Nikon's response to Canon's Rebel 300D?

[dan_andrews]

So, Canon announced its Rebel 300D, details of which can be found <a

href="http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/300D">here on

photo.net</a> and <a

href="http://www.canon.co.jp/Imaging/eosdigital/index.html">here on

Canon's annoying Flash-powered site</a>.<br><br>

 

So, how about a D65? D75? D200?<br><br>

 

Since Nikon's latest Digital SLR is the professional D2H, and (we

presume) a D2X could follow sometime soon, this leads to the

question, "Will Nikon come out with a cheaper, entry-level DSLR?"

The rumor mill has been silent on this point, but the low price of

the Rebel 300D coupled with the success of Nikon's other DSLRs should

push Nikon to release new models that are aimed at getting existing

amateur Nikon users to make the move to Digital.<br><br>

 

Frankly, I'm tempted to ditch my Nikon gear and move to Canon, since

the projected cost of the Rebel 300D plus one or two lenses would be

less than a D100 body. (Note the use of "tempted." I doubt that I

could ever part with my FM2n, AIS 55mm/f2.8 Micro-Nikkor, or my AI

20mm/f4.)<br><br>

 

I'm off my soapbox now. Who wants to get on next?

[john_bald]

<i>Frankly, I'm tempted to ditch my Nikon gear and move to Canon, since the projected cost of the Rebel 300D plus one or two lenses would be less than a D100 body. (Note the use of "tempted." I doubt that I could ever...</i>

<p>Dan, I feel exactly the same way. 100 percent. Really, Nikon is overdue in giving us some news to get excited about.

[Carl Stone]

And when the next new thing comes out, throw away what you have, and go buy it

also. Is this what we get from the "instant gratification" generation?

[emaxxman]

Just be glad you're not a Maxxum user like me. At least you some digital SLR bodies to choose from.

[klix]

Now, I'm really wondering what Nikon's response will be....

 

I was originally hoping for a D200 in the $1000 range to one-up the Canon 10D. I would've been interested.

 

Now, I wonder if it will be a D65, for same market segment as the Canon 300D for $1000... AND a D200 to challenge the 10D in the $1500 range.

 

Just wondering out loud... I guess we'll have to wait and see.

[ShunCheung]

About 9 months ago, Canon USA had predicted that low-end DSLRs would be below $1000 in about 18 months. Instead of 18, it becomes reality in 9 months. Essentially this is a new front of the competition. If you want a DSLR to take some casual images, I am sure the 300D with its consumer-grade lenses is fine. IMO, for any type of serious photography, the minimum I would get is an F80/N80 or the D100, which means at least the 10D in Canon.

 

I would imagine that Nikon will have a D65 or some sort in the sub-$1000 range within a few months. $899 plus lens is still expensive for a DSLR. You may still be better off getting a Coolpix or some sort. Moreover, there will be downward price pressure on the D100, 10D, Fuji S2, etc.

 

The more serious problem is probably that Nikon has yet to produce a DSLR to compete in the EOS 1Ds segment.

[ky2]

If it can't meter with my AI(s) lenses, I don't want it... btw, the new "Rebel" finish is truly repulsive.

 

BUT-- this will mean definite changes to Nikon's coolpix line, and will definitely shape up things in terms of pricing. Hurray to Canon for that. As for what's next-- I'll get a D1x RIGHT after the D2x ships.

[lachaine]

Personally, I don't give a flying fig about what Nikon or Canon are coming out with. If you can believe it, some people, like me, are getting more deeply involved with film than before. On the other hand, why are so many people eagerly salivating at every new announcement of digital offering, just itching for the opportunity to move over to digital. Geez, it seems like we go through this at least every couple of months, since that seems to be how fast one latest digigadget is superceded by another one. Are they really photographers, or just consumers of high tech gadgetry?

[jimvanson]

<i>The more serious problem is probably that Nikon has yet to produce a DSLR to compete in the EOS 1Ds segment.</i><p>I think the real problem is Nikon is going to get their butt kicked unless they release a 10D and more important a 300D equivalent...right now.<p>Think for a moment how many 300D's are going to be sold <i><B>(regardless of how good the camera really is)</B></i>. It's going to be a huge portion of the consumer population that have been waiting for the sub $1000 6 mega-pixel camera that will turn them into fabulous <b>photographers</b>. By getting this camera out first Canon is establishing brand loyalty in a huge chunk of the early adopter class. <p>So once again we see Nikon forced into a game of catch-up.

[tcb.photo]

Hi Shun

 

I Think your dead right on that one. I think they waited too long to develop a high end pro big mega pixal camera. But I for one wouldn't jump ship just because Nikon didn't have a DSLR to compete with the Ids. I'm sure they will bring out something by the end of the year, but unfortunately they will loose a litte business from it.

 

It's intresting, this new DSLR from Canon. I think Nikon might loose a lot more here. I believe Canon, is trying to entice a different end of the market. By introducing a "beginners" or entry level DSLR they will be able to attract a entirely new group of photographers to the Canon Line up. Even though they won't make a lot on the new DSLR, they will on all the lens they will sell to go with it. Then those people will upgrade and again go with Canon. Or buy the better lens. Very smart long range marketing

 

Like Dan Said: "I'm tempted to ditch my Nikon gear and move to Canon, since the projected cost of the Rebel 300D plus one or two lenses would be less than a D100 body.". He and how many others? Or how many "newbies" who are looking to get into photography will end up going to Canon, instead of Nikon.Seeing Canon as more inovative and offering more choices. My understanding is it will use all the Canon AF or EF lens, but we won't get into that argument again :).

 

Maybe Nikon focused to much on the "Coolpix" line, and once more lost the race. I don't know, only time will tell

 

I'm sure Nikon will respond, at least I hope so. But once again they were caught off guard by Canon, and I fear that will cost them more than any of us can imagine. They really have to get moving and retake the lead as far as inovation goes. Or I'm afraid Nikon will one day be be looking ahead only to see Canon's backside down the road.

[eye-of-searle]

Who cares who is ahead of who in releasing DSLRs. I want a quality camera that works for me. I, unlike alot of people on this site, do not buy cameras based on which is the biggest seller.

 

When did photography become only about sales and who could beat who to the latest and greatest for some people.

 

People, and you know who you are, go out and take some pictures and have fun. Quite sitting around Nikon and Canon's websites drooling and waiting eagerly for the next news release about the next DSLR.

 

Wow, Bob you got that article out in no time. You, won that race.

[josh a.]

Wow Rob,

 

That's an understatement. If R&D were the indy 500, Canon would be on lap 450 and Nikon on 200. I said it before and this is proof of it, Nikon has just sat on their "Laurels" for way too long. What's a shame is we are the ones who will pay for it. First they alienate many of their long time users by devoping lens they can't use, and now Canon got the jump on them to sell "entry level" DSLRs.

 

Rob, you were right on one thing, it will cost Nikon. Canon will be the "Pied Piper", and thousands will flock to them. And that's the problem In My Humble Opinion

[john_bald]

The Fuji S2 was well regarded. I'm anxious to see what the S3 will be like. (No word yet.)

[patty_mac]

Canon is a much larger corporate 'entity' than Nikon is, as such they probably have significantly more resources and efficiencies at their disposal for their consumer oriented products. Over the last 20 years or so Canon has significantly grown the commercial products/services end of their business - something that Nikon does not have the benefit of. As a result, Canon gets the benefit of 'trickle down' technology from in-house commercial imaging product development (CMOS sensors, for example) and manufacturing economies of scale that let them do more with less - something that will continue to perpetuate as long as cutting edge technology is a key factor in developing consumer products, like digital cameras.

[austin_calhoon]

Ohhh no... Nikon is is BIG trouble unless they produce something quick. Canon has

managed to churn out two mid level DSLR's to nikon's zero. Of course, these cameras

are aimed at ams, but what do you think is the biggest segment of camera

manufacturer's maket? Hmm... Ams.

 

So what does this all mean and how does it relate to those of us who could care less

what the newest camera has come out? Well... as Nikon falls further and further

behind in Digital Technology, profits are going to decrease, heads are going to roll

from the top, and quality is going to be compromised. Not to mention Nikon's prices

are likely to remain higher in the retail market due to the increase in R&D spending

needed to catch up.

 

I would love for Nikon to only produce PRO level DSLRs and that be that. However,

they are losing so many future customers as we speak this might not even be an

option soon. Brand loyality runs deep. Anyone who has a marketing or advertising

background realizes that its 10 times harder to convince people to switch from a

brand they are used to, then to be the first brand they have ever used of a product.

 

I hope Nikon has 5 new digital cameras sitting on the shelf, just waiting to drop them

all and stun the competition. Hmm.. i dont see that happening anytime soon.

 

Obviously Nikon made some poor decisions when hiring R&D, Marketing, and brand

managers.

 

So what does this all mean? Well, I still shoot 95% film, own a D1H, S2, F5, F2 and I'm

not going anywhere soon. But when the time comes that it's just not feasible to

shoot film and survive in the day-to-day professional sector, I will switch to the

company who is the most committed to digital technology. Yeah, the D2H seems

great, but the technology is a full year behind canon. Sorry this is so long.

 

I hope nikon can hold on. But it all begins on the consumer level and works up the

tree of experience. Get em fresh or not at all.

[austin_calhoon]

Trickle down branding? Perhaps... but take the average consumer... I have a Zenith

TV, a Panasonic VCR, a Apple computer, A brandless microwave, and a Sony video

camera. Trickle down branding isnt the obstacle. Nikon believing they had won the

race in the first mile is most likely the reason they are so far behind now. You know,

the whole tortoise and the haire??

[raymond_chi]

Although I am in no hurry to buy a DSLR, I do find Canon�s $900 price tag very tempting. It�s at a price range that I can afford if I really want to. I suspect it is true for most people buying digital cameras. Nikon�s current offering is way out of my price range. Even though this forum, and web, is dominated by rich geeks, how many do you think can afford or willing to spend $2000 on a digital camera? I think the majority of consumers spend $1000 or less on a camera, digital or not. Capturing this segment of the market is really important. Why did I buy that 486 instead of Apple 10 years ago? Because it�s cheap. Have I ever looked at Mac again after that? No.

 

In a way, I wish I had picked Canon when I started off. But I do have faith in Nikon. Canon�s priority seems to be coming out with things �fast�, even if they are buggy. Nikon seems to want to spend the time to make sure it�s right. Let�s hope the 300D doesn�t have any focusing problems. :)

 

I hope Nikon�s D200 (or a cheaper model) will be priced competitively. If they price it again at $2000 then I will be seriously thinking of selling my Nikon gears.

 

In the mean time, I am off to shoot more films!!

[Jim_Tardio]

I see Canon has designed two lenses that only fit this camera...similar to Nikon's DX lenses.

<p>

The digital Pentax istD* looks like a much nicer camera than this.

[majid]

Patrick, Canon is a larger corporation than Nikon, but Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi keiretsu, which is much larger than Canon. The interesting thing is, Nikon is very conservative with introducing technology, for instance, the USM (AF-S) motors pioneered by Canon are actually a Mitsubishi invention.

 

The reason Canon can make the 300D so cheap is they are vertically integrated and make their own sensors, including owning the fab. Nikon or Pentax have to share their profits with Sony, which gives them less scope to reduce prices. I hope Nikon finds a way to make LBCAST more affordable, even though they do not run their own fabs, so there can be more competition in this market.

[carl smith]

I wouldn't be surprised that Canon and Mitsubishi and possibly other companies were involved in development of technologies like USM/AFS and IS/VR, as that seems to often be the way of things in Japan. But i've never seen any documentation on the development of the USM motor, so Fazal if you have seen something I haven't I'd like to read it. Whether its a Mitsubishi development or not I doubt without seeing the papers but its not impossible.

 

Ultrasound motors are no magical device, they've been around.

[chuck]

"but Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi keiretsu"<p>

The picture that paints keiretsu as efficient organisations that facilitate seamless transfer of technology amongst its members as if its members were all part of a giant corporation is false. Members of a Japanese Keiretsu enjoy benefits like easier loans from banks that are also fellow members, as well as from more forgiving oversight as member's management sits on each other's board. But they operate independently. So while Nikon might be able to get existing chips made by other firms uner Mitsubish umbrella for slightly better than market rates, they would not be able to call upon other Mitsubishi firm to foot the cost of developing a new chip specifically for Nikon. So Nikon's membership in Mitsubishi can not come close to making up for the fact that Nikon is only a medium sized company with annual revenue of about 3 billion where Canon is a very large company with revenue of about 25 billion.

[mike r]

What still amazes me is how anyone can get all excited about paying even $1000 for a flimsy plastic camera that will be obsolete in a few short years, when a professional level state of the art camera like the F100, capable of taking photos with three times the resolution, built to last for 20 years or more, can be purchased for less.

[ShunCheung]

Mike, how much do you think you'll spend on film and processing during the 20 (or whatever) years you'll own your F100? In the one year I have had my D100, I have never run even one roll of film thru it. :-)

[jsbc]

Yah Mike. How much do the film and development and printing costs add up to in those 20 years that you use the F100.

 

I am an amateur and I can pay for the 300D with film and development costs budget in half a year.

 

Make no mistake, I shoot 90% film, but I have to point out that your economic argument is fallacy. I have a full set of Canon lenses, and for me, the 300D is only slightly more expensive than the Nikon 5400 that I purchased a week ago.

 

Btw, the fact that Nikon is pushing all these G-lenses means that old Nikon fans with Ais lenses who have to buy completely new lenses for a dSLR might as well jump ship to Canon, since the legacy equipment is useless anyway.

[jsbc]

Shun... you beat me to it.

 

Btw, if you have the budget, would you rather buy the D300, or the Sony 828 which has a 28-200 zoom (F2.0 too! ) and a killer movie mode. Maybe Nikon should think more of a camera on that vein (ie a electronic viewfinder), but one with a interchangeable lens system.

 

I find that when I pull out the digicam (as opposed to a film camera) it is because of the flexibility of the movie mode. I don't use my D-SLR that often, except for flash-related shots where they are great to check on the flash fill effects.