Fine art or artists? š
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Art photography seems like such a small niche to market a niche product to...
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
enasniearth
Well-known
nikon
nikon
nikon tried this 13 years ago -- but it was as an instant collectable and they lost money on every one .
only 2500 black sp with all black 3,5cm 1.8 were made
many of those are being used now -
art photographers use some really low tech or oddball items
there are so many film cameras for sale used -- that it seems not a good decision to make another from scratch.
nikon
nikon tried this 13 years ago -- but it was as an instant collectable and they lost money on every one .
only 2500 black sp with all black 3,5cm 1.8 were made
many of those are being used now -
art photographers use some really low tech or oddball items
there are so many film cameras for sale used -- that it seems not a good decision to make another from scratch.
colker
Well-known
You donĀ“t know.For all the reasons previously posted in this thread.
I bet on NikonĀ“s sensibility to Japanese collectors and passionate photo geeks.
All this rational talk gets trumped by passion every day of the week.
Film should be dead already and it keeps coming back.
Cameras should be dead already and we should all be clicking on Samsungs and iPhones but cameras are here.
Yeah, all of us skeptics are clueless, business decisions are entirely made upon wishful thinking, passion, and dreaming.
colker
Well-known
Nikon didnĀ“t try this. They released a limited edtion, expensive, for collectors. It had nothing to do w/ the film renaissance.
And if you think a non metered 5000 dollar camera is nikonĀ“s try to go along the young crowd who is shooting film.. well... think again.
Yes, clearly. They didn't even sell all of the SP 2005s at their original retail price, either.
colker
Well-known
clearly ItĀ“s an expensive collectors camera .
clearly ItĀ“s an expensive collectors camera .
clearly ItĀ“s an expensive collectors camera .
Released before the film renaissance.
It wasnĀ“t a camera made for the young crowds shooting film NOW.
All true, but it wasn't exactly a financial success for Nikon, at the time, and there was a lot more film being shot in 2000 and 2005 than there is now.
Do the bean counters there want to take another bath, considering the current state of the digital photography market, the rise of Sony as a major competitor, the recent release of their new mirrorless, and many other factors?
Slim. None.
Do the bean counters there want to take another bath, considering the current state of the digital photography market, the rise of Sony as a major competitor, the recent release of their new mirrorless, and many other factors?
Slim. None.
Actually no, Nikon was not showing off. At least, not initially. And back in the late 1990s, it was a rangefinder renaissance, not a film renaissance.
There used to be an interview style article on the Nikon Japan website about how the reissue Nikon rangefinder project came about. Basically, the marketing guys at Imaging Company (now called Imaging Business Unit) saw the rangefinder renaissance unfolding in the late 1990s and wanted to join the party. The camera they decided to produce was the chrome Nikon S3, because it was the easiest option to put into production, and their initial plan was to sell 10,000 units PER YEAR. Yes, you read that right, the initial plan was to sell 10,000 units per year. Mito Nikon was commissioned with manufacturing the reissue S3 cameras (right next to the F3 production line I heard) and Tochigi Nikon was commissioned with manufacturing the reissue 50mm lenses.
But as we now know, it became apparent very quickly that the camera wouldn't sell very well. Fast forward to late 2001, and the project was folded with approximately only 8,000 units sold. The number is approximate because it was not intended as a limited edition, and Nikon has never released the actual number sold other than "approximately 8,000 units".
Move forward to 2002, and Nikon finally caved to all the Nikon collectors that complained they really wanted a black paint reissue rangefinder, not a chrome reissue rangefinder, and released a black paint version, the Nikon S3 Limited Edition Black, as a limited edition, 2,000 units only. The word on the street here in Japan is that it was a way for Nikon to use up remaining parts at the factories. Two birds with one stone!
Move forward to 2005, and Nikon again caved to all the Nikon collectors who complained that they actually wanted a black paint Nikon SP reissue, not a lowly Nikon S3, which was the budget model to the SP. So after lots of painstaking work figuring out how to manufacture the complicated finder of the Nikon SP (the reason the Imaging Company marketing guys initially went with the S3) Nikon did another limited edition, this time 2,500 units only with a different lens, a 35mm f1.8 instead of a 50mm f1.4.
So there you have it. The limited edition Nikon SP reissue of 2005 was certainly Nikon showing off to say, "yeah we still got it", but the chrome Nikon S3 reissue of 2000 was just a bad marketing decision, and the subsequent black paint Nikon S3 reissue was just Nikon clearing out unused parts.
By the way, most Nikon employees I've met don't have a clue regarding the company's history and past cameras. Especially those under 40 years old. "Did Nikon even make film cameras???". Ahhhh yeah, Nikon did actually.
KEVIN-XU ę forever
所謂的攝影,就&
Thank you very much for sharing the back story of those Nikon reissue cameras. I own both the Nikon SP 2005 and original black paint SP. Itās amazing to see them sitting on the table at the same time and compare them side by side.
Thanks Jon, great information! Unfortunately this reveals even more reasons why we will likely never see such a project again.
All three Nikon reissues are incredible tributes to the originals. And yet the Rangefinder Renaissance was still not enough to support the production.
More history which documents the RF renaissance, courtesy of Stephen: https://cameraquest.com/rfren.htm
All three Nikon reissues are incredible tributes to the originals. And yet the Rangefinder Renaissance was still not enough to support the production.
More history which documents the RF renaissance, courtesy of Stephen: https://cameraquest.com/rfren.htm
css9450
Veteran
What would a new camera in 2019 or 2020 cost? Sure, maybe not $5000 but it sure won't be $600 either, not unless Nikon chooses to subsidize the "film renaissance" by bleeding red ink.
colker
Well-known
Something along an FM 2 level. How much would that be?
Corran
Well-known
Google tells me an FM2 was $364 in 1983. According to an inflation calculator, in 2017 dollars that is about $900.
How many FM2's were made? I can't find that number via a few minutes of Googling. I am sure the economy of scale was vastly higher than today, so my guess is that something like that would have to retail at well north of $1000.
How many FM2's were made? I can't find that number via a few minutes of Googling. I am sure the economy of scale was vastly higher than today, so my guess is that something like that would have to retail at well north of $1000.
aizan
Veteran
For shame! And Nikon even has its own museum.
Does Nikon have a corporate archives? I know Leica has, and Polaroid donated theirs to Harvard Business School.
jawarden
Well-known
Wow, that's an incomprehensibly lazy attitude toward learning about the company they work for. Kids these days, amiright?
Ted Striker
Well-known
That's an excellent point. I'm sure hundreds of thousands of FM2's were made and there's no way any new reissue of the camera would get close to that. The economy of scale would be much smaller and so the selling price much higher.
There are more FM2's available right now used than one can imagine. Why would anyone pay four times the used price for a new one??
Really? They use everything... check out a museum or gallery.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.