

Cheers János

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Michael Otis
Forum MemberPosts: 61Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Truman Prevatt, 8 months ago

The D4 is not a specialty camera.  It is a professional grade camera made for photographers that use their equipment frequently and require reliability, tough contstuction and weather sealing. Nikon should replace  the D4 with either the 24mp or 36mp sensor.

-- hide signature --

Magpie

 Michael Otis's gear list:Michael Otis's gear list
Nikon D3 Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF VR Nikon AF Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_cheese
Senior MemberPosts: 1,400
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Ronan_M, 8 months ago

Ronan_M wrote:

Alpha Tech wrote:

. Unfortunately, the company still does not understand that they can earn more revenue through large sales of lower profit cameras than through small sales of an overpriced niche camera.

Do you honestly believe that Nikon is run by a bunch of 22 y.o. fresh from marketing school and that they dont know where their main revenue is coming from?

Actually.....i would swing that back to you and ask what evidence do you have that they are not?

The fact remains that very few companies have effective marketing (think Apple and Google) that have a good idea of what consumers want and device requirements that allow for a desired product. Most others simply have the age old evolutionary, pound away on the rock, spray and pray product space and what not

-- hide signature --

"A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others."
- Ayn Rand

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ronan_M
Contributing MemberPosts: 781
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to blue_cheese, 8 months ago

blue_cheese wrote:

Ronan_M wrote:

Alpha Tech wrote:

. Unfortunately, the company still does not understand that they can earn more revenue through large sales of lower profit cameras than through small sales of an overpriced niche camera.

Do you honestly believe that Nikon is run by a bunch of 22 y.o. fresh from marketing school and that they dont know where their main revenue is coming from?

Actually.....i would swing that back to you and ask what evidence do you have that they are not?

So you concur with the OP that Nikon does not know what their market segment revenue figures are?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Andy G
Senior MemberPosts: 1,048Gear list
Like?
Rose-coloured glasses tinge peoples' view of the D700.
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

>The D800 is not an upgrade to D700

Why do people keep saying this? What special constellation properties did the D700 have that makes the D800 such a paltry follow up?

Generationally the D800's sensor, image resolution, dynamic range and other meat and potatoes stuff has improved but that aside, the D700 was bigger, heavier, had only a 95 per cent view finder, one card slot;  I admit, was a touch faster in terms of FPS but if you're consistently hitting that ceiling, even at the time the answer is rent/buy the sports shooter D3.

O, and the D800 is comparatively less expensive than the D700.

-- hide signature --

Could you all move half an inch to the left? Okay, pretend you like each other and smile.

 The Andy G's gear list:The Andy G's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
The Andy G
Senior MemberPosts: 1,048Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Jim Keye, 8 months ago

D600/10: 24 MPs, advanced feature set; somewhere around 2k or 2.2k.

D800: 24 MPs, fully pro feature set (basically what it currently has), higher fps, especially with grip, like the D700; priced around 3k.

D800e: 36 MPs, fully pro set/no AA filter, priced around 4K.

Want 36 MPs? You can still have them. Want a pro feature set and fps w/ more reasonable file sizes? You can have that too. Want affordable FX? Got that too.

So you want them to have three manufacturing lines instead of two with no logical price spread. The 3k price was a giant middle finger to Canon and an attempt to stake out the middle of the chessboard for full frame. From a business sense, this is good thinking.

It does mean that there's now a floor and ceiling for full frame that squeezed the D300 successor's price point out of existence. Your suggestion results in higher prices and no obvious advantages to anyone other than Canon. Nikon chose lower prices (yippie!) and an attempt to grab more market.

 The Andy G's gear list:The Andy G's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D Nikon AF-S Nikkor 35mm f/1.4G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_cheese
Senior MemberPosts: 1,400
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Ronan_M, 8 months ago

Ronan_M wrote:

blue_cheese wrote:

Ronan_M wrote:

Alpha Tech wrote:

. Unfortunately, the company still does not understand that they can earn more revenue through large sales of lower profit cameras than through small sales of an overpriced niche camera.

Do you honestly believe that Nikon is run by a bunch of 22 y.o. fresh from marketing school and that they dont know where their main revenue is coming from?

Actually.....i would swing that back to you and ask what evidence do you have that they are not?

So you concur with the OP that Nikon does not know what their market segment revenue figures are?

I am sure they know what their figures*are* that's easy, add them up, but I concur that they probably do not have a good model for what their market segment revenue figures *will* be, few companies do.

They clearly do not have good idea of the total available market in each segment, and are challenged to enter products at the right feature/price point levels to make a compelling product for the market. If they did, their financials would not have been so abysmal, they would have foreseen trends earlier and prepared products to attack new markets, rather than defend a declining position.

-- hide signature --

"A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others."
- Ayn Rand

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Truman Prevatt
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,622Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to Michael Otis, 8 months ago

That's all fine but given the size and weight it is not one you would want to carry on the street for 6 or 7 hours nor one you would want to pack over a 12,000 foot pass in the Rockies.  No only that it a significant amount of resolution for frame rate and IOS.  That sounds like a specialty camera to me.

Michael Otis wrote:

The D4 is not a specialty camera. It is a professional grade camera made for photographers that use their equipment frequently and require reliability, tough contstuction and weather sealing. Nikon should replace the D4 with either the 24mp or 36mp sensor.

-- hide signature --

Magpie

-- hide signature --

Truman
www.pbase.com/tprevatt

 Truman Prevatt's gear list:Truman Prevatt's gear list
Nikon D800E Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 135mm f/2D DC Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
inasir1971
Senior MemberPosts: 3,116Gear list
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to NJani, 8 months ago

NJani wrote:

Until some years ago around the Nikon cameras everything was clear, we all could imagine the Nikon vision of the future and we all thought we know where the Nikon is going. There were DX and FX lines and each line offered cameras for beginner through enthusiat for professionals.

Didn't the single digit models move from DX to FX with the D3 when it became economically and technologically viable?

And then Nikon added a new line, the mirrorless CX which is OK. Also started to upgrade the DX line cameras which is OK too and we were waiting -and still wait- for the upgrade of D300 but nothing is happening for years.

Isn't this simply transitioning the next 'tier' to FX after the D3? Perhaps it is more appropriate to say back to FX as F mount was designed for 135 format - not DX. (A format designed for DX would use a much shorter flange distance).

And then Nikon started to mix the FX line, only the D4 is the camera I can position as the successor to D3.

By this logic, where is the successor to the D2 as the D4 line started with the D3.

But what about the others ? The D800 is not an upgrade to D700, it is something like a successor to both D700 and D3x.

Technologies change, markets change. A high resolution camera (D3X) used to cost $8000 which would limit sales, however, with the D800 Nikon were able to do it for $3000. There are many who have been happy to move from the D700 (and the D3X) to the D800 and many who have come to shoot Nikon from other makes because of the D800.

The D600 is an entry level DSLR so it is positioned below D700. The DF simply seems a new line in FX line, I don't know what group of users is targeted.

New ones and enthusiasts.

The D300 and D700 were the most beloved cameras and they were selled well. I have both but I can't change them still there are no successors.

Why Nikon is makeing experiments with such dead-born ideas ?

-- hide signature --

Cheers János

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MoreorLess
Senior MemberPosts: 2,426
Like?
Re: Rose-coloured glasses tinge peoples' view of the D700.
In reply to The Andy G, 8 months ago

The Andy G wrote:

>The D800 is not an upgrade to D700

Why do people keep saying this? What special constellation properties did the D700 have that makes the D800 such a paltry follow up?

Generationally the D800's sensor, image resolution, dynamic range and other meat and potatoes stuff has improved but that aside, the D700 was bigger, heavier, had only a 95 per cent view finder, one card slot; I admit, was a touch faster in terms of FPS but if you're consistently hitting that ceiling, even at the time the answer is rent/buy the sports shooter D3.

O, and the D800 is comparatively less expensive than the D700.

-- hide signature --

Could you all move half an inch to the left? Okay, pretend you like each other and smile.

You could I spose argue its more the improvements it doesnt have compared to a D700,

Really though I'd argue that all the people happy with there D700 highlights the issue for Nikon. That camera sold well for a number of years and many users of it are happy with the performance it gives them and not ready to upgrade. Instead target photographers who weren't happy with the D700's lack of resolution with the D800.

Canon was arguably in the reverese position with the 5D2/5D3, the former had satisifed a lot of resolution hungry photographers so rather than target them again go after improved autofocus/FPS.

My guess is both will go back to these markets in a year or two when they believe demand is higher enough to justify a new camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ronan_M
Contributing MemberPosts: 781
Like?
Re: I don't see Nikon's continuity in FX lineup ...
In reply to blue_cheese, 8 months ago

blue_cheese wrote:

I am sure they know what their figures*are* that's easy, add them up, but I concur that they probably do not have a good model for what their market segment revenue figures *will* be, few companies do.

In an industry as dynamic as this one, mostly likely not a single player can predict those figures with a reasonable degree of accuracy.

They clearly do not have good idea of the total available market in each segment, and are challenged to enter products at the right feature/price point levels to make a compelling product for the market. If they did, their financials would not have been so abysmal, they would have foreseen trends earlier and prepared products to attack new markets, rather than defend a declining position.

Again...I dont think anyone really does have an idea of how big / small each segment will be. Drops in share price are generally mid/ short term market reactions to specific event (such as failing to meet revenue targets) and most companies go through that (taka a look @ Apple if not).

Case in point Nikon and Canon hold a significant portion of the marketshare to have significant power in defining and shaping that market. Let others that need to take risks to climb up the market share ladder (such as Olympus / Sony / etc) make the bold moves and then...if the market moves in that direction, they will respond. This is exactly whats happening with the M4/3 segment.

My point: I reckon Nikon hires the best market analysts money can buy to set their corporate strategy. Looking at these fourms, the reaction is "Wahh...the new Nikon Dxyz model does not have 7 FPS, which is the camera that I want...Obviously Nikon does not have a clue of what they are doing"

Cant ppl realize that the market is bigger than their own personal camera desires and that -maybe- Nikon knows what they are doing it and why they are doing it?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RichRMA
Contributing MemberPosts: 745Gear list
Like?
Forget the niche body, Nikon is on a body cost-cutting binge
In reply to Alpha Tech, 8 months ago

The D600 and D7100?  Cost-cutting.  Their two ways of increasing profits are to cost-cut bodies and to bring in revised higher-end lenses that cost at least 40% more than their previous versions.  A D400?  No way, D300 body is too high-end, it would cost as much as the D610 and why would someone buy an APS and not a FF for the same price, body aside?

 RichRMA's gear list:RichRMA's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D200 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1 Pentax K-01 Olympus OM-D E-M5
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads