Thom Hogan’s Fever Dream...

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
Bisonbison
OP Bisonbison Regular Member • Posts: 483
Re: Thom Hogan’s Fever Dream...
1

Droster wrote:

Bisonbison wrote:

Jim Keye wrote:

sirhawkeye64 wrote:

Yes it would be nice if Nikon would do this as they kind of need a fast APS-C ML body for the pros.

Nikon needs marketshare, and the "pro" or high-end APS-C market is the smallest one there is, particularly with the lack of lens support. Nikon has been pushing full frame ever since the D3. So a high-end APC-C MILC is going to be one of the last holes Nikon fills, if they ever do.

You are correct in your assessment that Nikon needs market share. Which is why they need a pro mirrorless DX option. Everyone who currently shoots with a D500 (and D7xxx) does so for a reason. If they wanted and could afford to get a full frame option they would have.
If Nikon thinks that all of those users will just say oh well and get a Nikon full frame mirrorless when capable crop sensor models exist in competitors’ line ups, they are mistaken.
In the current market they can’t afford to just focus on the biggest slice of their market and hope to retain their share of available camera buyers. Even more important, they need to give some indication either on a roadmap or interview that they are working to provide equivalent Z options for all their existing DSLR users if they have any hope of holding on to them. Just having an FTZ isn’t enough.

On the contrary, if they’re interested in market share they would have to release an a7siii-esque video-centric camera to pit against the likes of the R5, S1H and the aforementioned a7siii.

Thats not going to happen because they’re not a video company by DNA, so with regards to marketshare Nikon will likely eventually settle into a comfortable third, around 10% with the remaining majority shared between Canon and Sony, 30% and 50% respectively and the last 10% shared by Panasonic, Fujifilm, and others.

Sure, people do use a D500-level camera. The right questions to ask are are there enough people to justify that kind of a camera and when do they have enough spare resources to afford the luxury of designing such a camera.

The priorities now is to finish their foundations and address their gen 1 concerns with the gen 2 bodies, and then use the time they have now to secure a foothold with the the FX professional market with answers like a mirrorless successor to the D850 and an a9ii equivalent sport-focused body. I want Nikon to be ready when the world is ready to reboot proper. The FTZ plays an important role here because we already have the glass. The pros can just adapt lenses like the 180-400 and 400 f2.8E.

Nikon can do all those middle of the park stuff like the 70-200 f4 but there are more important things to do now. It took them forever to release the D500 to succeed the D300s, it’s going to take them an equal amount of forever to release a mirrorless D500 to succeed the D500. We’ll probably see one along the Z9s.

I took a look at the relative numbers on the photosynthesis.co.nz site and I have to concede that you guys are right. Nikon will probably make sure they hold on to their FX crowd and low end DX crowd before they target the Pro DX niche.

I do hope they don’t try to go head to head with a video centric camera at the expense of the stills users. I’m not sure they will stand a chance against Sony, Canon and Panasonic, who have established expertise in video. But only they know what products make them most margin. If they get those right, they will eventually get to it. 
Cheers!

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow