Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Coffee With Mentors > Nikon Historical Society

Nikon Historical Society -- hosted by the founding member Bob Rotoloni and members of the society. The NHS, based the US, has a worldwide membership. Our "Nikon Journal," published four times a year, concentrates on the history of Japanese photo equipment from the perspective of the Nikon Camera Company. The Nikon Journal often includes Nikon information not published anywhere else in the world. This forum provides an opportunity for conversation between collectors and users of classic film Nikons. See forum “stickies” for more information about the Society. If you are a serious Nikon Collector, you MUST be a NHS member. Join at http://www.nikonhistoricalsociety.com/!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

OK Nikon, Where is the Nikon Mirrorless ?????
Old 02-20-2017   #1
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,348
OK Nikon, Where is the Nikon Mirrorless ?????

OK Nikon management, where is Nikon's version of the best mirrorless camera?

What is the problem? Why is that camera not already on dealer shelves?

How hard can it be for Nikon to put this together right insead of wasting corporate time and money on foolish new products that don't sell?

1) Sony's latest and best FF sensor
2) modify sensor so it will perform well with rangefinder lenses
3) 100% compatibility with Nikon's wonderful flash system
4) 100% compatibility with all Nikon F lenses including AF via adapter
5) New wide throat G mount (G comes after F)
6) Rotating extendable super hi res LCD panel
7) Higher resolution EVF than any other camera
8) built in wifi to smart phones, pads, computers

Nikon fans are waiting - get on it already!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #2
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 67
Posts: 532
Exactly.
However, the fact that they haven't done this already indicates that those in management believe that the DL things and the Go Pro clone things made more sense. That's what's scary.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #3
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is online now
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 1,437
It will not be all you dream of...

1) Most likely
2) Never. Nikon want you to only use their lenses. They often update things to make 3rd party lenses incompatible.
3) has to happen
4) has to happen
5) should happen, but it won't be G, Sony already have G lenses... if it happens it'll take a long time to get what you want, if al all (DX primes?)
6) maybe
7) unlikely at the price you want to pay (Leica SL anyone?)
8) hilarious! This is Nikon!

I don't think Nikon should bring a FF mirrorless to market. Make it a DX and make it small and fast.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #4
TXForester
Registered User
 
TXForester's Avatar
 
TXForester is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Alba, Texas
Posts: 1,228
Judging by m4/3 cameras, AF via an adapter may be slower than AF of system lenses. My 4/3 lenses are dogs on my m4/3 cameras. The AF via an adapter will probably be useless for moving subjects but ok for still subjects.
__________________
Bender: I support and oppose many things, but not strongly enough to pick up a pen.

“Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey-cage.” ― H.L. Mencken
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #5
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,072
Whole thing is a BS concept.

I would like to see a FF digi with screen like Nikon F interchangeable with one for AF lenses. Oh wait that is a DF2.

They need to rationalize the product line and eliminate all those that do what cell phones do. Either that or put phones in the cameras.

Nikon needs to understand people are not buying stuff anymore. All the stuff we need we have. Economy is crap. Major retailers are looking at bankruptcy as I saw on Fox Business today. Although Amazon is doing well.

Chicago has driven retail shoppers from city center, driven small business from their territory ( I know of several ), & so go the jobs. What is left is drug dealers and welfare and a few rich who have what they need.

Dont cha understand leaders ? Roll with what you have until things get better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #6
View Range
Registered User
 
View Range is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 177
I vote for a super hi-res / very high refresh rate EVF, not because I want a mirrorless camera, but because the D5 really needs an EVF to put onto the accessory shoe so that the video mode becomes useful for other than static subjects.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #7
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,634
If Nikon want my money, they should make cameras that have a strong resonance with their history ( taking a leaf out of Leica's book )

Update the Coolpix A concept ( APS-C Ricoh GR copy ) with 24Mpixel and 4k video:

add a built in EVF and selfie screen, 28/2 lens ( 40mm view) and put it in a retro body so it looks like a small fixed lens clone of the Black Nikon SP ( i.e. their X100 )



Take the same sensor and electronics with a 18/2 and make it survive like a modern day Nikonos V


Take the same sensor and electronics with a 18/2.8 and make as thin and elegant as possible.

Take the same electronics and a sensor with PDAF cells and make a general market EVIL mirrorless system that works with adapted DSLR lenses.

Stick with it - keep evolving generation after generation until the speed and AF is as good as a DSLR.
__________________
It's the weird colour scheme that freaks me. Every time you try to operate one of these weird black controls, which are labeled in black on a black background, a small black light lights up black to let you know you've done it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #8
Contarama
Registered User
 
Contarama is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Tulsa
Posts: 807
The Nikon corporate answer is simple - it will cut into sales of our DSLRs. LMAO

I'm taking an entry level photography course at the local camera store to review basics and learn a few things I am still sketchy on. 20 in our class. 18 Canons. 1 Nikon hybrid camera. My Df the only full frame in the class besides the instructor's camera (Nikon btw). First night made me so sad I bought two F2's and enrolled for the next B&W develop and print class.

So Df and F2 for me. The mirrorless Nikon is like the D400 in my books. I'll never buy another camera...other than a M2 or M240 and at that point I'll turn my nose up to all other cameras.
__________________
Art is the ability to make something...even if it is a big mess...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #9
Frontman
Registered User
 
Frontman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: 東京日本
Posts: 1,690
Are those who are making mirrorless cameras earning a profit from them? Judging by the recent sales of digital cameras, probably not. As much as I love that companies are making these cameras, if they are losing money with them, Nikon may be wise to stay out of the market.

In the past Nikon resurrected the S3 and SP, which for those of us who appreciate classic cameras was amazing. But I have no doubt that Nikon lost a fair amount of money on these projects. They are not going to invest in a new system when the odds of earning a positive return are not possible, and if they do, we may appreciate it, but it does little good for Nikon and it's investors.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #10
hap
Registered User
 
hap is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 75
You know.....I think you have a point. perhaps it's tortoise and hare with Nikon. Hard to imagine themselves engineering themselves out of business. Lloyd Chambers , who praises his D810 to high heaven, is clamoring for just a few significant improvments......starting with a class leading EVF. However, I read on posts here that people get headaches from EVF.....is that really the case this is a significant problem?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #11
kuzano
Registered User
 
kuzano is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by CameraQuest View Post
OK Nikon management, where is Nikon's version of the best mirrorless camera?

What is the problem? Why is that camera not already on dealer shelves?

How hard can it be for Nikon to put this together right insead of wasting corporate time and money on foolish new products that don't sell?

1) Sony's latest and best FF sensor
2) modify sensor so it will perform well with rangefinder lenses
3) 100% compatibility with Nikon's wonderful flash system
4) 100% compatibility with all Nikon F lenses including AF via adapter
5) New wide throat G mount (G comes after F)
6) Rotating extendable super hi res LCD panel
7) Higher resolution EVF than any other camera
8) built in wifi to smart phones, pads, computers

Nikon fans are waiting - get on it already!
Hmmm. Last I heard isn't Nikon going Teat's Up?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #12
gavinlg
Registered User
 
gavinlg's Avatar
 
gavinlg is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Wellington NZ
Posts: 4,926
Couldn't agree more with the original post. Nikon needs to make a stonking camera that brings people to the brand if it wants to stay relevant. The time for SLRs is running out.

If nikon made a digital SP, and did it right people would flock. If nikon made a full frame 35mm f2.8 35ti with the analog gauges, people would flock. If nikon remade the DF mirrorless in its own dedicated all metal body with a giant EVF, made it to look like an f3 or an fm2, people would flock.
__________________
NO PRAISE
@gavinlagrange
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-20-2017   #13
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 35
Posts: 3,929
i wish nikon would take a few hints from what other companies have made and go one step further.

imagine a sony rx100 with a fixed, built-in rangefinder-style evf (no pop-up unit), a 24-100mm f/2 lens, and more of a grip.

imagine a sony rx1 with an evf and focusing tab like the leica q.

imagine a ricoh gr with an evf.

imagine a fuji x100f with a focusing tab like the leica q.

when nikon comes to its senses, it'll probably do something boring like making a half-hearted aps-c mirrorless system. just like canon.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #14
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frontman View Post
Are those who are making mirrorless cameras earning a profit from them? Judging by the recent sales of digital cameras, probably not. As much as I love that companies are making these cameras, if they are losing money with them, Nikon may be wise to stay out of the market.
That are indeed the most important points.
So far the DSLM market has not been a success story for the manufacturers in economic terms. Several manufacturers had losses, some get +/- 0 and the best performers only made very small profits.
The DSLR market is much more profitable! Not surprising, because it is much bigger and has much less competition.

No matter whether Nikon would enter the DSLM market with a FF or APS-C system, huge investments are needed. And Nikon has to fight against Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon, Fujifilm, Leica, Sigma. Lots of established competition.
Could Nikon get a ROI under such difficult circumstances?
The danger of loosing lots of money is big.
Loosing money would make Nikon's situation even worse.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #15
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contarama View Post
The Nikon corporate answer is simple - it will cut into sales of our DSLRs. LMAO

...
Yup. Nikon missed the boat. The boat they did sail (J1, V1 etc) is becalmed.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #16
Vobluda
Registered User
 
Vobluda is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Age: 42
Posts: 830
Who is Nikon in 2017?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #17
splitimageview
Registered User
 
splitimageview is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,136
The struggle is real, industry revenues and profits are down, will Nikon weather the storm of the changing market?

Things are likely to get worse before they get better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #18
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 67
Posts: 532
Must admit I have been a little surprised at some of the comments indicating that Nikon, in order to survive, should actually stay out of the mirrorless market. I had been under the impression that no one still believed there was any significant, market dominating, future for SLR bodies, though there might always be a niche. Only time will tell, but the slow response of Nikon management to changes in camera paradigms seems problematic to me. It seems troublingly reminiscent of Graflex management advocating "stay the course, we have the pro market covered", which they did.

Here is the conclusion of a recent analysis, with a link to the full article to follow. People can disagree, but the "writing is on the wall", seems to me.

"In summary, I would like to say that DSLRs simply have no way to compete with mirrorless in the future. I am not saying that everyone will be switching to smaller and lighter mirrorless cameras soon – no, we are still far from that point. However, it simply does not make sense for manufacturers like Nikon and Canon to continue investing into making DSLRs better, when the technology advantage is clearly with mirrorless."

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

The article covers, I think, all the salient technological points relating to SLR bodies vs. mirrorless bodies now and going forward. It also includes some specific points related to Nikon. It is a long article, but I would recommend reading it and then having a long, unemotional, think about the points raised, to anyone who is sincerely interested in the topic.

Last edited by Larry Cloetta : 02-21-2017 at 06:20. Reason: content
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #19
nikonhswebmaster
Moderator NHS Forum
 
nikonhswebmaster's Avatar
 
nikonhswebmaster is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Must admit I have been a little surprised at some of the comments indicating that Nikon, in order to survive, should actually stay out of the mirrorless market. ....

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr
Maybe, but the list of shortcomings is much more important than the article makes out...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #20
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Must admit I have been a little surprised at some of the comments indicating that Nikon, in order to survive, should actually stay out of the mirrorless market. I had been under the impression that no one still believed there was any significant, market dominating, future for SLR bodies, though there might always be a niche.
That is what the DSLM marketing people say. For more than a decade now.
But the reality is different:
In 2016 the ILC market share for DSLRs was 72.5 %, for DSLM only 27.5%.
I doubt that DSLM will have a bigger market share in the future compared to DSLRs. I am convinced DSLRs will have above 60% market share in the long run.

Very difficult decision for Nikon: The DSLM market is relative small, and has lots of competition (much more than in the DSLR market). Even the better performers in the DSLM market are only selling some 100k units p.a.. That is not very much.
Especially considering the big investments, which got into R&D.
So could Nikon really get their R&D money back?
It is at least questionable......

Entering a new market generally make only sense if a significant profit can be made.

The main reason for photographers to go for DSLM is that they want a bit more compact and lighter system.
That works for m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless systems, but not so much for FF mirorless. In FF the lenses have the same size, and as the bodies need much more power because of the power consuming EVF you have to carry spare batteries with you which compensates the little advantage of the smaller body.

If you look how compact and light a Nikon 3400 / 5600 / 7200 APS-C DSLR is (for my hands even a bit too small), maybe improving that route could be an alternative strategy:
- more Nikon DX lenses in general
- more small DX prime lenses
- additionally some "pancake designed" fixed primes (these would even be smaller and lighter than the current APS-C mirrorless lenses).

The difference in size and weight between such a Nikon DX camera+lenses kit and a Fujifilm XT-2 camera and lenses kit is negligible.
And the Nikon kit is much cheaper for the photographer.
And is nevertheless more profitable for Nikon (much lower investment costs).

And in parallel:
Nikon should have a look at a much bigger market than DSLM:
Instax instant film photography. It is an open system. And Fuji alone sold about 6.5 million cameras in 2016 (all DSLM companies together only sold 3.13 million cameras).
This market in increasing, the DSLM market decreased in the last years.
There is much room for better cameras in instant photography. And the R&D for such a camera is much much smaller than for a DSLM line.
Sometimes you have to think "out of the box".

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #21
brennanphotoguy
Registered User
 
brennanphotoguy's Avatar
 
brennanphotoguy is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: NYC
Age: 27
Posts: 787
I don't think an instant film camera is the answer to their financial woes.
__________________
M3 / IIIg / Rollei 3.5E3
www.instagram.com/brennan_mckissick
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #22
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 541
When profits are down..the last thing you want to do is take risks..
But...that's exactly what they should do..
The ole..catch 22..
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #23
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by brennanphotoguy View Post
I don't think an instant film camera is the answer to their financial woes.
Fuji is making much much more money with their Instax products compared to all their digital products......Look at their financial reports.

The DSLM market
- is decreasing
- has lots of very strong competitors, which are established in that market for years
- is very small compared to other camera segment markets
- huge investments are needed for a company to enter this market.

That is simply the hard reality.
Nikon at least should very carefully evaluate taking the risk to enter such a market. They definitely have to think twice.
And they should take time also to evaluate alternative strategies.
That is all I am saying.

Maybe they can be successful in DSLM market. But I am sure it is extremely hard to get to this point.......

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #24
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,260
Nikon needs to play to their strengths. My read is that for the past seven to ten years or so that folks in the marketing department have been playing follow the leader.

Almost every camera market is Full-O-Stuff that's good enough for many. Nikon needs to play to their strengths, Optics, System Integration, Professionalism.

The Nikon 1 has strengths (size and AF speed), play to them. Bring out a few prime wides that DONOT use software in the camera to adjust distortion, they are much better than that. Give us world class glass for folks who want a fast small interchangeable lens camera. Play to the strengths, add master flash control, etc, make it a full part of the family!

As the Coolpix A is there, make an A2 (add master flash, improve AF, WiFi, etc) to widen the appeal to serious photographers who have LOTs of Nikon gear (leverage your base).

Simplify your software and remove 3/4 of the special modes and artistic modes you have.

They need to be in FFM (Full Frame Mirrorless).

Look to the Nikon F as how to do it. Start with off the shelf stuff (e.g. EVF) and make it modular so people can upgrade EVFs over time. Don't put a viewfinder on the body, but have two hot shoes. Make both the same, one on the far left of the camera (for left eyed shooters) one in the middle. Allow them to take an EVF, Electronic Flash, or an Optical Viewfinder. If you look at the F prism history you see how it got better pretty quickly, take the same approach.

Glass, has to be the F mount, no reason for changes.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #25
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
 
NIKON KIU's Avatar
 
NIKON KIU is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington DC suburbs
Age: 55
Posts: 1,923
As much as I wish for another film camera from Nikon, I don't think it will ever happen.
I can envision some limited edition 100th year anniversary meant for Japan F6 or something along the line.

By now, Nikon is heavily invested in their own mirrorless Nikon 1
It'll be rough to just get out.

I see no future for the Coolpix line, P&S cameras are doomed, it was wise to get out the premium line they planned, it will be even more so if they did away with the Coolpix and went a new direction.
I do expect something fresh for the 100th year.

Kiu
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #26
brennanphotoguy
Registered User
 
brennanphotoguy's Avatar
 
brennanphotoguy is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: NYC
Age: 27
Posts: 787
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Fuji is making much much more money with their Instax products compared to all their digital products......Look at their financial reports.

The DSLM market
- is decreasing
- has lots of very strong competitors, which are established in that market for years
- is very small compared to other camera segment markets
- huge investments are needed for a company to enter this market.

That is simply the hard reality.
Nikon at least should very carefully evaluate taking the risk to enter such a market. They definitely have to think twice.
And they should take time also to evaluate alternative strategies.
That is all I am saying.

Maybe they can be successful in DSLM market. But I am sure it is extremely hard to get to this point.......

Cheers, Jan
I didn't say they needed to make a mirrorless camera either. I just said an instax camera wouldn't solve their problems.

If you ask me they need to simplify their product lines by eliminating the point and shoots except for maybe a few higher end models, eliminating the D5XXX and D3XXX lines and focusing on pro and prosumer products instead. I say what they need to do is release a retro styled camera that isn't half-a$$ed like the Df was. That might differentiate their product line a little more and get more people interested because they look cooler. People who want a better camera but think their iPhone is great (they really are though) aren't going to buy a camera because it has 8fps. They are going to look at aesthetics that differentiate it from product X from manufacturer Y.
__________________
M3 / IIIg / Rollei 3.5E3
www.instagram.com/brennan_mckissick
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #27
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 67
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
But the reality is different:
In 2016 the ILC market share for DSLRs was 72.5 %, for DSLM only 27.5%.
I doubt that DSLM will have a bigger market share in the future compared to DSLRs. I am convinced DSLRs will have above 60% market share in the long run.........


The main reason for photographers to go for DSLM is that they want a bit more compact and lighter system.
Jan,

I am not trying to be argumentative just to be argumentative, only interested in a discussion. When saying that "the main reason for photographers to go for DSLM is that they want a more compact and lighter system", I am wondering if you took the time to read the linked article. There are a myriad of technological reasons why mirrorless is just 'better' than SLR bodies either already or coming soon, and they are detailed in the article. Lighter and more compact is not close to the main reason speaking only for myself.

Mirrorless is not yet a perfect system, by any means, but the two main issues it has had in the past, the EVF and focus tracking and speed, are rapidly being overcome, and these are problems which can be fully overcome with time. Likely not too much more time.

Pointing to market share in 2016 is not an indicator of where companies need to position themselves to be around in the future, any more than saying that market share of mirrorless in 2003 was 0% and market share of SLRs was 100%, which it was (if comparing only those two). If anything it just shows how rapidly, if taking the long view, SLR share is eroding.

I would love for Nikon to be around, and at or near the top, for as long as people want the best out of photography. After taking stock of the present technology of DSLRs, and the developing tech of mirrorless (as explained in the linked article), I sold my D800E a couple of years ago in order to wait for Nikon to do mirrorless, but do it right which no one had then yet done. What I was waiting for was a D5 level mirrorless body, which I was hoping would have been revealed at the last Photokina. But, we got Key Mission instead. That hurt.

I've handled, owned, and shot with a lot of mirrorless bodies, from pretty much every manufacturer, many of which returned fabulous results, but none of which were truly "there yet" operationally for me. But, they are getting there. In the meantime, I've just been shooting film, mostly.

The only two extant mirrorless bodies available now which would be worth the expenditure to me (to me, that's all I am saying) are the Leica SL and possibly the new Hasselblad.
What I was hoping for from Nikon was an SL level quality construction body, with an equivalent or better EVF and equivalent or better sensor, for less money (hoping covers a lot of ground). My thinking was that if Nikon is, or wants to again be, the giant of the photography world, it needs to act like the giant and blow people out of the water. But, then, Key Mission, and acting more like Lomo. Apparently my thinking was off a bit

I don't pretend to have any idea what they are thinking at Nikon, and hope for the best, but, long term, I don't think they will regain the place they once had at the table without a world class mirrorless system. It's never too late to be better than everybody else if you have the brains, the foresight, and the will.
All the funding in the world won't get you there without those, and, if you have those you can get the funding.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #28
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by brennanphotoguy View Post
..
If you ask me they need to simplify their product lines by eliminating the point and shoots except for maybe a few higher end models, eliminating the D5XXX and D3XXX lines and focusing on pro and prosumer products instead. I say what they need to do is release a retro styled camera that isn't half-a$$ed like the Df was. That might differentiate their product line a little more and get more people interested because they look cooler. People who want a better camera but think their iPhone is great (they really are though) aren't going to buy a camera because it has 8fps. They are going to look at aesthetics that differentiate it from product X from manufacturer Y.
Bring out a digital F body with much of the electronics stuffed into a FTn prisim, damn would they sell out every production run.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #29
hap
Registered User
 
hap is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 75
Japanese and many others like hip and cache......maybe Nikon should buy lomo or look to support millions of folks who own their film cameras. Make better long reach zooms in the cool pix or new line. Put evf on A. Df a great camera....easily made better.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #30
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 67
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKON KIU View Post
By now, Nikon is heavily invested in their own mirrorless Nikon 1
Kiu
Ooooh, how I wish that were the case. It's kind of fun periodically to go over to the the DPR "Nikon 1 System talk" forum, watching, for years now, the 'when is the V4 coming out' threads pop up.

Don't get me wrong, I love my V1. Actually prefer it to V2 or V3 operationally and for the integrated EVF. Some of the lenses are stellar, some are very much not (plastic mounts on the kit lenses, really?). It's a great camera for what it is, solid as a rock, lightning quick focus, (the NEX7 I sold is probably still hunting for focus on that shot of mermaids I tried to get 3 years ago. Dang that would have been a money shot.) and quite nice within it's ISO limits. I just bought another one.

Anyway, the Nikon 1 was more of a marketing failure than a camera failure, and I'd guess they lost money on it, but it does not seem like they have been heavily invested in it for years.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #31
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Jan,

I am not trying to be argumentative just to be argumentative, only interested in a discussion. When saying that "the main reason for photographers to go for DSLM is that they want a more compact and lighter system", I am wondering if you took the time to read the linked article. There are a myriad of technological reasons why mirrorless is just 'better' than SLR bodies either already or coming soon, and they are detailed in the article. Lighter and more compact is not close to the main reason speaking only for myself.
Larry, I have to disagree:
1. Yes, I've read the article. And from my experience with the different systems there are much more problems with DSLM technology, and much less with DSLR technology.
2. Yes, DSLMs are getting better. But DSLRs are getting better, too (but they are of course already more matured).
3. As soon as DSLMs are on a mature level, they will see exactly the same problem as the DSLRs are currently facing:
Declining sales because the photographers are refusing to upgrade. They are using their expensive DSLMs just longer, and will not buy new in every new model cycle.

In the end all that leads to a situation, that market shares will not differ so much in the future compared to today: With DSLRs having the significantly bigger market share compared to DSLMs.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #32
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
 
xayraa33's Avatar
 
xayraa33 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,026
There are too many camera brands of mirrorless cameras already and we don't need another " me too" mirrorless camera, especially an APS sized senor one.

How about a digital full frame Nikon SP?

Something arcane and modern at the same time to compete with the Leica products.

Yes, I know, it will be expensive and it will not sell in great quantities, so it will do zilch to help Nikon financially.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #33
pgk
Registered User
 
pgk is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 165
FWIW I went to a photo show last year organised by my local camera dealer. By far the most innovative manufacturer was Leica! New products, in a variety of categories but only one dSLR which should tell us something. The least innovative were clearly Nikon and Canon. In between were the others who had some good stuff and were clearly vying with each other. As a second choice of innovative gear I'd place Sony - quality and a mix of conventional and very unconventional. Just my take but now is not a time for manufacturers to sit back and hope, its a time for manufacturers to find out what their potential customers are really likely to buy and build it. Personally speaking, having owned numerous dSLRs and SLRs I can't say that I'm going to buy any more, unless they offer something impossible in any other type of camera in the future, which surprises me too! Digital has changed everything and is likely to continue to do so.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #34
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 67
Posts: 532
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Larry, I have to disagree:
1. Yes, I've read the article. And from my experience with the different systems there are much more problems with DSLM technology, and much less with DSLR technology.
2. Yes, DSLMs are getting better. But DSLRs are getting better, too (but they are of course already more matured).
3. As soon as DSLMs are on a mature level, they will see exactly the same problem as the DSLRs are currently facing:
Declining sales because the photographers are refusing to upgrade. They are using their expensive DSLMs just longer, and will not buy new in every new model cycle.

In the end all that leads to a situation, that market shares will not differ so much in the future compared to today: With DSLRs having the significantly bigger market share compared to DSLMs.

Cheers, Jan
Jan,

Thanks for the response. Fair enough.
I certainly don't disagree that there are declining sales in general all across the spectrum which poses large problems for everybody. I don't see that changing.

Time will tell. Let's both subscribe to this thread and come back and look at in in 10 years and see what actually happened. I was probably going to be dead by then, but will try to hold on.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #35
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
 
NIKON KIU's Avatar
 
NIKON KIU is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington DC suburbs
Age: 55
Posts: 1,923
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Ooooh, how I wish that were the case. It's kind of fun periodically to go over to the the DPR "Nikon 1 System talk" forum, watching, for years now, the 'when is the V4 coming out' threads pop up.

Don't get me wrong, I love my V1. Actually prefer it to V2 or V3 operationally and for the integrated EVF. Some of the lenses are stellar, some are very much not (plastic mounts on the kit lenses, really?). It's a great camera for what it is, solid as a rock, lightning quick focus, (the NEX7 I sold is probably still hunting for focus on that shot of mermaids I tried to get 3 years ago. Dang that would have been a money shot.) and quite nice within it's ISO limits. I just bought another one.

Anyway, the Nikon 1 was more of a marketing failure than a camera failure, and I'd guess they lost money on it, but it does not seem like they have been heavily invested in it for years.
Larry,
They can still get it right, the direction could be corrected.
But they are heavily invested, since the introduction in late 2011, the entire line has been updated a few times. Today, looking at the Nikon USA website, they offer 3 cameras along with 13 lenses, 4 different flash units, not to mention other gadgets, some of the lenses are offered in 5-10 different colors!
It also seems they retired quite a few models in the line.

Obviously they have abandoned the premium line of Coolpix to do something else, we just have to wait and see what it is.

----------------------------------

I also like to make a side note here, Nikon has produced 40 million more lenses since they announced 60 million in 2011

The DF was announced in November 2013

Kiu
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #36
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
...Time will tell. Let's both subscribe to this thread and come back and look at in in 10 years and see what actually happened. I was probably going to be dead by then, but will try to hold on.
My guess is with the crazy speed of business these days we will have a pretty clear picture in three to five years max.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-21-2017   #37
DougFord
on the good foot
 
DougFord's Avatar
 
DougFord is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 713
Consolidation.
Maybe not Canikon but maybe Foxconnikon.
__________________

the walk
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #38
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Must admit I have been a little surprised at some of the comments indicating that Nikon, in order to survive, should actually stay out of the mirrorless market. I had been under the impression that no one still believed there was any significant, market dominating, future for SLR bodies, though there might always be a niche. Only time will tell, but the slow response of Nikon management to changes in camera paradigms seems problematic to me. It seems troublingly reminiscent of Graflex management advocating "stay the course, we have the pro market covered", which they did.

Here is the conclusion of a recent analysis, with a link to the full article to follow. People can disagree, but the "writing is on the wall", seems to me.

"In summary, I would like to say that DSLRs simply have no way to compete with mirrorless in the future. I am not saying that everyone will be switching to smaller and lighter mirrorless cameras soon – no, we are still far from that point. However, it simply does not make sense for manufacturers like Nikon and Canon to continue investing into making DSLRs better, when the technology advantage is clearly with mirrorless."

https://photographylife.com/mirrorless-vs-dslr

The article covers, I think, all the salient technological points relating to SLR bodies vs. mirrorless bodies now and going forward. It also includes some specific points related to Nikon. It is a long article, but I would recommend reading it and then having a long, unemotional, think about the points raised, to anyone who is sincerely interested in the topic.

I completely agree with the reflex camera is well past its peak. All other reasons, comparisons and arguments aside... it is less expensive to manufacture a mirrorless body.

The problem is: when you think about how Nikon's product development strategy, they did everything possible to protect the FX DSLR product line.

Apparently, now Nikon can't afford to bring a CX mirrorless product line to market.

Nikon decided the DX platform's only purpose was for those who wanted to upgrade for P&S compacts or smart phones. Panasonic, Olympus, and Fujifilm showed the market demographic for cameras with smaller sensor areas was quite different. So Nikon went to CX and we know how that turned out.

So, Nikon protected their DLSR business instead of being a leader and creating change. Fighting change is a loosing proposition.
__________________
"Perspective is governed by where you stand – object size and the angle of view included in the picture is determined by focal length." H.S. Newcombe

williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #39
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,205
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
I completely agree with the reflex camera is well past its peak. All other reasons, comparisons and arguments aside... it is less expensive to manufacture a mirrorless body.
Really???
If that would be really the case, why all entry level DSLRs are much cheaper than similar (based on features and capabilities) DSLM cameras?
Are the DSLM manufacturers ripping their customers off?

This "reflex mirror systems are complicated and expensive" is just a total lie, stupid marketing propaganda by DSLM propagandists.
Reflex mirror system is a technology which has been perfectioned over decades by the camera manufacturers.
A fully matured, extremly proven, reliable and robust technology.

The evidence is so clear: Just look at the prices of the latest film SLRs which were produced until 2005-2007:
Canon EOS 3000N (incl. kit lens): 150€
Canon EOS 3000V: 150€
Canon EOS 300V: 190€
Canon EOS 300X: 220€
Canon EOS 33V: 360€
Canon EOS 30V: 450€
Nikon F55: 120€
Nikon F65: 230€
Nikon F75: 160€
Nikon F80: 360€
Minolta Dynax 40: 120€
Minolta Dynax 60: 200€

Cheap as chips. And all with reflex mirror systems!!!
Most of these cameras have been even cheaper than a vertical grip for todays digital cameras.

So fact is:
Reflex mirror systems are not complicated, and not expensive!!

A good reflex mirror systems is much cheaper than a good EVF.

The cost drivers are the sensors, image processors, rear LCD, EVF etc.. The main electronic parts.
Not the mechanical parts like the reflex mirror system.

Cheers, Jan

Last edited by HHPhoto : 02-22-2017 at 07:04. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2017   #40
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Really???
If that would be really the case, why all entry level DSLRs are much cheaper than similar (based on features and capabilities) DSLM cameras?
Are the DSLM manufacturers ripping their customers off?
Yes, and I think you are a bit biased in your data collection.

There are a number of companies that have no expertise in SLRs or film based cameras that are coming up with mirror-less cameras, not DLSR.

I would submit that DSLRs came to market because the technology for EVF early on was not sufficient to garner any market share. DSLRs were a fine stepping stone in the evolution of digital cameras.


Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
...The evidence is so clear: Just look at the prices of the latest film SLRs which were produced until 2005-2007:
Canon EOS 3000N (incl. kit lens): 150€
Canon EOS 3000V: 150€
Canon EOS 300V: 190€
Canon EOS 300X: 220€
Canon EOS 33V: 360€
Canon EOS 30V: 450€
Nikon F55: 120€
Nikon F65: 230€
Nikon F75: 160€
Nikon F80: 360€
Minolta Dynax 40: 120€
Minolta Dynax 60: 200€
I might suggest that the prices more due to companies trying to chase after any consumer as the market tanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
...Reflex mirror systems are not complicated, and not expensive!!
Priced out a Nikon D5 recently? My oldest is lusting after a high-end Canon because of the video capability and that system is outrageously expensive (IMHO).

Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
[/u]The cost drivers are the sensors, image processors, rear LCD, EVF etc.. The main electronic parts.
Not the mechanical parts like the reflex mirror system.

Cheers, Jan
You have forgotten some less physical costs that I would suggest may actually be higher. Software development and testing if you are developing from scratch might overshadow much of the hardware in a Mirror-less camera.

Also look to what Leica did for their new SL. Viewfinders in the film based SL line were EXCELLENT, yet they choose a EVF over a prism.

I might suggest your facts don't hold up to even the quickest testing. You do bring up some great points of discussion though.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:07.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.