Previous news story    Next news story

CP+ 2014: Nikon Interview - 'our cameras need to evolve'

By Barney Britton on Feb 17, 2014 at 12:34 GMT

The CP+ show in Yokohama Japan has just closed, but in between visits to the various booths we made time to sit down with four senior Nikon executives to get their thoughts on the state of the market, future opportunities and the inevitable coming together of stills and video. 

Comments

Total comments: 460
1234
FiReDuCk
By FiReDuCk (4 weeks ago)

Canon is putting a lot of energy into Cinema EOS. Is there an opportunity for Nikon in the professional video space?

When we made the D800 we got a good response from the market for the video functionality, which naturally leads us to consider our next steps in terms of what we should do with video. We are considering various options, and we’re listening to the voices of our customers. But it’s not really about what to do to compete with Canon.

We have paid lots of money for Nikon D4 - this is high-end system and you can't even fix damn video on FX mode - where we can't take advantage of FX lens. Certainly you have made worse on D4s FX video is very mushy compare to D4.

The big question is did they really listen to D4 users regarding video issue? well i guess NOT!!

1 upvote
Sad Joe
By Sad Joe (1 month ago)

PLUS: Our cameras need to evolve CONS: Beyond dust and muck and an attempted cover up - so sorry.

0 upvotes
Just Ed
By Just Ed (2 months ago)

Again, I want to thank DP for this informative interview. Since it has been posted I find myself referring back to how the Nikon quartet sees the market. Laugh as some may, these cats have been in this business and just this business for quite some time. Their views are very relevant to what we might see (or not) for the next few years.

1 upvote
bawbaw
By bawbaw (2 months ago)

Into what? Their cameras have evolved so far into the best cameras for many generations. Probably the best stills cameras just now.

What this should really say is how can we re-package our cameras to look like Sony or the M 4/3rds dross, as that is what they really want to say... actually no.. what you see is the two who arent't speaking at the time to the interviewer are arguing over who told them it was a bad idea to not collaborate fully with sony. Something to the the lines of..

"Open the back the sensor says sony .. not nikon!"

Also nikon have said this 2 years running so journalistically this is as dire as the manufacturers reporting loss of sales ( none going bankrupt! ) and like today reporting CIPA loss of sales figures..

What nikon could do is revolutionise printing... make it cheap, accurate and good quality as little hassle as the taking part. Not the minefield it is now.

0 upvotes
ninja250
By ninja250 (2 months ago)

16. Vertically integrate – batteries, glass, retail stores, tripods, heads, plates, bags, memory cards, classes whatever
17. Expand your Nikon school. Partner with colleges and university photography and film schools so students use your cameras
18. Layoff people as necessary
19. Hire in young grads who are hungry, aggressive, and foolish enough to try something new – apple and google do this
20. Create apps so we can control Nikon's remotely with Android and IOS (maybe this is already possible)

0 upvotes
ninja250
By ninja250 (2 months ago)

21. Partner with apple or samsung etc and put your lenses and sensors in their phones. Create some cool phone/camera together so consumers will love it and then want to buy a dslr from you.

0 upvotes
ninja250
By ninja250 (2 months ago)

11. Compacts – admit that this market will almost disappear as cell phone cameras get better. Simplify your line to 4-5 models and product differentiation clearer to make consumer selection easier. Look at Apple’s ipod, iphone, ipad lines for a model here.
12. Figure out how to market your cameras to filmmakers. Do you need a dedicated body? Lenses? Canon has all of this
13. Make sure we know about any movies shot on a Nikon
14. Make small improvements that actually make photography better or more fun. I love the built in level in my Canon 70D.
15. Figure out the next big thing, but also small and moderate improvements. What about built in memory like 32-64gb in each camera? With some type of archive/compression feature if we get caught with full memory and no cards with us

0 upvotes
ninja250
By ninja250 (2 months ago)

Nikon,
Your cameras need to do more than just evolve. Nikon can survive and thrive if you act like a silicon valley company. Here are the top 20 things to do to stay relevant:
1. Fire everyone that okayed the DF project
2. Fire everyone associated with D600 oil on the sensor problem
3. Exchanged old D600’s for a new D610 to all customers who request it
4. Create a new D2300 to compete with Canon’s SL1
5. Discontinue the D7000 line
6. Introduce the D400 immediately
7. Plan the D400s immediately
8. Plan the D500 soon
9. Plan on introducing the D810 soon with 4K, and some other improvements
10. Discontinue the entire mirrorless line, remember the Pronea? The problem is if you had a decent competitor to the Canon SL1, few would want to buy mirrorless and buy a whole new lens collection. Small DSLRs are close enough in size to mirrorless that there is no need to fill this small gap

1 upvote
Mark Kalenian
By Mark Kalenian (2 months ago)

I liked the question about the D300S replacement. A more pointed question would have been: Has DX on the higher end cameras been officially discontinued.

0 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (2 months ago)

Or, the D300 have found a very appreciative user base, would you agree?
Followed with:
Do you have a strategy for how to continue supporting them?

In all honesty i do think that some answers are these result of culture and speaking a 2nd language.

0 upvotes
Mark Kalenian
By Mark Kalenian (2 months ago)

The problem I see with mirrorless is that many of us in the USA who have bought into the Nikon line may have invested heavily over time in a number of lenses including long ones. For me to go mirrorless, I would want a new camera to interface all my old Nikon DLSR lenses. The mirrorless camera I would consider now with no more than 1-2 lenses at most would be one of the newer Fuji ones do to light-weight or weekend work, street photography or hiking and keep with the nikon dlsr system for mores serious work. Since I and others in our club prefer nature photography, we still await the D300 and D300S replacement since we like the DX reach and increased dof. The nikon D7100 doesn't have the buffer size nor fps that would crown it as a true D300S replacement, and the D7100 is not built with that pro feel. Also it takes years for a mirrorless system to develop out its full line of lenses, especially longer ones, and with falling consumer camera sales, product releeases are prolonged.

1 upvote
Jude McDowell
By Jude McDowell (2 months ago)

They could always do what Olympus did; and release adapters for their existing range of lenses at the same time as they release a mirrorless body.

I suspect there may also be quite a few people outside of the USA who have also built up sizeable collections of lenses :-)

1 upvote
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (2 months ago)

Jude, Nikon does make such an adapter.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-3613-FT-1-F-Mount-Adapter/dp/B005TMSN4E/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1393258784&sr=8-3&keywords=nikon+1+adapter+to+f+mount

If you buy that adapter, you can use use Nikon F lenses on a Nikon 1 camera and still have autofocus. Just like the Olympus MMF adapters do for M4/3.

The downside is the adapter is huge, and expensive ($239). The size and weight alone is enough to negate the advantage of buying a tiny camera.

0 upvotes
Mark Kalenian
By Mark Kalenian (2 months ago)

The nikon 1 is CX format, smaller than 4/3 or DX. I dont believe a purist photo afficianado would go near nikons current system unless they have at least a DX size sensor like Fuji or Sony and a good quality lens line with a number of available lenses and/or an adapter for old nikon lenses to a nikon mirrorless that at least has a DX sensor size.

0 upvotes
Pooshka
By Pooshka (2 months ago)

I wish Apple got into camera/lens business.

0 upvotes
jeffharris
By jeffharris (2 months ago)

Apple DOES make cameras… iPhone and iPod! ;-)

I'd love to see Apple design a user interface for cameras!

They've gotten so ridiculously complex, difficult to learn and setup properly, there simply MUST be a better way!

Also, it would be great if the tool sets were in some way modular, so you could simply shut off or completely remove stupid things like in-camera editing, "art" filters, scene modes, etc..

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
JGoodard
By JGoodard (2 months ago)

Pentax UI is very basic and easy to navigate. There are also more efficient and user friendly OS UI's than IOS; BB10 for ex.

0 upvotes
Jaythomasni
By Jaythomasni (1 month ago)

Interesting thing about apple is they Won't make anything with moving parts. Precision engineering and legendary electronics manufacturing is still the Japanese fort.
Apples success with touch screen iproducts is more of a hype. They have legendary software with superior touch interface. On engineering front apple is nothing. IPhone as a camera is more of a marketing success.
Any ways all the internals are Sony.
Apple or even Samsung can't match when it comes to pure engineering and electronics design and moving parts. See where is Samsung as a camera maker of even a printer maker. They are doing good in TVs again no moving parts or cutting edge electronics.
Germans are the closest in terms of lens quality. But see how they do with the electronics experiment of a camera.
No one can beat Japanese in terms of absolute electronics design and engineering.

0 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (2 months ago)

not to be overly critical, but I wouldn't mind having a nikon FX or DX milc next to my dslr. Nikon 1 series doesn't interest me except for the aw1 or the underwater version (if it was cheaper I might get that).

2 upvotes
rich889
By rich889 (2 months ago)

The sense that I came away with in this interview that Nikon is extremely complacent. For instance, Nikon does NOT want to create a high quality mirror-less camera because it might detract from their DSLR revenue so instead they blame the American public. Denial to cover mediocrity. They ignore the fact that the move towards mirror-less is a growing market, and that the picture quality of Nikon 1 v1 and v2 is indeed INFERIOR to APS-C and even Micro Four Thirds. Nikon has not been an pioneer in the digital age for over 15 years, but the recent falling-off of quality (as shown by problems with the D600) is troubling, and is a shame for those of us who have used Nikon equipment for decades.

5 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Interesting observation rich889. I guess the big 2 are just too stubborn to join this "great and growing (snicker!) mirrorless revolution" and make an extra few billion dollars in the process. Hmmm! Of course, if there really were a mirrorless revolution similiar to the auto focus revolution that Minolta started in 1984-85, then Canon would put major resources into its development efforts as they did in 1987 with their EOS cameras and EF lenses for the AF revolution. Nikon would do the same. So, whenever, and if ever one or more of the mirrorless camera manufacturers proves that there actually is a mirrorless revolution, (by making a profit and growing substantial market share), then the big 2 would have reason to step in and take over. Hey, don't take my word for it, just ask Minolta. :)

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
HFLM
By HFLM (2 months ago)

So far, there is no mirror less revolution. It might come, but sheer numbers suggest otherwise. Look at bythom.com for an interesting article on this very issue. He is very good at analysing trends.

2 upvotes
Eleson
By Eleson (2 months ago)

He is a 'love nikon at all cost' kind of guy. Instead of saying that nikon was great for listening to the needs for communication, he could have listed the options or there that already does what nikon aims at.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@HFLM,

I took your advise and visited the bythom.com site. The article pointing to the strengths and weaknesses of the competing camera manufacturers and their importance or relevance to their parent companies' revenue stream was an especially good read. It shows that Darwinism is very much at work among these very different companies, and that's why they each have their own unique approach to product creation and marketing.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
pizzolog
By pizzolog (2 months ago)

A minor statement rich889 was making is that the move towards mirrorless is a growing market, and not as DonnieG has wrongly paraphased "great and growing (snicker!) mirrorless revolution". It seems that there are a number of mirrorless cameras being produced supporting the rich889 statement.

The point rich889 is making is that Nikon does not want to create a high quality mirrorless camera because it may detract from their DSLR revenue base. Based on the above interview, this appear to be a reasonable inference.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@pizzolog,

I'm willing to bet that Nikon is already busily at work on making a high quality camera that doesn't have a mirror box, and they will bring it to market as soon as they can design one that is better than the product it is intended to replace, yet can still be used with their legacy lenses and accessaries. While pros and hard core enthusiasts might like having a tool that is a little smaller and lighter than what they're carrying today, they will still expect it to work with the gear they already own. There's really no need for Nikon to "throw out the baby with the bath water" in order to please the "tiniest is best" crowd. That crowd can be happily served by the m4/3 camera companies or a smartphone vendor. :)

0 upvotes
pizzolog
By pizzolog (2 months ago)

I agree, the likelihood is that Nikon is developing, and certainly should be developing, a mirrorless camera compatible with, what I believe, is the best and most comprehensive lens system in the industry. Their motto has long been: Any Nikon body will work with any Nikkor lens ever made.
Bty, Nikon has pleased the "tiniest is best" crowd in the ultracompact Coolpix S01. The S01 turns out surprisingly high image quality photographs.

1 upvote
AndyGM
By AndyGM (2 months ago)

@Donnie G

It is my opinion that the sweet spot for mirrorless is shorter focal lengths, medium tele downwards. The key strength of mirrorless is small size, less weight, more portable, once you start making a super tele lens for a mirrorless camera, it will still be pretty large, so you need a larger body with a larger grip to balance it well, and then you've removed the one major advantage of mirrorless. For this use case, super telephoto, DSLR still makes the most sense.

For this same reason, using existing DSLR lenses with mirrorless cameras is pretty pointless. To get the advantages of mirrorless, the whole system, body and lenses, needs to be small.

I personally don't have any need for focal lengths longer than 200mm equiv, so mirrorless cameras suit me much better than a DSLR.

@rich889 Being truthful about US customers, their beliefs and preconceptions isn't "blaming them" for anything. Perhaps Nikon should have done the research first before designing a mirrorless camera!

0 upvotes
pizzolog
By pizzolog (2 months ago)

I always looked towards Nikon to produce the state-of-the-art camera for the Professional and Enthusiast. For the Nikon executives to admit that mirrorless cameras offer the same high image quality in a smaller system, shows that Nikon gives the Professional and Enthusiast the camera they think they want, rather then market the best technically advanced camera Nikon knows the consumer should want.
The innovation of the SLR over the range finder, which Nikon championed, was the superior design for film photography. In the digital era, the DSLR pays a heavy weight and bulk penalty for its mirror box design. Electronically viewing the image from the sensor rather then through-the-lens makes for a lighter and more efficient camera, and thus the better design. The dslr design is obsolete, and Nikon knows it.
Integrity would lead Nikon to make the better camera, rather then studying why the American customer is mis-informed.
We all want Nikon to make money, but not at the expense of virtue.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@pizzolog

So you seriously believe that Nikon shouldn't make products that their customers want, but instead, should make only products that your committee of one has decided is the better choice for those customers. And of course those customers will bow to your logic that they don't know what's good for them and therefore shouldn't be given any choices in their purchases. Well, If you ever make it onto the Nikon board of directors, let us know how that plan works out for you. :)

1 upvote
pizzolog
By pizzolog (2 months ago)

Saturday, February 22, 2014
There are several camera manufactures pioneering the significant design benefits of the mirrorless camera. For years now, these manufacturers have been producing state-of-the-art cameras that rival Nikon’s dslr’s Image Quality but only in a smaller, lighter and less bulky package. And these manufacturers have been enjoying praises and winning awards. Sony’s RX100ii, RX1, Alpha 7, 7R; Olympus OM M5 & M1; Fuji X-T1, X-E2; Panasonic GX7.
Since the 1950’s, Nikon’s image has been The Pioneer of great cameras, there may never be another camera as universally loved in its day as the Nikon F for example.
So yes, I think that Nikon should produce the very best cameras for the Professional and the Enthusiast rather then doing as they are doing, and giving them the camera they think they want in the dslr form. This has been always Nikon’s marketing image.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
1 upvote
binauralbeats
By binauralbeats (2 months ago)

These are the guys that brought you "Pure Photography".

4 upvotes
Janoch
By Janoch (2 months ago)

Why the heck didn't you ask them, if they are completely blind or deaf to the requests for a D300s update??

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

I'd rather have a 48MPix D700S.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (2 months ago)

Yeah, great interview technique - aggressively ask them questions you know they won't answer...

8 upvotes
GoldRingNikkor
By GoldRingNikkor (2 months ago)

To be honest, I think that a few slightly more critical questions would have been on order. If Nikon thinks that their quality control is already rigorous, why the D800 and D600 QC disasters? If Nikon thinks that their mirrorless cameras are not selling well, why not ask them why they price them like DSLRs even though they use smaller sensors and fewer parts? I do understand that you don't want to upset your interview partner(s), but honestly, I'm not all that interested in hearing about their targeting of flowery motifs to India and Europe...

1 upvote
Janoch
By Janoch (2 months ago)

"Aggressively ask"? Where did that come from?
It surely must be possible to phrase a question on behalf of the large D300 group - who often and everywhere are begging for a true replacement - without being "aggressive"??
But of course the opportunity has been passed, so no point in this... I was just curious!
And sorry if it sounded "aggressive". Not meant to be, and not really my "style".
Cheers, Jan.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (2 months ago)

You don't get as big and successful as DPR by putting people, especially the Japanese, over the coals. Maybe, after failing to give the Df a gold medal, DPR decided to tread lightly.

For consumers, things are getting better, at least more interesting with loose canons like Fake Chuck but if you're a "mainstream" presence on the internet, you temper your remarks.

1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (2 months ago)

What yabokkie and the FF crowd won't tell you is that FF digital image quality is inferior to drum scanned 8x10 film. Therefore, every time they click the shutter on a FF digital camera, they are choosing to use an inferior imaging format, in exchange for convenience and comfort.

6 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

an 8x10 may or may not have better image quality than 35mm format cameras. it all depends on the application and lens aperture, not the format, is a more decisive factor.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (2 months ago)

I'm not sure I can take you seriously, yabokkie. An 8x10 view camera with the best lenses available will ALWAYS out-resolve any FF digital camera you care to name, as well as capture more dynamic range, color tones, etc. It is no contest.

Therefore, in choosing to use a FF digital camera, you are a rank amateur. It may be that your opinions are not even worth considering, if you can't recognize the inferiority of your chosen format.

Of course, if you DO recognize the inferiority of your chosen format, then we can discuss the reasons why you have decided to COMPROMISE ULTIMATE IMAGE QUALITY. It may be that convenience, size, weight, and performance are also important considerations when buying a camera. Is that right?

8 upvotes
Provia_fan
By Provia_fan (2 months ago)

In the 2 interactions I have had with him, I have decided that you can't take him serious at all. Spews a lot with little significance or knowledge.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

okay, I'd like to give a simple lesson here.

a large format is basically the same as a smaller one at lower ISO, where the ISO numbers are propotional to the area ratio (ISO equivalent). you can think that all the differences in resolution, dynamic range, color tones, etc., come from lower ISO equivalent.

since 8x10 is 60 times larger in area than 35mm format, ISO100 on 35mm format will perform exactly the same as ISO6000 on 8x10 (except abnormal chemical/electronic responses like reciprocity failure). but this is for adequate light (or slow shutter). for low light, lens aperture takes over format as the dominating factor and this is why 35mm SLR is the prefered system for sports and events.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 15 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Fransv
By Fransv (2 months ago)

@Plastek: Why are lots of people selling their DSLR's (including myself) in favour of mirrorless cameras like Fuji X? Simple: sensor quality is equal to SLR and Fuji's glass is on a PAR-level (Leica-like) The DSLR-market is deminishing the next 5 to 10 years in favour of mirrorless.

3 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (2 months ago)

" We have done some studies where we presented consumers with a DSLR and a mirrorless camera and ask them if the image quality was the same, which one they would chose, and generally they chose the DSLR." - I would answer in exactly the same way. Simply because DSLRs offer by far wider choice of lenses many of which are superior to mirrorless glass. And then there are whole systems of accessories, flashes, and well: everything else that in the end creates a photograph.

So: Yes, DSLRs DO offer better final image quality, but reasons for that go beyond body itself.

1 upvote
flipmac
By flipmac (2 months ago)

Maybe on FF. On APS-C DSLRs like the majority of users, it's difficult to say that mirrorless is inferior as a general statement.

I mean, I've had Rebels for years and Canon never made an EF-S 'normal' lens (around 28-35mm) and only ever bothered making only ONE EF-S prime. Yes, you could use EF (FF) lenses or lenses from third party, but it's obvious that Canon's main focus is FF. A while ago, Nikon was in a similar boat, but luckily they've put more effort in making DX lenses. Now, compare that to the number of mirrorless lenses released so far in the last few years, particularly in m4/3. Even Fuji released 3 primes right off the bat. Mirrorless lenses, like m4/3, perform just as well as their DSLR equivalent mounted on a APS-C bodies.

As for accessories like flash, m4/3 is using the same flash system as their DSLR. Also, even the cheapest body, like the E-PL1, has multi-flash wireless remote control built-in, where as you'd need a middle tier body or higher to get that on DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
technotic
By technotic (2 months ago)

I'm curious what the DPR staff think of yabokkie's comments.

0 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

Im sure they print them out and put them up on their walls!

2 upvotes
binauralbeats
By binauralbeats (2 months ago)

They often delete his/her posts.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
AndyGM
By AndyGM (2 months ago)

A far wider choice of lenses is not the rationale that these Joe Public types are giving when they tell the Nikon Market Researcher they prefer the DSLR.

And why should it be? The lens attach rate for APS-C DSLRs is less than 2! How often do you see people toting a DSLR at some tourist destination? All the time, right? How often do you see someone toting a DSLR at some tourist destination that hasn't got the kit lens mounted? Hardly ever!

These Nikon guys told Barney what their customers told them, in the US it's the "bigger is better" belief, in Europe it is a prestige thing. Which suits Nikon just fine, they've got loads of DLSRs on the market already, loads of market share, so there is no need for them to do any expensive work inventing or perfecting a new camera system, they can keep churning out what they've always done with little R&D and therefore lots of profit margin, and Americans and Europeans will keep buying them.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (2 months ago)

I still shoot my D700 from late 2007.. the problem for Nikon is that i dont need to buy a new DSLR every year the way people do with mirrorless cameras. That is what is driving that market and why companies are trying to get in.

Consumers in the mirorrless segment of the market will buy lackluster cameras only to upgrade then annually (just read the m43 forum)... whereas a DSLR will last you a decade or more. Nothing glamourous here, nothing to show-off.. just a rock solid DSLR that does its job and lasts.

4 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

Maybe they don't buy new DSLR's because DSLR vendors keep releasing the same crap over and over, without innovation?

7 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (2 months ago)

Pdelux: They already perform! Mirrorless are only now getting to the point where they can be considered at the same and in some case superior level. What's innovation for you? Isn't it enough to improve LCD, sensor, processor jpg engine...? Mirrorless need larger innovation to gain attention and to show that there is an alternative which is of use, too. But it takes some time until they get a track record, accessory chain, professional maintenance service (for pro models) etc.

2 upvotes
The Silver Fox
By The Silver Fox (2 months ago)

I agree with HFLM. I am a strong proponent for mirrorless (I own one, along with my DSLR), but it must be recognized that mirrorless cameras have been playing catch-up these last few years. Only now (perhaps since the release of the Olympus OM-D EM-5) are mirrorless at a level where they can replace DSLR's for many users (not every user, understand).

1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

HFLM, No arguments there, but that is what I am saying, DSLR have not changed, because they are the leader and have no reason to innovate. But one might say that Mirrorless is the Evolution of the SLR. Even in nature some things are left behind because they become redundant - e.g. Bats are blind because they live in darkness no need for eye sight.

1 upvote
jtan163
By jtan163 (2 months ago)

And I guess you still don't have HD video or means of transferring your shots to your phone?

Some people upgrade their cameras because new features are available.

You wouldn't know that as a Nikon buyer though, because Nikon iterate, where other brands are innovating.

There have been some pretty nice features added to the last generation or two of mirrorless - not so much the case in Nikon DSLR world. The Canon DSLR world is slightly more innovative, but not a great deal.

Some people, are still shooting box brownies, but I don't think that is an argument against DSLRs or even mirrorless.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (2 months ago)

The problem is that nobody, mirrorless or SLR, needs a new camera every year. Innovation won't fix this because the reason they don't need a new camera is because their current camera is so good.

These handsome gents have just about worked themselves out of a job. The only hope is to get more people interested in video. It's like the "4-D" movie theaters in China or 19-speaker surround sound. Eventually you run the string.

0 upvotes
HFLM
By HFLM (2 months ago)

AbrasiveReducer: Exactly, almost nobody needs a new camera every year. Quality is so good you can make excellent images with most formats. I always wonder why people buy the newest mirror less just for uploading pictures to Facebook. I for myself don't need video or Wlan... This is however one of the few areas where camera manufacturers see possibility for growth. The market is mostly saturated, it's difficult to find new gimmicks and it gets more important to implant the desire into people that a new camera is essential to become a better photographer.

1 upvote
photosen
By photosen (2 months ago)

Interesting.

0 upvotes
Autocrat
By Autocrat (2 months ago)

Steve Jobs famously said

“If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.”

Most businesses protect existing products, services, and processes and fear change. Such fear comes at a great price. Remember Kodak? Xerox? Blockbuster? Book stores?

No industry is immune – no company is safe.

Evolve or die.

7 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (2 months ago)

Well, Nikon seems to be doing quite fine. They even experiment with smartphones and try to cooperate with companies strong on that market (Nikon is the one to get their Android compacts out first, and rumors about Nikon smartphone pop from time to time so there's certainly something in the air). They don't bother with Mirrorless cause they seem to collapse under their own weight anyway, but their AW series was quite creative - after all it's first WR mirrorless on a market.

As one of analysts said: Only Canon, Nikon and Sony will survive smartphone onslaught.

0 upvotes
adr23
By adr23 (2 months ago)

It pains me to say this but Nikon needs to fall down all the way to near bottom, fire all their executives, restructure and get some fresh minds in there. Then, maybe then, we'll get some true innovation.
Same old simply doesn't cut anymore.

9 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (2 months ago)

If these guys makes weapons instead most of the world would love them....

1 upvote
alcaher
By alcaher (2 months ago)

The one at the top left side looks like a japanesse teacher at Harvard, the one at the botoom left side looks like a retired jappanesse actor, the one at the botton right side looks like a lawyer with so many lost cases and the one at the top right side i dont know what does he look like

... but none of them know something about global market and photography.

2 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (2 months ago)

So I guess you know more about the global market and photography than the Nikon executives?

3 upvotes
alcaher
By alcaher (2 months ago)

i know nothing about it, you are right :-/

0 upvotes
ninja250
By ninja250 (2 months ago)

I loved my D300 and D300s, but I got tired of waiting for the D400. Bought a D7000, didn't like it. Considered getting a D600, but ended up selling my D7000, D300s, D3200, D5100 and all my Nikon lenses. Got a 70D and 6D and love this combination. The 70D is what the D400 should have been and more. I love the autofocus, video, image quality, built in level in the finder, and overall handling. I use the 6D for landscapes. The UI and control layout is very similar between the 70D and 6D and the image quality is outstanding. After hearing about the D600 issue, I'm happy with my decision. I don't wonder and hope for a D400 anymore. I don't even wonder when a 80D and 6D II are coming out, since I'm totally happy with the two Canon bodies I'm using and get outstanding stills and video. Consider buying Canon and keeping your Nikon equipment for 1-2 years. I found myself not using my Nikon gear once I had enough Canon gear so I eventually sold all my Nikon stuff.

4 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (2 months ago)

In the name of the DPR community I would like to sincerely apalogize Nikon Management for our rude and uncivilized style of commenting their thoughtful and polished interview statements. I do this to strengthen mutual trust in Nikon. I am sure you struggle to maintain this trust with your shareholders under the ever changing and challenging market environment. I am also sure you struggle to maintain any trust with your customers, including us. That is the reason for this rude behavior from our part. You have to avoid the overestimated value proposals (initial Nikon 1, Df, 1.4/58mm), and quality issues (D600). You have to plan your communication better, like the above. You have to manage customer perceptions much better. After then we will see.

0 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

"our cameras need to evolve"

As opposed to just selling the same stuff year after year?

In Australia we have a saying, "No sh*t Sherlock!", which applies to the above statement.

5 upvotes
Debankur Mukherjee
By Debankur Mukherjee (2 months ago)

How many defective bodies will Nikon make and put our hard earned money to the drain before they can be termed as a "evolved" camera manufacturer ??

0 upvotes
svx94
By svx94 (2 months ago)

If they think Nikon 1 is a mirror less , they are not wake up yet

2 upvotes
camerosity
By camerosity (2 months ago)

It's been a long time since Nikon released a camera like the F3HP. That camera was absolutely ground breaking. No other camera had that kind of shutter, that kind of viewfinder. They boldly went where no photographer had been before. And the F3 was made for 21 years. No other camera can claim that kind of longevity. I know I'll never sell mine.

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (2 months ago)

Nikon and Canon epitomize the camera Jurassic era. Evolve before extinction.

1 upvote
Ben Ramsey
By Ben Ramsey (2 months ago)

Not really the best analogy. The Jurrasic lasted over 50 million years and was followed by the Cretaceous, which lasted another 80 million, if memory serves. There was no mass extinction seperating the two. The end of the dinosaurs was brought about by cataclysm. Had that not occurred, we never would have stood a chance regardless of our current arrogance.

1 upvote
NDaniel
By NDaniel (2 months ago)

All these executive will look nicer if only they carry a D4S with a 1200-1700mm f/5.6-8P IF-ED close to their eye... surely we will listen more to their words if it happen, well bigger mean better quality right?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Antahkarana
By Antahkarana (2 months ago)

I hope that Nikon is actually reading all these comments. They will learn a lot about what is missing in their product lineup.

I rarely comment on forums and this was the first time I started to comment here because I felt as strongly as others that lots of things have to change @ Nikon.

1 upvote
Carlos Loff
By Carlos Loff (2 months ago)

Nikon does not read DPReview comments - That is way it is slowly but surely crumbling down

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (2 months ago)

Read the Fuji interview, then the Nikon one. Interesting.

Clearly Nikon know that the consumer (APSC) future will have to be mirrorless. They have the technology well in hand, probably even have a number of production ready prototypes, but they wont do it before Canon does, and Canon wont do it before Nikon does. No-one is blinking right now, but when they press that button the whole market will turn upside down.

The risk to Nikon will be that they have no way to differentiate themselves from the pack any more. Nikon would have to cannibalise sales of its (bread winning) mid range SLR line, with no guarantee of matching sales in a parallel mirrorless line. Indeed, by blessing mirrorless, they may open the taps for Fuji, Sony etc. since having legacy lenses will no longer be an incentive to stay with Nikon.

Of course if Canon move, they will have no choice. Which one will move first?

4 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (2 months ago)

No, they don't know the APS-C future is mirrorless.
No one knows what is future of us all.

But Nikon wants to DESIGN the future as far as they can, by pushing forward their FX FF DSLR line, and in time extinguishing their DX DSLR line.

Just wait another 12 months or so when a D5xxx something comes out with an FF sensor.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Interesting observation 57even, and it may even be, at least, partially true. If there really were a mirrorless revolution similiar to the auto focus revolution that Minolta started in 1984-85, then Canon would put major resources into its development efforts as they did in 1987 with their EOS cameras and EF lenses for the AF revolution. Nikon would do the same. So, whenever, and if ever one or more of the mirrorless camera manufacturers proves that there actually is a mirrorless revolution, by making a profit and growing substantial market share, then the big 2 would have reason to step in and take over. Don't take my word for it, just ask Minolta.

1 upvote
57even
By 57even (2 months ago)

@Zvonimir

Look at the sales numbers of APSC and FF and get back to me on that.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (2 months ago)

@Donnie G

I think in some markets the revolution already happened, but the big brands have a lot of marketing muscle and some consumer groups just buy Nikon or Canon because they feel they are the reliable brand.

If they produced a good mirrorless product that competed with their APSC SLRs, people would look at the badge and think OK this mirrorless thing must be OK then.

But this is also a problem, because they cannot then guarantee dominance. Nor will they benefit from the reflected glory of their pro cameras because people can't buy a "mini" D4 when they buy their D3200. Nor can they buy lenses which they can later use when they upgrade to FF (not that all that many ever do).

The biggest issue for both makers is their legacy. Enthusiasts generally have a nice collection of Nikon glass which could suddenly become redundant overnight if the market perceives a general shift.

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@57even

I'm using Canon as an example because I am most familiar with their system:

Irregardless of market forces, it would make no sense for Canon to bear the expense or manufacturing complexities of producing an interchangeable lens line that competes with their world beating EF lenses. The EF-M, EF-S and EF lenses are all compatible natively or by way of an adapter to their specific EOS body type, and that would have to be the case for any interchangeable lens body within the Canon eco-system. I suspect the same would be true within the Nikon eco-system as well. Do these systems pretend to play friendly with 3rd party lens makers? No! And they don't have to, because the idea is to grow their native systems exclusively. They must be doing something right, since they are the only ones who are able to turn a profit in their business.

1 upvote
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@57even

In conclusion: If mirrorless bodies ever evolve to the point where they gained technological superiority in AF tracking, battery life, WYSIWYG viewfinder performance, all day hand holding ergonomics, and wide spread acceptance among working professionals and hard core enthusiasts as their primary tool of choice, then, and only then would it make sense for Canon to develop an entirely new EF lens system solely to support mirrorless bodies.

1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

"If mirrorless bodies ever evolve to the point where they gained technological superiority in AF tracking, battery life, WYSIWYG viewfinder performance, all day hand holding ergonomics, and wide spread acceptance among working professionals and hard core enthusiasts as their primary tool of choice, then, and only then would it make sense for Canon to develop an entirely new EF lens system solely to support mirrorless bodies."

If canon wait until pro's are using mirrorless from other brands, then its probably too late to play catchup.

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (2 months ago)

What sells those mid-range DSLRs is not sensor, but price. Many people buying them have no idea what sensor those D5xxxxs have. If the crop sensor is replaced by an FF sensor, and price remains similar, Nikon has *evolved* the offer and does not need to bother with maintenance of two separate lines. And maintenance and further diversification of two separate lines is what some Nikon users want from Nikon, albeit it makes no sense for Nikon.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

@pdelux

If the EOS M2 shows any real potential for sustained sales growth outside of Japan and Asia, just watch how fast Canon will put its marketing clout behind it worldwide. Neither Canon nor Nikon have to be the first ones out of the gate in order to win the race. Just ask Minolta, Kodak, Konica, Contax, etc.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dg90
By dg90 (2 months ago)

Canon will rule the world, a sleeping giant. But if the time comes, he will be the winner. Just ask Minolta, Kodak, Konica, Contax, etc ... or in the future Olympus, Panasonic, Sony, Pentax (haha), Samsung, [type in a brand which you don´t have or like]

Canon is moving slowly, in the shadows, like a ninja.

0 upvotes
Autocrat
By Autocrat (2 months ago)

Steve Jobs famously said “If you don’t cannibalize yourself, someone else will.”

Most businesses protect existing products, services, and processes and fear change. Such fear comes at a great price. Remember Kodak? Xerox? Blockbuster? Book stores?

The music industry is changing before our eyes. The publishing industry is collapsing under its own weight and fear.The advertising industry is faced with a simple choice: innovate or die.

No industry is immune – no company is safe.

Evolve or die.

0 upvotes
BIOGONS
By BIOGONS (2 months ago)

The large qtty of good FF and DX lenses, in the Nikon side, is a heavy ballast to move to a mirrorless system. They have to develop a new mless line with shorter focus distance, and rival the new Olympus, Panasonic, Sony anf Fuji mless cameras. Find a nikonist leaving aside his lenses.

0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (2 months ago)

Oh yeah. There was that little comment about smaller, crapper sensors making good enough image quality, and I'm thinking is that your job? Making worse cameras? I'm telling ya. These people are waiting for us to say stop cutting corners on the sensor! THAT is not where you cut your "components".

It's simple. They will continue to make higher profits on crappers cameras until we stop buying them. Let's not praise only the newness, gadgets, non-photographic benefits. Let's get better lenses AND better sensors, in a total benefit balanced(speeds, sizes, controls, video quality, PRICED/VALUE) camera. Please.

Plus, mirrrorless is on it's way only when EVF's beats OVF's. Get the speeds up. That makes for smaller cameras, and better video.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (2 months ago)

Oh please. I'm working with an old Nikon DSLR only because of it's price per image quality. Not because of it's bigger size! I am WAITING on Nikon to make something better than the N1 series. One with no-jello video, and manual control.

Make a mirrorless D610 (and D7100) and stop cheaping-out on the sensor. We can tell! Make a smaller camera with all that, and....

Fast refresh side mount EVF-only rangfinder-like (smaller) system and lenses. Like the effort you did on the wrong N1 system.

APS-C improved, would work also; but you might as well go full frame. Sony did.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
GPW
By GPW (2 months ago)

If you want smaller, buy a cell phone. I want D300 size so I can shoot the F@#$%NG camera with gloves on, it gets cold here in Canada, and mirrorless is still not up to par, period.

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (2 months ago)

It's cheaper and more profitable to hammer existing customers on lens price increases than to innovate new camera models.

0 upvotes
David V
By David V (2 months ago)

Looks more like the re-enactment of the Beatles Let it Be album cover! LOL!!

2 upvotes
Artifact
By Artifact (2 months ago)

What a bunch of whiny photographers in this comment section! I just switched from canon 'cause d5300 had the best sensor for the price and I am loving it.
I do not know what is so great about mirrorless cameras though. They are much better than ones from 10 years ago but still no match to OVFs. If you move fast image in the viewfinder gets blurry. SLR with optical viewfinder is still the best thing for fast photography.

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (2 months ago)

Let people enjoy their hobby of photography. This is photography's equivalent of the hot stove league in baseball. Nothing wrong. Very entertaining.

The D5100.D5200/D5300 clearly one of the sweet spots in DLSR photography. But OVF is not everything. There are focusing issues and OEMs didn't try to incorporate LCD features (overhead projection) over the OVF view. I would love OVF that gives a slightly greater field of view than the imaging area as a couple of Sigma DLSRs had out of necessity.

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (2 months ago)

Why do you people broadbrush about the EVF versus OVF? EVF is superior in almost every way, especially for critical manual focusing, viewing in dark areas, OVF is superficially better "looking" which has nothing to do with anything.

2 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

The mirrorless fans have really had a fun time bashing these Nikon execs for not giving away any future product development plans. So have some frustrated Nikon fans who are tired of waiting for the mythical D400. What if the D400 does arrive shortly, dressed in a mirrorless pro grade DX format body and sporting a killer EVF inside the traditionally placed viewfinder hump on the top of the camera body? Would mirrorless fans finally shut up and be happy? Would the Nikon faithful accept the new camera as the answer to their pro DX prayers? My best guess answer to both questions; PROBABLY NOT! Now you know why the Nikon execs have frizzy hair. :)

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Antahkarana
By Antahkarana (2 months ago)

They are losing camera sales partially because the market is saturated with me-too designs and rehashes from the last decade. Even if the sensors have improved, the concept of the SLR is fast-becoming dated.

The F-Mount harkens back to 1959. It was a great idea that your Dad or Grandpa's lenses could fit on a modern camera but if we do not need to have a mirror loudly flapping around causing camera shake, why have it? OLED technology is ready to do the job.

If Nikon joins the micro 4/3 group, upgrades their FF line to OLED, and gives the DX users their beloved D400 with OLED, people will be pleasantly surprised.

1 upvote
Neodp
By Neodp (2 months ago)

BS the opposite is true. They sound like they are heading down a bigger camera path because the N1 system failed. That just stupid. That camera failed because it has an inferior sensor, at any size. All other things are actually good; but that kills it.

So, make a better mirrorless camera than Sony, and make it smaller. Make a better, faster EVF, and tend to the video AND stills. F the D400. F the GPS. F the the funky colors.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (2 months ago)

Gosh Neodp, it sounds like those Nikon execs aren't the only ones with frizzy hair.

0 upvotes
Valiant Thor
By Valiant Thor (2 months ago)

Who the hell cut their hair? I'll never be able to look at my Nikon the same anymore.

4 upvotes
Neodp
By Neodp (2 months ago)

LOL. Same person who thought they should make cameras for girls!

Seriously, I respect their difficulties understanding what we want (and will buy). Plus, I think they are gracious to give the interview in the first place.

Here's to more honorable products!

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
LFLee
By LFLee (2 months ago)

I have an explanation why north American mirrorless market is weak: all those burgers make our hand so fat we can't press one button on mirrorless without touching other buttons... the camera is too small for our fat fingers and hands.

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

mirrorless makers should not blame others but work hard to make some good products.

0 upvotes
Valiant Thor
By Valiant Thor (2 months ago)

No mystery at all. The USA is currently around 26th in literacy and is fast becoming a population of TV watching, smartphone addicted, fast food eating, video game playing, WalMart shoppers. Clear-headed and critical thinking is rapidly becoming a scarce resource.

4 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (2 months ago)

Until Americans stop equating size and bulk with quality, sales of mirror-less will not be where DSLR's are.

3 upvotes
pdelux
By pdelux (2 months ago)

America has ingrained a bigger is better mentality (in most areas, not all). Look at the size of their cars, omg HUMMERS, Ford pickups, the size of 2 small european or Japanese cars, 25 inch Rims, BLING BLING, I guess cameras are rationalised the same.

0 upvotes
PazinBoise
By PazinBoise (2 months ago)

@pdelux - While the "bigger is better" mentality is still a strong part of American culture there is more to it than that when it comes to why mirrorless camera's popularity has yet to explode here in the US.

It's not so much that many America view DSLRs as being better because they are bulkier it's that the general perception is DSLRs are the next step up from their phones and point&shoots. Ask the average consumer in the US what they know about DSLRs and they'll tell you it's what pros/serious photographers use and that they produce better IQ. The majority of US consumers (i.e. non-photo enthusiast) are unaware of what mirrorless cameras actually are and view them as simply another non-DSLR camera.

Better marketing effort to the general populace about why mirrorless cameras are just as good as DSLRs (at least for them) along with better product placement in movies, TV, and with celebrities needs to happen in the US for them to sell better.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
thejohnnerparty
By thejohnnerparty (2 months ago)

For me, I would rather that they do more to the D610 - better autofocus, i.e. more frame coverage and if the can make it even faster. The resolution is fine - don't need more. Maybe a little more low light capability. Aperture control in live view! Call it the D620! :-)

1 upvote
pixperfect
By pixperfect (2 months ago)

The name Nikon is slowly fading away, just like a car going downhill with failing brakes.
Reducing cost (or making bigger profits) by moving the manufacturing to China.
Very deceiving when looking at the label and finding out that the camera is made in China ( V1, P7800, etc...)! cheaper price? Better quality?
Look at Fujifilm's camera body, lens, all made in Japan.
If this trend continues, in a few more years, there will no more Nikons because nobody wants a Nikon.

6 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (2 months ago)

then why some products made in China, Thailand, Malaysia, or Taiwan got better quality than made in Japan?

0 upvotes
taktak91
By taktak91 (2 months ago)

Because "MADE IN JAPAN" these days means they're made in a factory located somewhere in Japan. Doesn't mean those working there are Japanese. Case in point is a shuttle bus accident involving workers from SHARP's Kameyama factory in Japan. All the victims were from the Philippines.

1 upvote
Jaythomasni
By Jaythomasni (2 months ago)

Its true. Once Nikon name sounded quality optics, electronic and engineering. Todays Nikon is all crap made in Thailand, china,Philippines and Vietnam almost all over. Just one look at the glass ,plastics and labels and the tolerances and texture one can make out its 'Cheap' version. 'it looks cheap' became a phrase in photography world due to this.
Canon to some extend reserves key products to japan.
Fuji realized the power and image of 'made in japan' seal and advertising and trying to be consistent in quality . Only Fuji and canon have some image left in this regard . Rest all carry Chinese crap image. Same with other electronic companies.

Japanese companies while imitating western companies for profits never realized their brand respect they achieved over decades was only with their relentless commitment to quality and legendary engineering which they are loosing painfully

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (2 months ago)

Where is Joe Ehrenreich when we need him? I'd better include a link.

http://www.pacificrimcamera.com/pp/nikon/fstory.htm

1 upvote
nidri
By nidri (2 months ago)

The biggest gap for Nikon is video. Primarily because they don't have a pro range of videocameras to 'protect' by dumbing down on video features. (Something Canon, Sony and Panasonic are always going to have to deal with.) So here's the plan. Aptina has already announced a 1 inch sensor that's 4K video capable*. Stick that, along with the latest Expeed and UHS-II, into a consumer model V3 that'll work out of the box with all existing 1 series AF glass. But don't stop there. Then bring out a V3 Pro (or V4K if you prefer) in a more rugged body with XLR audio and better codecs, etc. But don't stop there either. To go along with the V4K, why not also release some awesome MF cine primes. Small but optically worthy of the Nikkor name.

Or go back to work on the D3400, D5400 and D7200.

*http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/10/08/Aptina-gives-detail-of-4k-video-capable-10MP-sensor

0 upvotes
djsphynx
By djsphynx (2 months ago)

Not only do they not talk to photographers about how to make their product and services more responsive to customer needs, they don't even bother to ask a pro photographer to take their corporate picture for them.

What are those pictures taken with, a Nokia flip phone ;-) ?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
naturenewbe
By naturenewbe (2 months ago)

I go hang out with photographers who use there canon cameras all the time all I see them use is the kit lens, auto settings and liveview. I'm the only one using the viewfinder and shooting in manual mode. How much better suited my friends would be to just a mirorless camera like a A5000. Also the newly wed couple at best buy who want to take better pictures of there new baby but dont want to hassel with learning with DSLR buying there second DSLR because there pictures dont look right.... I dont see them liking there next new DSLR Even more. I have a D40 that has been faithfull for many years but stop my self from buying a new nikon body and lens because I cant take the weight on my back anymore. Personally I'm leaning toward Panasonic because of video quality and size.

0 upvotes
instamatic
By instamatic (2 months ago)

I believe that Canon's automatic metering may be a little better than Nikon's, just as is Canon's default JPEG color. What I find painful with Nikon is that for the last few years the matrix meter is tied to the active focus point. The old matrix meter used on the D70 and in the D200 was terrific when also you added 1 or 2 external Nikon flashes to the mix. The new meter tied to focus points makes it a bit unpredictable and I just can't trust it for consistency. Regarding Panasonic. My wife and I use the Panasonic LX7 and it's a terrific camera. We bought it because Nikon didn't have a comparable offering (and still does not). The LX7 has terrific colors out of the box, good exposure (perhaps even a bit hot), and great video with no jello effect. It has a small sensor, but it's lens is f/1.4 through f/2.3 and that helps a lot. I can highly recommend that camera. The only missing point that I wish it had is a wireless remote. Otherwise it meets and exceeds our requirements.

1 upvote
Maarten
By Maarten (2 months ago)

You're absolutely right about the D70 and D200 meter. Exposure was always accurate and consistent. Our D40 is worse, our D7000 more worse and our D90 worst. I guess the meter aims to please people who want only their (supposed by AF system) subject to be metered correctly. The F(N)90/F(N)100 meters also metered much better, like the D70 and D200 still did. Present Nikon metering, even when based on 90.000 color pixels, is miles away from for instance an iPhone. Don't get me started on the quality of white balance where an iPhone blows any Nikon straight out of the water. Can anyone explain to me why Nikon (or Canon) get away with that?

0 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (2 months ago)

http://newcameranews.com/2014/02/18/missing-honda-asimii/#comment-1226

1 upvote
rich889
By rich889 (2 months ago)

Nikon has been reactive rather than pro-active for decades. Regrettably, they are NOT an innovative company, (look at sensor backside-illumination, or sensor-shift technologies, or fast response 2.3 mil dot EVF's) and their poor effort shows in the Nikon 1 v1. I purchased both, the v1 and v2 hoping for something better. Both models have great detail for their sensor size and have some excellent features, but are generally bested by Micro Four Thirds in a shot-by-shot comparison, especially now with the Olympus OM-D E-M1.

Nikon is so afraid to compete against themselves (DSLR's) that it stifles anyone who wants to cheer them on. In the mirror-less market as well as lens construction (in many lenses) they settle for mediocrity.

3 upvotes
JohnEwing
By JohnEwing (2 months ago)

The consumer advantage has been that Series 1 resale prices are very low. Last year I picked up, as unused stock/display models, a J1, V1, 10-30mm & 30-110mm, and FT-1 for the list price of a V1. I certainly wouldn't have paid the full price for any of them, but for those prices they're nice cameras for travelling light.

Hardly cheering news for Nikon, though.

2 upvotes
duchamp
By duchamp (2 months ago)

I felt as if Nikon representatives were puppets under strict control as they tried to be as less informative answers as possible. Such a great opportunity missed to intrigue a vast audience. Nikon disappoints me once more.

5 upvotes
Antahkarana
By Antahkarana (2 months ago)

It's very possible they do not have many creative products in the near-term. Much of what we've seen in the last 2 yrs have been iterations of lines (e.g. d7000-d7100, d3100-d3300, d5100-d5300, d600-d610 (oil spot fiasco)).

0 upvotes
duchamp
By duchamp (2 months ago)

They could spill some info about their current developments and maybe future trends.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 460
1234