Death of the F mount

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by kevin_beretta, May 12, 2021.

  1. Yes. For profit. So they make what sells.
     
  2. Yup, right until they have to clear inventory with a fire sale.

    What no-one actually knows is what 'at cost' actually is!
     
  3. Zeiss is making some really good lenses for the F mount. Manual focus, chipped, and have an aperture ring. The F6 and D800 like the chipped lenses and the aperture ring allow me to get great results on the F, F2as, and the FMn2n. In fact if you haven't shot film with these lenses you don't know how good film can get. I assume similar results could be obtained with a Leica on film.
     
    luis triguez likes this.
  4. ´Fire sales´happen when a manufacturer made more of something than would sell. Usually that is because their customers want to buy another product. Perhaps similar to Nikon and their F mount and Z mount? Z sells. So they make Z.
    But F still sells too. Where is that fire sale? And where was mention of ´at cost´?
     
  5. This is tricky part, if I have to change lens mount, I may change brand as well. Canon mirrorless looks better to me.
     
  6. Q,G, You mentioned 'for profit'. No-one, apart from a few executives at Nikon, actually knows how much they cost to make, so judging profit is impossible.

    I'd think a fire sale would not run at a loss to Nikon, but cover costs.

    When they pulled out of the Nikon 1, there were some very good sales!

    Agreed for F, just not yet.
     
  7. I mentioned profit as the motivator, and pointed out that making profit depends on people wanting to give money in exchange for a product. That, to make clear that, certainly in the current market, companies do not force their decisions through their customers' throats, as was suggested, but on the contrary try to follow their customers' desires re products.
    Fire sales (but where do we see such?) are a sign of a company acknowledging that what they made thus far is not what their customers want. They then try to get some of what they invested making the stuff back by giving deep discounts. Remember that anything in return is better than nothing. Taking a big loss would of course be preferable over the bigger loss of not getting anything at all.

    In short: the complaint about dictatorial behaviour on the part of Nikon is missing an understanding of how things work.
     
  8. Folks, there are fire sales and then there are fire sales. Stores have fire sales.

    In 1969, when I was in the US Army at Fort Jackson, S.C., there was a fire in a PX warehouse. After the fire, a fire sale.

    I bought a fire sale Yashica SU60E S8 cine camera new in box, without fire, smoke or water damage, for pennies. It was DOA, as were many S8 camera of that era. See Lenny Lipton's The S8 Book about that. After a bit of wrangling Yashica repaired it on warranty. And then it took good footage.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2021
    bgelfand likes this.
  9. Sums up the Nikon 1 Series pretty well....:)

    EDIT. I liked my J5 and still use it regularly.
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2021
  10. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    The original J1 and V1 went on a serious fire sale after just one year, when Nikon introduced the J2 and V2. For a while I was somewhat interested in the Nikon 1 70-300mm lens for wildlife due to the serious crop factor, but that lens was going for like US$1000 when an F-mount 70-300 was about half that price. Eventually I never owned any Nikon 1 product. I am happy that I started buying Nikon mirrorless ownership with the Z6. (Nikon USA did loan me a J1 and later on an AW for review.)
     
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  11. Sadly, Nikon deliberately crippled the use of long teles on the Nikon 1 series... however, if the target is stationary it's possible to use a dumb FT1 adapter and the J5's BSI sensor can produce some very fine results.

    I'd like someone to remove the >300mm cripple-ware limitation. This issue doesn't help me love Nikon.....:(
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2021
  12. Yes. For profit. So they make what sells.

    That's the thing - they haven't made what sells and their market share is plunging. I recall reading recent estimates around 13% of the ILC market share being Nikon's, in the best of times just less than 10 years ago it was > 30%.

    Unfortunately, often Nikon and other manufacturers try to spread out the desirable features over a range of products rather than giving all of them in one, and this tends to annoy customers. Previously this might have been technology-limited, e.g. it may not have been possible to make a high-fps high-resolution camera several years ago but today there is a (Sony) camera that shoots at 30 fps with 50 MP, and apparently packed with the best technology anyone has available. Nikon, however, seem to continue spreading out the features: for example, the D6 has their best viewfinder AF system (in a DSLR) but it doesn't have good live view AF, limiting its use e.g. for video and for situations where one must use the LV (such as might be when used with their new NX Field system, or when taking low or high position shots with the LCD). The D6 also is extremely optimized for high ISO. The D780 by contrast has excellent live view AF, but it has the relatively old 2014 AF Module "Advanced Multi-CAM 3500 II" for viewfinder photography. At least for me this creates considerable problems in making sensible choices. I ended up purchasing the D6, which is wonderful in terms of its handling and AF system (especially for sports), but its sensor is about as far from general-purpose as one might be able to imagine, and for example the much lower-priced D780's sensor is much better at low to mid ISO. It is a very common approach where the stated intention of the manufacturer is to target specific users with specific cameras but often users want to do more than one thing with their cameras, and thus those cameras which end up being great all-around performers (instead of the niche cameras) become very popular (the D850 is one example). Nikon admitted in a recent interview that they hadn't seen (understood) the market clearly. No kidding. Now they seem to be targeting the Sony A1 "do-it-all" camera with their upcoming Z9. I hope they have some success with it although I'm pretty sure the price of that camera will be very high and only a relatively small number of people will be able to afford it, especially if major lens purchases are needed to obtain optimum AF performance.

    I find it quite ironic that when Nikon were doing very well economically in the first decade of 21st century, their camera sales increased very rapidly indeed and for many years but I found the products very much lacking, the viewfinders were poor and lenses were mostly oriented towards high zoom ratios and such things. In the second decade of the digital camera era they finally made an excellent range of AF-S primes and a range of tilt/shift lenses (starting in 2008) which I very much like, and the viewfinders improved remarkably in clarity, but then they landed in financial trouble, partly because of smartphones, but also by delaying their entry into serious mirrorless cameras. Although I would like to be considered a good customer it seems when they are making products that I like, they end up in trouble and when they make 18-200 zooms then they make a killing in the market. I am puzzled, but it just shows that I'm not a typical customer. Or it could be a non-causal coincidence. Actually I think Nikon's Z lens lineup is very sensible and high quality, and I hope they end up succeeding with it, and this current situations ends up a temporary hiccup. Hopefully.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2021
  13. My understanding is that the 1-series 70-300mm is a high-quality lens and Nikon may have preferred users to get that rather than try to adopt F-mount lenses for the 1 system. But of course for the user it would be more economical to be able to use the same lenses across cameras.

    I think the 1 series was a rather curious case of trying to make something differently, aiming to expand the camera market but it didn't work out that way for Nikon. Or actually it did, in that CX sensors are used in Sony's very popular RX100 series cameras ... which have many of the same features that the 1-series first brought to the market. It was in some way an innovation but apparently didn't end up benefiting Nikon but others. And ironically Nikon were the first to make commercially available the on-sensor phase-detect AF technology but they didn't incorporate it in their DSLRs until finally in the D780. Others took this technology up and took over much of the market. It's bizarre how this could have happened. A bit like Kodak inventing the digital camera and then hiding it under the carpet for many years. Personally I like DSLRs and optical viewfinders but I would still prefer to have OSPDAF available for when the back LCD is needed.
     
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  14. With a huge fast prime gap after 85mm until...... err....ever!
     
  15. With a fast prime Mike is probably referring to something from f/2 to f/1.2 in the short tele range (85-135 mm), or f/2.8 to f/2 in the medium tele range (180 to 300 mm). Not that I can read minds, but a fast prime lens is a term conventionally used for a lens which has a larger aperture than standard prime lenses of a particular focal length.
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2021
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  16. Really? Like Apple soldering memory sticks in computer, so you can't upgrade upgrade it, or removing headset jack from phone, using different power cable. Or make cellphones with non removable/replaceable battery.
    And right now Nikon just saying go to Z system, and dump everything you had before, including memory cards, that 's priceless.:)
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2021
    mike_halliwell likes this.
  17. Spot on Ilkka.....;)

    You've only got to look at Roland's excellent site to see what Nikon has made in the past up to the present.

    Nikon Lenses

    To cherrypick, past 85mm, there's the:-

    105mm 1.8 AIS, 105mm 2 DC or 105mm 1.4E

    135mm 2 K > AF DC

    180mm 2.8 F > AF

    200mm 2 AI > AFS VRII

    300mm 2.8 AI > AFS VRII

    Going further, there's some hope with the 400mm, prob 2.8 and 600mm, prob 4, which are on the road map... but that's it.

    Sure the FTZ works, but no-one really wants to HAVE to use them!
     
  18. And yet it seems to be the right move as they didn't lose any sales because of that. People actually like it.
     
  19. How could anyone know that?

    The trouble with that logic is that they may have sold MORE if they hadn't deliberately crippled the upgrade pathway.....:(

    Asking punters their buying intentions one way or another is about as reliable as trusting exit polls in elections.....:D
     

Share This Page