Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon is dying

Go to last post
syberman7 said:
David Garth said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Yep. Some graphs from Japan. https://www.bcnretail.com/market/detail/20191124_146544.html

Darker columns are units. Lighter columns are cash value. The set of first three columns are all units. The middle set of three are crop sensor cameras, the last three to our right are full frame cameras.
Darker columns are units. Lighter columns are cash value. The set of first three columns are all units. The middle set of three are crop sensor cameras, the last three to our right are full frame cameras.

These are % of how each company did over last year. Sony is the only company to register growth in both units sold and cash value across the board. Nikon overall only got 75.4% of last year's units sold.

Nikon's big drop is in crop cameras, garnering only 74% of what they got last year. Full frame dropped too, this is the first year the Z cameras started selling, so without the Z cameras the 86.3% would be even lower.

% of types of ILC sold.
% of types of ILC sold.

Darker blue = non-full frame mirrorless

Light blue = non-full frame DSLRs

Dark orange = full frame mirrorless

Light orange = full frame DSLR

55.7% of the cameras sold in Japan over the past year are crop sensor mirrorless cameras. Nikon virtually has no horse in that race over the past year. And the full frame market is still a fraction of the total market.

% of market share based on full frame units sold
% of market share based on full frame units sold

Full frame cameras is a rough indicator of where your professionals are. Your big three will still be your big three. Sony overtook Canon with 38%, Canon is now at 36%, while Nikon dropped to 24%. Panasonic's S1 cameras and others fall into that purple line.
 
So clear;y Nikon NEEDS APS-C sensor Z cameras. I really hope Z50 is only a start and we will see one camera below it and one above it in near future, as well as couple new lenses (I know there is only 18-140 in the roadmap, but I hope they will rethink this). Crop cameras are the moving force of the market, even if the market itself is declining.
 
PaulSnowcat said:
So clear;y Nikon NEEDS APS-C sensor Z cameras. I really hope Z50 is only a start and we will see one camera below it and one above it in near future, as well as couple new lenses (I know there is only 18-140 in the roadmap, but I hope they will rethink this). Crop cameras are the moving force of the market, even if the market itself is declining.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. The z6 is priced very attractively, many m4/3 and APSC options are more expensive than the z6+24-70 kit.

In time, people will realize that it is a waste of money to pay 1000€ on a crop lens if the equivalent FF costs 700 ...

It is up to Nikon to decide which is better:

- make budget f5.6-f8 pancake lenses for the z6 or a later "budget" FF body, streamline the portfolio and abandon everything else except FF mirrorless.

- make a crop-line, cheaper bodies but a whole different line of lenses (=R&D), maintenance of 2 or even 4 different product lines if DSLR is kept alive. BTW, separating FF and crop mirrorless, they could just revive the Nikon 1 system! much more portable stuff...
 
I am glad that it is in my generation, I am seeing the Technological evolution of the Photography Tool. As happens with every evolution, the old technology dies and new one takes over. Some times, few companies die with the old technology, like Nokia, Kodak, etc., who didn't evolve with technology. On the other hand, there are companies that are flourishing even after 100 years of existence.

Where does Nikon fit into this? No doubt Sony started the Mirror-less technology revolution, but does that mean they will be the leaders in Camera business? What happened to Xerox? Canon left Xerox far behind.

I see Nikon has seen the Technological evolution to ML, and has decided to adopt it, which is the good part. Will they be able to leave Sony behind, is something so be seen. At the moment, it seems Sony has much better processors inside the camera, to help them with faster operations, and better data crunching, to help them give better AF experience. S

Nikon has to now move to better processors and better software solutions. And I am sure they can do this, as there are many solution providers in the market for this. Sony here is trying to do to Nikon what Samsung did to them in TV business. Samsung was the screed supplier to Sony, but took over their business. Sony was the sensor provider to Nikon, and other manufacturers, but is tying to take over the business.

Canon prevailed over Xerox, Samsung over Sony, Toyota over Ford, etc. And it surely is possible for Sony to leave Nikon and Canon behind, if they continue to move with speed and Nikon is not able to catch up with them. If Nikon is not able to offer newer features that are under development, like Global Shutters, flicker free EVF with no delay, AF speed etc, people may continue moving away to Sony, with unfavorable consequences for Nikon.

However, looking at Nikon's first Z offerings, it does seem Nikon has understood the new technology well, and knows what they have to do next. Consequences of not taking a larger leap in their next offering will have grave consequences. So I am waiting for their next ML offering to guess if they are going to conquer Sony, or will be fighting a loosing battle...
 
APS-C is not necessarily about portability and very small bodies. Nikon understood that and created a COMFORTABLE body for Z50, not a tiny one. Thank gods!

APS-C is about MUCH cheaper system price and about lenses that just cannot be created for FF with reasonable price and size.

Getting yourself into FF system (no matter how cheap the initial kit is) means spending tons and tons of money on good lenses. Not everyone has that money.

The other reason is that APS-C can offer you lenses that cannot exist in FF ecosystem. For example, 50-100/1.8 - is something unthinkable for FF system. A brilliant lens. 70-200/2.8 is darker, is heavier, is much more expensive.

16-300 (24-450 in terms of FF!) cannot be replicated on FF at all, it is impossible! 28-300 is a bleak parody as it is shorter on both sides and has MUCH worse quality on it's corners.

So, APS-C is NOT just a step to Full Frame, it is a separate, much more popular kind of cameras with it's own strengths. If a manufacturer wants to sell it's cameras in big quantities, it must go into this ecosystem. I am almost sure Z50 will prove this to Nikon.
 
aniltulsi said:
I am glad that it is in my generation, I am seeing the Technological evolution of the Photography Tool. As happens with every evolution, the old technology dies and new one takes over. Some times, few companies die with the old technology, like Nokia, Kodak, etc., who didn't evolve with technology. On the other hand, there are companies that are flourishing even after 100 years of existence.

Where does Nikon fit into this? No doubt Sony started the Mirror-less technology revolution, but does that mean they will be the leaders in Camera business? What happened to Xerox? Canon left Xerox far behind.

I see Nikon has seen the Technological evolution to ML, and has decided to adopt it, which is the good part. Will they be able to leave Sony behind, is something so be seen. At the moment, it seems Sony has much better processors inside the camera, to help them with faster operations, and better data crunching, to help them give better AF experience. S

Nikon has to now move to better processors and better software solutions. And I am sure they can do this, as there are many solution providers in the market for this. Sony here is trying to do to Nikon what Samsung did to them in TV business. Samsung was the screed supplier to Sony, but took over their business. Sony was the sensor provider to Nikon, and other manufacturers, but is tying to take over the business.

Canon prevailed over Xerox, Samsung over Sony, Toyota over Ford, etc. And it surely is possible for Sony to leave Nikon and Canon behind, if they continue to move with speed and Nikon is not able to catch up with them. If Nikon is not able to offer newer features that are under development, like Global Shutters, flicker free EVF with no delay, AF speed etc, people may continue moving away to Sony, with unfavorable consequences for Nikon.

However, looking at Nikon's first Z offerings, it does seem Nikon has understood the new technology well, and knows what they have to do next. Consequences of not taking a larger leap in their next offering will have grave consequences. So I am waiting for their next ML offering to guess if they are going to conquer Sony, or will be fighting a loosing battle...
Click to expand...
Good analysis. I'm about to buy the Z7 with the 24-70 2.8. Many years since I owned a Nikon. I know the next Z models will be great and most likely be released next year. Too long for me to wait, but I'm sure they will have good AF and better battery life. Some more lenses too next year and Nikon is back in the game. But they started 3-4 years too late with the FF mirrorless and it's hard to catch up with Sony now. But the new mount and Z models are a good decision made by Nikon.
 
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...
Good grief. Why do people continue to read stuff by the Ken and Barbie of photo blogging. Cheap plastic rubbish, and their blog isn’t any better.
 
Last edited:
Crypt Keeper said:
Crypt Keeper said:
Crypt Keeper said:
That doesn't stop the fact that the Northrup's use click bait videos to drum up veiewer count.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
Well that is your opinion :) All I see is a thumbnail of someone holding a Z50, to a video discussing whether this camera is a good strategy for Nikon. What is deceptive about that? Are you maybe reading something into the video that's not there?

To be clear, I'm not here to defend true deception or misinformation. But if I see people putting themselves in a mental prison by interpreting reality in a negative light when it is not warranted, I can't resist trying to break them out of that prison.
 
Last edited:
PaulSnowcat said:
APS-C is not necessarily about portability and very small bodies. Nikon understood that and created a COMFORTABLE body for Z50, not a tiny one. Thank gods!
Click to expand...
Once you made an APS-c, God forbid m4/3 body with decent grip, you'll carry the same weight pay similar price as for a FF body. See Fuji x-h1, Olympus E-m5III (intentionally missed the extremely overpriced e-m1 line)
PaulSnowcat said:
APS-C is about MUCH cheaper system price and about lenses that just cannot be created for FF with reasonable price and size.
Click to expand...
I guess you need to look up some chapters regarding equivalence...
PaulSnowcat said:
Getting yourself into FF system (no matter how cheap the initial kit is) means spending tons and tons of money on good lenses. Not everyone has that money.
Click to expand...
True. A z6+24-70+FTZ+xqd kit costs €2000, that's the cheapest entry to the (nikon) FF mirrorless world and you might want a telephoto or wide too. Probably a <$/€1000 double zoom kit would be a solution here. Is it possible to guarantee a decent quality at that price level? Nikon doesn't seem to make a huge margin on its bargain-basement priced, cheap to manufacture D3x00 series...
PaulSnowcat said:
The other reason is that APS-C can offer you lenses that cannot exist in FF ecosystem. For example, 50-100/1.8 - is something unthinkable for FF system. A brilliant lens. 70-200/2.8 is darker, is heavier, is much more expensive.
Click to expand...
Again, check that equivalence thing pls... Your 50-100 is indeed a great lens, but it's FF equivalent has been around for 30 years;)
PaulSnowcat said:
16-300 (24-450 in terms of FF!) cannot be replicated on FF at all, it is impossible! 28-300 is a bleak parody as it is shorter on both sides and has MUCH worse quality on it's corners.
Click to expand...
Hint: your factor of 1.5 only stands if we are talking about the same pixel count. Approximately true for a z50-z6 comparison, but not entirely with a z7 with almost 50% higher linear resolution... It won't save that 28-300 paperweight for sure. However, if you want to use a superzoom, why bother with an ILC instead of a bridge?
PaulSnowcat said:
So, APS-C is NOT just a step to Full Frame, it is a separate, much more popular kind of cameras with it's own strengths. If a manufacturer wants to sell it's cameras in big quantities, it must go into this ecosystem. I am almost sure Z50 will prove this to Nikon.
Click to expand...
APS-C was a compromise at the dawn of the digital era and I am finally happy to wave goodbye to it. The industry wasn't able to produce FF sensors at a reasonable price and quantity. The price difference between FF and APSC bodies has fallen a huge deal, we even see some obscene crop pricing (see Olympus e-m1x) beyond many decent FF systems. Meantime, you get second hand FF bodies for chips, D750 sometimes cheaper than a z50, a7mkI for €400...

I do agree that many live on a limited budget, but to establish a market sector, the company has to explore what are the typical limits. Below a certain standard people will just use their smartphones, some have "telephoto" lenses now...
 
Last edited:
aniltulsi said:
I am glad that it is in my generation, I am seeing the Technological evolution of the Photography Tool. As happens with every evolution, the old technology dies and new one takes over. Some times, few companies die with the old technology, like Nokia, Kodak, etc., who didn't evolve with technology. On the other hand, there are companies that are flourishing even after 100 years of existence.

Where does Nikon fit into this? No doubt Sony started the Mirror-less technology revolution, but does that mean they will be the leaders in Camera business? What happened to Xerox? Canon left Xerox far behind.

I see Nikon has seen the Technological evolution to ML, and has decided to adopt it, which is the good part. Will they be able to leave Sony behind, is something so be seen. At the moment, it seems Sony has much better processors inside the camera, to help them with faster operations, and better data crunching, to help them give better AF experience. S

Nikon has to now move to better processors and better software solutions. And I am sure they can do this, as there are many solution providers in the market for this. Sony here is trying to do to Nikon what Samsung did to them in TV business. Samsung was the screed supplier to Sony, but took over their business. Sony was the sensor provider to Nikon, and other manufacturers, but is tying to take over the business.

Canon prevailed over Xerox, Samsung over Sony, Toyota over Ford, etc. And it surely is possible for Sony to leave Nikon and Canon behind, if they continue to move with speed and Nikon is not able to catch up with them. If Nikon is not able to offer newer features that are under development, like Global Shutters, flicker free EVF with no delay, AF speed etc, people may continue moving away to Sony, with unfavorable consequences for Nikon.

However, looking at Nikon's first Z offerings, it does seem Nikon has understood the new technology well, and knows what they have to do next. Consequences of not taking a larger leap in their next offering will have grave consequences. So I am waiting for their next ML offering to guess if they are going to conquer Sony, or will be fighting a loosing battle...
Click to expand...
+1 for an excellent post...especially the comments about the criticality of processors and software. I'm not so sure Nikon is up to the challenge, but there's hope....

--
Garfield
 
Last edited:
... requires an innovative technology R&D department with a sufficient budget and management authorization to truly innovate. I hope Nikon has the vision to fund, support, and encourage such R&D - because Sony is doing it.

Loading…

www.dpreview.com
aniltulsi said:
I am glad that it is in my generation, I am seeing the Technological evolution of the Photography Tool. As happens with every evolution, the old technology dies and new one takes over. Some times, few companies die with the old technology, like Nokia, Kodak, etc., who didn't evolve with technology. On the other hand, there are companies that are flourishing even after 100 years of existence.

Where does Nikon fit into this? No doubt Sony started the Mirror-less technology revolution, but does that mean they will be the leaders in Camera business? What happened to Xerox? Canon left Xerox far behind.

I see Nikon has seen the Technological evolution to ML, and has decided to adopt it, which is the good part. Will they be able to leave Sony behind, is something so be seen. At the moment, it seems Sony has much better processors inside the camera, to help them with faster operations, and better data crunching, to help them give better AF experience. S

Nikon has to now move to better processors and better software solutions. And I am sure they can do this, as there are many solution providers in the market for this. Sony here is trying to do to Nikon what Samsung did to them in TV business. Samsung was the screed supplier to Sony, but took over their business. Sony was the sensor provider to Nikon, and other manufacturers, but is tying to take over the business.

Canon prevailed over Xerox, Samsung over Sony, Toyota over Ford, etc. And it surely is possible for Sony to leave Nikon and Canon behind, if they continue to move with speed and Nikon is not able to catch up with them. If Nikon is not able to offer newer features that are under development, like Global Shutters, flicker free EVF with no delay, AF speed etc, people may continue moving away to Sony, with unfavorable consequences for Nikon.

However, looking at Nikon's first Z offerings, it does seem Nikon has understood the new technology well, and knows what they have to do next. Consequences of not taking a larger leap in their next offering will have grave consequences. So I am waiting for their next ML offering to guess if they are going to conquer Sony, or will be fighting a loosing battle...
Click to expand...
 
Photo Pete said:
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...
Good grief. Why do people continue to read stuff by the Ken and Barbie of photo blogging. Cheap plastic rubbish, and their blog isn’t any better.
Click to expand...
Starting at around the ten minute point in the video the Northrup's shift into making suggestions and overall optimism about Nikon. More generally, I find the Northrup's equipment reviews extremely useful - concise and perceptive with most or all of the relevant points addressed. I see people bad mouth them ("rubbish"?) but rarely see details on mistakes or omissions that the Northrup's actually make.

If you are going to complain about them, please be specific. I, for one, would definitely like to know if they are less reliable than I perceive them to be. Vague smears don't help.

--
Art M Altman
Headshot / Portrait Photographer
http://www.artmaltman.photography
 
Last edited:
Droster said:
Full frame cameras is a rough indicator of where your professionals are. Your big three will still be your big three. Sony overtook Canon with 38%, Canon is now at 36%, while Nikon dropped to 24%. Panasonic's S1 cameras and others fall into that purple line.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the data points. I think this demonstrates that Nikon is far from done with. They are not in a great position, but they certainly have a better chance of continuing their imaging business than the 'purple line' does.
 
This clickbait thread misses the point. Canon is declining at the same speed as Nikon. The whole photo industry actually. Sony is loosing money at slower rate cause mirrorless will be "the last man standing". And it's not cause of some Nikon mistakes. I think that instagram times are over, it's time for youtube, all those vloggers etc. It's more interesting to see video footage of the event than some photos (mostly done by mediocre photojournalists). More informative, more entertaining. The photo days are over.

Photography itself is becoming more ART than general communication method. It's OK, so it was in film days that I remember very well.
 
Full-frame sensors aren't going away - there will always be professionals and someone has to supply gear to professionals and really serious amateurs. Why not just do that? Professionals will pay for the best equipment, so if you make the best gear you can keep good margins.

Having to serve the needs of amateurs, "prosumers", and professionals forces too many compromises. And right now Nikon, with dwindling financial resources is having to support THREE different lens formats and associated bodies: FF F-mount, FF-Z-mount, and DX Z-mount. That spreads them too thin! Leica is profitable by identifying their core market - rich top-end camera buyers and focusing like a laser on that market. I think Nikon should something similar - identify a core market - I say professionals - and focus on being the best in that market. Market share isn't everything.
 
I do not think Nikon will disappear. I think there would be many interested buyer such as Huawei , for one, and other Chinese companies. I do not think the Japanese government of Industry would let that happen. Probably a deal would be brokered to keep the Company and Name in Japan.

What that means to those of use that use Nikon? Some ideas but probably no better than anyone else's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top