NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: RobOK on January 25, 2017, 02:23:33
-
I liked this article:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/what-camera-would-you-pick.html
It's a hypothetical what would you chose if you were starting from scratch. For me it would be a toss up between Nikon and Fuji. If I had no lenses (i.e, really starting from scratch), probably Fuji for me.
Rob.
-
Very interesting article. Personally ? If I would do it again ? Nikon for sure, although all this started more than 40 years ago, almost by accident, as most of my friends where on Canon. If I would, at that time, bought a Canon, I would probably still be on Canon .... 😊
-
Don't like Thom Hogan's tone.
I just switched to Nikon ... after 7 years shooting Canon.
I was less concerned with Canon's "marketplace position" than I was with its sensor position ... always behind everyone else.
I replaced my two 7Ds with a D810 and a D500 ... and it's nice knowing I am shooting the best I can do (sans the D5).
As a wildlife shooter, Fuji doesn't have anywhere near the options of Nikon.
Sony was attractive, but the full-functionality of its cameras is still way behind. (Plus I don't want to have to spend extra for adapters.)
Nikon offers the best image quality, plus the most options.
Canon offers the same multitude of options, but not the best possible image quality.
That and the fact I really like the idea of being able to purchase and try elder lenses with Nikon ... that can't be done with Canon (Fuji, or anyone else).
-
Fortunately i don't have to start from scratch any more
-
Don't like Thom Hogan's tone.
I just switched to Nikon ... after 7 years shooting Canon.
I was less concerned with Canon's "marketplace position" than I was with its sensor position ... always behind everyone else.
I replaced my two 7Ds with a D810 and a D500 ... and it's nice knowing I am shooting the best I can do (sans the D5).
As a wildlife shooter, Fuji doesn't have anywhere near the options of Nikon.
Sony was attractive, but the full-functionality of its cameras is still way behind. (Plus I don't want to have to spend extra for adapters.)
Nikon offers the best image quality, plus the most options.
Canon offers the same multitude of options, but not the best possible image quality.
That and the fact I really like the idea of being able to purchase and try elder lenses with Nikon ... that can't be done with Canon (Fuji, or anyone else).
I like what you wrote.
And, I would add the D4 or D4s for sure to the list of amazing cameras. (I would grab it from a bag before the D810 or D500, but that's just me).
-
Fortunately i don't have to start from scratch any more
I am with Wolfgang here :) Fortunately I don't have to start from scratch - again.
Been there done that - Nikon - Canon - Nikon : and lots a LOT OF $$$$$ in the switching back especially. No one wanted my Canon gear!
However - I will never tell someone to switch - each to his own and what suits his hand and eye.
-
Canon offers the same multitude of options, but not the best possible image quality.
John, are you sure you don't regret your MP-E 65mm as macro photographer ?
There is no equivalent in Nikon system and unfortunately no compatibility or adaptability between Canon lenses and Nikon body. ::)
No Nikon bashing intended, though ! ;)
-
Every system tends to have a particular 'gem' not found elsewhere. If that particular item is of vital importance, one might consider buying it with a matching camera to which it is literally glued.
The Canon MPE-65 might be such a lens, the UV-Nikkor is another example for Nikon aficionados. I'm sure there are many more.
No harm looking over the fences once in a while. However, "switching" back and forth constitutes a heavy financial drain.
-
I am with Wolfgang here :) Fortunately I don't have to start from scratch - again.
Been there done that - Nikon - Canon - Nikon : and lots a LOT OF $$$$$ in the switching back especially. No one wanted my Canon gear!
However - I will never tell someone to switch - each to his own and what suits his hand and eye.
:-)
Feeling lucky having started with Nikon and never switched. Most of the time i did not regret it (except when Canon brought USM, VR and advanced AF and nikon did not move and then again when the 70-200/2,8 was released as G-design.
-
It is a fact that Canon bodies have it easier to use other lenses than Nikon. Bjørn mentioned the gems that come to mind at first. I would add the 10 mm OP fisheye or the 200-400 and 14-24 mm Nikkors that had nothing similar in the Canon system for years and the Canon 17 mm T/S the other way round (we have the 19 now). Nothing against a dedicated body for a specific lens, dont like the Canon menus and interfaces personally.
The Canon MPE-65 is something I'd wish to have from Nikon, lets see what future brings
-
Don't like Thom Hogan's tone.
I can appreciate that, he writes in a more critical tone. I do think it is important to understand how your chosen company supports customers and thinks about product development.
He's pretty positive on Nikon:
Nikon FX (with a caveat). There's simply no questioning how good the D750, D810, and D5 are. Don't even bother. That's despite the fact that the D750 and D810 are two years old and are due for replacement soon; they're so good that at the end of their life they still kick butt. If you gravitate to a full frame DSLR, the case can be made that these three models are "best in class." Coupled with Nikon's deep and broad F-mount lens lineup, there shouldn't be anything you can't do. The caveat this time has to do with Nikon support. There's been clear erosion in the company-to-customer relationship with Nikon.
Rob.
-
John, are you sure you don't regret your MP-E 65mm as macro photographer ?
You are an insightful person, Rosko :)
It was the MP-E 65mm that actually kept me with Canon for so long ... did not want to abandon this lens :'(
The trouble was, my 7D was sooo far behind, in sensor technology, that I began to grow impatient for a replacement (http://nikongear.online/images/smilies/waiting.gif)
When Canon came out with the 7D Mk II ... I was underwhelmed. It did literally nothing excellent.
Brand new, the 7D Mk II was already mediocre. All it did was burn so-so images faster than its predecessor to the memory card.
I figured I would wait for Canon's next 5D ... and the 5DSr came close to tempting me ... but it, too, was (essentially) a giant, high-res, but (ultimately) mediocre sensor.
That was when I ditched my Canon cameras and moved to Nikon.
There is no equivalent in Nikon system and unfortunately no compatibility or adaptability between Canon lenses and Nikon body. ::)
No equivalents, true, but there are workarounds.
For one thing, the MP-E 65mm isn't a truly high-quality optic; it is only convenient. For another, it is useless for anything but macro.
In discovering Nikon still had the AI and Ai-S manual lenses, that could be reversed and still retain aperture control, I found my solution to the problem of "how to do" high-mag macro work ... just use Ai-S lenses, reversed ;D
The glass quality of the better Ai-S lenses is at least as good as the MP-E, and I can orient them properly and have decent wide-angle lenses.
Here are a couple shots I took with a 28mm, reversed, for 2.4x lifesize:
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001967_large.jpg)
(http://www.thenaturephotographer.club/thumbnails/1/1_thumb_0000001624_large.jpg)
Even when I had the MPE, I rarely went over 3x lifesize ... I was usually in the 1.5 to 3x lifesize range, so between my 50mm and 28mm AI-S lenses, reversed, I am good.
(Beyond 3x, you need a studio, really).
No Nikon bashing intended, though ! ;)
I do bash Canon a little bit, because I was a big fan of theirs. When the 7D first came out, it bested Nikon's D300.
However, Nikon quickly came out with the D3x, and then the D700. When it came out with the D800/D810, Canon sensors were pretty obsolete ... and a lot of people switched.
I eventually switched too 8)
Sony was a very, very attractive alternative, offering greater lens interchangeability than either ... but I really don't want to fool with adapters.
(By themselves, Sony doesn't have much in the way of lenses; Fuji even less options.)
The reason I went with Nikon is their virtually-limitless options ... and everytime they come out with something new, they set a new precedent.
When it first came out, the D810 blew everything away.
2.5 years later, the D810 still has the best base ISO capability.
The Nikon D5 and D4s lead in high ISO capability.
The D5 and D500 both have industry-leading 3D AF tracking.
Every single FL super-telephoto lens Nikkor has made beats every single Canon equivalent.
Unlike the 7D Mk II, Nikon's D500 is a benchmark pretty much everywhere in its class.
When the 7D II came out, it won a Silver award at DP Review.
When the D500 came out, in won a Gold award, Best High-End DSLR, and Best Overall Product, period, for the whole year.
Nikon's technology is exciting ... not disappointing.
Companies like Sony and Fuji pretty much appeal to folks shooting "normal" stuff (landscapes, portraits), as all these companies offer are "normal" focal length lenses and that's it. Fuji has nothing to offer a serious wildlife shooter. Nothing. (Sony's does have some super-telephoto lenses, but they are ultra-expensive, and totally inferior, to Nikon and Canon super-telephotos. Sony super-telephotos are based on the elder Minolta designs and are junk by comparison to Canon and Nikon's best.)
For sports and wildlife, Canon and Nikon are the only truly complete options.
Canon and Nikon have equivalent super-telephotos, but Nikon has the edge.
Nikon also has the better sensors as well as better AF systems.
Every edge goes to Nikon over Canon for wildlife shooting ... except the 1DxII has better 4K video.
Canon's MP-E 65 was a definite edge, as a lone tool, over Nikon ... but Nikon's other macro lenses are better than Canon's, and Nikon's sensors are better than Canon's, and (by reversing AI-S lenses) I can get the same "beyond 1:1 macro shots" as I could with the MP-E ... and I get to capture my efforts on a better sensor.
Cheers,
Jack
-
There are a lot of Macro Options an Micro nikkors
Nikon had its old set of 4 Macro Nikkors (Multiphot) as well but they are not too easy to apply to field work
Nikon should consider bringing a new option - When the Canon lens is mediocre then Nikon has a chance to do better
-
I eventually switched too 8)
Thanks for all these explanations !
So, we both gave up with Canon, but not for the same reasons :
When I did, about 40 years ago, I was really pissed off because they decided to change their mount from FD to EF, making my FD range obsolete as I wanted to upgrade my body. This is how I came in ''Nikon galaxy'' with the F4... :)
I don't regret it but I have to admit that I got some (minor) disappointments with the Df mostly mechanical.
I just hope Nikon isn't tempted to reduce the quality of the material to save money or going deliberately toward ''planned obsolescence''.
I haven't encountered such issues with my D70, D300 and D700 before.
I am still happy with Nikon, but these changes in quality/reliability alters my trust for Nikon...However, I didn't read any complaint about the D810 so far. ;)
-
Thanks for all these explanations !
So, we both gave up with Canon, but not for the same reasons :
When I did, about 40 years ago, I was really pissed of because they decided to change their mount from FD to EF, making my FD range obsolete as I wanted to upgrade my body. This is how I came in ''Nikon galaxy'' with the F4... :)
I would have been pissed off, too, if every lens I had purchased from a company became instantly obsolete.
Lenses are the heaviest investments; camera backs come and go.
The fact I have an "open door" to Nikon's elder lenses is another reason why I am glad I switched; fascinating history :)
I don't regret it but I have to admit that I got some (minor) disappointments with the Df mostly mechanical.
I just hope Nikon isn't tempted to reduce the quality of the material to save money or going deliberately toward ''planned obsolescence''.
I haven't encountered such issues with my D70, D300 and D700 before.
I am still happy with Nikon, but these changes in quality/reliability alters my trust for Nikon...However, I didn't read any complaint about the D810 so far. ;)
If anything, Nikon seems to be gravitating to producing the finest-quality they can (D5, D500, D810, Flourite lenses, 105 f1/4, etc.)
Saving money is good, but not at the expense of quality. My D500 freezes every-so-often, when it can't read the card, but it is still a great camera.
Have never had a single issue with my D810 ... I absolutely love it.
I am 100% happy that I made the switch, and none of these "new" companies are at the head of anything, really.
They come up with some interesting stuff, but have nowhere near the depth, and breadth, of what Nikon offers ... in either cameras or lenses.
Again, they only really appeal to folks who walk around with standard 24 - 100mm lenses.
(Have seen some amazing macro work on the Pentax K1, but again it's just too limited overall for me to take the plunge into Pentax.)
I appreciate the efforts of these new companies, as well as fringe older companies, but the grass isn't truly greener "over there" IMO ... it's as green as it gets right here ;D
Jack
-
Hear! Hear !! Best synopsis I've read yet why Nikon rocks ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
this post + others
Lenses are the heaviest investments; camera backs come and go.
The fact I have an "open door" to Nikon's elder lenses is another reason why I am glad I switched; fascinating history :)
If anything, Nikon seems to be gravitating to producing the finest-quality they can (D5, D500, D810, Flourite lenses, 105 f1/4, etc.)
I appreciate the efforts of these new companies, as well as fringe older companies, but the grass isn't truly greener "over there" IMO ... it's as green as it gets right here ;D
Jack
-
Whereas there is some truth in this analysis, it wont be helpful if Nikon continues to decrease overall sales despite offering quality equipment.
-
It takes time to achieve or rebuild a reputation for quality. If people diss Nikon when they make better gear than ever, this is precisely what prevents them from being successful. Making a lot of money on selling rubbish should not be the goal.
-
Whereas there is some truth in this analysis, it wont be helpful if Nikon continues to decrease overall sales despite offering quality equipment.
It takes time to achieve or rebuild a reputation for quality. If people diss Nikon when they make better gear than ever, this is precisely what prevents them from being successful. Making a lot of money on selling rubbish should not be the goal.
I don't have raw statistics [such as sales of items/yr) in each main format. Yet, the photography industry has exploded in raw volume since the first digitals reached the market in the 1990s along different and diverging trajectories. Everybody wants the permanent visual record and the media feeds this lust. Demography = more consumers and GLOBALLY it is one massive primary variable in what is a complex equation. Today, surely the multiple uses of cellular "phones" speak volumes? Especially true in the 3rd world, where smaller "cameras" are easier to carry and avoid theft etc [not only in the street but from bullies of corrupt officials at borders etc... as with Zimbabwean customs %^*&%%$!! ; they confiscate to resell such stolen goods for personal gain
Fascinating examples of Schumpteran economics in real-time....innovations into not one but n+ expanding markets; there are more ways than ever before for Homo sapiens to record a visual record
It follows the single excel across such a diverse ecosystem. The SLR film camera industry that peaked before the millennium in the 1st Gen AF lenses is not even a dinosaur compared to 4+ decades on. It's analogous to the expansion of biodiversity since the Proterozoic inaugurated by the Cambrian Explosion of multicellular life...followed by the radiations of life on land.
It's probably corporate suicide for the likes of Nikon to innovate all market niches AND succeed. Yes, stay away from rubbish and build innovations into the 21st century on world leading successes, surely.
-
Don't like Thom Hogan's tone.
I've read that Nikon doesn't like his remarks either. OTOH, that doesn't make Hogan wrong in his assessments. Camera sales are down and Nikon has lost market share, which in the scheme of things, is not good for them or their customers. They have also managed to alienate many of their customers with their version of customer support.
Hogan would like to see Nikon not only succeed, but excel. A lot of us share that sentiment, me included. ;)
-
Just a comment from the side line: the quality of Nikon support varies through the world. In some areas, it is excellent.
Canon users also complain about their support. Rumours have it a few other well-known makers face similar complaints.
-
Whereas there is some truth in this analysis, it wont be helpful if Nikon continues to decrease overall sales despite offering quality equipment.
Everyone is going to "decrease overall sales" in a shrinking marketplace.
Nobody really needs budget cameras anymore, with cell phones filling the lower (and even mid-) level niches.
To stay in the camera business, in an age where cell phones have gobbled-up the "general purpose" marketplace, camera companies are going to have to stay with the best, highest-end cameras they make ... and the best, highest-end lenses they make ... SOOO good, that no "phone" can ever duplicate what they do ... and at a price point where they still profit.
To me, that is exactly what Nikon is doing ... and kicking butt doing 8)
-
I'm not particular about brands, but at least here in Japan, Nikon offers the best user support among Panasonic, Sony, Canon and Nikon that I've used, even for me as amateur, non-NPS member. The user support of Sony and Panasonic is just like that for the home appliances.
-
I've read that Nikon doesn't like his remarks either. OTOH, that doesn't make Hogan wrong in his assessments. Camera sales are down and Nikon has lost market share, which in the scheme of things, is not good for them or their customers.
I really believe all camera sales are down, because of cell phones (not because of inter-camera-company competition). The ease and quality of modern cell phone cameras have gobbled-up a HUGE share of the marketplace ... and that will never change.
The "other" share of the marketplace is high-end ... and now, with the Sony, Fuji, Pentax, etc. all rising in their "portrait-landscape" type cameras, these are eating into Nikon's territory, and maybe more so than Canon's. But the fact is Nikon is still FAR and away enjoying the 2nd Place position (behind only Canon) in overall sales ...
The really big point of consideration is, Nikon occupies The #1 Position in more high-end segments than anyone in the camera/lens business.
On another thread I showed, of the absolute best cameras and lenses made, Nikon is the leader. [Check out DxO Mark, or LenScore, and you will see the total domination of Nikon at the highest end. 2-1 (or more) over the others.]
Hogan is mute on this. If he really cared about "Nikon's sales," he would underscore this fact.
They have also managed to alienate many of their customers with their version of customer support.
I haven't had to experience Nikon support, because their products are good :D
Still, as Bjørn said, customer support (of any brand) varies because the temperaments of people vary ...
I am sure Nikon has great, supportive customer people in place (as well as lousy ones), like anyone else.
Hogan would like to see Nikon not only succeed, but excel. A lot of us share that sentiment, me included. ;)
Hogan comes off like a pompous jerk, IMO. His tone is neither friendly, intellectual, nor positive, only critical and arrogant.
IMO, he unnecessarily-negative.
If a person were to look at the facts, and study which camera/lens manufacturer came out with the MOST significant products in 2016, they would see Nikon came out with more of the absolute best cameras/lenses than anyone.
Nikon's D5 and Canon's 1DX II were equivalent ... but the D5's AF system is the true advancement ...
None of Canon's other cameras hit the grand slam that the D500 did.
Nikon's 105 f/1.4 is in a class by itself ... and it 70-200 VR III is a good as Canon's 35 ...
The new Fuji is "interesting," but it is nowhere near the overall powerhouse that the D500 is.
Canon's APC-Ss are anemic weaklings compared to the D500 as well.
IMO, Hogan doesn't really underscore this ... he spends way too much time "bitching and moaning" ... and way too little time appreciating how GOOD Nikon's products really are, compared to the competition.
As a public figure, for Thom Hogan to over-exaggerate the negative, and downplay what is truly positive, isn't even "honest" ... it is negatively-biased.
Hogan is no "friend" of Nikon IMO.
Jack
-
I'm not particular about brands, but at least here in Japan, Nikon offers the best user support among Panasonic, Sony, Canon and Nikon that I've used, even for me as amateur, non-NPS member. The user support of Sony and Panasonic is just like that for the home appliances.
I can confirm this. I get NPS-style services from Nikon because I used to use my cameras for work and people at the counter know me for years :o :o :o
-
I love my D800, but if I was starting from scratch I would get something else, probably Canon. The problem is Nikon will only supply parts to certain repair shops with all their special tools. This is required even for repairs not needing the special tools. Although I live in the 4th largest city in the US, there is not a single Nikon approved repair shop here. That means a minimum of 3 weeks to send something off. The result is minor problems do not get fixed.
There is some dust in my viewfinder but I could not get a repair shop to touch it because they said if the focusing screen got scratched they can't order another one from Nikon and the camera would have to be sent off.
Nikon, bite me.
-
D800/800E were really epoch-making models that made a lot of Canon users to switch to Nikon, most notably the landscape photographers. Prior to that, D3 had played the same role. I heard that Canon professionals, especially sports and journalism photographers, asked Canon to allow them to use Nikon D3 because they couldn't compete with the high-ISO image quality yielded by D3.
Another problem of Canon is that Canon Marketing Japan has too strong a control on the lineups of their products. Regardless of the attractiveness of the products the designers are developing, they cannot release them or implement nice features if the products compete with the ones in other segments of Canon's own. Canon has at least three self-competing EOS segments now, DSLR, mirrorless M and Cinema. The awkward implementation of 4k video of the latest 5D MkVI (motion JPEG!) is one sad example. This is really ironical because 5D Mk II was epoch-making "thanks to" its video function. I'm not sure if there was Cinema EOS line at that time, but surely the line has grown to compete with the DSLR line. The belated implementation of the dual pixcel sensor into M model (M5) was another example (to avoid the competition with the DSLR line).
This is very sad, because I've thought about the switch from Nikon to Canon for good a couple of times, and I actually used 5D Mk III with 40/2.8 pancake for a while. One of the great thing about Canon was that, in live view mode, you could use the DSLR virtually as a dedicated mirrorless camera, thanks to its fast shutter response. Up to this point, D5 is the only Nikon DSLR that can offer relatively (yes, only "relatively") acceptable response, but that is still way behind Canon's responses of even their entry-level models. The current Canon DSLRs, especially those with the dual pixel sensors, can freely and admirably switch between DLSR and "dedicated" mirrorless.
-
Please don't misunderstand, I'm not here to bash Nikon, my favorite camera manufacturer, nor am I a shill for Thom Hogan. But. facts are facts, and if Hogan points them out, I don't think that means that we should "shoot the messenger" because we don't like the facts. The thread topic is "Where companies are in the market (per Thom Hogan)", so here's the latest sales info for the Japanese market http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikons-slow-failure-in.html.
Hardly enthusiastic results for Nikon, although the entire market is down. This is not about who makes the best camera(s), it'a about market position, current sales volume for the major players.
Look at Ron's post if you think that I was incorrect about Nikon's customer service here in the US, and he's just the tip of the iceberg. You can love or hate Thom Hogan, but he isn't controlling sales or how Nikon treats their customers here in the US. Now, I will say that Hogan and I are often on opposite sides of things, but, I can't argue with sales volume reports just because I don't like what I see. ;)
-
Worldwide market share both in units as well as monetary terms would be more interesting than just unit sales in one country. Anyway, I think we all agree that Nikon has lost market share but from these data we cannot make conclusions about worldwide sales.
Also it seems customer service level by Nikon USA has been declining for a while now. Again this doesn't tell us about the situation in other countries. In Finland I have found the service to be excellent. The service is done by JAS (Nikon used to have their own in house repair but they outsourced it). No complaints from me. Sometimes they repair stuff for free even though it was my fault something broke. Quite the opposite of what I hear from some US customers.
-
Worldwide market share both in units as well as monetary terms would be more interesting than just unit sales in one country. Anyway, I think we all agree that Nikon has lost market share but from these data we cannot make conclusions about worldwide sales.
Also it seems customer service level by Nikon USA has been declining for a while now. Again this doesn't tell us about the situation in other countries. In Finland I have found the service to be excellent. The service is done by JAS (Nikon used to have their own in house repair but they outsourced it). No complaints from me. Sometimes they repair stuff for free even though it was my fault something broke. Quite the opposite of what I hear from some US customers.
Indeed, a good example of service in a place other than the US, and as Bjørn has pointed out, things are not the same everywhere. Personally, I would love to see Nikon excel everywhere, as well as reestablish their good customer relations here.
Still, Nikon's results against it's competition in it's home market is newsworthy, IMO, and in keeping on topic can't be blamed on Hogan's remarks, which is my point.
-
It is curious that Nikon is not doing better, considering that independent reports rate its products so highly against Canon.
This is something worthy of investigation.
Nikon USA service does seem to receive a lot of complaints. In the UK my experience (fortunately limited) has been good. And the Nikon School in London is a great ambassador for the brand.
Although I mainly shoot with Fuji, I still have and use Nikon equipment and I have great respect for Nikon products and the system.
-
It is curious that Nikon is not doing better, considering that independent reports rate its products so highly against Canon.
Think of all the news/sports/editorial pros around the world that left Nikon behind 20 years ago, and then proceeded to build up expensive collections of lenses of the Canon persuasion . For print and web publication, the Canon sensors having a few dB less signal to noise ratio means nothing. Hence, no [economic]reason to switch.
-
Think of all the news/sports/editorial pros around the world that left Nikon behind 20 years ago, and then proceeded to build up expensive collections of lenses of the Canon persuasion . For print and web publication, the Canon sensors having a few dB less signal to noise ratio means nothing. Hence, no [economic]reason to switch.
However, Nikon's new 3-D AF tracking, which will result in a MUCH higher likelihood of capturing an epic image, could most definitely be an "economic" reason to switch 8)
-
well, Canon and Fuji marketing is really hard to beat :o :o :o
they are VERY aggressive. ::)
-
Think of all the news/sports/editorial pros around the world that left Nikon behind 20 years ago, and then proceeded to build up expensive collections of lenses of the Canon persuasion . For print and web publication, the Canon sensors having a few dB less signal to noise ratio means nothing. Hence, no [economic]reason to switch.
True, but the problem also has a more recent aspect. The Hogan table shows that in 2013 the Canon/Nikon split was 49.2/42.5, while in 2016 it was 63.3/31.6. That is a huge, recent drop in market share, despite Nikon having introduced its best ever cameras. Admittedly, 2013 was a high point, but 2016 is a low point.
-
The D600 debacle and the ham fisted manner in which Nikon initially responded to the issue cost the company dearly.
If it were not for an impending class action in the US, Nikon would have done even less than they did.
A great shame really, as the amended D600 eventually became a good camera (and especially in debugged and rebadged form as the D610). However people have long memories about such bad behaviours.
-
Indeed the post D3/D300/D700 period has been a steadily downslope. Granted, the mobile phone market has had a huge impact on the compact camera market and to me it seems like Nikon and Canon tried to counteract that with smaller DSLRs bundled with social media connectivity features. My experience with younger people in my family is that they don't care about this at all. Half hearted attempts (Snap Bridge, NX-2/D, GPS, LV, etc. has left Nikon behind the competition. Likewise, trying to lure customers into the low end (and pro) segment of APS-C is where Thom is absolutely right on the money when commenting on the lack of prime lens initiative.
I do hope Nikon regroup and revert back to a well aimed strategy that takes the company back to where it belongs.
-
I had expected the D500 to sell in large numbers because it is soo advanced, and thus having an impact similar to D700.
Maybe a share of the rapid loss 2016 has also to be credited to availability issues? I vaguely remember hearing something about earthquakes and production losses.
-
Social connectivity for amateurs and fast transfer of images to editors for professionals (using Nikon D4/D5 Canon EOS-1DX) won't work for real until the manufacturers pot SIM cards in the cameras. Stuff like the the Nikon WT-6/7 should feature multiple SIM slots. Don't say it can't be done, because this is already standard features for broadcasters using it for live video transfers of "breaking" news. E.g. Norwegian broadcaster NRK does this (multiple SIMs again). Thom Hogan mentions similar uses for broadcasting and pro video in one of his recent articles. The first brand to offer still cameras with SIM card slots will have an instant hit. This is a chance up for grabs! Nikon, Canon, Sony, Fujifilm, Panasonic? Apple, Huawei, Samsung are already there, by default.
Canon introduces USM motors in their AF lenses 30 years ago as well as electromagnetic diphragm. This enabled them to make a standardized fully electronic lens mount 30 years ago. I think this one major reason for Canon's almost perpetual success. What has Nikon done in the same time span? Non-D, D, G, P, E and AF, AF-I, AF-S and now AF-P, all of which creates another hurdle for the customers, in making the Nikon F mount less standardized than the Canon EOS mount. In the long run, I think, this matters more than who's the leader on sensor tech right now. I remember when Canon offered the coveted "full frame" and the others didn't.
-
I had expected the D500 to sell in large numbers because it is soo advanced, and thus having an impact similar to D700.
Maybe a share of the rapid loss 2016 has also to be credited to availability issues? I vaguely remember hearing something about earthquakes and production losses.
The D500 is to expensive for that. Add to that Nikon's lacklustre selection of dedicated DX primes. Fujifilm's APS-C lens lineup makes an investment into an expensive APS-C camera much easier to defend. The new FX primes are bulky and none of them is that wide on a DX camera. Fujifilm is the only manufacturer to offer a proper and well thought out APS-C lens line. Thom Hogan uses the phrase "buzz buzz" for this, since he has mentioned it for years, and yet it remains a riddle for Canon and Nikon. This absense of a wider selection of dedicated DX/APS-C DSLR lenses has been one of the enablers for the mirrorless manufacturers.
-
There is also mention market saturation and Hogan's 'Last Camera Syndrome'. Thanks to the big pro D3/D4/D5-type cams, the hi-res D800s, the classic-themed Df, the smaller/budget-oriented D750/D600 cams, and now the "dream APS-C cam" D500, for many non-pro enthusiast users and even for many working pros, there is no pressing need to get 'something better' this year or maybe the next few years. Everyone has a camera that fulfills their picture-making needs; if not perfectly, then at least very well.
-
Very valid points Keith.
In my own case I tend to buy every second camera update, so I will not be looking to a (say) D820, but to its successor - but maybe the D830 if I am allowed to surmise as to future naming of camera models. I am far too mean to trade up to a new camera body for just a small incremental gain. I guess that folks such as myself are not good for business, but the days of new successor cameras being quantum leaps ahead of the models that they replace are rapidly fading.
There is also mention market saturation and Hogan's 'Last Camera Syndrome'. Thanks to the big pro D3/D4/D5-type cams, the hi-res D800s, the classic-themed Df, the smaller/budget-oriented D750/D600 cams, and now the "dream APS-C cam" D500, for many non-pro enthusiast users and even for many working pros, there is no pressing need to get 'something better' this year or maybe the next few years. Everyone has a camera that fulfills their picture-making needs; if not perfectly, then at least very well.
-
In my own case I tend to buy every second camera update, so I will not be looking to a (say) a D820, but to its successor - but maybe the D830 if I am allowed to surmise as to future naming of camera models. I am far too mean to trade up to a new camera body for just a small incremental gain. I guess that folks such as myself are not good for business, but the days of new successor cameras being quantum leaps ahead of the models that they replace are rapidly fading.
I have got a similar approach. But when I consider that some forum members accumulate several bodies and a lot of lenses in total I dont think that we are not good for business.
-
...there is no pressing need to get 'something better' this year or maybe the next few years. Everyone has a camera that fulfills their picture-making needs; if not perfectly, then at least very well.
Well said! I'm always surprised that even Leica releases new M models at similar paces as other Japanese manufacturers, sometimes even the lenses...
-
...there is no pressing need to get 'something better' this year or maybe the next few years. Everyone has a camera that fulfills their picture-making needs; if not perfectly, then at least very well.
I have no pressing money :(
I have a D800 and a D300s. If I could I'd add a D5. I'd rather have a true D700 replacement as I don't need the high frame rate. What I really need is time but I can have that. The D800 isn't all that good at high ISO. DoF, low shutter speeds, high ISO fuzzed out detail drive me up the wall.
I need a D700 replacement and I hope Nikon does too.
Dave Hartman
-
The D800 isn't all that good at high ISO. DoF, low shutter speeds, high ISO fuzzed out detail drive me up the wall.
I need a D700 replacement and I hope Nikon does too.
Well, the D750 has excellent high ISO image quality, and is less expensive than the D810. What I don't like about the D750 is the sound of the mirror/shutter, the shape of the grip, and the meager 12 focus fine tune registers available. The autofocus is excellent in low light, the viewfinder good, and image quality is good across a wide range of ISO settings. Unlike the D5, the D750's dynamic range is excellent also at ISO 100.
I think it would be great to have the D750 sensor in a D810 body (or its successor). Maybe they will make one. But I suppose there is a limit to the number of variations Nikon can make. Some like the smaller body.
-
The evaluation of the ergonomics would depend on the individual users. My hands love the ergonomics of D750: deep grip and narrow width. The narrow width makes the camera feel very small.
On the other hand, I don't like the mirror/shutter sound either. Their shock is also a bit too strong and affect the lowest hand-holdable shutter speed. Even the mirror is locked up, the shutter unit causes some blur when I do high magnification (x3-5 range) closeups.
The pliability of NEF makes it very hard to leave Nikon.
-
The evaluation of the ergonomics would depend on the individual users. My hands love the ergonomics of D750: deep grip and narrow width. The narrow width makes the camera feel very small.
Yes, I understand this is very individual. My fingers simply don't bend on such a small radius and it feels uncomfortable to hold the D750's grip. The D810 grip is good for me, as is the D5's.
-
I think I'm pushing 40 F mount Nikkor lenses so switching to another brand would be very painful. The only lenses I can't use directly on my D800 are a pair of 55/3.5 compensating aperture Micro-Nikkors. I can mount them on their M tubes or an E2 tube to the D800. That's about 1965 to date for the lenses I own. That's amazing compatibility over the years.
Dave Hartman
-
Yes, I understand this is very individual. My fingers simply don't bend on such a small radius and it feels uncomfortable to hold the D750's grip. The D810 grip is good for me, as is the D5's.
Yes, the grip of D750 could feel too narrow for some people. I like the fact that my finger tips doesn't hit against the body, and it is comfortable and safe to "hang" the camera with my fingers as a "hook" when I'm walk around to look for something interesting to shoot thanks to its depth.