Nikon Floundering?

Not a total surprise:

 

Nikon in 'Dire Straits' as its Slump is Particularly Untimely: Report

Hmm... they should bring

back their entire manual

focus AIS lens line...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

Don't know but I don't think I would buy a new Nikon any more.

Hmm... they should bring

back their entire manual

focus AIS lens line...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif

 

I fact I might buy a new camera designed solely for the AI-S lenses.

Not sure what to make of all this. Ken Rockwell said don't by Nikon and Thom Hogan's latest article is quite critical of their marketing decisions. The Z bodies are excellent and the S-series lenses are probably better than almost anything else anybody has ever made. Still, it may not be enough. I don't even know anybody who's interested in buying a camera rather than a cell phone, and the economic and social changes brought on by the pandemic could be the last nail in the coffin. I've been shooting Nikon since 1972, 48 years, and I'd hate to see them fail.

Photography is only part of their business.

If Leica managed to survive, Nikon will manage too.

People not that interested in photography anymore, most US photo magazines out of business.

Photography is only part of their business.

Looks like all parts of their business are in trouble.

 

Another one of these "the sky is falling" articles. Yes, Nikon has made a slew of poor decisions and they are paying the price for it now. Nikon appears to be a company that produces their best when they are under pressure - so let's hope they can pull it off again. There's little point in looking back at what Nikon could (and should) have done differently - all what counts now is looking forward and hope that Nikon doesn't trip over their own feet yet again.

 

Leica managed to survive,

Quite a miracle - amazing how they can cruise along (and even thrive) on their name alone.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Dieter Schaefer

I have replaced two of my three Z bodies with the new cameras, I am well invested in this system and I think the optics are incredible.

 

I’m not really interested in what the competition is doing because I like the way Nikon cameras “think” and that allows me to not have to, just get the images made.

 

I sure hope they pull through, they have my support for sure.

Maybe if Nikon regularly kept up with Photo.net, and implemented what's requested they'd be in a better state....;)

 

 

 

.......or maybe NOT! :p

Interesting or telling that the main independents haven't made any Z Mount lenses.... yet.

 

I'm thinking Sigma and Tamron mainly.

 

Maybe if Nikon opened up the Z Mount to others they'd get some traction in this limited market?

 

I'm happy to buy a lens that does exactly what I want and am not particularly brand based.

I'm thinking Sigma and Tamron mainly.

Took a while until they offered lenses for Sony E-mount.

Maybe if Nikon opened up the Z Mount to others they'd get some traction in this limited market?

I can imagine that Nikon is afraid of creating competition for themselves at this point. They always were:(. Which at least partially is to blame for the situation they are finding themselves in now.

Looks like all parts of their business are in trouble.

 

Another one of these "the sky is falling" articles. Yes, Nikon has made a slew of poor decisions and they are paying the price for it now. Nikon appears to be a company that produces their best when they are under pressure - so let's hope they can pull it off again. There's little point in looking back at what Nikon could (and should) have done differently - all what counts now is looking forward and hope that Nikon doesn't trip over their own feet yet again.

 

 

Quite a miracle - amazing how they can cruise along (and even thrive) on their name alone.

 

Toyo keizai was just relaying Nikon's financials--not exactly "Chicken Little" fake news doomsaying. Indeed, Nikon's serial missteps also don't offer much joy if the same illogic informs their future plans. Diversification isn't there to cushion the company from many more dud product losses. The parallel F and Z mount lines embody the kind of puzzle that Nikon can't seem to solve.The Nikon 1, Key Mission, a belated MILC rollout, and a legacy of QC bungling all took a toll. Innovation hasn't been in residence at Nikon for years.

Innovation hasn't been in residence at Nikon for years.

Why? I think what they offering is pretty much cover any photography you can think of, except medium format.

All industry just scaling down from digital boom, it will stabilize at some point. Amateur camera segment get wiped out by cellphones.

There is no money in photography anymore, images available for free on the web.

I might be interested in a Z50 but I need to get my hands on one before I spend $1000. That's the problem...no more camera stores.

Maybe if Nikon opened up the Z Mount to others they'd get some traction in this limited market?

 

Tamron are rumored to be developing Z mount lenses. I think one issue is that since Nikon have the most liberal mount (widest inner diameter and shortest flange back distance) and 3rd parties make their volume from utilizing the same optical design in multiple camera systems, so in order to create lenses for many systems they have to accept the most restrictive mount parameters (Sony E diameter and Canon RF flange back distance) and this would put them at a slight disadvantage over Nikon Z lenses because Nikon can take advantage of the least mechanical restrictions in their lens designs. All Sony E mount third party lenses should be possible to port to Z mount if they just figure out the electronics and communication interface.

 

I think Nikon just wanted a head start before competing with autofocus third-party lenses, which is understandable. Manual focus lenses are available for Z mount already.

 

I actually like Nikon lenses which is one of the main reasons I am using Nikon. I have a few third-party lenses but don't use them much. I've come to conclude that the lenses I like the results from the most tend to be Nikon. It's something about the style of rendering. My latest third-party lens is the Laowa 25mm 2.5x-5x macro lens, it is an area of photography for which Nikon have not made products in a long time.

 

"I like the way Nikon cameras “think” and that allows me to not have to, just get the images made. "

 

Indeed.

 

Quite a lot of people online complain about Nikon cameras' restrictions to configuring different functions under various buttons. Generally I am like - why would I need to do that? The most awkward thing on a Nikon camera was the LV activation in the 2007-8 Nikons and the fact that when taking pics in LV mode the shutter and mirror had to do a full dance, which they subsequently corrected in newer models. But since then I haven't really encountered anything that I needed to do that was particularly difficult on a Nikon camera. I've always felt that issues in Nikon cameras are resolved quickly.

The parallel F and Z mount lines embody the kind of puzzle that Nikon can't seem to solve.

 

Why would this be a puzzle? Each product line and technology have their users and technological advantages and disadvantages. It is normal for companies to have multiple product lines. For example, Canon have EF, RF, M, and PL mount cameras and somehow gained a 40-50% market share which is remarkable. It would seem that a diverse product portfolio is a key to success and certainly not a hindrance.

 

Fujifilm have an APS-C and a medium format mount. Hasselblad has DSLR and mirrorless medium format product lines. Nikon in the past made a huge array of compact cameras which they no longer make and so clearly they are capable of maintaining diverse products. I think today they have much better focus.

 

The Nikon 1, Key Mission, a belated MILC rollout, and a legacy of QC bungling all took a toll. Innovation hasn't been in residence at Nikon for years.

 

Somehow I have missed Nikon's QC problems even though own dozens of their products. Yes, they have a poor record of software quality but even that seemed to have a low point in 2014-2016 and has improved since. And they had quality problems in 2012 after the earthquake, tsunami and flooding destroyed their factories the year before. I am willing to forgive them for that since it was not something easy to prepare for. Think about the tens of thousands of people who died and lost their homes. It is a little difficult to manufacture precision optical products when the loo doesn't work and there is no infrastructure.

 

Since then I have only seen a remarkable

improvement in product quality from Nikon. For example the requirement for fine tuning lenses has dramatically reduced in the latest release. Most of Nikons have fine tune standard deviation across lenses around 5-7 fine tune steps; the D6 has mean -0.17 and SD 2 and now the auto fine tune delivers reproducible results so the process is quick and painless. The D800 was the worst (I suspect teething problems with newly reconstructed factories) with 9 points SD across lenses, so fine tuning was not only mandatory, it took me many days. Now it is all done within an hour for all my AF-S lenses. This nicely shows how much improvement in calibration accuracy Nikon have managed in the course of 8 years.

 

The quality of Nikon lenses has had a marked improvement as well, this goes for both mounts. Competition is more intense now, that much is given. I think somehow the advent of high-resolution 35mm sensors motivated the competition and everyone makes higher contrast and resolution lenses as a rule now.

Edited November 25, 2020 by ilkka_nissila

If Nikon had $100 for each report over the years that they are going to shut down they'd have enough to keep them in profit without selling cameras! :)

Why would this be a puzzle? Each product line and technology have their users and technological advantages and disadvantages. It is normal for companies to have multiple product lines. For example, Canon have EF, RF, M, and PL mount cameras and somehow gained a 40-50% market share which is remarkable. It would seem that a diverse product portfolio is a key to success and certainly not a hindrance.

 

Fujifilm have an APS-C and a medium format mount. Hasselblad has DSLR and mirrorless medium format product lines. Nikon in the past made a huge array of compact cameras which they no longer make and so clearly they are capable of maintaining diverse products. I think today they have much better focus.

 

 

 

Somehow I have missed Nikon's QC problems even though own dozens of their products. Yes, they have a poor record of software quality but even that seemed to have a low point in 2014-2016 and has improved since. And they had quality problems in 2012 after the earthquake, tsunami and flooding destroyed their factories the year before. I am willing to forgive them for that since it was not something easy to prepare for. Think about the tens of thousands of people who died and lost their homes. It is a little difficult to manufacture precision optical products when the loo doesn't work and there is no infrastructure.

 

Since then I have only seen a remarkable everything

improvement in product quality from Nikon. For example the requirement for fine tuning lenses has dramatically reduced in the latest release. Most of Nikons have fine tune standard deviation across lenses around 5-7 fine tune steps; the D6 has mean -0.17 and SD 2 and now the auto fine tune delivers reproducible results so the process is quick and painless. The D800 was the worst (I suspect teething problems with newly reconstructed factories) with 9 points SD across lenses, so fine tuning was not only mandatory, it took me many days. Now it is all done within an hour for all my AF-S lenses. This nicely shows how much improvement in calibration accuracy Nikon have managed in the course of 8 years.

 

The quality of Nikon lenses has had a marked improvement as well, this goes for both mounts. Competition is more intense now, that much is given. I think somehow the advent of high-resolution 35mm sensors motivated the competition and everyone makes higher contrast and resolution lenses as a rule now.

 

Think you're lost in the fanboy fog. Put yourself behind the counter trying to make a sale to a customer whose eyes are glazing over as you explain the F and Z mount systems. Then there's the challenge of pitching one without crapping on the other--and killing what little brand heat Nikon retains in the process.

 

Nikon's QC+CRM took a serious hit with the infamous D600--remember? Baked-in defects Nikon first denied then only slowly tried to remedy before finally just giving away D610s to disgruntled D600 owners tired of multiple failed repair attempts. Service advisories(i.e.,"recalls") irked customers. Not a few left the the brand for keeps.

 

They missed the boat with mirrorless. Fuji introduced the original X100 in 2010 and the X-T1 in 2014, each updated regularly ever since their debut. Nikon gave us the Nikon 1 and the Key Mission...

Think you're lost in the fanboy fog. Put yourself behind the counter trying to make a sale to a customer whose eyes are glazing over as you explain the F and Z mount systems. Then there's the challenge of pitching one without crapping on the other--and killing what little brand heat Nikon retains in the process.

 

Nikon's QC+CRM took a serious hit with the infamous D600--remember? Baked-in defects Nikon first denied then only slowly tried to remedy before finally just giving away D610s to disgruntled D600 owners tired of multiple failed repair attempts. Service advisories(i.e.,"recalls") irked customers. Not a few left the the brand for keeps.

 

They missed the boat with mirrorless. Fuji introduced the original X100 in 2010 and the X-T1 in 2014, each updated regularly ever since their debut. Nikon gave us the Nikon 1 and the Key Mission...

D600 is history, Canon too had 1D3 mirror assembly recall. Fuji make nice toys, but that's niche market.

I an pretty sure if Nikon just stopped making F6, they will support their customers way longer then I will need it.

But if you so disappointed, I am looking for Nikon glass at discounted prices.

Edited November 25, 2020 by Nick D.

Nikon gave us the Nikon 1

Which they finally got right with the J5,.....and them terminated the program.

Think you're lost in the fanboy fog.

 

That's very insulting.

 

Put yourself behind the counter trying to make a sale to a customer whose eyes are glazing over as you explain the F and Z mount systems.

 

Today there are few camera store counters in existence and many people buy their gear online with tips from their friends and by reading information online.

 

I would explain it like this (I am just quoting from memory, not doing new research to write this post):

F-mount:

+ optical viewfinder, no lag, you see the subject through the lens without any computer processing, no flickering, no artifacts

+ huge range of lenses available from Nikon and other manufacturers both new and used

+ autofocus can keep up with the fastest subjects

+ many different camera body models available in different price classes, both new and used

+ superior range of telephoto options available (granted covered by second point but I want to emphasize that the difference is greatest at longer focal lengths)

- manual focusing by eye may be difficult

- viewfinder is not available in video recording (but I'd also explain that a lot of videography is done without using the viewfinder and even some high-end video cameras now lack an EVF: Sony FX6 and Canon C70)

- live view and video autofocus has limited ability to follow moving subjects except for the D780 which should be comparable with mirrorless cameras

- best results with AF require fine-tuning which fortunately in the newest models from 2016 onwards is automated

- AF points in viewfinder photography limited in area

 

Z-mount

+ superior optical quality of wide angle and normal lenses

+ potential for compact short and medium focal length lenses (though not yet realized in products)

+ EVF is available also during video recording

+ camera bodies are lighter and more compact than comparable DSLRs

+ AF points available across the frame

+ probably better identification of subject eyes and tracking of them than DSLR though if the subject is moving fast, DSLR may still give better results (e.g. in sports)

+ generally no need to do autofocus fine-tuning (though some disagree and Nikon gives the option)

+ silent shutter can be used in viewfinder photography also (but may introduce rolling shutter and banding artifacts)

+ camera automatically finds eyes and can track them (but it is not foolproof)

- currently AF with telephoto lenses doesn't keep up with the best DSLRs

- fewer native lenses available, no macro, no tilt/shift, no supertele, no fisheye, few fast primes

- smaller used market for Z stuff because not many cameras and lenses have been sold

- viewfinder shows lag that can be nauseating when panning, some get headaches from prolonged use of EVF; I personally get nausea

 

So, one can judge one's needs - for example, a travel photographer would possibly value the compact, high-quality lenses of Z, a portrait photographer might want to use eye AF, a wildlife photographer might prefer a D7500, D500, D850, or D6, depending on budget and other considerations, a landscape photographer probably Z, and so on. Someone who already owns a lot of F mount gear and likes the OVF experience may want to stick to F mount, or use both.

 

But this is highly personal. You could go to a car dealership and be introduced a huge variety of different cars, surely this is much easier to deal with cameras.

 

Then there's the challenge of pitching one without crapping on the other

 

Why would a salesperson do that? It's sufficient to explain the benefits and downsides of each system and let the customer decide.

 

Nikon's QC+CRM took a serious hit with the infamous D600--remember?

 

Yes, I already said that in 2012 Nikon had real problems with production as in the previous year a historic earthquake hit Japan and thus Nikon had severe damage to their factories. Tens of thousands died, and more lost their homes in the coastal areas of Japan. There was even a serious nuclear accident. To add insult to injury, later that year Nikon's Thailand factories were flooded as well. So when they started to produce cameras again in 2012, to get there they had to rebuild their factories basically, and I find it surprising that people are so disassociated from the people who make the products that they would then be surprised that there are manufacturing problems in the new products made in the following year? I wasn't sure Nikon would survive and was glad that they did. I bought a D800 which had poor focusing accuracy but I made do with it until the much-improved D810 came out and then used that. Is it a sign of fan-boyism that I have kept using Nikon despite the D800 problems? No, it's perfectly natural since I don't like competing products better, and I don't have it in my personality to hate someone (natural or legal entity) for a long time for whatever mistakes they make. I have used Minolta, Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fujifilm, Mamiya, Zeiss, Rodenstock, Laowa, Tamron, Panasonic, Olympus camera and lens products and the stuff I keep coming back to is Nikon because I find the results and the shooting experience generally most pleasing. It's still pretty insulting to be called a fanboy as I have a lot of experience from which I have come to my conclusions.

 

They missed the boat with mirrorless. Fuji introduced the original X100 in 2010 and the X-T1 in 2014, each updated regularly ever since their debut. Nikon gave us the Nikon 1 and the Key Mission...

 

IMO if they had introduced mirrorless earlier they would have been in their current financial situation earlier.

 

I never took much interest in Nikon's compact cameras or action cameras (I do research before I buy something). KeyMission was unfortunate.

Edited November 25, 2020 by ilkka_nissila

Which they finally got right with the J5,.....and them terminated the program.

 

The 1 system was at least in part a technology test bed for the development that was needed to create eventually the "real stuff", i.e. the Z system. Nikon probably judged they can't maintain three mounts and cancelled the 1 system when they launched the Z. I think the sensor size was too small for the images to distinguish themselves from cell phone cameras by a large enough margin. Canon also made a small-sensor APS-C mirrorless "EOS M" system which was more successful and they have kept it around, but it's quite possible that since it's not compatible with the RF system, they may also cancel it. I suspect this will happen quite soon as there is no easy transition from M to RF and I am pretty sure that Canon also want APS-C users to move upmarket if at all possible.

 

I agree that the J5 was really nice as an alternative to a compact camera. Sony seem to have taken up that market with their RX100 series.

Remember when Nikon prided itself on "never" abandoning it's base by changing their mount, unlike Olympus, Pentax, Canon, etc. who felt they needed to modernize for the coming AF revolution. Now I'm locked into the disappearing D mount lenses if I want things to operate properly on my two old Nikons.

D600 is history, Canon too had 1D3 mirror assembly recall. Fuji make nice toys, but that's niche market.

 

I have also read about Canon 5D's dropping mirrors, the 1D X II and III accumulating a lot of sensor dust / oil specs (I have only needed to clean my D5 sensor a few times in 140000 frames), and now users are reporting the Canon R5 to occasionally hang in use, requiring e.g. taking out the battery and reinserting it in some cases. Jim Kasson has long been reporting that the Fuji medium format cameras lenses don't maintain focus consistently so even when the lens focus should not be changing, it can jump a bit, resulting in variable sharpness of his test shots. It's not like other manufacturers don't have issues. In recent years I've found Nikon have dealt with issues very well, but I realize this may be region-dependent.

Edited November 25, 2020 by ilkka_nissila