-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Nikon is dying
- Thread starter eliehbk
- Start date
nunatak
Veteran Member
It's a debatable decision, i'll grant you that. however i too believe Nikon missed their mark. i believe the camera will sell some, like it's older siblings — just not nearly as well as Nikon hoped.
— no IBIS
— no dust removal
if Nikon's goal was to sell to the 'wanderlust' crowd, most of these smart kids already have a camera with IBIS which isn't prone to 'dust contamination'. it's called a 'smartPhone'. it's also a lot smaller, lighter, fits into one's pocket, and 'calls home'.
if the objective of the Z is to sell people on 'potentially better IQ', then perhaps it might include features which match or exceed their smart phones — instead of a 'watered-down' version.
if the objective was to 'boot-strap' 'wanderlusters' into the Z system, they'll be likely to 'boot-horn' out again once they understand 'nikkor-s glass' won't be stabilized on their Z50.
'cheaper', sure. however i don't see the 'value proposition' for the 'cheap' market. better to have included IBIS, dust removal, and leapfrogged their competitors — granted at a slightly greater expense — than to chase after their competitor's tails with a model which includes less than their 'smartPhone'.
that, perhaps, is 'naive'. JMO Leonard.
--
design guy
Last edited:
chambeshi
Veteran Member
I steer well clear of these clickbaiters' nonsenses....
So unfortunate the offending video is even mentioned in this article.... Scroll down to the synopsis by Roy P, who seems to know his subject:
https://diglloyd.com/blog/2019/20191124_0908-wither-Nikon.html
However, the author overlooks the well known fact that Nikon designs its own sensors (which is why the colours etc are so excellent).
Nikon already has state of the art MILC optics (AFP with stepping motors etc) on an excellent mount. The diagnosis and solutions in this 'magestaria' by Roy P are crippled by a failure to invest a modicum of effort in understanding key facts - i.e. key details of the Z system including its origins. After all, it is founded on 2+ decades of Nikon's own mirrorless R&D: besides Coolpix etc, the N1 system; and Linear AF motors appeared first in the AFP zooms (2017) etc
Nikon must be very well aware of the direction in which its future sensors have to evolve...
Last edited:
I think their goal was to sell to the Canon M6.ii and Sony A6100 "crowd". Period.
I think their objective was to sell to the Canon M6.ii and Sony A6100 "crowd". Period.
I think their objective was to sell to the Canon M6.ii and Sony A6100 "crowd". Period.
The value proposition relative to it's competitors I'd see as
- having a decent EVF built in and not the ungainly bolt on of the Canon
- having an excellent pancake kit zoom rather than the mediocre 'half coke can' size Sony kit lens and the not-very-compact Canon one
Not having IBIS just like its direct Canon, Sony and Fuji competitors.
Of course in an ideal world you leapfrog and compete at a price point in the market with features from a higher price point. Doesn't take marketing genius to figure that out. But economically it can't work so, in an intensely competitive market they made a broadly competitive product. Nikon made one stand-out innovation - a super compact kit lens, which isn't a slow power-zoom, but an excellent performer: see Jim Kasson's test
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4442379
The kit lens for the Z50 is a tiny little thing. It's a 16-50 mm f/3.5 to f/6.3, that collapses into a pancake a bit over an inch long. It's made of plastic and glass, and it's dirt cheap, especially if you buy it with the camera. It's hard to imagine that it's any good at all.
But it is.
It's so good, in fact, that I didn't post this morning's results of my informal test against the excellent Nikon 24-70mm f/4 Z-mount lens because I couldn't believe how good the lens was, and thought I'd screwed up
For the 90% (?) of APSC customers who don't buy more than the 2 lens kit, it feels to me the Z50 has some good features relative to the Canon and Sony. Nikon are not in a position to reinvent the camera - they simply needed an APSC MILC competitor. It would be easy to recommend the twin lens kit to a friend in the "looking for something better than a phone for vacations and kid's sports" vs its direct competitors.
Last edited:
I completely agree with all your points, but especially those to do with the 16-50 zoom.
The Z mount enables this kit lens to have extremely good IQ as well as being very compact, and significantly better in both respects than competitors' offerings.
I felt that dpreviews recent comparison of four mirrorless APS-C completely overlooked that point when they compared lenses for those bodies. If the majority of the target market isn't going to buy anything other than the one-lens bundle or possibly the two-lens bundle, then the quality of the kit lens is extremely important.
The poor quality of Canon and Sony kit lenses means that purchasers have to buy primes to fully take advantage of the sensors - especially Canon M6 II purchasers.
Ok, the 16-50 construction is based plastic, including the mount - but for the target market who are unlikely to be swapping lenses very often, that isn't a major issue. And the plastic will be high quality polycarbonate, a very tough product.
One thing that Nikon do need is a wider angle zoom for the Z50, which curiously is not on their roadmap.
vtpeters
Leading Member
I'm also waiting for a Z-mount 70-200mm f/2.8 to become available soon. It is on Nikons official lens road map (this and previous versions) and was supposed to be released in 2019. Well, 2019 is almost over and there hasn't been an announcement for this lens yet.
No they don't.
Their company-wide Operating Profit is forecast to go from 82.6 billion yen last fiscal year to 20.0 billion yen this fiscal year.
Last edited:
Leonard Shepherd
Veteran Member
Perhaps you are looking in the wrong place
"Operating profit surpassed by ¥2.5B
- Despite headwinds from shrinking Imaging Products Business profits, increased profit in
• Revenue down ¥44.7B
cover lower profits in FPD.
were incurred as restructuring relevant expenses, but there was also gain from the sale of unused land.
• Revenue surpassed by ¥1.0B
other businesses more than picked up the slack."
"Operating profit surpassed by ¥2.5B
- Despite headwinds from shrinking Imaging Products Business profits, increased profit in
• Revenue down ¥44.7B
cover lower profits in FPD.
- - Industrial Metrology & Others: Profit down as customers reined in capex.
- - Corporate P/L non-attributable to any reportable segments: Foreign exchange valuation losses
were incurred as restructuring relevant expenses, but there was also gain from the sale of unused land.
• Revenue surpassed by ¥1.0B
other businesses more than picked up the slack."
PaulSnowcat
Veteran Member
Tony is talking more and more madness... I REALLY hope that Nikon will not listen to them... He was THE ONE and perhaps only of major camera bloggers who had no Nikon Z50 in his hands... perhaps Nikon cast him out of it's circle of influence. Maybe he's just mad about this...
Beginning from his "theory" about Full Frame lenses that work WORSE on APS-C cameras, he speaks more and more strange things...
Beginning from his "theory" about Full Frame lenses that work WORSE on APS-C cameras, he speaks more and more strange things...
nunatak
Veteran Member
your thought differs from Nikon's own marketing statements. Nikon has spoken.
your thought differs from Nikon's own marketing statements. Nikon has spoken.
your thought differs from Nikon's own marketing statements. Nikon has spoken.
it's a new model, and for Nikon fans who wanted a Z but couldn't afford the FF, relatively affordable. but for smartPhone photographers it's already a little long in the tooth with, IMO, a debatable future.
David Garth
Leading Member
As I’ve read this thread I’ve noticed lots of nasty comments about the Northrups but very little defending Nikon’s business situation. Their video was not about whether Nikon makes good products or not, but whether a Nikon is in a good position to survive in a terrible camera market.
A declining market share in a quickly declining market that’s expected by everyone, including Nikon, to keep declining, is not a good situation to be in. Usually in cases like this, the market consolidates, and weaker competitors get bought out by stronger ones. Nikon is not one of the stronger ones. Those are irrefutable facts.
A declining market share in a quickly declining market that’s expected by everyone, including Nikon, to keep declining, is not a good situation to be in. Usually in cases like this, the market consolidates, and weaker competitors get bought out by stronger ones. Nikon is not one of the stronger ones. Those are irrefutable facts.
MrALLCAPS
Veteran Member
chambeshi
Veteran Member
Review? They disfigure the concept. Distortion of 'Review' is the nux of the problems with youtube channels, which pretend to evaluate cameras and lenses. This thread is (yet again) discussing the recurring Nikon-bashing (usually by abusers in Sony boots).
The complexities of testing modern cameras demands time by experienced [= real] photographers. Thus, the real reviews of the Z6 and Z7 trickled out, weeks after first releases (exceptions are the scarcer tests of pre-release gear).
Thus, Photography Life published their Z reviews incrementally. Sections were filled in, only once the reviewers had completed testing the cameras.
A reliable review of a modern camera takes weeks or better months
Last edited:
thelenspainter
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 1,906
- Solutions
- 3
- Reaction score
- 1,388
I don’t think anybody is arguing with that. It’s a very successful business model. They are in the business of running a YouTube channel. The problem comes when you try to read their minds to discern their motivations or intent. The only thing we can see from the available evidence is that they want maximise their YouTube viewership. I can’t fault them for that.
Last edited:
Survival depends very much on the subsequent actions of Nikon. They desperately need to BEAT the a7III in most aspects. First need to eliminate the major disadvantages: push more top notch native glass to market ASAP, address the AF/tracking questions properly. DON'T forget video! Look at Panasonic regarding video, with the lightning fast xqd cards nikon is in the best position to offer INTERNAL 10bit at really high bitrates/raw. Show something new and really useful vs Sony. E.g Fuji surpassed Sony in terms of video, showing it is far from impossible.
And the miracle is that except for native z-glass availability, 99% of the issues can be addressed in the firmware, no need to release a z6 mkII!
Last edited:
Crypt Keeper
Well-known member
- Messages
- 125
- Reaction score
- 145
I think your are entitled to your opinion. But for many who saw a video thumbnail by a known reviewer displaying a particular camera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SFq1_ImjzQto later realize he doesn't even has the camera is deceptive. Borderline dishonest.
I replied to him that this click bait practice was the shortest way to lose subscribers. He chose to hide my reply.
Over 2500 dislikes on that video alone.
Last edited:
A fair commentry of the situation
Nikon is number three in the ILC market after Canon and Sony. That's not 'a weaker competitor'. The weaker competitors are the 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th brands.
I could use hyperbole to rephrase Nikon's position in the market by saying: " Nikon is in the strongest troika of the ILC market leaving those weaker competitors in the dust".
There is so much BS written and said about this market decline. Nikon has rapidly turned around their poor business decisions from 2012 to 2017 with the launch of the Z system. They have done some major restructuring over the past couple of years and continue to do so. I think their is some hope that they can maintain a position in the camera industry as a major player yet.
Anonymous Pi
Leading Member
- Messages
- 915
- Reaction score
- 1,030
You don't need to read their minds, and the fact that it's done for "business" purposes makes it worse rather than excuses it. Their content is misleading, inflammatory and often blatantly false. The reason doesn't matter and they ought certainly be faulted for that. They deserve all the scorn and derision that comes their way.
However, without naming any names, everyone should knock off the mysoginistic comments which have no place in criticizing them.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum