Nikon is dying

This thread is certainly very entertaining. On the same forum we have another thread where people are lamenting that we might not see the Z mount 70-200 this year because of cuts Nikon will have to make. Yet on this thread we have other people saying nothing is wrong and stop saying Nikon is dying.

BTW, I have followed Northrup's channel for many years. They were making high quality education content and only pivoted to 'clickbait' in the last 2 years or so, when they apparently realized that they would get flamed whether they tried to be factual or not. Might as well make clickbait then since it gets more views!

Sad to say, Youtube videos are a perfect reflection of the kind of thing the audience will click on. If you want less clickbait, don't click on it.

eliehbk said:

Tony and Chelsea Northrup strike again. According to them Nikon is in deep trouble unless they listen to them and put their efforts back into DSLRs and not mirrorless because the company is hopeless at writing good software. These two get better and better with time, their videos are priceless. I also loved how they were almost ashamed at admitting being in Costco (this is for the American readers). So guys start selling tour gear before the company goes under )

Click to expand...

I don't watch them any longer. They creep me out.

thelenspainter said:

This thread is certainly very entertaining. On the same forum we have another thread where people are lamenting that we might not see the Z mount 70-200 this year because of cuts Nikon will have to make. Yet on this thread we have other people saying nothing is wrong and stop saying Nikon is dying.

BTW, I have followed Northrup's channel for many years. They were making high quality education content and only pivoted to 'clickbait' in the last 2 years or so, when they apparently realized that they would get flamed whether they tried to be factual or not. Might as well make clickbait then since it gets more views!

Sad to say, Youtube videos are a perfect reflection of the kind of thing the audience will click on. If you want less clickbait, don't click on it.

Click to expand...

In recent years, Nikon typically releases/announces around five-six lenses a year. The seven we have current is par on course even for bumper years further into the past.

2014 (7): 18-55, 35, 70-300 (N1), 10-30 (N1), 18-300, 400E, 20

2015 (8): 24-70VR, 200-500, 24/1.8G, 500, 600, 300. 55-200, 16-80

2016 (5): 70-200FL, 19 PCE, AF-P 70-300 DX, AF-P 18-55 DX, 105mm f1.4

2017 (4): AF-P 70-300 FX, AF-P 10-20, 8-15mm fish eye, 28 f1.4,

2018 (5-6): 180-400, 24-70/4, 35, 50, 500PF, (noct)

2019 (6-7): 14-30, 24-70/2.8, 85, 24, 16-50, 50-250, (120-300)

If anything the 70-200 got bumped into 2020 because of the DX Z lenses. If the Z roadmap doesn't shift much, we have 13 Z lenses for 2020 and 2021. Which fits in just nice with room for one, maybe two F-mount lens.

Which one are you, Tony or Chelsea?

thelenspainter said:

They were making high quality education content and only pivoted to 'clickbait' in the last 2 years or so, when they apparently realized that they would get flamed whether they tried to be factual or not. Might as well make clickbait then since it gets more views!

Click to expand...

They used to get flamed because their facts were very often wrong.

RMcL said:

GodSpeaks said:

... or at least they should be.

Come on, WHO gives then ANY credibility?

Click to expand...

Well, from the couple of videos of their’s I’ve watched, it looks like his wife is dying of embarrassment/boredom when he uses her as a model

Click to expand...

He has yet to learn it is not possible to make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

whimsicalmike said:

thelenspainter said:

They were making high quality education content and only pivoted to 'clickbait' in the last 2 years or so, when they apparently realized that they would get flamed whether they tried to be factual or not. Might as well make clickbait then since it gets more views!

Click to expand...

They used to get flamed because their facts were very often wrong.

Click to expand...

So they decided to drop the pretense?

I don't have any particular interest in either T&C Northrup or Nikon Z cameras, but what I really like about this silly line of conjecture is that it takes the heat off of the m43 system.

I recently bought a fairly expensive m43 camera and I'll be sad if the m43 system is totally steamrolled by the Full Frame hype train and then drys up and blows away, but mostly I just take pictures and don't worry too much about either the Northrup's or market trends. If in five years there aren't any new m43's cameras to buy, I'll buy into a different system. Maybe even a brand new Nikon Z 8 and some really great lenses.

But I HATE (!) reading about the imminent demise of the camera system I just spent a bunch of money on, written by click obsessed Vloggers or Troll's, who don't have any more inside information than I do. God knows they might turn out to be right, but I don't want to be told about it and now, thanks to Nikon, I won't have to be.


Thanks guys, luv ya!! Carry on.

--
I own a camera, I don't belong to a tribe.
Tacoma, Washington, USA

Leonard Shepherd said:

howieb101 said:

Well not including inbuilt image stabilisation in the Z50 was a poor decision.

If they can do it in full frame why not aps-c?

Click to expand...

Are you being naive?

IBIS would have made the Z50 bigger and quite a bit expensive.

Click to expand...

Sony is making it work. Just sayin'

If you visit the Northrup's "Is Nikon Dying" video, skip the first ten minutes. At almost precisely the ten minute mark they start to make constructive suggestions. I found their suggestions very clever, and I hope that people at Nikon will manage to get past the first ten minutes to hear the suggestions.

I despise the clickbait title, but their response is essential that Nikon is NOT necessarily dying, it just depends on what steps they take from here.

One of their points on the downside is a particular sore point for me: while Nikon was pouring R&D into the NOCT lens, Canon produced a brilliant 85mm f/1.2. Sigh.

n3eg said:

eliehbk said:

Tony and Chelsea Northrup strike again. According to them Nikon is in deep trouble...

Click to expand...

No, Nikon can NOT be doomed yet. This week's doom belongs to Olympus.

Nikon can be next week's "Doom Of The Week." Then Pentax can reclaim their monthly reserved spot going into December.

I'm waiting for DPR to create a "Most Doomed Cameras" list on their main page.

Click to expand...

It is likely that in 10 years only Sony and Canon will survive in the ILC market.

Anonymous Pi said:

whimsicalmike said:

thelenspainter said:

They were making high quality education content and only pivoted to 'clickbait' in the last 2 years or so, when they apparently realized that they would get flamed whether they tried to be factual or not. Might as well make clickbait then since it gets more views!

Click to expand...

They used to get flamed because their facts were very often wrong.

Click to expand...

So they decided to drop the pretense?

Click to expand...

I don't think either of them are smart enough to realise they are not knowledgeable about photography

ArtAlt said:

If you visit the Northrup's "Is Nikon Dying" video, skip the first ten minutes. At almost precisely the ten minute mark they start to make constructive suggestions. I found their suggestions very clever, and I hope that people at Nikon will manage to get past the first ten minutes to hear the suggestions.

Click to expand...

They say Nikon is bad at software and yet a lot of suggestion they make involves heavy software development ("computational photography, option of image averaging, better touchscreen capabilities, android, wifi, cellular etc.) If they are bad at software, this means they don't have the capacity for further software developments.

seahawk said:

n3eg said:

eliehbk said:

Tony and Chelsea Northrup strike again. According to them Nikon is in deep trouble...

Click to expand...

No, Nikon can NOT be doomed yet. This week's doom belongs to Olympus.

Nikon can be next week's "Doom Of The Week." Then Pentax can reclaim their monthly reserved spot going into December.

I'm waiting for DPR to create a "Most Doomed Cameras" list on their main page.

Click to expand...

It is likely that in 10 years only Sony and Canon will survive in the ILC market.

Click to expand...

That's a relieve as these sort of confident predictions usually mean the exact opposite will occur.

Sony are not doomed as they will just move on but Canon seem the best candidates for doom as they are geared to large turnover in a large camera market. The next Kodak if ever there was. The Nikon Z seems a lot slicker and more polished than anything Canon puts out at the moment.

I have a Canon G5X but more for its old world charm as it was not exactly state of the art when it came out. Canon do rely on a conservative unadventurous user base to take up in bulk stripped back stale technology products but can that last and can they scale back?

It’s a point of view, but very subjective, speculative and devoid of facts.

equally so is the gross assumption of what canon stand for conservative values. That of course is the polemic for innovation and constant product refreshes for minor upgrades.

I like that Olympus and canon sell gear with a longer product life cycle. It’s reassuring given the costs of investment .
I dislike the fools gold of multiple iterations of the same model over a short period of time. That feels like you are investing in yesterday’s products and of course it’s not sustainable as ultimately and over time tech development plateaus and become much the same. You also end up with stuff you never needed, but then again that is the opium of gearheads.

AllFlawed said:

seahawk said:

n3eg said:

eliehbk said:

Tony and Chelsea Northrup strike again. According to them Nikon is in deep trouble...

Click to expand...

No, Nikon can NOT be doomed yet. This week's doom belongs to Olympus.

Nikon can be next week's "Doom Of The Week." Then Pentax can reclaim their monthly reserved spot going into December.

I'm waiting for DPR to create a "Most Doomed Cameras" list on their main page.

Click to expand...

It is likely that in 10 years only Sony and Canon will survive in the ILC market.

Click to expand...

That's a relieve as these sort of confident predictions usually mean the exact opposite will occur.

Sony are not doomed as they will just move on but Canon seem the best candidates for doom as they are geared to large turnover in a large camera market. The next Kodak if ever there was. The Nikon Z seems a lot slicker and more polished than anything Canon puts out at the moment.

I have a Canon G5X but more for its old world charm as it was not exactly state of the art when it came out. Canon do rely on a conservative unadventurous user base to take up in bulk stripped back stale technology products but can that last and can they scale back?

Click to expand...

But the camera market is moving more and more away from the old style optical companies towards semi-conductor and software development. Sony and Canon have their own sensors and both seem reasonably set to tackle the software challenges of the future. Nikon on the other hand...

George1958 said:

It’s a point of view, but very subjective, speculative and devoid of facts.

Click to expand...

My experience comes from the compact side of Canon cameras. The AF facilities on these are monumentally crude by modern standards. Two small AF boxes or everything. For the largest camera company to struggle in their compacts the way they do is very odd. The G3X is another example with no EVF on a 600mm equivalent zoom and the same AF modes many years behind what Panasonic and Sony are doing. If the main companies are crazy in updates Canon seem to be at the other end of the spectrum.

You look at EOS M. Single control dials and a reluctance to put EVF in the cameras. In compacts they have just cloned the RX100 but still having to pull out the viewfinder and auto deployment is a very useful improvement after using an HX90V myself.

The fact that Canon cannot make their own dual pixel 1" sensor but have expended little effort in improving the flexibility of their CDAF is not good and if they do get an embedded PDAF Sony sensor can they afford to upgrade their processing to cope with what will be a new way of doing things in dual pixel land.

In some ways I am speaking as a conservative Canon user but they do need to get a bit more oomph in to their products. Holding one of their compacts, especially the G3X it is difficult not to always feel the ship has been spoiled for a ha'porth of tar.

George1958 said:

equally so is the gross assumption of what canon stand for conservative values. That of course is the polemic for innovation and constant product refreshes for minor upgrades.

I like that Olympus and canon sell gear with a longer product life cycle. It’s reassuring given the costs of investment .
I dislike the fools gold of multiple iterations of the same model over a short period of time. That feels like you are investing in yesterday’s products and of course it’s not sustainable as ultimately and over time tech development plateaus and become much the same. You also end up with stuff you never needed, but then again that is the opium of gearheads.

Click to expand...

seahawk said:

AllFlawed said:

seahawk said:

n3eg said:

eliehbk said:

Tony and Chelsea Northrup strike again. According to them Nikon is in deep trouble...

Click to expand...

No, Nikon can NOT be doomed yet. This week's doom belongs to Olympus.

Nikon can be next week's "Doom Of The Week." Then Pentax can reclaim their monthly reserved spot going into December.

I'm waiting for DPR to create a "Most Doomed Cameras" list on their main page.

Click to expand...

It is likely that in 10 years only Sony and Canon will survive in the ILC market.

Click to expand...

That's a relieve as these sort of confident predictions usually mean the exact opposite will occur.

Sony are not doomed as they will just move on but Canon seem the best candidates for doom as they are geared to large turnover in a large camera market. The next Kodak if ever there was. The Nikon Z seems a lot slicker and more polished than anything Canon puts out at the moment.

I have a Canon G5X but more for its old world charm as it was not exactly state of the art when it came out. Canon do rely on a conservative unadventurous user base to take up in bulk stripped back stale technology products but can that last and can they scale back?

Click to expand...

But the camera market is moving more and more away from the old style optical companies towards semi-conductor and software development. Sony and Canon have their own sensors and both seem reasonably set to tackle the software challenges of the future. Nikon on the other hand...

Click to expand...

Canon do not have a compact sensor and are hanging on to Sony's coat tails here making do with stale hand me down stuff and that market is not a lot smaller than ILC nowadays and looking more resilient if anything.

I just think anyone on the good ship Canon who think they are safe in their great leviathan ploughing on through the water should think how many of the boilers are lit down below and how much is just inertia and are the problems just too much to fix given the funding available and the size of the vessel.

Sony in a way are similar to Samsung in that they bought in late to the camera industry and have not the same long tradition that I know of. They are excited by the technology but for how long ? Samsung demonstrated that a large prosperous diversified corporation can walk away from its user base without a word with total disdain and the loss of goodwill amongst it users in the now tiny photographic community has little effect on overall performance.

George1958 said:

It’s a point of view, but very subjective, speculative and devoid of facts.

equally so is the gross assumption of what canon stand for conservative values. That of course is the polemic for innovation and constant product refreshes for minor upgrades.

I like that Olympus and canon sell gear with a longer product life cycle. It’s reassuring given the costs of investment .
I dislike the fools gold of multiple iterations of the same model over a short period of time. That feels like you are investing in yesterday’s products and of course it’s not sustainable as ultimately and over time tech development plateaus and become much the same. You also end up with stuff you never needed, but then again that is the opium of gearheads.

Click to expand...

Counter point. It's like the iPhones. On the consumer end, we don't have to get a new one every time a company makes one.

People have different starting points. Those of us who got a Z6 may find it adequate and not need or justify a mark 2, but others would be waiting for the mark 2, get said mark 2, and not need the mark 3, while those of us with the mark 1 may get the mark 3 or the mark 4.

The companies on their end will still have to determine what's a reasonable and cost effective release cycle. In the handset world, it's a calendar year. In the camera universe, it's usually two to four. A shorter update cycle also means people who are waiting for their update (see above para) do not have to wait too long to get it.

They can then stagger releases and update their products in a regular fashion to keep their brand name buzz going. Sony does that very effectively with their range of cameras even though each line have roughly three year refresh cycles but it seems like they have a new camera every year.

sassan_n said:

ArtAlt said:

If you visit the Northrup's "Is Nikon Dying" video, skip the first ten minutes. At almost precisely the ten minute mark they start to make constructive suggestions. I found their suggestions very clever, and I hope that people at Nikon will manage to get past the first ten minutes to hear the suggestions.

Click to expand...

They say Nikon is bad at software and yet a lot of suggestion they make involves heavy software development ("computational photography, option of image averaging, better touchscreen capabilities, android, wifi, cellular etc.) If they are bad at software, this means they don't have the capacity for further software developments.

Click to expand...

I agree -- although Nikon's software engineers seem to do a good job with standard camera functionality, when it comes to value-added processing (e.g. focus stacking), communications (snapbridge), and all of their post processing software after NX2, Nikon appears to be very amateurish. Mirrorless and computational tech -- which clearly is the future of photography -- is going to require much more software know-how, and Nikon is going to have to make some investments in software engineering if they want to survive in the camera business, let alone grow and prosper.

--
Garfield