The timing of this article is interesting, too. Why now? After decades of being business?
David Etchells along with a couple of hundred other journalists and bloggers (including me) from around the world who cover the business of photography were all in the same hall in Tokyo back in August 2007 when Nikon introduced the D3. Back then questions were asked about who designed and who if not Nikon was fabricating the sensor in that camera. I know Etchells professionally and I know he’s been wanting to write an in-depth story about sensor design for a very long time. The other companies didn’t bite, but Nikon did.
Is this a p.r. coup for Nikon? Of course. Is any of the information discussed demonstrably untrue?
Well if you are knowledgeable speak up. Write to the editors of Dpreview or any other website or publication and pitch your own researched article refuting the information in the Imaging-resource article.
Maybe trying to hype their upcoming mirrorless cameras?
Maybe. In which case: smarter marketing on Nikon’s part than by either Team Sony or Team Canon, et. al.
I think so. The fact they use third party sensors has been a source of shame for Nikon for some time, and they are often intentionally misleading in their claims about "designing" their own sensors. If the rumours of the upcoming mirrorless are true, then Nikon will soon be directly competing with Sony FE for the first time so they need to try even harder to differentiate their sensors from Sony. Obviously the "article" is nothing more than a puff piece to help push the narrative that Nikon sensors are special and unique, but it is interesting to see how the Nikon faithful blindly accept it as fact because it tells them what they want to hear.
Some news from the real world;
not only are the Nikon designed sensors in Nikon cameras unique
- The Canon designed sensors (and not all are fabricated by Canon as well) are also unique
-The Sony designed sensors in Sony cameras are also unique.
- The Fuji designed sensors in Fuji cameras? Those are unique too.
- Same with the Panasonic designed sensors in their cameras,
-The sensors in Leica digital cameras? Also unique to Leica.
- Same with Olympus.
- Same with Sigma.
- The Sony manufactured sensors in Hasselblad and PhaseOne cameras? Unique to those respective brands as well.
And the same goes for the sensors in Arriflex, Panavision, and Red cameras.
Probably the same is true for Apple, and the various makers of Android compatible phones and tablets.
All of these companies employ a lot of really smart engineers. All of these companies bring something unique to their company’s products.
My point is: all of these companies design the sensor assemblies to perform they want them to perform. If company A develops a sensor technology and are willing to license it to Company B who wants to utilize for their purposes and incorporate with their in-house developed technology, and both sides can come to a mutually beneficial arrangement which might include fabrication deals , Company A’s management would be stupid not to do the deal. Not only would the licensing and fabrication fees bring in a lot of cash, but by being able to scale up manufacturing capacity to meet the increased demand Company A’s s basic manufacturing costs are lowered as well.
You exhibit all of the traits of a typical “brand warrior”. You think it is a zero sum game. You appear to think that for Sony to win, Nikon must lose. If Nikon fails, Sony loses a good customer. Both Sony and Nikon (in this instance) benefit from the co-operation as well as the competition.
You use words like “a source of shame” as if they are meaningful in the context of really big business. . This isn’t personal, it isn’t like your parents catching you watching porn.
