Severe crisis at Nikon

gilpen123 said:
They have the capabilities just need to be strategic......DSLRs IMO will remain to be the tools of professionals but there are more enthusiasts in the market.
Click to expand...

The importance of professionals for the camera sales has always been much much overestimated by amateurs enthusiasts.
Only 1-2 % of all DSLRs are bought by professionals. The whole rest is bought by enthusiast photographers.

Without the market of the enthusiast / amateur photographers it would have never been possible to develop professional cameras. The buying power of professionals alone has always been too weak to keep such a market alive.

Cheers, Jan
 
Half of Nikon's loss was not in the restructuring of the imaging side of the business.

"In accordance with this restructuring, the Semiconductor Lithography Group recorded an extraordinary loss of 29,790 million yen"

The digital imaging market may have peaked and reached a saturation point where folks like me don't really need this years latest camera offerings. Fingers crossed, I hope that once the market settles to a new plateau that we are not left with only the current 3 major players.

In other words, my fingers are crossed for what's left for Olympus and Ricoh/Pentax.
 
HHPhoto said:
I've never said that!

I am doing both film and digital. And in digital it is currently 100% Nikon, so it is not good news for me.

We all have to face the reality with the significant problems in the digital camera market. It is affecting lots of us. Some of us more more, some of us less.

It would be very naive to ignore these massive market problems. There will be much more bad news in the coming years. From several companies.

Cheers, Jan
Click to expand...

Jokes, Jan, Jokes! I put a 😉 ... I understand this is bad news.
 
Stephen G said:
The Nikon A, fixed-28mm Ricoh GR killer turned out to be mostly a dude to many. Not much to offer over the GR, more expensive, and quickly killed off.
Click to expand...

The Coolpix A is an interesting camera to think about regarding their troubles. It is actually a *very* good camera (I have three). The IQ is fantastic, interface is straight out of their DSLRs (including the Nikon picture controls functionality), well built and feels solid in the hand with surprising battery life.

It was obviously built to go up against the well established GR series. From a quality and feature standpoint it could compete with it. But Nikon priced it around 40% higher. The accessories were crazy priced too. That doomed it from the start. Nikon eventually ended up selling them for around $275 direct which was a steal.

A couple of tweaks and that camera could have had a very different ending. Built in Wifi, commander mode for the flash (would hook existing Nikon shooters), remember focus position for MF, be able to turn off the LCD (for the optical viewfinder) and a competitive price would have done it.

Shawn
 
I'm not sure about who was first, egg or chicken. Canon and Sony are heavily invested in professional market. No, not just DLSRs, but professional cameras for broadcast, television and movies. Canon does a lot of optics for it and Fujinon as well. While Nikon just sitting in the niche were rules of game has changed not in the favor of DSLRs.
 
To everyone that has said Nikon needed to change with the market, what direction do you think they should have gone? Made Smartphones? That niche is filled. The truth is ALL camera companies are at risk. There is no photography market anymore, when every phone can capture perfect pictures.

Ask 10 people how they take photographs for work or pleasure, and you'll hear 10 of them say, "my cell phone". You'd have to ask about 50 before you'd find one that says, "a camera."
 
goamules said:
There is no photography market anymore, when every phone can capture perfect pictures.
Click to expand...

This might be true for the low-end market... However, phones are far from perfect in quality or are they versatile enough for most styles - for those who want / need to do photography (and not social media), they just aren't sufficient.
 
Geez. And all it would take for me to buy something new from Nikon would be the Coolpix A, with a pop up EVF a la RX100. That's it. Simple.

Nikon ain't consumer-savvy it seems.
 
goamules said:
To everyone that has said Nikon needed to change with the market, what direction do you think they should have gone? Made Smartphones? That niche is filled. The truth is ALL camera companies are at risk. There is no photography market anymore, when every phone can capture perfect pictures.

Ask 10 people how they take photographs for work or pleasure, and you'll hear 10 of them say, "my cell phone". You'd have to ask about 50 before you'd find one that says, "a camera."
Click to expand...

20-20 hindsight is much easier…

1) Should have embraced the smartphone market. Maybe a lens/sensor combo sold to OEMs with “Nikon Inside” type marketing. People upgrade their phones for better built in cameras pretty regularly. Build interest in their full cameras by putting the best cameras in phones. Maybe you don’t sell additional stand alone cameras but you sell millions of modules….

2) Earlier on make all their cameras easily integrated with smartphones (and social media) and make people aware of this. Most people still don’t realize this is a possibility. They don’t consider a ‘real’ camera as they just want to post to facebook or text pictures. IOW… make this easy for soccer moms who would be able to show off their kids better than those shooting from their phones. When I’m shooting at my sons games everyone is amazed when I text them a picture of their kid taken on my Fuji while I’m standing next to them. It is the digital ages version of a polaroid. Teach people that this exists and make it as easy as possible to use.

The Nikon 1 seemed to be aimed at soccer moms but they missed this step.

3) As good as the Nikon 1 is supposed to be the thoughts about its sensor size hurt it from the start for Nikon’s repeat DSLR customers. Imagine if 5 years ago Nikon shipped an APS/C or FF mirrorless with full support for Nikon’s creative lighting system and included a bundled adapter that allowed for all existing AF-S lenses to be used on it. Or go totally crazy and include screw drive lenses too. It wouldn’t stop the decline of digital overall but it would have certainly stemmed the flow of those leaving Nikon for mirrorless from other makers. The adapter would have also bought time while the mirrorless lens lineup was rolled out.


Shawn
 
Hern said:
Geez. And all it would take for me to buy something new from Nikon would be the Coolpix A, with a pop up EVF a la RX100. That's it. Simple.

Nikon ain't consumer-savvy it seems.
Click to expand...

Yes... but... make it built in like the Panasonic GM5. The pop up EVF is a PITA to use and totally takes away from the quick spontaneous use of it. Too fragile feeling to leave it extended and it doesn't fit in a shirt pocket with it out.

Shawn
 
shawn said:
The Coolpix A is an interesting camera......

A couple of tweaks and that camera could have had a very different ending. Built in Wifi, commander mode for the flash (would hook existing Nikon shooters), remember focus position for MF, be able to turn off the LCD (for the optical viewfinder) and a competitive price would have done it.

Shawn
Click to expand...

+1

They had the technology in place at the time for all those tweaks in other cameras. Yes, the integration would have been a bit of work but it wasn't anywhere near from scratch.

They churned out upgrades every few months when they were pumping out P&S Coolpix, I wish management had the guts to see if they could have tweaked the A for at least one rev.

B2 (;->
 
they should have attacked Fuji and the X100/X-Pro lines. Use the manual dials from the Df, stick it in a crop frame/FF mirrorless body (optimally with a hybrid OVF/EVF), call it the Nikon Sf and drink from that sweet sweet nostalgia train. While I have a soft spot for the brand, I have no sympathy for them being reticent and arrogant about (not) understanding the market.
 
Spicy said:
they should have attacked Fuji and the X100/X-Pro lines. Use the manual dials from the Df, stick it in a crop frame/FF mirrorless body (optimally with a hybrid OVF/EVF), call it the Nikon Sf and drink from that sweet sweet nostalgia train. While I have a soft spot for the brand, I have no sympathy for them being reticent and arrogant about (not) understanding the market.
Click to expand...


Or the hybrid OVF/EVF in a DSLR body. Mirror down is traditional SLR OVF, lock the mirror up and you are EVF through the viewfinder. That would have been a true "Digital Fusion." Less resources to do this as you would be using existing lenses and most of the body, just a different top end.

Shawn
 
I don't get how people are saying Nikon messed up by not embracing mirrorless digital photography. That market is sucking seaweed too.
Mainstream photography, as everyone knows (but some seem to be in denial) is smartphone photography. What is left are high end photographic products.
Wonder why Sony's A6300 replacement/update - the A6500 - is almost 50% more expensive than its replacement? Cuz there is no money left in making 'cheap' cameras.
And Sony's consumer camera division is not making money - it's all propped up by their imaging sensor sales and CCTV units.
Olympus and Fuji - pure mirrorless camera mfgs - have not turned a profit with this sector in years. Fuji only makes money selling film and film cameras - the Instax series - in their consumer photo division.
Fuji, Olympus, Sony, Canon photo divisions still exist because they are just a small part of a much larger corporation.

Leica is doing ok because they are high end, and have always been.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

bmattock
FID Warning...Kodak cuts jobs, triples CEO pay, Lucky isn't, silver up...etc.
Replies
2
Views
2K
VinceC
V
Back
Top Bottom