Who will rescue Nikon?

[Georgiy Romanov]

I think SHVABE must buy Nikon. SHVABE if who not know's maded Zenith cameras and create excellent optics now for military. Just imagine ZeNikon SuperD 9999 model.

 

[ptpdprinter]

[duplicate]

 

[BlackXList]

Toy cameras are mostly not bought any more. Cell phone is the auto that replaced the buggy.

I refuse to buy consumer grade and so will any real photographer.

Totally give up sub $1500 / $2000 bodies.

As a real photographer (although a Canon user, so some may disagree), and one who's shot a 1Dmk2 to pieces, and my main work kit consists of a 5dIII, 6D, 7D, and a 5Dmk1 as backup, I also have and use an SL1/100D, 2 Ricoh GRs and a Sony RX100.

There's a place for all of them, and it's nonsense to tie them into "real photographers"

Admittedly I'm saying this not as a Nikon user, but step 1 is to make sure that their DSLR product line is clear and less confusing than it is right now, and to make sure that the distinctions between DX and FX on equipment are made much clearer to newcomers.

Cheap compacts, - the market is dead, don't bother.

Action Cameras - others do them better.

High End Compacts, - There's definitely a significant market, however Nikon's efforts have been bizarre, (trying to take on the GR wasn't smart), and as interesting as the new range was going to be, it was 3 years late on the 1 inch sensor bandwagon.

I understand their superzooms are far longer than anyone else's, it's not my thing, but that's a point of difference to make the most of.

Consumer SLRs - make it incredibly simple for people, clear model names. slower upgrade cycle, stop competing with yourself. One entry level, one with more direct controls (like the XXXD XXD models in Canon's range).

Include stuff in every camera box, and on the site about the compatibility of lenses (which old lenses can be used etc), demystify it for people.

Pro SLR's - The sensors are already better than Canon, but don't let them out to market without having ironed out the problems first.

I wouldn't recommend the massive diversification that's been mentioned, Sony already have them beat on that at the moment, and they need to establish a stable base before striking out out on niche products.



Something which would be a great idea, would be to make it easier for sharing with the new cameras, especially the APSC range, if Wifi and NFC can be fitted into the Ricoh GRII, then Nikon can fit it into a consumer SLR.

push the sharing angle, it's what a lot of the market takes photos for, make it really easy.

If the range is easy to understand, good quality, and they crack that sharing thing before Canon, it'll be a huge advantage to Nikon.

Also (this may be Canon user annoyance speaking, even though I know they have improved it in recent years) there is absolutely NO excuse for the kit lens sucking.
The customer has spent a significant amount on the camera, don't hobble their results with a crap lens.

 

[Ranchu]

Maybe have the pensioners take it over, like Kodak. Nikon lenses are apparently made without any regard for the aesthetics of the formed image other than sharpness and contrast. They might want to rethink that. Bleh.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I think it is only in major markets that we see all of their different models at once. For instance, in Chile, the Nikon stores don't carry all of the redundant models and mostly have the low end stuff.

So imagine going though the rigamarole of selecting a body from all the options available and then not being able to buy it. Back to the drawing board. Because you can count on the one feature that tipped you over to choosing one model over another not being on the models on the shelf.

I know there is a marketing strategy to having ten models instead of three; though some psychological mechanism a consumer will supposedly end up spending a little more than he would have if only three models were available, but it only makes sense to the bean counters who probably don't include sales lost to confusion in their calculation.

 

[Ranchu]

I can't tell the difference between a Canon Rebel xs and any other Canon, personally. Weight?

 

[Huss]

Maybe have the pensioners take it over, like Kodak. Nikon lenses are apparently made without any regard for the aesthetics of the formed image other than sharpness and contrast. They might want to rethink that. Bleh.

The recent Nikon 58 1.4G proves otherwise.

 

[Ranchu]

A 58mm lens is something I can't remember ever enjoying the use of. Does it still have good ol Nikon Longitudinal Chromatic Abberation? Is it Green from cheap glass on top of that? Lobster skin tones too? No thank you.

edit: I do so love it when the foreground has a magenta cast, and the backround has a green one.

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon_nikkor_af-s_58mm_f1-4g/2/

 

[Huss]

.... Nikon lenses are apparently made without any regard for the aesthetics of the formed image other than sharpness and contrast. They might want to rethink that. Bleh.

And yet....

A 58mm lens is something I can't remember ever enjoying the use of. Does it still have good ol Nikon Longitudinal Chromatic Abberation? Is it Green from cheap glass on top of that? Lobster skin tones too? No thank you.

edit: I do so love it when the foreground has a magenta cast, and the backround has a green one.

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon_nikkor_af-s_58mm_f1-4g/2/

😀

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1253369

 

[RObert Budding]

A 58mm lens is something I can't remember ever enjoying the use of. Does it still have good ol Nikon Longitudinal Chromatic Abberation? Is it Green from cheap glass on top of that? Lobster skin tones too? No thank you.

edit: I do so love it when the foreground has a magenta cast, and the backround has a green one.

https://www.cameralabs.com/nikon_nikkor_af-s_58mm_f1-4g/2/

And yet some photographers have captured stunning images with Nikon lenses:

https://i0.wp.com/www.casualphotoph...nd-their-cameras-004.jpg?resize=450,600&ssl=1

 

[Ranchu]

I have no use for it, anyway. Nikon's been riding on their name, rather than their lenses for years now. That pic is 50 years old, buddy. How about a 50mm f2 Sonnar copy? Wouldn't that be nicer than that 58mm hood ornament?

http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/Sonnar_heritage/00_pag.htm

 

[RObert Budding]

I have no use for it, anyway. Nikon's been riding on their name, rather than their lenses for years now. That pic is 50 years old, buddy. How about a 50mm f2 Sonnar copy? Wouldn't that be nicer than that 58mm hood ornament?

I'm not your buddy, you pompous ass. Here, why don't you critique Joe McNally's photos.

http://portfolio.joemcnally.com/index

 

[Ranchu]

I'm not your buddy, you pompous ass. Here, why don't you critique Joe McNally's photos.

http://portfolio.joemcnally.com/index

Oh babydoll, don't get your feelings hurt. I'm critiquing Nikon, not random dude.

 

[jsrockit]

So imagine going though the rigamarole of selecting a body from all the options available and then not being able to buy it. Back to the drawing board. Because you can count on the one feature that tipped you over to choosing one model over another not being on the models on the shelf.

I know there is a marketing strategy to having ten models instead of three; though some psychological mechanism a consumer will supposedly end up spending a little more than he would have if only three models were available, but it only makes sense to the bean counters who probably don't include sales lost to confusion in their calculation.

Yeah, understood, but it isn't that hard either. If you are not into figuring what to buy, you most likely should buy a cheap model. If you are into photography more, you know what you need. I don't see a huge problem with the line-up to be honest. Most people have a price point and they see what they can buy at that price point.

 

[fireblade]

Oh babydoll, don't get your feelings hurt. I'm critiquing Nikon, not random dude.

I'm not your buddy, you pompous ass. Here, why don't you critique Joe McNally's photos.

http://portfolio.joemcnally.com/index

You're dealing with a provocative jackass.
Leave the bait alone 🙂

 

[Penzes]

I voted for Nikon, all other options are not really feasible.

 

[Ranchu]

You're dealing with a provocative jackass.
Leave the bait alone 🙂

They could maybe copy this and get rid of that olive oil colored 1.8 they've been flogging for the last 30 years. Probably a good move.

http://blog.bkspicture.com/review_SMC_Pentax-M_50mm_f2.html

 

[Huss]

They could maybe copy this and get rid of that olive oil colored 1.8 they've been flogging for the last 30 years. Probably a good move.

http://blog.bkspicture.com/review_SMC_Pentax-M_50mm_f2.html

What do you mean by olive oil coloured, and are you talking about the 50 1.8G?

 

[Mr. Fizzlesticks]

I think Ranchu is being funny and honest. Never liked Nikon glass myself. Prefer Zeiss/Leica or Pentax, Canon, Minolta... Of course people that are invested in Nikon will never admit that there are better options. Just human nature.

I wouldn't call it a big loss if Nikon went under. I pretty much expect two or three manufacturers to call it quits in the next few years. You can see it coming.

And Ranchu isn't a pompous Jackass for pointing out what the truth is....

 

[Huss]

I think Ranchu is being funny and honest. Never liked Nikon glass myself. Prefer Zeiss/Leica or Pentax, Canon, Minolta... Of course people that are invested in Nikon will never admit that there are better options. Just human nature.

I'm not invested in Nikon glass, I have Leica, Zeiss, CV, Minolta, Mamiya, Fuji etc as well.
Even Russian stuff and Lomo!

I'm just wondering what he means by 'olive oil', as I find the 50 1.8G to be a wonderful performer for very cheap money for AF bodies. $100 used like new condition.

Olive Oil 50 1.8G:

Crappy 24-120 f4 vrG zoom:

45 2.8 on Fuji C200

I find it interesting that with all these claims of crappy Nikon glass, Nikon has been the professional photographer's main stay for decades. Perhaps someone should have told them?