# Nikon is dying?



## Jim C. (Nov 23, 2019)

I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying. How can this possibly be true. Nikon has been around a long time and is recognized as a leader in photography. The quality is excellent and the camera and lens choices are amazing. The articles seem to be based on the mirrorless cameras not selling as predicted and the quality of lens in cell phones.
I witnessed the fall of Minolta and as I shot Minolta it bothered me. I shot Minolta film cameras and even purchased a Minolta/Konica digital. (somewhat disappointing).
I think all photography will adjust to the fact that cell phones are the point and shoot cameras of the present and future and a lot of entry level cameras are going away. I think or hope that the serious photographer will continue to use a quality camera. But for carry around picture taking I use my cell phone.


----------



## Soocom1 (Nov 23, 2019)

As with anything, there is a time for all things. 

Nikon will eventually disappear. When? Who knows. 

The market analysis is something I don't pay much attention to because they are almost always wrong. 

Minolta was in pretty bad shape in the mid 2000's after two lawsuits and the slow upstart with digital. Plus the 5 and 7D models were not what many wanted and lacked substantial umph. The only real selling point was an IBIS. 

Consider that when the 7D came out it was only a 6Mp sensor and Nikon already had a 14 in the FF category. 
Additionally Minolta had to combine with a competitor (Konica) in order to survive. Minolta not only made cameras, they also made imaging equipment and enterprise printers. 

Right now, unless there is a meteor strike on Tokyo, I don't see it happening.


----------



## cgw (Nov 23, 2019)

_I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying.
_
Where, exactly?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Nov 23, 2019)

There's at least one rumor going around that started with someone speculating on a message board. Nothing to it. Then these things go viral...


----------



## Overread (Nov 23, 2019)

Considering Nikon is beating canon sensor wise at present I'd have thought Nikon was in a very good spot right now.

That said ALL the camera companies are feeling some pinch as whilst the camera market is still very profitable the insane growth we saw as digital took over is easing off. That idealistic "oh more profits every year" economist talk never lasts forever. What you'll see is companies start to rein in profits and such because the market will contract. Sometimes new tricks like mirrorless can add some extra life; however with mobile phones eating up the casual end of the market and with pro end gear being longer term investments for many customers (many people skip a generation in updating their DSLR and for lenses the top end ones might be used until they break or are broken rather than replaced when a new edition is released). 

So you'll see loads of "doom and gloom" articles which, for those looking for shares with a high return on investment, are probably accurate to read. However there's still a lot of life left in the companies. Heck I'd personally rather like it if the company level stock market vanished as I feel its to blame for a lot of panic choices companies make and for a shift in their views from customer orientated to shareholder orientated but that's possibly for another chat.


----------



## jcdeboever (Nov 23, 2019)

I seen the finacial report and its not good. The bulk of their sales are from consumer level cameras which has declined steadily because of smart phones. Their professional level cameras are not a large portion but has remained somewhat steady.  People just don't want to lug around camera gear in general IMO. They are late into the mirrorless game and to compound poor sales, they can't drive some of the excellent af-d lenses. My guess is they will buy back some stock, revamp the lineup of mirrorless, and focus on other segments which priduce profit. Doubt they will go away but change their approach.

Nikon | Investor Relations | Financial Results and Presentation Materials


----------



## Derrel (Nov 23, 2019)

I thought Canon camera  had year-over-year profits down 20% from last year. Is Canon camera dying?


----------



## Jeff15 (Nov 23, 2019)

Both Nikon and Canon although making very good cameras in the past are really falling behind the times at the moment.


----------



## Overread (Nov 23, 2019)

I can see them losing the casual consumer war somewhat and reducing their hold their. The mobile phone camera is going to replace most small compacts if it hasn't already meanwhile mirrorless and "bridge" type cameras might well get carved up between them and other giants like Sony. There's far more competition there, but it also moves faster and fads come and go very quickly. DSLR wise I think both will remain top of the market for a long while yet - whilst they are slower products to sell the customerbase is typically more brand loyal once invested into a brand. Furthermore both Canon and Nikon have very extensive own brand ranges of lenses as well as extensive 3rd party support. 

Others might try and push in, but it will take longer for the brand loyalty to kick and for them to get complete lens ranges; esp of the bigger and more expensive kit.


----------



## pocketshaver (Nov 23, 2019)

The whole market for electronics is nuts.

It just takes a restructure of what is actually made.

Look at Nikon, the folks in charge of production still think that cell phones only have 3 megapixel cameras in them.  In the Coolpix compact line of 17 cameras, 9 of them are directly competing with cell phone cameras, and most of them LOSE against the last 3 generations of Samsung and Iphone cameras. And these 9 are also in direct competition with their action camera lineup.

The other Coolpix cameras are only besting cellphones in terms of lens diameter and optical zoom. Everything else is a draw for the consumer standpoint.

What they need to do is the following.

Focus on lowering costs for the new z line, the FX line, and reorganize the DX lineup.

Focus on the D500. Its got a lot going for it.

Even out the cameras in the enthusiast, advanced entry, and entry level lines.   Its just really really nuts when the bare bottom 3500/3400 share the same spot in the universe as the Coolpix line, but have the addition of replaceable lenses.

56/55/5300 . Even the technology out among them and start lowering the prices on the older ones. Shouldn't have the latest top of the line camera being cheaper MSRP then the 2 generation old one. Implied value is major with expensive purchases.

75/7200. Same thing on even out technology between them, reduce prices on the old one. Or turn the old one into the "high end" of the next lower category.

If they focused on evening out the image sensor power in ALL of their cameras it would be nice. The bottom end 3500 shouldn't have a 24 megapixel sensor while the top of the line cameras costing 2-3 times as much only have a 20 megapixel sensor.

Yes software and processing aside, that does create an issue with consumers. Newer generations should be superior.  Its why cell phone cameras have knocked the crap out of regular DSLRs.  Hey, anyone remember that the first 10 years of digital cameras sucked image wise to 1990s point and shoot 35mm cameras.


----------



## Nwcid (Nov 23, 2019)

If you have time for videos, the first 20 minutes of this is a good one to watch.  It deals with this topic, however it was more focused on Olympus.  Agree or disagree, that is fine, but is another perspective that this this topic.


----------



## Dave442 (Nov 23, 2019)

I bought my first digital camera for the express purpose of being able to share images by e-mail with family in other countries. Today you are much better off using your phone to take pictures for most social sharing of images. 

I bet if I go ask my friends that jumped into a DSLR setup five or ten years ago I would find that 50% of them have their camera sitting on a shelf and the other 50% bought some type of mirrorless - but 100% are taking more pictures with their phone than with their camera.

No surprise to see camera companies with a drop in sales.


----------



## pocketshaver (Nov 23, 2019)

Look at sony, they sell camera components to other camera companies, and even to cell phone companies. They've actually stretched market share by doing so.

Other companies are trying to have a finger in each part of the camera pie. While that looks ok on paper, you just over extend yourself.

If sony went to ONE mirrorless and one DSLR and built components for other companies, and made their little "compact" cameras theyd stay fine.

If canon and Nikon thinned their camera offerings to something like pentax has done, they would truly start saving money.

If Fujifilm built an actual website that showed their product, and sold it online from their own store they would increase sales. Why? Their website was created by rube Goldberg if your trying to find information on what they offer. And they have to many official dealers that DONT carry their cameras in store.

Leica simply needs to simplify their offerings. Sure like Nikon and sony they have other product divisions to use to keep overall company health and profit, but having so many different camera lines is a nightmare for the consumer. Some are still just a difference in how a dial is painted...

Voightlander CAN make a comeback if they kept to film cameras.  There IS no competition in film cameras today.   Nikon has the budget 600$ FM10, The F6 for 2K$. Leica hits 3000$ for a drool worthy 35mm camera.
If they come back with one of their late model 35mm's and price it between the Nikon D3400 and the Nikon FM10 they would see good market.


----------



## Overread (Nov 24, 2019)

Honestly I think part of Leica's marketing is that they realise many people buy their cameras because they are a Leica and almost nothing else. So having a wide range appeals to camera collectors as a market. It's probably something only Leica can do because they've built that quality and collecting market atmosphere around their brand. Even secondhand film Leicas still sell for a decent value whilst many other brands are lumped into boxes and still take a while to sell. 

I agree that film still has a viable market and will likely continue to do so. It probably needs a bit more time for the glut of decent film cameras to steadily dwindle off the market and also for a company to be big enough to hit the national markets; but not so big that they need super high sales volume.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 24, 2019)

I do not think there is much Market for a film camera, since film sales are now less than 1% of what they used to be. Film is a very small niche market, and film cameras even smaller, since film is a consumable and film cameras are very durable goods. I have a working camera that was made in 1938, meaning it has lasted 81 years. The camera has outlived basically a whole generation of people. There are Untold millions of 35 mm cameras and probably tens of Millions of 120 roll film models available for purchase on the used Market, often for as little as $10 to $100 for common examples such as the Argus C3 or the Pentax K1000 or the Nikon F, etc.. A quick look through KEH shows hundreds of working 35 mm film cameras, which represent a tremendous obstacle to entering the market with a new model. I do not think that most people are interested in film shooting with  a new camera when many highly desirable cameras are available on the used Market. If I were to buy a "new" 35 millimeter film camera to replace one of the six I already own, it would most likely look for a good clean used Leica M3 made sometime between 1953 and 1957. It is highly unlikely that any camera of new design could have higher appeal than what I consider to be one of the nicest film cameras ever made.


----------



## daveo228i (Nov 24, 2019)

Minolta was always big in Europe. In the US it was up against Nikon and Canon. I think it was a question of money. At one time Nikon had a joint venture with Minolta. Minolta was producing the end product, but quality was poor. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## cgw (Nov 24, 2019)

pocketshaver said:


> Look at sony, they sell camera components to other camera companies, and even to cell phone companies. They've actually stretched market share by doing so.
> 
> Other companies are trying to have a finger in each part of the camera pie. While that looks ok on paper, you just over extend yourself.
> 
> ...



Hmmm. I'm guessing(but could, as always, be wrong) that you're not enjoying much of a career as a marketing/product placement consultant? Just asking...


----------



## pocketshaver (Nov 24, 2019)

About 5 years ago the auto industry did research about re introducing the El Camino. Yeah the only American vehicle that came close to the Australian tray back.  Anyway they did the research and all ideas were scrapped.

Why? They discovered that if it was reintroduced, the market demand would KILL truck production smaller then 3/4 ton. Truck companies didn't want to undercut their truck sales so it was cut out of planning.

It also would have hurt SUV sales horribly.


----------



## WilliamK1974 (Nov 26, 2019)

pocketshaver said:


> About 5 years ago the auto industry did research about re introducing the El Camino. Yeah the only American vehicle that came close to the Australian tray back.  Anyway they did the research and all ideas were scrapped.
> 
> Why? They discovered that if it was reintroduced, the market demand would KILL truck production smaller then 3/4 ton. Truck companies didn't want to undercut their truck sales so it was cut out of planning.
> 
> It also would have hurt SUV sales horribly.



Maybe that's why that Chevrolet SS truck that came out a few years ago wasn't branded El Camino. It had that modern/retro styling, a Corvette engine, and a price point that put it close to new 'Vette territory. Then, GM was surprised that they didn't sell a million of them, and pulled the plug. Had they branded it El Camino and put one of their bulletproof pushrod V6 engines in it and priced it in the low to mid $20k's, they would have sold like hotcakes to the under-35 male demographic. But that would have stolen sales from the S10/Colorado segment, and maybe the low-level Silverado segment as well, even though it could have been more profitable.


----------



## pocketshaver (Nov 26, 2019)

barra at GM only got the job because she was a woman and her father had been an employee. EVERY special project she has created has ended up getting trashed.

Having the CAMERA companies focused on NON camera things, like the action cameras, point and shoot, and compact cameras is only hurting them.  Enough smaller companies are filling that use niche and doing it well. Attempting to compete with these companies, and all the little Asian companies making them is just whittling down profit and over all sales.

Putting movie capabilities into DSLRs does seem nice, but there are far to many companies like black magic that use the same DSLR body and lenses to make video cameras that kick regular cameras out of the market.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 26, 2019)

Speaking of trucks and cars,did anyone watch Elon Musk unveil his new prototype electric truck , the one where they smashed the windows twice with large steel balls?

I think Nikon has a pretty good handle on what the demand is for brand new 35 mm film cameras. I do not think that there is anything they could do to change the demand level. It is not up to manufacturers to set demand levels, that is something the market does. There is now a glut of used camera equipment on the market, built up over basically two and a half decades or more of constant Manufacturing of film cameras which are of high quality. There are plenty of used film cameras on the market.


----------



## pocketshaver (Nov 26, 2019)

Derrel said:


> Speaking of trucks and cars,did anyone watch Elon Musk unveil his new prototype electric truck , the one where they smashed the windows twice with large steel balls?
> 
> I think Nikon has a pretty good handle on what the demand is for brand new 35 mm film cameras. I do not think that there is anything they could do to change the demand level. It is not up to manufacturers to set demand levels, that is something the market does. There is now a glut of used camera equipment on the market, built up over basically two and a half decades or more of constant Manufacturing of film cameras which are of high quality. There are plenty of used film cameras on the market.


there is a large glut of film cameras on Ebay.. However far to many do not work. And there are not many people left who can actually REPAIR the cameras. Factories don't. And the "simple repairs" like adjusting the shutter speed is going to hit you for 200$ sight unseen.

I think its why the FM10 sells.  If a person has to decide between buying a used FM5 on ebay for 3-500 and risk having to put that much more into it for repairs,  a brand new FM10 is a reasonable  item to get instead.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 26, 2019)

A person who wants to buy a used 35 mm single-lens reflex can do so from camera stores and web Outlets spread across the 50 United States and each province in Canada, and even in Mexico. The Nikon FM10 has been available for over 20 years. It satisfies the low-end market for new 35 millimeter cameras, and as I understand it, there are brand new Nikon F6 cameras available for purchase.

As I mentioned above camera quest.com sells a number of brand new rangefinder cameras that bear the Voigtlander  "Bessa" brand. I bought a complete Bessa outfit back in the early 2000s with a 35mm f/1.7 aspherical, a 50 mm  f/1.5 aspherical, and a 75 mm.  the lenses were very good.


----------



## vin88 (Nov 26, 2019)

WilliamK1974 said:


> pocketshaver said:
> 
> 
> > About 5 years ago the auto industry did research about re introducing the El Camino. Yeah the only American vehicle that came close to the Australian tray back.  Anyway they did the research and all ideas were scrapped.
> ...


    GMC  V 6  were not as popular as the V8.   the first V 6 in a truck was trash and replaced by the old inline   6.


----------



## cgw (Nov 27, 2019)

Prayers answered:

ILFORD Harman Reusable Camera with Kentmere Film


----------



## Tim Tucker 2 (Nov 28, 2019)

"I'll be back... "


----------



## Solarflare (Nov 28, 2019)

Jim C. said:


> I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying. How can this possibly be true. Nikon has been around a long time and is recognized as a leader in photography. The quality is excellent and the camera and lens choices are amazing. The articles seem to be based on the mirrorless cameras not selling as predicted and the quality of lens in cell phones. [...]



Nikon has done a lot of poor decisions lately.

They have put their name on a lot of poor recent products. The Nikon One system, the new Z system are NOT amazing. The Z system lenses are expensive and poorly built; while their cameras aint too great either (not in regards to build quality), at least those can be fixed in the second generation. Their planned 1 inch sensor compacts never actually got offered, despite production being ready; that cant have been cheap for Nikon, neither can the now failed One system.

They have ignored price competition from third party lens manufacturers for a long time, until those companies dominated the market, taking away large parts of Nikons profits. Why cant Nikon offer a 35mm f1.4 at an affordable price point when so many people want such a piece of glas ? And I dont like how Nikon is now effectively offering Sigma glas, like the AF-S 105mm f1.4, a lens optimized for fast autofocus and sharpness, but not for good bokeh or strong color saturation, like a good portrait lens should do.

They have ignored many other things other companies did. For example, they left IBIS with DSLR completely to Pentax, including pixel shift technology. And when they tried it, like with the Df, their attempt was halfhearted and halfassed and they never tried to fix it later either.

Yes, they also did some great things. The D500, the D850, the AF-S 24mm f1.8, the AF-S 200-500mm f5.6 VR are all recent and amazing pieces of gear. The AF-S 70-200mm f2.8 e fl vr, too, though that got almost immediately voided by the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 vc g2.

So yeah, its sad but not too surprising Nikon is in trouble.

It doesnt help that Nikon depends a lot on the photography market alone and that market is shrinking.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 28, 2019)

The 105 mm F / 1.4 has bad bokeh and poor color saturation? Is this on planet Earth? I think it looks like a simply amazing lens, and  likening it to a Sigma is almost sacrilegious.

The 200 mm to 500 mm f/5.6 was a good example of Nikon recognizing a spot where they could make a fairly low priced lens that would snuff out offerings from two competing companies.

Low price is nice, but resale value is one area where Sigma and Tamron and other third-party lenses really take a huge hit. I bought a Nikon 70 to 200 VR the first model, the very week that it was made available, and I sold it 13 years later for about $1,000. With a Sigma or Tamron your resale value after a year is cut basically in half and after 5 years you are forced to sell it for a little bit of nothing on the used Market.

You are right about Nikon's basically Imaging- only status. They don't make those great photo copiers like Canon does, and they don't make alarm clocks or ghetto blaster radios and CD players like Sony does. In today's market I think they are at a real disadvantage when competing against larger and more Diversified corporations.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 28, 2019)

cgw said:


> Prayers answered:
> 
> ILFORD Harman Reusable Camera with Kentmere Film



It's reusable!


----------



## Tim Tucker 2 (Nov 28, 2019)

I was getting very jaded with these constant threads on *a rival site*. Armchair Executives repeating little more than rumor, hearsay, internet opinion (_trash..._), and a disregard for research, facts and objective opinion that would astonish even a harden conspiracy theorist.

Why do all these threads predict doom and gloom, none seem to predict anything else, glowing sales, market crushing wisdom...?

Why is there always a polarised black and white narrative or *hero or zero*, there is never a "_likely to hold their market share with solid if predictable releases..._" and as observed above, always zero never hero?

Why are they always based, (as everything is based) on the forum members understanding of the camera, such and such a model failed because it had a claimed marketing DR number that was just 0.1 of a marketing unit less than the opposition, was just the wrong shade of black, or in the search for greater reliability found a different card that you only needed one of...?

@Solarflare sorry to pull you up here, but your opinion is based on a technical understanding and personal rating of the *product* and not consumer or market awareness.

You don't have to look that far to realise that the part of the market that is generating all this noise isn't quite as representative of the *sane and stable* consumers as they presume. Witness a thread started on the rival site where it is claimed that many of the zoom lenses are *labelled incorrectly*! Yes, a 24-105 should be 105-24 if the zoom turns the other way to what the poster assumed was the correct way. It will make all the names logical and avoid confusion and turning the ring the wrong way by mistake. Such is the desire for all things to be labeled, logical that stems entirely from our own viewpoints that we fail to see just how abstract our thought often is.



We claim to look at things logically, create a logical narrative based on wants and needs, desires and dreams. Then moan and complain when the *new* cameras are too different and change our pre-conceptions and thinking habits. We refuse to let go of our logic or our process, we want cameras that change our photography but do it in the way we understand, fit into our rigid views, in short cameras that are game changing, astounding, revolutionary, but essentially allow us to carry on with the same habits and understandings as before. Cameras that are revolution-_arily_ the same, a set of the same numbers that we can add up or subtract, compare and trash cameras we've never seen other than on a web page.

Quite an ask for the camera manufacturers...



I was beginning to believe that these wars were real and aggressive, that I really did need to duck the bullets on the way up to the local shops for the milk and bread. Skirt the craters on the pavement to get the paper, KABOOM! "Canon have taken another hit."

We've already got excellent cameras so what else exactly are we looking for? Must it also be an action movie, Arnie against all-comers? Are we so settled into those armchairs that we have to create a fantasy life or death, doom or gloom narrative over which camera brand we own?

If we put the same imagination into our photographs, understood how to contain it within a rectangle rather than making it about ourselves and what we do own/could own, photography would be in a better place, I think.


----------



## cgw (Nov 28, 2019)

Derrel said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > Prayers answered:
> ...


Unlike so many of those Nixon-era eBay classic SLRs that reek of damp basements and Lucky Strikes...


----------



## Peeb (Nov 28, 2019)

Solarflare said:


> Jim C. said:
> 
> 
> > I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying. How can this possibly be true. Nikon has been around a long time and is recognized as a leader in photography. The quality is excellent and the camera and lens choices are amazing. The articles seem to be based on the mirrorless cameras not selling as predicted and the quality of lens in cell phones. [...]
> ...


I traded the D610 for a Z6 with 24-70 f/4 zoom and it was a BIG step up in image quality and ease of use. I really love it. I’ll agree that it was costly, but what is the source of your opinion that the lenses are “poorly built”?  Saying it was a mistake to wait so long to go all-in with mirrorless is a fair criticism of Nikon, but hardly anyone is suggesting that the z-lenses disappoint. Simply not rooted in reality. 

Respectfully disagree.


----------



## Solarflare (Nov 29, 2019)

Derrel said:


> The 105 mm F / 1.4 has bad bokeh and poor color saturation? Is this on planet Earth?


Um, why, yes ? I wasnt joking.

Aside from being very sharp and highly corrected, this is an optically absolutely horrible lens, and I hate it with a passion.

I dont even know any zooms with such an ugly Bokeh. In fact its the only lens I know that actually can make me seasick, because it has a slight Petzval kind of swirl but to an amount that looks as if my vision would be impaired. A real Petzval lens doesnt do that because its a clear effect, not an ugly muted one.

Obviously its bad build quality has also been documented, too.

Taking Apart the New Nikon 105mm f/1.4E ED AF-S

Doubly disappointing considering the price point and manufacturer.

And yes people praise this lens all over the net. Then they provide images that either have been massively edited, or images which look like absolute garbage. I'm sorry but if I have to massively edit an image to make it look decent, sure I can use any lens I want. But I might just as well do paintings instead of photographs.

I'm convinced the only reason people love this lens is because its 105mm f1.4. That clearly shuts off many peoples brain.


----------



## Tim Tucker 2 (Nov 29, 2019)

Solarflare said:


> I dont even know any zooms with such an ugly Bokeh. In fact its the only lens I know that actually can make me seasick, because it has a slight Petzval kind of swirl but to an amount that looks as if my vision would be impaired. A real Petzval lens doesnt do that because its a clear effect, not an ugly muted one.



Err... *Swirly bokeh* is an optical property of ALL fast SLR lenses (_mount restrictions_). It happens because it's f1.4 and there's no way of getting around this. It also is only at the faster apertures and so preferring a zoom that only goes to f2.8 because it has less swirly bokeh than a prime at f1.4 is, well flawed. Especially when that prime at f2.8... The OOF at maximum aperture does not define the lens and is rarely the subject of the image. With all faster primes, watch your backgrounds.

It seems the forum populous clamors for a fast, sharp portrait lens with real character and when they have it they slam it because it doesn't fit their current understanding, (it's not the same as everything else). Or apply so much processing that the character and pretty much the level of sharpness of the lens is completely obliterated.

I've seen some very impressive images on the net, though not seen anything in print. Perhaps look again without the bias?






P.S. It's interesting to note that the Z series actually addresses this problem by relaxing the mount restrictions, and yet is still a failure in your view, along with the 105/1.4. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2019)

Aside from being very sharp and highly corrected, this is an optically absolutely horrible lens, and I hate it with a passion.

I dont even know any zooms with such an ugly Bokeh. In fact its

I really don't know what you're talkin about, Solarflare.I have seen quite a few images from the 105/1.4 lens and I think it looks very nice. As far as low color saturation, I think that is silly to conclude low color saturation is a property of the lens. I think the images that the lens produces look distinctly different from many other lenses, and yes the word I would use is better. I think it looks a lot like the 200 F2 VR  but in a much smaller and more affordable package, and it is capable of giving really defocused backgrounds in regular situations. Apparently you seem to think that Nikon should be ashamed for having made a lens that is too sharp and too well-corrected, and I understand that.  The old 85 mm f / 1.4 AF-D was not that sharp especially at the corners and had terrible light fall-off in the first stop and 1/2 from wide open, and it yet it was widely regarded as the best portrait lens that Nikon made for many years. I had one and it was decidedly less well corrected and more flawed than the newer 85 G Series lenses. The 85 mm f 1.8 G was incredibly Sharp! It was as I have often pointed out  listed as  one of the sharpest lenses under $4,000 by dxomark in their testing of hundreds of lenses.

I think today people want to see a lens with less character, or put another way, most people today want a lens with fewer flaws.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2019)

But just read Roger's teardown report from 2016... here are a couple of screencaps from that report


----------



## Derrel (Nov 29, 2019)

Note that this Guru of dust removal calls the lens a "great lens", and in the report he notes that he himself would have left this lens alone, but because it is a rental people would scream if they saw even a fleck of dust in the rental lens. I have a Nikon 105 mm f/ 2.5 from 1982, which I used to carry with me in a wheat harvesting combine one summer in 1984, and the lens is filled with dust, yet in a blind test with another example from the late 2000s, I was unable to find any real impact from this super-dusty lens condition.


----------



## webestang64 (Dec 13, 2019)

The Nikon rep was at the camera store I work at last week and I asked him if Nikon is dying and if he needs to look for another job.

His reply......."Stop believing everything you read on the internet"......................


----------



## shadowlands (Dec 17, 2019)

Peeb said:


> Solarflare said:
> 
> 
> > Jim C. said:
> ...


 Indeed! The Z6 is built like a tank and feels 100% better in hand than the Sony's. Ergonomics. My Z 85mm F1.8 S and Z 50mm F1.8 S are built very well and the image quality is highly praised for them both. Don't listen to the BS.
The Z50 is selling very well. Smart move by Nikon to introduce a DX Z mount camera.


----------



## daveo228i (Dec 23, 2019)

My 2cents. Back in the early 80’s I bought my first 35 m camera. A Nikon EM with a 50 1.8 E. It was though a coupon offering by one of the gasoline companies. I had little technical knowledge at the time. Several years later and having acquired some technical knowledge, it was time to upgrade. At a large camera store, a sales clerk showed me a Canon A1-E program. I wasn’t impressed with any Nikon in that range. I purchased my first Canon and a couple of lenses. From that time forward, in 35mm, it was Canon that I purchased. Just recently I bought a Nikon FM2N because I wanted a mechanical. I have loved and enjoyed shooting professionally with my Canon’s and their lenses. Nikon has presented some fine cameras and glass for film. In digital they were slow starting, behind Canon which grabbed the digital lead. To me Nikon at the present is still struggling in the face of intense completion from Sony, Panasonic and all the others in the electronic field.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Derrel (Dec 23, 2019)

Apparently you have not heard of the Nikon d850 which quite a few people describe as the best digital SLR ever made. Of course Sony and Panasonic make some wonderful clock radios, and Sony has a great Motion Picture division,music Division, and makes the wonderful Sony PlayStation. Sony also makes a very fine line of television sets. The fact that they once went 7 years in a row without turning a corporate profit shows how fantastic they must be!

It's kind of amusing that you thought Nikon was slow starting in digital, since they introduced the first affordable professional level DSLR camera, to which Canon lamely responded with the amateur market-oriented  3-megapixel D30, which was fairly quickly followed up by the Canon D60, which was in turn followed by the 10D. By 2004 after about five years of the DSLR Market,I would give the edge to Canon, but beginning in 2009 and continuing to this day, Canon has been badly eclipsed by sensors made by Sony. For basically seven years Canon used the same tired old 18-megapixel sensor in all of its consumer cameras, and has greatly lost market share as other manufacturers worked diligently to provide world-class sensors in the cameras that they offered to users.


----------



## compur (Dec 23, 2019)

I think it's ironic that phones are now doing to digital cameras what digital cameras did to film cameras.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 23, 2019)

About a week ago somehow YouTube offered up a Tony Northrup video that had the same title as this thread. In an uncharacteristic display of behavior for me, I actually watched it. Tony and his wife Chelsea demonstrated through graphs and charts the declining sales and declining profits of the Nikon camera division, and like the camera industry armchair experts that they see themselves as, they offered a number of potential courses of action for Nikon to return to its former profitability, and one course of action was for Nikon to offer a monthly cloud storage plan for its users.

Another option was to make a camera that works a lot like a cell phone with built-in file sharing and internet uploading capability, as they put it,because the younger generation does not understand the direct "download to computer" model, and have always depended upon internet sharing and upon uploading to someplace other than one's own personal computer hard drive.


----------



## TWX (Dec 23, 2019)

Heh.  When Dad's 16 megapixel Coolpix S7000 broke, what failed was something in the alignment of the lens as it opened.  The sensor showed strange optical abberation, one side of the image was out of focus in front of the plane, the middle-ish was focused in a sort of column up and down, and the other side was out of focus behind the plane.  He'd only had the camera a couple of years and was disappointed enough in how it broke that he wasn't intrested in another Nikon at all.  Strangely the lens still extends and retracts.

For me, while the F-mount has a very long history, far longer than Canon's EOS/EF-mount, it suffers from having confusing technological changes during its run, especially as far as autofocus control is concerned.  With EOS, I know that basically all full-frame and APS-H cameras will use all EF lenses, and all APS-C cameras will work with all EF and all EF-S lenses.  For the Canon universe it only starts getting confusing when looking at third-party lenses that are for APS-C sensors but feature the EF mount, but no Canon-sourced EF-S lenses will even mount on a full-frame or APS-H EOS camera.  As far as I'm aware, every Canon-produced lens for the EOS system also has autofocus capability except for early tilt-shift models.

I wasn't in a position to notice it, but I gather that Canon's complete end of the FD line in favor of the EOS/EF line really ruffled some feathers, but now more than thirty years later we're seeing the benefit of that, in that compatibility is excellent.  Nikon's continuing to use a mount for sixty years ultimately means potentially incompatible generations of lenses will still mount-up even if they don't work for whatever reason.  They tried to make a clean break of it with their early CX mirrorless cameras, but their discontinuation doesn't inspire confidence.

It wouldn't surprise me if it's primarily existing Nikon owners that would continue to purchase new Nikon cameras, since they're already accustomed to the nature of the lenses over the years.  Since cameras are reasonably durable, long-lasting purchases though, potentially lacking new first-time buyers could be problematic for their bottom line.


----------



## AQS (Dec 24, 2019)

Derrel said:


> About a week ago somehow YouTube offered up a Tony Northrup video that had the same title as this thread. In an uncharacteristic display of behavior for me, I actually watched it.



I watched it the other day too, it was all gloom and doom, but keep in mind that "click bait" is what leads to viewership and more money for him to be able to put petrol in his BMW 840i (minute 3:04):


----------



## AQS (Dec 24, 2019)

Not sure if this wasn't mentioned before, but it seems back in November, Nikon has started to repurchase its own shares:

https://www.nikon.com/news/2019/20191202_e.pdf


----------



## manaheim (Dec 24, 2019)

Hate to say it but Canon will likely be the last one standing because they have a significantly more diversified portfolio.

That said, I suspect even they will have some challenges.


----------



## AQS (Dec 24, 2019)

Who knows? Nikon is not 100% wedded to photography as we know it.

From what I can see on Youtube, there are a lot of mid-20s people taking up photography, giving tutorials. So there is hope yet, but maybe not among the masses. But again, who knows? That all could change. I frankly hate taking photos on my phone, such a lack of control...


----------



## TWX (Dec 24, 2019)

manaheim said:


> Hate to say it but Canon will likely be the last one standing because they have a significantly more diversified portfolio.
> 
> That said, I suspect even they will have some challenges.



So are talking a Jet-Li scenario, or a Christopher Lambert scenario?  *grin*



AQS said:


> Who knows? Nikon is not 100% wedded to photography as we know it.



My guess is that the companies that remain will do so in part based on their ability to survive contracting into smaller companies, and in part due to their ability to get their products integrated into other companies' products like phones, computers, tablets, even automobiles, dashcams, etc.

Nikon appears to have a strong foothold in commercial imaging (think manufacturing, the camera as part of the machine doing manufacturing or quality assurance as an automated process) to the point tht Canon put a Nikon mount on their own commercial camera offering.

Possibly one of the bigger hurdles are how parent-companies will treat the shrinking division/company.  Nikon is part of Mitsubishi, which could matter a great deal depending on who's in charge at Mitsubishi.  Canon is its own entity, and additionally it has more products than _just_ cameras, in having copiers, printers, scanners, projectors, etc.  We have hundreds, possibly upwards of a thousand new Canon copiers at work and the previous copiers were also Canon, so if my anecdote is anythning to go by, someone is buying their business products and driving profits.  Canon is unlikely to throw in the towel on cameras if they consider that a core part of their business, that is less sure for Nikon.

We'll just have to see.


----------



## AQS (Jan 4, 2020)

Coming back to this discussion, I watched a very interesting video by Matt Irwin this morning, not talking about if Nikon is dying or not, but rather showing why he is switching back to Nikon, while also taking a poke at other Youtube photo personalities who tout brands B, C or D as being better for X, Y or Z reason (this usually only lasts until the next, newest shiniest thing comes out), whereas Nikon take a long term approach.

Frankly, I think he makes some good points, and shows where the Nikon Z mount is a better solution and where Nikon is being more intelligent / using a long-term strategy.







After watching that, and discounting all the hype the other camera channels make about Sony (Fro et al), and taking a view of what I would use my next camera for, odds are I will be buying another Nikon in a few years, and most likely a Z.


----------



## Soocom1 (Jan 4, 2020)

Read the list of current and out of buisness camera companies. 

Your worried about Nikon?
List of photographic equipment makers - Wikipedia


----------



## Peeb (Jan 4, 2020)

I love my nikon z6 paired with an s-mount 24-70 f/4 more than baby puppies and rainbows.  Could it be that I just didn't know what good cameras work like?  I don't think so.

I've shot:
FILM
Canon Canonet QL-17 G-III;
Yashica FR
Nikon FG-20
Fujifilm point-&-shoot (forget model)
Nikon N70
Nikon FE
Nikon F100

DIGITAL
Olympus Camedia C-200
Nikon Coolpix
Nikon D40
Canon Digital Rebel
Nikon D5500
Nikon D600
Nikon D610
Fujifilm X-T20


----------



## shadowlands (Jan 15, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Apparently you have not heard of the Nikon d850 which quite a few people describe as the best digital SLR ever made. Of course Sony and Panasonic make some wonderful clock radios, and Sony has a great Motion Picture division,music Division, and makes the wonderful Sony PlayStation. Sony also makes a very fine line of television sets. The fact that they once went 7 years in a row without turning a corporate profit shows how fantastic they must be!
> 
> It's kind of amusing that you thought Nikon was slow starting in digital, since they introduced the first affordable professional level DSLR camera, to which Canon lamely responded with the amateur market-oriented  3-megapixel D30, which was fairly quickly followed up by the Canon D60, which was in turn followed by the 10D. By 2004 after about five years of the DSLR Market,I would give the edge to Canon, but beginning in 2009 and continuing to this day, Canon has been badly eclipsed by sensors made by Sony. For basically seven years Canon used the same tired old 18-megapixel sensor in all of its consumer cameras, and has greatly lost market share as other manufacturers worked diligently to provide world-class sensors in the cameras that they offered to users.



Exactly!!! Sony Playstation? Nah... XBOX all day!!! And of course... NIKON all day!!! Held a few Sony A7's. YUCK!


----------



## BrightSight (Jan 16, 2020)

interesting historical perspective & prediction that nikon will return strongly with mirror-less:


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 16, 2020)

The last few respondeds were just Fan Boy stuff. Nobody is saying that Nikon is not great stuff. You’re entitled to love your Nikon and proclaim your next camera will be another Nikon! Who cares what air-headed guys like big hair Fro say or think, that’s all clickbait. 
The discussion is that a few(many?) guys/opinion pieces have raised a red flag that according to nikons financial reports, by some that supposedly know about theses things that Nikon could possibly be in financial trouble? It’s possible to make great products and be in financial trouble. 
Maybe it’s something as simple as paying a premium to Sony for using the Sony sensor. Maybe in the long run that was a bad move. Or it could be that nikon missed the boat in making printers. Probably half of Nikon users that print are probably helping kill Nikon by buying Canon printers when they would likely have bought Nikon printers had they made one. 
If it was a merely conspiracy theory, I think Nikon would have come out and publicly put it to bed. I have not seen that Nikon has in any way attempted that. 
For us to sit here and say that Nikon is primarily an industrial optics company or needs more diversification is pointless. Nikon could release a mirrorless camera better than Sony or canon or Panasonic or whatever and it may not be enough. It needs volume, not one great $3000 camera. 
We can cheer at Matt Irwin but if Nikon is in trouble, cheering might not be what saves it. 
Probably only Nikon can save Nikon if indeed it’s in some kind of trouble. It would likely need some debt dumping and restructuring and getting lean and mean. 
I hope Nikon comes out of its corner punching hard but that’s up to Nikon, these problems  don’t happen over night, and neither do the solutions!!!
SS


----------



## malling (Jan 16, 2020)

Nikon is not going bankrupt not even if their camera division dies, the camera market is only a very small fraction of their entire corporation. 

Nikon also manufacture healthcare product, industrial methodology product, FPD, Semiconductor Lithography systems, survey instruments, optical equipmeant and so on. 

If Nikon is having financial problems, it’s not only due to how their camera business is doing, but their entire corporation. But to my knowledge that is not really the case. It is only their camera division who are at risk, Nikon as a company will survive with or without the camera division.

However they have allot of pride in that, so they are not letting it die without a fight. But I could imagine that they at some point will discontinue a huge part of their DSLR catalog, and their single lens cameras is probably also been put to death soon if the negative trend continues.


----------



## shadowlands (Jan 16, 2020)

Not dead yet...


----------



## malling (Jan 16, 2020)

The financial report from Nikons camera division is anything but healthy, an is a good example of why market share is not a very good indicator on its own.

So Nikon camera division is still on the line. Whether or not it survive really depends on if they manage to turn the ship around, for that to happen, Nikon need to get rid of the unhealthy part of the camera business, and most importantly they need to reduce costs, this can be done by reducing the size of the catalog eg getting rid of all the products that dos not make a profit, discontinued all mounts except the Z mount and use that mount on all new cameras and line up.


----------



## TWX (Jan 16, 2020)

AQS said:


> Coming back to this discussion, I watched a very interesting video by Matt Irwin this morning, not talking about if Nikon is dying or not, but rather showing why he is switching back to Nikon, while also taking a poke at other Youtube photo personalities who tout brands B, C or D as being better for X, Y or Z reason (this usually only lasts until the next, newest shiniest thing comes out), whereas Nikon take a long term approach.
> 
> Frankly, I think he makes some good points, and shows where the Nikon Z mount is a better solution and where Nikon is being more intelligent / using a long-term strategy.
> 
> ...




So here's a dumb question.

Could either Canon or Nikon, with their larger diameter mirroless mounts, be considering sensor formats larger than traditional full-frame?  54mm/55mm are both larger than than necessary for a 36mm by 24mm sensor.  36mm by 24mm only requires an inner throat diameter of around 44mm, which explains the 44mm of the Nikon F-mount and the 48mm Canon FD-mount.  Canon's EF-mount is 54mm, and likewise Canon's RF-mount and Nikon's Z-mount are 54mm and 55mm respectively.  Could either of these companies be thinking about medium-format mirrorless?  They could possibly get upwards of 45mm by 30mm assuming a 3:2 aspect ratio.  Obviously this would require the lens to present an image circle large enough to fill such an oversized sensor, but given that the RF and Z systems respectively are no longer especially tightly coupled to legacy film formats, might this be the future?

It seems like if the goal were _just_ to be full-frame, they wouldn't have to go much larger than the diameters of their DSLR mounts, much as Sony has with E-mount at 46.1mm.


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 16, 2020)

malling said:


> discontinued all mounts except the Z mount and use that mount on all new cameras and line up.



WHAT?!?!?! No Bro, say it ain’t so!!!
Not the mount that all the legacy people are gaga about?! That’s the only reason the loyal tribe is still there!!! LoL 
SS


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 16, 2020)

TWX said:


> AQS said:
> 
> 
> > Coming back to this discussion, I watched a very interesting video by Matt Irwin this morning, not talking about if Nikon is dying or not, but rather showing why he is switching back to Nikon, while also taking a poke at other Youtube photo personalities who tout brands B, C or D as being better for X, Y or Z reason (this usually only lasts until the next, newest shiniest thing comes out), whereas Nikon take a long term approach.
> ...



That would certainly be nice and I’ve brought that up before but my guess is no, since the smaller Nikon mount is obviously big enough for FF, that means that Canon’s much larger mount diameter gave them the ability to go MF(FF+) 30 years ago and it never has. 
Supposedly the larger diameters are strictly to give the lens/body interface more capacity to transfer more data back and forth. Faster lenses are possible too!
Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now. 
I’ve thought that very thing for MANY years but maybe the goal is simply to densify the pixels into the same area as small pixels get cleaner. 
SS


----------



## TWX (Jan 16, 2020)

Sharpshooterr said:


> Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now.


It makes me wonder if a camera manufacturer would create the equivalent of Canon's L-lenses that would work on a 36mm by 24mm sensor, but would have an image circle that's bigger for a bigger sensor, kind of like using a FF lens on an APS-C camera versus on a FF camera.  Though it'd probably be more like using a FF lens on an APS-*H* camera vs a full-frame camera.  If that were the case, then it may be that the current crop of lenses would be the normal FF lenses, and the special, more expensive lenses would be these larger image circle lenses.

Though admittedly this is all based on just reading into the largest sensor that could fit within the throat of the lens mount, and obviously I have not taken any measurements at all as to what the actual image circles produced by current lenses do.  I'm sure that someone more enterprising that I am could mock-up a lens set the requisite distance from a piece of paper as the plane of focus and then play with zoom, if the lenses can be manually controlled.


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 16, 2020)

TWX said:


> Sharpshooterr said:
> 
> 
> > Flange distance would affect the sensor circle a small amount. I would be very pleasantly surprised if canon had built that capability to throw a bigger circle on the sensor into all the new ML lens line but I’m SURE mathematician types would have already made those calculations and let the cat out of the bag by now.
> ...



I agree! That’s why I mentioned that I’m sure the mathematician types would have already gone there!! Maybe studies have shown that even if the capability were there, the market just wouldn’t be. I know a lot of people liked the aps-h but Canon got rid of it, as a Canon tech told me, that the higher mp 1Dx had the ability to crop to 1.3 with the same resolution as the lessor mp sensor of the 1.3. 
It seems to me that crop is crop, but then 3 sized sensors is that much more R&D too. 
Canon might find itself struggling as Nikon has to build all its lenses around a dying mount just to keep the legacy users happy. Legacy people probably don’t put as much money into the Nikon coffers as new lens buyers do and that could all contribute to a financial problem!
SS


----------



## TWX (Jan 16, 2020)

Without knowing what existing lenses can do it's simply hard to say.  My guess is that since each sensor is its own development anyway, and since all of these companies are already accustomed to developing multiple sensors for their full-frame, APS-C, and affixed-lens cameras of various types and sizes, that a larger sensor might not really be that big of a problem.  After all, Ricoh and Fujifilm both have such sensors, and neither of those companies are sitting at especially domineering positions in the market.  If they can make it work with presumably less resources than the larger companies, I don't see why larger companies couldn't get in on the act if they felt the market would respond well.

Since Canon has only 10 RF lenses and Nikon has even fewer, further expansion of their respective product lines might well allow for such even if their current lenses don't have the capability.  Canon might be in a slightly better position to leverage this if they continue to differentiate consumer and professional cameras with their M-series versus their R-series since they have entirely different mounts.


----------



## malling (Jan 17, 2020)

Sharpshooterr said:


> malling said:
> 
> 
> > discontinued all mounts except the Z mount and use that mount on all new cameras and line up.
> ...



unfortunately it’s allot more expensive for manufacturers to keep on offering different mounts, then if they just had one in their catalog. There is a good reason why Sony did not launch a new mount back when they decided to go the FF route. Reducing the amount of mounts is a very effective way to cut costs, as everything will work across products and platforms.

Obviously Nikon will keep a DSLR mount as long as they have DSLR in their catalog, but you should not have more then one. 

Nikon have made the right choice lately  focusing their energy and money on the new system, it’s where the money is. Keeping legacy customers happy by keeping a line up alive that is giving your financial problems doesn’t seem like the right decision, it’s not like those customers are securing a healthy profit, they just want it to be available in case they need a replacement 5-10 years down the line. So I completely agree with you that the money is mostly in new customers, who might spend quite a substantial amount on new lenses and other essential equipment, Legacy users rarely buy much, except when something break or wear down. 

I don’t think a larger sensor plays any role at all, I think Nikon have made it quite clear why, flang distance, faster transfer of data, and the ability to use very fast lenses. I don’t even think there is much of a demand for a larger sensor camera, it’s not like hasselblad Mirrorless is selling in wast numbers, sure Nikon could make it more affordable, but who would buy it, larger sensor required substantial larger and heavier lenses, is that really where the trend is, I don’t think so.


----------



## TWX (Jan 17, 2020)

What do you guys see available locally, actually stocked, ready to be purchased?

I ask because when I bought my 77D that was a bit of a problem.  We're pretty big on shopping at Costco and if I remember right they were pushing the T6i and SL1 for their Canon selection, and even now they're selling a 18MP Nikon kit instead of something newer.  Target likewise, older cameras or lower-end.  Target's offerings in-store are mostly limited to lower-end offierings, Canon's base T7, Nikon's D3500 and their older D5600.  Certain Best Buy stores have well-equipped and well-stocked camera departments, but we hadn't figured that out at that point, the stored we originally shopped were not especially well-stocked.  Since I wasn't buying an expensive full-frame camera I wasn't especially interested in going to the only camera-store left locally to me, which basically meant I ordered my 77D without handling one first, based on a combination of reviews, specification sheets, and physically comparing the controls/layout to my Rebel XS.

I know it's expensive to manufacture and ship a bunch of mid-range cameras speculatively to just consign them to retailers' inventories, but for a novice photographer that want the articulating screen, not being able to handle the cameras before buying is a barrier that might prevent them from making the purchase altogether.  I have to wonder if stocking cameras without the articulating screens and without the dozens of autofocus points actually may do more harm than good, since potential new buyers that have never owned an interchangable-lens camera will look, see large cameras that don't overtly display features that call-out to them, and just look at these low-end DSLRs as relics of old, and that may reflect on the companies themselves, even if it's only a small part of their total catalog.  Remember, the consumer that looks at these cameras may not really understand sensor-size, or depth-of-field, or ISO, and even if a T7 or D3500 has vastly more capabilities than their cell phone, those capabilities are not recognized by them.

The Best Buy in town that has the huge camera department has been handy.  We haven't bought a camera there but we have looked, and we have bought lenses and other accessories.  They have the Nikon Z-series, the EOS R, the EOS M-series, and current models from each lineup, plus Olympus, Sony, and maybe even Fujifilm if I'm remembering right.  They even had one-inch cameras, a slew of Powershot G-series plus a couple variants of the Sony RX100 lineup.  It might not be practical for retailers to have such large camera departments in every store, but if they look at their markets and can pick certain locations to set up this way then it may improve sales all of the way around, rather than presenting products that aren't especially exciting.


----------



## malling (Jan 17, 2020)

If you don’t buy at your local shop, then that one place will stop existing,  leaving you left with electronic chains that don’t care nor poses the necessary knowledge or buy at online vendors.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 17, 2020)

There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.

As users of the Fujifilm gfx 50 showed, there are literally hundreds of 35 mm and DSLR lenses in existence which can cover the 43 by 33 millimeter sensor area of mezzo format digital. So the image Circle size of many Legacy 35 mm lenses is perfectly adequate to handle a medium format digital sensor, or in my terminology and that of Ken Rockwell, the mezzo format, the 43 by 33 size.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 17, 2020)

Best Buy is actually a pretty decent Big Box store when it comes to stocking cameras and lenses. They also have a pretty good return policy. 

 in my area Best Buy might be the best camera store around, behind prophotosuppy. prophotosupply easily has 100 times more camera and lens inventory and many times more accessories, but compared to any other big box retailer Best Buy is Far and Away the leading store in my area.


----------



## TWX (Jan 17, 2020)

Derrel said:


> There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.


I'll check again next time I'm at Costco, but I could've sworn that their small display of cameras had a Nikon box with "18MP" emblazoned in big bold text on it.  I specifically remember that whatever the resolution was, it was lower than I expected to see on a new camera.

And I'm pretty sure it wasn't the 20.something of the D7500 that Costco currently shows on their website.  I donno.  It doesn't matter anyway.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 17, 2020)

Misinformation doesn't matter .I want to get that new Canon 5D Mark IV 12- megapixel, maybe for my next birthday. I could have sworn I saw an ad for it on Amazon for just $800.


----------



## TWX (Jan 17, 2020)

malling said:


> If you don’t buy at your local shop, then that one place will stop existing,  leaving you left with electronic chains that don’t care nor poses the necessary knowledge or buy at online vendors.


I know.  Trouble is, they basically cater to the professional with an immediate need that is willing to shell-out the money for something that otherwise is overpriced.  I get that because they're stocking supplies those supplies are probably going to cost more than if they come from a catalog seller, but when things like cheap arca-swiss-compatible mounts (and I mean the generic compatible ones, not the real-deal) are three times the price, I just can't afford to give them much business for a hobby.

And it doesn't help that the guys in the new-equipment section (as opposed to the repair and used equipment section) have a certain attiude like you're inconveniencing them by asking them to help.  Even when you're the only customer in their part of the store and there are three of them.

The people in the used-equipment and repair section are incredibly helpful though, both with answering questions and with a decent selection of used gear and supplies, marked-down as cheaply as the stuff in the new area is expensive.  It's weird.


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 17, 2020)

Derrel said:


> There is no Nikon 18 megapixel dslr or mirrorless camera. Nikon has long standardized on 24 megapixels .Canon however went to 18 megapixels about 10 years ago.
> 
> As users of the Fujifilm gfx 50 showed, there are literally hundreds of 35 mm and DSLR lenses in existence which can cover the 43 by 33 millimeter sensor area of mezzo format digital. So the image Circle size of many Legacy 35 mm lenses is perfectly adequate to handle a medium format digital sensor, or in my terminology and that of Ken Rockwell, the mezzo format, the 43 by 33 size.


A company, as Fuji, can easily design a MF to use std. FF lenses by just adjusting the flange distance. And it was smart of Fuji to do so. Just like Sony designed its cameras so users could use Canon lenses on its bodies even before it put out its line of lenses. 
I guess what some of us are hoping is that Canon has built their new lenses to natively mount them to a new MF body by just making a slight flange distance adjustment. 
We could have FF and MF bodies using the same lens with no adapters!!!
SS


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 17, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Misinformation doesn't matter .I want to get that new Canon 5D Mark IV 12- megapixel, maybe for my next birthday. I could have sworn I saw an ad for it on Amazon for just $800.


Oh that will be easy! Just get an old Nikon D700 and with a sharpie write 5D mkV on it and you’ll have your dream camera!!!
I think you’ll even be able to use Nikon legacy glass on it TOO!!!
SS


----------



## TWX (Jan 17, 2020)

Sharpshooterr said:


> A company, as Fuji, can easily design a MF to use std. FF lenses by just adjusting the flange distance. And it was smart of Fuji to do so.



I didn't think that was what they did though.  As far as I am aware, the Fuji G-mount is exclusive to their medium-format cameras.

Wouldn't changing the flange distance result in a lens that might not focus to infinity?  I mean, if this technique worked you'd see Canon EF users buying cheap EFS lenses and extension tubes for regular shooting to avoid vignetting.


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 17, 2020)

TWX said:


> Sharpshooterr said:
> 
> 
> > A company, as Fuji, can easily design a MF to use std. FF lenses by just adjusting the flange distance. And it was smart of Fuji to do so.
> ...



Hmmm, I think you’re right. The adapters would have to be glassed to refocus the lenses!
I’m not actually familiar with the Fuji’s. Maybe Derrel can tell us if the the lenses were being used with glassed adapters??
SS


----------



## Derrel (Jan 17, 2020)

The flange distance is something that Fuji had full control over. This is the advantage of mirrorless. However with the Fuji gfx 50, when it premiered, there were a huge rush of postings on the Facebook group in which users worldwide pressed legacy 35 mm lenses from all types of brands. As one might expect most of these lenses did pretty well, covering the entire 43 by 33 mm sensor
With a very little or no vignetting.

There are two issues here flange distance and also the covering Circle of the lenses.

One small bit of factual information might be of interest to some here that seem to think that on 35 millimeter and single-lens reflex digital systems that the mount width determines maximun lens speed possibkr....uh, no not really, the mirror box is smaller than the mount diameter by far. So it wouldn't matter if you had a quart-jar-size opening on the front - the mirror box is 24 by 36 mm across!Something to think about before repeating unsubstantiated "internet wisdom "....


----------



## TWX (Feb 20, 2020)

Nikon Just Released Some Terrible Financial Results

"The company as a whole has reported year-on-year figures that don’t make for pleasant reading for shareholders: revenue is down 13.3% and operating profit has fallen by 42.9%. Profit before income taxes is down by 40.6%."

I donno about you, but bringing in only half of the profit that you previously brought in is not exactly good news, and is worse when growth is demanded, rather than contraction.


----------



## Derrel (Feb 20, 2020)

I thought that Canon's 2019 year-over-year profits were down 62% in the Imaging division, according to what I read about 2 weeks ago. Sales were down too  but the real alarm was the decline in profit margin.

We need to reset expectations. People are no longer rushing out in huge numbers to buy new and updated cameras, as cameras have reached a point of sufficiency. Almost any digital single-lens reflex released within the past 7 years can still do incredibly good work. A couple of months ago I was looking at some images made in 2006 and 2007 on my Apple 30 inch Cinema display and even images made with 6 and 8 megapixel DSLR cameras from 2004 and 2005 looked quite good .In other words cameras have been sufficient for a long time now.


----------



## shadowlands (Feb 20, 2020)

Nikon's new Firmware for the Z6/Z7 is awesome!


----------



## Lonnie1212 (Feb 28, 2020)

Jim C. said:


> I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying. How can this possibly be true. Nikon has been around a long time and is recognized as a leader in photography. The quality is excellent and the camera and lens choices are amazing. The articles seem to be based on the mirrorless cameras not selling as predicted and the quality of lens in cell phones.
> I witnessed the fall of Minolta and as I shot Minolta it bothered me. I shot Minolta film cameras and even purchased a Minolta/Konica digital. (somewhat disappointing).
> I think all photography will adjust to the fact that cell phones are the point and shoot cameras of the present and future and a lot of entry level cameras are going away. I think or hope that the serious photographer will continue to use a quality camera. But for carry around picture taking I use my cell phone.



Hi Jim C, 

I will give you my 2 cents worth on this one.  I have been dealing with Nikon customer service for the past 3 days.  It has not been a good experience.  The help desk technicians are not knowledgeable about photography or camera's.  I can understand that people need to get experience working at customer service etc...  But the help desk technicians have not gotten back to me as they promised they would.  If their attitude is reflective of the upper leadership attitude, then Nikon is going to be in trouble.


----------



## Indrajeet (Feb 28, 2020)

Jim C. said:


> I have read several articles in financial news pieces that Nikon is dying. How can this possibly be true. Nikon has been around a long time and is recognized as a leader in photography. The quality is excellent and the camera and lens choices are amazing. The articles seem to be based on the mirrorless cameras not selling as predicted and the quality of lens in cell phones.
> I witnessed the fall of Minolta and as I shot Minolta it bothered me. I shot Minolta film cameras and even purchased a Minolta/Konica digital. (somewhat disappointing).
> I think all photography will adjust to the fact that cell phones are the point and shoot cameras of the present and future and a lot of entry level cameras are going away. I think or hope that the serious photographer will continue to use a quality camera. But for carry around picture taking I use my cell phone.


----------



## Indrajeet (Feb 28, 2020)

Nikon have always been late, whether it be DSLRs, Video features, firmware updates, mirrorless et al. Having said that, they are a powerhouse of technology and have have many exciting patents, which we will probably see soon. Some of their policy decisions appear questionable and a good case in point is the much awaited firmware update for the D850 and D500, which would enable recall shooting functions, same as we had on the D7100 and D7200. The Z series of mirrorless cameras, though behind the field in several areas has been seen to be slowly catching up. It is my opinion that we will see an interesting introduction of models from Nikon soon, probably in the form of the Z8 and the upgrade of the D850, possibly even the first ever true "Hybrid". Time will tell, in the meantime, happy with the D500 and the D850, which remain to be some of best performing cameras in my world of photography, wildlife action, specially birds.


----------



## Solarflare (Mar 2, 2020)

Would be great to see if Nikon would become more like Fujifilm and actually add new features to existing cameras, but I'm not holding my breath in that department.

The D850 and D500 are mighty fine cameras, but otherwise I'm very underwhelmed by what Nikon has released recently. The D780 is just an embarassing deal, and so is the D6. Mirrorless, well, the Z50 was perfectly fine for this price point. The full frame bodies, not so much. Only a single card slot, no support for autofocus with AF lenses on the adapter, missing battery grip, etc. Plus the Z7 was 75% more expensive than the Z6, but both are, except for the sensor, exactly the same camera. And the sensors have been identical technology, both are backlit, so there is no way the Z7 sensor is $1500 more expensive than the Z6 one.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 2, 2020)

People who have actually shot the D780 have been impressed with it. The Z6  has been well- received by users. I remember the initial outcry when Apple introduced the USB port on the iMac, with all types of people roundly criticizing this decision, and look where we are now, the USB port has become a de facto standard in thousands of products in daily use all around the world.

One single card slot used to be the standard, and I have owned 9 different DSLR cameras which had only one card slot. I have never had a card malfunction, but then I've only been using digital cameras for the past 20 years or so, so someday perhaps I will need that second card. I have owned a couple of two-card cameras but my first 9 DSLR cameras only had one single card slot, and it never let me down, but it is a good feature to ***** about.


----------



## Derrel (Mar 2, 2020)

The D3x was $7995 when released, the D3 was $4995 as I recall. If you remember the d3x was a 24 megapixel full frame sensor, and the D3 and d3s were 12 megapixel cameras many people bitched and moaned about the $3,000 price difference between the d3x and the regular D3 price. I can tell you that the d3x which I used for over 3 years was the single best camera I have ever used in my life. I bought a used copy in 2012, for a really good deal,$2,800,at the time when used d3x cameras were going for around $4,400 used all across the USA.

The 36 megapixel Nikon D800 was initially priced at around $3,500, but I bought myself a used example for $748 in the summer of 2017. The takeaway is if you can't buy something brand new wait for it to become trailing Edge and then get it for a steal.


----------



## cgw (Mar 2, 2020)

Lord only knows how the coronavirus shock will affect Q1-Q2 earnings for Nikon or any other maker whose supply chains are linked to China. Fujifilm is essentially a chemical company whose imaging sector yields something south of 20% of earnings.


----------



## Lonnie1212 (May 13, 2020)

More news about Nikon from The Angry Photographer.


----------



## Designer (May 13, 2020)

Watching Nikon from out here in the cheap seats, with absolutely no connection with Nikon, I find myself wondering what is going on over there, and did Nikon do anything to cause it, or is it simply a matter of market forces at work.  

Some of us Nikon enthusiasts have noticed Nikon has made some disappointing marketing decisions over the past several years, leading me to wonder "what if" they had done things differently, would they still now be in trouble.


----------



## Lonnie1212 (May 13, 2020)

Designer said:


> Watching Nikon from out here in the cheap seats, with absolutely no connection with Nikon, I find myself wondering what is going on over there, and did Nikon do anything to cause it, or is it simply a matter of market forces at work.
> 
> Some of us Nikon enthusiasts have noticed Nikon has made some disappointing marketing decisions over the past several years, leading me to wonder "what if" they had done things differently, would they still now be in trouble.



Complacency comes to my mind.  It seems that complacency sets in the attitudes of people that become wealthy and comfortable.  New ideas, visions, and dreams seem to come from people and organizations that want to become industrious and grow.


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2020)

Conservatism ought not be confused with complacency. COVID -19 has  hurt many Japanese companies...if I recall correctly,  Toyota said it has suffered a shortfall of 28 billion American dollars this quarter.

The NBA said its coronavirus shutdown, which began 11 March, has caused them a 12 billion dollar loss...in less than 8 weeks...


----------



## Lonnie1212 (May 13, 2020)

Derrel said:


> Conservatism ought not be confused with complacency. COVID -19 has  hurt many Japanese companies...if I recall correctly,  Toyota said it has suffered a shortfall of 28 billion American dollars this quarter.
> 
> The NBA said its coronavirus shutdown, which began 11 March, has caused them a 12 billion dollar loss...in less than 8 weeks...



We can recover from all of this.  Maybe there will be a positive side to everything that is happening.


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2020)

I think a large percentage of independent restaurants will close and never reopen.


----------



## Derrel (May 13, 2020)

Have not seen Q1 or Q2 financial info from any companies...only what I have heard on the radio.


----------



## Warhorse (May 14, 2020)

Oh no!

Darn, now I'm going to have to trash my complete Nikon system, pray tell me, What brand of camera equipment is predicted as having a fiscally sound Q1-Q2?


----------



## Original katomi (May 14, 2020)

Warhorse said:


> Oh no!
> 
> Darn, now I'm going to have to trash my complete Nikon system, pray tell me, What brand of camera equipment is predicted as having a fiscally sound Q1-Q2?


The only one I know of is the one where you photo the paper and it shows next months news
Future photo plc I think makes them. The lockdown madness finally strikes lol


----------



## vin88 (May 14, 2020)

Lonnie1212 said:


> More news about Nikon from The Angry Photographer.


farewell to  nikon and kodac film !   just use vintage cameras and fugi film (i used to by 100 ft. rolls of fugi).   as kodac tryed to stop import of fugi.  will we must carry on,  sony cameras  and dockumation of this horable Chiezze virus.  LOL       vin


----------



## cgw (May 14, 2020)

Have a look here before dodging chunks of falling sky:

Nikon Warns of 'Extraordinary Losses' Due to COVID-19

I don't recall noticing 'ol Jabba Jr. having a column in the WSJ, do you? Doubt he could make sense of a financial statement at gunpoint.


----------



## Derrel (May 14, 2020)

cgw said:


> Have a look here before dodging chunks of falling sky:
> 
> Nikon Warns of 'Extraordinary Losses' Due to COVID-19
> 
> I don't recall noticing 'ol Jabba Jr. having a column in the WSJ, do you? Doubt he could make sense of a financial statement at gunpoint.



Amazing what expertise can do when one reports on the news...I did not know that "extraordinary" had a financial meaning.


----------



## Designer (May 14, 2020)

cgw said:


> Have a look here before dodging chunks of falling sky:
> 
> Nikon Warns of 'Extraordinary Losses' Due to COVID-19
> 
> I don't recall noticing 'ol Jabba Jr. having a column in the WSJ, do you? Doubt he could make sense of a financial statement at gunpoint.


According to the press release, Nikon is technically making a profit, albeit less than they would like.


----------



## vin88 (May 14, 2020)

cgw said:


> Have a look here before dodging chunks of falling sky:
> 
> Nikon Warns of 'Extraordinary Losses' Due to COVID-19
> 
> I don't recall noticing 'ol Jabba Jr. having a column in the WSJ, do you? Doubt he could make sense of a financial statement at gunpoint.


       not nesusairly


cgw said:


> Have a look here before dodging chunks of falling sky:
> 
> Nikon Warns of 'Extraordinary Losses' Due to COVID-19
> 
> I don't recall noticing 'ol Jabba Jr. having a column in the WSJ, do you? Doubt he could make sense of a financial statement at gunpoint.


     not exactly gun point  ------- ignor the gov..   many are.    i walk around with a camera.  whats the food like in the Seattle jail?         vin


----------



## compur (May 14, 2020)

They just need to make more film cameras.


----------



## cgw (May 15, 2020)

Derrel said:


> I did not know that "extraordinary" had a financial meaning.


 
On my side of the border, it doesn't among accountants aside from the dictionary definition. Sadly, Nikon hasn't seen bottom yet.


----------



## Derrel (May 15, 2020)

cgw said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > I did not know that "extraordinary" had a financial meaning.
> ...











Just going by hyperlinks in the Petapixel piece you yourself posted cgw.Here are a couple of screencaps from the article _you_ linked us to, cgw.

Sounds as if you are unaware of financial disclosure terminology regarding "extraordinary " financial events (unless Canada has a wholly separate use of the word)....I assume that Investopedia knows what "extraordinary" means when it is used in regard to a financial disclosure. You posted a Petapixel article. But apparently you disagree with the very article you linked us to to bolster your point. Feel free to explain in "Canadian English" what extraordinary means in relation to financial disclosures.Would love to know how "on your side of the border" extraordinary means something besides what a finance and investing website says it means.


----------



## cgw (May 15, 2020)

Derrel said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Chill. Canadian accounting standards differ on disclosure terminology. Simple. It's a _qualitative _term as the quoted material states. Have no idea whether your quoted material is AICPA based. Not certain there's really an axe to grind here. Can only say that Jabba Jr.'s take linked by the OP on Nikon's financials was over-the-top. Nikon, like other consumer imaging companies, is in for a rough ride.


----------



## compur (May 15, 2020)

Canon isn't exactly flourishing either:
Canon: Imaging Profits Down 80% in Q1, But the Worst is Yet to Come


----------



## VidThreeNorth (Nov 7, 2020)

Here's DP Review's recently posted look at Nikon's finances.  All things considered, I thought it looked ok:

"Nikon Q2 financial results: better-than-expected revenue with plans to cut expenses and increase focus on higher-end cameras, lenses",
Posted Nov 5, 2020 by DPReview, written by "Gannon Burgett"
"Nikon Q2 financial results: better-than-expected revenue with plans to cut expenses and increase focus on higher-end cameras, lenses"


----------



## Soskill2Love (Jan 21, 2021)

I own a new Nikon and I am completely satisfied with it


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 27, 2021)

compur said:


> They just need to make more film cameras.


Film cameras?? Didn't Nikon quit it's last film camera about ten years ago???
And that was about ten years to long. 
You want a new film camera...., GET A HOLGA!!! LoL
SS


----------



## compur (Jan 27, 2021)

Sharpshooterr said:


> compur said:
> 
> 
> > They just need to make more film cameras.
> ...



No. Nikon discontinued its last film camera a few months ago, the F6.



> You want a new film camera...., GET A HOLGA!!! LoL



How about you get a new sense of humor instead?


----------



## Sharpshooterr (Jan 31, 2021)

compur said:


> Sharpshooterr said:
> 
> 
> > compur said:
> ...



One time at band camp,  when climbing on  my tripod, I fell off and broke my humerus but fortunately for you, it healed!!! LoL
Hey, the Holga is a MF, need I say more??
SS


----------

