Nikon in Dire Straits

C

combatentropy

Veteran
Nikon in "Dire Straits" as its Slump is Particularly Untimely

Smartphones and the pandemic are only partially to blame. Nikon had already been weak for a few years.

  • operating deficit of almost half a billion dollars
  • fear of conflicting with its DSLR camera sales made the company reluctant to produce a mirrorless camera. By the time it entered the market, Sony had long since entrenched itself.*
  • a major difference between Canon and Nikon is that Canon is far more diversified.
  • Nikon's healthcare business has been in a deficit since 2017 and its precision machinery business – where it has traditionally had the largest sales figures – is down 98%
  • yet to fully recover from its third consecutive new product failure in consumer products (Nikon 1, Keymission, Nikon DL)
  • to cut 20% of its international workforce by March of 2022 (details)

* I'm reminded of a quote by Steve Jobs, "If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will."
 
Last edited:
Yep, not cannibalizing is one of the toughest things for a major market leader to get their head around. They get old, stodgy, comfortable, and afraid to take risks. The fact that they have something to lose is why they fail to act like a startup, which has nothing to lose.
 
As a former Nikon owner and fan, I find it sad that the once industry leader has come to this. But they are old school and failed to strategize as well as Canon did
and now they are paying the price for not innovating and changing.
 
Nikon still has one half of the Camera Duopoly (soon/already a Tripoly? But for now, Nikon sells more ILC than Sony), and Nikon still has the biggest back catalogue of lenses. (and I think if you ignore kit lenses, has sold more F Mount lenses than EF Mount lenses? And has more specific lens models I think than Canon)

Nikon is and remains a major prestigious brand in its industry that is legendary.

I wouldn't rush to hastily write off Nikon, I'm not going to bet on Nikon to be the next company to exit the industry.

One possible gold mine that might turn around Nikons fortunes quickly is the current China vs USA trade war. Because the bans on exports for American companies is leading to Chinese trying to do more in making semi conductors themselves, and Nikon is positioned well to sell equipment & services to those new Chinese factories.

But yes, Nikon has had so much opportunity only to squander it, as after all it was Nikon which put HD video first into an ILC!
 
Nikon, much like Olympus, was fooled by the promises of a cartel. They agreed to play nice with one another and concentrate on the photography portion of the business. Well, the photography went to smartphones and video went to Canon and Sony. Poor Nikon wasn't even allowed to compete in the video sector with those two. Nor was it allowed to release a camera with the superior photo specs. Sony had to have the crown in the full frame sector (it let Fuji make a $10,000 FGX100 in the medium format but that's a small niche), leaving Nikon with nothing.

In a competitive market, Nikon would have had higher resolution DX line, a competitive FX line, a few videocentric models in both DX and FX, and a few C-70/C100/200 type "pro" video units. It might have made its P1000 with a higher res sensor. But it had to defer to other members.

And now it's likely to follow Olympus into a garbage bin. I had long anticipated that there will be only two major players left in the entire industry and it certainly looks this way now.

Panasonic, you're on the clock.
 
IronFilm said:
.... I wouldn't rush to hastily write off Nikon, I'm not going to bet on Nikon to be the next company to exit the industry.!
Click to expand...

I don't know. When you read stuff like this from their November 5th financial call, it's not exactly confidence building. On their plan to get back to being profitable:

"Shift to a structure that secures profits constantly even when revenue drops, through strengthening the business structure and diverting the sales and product mix"
"Focus on pro/hobbyist when product planning, development and sales"

Riveting, eh? Hopefully, there is something under the covers, but that's not the sort of presentation material that would make me a stockholder.
 
Its a funny old world. Ive been nikon for decades and have a huge pie of glass. But only my 70-200F4 and a crappy kit zoom work with the latest AF generation.

Effectively my buy in is one 80-200 - so if ever there was a time to leave it would be now.

I bought the z6 because I wanted a 'handy camera' - an ability to do video without lugging my FS7 - but Im now thinking that was a mistake as the new sony sounds like it is actually professional in the footage (10bit 4k log)

But the nikon is still nice to use - my experience with mirrorless from sony and panny is that they are just horrid.

Do nikon use Sony sensors and are stuck with last years chuck outs ? I think so.. and that means being 2 years off the curve for ever.. death. Like panny with thier AF problems which IMO are all predictable from the board room and drawing board.

Of course any camera who's HDMI is vunerable and pokes out and lacks an ND is not really a tool for work. The market is wide open for a simple camera that is not fundamentally flawed.

Any maker who employs someone with a degree in engineering design and can get a GUI written by a grown up should and then tests with a few pros should wipe the floor.

Waffle waffle.

No one is really making me want to give them money, but Sony and Canon are much closer to not being useless. And that makes me shy awat from buying any $500+ nikkors.

My manual nikkors will always have a place from F35 to sony mirrorles and that is fine.
 
Im teetering with nikon - I need to buy a 24-105 or 70-200 or 24-200 -basically put in another $1k to have a current single purpose zoom. I could do with $100 of cage too.

Or leave.

Here is a thing. I was chatting about a thing with a client and thought Id set up the nikon for web use as that client might want to Zoom at a higher level than webcam.

Well nikon have a software (as of 05/11/2020) and in two mins Im on skype chatting to a mate at 35/2 full frame - interesting.

But skype? a bit 1995 right.

I tried it with Zoom and it doesnt work.. maybe you can fix it but it didnt just work.

Any maker who does not take Zoom seriously is not taking themselves seriously.
 
The blogerati are 'interesting' there is oodles of chat on DR or whatever but little discussion of the cameras in use. This does not help anyone but sony - which are unusable but have good tech specs.
 
It's not that Sony sells them or Panasonic old sensors, it's that something has to be crippled among all of them. A7III has the 8-bit codec but a kick-ass AF, Nikon and Panasonic have dubious auto focus capabilities with the old 8-bit codec. Granted, Z6 has the eternal Raw via the HDMI but it's a line-skipper.
 
morgan_moore said:
The blogerati are 'interesting' there is oodles of chat on DR or whatever but little discussion of the cameras in use. This does not help anyone but sony - which are unusable but have good tech specs.
Click to expand...

Yes, the ideal would be to have the specs and good design and engineering.
 
DLD said:
It's not that Sony sells them or Panasonic old sensors, it's that something has to be crippled among all of them. A7III has the 8-bit codec but a kick-ass AF, Nikon and Panasonic have dubious auto focus capabilities with the old 8-bit codec. Granted, Z6 has the eternal Raw via the HDMI but it's a line-skipper.
Click to expand...

Its a basic power* thing. Sony as prime maker are not going to give thier tech away so the other brands are going to be kept in the loser position.

*economic not volts/watts
 
James0b57 said:
Yes, the ideal would be to have the specs and good design and engineering.
Click to expand...

A 10min conversation with a working op would bring a design that could be a total winner. So any of these brands have it on a plate to win if they are not total morons - which they are. If they go bust they have no-one to blame but themselves.
 
So in my basket I have z6 cage and bits.. but this thread for some reason is really making me hold back.

Is it time to go sony or canon and if so which - Im thinking of a thread on that.
 
morgan_moore said:
Its a basic power* thing. Sony as prime maker are not going to give thier tech away so the other brands are going to be kept in the loser position.

*economic not volts/watts
Click to expand...

It's more subtle than that. For example, Panasonic uses the same sensor as A7III on S1 and S1H as Nikon on Z6 as Sigma on fp. A7III has 693 phase detect points and 225 contrast detect. S1 and S1H only 225 contrast detect. Sigma fp only 49 contrast detect. Z6 II only 273 phase detect. Varying the internal camera programming varies the AF performance as well. (ah, yes, Fuji XT-3 "upgrade"). It also allows for the firmware upgrades where the AF improves because, after a certain time out in the wild, cameras are magically allowed to become less crippled. Not better, mind you, just "less worse".

PS. S1 and S1H just had another round of AF upgrades (November, 24th). The upgrade probably enables some phase detect points.
 
Wish I had a $ for every shot I took on Nikkor lenses on Nikon F's and Nikkormats during the mid-sixties. Ending up with a couple of Photomics in '68. Hope Nikon survives. Never forget when Nat Geo switched from Leica to Nikon for its staff photogs in the mid-sixties. That move sent shock waves around the photo industry. This was the dude who inspired me in the day and made me go for Nikon. Notice the rare Contax inspired Nikon SP in his hands!

Chris Young

 
I was a Nikon guy in my photo days. Their ergonomics on the bodies was top-notch and IMO far better than Canon's button-hold-and-spin-dial UX at the time. At some point, though, it was impossible to keep paying more for less capability AND Nikon never moved into cinema cameras like Canon did with the C100 and C300... so I jumped ship.
 
jbregar said:
I was a Nikon guy in my photo days. Their ergonomics on the bodies was top-notch and IMO far better than Canon's button-hold-and-spin-dial UX at the time. At some point, though, it was impossible to keep paying more for less capability AND Nikon never moved into cinema cameras like Canon did with the C100 and C300... so I jumped ship.
Click to expand...

I was the same too, when I was really into still shooting as a kid (I made the cover photo for a national horse magazine when I was 13 years old!), Nikon was it. My photo teacher in school was a Nikon guy and that rubbed off on me
and I always had Nikons. Until the AE-1 shipped, I had to have an AE-1. I kept my Nikons, but shot with my AE-1 and Canon lenses a lot then too. For digital though, I drifted back to Nikon. Great lenses and operationally, I did like
Nikon better than the Canons. But once Canon shipped the 5D MKII, I made the jump to Canon because it's video capabilities were better than the Nikon D90. After that, it was over with me and Nikon and I really moved from
stills to cinematography more. I hope they surivive, but I doubt they will.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top