Glad to know. Could you provide some?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
- Status
I'd rather someone provide us with the evidence that Nikon is actually cutting R&D and/ or if they are by what amount. So far, we have no actual evidence just speculation by uninformed youtubers and armchair forum "experts".
We can see it in 2 weeks. Nikon isn't cutting R & D budget, the change can be who get it. Imaging Products Business, Precision Equipment Business, Healthcare Business or Industrial Metrology and Others (the 4 lines of reporting)? That chance every year. It seems that Precision Equipment get this financial year more of the budget. The R & D department work for all businesses and and we don't know how they split the finances between the businesses.
Leonard Shepherd
Forum Pro
https://www.nikon.com/about/technology/rd/pdf/nrr_vol2_2020_e.pdf is an interesting read for
1/ background on the Z 58mm f0.95
2/ work Nikon does to make recent high MP sensors possible
3/ the breadth of Nikon research - including with universities in Arizona, London and Berlin as well as Japan.
See. That is interesting.
ericbowles
Veteran Member
You're taking advice from Ken Rockwell?! He is not held in high esteem due to his outlandish statements. Do you remember when he recommended everyone shoot JPEG? Or that his favorite lens was the Nikon 18-200? Why not take a look at his photography and see what you think - if you can find anything beyond family photos.
I'd suggest you get more balance in the reviews you are reading. Ken has some good points occasionally, but he's all over the place. Both Nikon and Canon have not yet released flagship cameras that have been announced. Rockwell is paid for clicks on those links in his posts so he can't say he is commercial free. If you noticed, he has nine paid links in the article including both the Canon camera he endorses and the Nikon Z9 he also endorses.
I'd suggest you get more balance in the reviews you are reading. Ken has some good points occasionally, but he's all over the place. Both Nikon and Canon have not yet released flagship cameras that have been announced. Rockwell is paid for clicks on those links in his posts so he can't say he is commercial free. If you noticed, he has nine paid links in the article including both the Canon camera he endorses and the Nikon Z9 he also endorses.
I am certain that some people are testing the actual camera out there. None of them will even pretend to have heard the name until the product is announced.
Many of them, including DPR, will publish their initial reviews/impressions along with the product release. Until then they ignore even rumors and forum questions.
This is not the first time. I have seen him write entire review with raving recommendations without actually having touched the camera. He clearly said so in the reviews. So, it's all "SPEC"ulation. Something about published or rumored specs not the actual camera.
ericbowles
Veteran Member
Sounds like a much more balanced point of view.
I can assure you that there are people with very nicely balanced reviews and evaluations, but there are also some that are very biased and do no research at all. It was not long ago that one popular Youtuber had a chance to handle a pre-release Nikon Z7. They handled it for just two hours in a meeting room, never saw or read any kind of manual, used the wrong focus modes and techniques, and then created a series of You Tube videos with factually incorrect statements and errors. And by the way - they are paid by a competing brand.
Even a balanced reviewer often has their personal preference on shooting subjects, style of shooting, and a desire to promote the shiny new gear. For example, if you give a camera to someone who shoots lots of video, the video features will drive the recommendation. Generally someone who reviews a lot of different brands does not understand most brands well enough to be considered an expert, and they often are using a technique or setting from a different brand in their testing.
Nikon is very restrictive about pre-release cameras. People who do actually see or handle those cameras have to sign a non-disclosure making them subject to serious liability if they discuss the cameras or share images without authorization. They also are using pre-production firmware, there is no manual, and the time they have ranges from a few minutes to a week. Rockwell is not in that crowd - it's just a few Nikon Ambassadors and even they can't handle every new release.
This is what I can find so far:
R&D Expenditures, Capital Expenditures, Depreciation and Amortization | Financial Information | Nikon About Us
R&D Expenditures, Capital Expenditures, Depreciation and Amortization are introduced
www.nikon.com
I wonder 2021/3 data will show huge difference.
karlreed
Veteran Member
\Thanks, I'll try again with my 24-70mm f2.8 G
Leonard Shepherd
Forum Pro
What "huge" difference?.https://www.nikon.com/about/ir/finance/expenditure/index.htm
I wonder 2021/3 data will show huge difference.
It seems to vary between 10.33 and 10.75%
--
Leonard Shepherd
In lots of ways good photography is much more about how equipment is used rather than anything else.
I am not expecting to see the "huge difference". If you check Canon's report, you will also find similar decrease in R&D budget.What "huge" difference?.https://www.nikon.com/about/ir/finance/expenditure/index.htm
I wonder 2021/3 data will show huge difference.
It seems to vary between 10.33 and 10.75%
So may I ask why you are so interested in these facts?
Parry Johnson
Veteran Member
The problem with social media, Youtube influencers (and for that matter, the entire Internet) is that sales are driven by a NOW factor. What is often forgotten that any product needs to have an extended value over time. If that time is short, cycles between replacements are more frequent.
That's been the case for most of the digital photography and much of the film era. The Z7 is a great camera now, and likely will be for another few years. Similarly, a Z50 is also excellent now, but the longevity of its excellence is probably not as long.
So the question I have is, "If you paid a premium price for a product that checked all the boxes now, why aren't you giving it an honest effort over a period of time?" Otherwise, you simply bought the wrong product.
Let me present a real-life case: You have a sports car and you fall in love with your partner. In what seems like no time, you find yourself with some children and your sports car magically turns into an SUV. Did you make a mistake by buying the sports car? Probably not -- you still had some good use out of it before you found out the SUV is more practical. There may even be regrets for getting married or having children, but the benefits and learning involved probably far outweigh the benefits of the sports car.
Cameras, stereos, power tools, dress shoes -- they're all like that. Economies thrive on the NOW concept. Do your share to help the economy, but remember that whatever you decide to keep can have a lifespan far beyond what others try to convince you.
(Heck, that's why some of us still have 35mm cameras and AF-D lenses!)
That's been the case for most of the digital photography and much of the film era. The Z7 is a great camera now, and likely will be for another few years. Similarly, a Z50 is also excellent now, but the longevity of its excellence is probably not as long.
So the question I have is, "If you paid a premium price for a product that checked all the boxes now, why aren't you giving it an honest effort over a period of time?" Otherwise, you simply bought the wrong product.
Let me present a real-life case: You have a sports car and you fall in love with your partner. In what seems like no time, you find yourself with some children and your sports car magically turns into an SUV. Did you make a mistake by buying the sports car? Probably not -- you still had some good use out of it before you found out the SUV is more practical. There may even be regrets for getting married or having children, but the benefits and learning involved probably far outweigh the benefits of the sports car.
Cameras, stereos, power tools, dress shoes -- they're all like that. Economies thrive on the NOW concept. Do your share to help the economy, but remember that whatever you decide to keep can have a lifespan far beyond what others try to convince you.
(Heck, that's why some of us still have 35mm cameras and AF-D lenses!)
Rich Rosen
Veteran Member
Ken Rockwell is a very controversial figure in the photo world. His site is supported by photo companies and stores. And he is known commenting (in review form) on products he has never touched. He is known for his critical comments on the origin of where a product is manufactured, without handling the product. He also has little use for third party lenses such as the Sigma Art and Sport series In summary; Ken Rockwell publishes preconceived notions about certain products having never touched them. His comments on the Z 9 are premature and unfair. I don't see similar comments on the newly announced Canon R3, which also can be considered FUD.
I like your concept of 'NOW factor'.
I was having a conversation with my daughter few days ago of a similar concept in news reporting and news cycles today. She is a major in journalism and working as a school teacher.
I was having a conversation with my daughter few days ago of a similar concept in news reporting and news cycles today. She is a major in journalism and working as a school teacher.
In his own words https://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm
I continue to do this site all by myself for fun — probably the last remaining 1990's for-fun website that hasn't sold out to other interests. Even though it has become popular, presumably because so many people find it helpful, it is still run just for fun. I am this site's only author. I have no one to proofread, spell check or fact check for me, so there will always be errors and omissions. Apparently the world finds my opinions very useful, but remember, they are the opinions of one man. I have a big sense of humor, and do this site to entertain you (and myself), as well as to inform and to educate. I occasionally weave fiction and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. I love a good hoax
Unfortunately the site doesn't have an indicator (eg. text color) of what content "informs and educates" versus what content is "just for fun" vs what content is "a good hoax".
BGD300V1
Veteran Member
Well, at least she isn't a lawyer.
peripheralfocus
Veteran Member
Actually, Rockwell clearly has become a hater of Nikon. His write-up of the Z9 development announcement (which he calls a "review", a total lie) is a blatantly biased screed.
Bias is actually pretty easy to detect; it reveals itself clearly when people describe equal events in different ways, or criticize something when one party does it, then ignore the same action when another party does it.
Nikon made the Z9 development announcement on March 10 and Rockwell published his screed about it on March 13, three days later.
On April 14, Canon, the brand Rockwell now reveres, did exactly the same thing as Nikon had done; they made a development announcement of the EOS R3. Everything Rockwell said about the Z9 announcement he could have said about Canon's R3 announcement. The two events were nearly identical.
Instead, Rockwell lauded the one detail Canon provided about the R3 and ended his write-up with "Bravo!" No scathing and sarcastic comments about the lack of detail provided by Canon; no commentary about how the camera is useless, or a "unicorn", because it's not available yet, yada, yada, yada. (Scroll down on this page to see it: https://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm)
Compare that to the way DPReview treated both announcements. DPReview treated both events very similarly, as, of course, they should have, since the events are almost identical.
Rockwell has always been a cesspool of subjective opinions, many of them stupid. But with Nikon he's fallen into a pattern I've seen many times before in people who switch brand loyalties (or loyalties of any kind, really); he's become a blatant hater of his former love. He feels they let him down, which he feels makes him look silly for championing them, and now he's out for revenge.
Last edited:
BrownieVet
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 3,583
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,666
The Oracle in Delphi might be able to answer that hypothetical question . . . but not I !
I concur with EVERYTHING you posted (below) . . . but would not claim it is right. I respect the rights of others who fell otherwise.
I own and still use several vintage film SLR non-Ai and Ai lenses. The NOCT 58mm f/1.2 Aspherical is my prized lens. Have some E and G DX and FX lenses but practically welded to my (two) D800 are AF-D lenses. I prefer the "long throw" travel of the focusing rings over the motorized AF.
.
I concur with EVERYTHING you posted (below) . . . but would not claim it is right. I respect the rights of others who fell otherwise.
I use Nikon / Nikkors exclusively since the original Nikon F (early 1960s).
I own and still use several vintage film SLR non-Ai and Ai lenses. The NOCT 58mm f/1.2 Aspherical is my prized lens. Have some E and G DX and FX lenses but practically welded to my (two) D800 are AF-D lenses. I prefer the "long throw" travel of the focusing rings over the motorized AF.
.
peripheralfocus
Veteran Member
Exactly right. I just made the same point (although a lot wordier than your pithy point) lower in the thread before I had read your comment.
Short answer for anyone curious: of course Rockwell did not describe the R3 announcement in any way similarly to what he said about the Z9.
- Status
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum