NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: stenrasmussen on April 14, 2017, 18:00:32
-
So it has happened. Sony has "concoured" Nikon in the "full-frame" marked in th US.
Wonder if the mirrorless concept plays a role..?
https://alphauniverse.com/stories/sony-overtakes--2-position-in-u-s--full-frame-interchangeable-lens-camera-market/
-
I saw the news, is is all over the internet
Of course mirrorless plays a roll , that along with a full frame sensor, adapters and focus peaking allowing a fairly easy use of what seems any lens on the A7s
In the mean time Nikon releases a D7500 with some missing features from the lower model apparently to prevent cannibalizing sales from the the D500 , a strategy that is obviously working wonders for the competition
I get a feel engineering in Nikon is not allowed to do what they truly want.
-
Well, we can hope that this pushes Nikon closer towards innovation instead of refinement as we have had for a while now. More importantly, I hope Nikon reconsiders some of it's stances in favor of what people want that the Sony mirrorless FF offers. If Nikon keeps the OVF, which I hope they do, they simply must develop a good hybrid VF. The A7's lust factor for many is the manual lens support, namely features such as focus magnification, peaking, etc. Please let us not get into focus screens/technique/etc. and face the fact that an A7 is an easier camera to nail focus with our beloved fast Nikkors, generally speaking. Of course, catering to manual lens support has not at all been anywhere close to Nikon's plan. Foolishly, in my opinion. Instead of seeing the vast used MF Nikkor market as some sort of competitor to their modern lens catalog, they should use it as a platform.
Nikon know people want higher and higher performance.
Nikon does not know that manual lenses are gaining popularity and are stil a Nikon asset.
If I had the power, Nikon would release a DF-esque FF with a large hybrid VF, modular grip and run a campaign on it's prowess using both cutting edge *and* classic lenses. Let users know that even if they are eyeing used manual lenses, Nikon is the best camera for the job. Everyone I've known who got into DSLRs starts this way. Nikon needs to be there when they decide to fork out for a modern marvel lens.
Or Sony will, like they are.
"Want to buy a $3k body and a $100 old prime off ebay to start? Sure! When you decide to update, we have some G Master lenses for you."
-
Sony has "concoured" Nikon in the "full-frame" marked in th US.
Two months, one single format, one single country. Some statistics, huh. A much more useful statistic would be to look at total sales of all interchangeable lens cameras in 2016 (or the past 12 months) in all countries combined.
Many Nikon FX users are waiting for the updates to D610, D750, D810 and perhaps Df. Now that they have seen what is in the D500/D5 there is probably few who want to buy another Multi-CAM 3500 camera if it is not for budget reasons.
-
Neither camera (D500 or D7500) is full frame, they're both DX, so their successes or failures would not be seen in the statistics quoted in the article (which concerned only full frame sales). And since the D7500 was announced in April, its features cannot have influenced full frame buyers in January or Feburary of the same year, unless buyers are clairvoyant. In any case neither Canon nor Sony support old lenses with full functionality, either, and neither of them have given dual card slots in the D7500's price class so it may well have been Canon and Sony that Nikon is imitating in the D7500 design. Nikon is just copying successful brands.
-
Sony support all autofocus Minolta/Sony A-mount (with Sony adapters LA-EA1/2/3/4) and E-mount lenses with AF as well as metering and all exposure modes on Sony mirrorless. Minolta MD as well as Minolta M mount lenses can be used via third party adapters and you get A and M exposure modes as well as full metering. Yes, Minolta made some lenses with Leica M mount! (Does Nikon a have full frame digital camera supporting their own L39 or S mount lenses? )
Zeiss, Voigtländer (Cosina) and Tokina make make manual focus lenses with modern optics and classical handling as well as electronic integration. A total of eleven native E mount full frame manual focus lenses with CPUs have been introduced/announced (8/3).
Maybe Sony's excellent support for legacy glass as well as modern MF and AF glass combine to earn them the number two position in the US. Sony A7/II sure are the best manual focus cameras I've ever had, making them as fun as an old Olympus OM-1 albeit very diferent, but just as small. :) 8)
-
For the period covered, Sony had big discounts in the US market so a bit misleading. I'm pretty heavily invested in the Sony system but I just cannot use for a large percentage of what I shoot. Still too many places where it falls short. Today I am shooting a soccer tournament and will be using D3S and D500. I am taking the a7rii with the FE 24-70 f4 for team photos. My, now dead , D750 was a much better all rounder than the a7rii. I have events coming up which cannot be shot, by me, with the Sonys. For those requiring high resolution, for static targets, the Sonys are very good and due to size/weight, great for Air Travel. I am in the process of culling my Sony system to buy a Leica 135mm f3.4.
From what I see on the Net , many Sony fanboys are Techies with cash. I have no interest in D7500 but do hope it sells well.
-
Two months, one single format, one single country. Some statistics, huh. ....
Not only that, but the fact that the unseating is measured by dollar value, not unit sales!
I don't know the dollar value of each unit per each customer, but if Sony are selling fewer units at the higher dollar value, then of course there is the situation that their dollar sales over the period will be greater.
What's more interesting is how many individual units are being sold.
-
Sony makes good sensors. They still have to learn to make a good camera. And, for the time being, a hybrid camera does not stand for progress.
-
If I had the power, Nikon would release a DF-esque FF with a large hybrid VF, modular grip and run a campaign on it's prowess using both cutting edge *and* classic lenses. Let users know that even if they are eyeing used manual lenses, Nikon is the best camera for the job. Everyone I've known who got into DSLRs starts this way. Nikon needs to be there when they decide to fork out for a modern marvel lens.
I have a Df but if a Ds came out I'd probably buy it.
-
Nikon needs a better management
and then a better support
don't think its the engineers
-
There's a question as to whether Sony's figures even included all US retailers -- it's data tracking of smaller dealers they were using and it's not clear if B&H, Adorama and Amazon among others were in there -- and they were running big promotions during the January February period they used for the figures. Take the whole first quarter from all dealers and it won't be close.
However, the trend for Nikon is worrying.
-
... However, the trend for Nikon is worrying.
Nikon has designed some nice "me too" products over the last few years, but the last big bang was D800 some 5 years ago. And on top of that they have had several manufacturing and quality control issues, and to add insult to injury, they have managed to handle those very poorly causing too much unnecessary customer anger. I give the engineers full A, but the marketing, QC and aftermarket people get only a C-.
I would have bought a D4X if there was one. The next big thing I'd be interested in would be a D5X. What are the odds of that? But if Nikon did a 80 megapixel D5X that would rise some public interest to the whole product line. And follow it 6 months later with a 64 mpix D820 to reap the benefits of volume sales.
As it is now... yawn. I mean, nice products sure, but I'm settled for the next decade with D4S, D3X and D3S. I am happy to sit on top of my wallet, if nothing exciting does not pop out.
-
No matter how one argues (yes...) Sony has moved upwards and forwards in a manner Nikon ought to study closer and learn from...and move accordingly. They haven't.
-
I just tested again the Sony A7II EVF was disgusted by it. The image shows a lot of artifacts instead of just the subject; the edges have jaggies which move about, it's like a Frankenstein version of a viewfinder. Until Sony brings back their excellent optical viewfinders seen in their old DSLRs, there is no money going to their camera division from me.
Nikon's 2016 products including the D5, the superb 105/1.4, and the 70-200/2.8E earn top grade from me. Especially the D5's outstanding AF has increased my percentage of keepers with fast primes considerably (in some conditions, from 30% in focus at f/1.4 with Advanced Multi-CAM 3500 to about 90-95% with the D5). In low light the ability to focus even in light requiring 1/125s, f/2.8, ISO 51200 was just witnessed yesterday when I was photographing the darker parts of a play. I would say Multi-CAM 20k is the most signicant technical innovation in the history of Nikon AF.
In particular the 105/1,4 has not ceased to amaze me with its consistently high image quality and remarkably beautiful transition from sharp to unsharp regions. I am actually really surprised why Nikon is seemingly suffering commercially at the same time these products hit the market. :o
My experience with Nikon QC is quite good; only cameras I had trouble with were the D7000 and D800 (AF). I think it is understandable given that the resolution of the sensor increased rapidly at that time and AF wasn't able to keep up. However, they have really improved AF greatly since. Nikon's service in Finland has been outstanding and they have gone out of their way to provide good service, in many cases doing things free outside of any warranty period obligation. I understand that not every region benefits from such service and this is unfortunate.
By contrast my experience with Sony service (VAIO laptop) is that they take no responsibility of a product which did not work correctly.
A D4X or D5X has the problem that it would likely have similar features to D810 but at twice the cost. Thus it is commerciably viable only if the D810 line is discontinued or crippled. I think the D810 is a great product in itself and I add the vertical grip when needed. I use the D5 but would not buy a D5X.
-
No matter how one argues (yes...) Sony has moved upwards and forwards in a manner Nikon ought to study closer and learn from...and move accordingly. They haven't.
If we are to believe Thom Hogan, Nikon is just shuffling around its consensus based management. If that's right, I doubt they will study or learn anything at a sufficiently quick pace for Nikon to react to market changes.
When will Fujifilm announce that they are the number two APS-C maker? (With Canon as the number one.)
-
Another thing that astonishes me is that Nikon users complain about the price of e.g. the 105/1,4 but for Sony you can pay as much for a 135/2.8. Two stops extra speed and beautiful in focus to out of focus transition is what you get extra by buying the Nikon. Yet people don't seem to think twice about Sony mount lens prices. :o
I think a modern apo 135/2.8 is worth roughly 700€-1000€, not 2000€.
It feels a bit like Nikon-bashing has become a popular sport, similar to what lead to genocides in the past, or voting for some politicians with no rational arguments behind the behavior, just finding euphoria with agreeing to throw stones and feeling a sense of belonging in the crowd.
-
It feels a bit like Nikon-bashing has become a popular sport, similar to what lead to genocides in the past, or voting for some politicians with no rational arguments behind the behavior, just finding euphoria with agreeing to throw stones and feeling a sense of belonging in the crowd.
I also feel that is an unhealthy way to release one's frustration...
-
Let people migrate to Sony by the millions. It's a win win situation for me. Dirt cheap second hand, quality gear that has hardly been used. How could that be wrong :)
-
I hope my wording isn't interpreted as Nikon-bashing. I still like Nikon's products. The matter of the fact is that Nikon is struggling and needs to do something. I sincerely hope this is happening but as long as they keep turning out updates of older camera models their sales aren't improving at sufficient rates.
-
Madonna did sell a lot more albums than Miles Davis.
Please report all bashing comments and I will delete them, thanks :)
-
Madonna did sell a lot more albums than Miles Davis.
Would I rather have Madonna than MD in mee hands ? 😆😆😆
-
Would I rather have Madonna than MD in mee hands ? 😆😆😆
:D
-
A perfect opportunity to lock this topic considering the sexist remarks.
-
OK, let's try again. Keep to the topic under discussion and all is well.
-
Nikon is very present at big sports events, listening to pro photographers and their problems. They are conspicuously absent for all other users, in my view. You have to jump through hoops to get to speak to someone, and then you often feel the pressure of not being allowed to be completely straight. There is nothing wrong with Nikon products, both their entry-level stuff which is amazing value for the money as well as the high-end gear that has been offering many unique designs. But their marketing is not as effective as it needs to be: e.g. many people don't know about entry-level DSLRs capabilities (i.e. that they are so close to the high-end stuff for a very low price, and very tough). They continue to neglect the DX line by not giving users more lens options, because of fear of endangering Fx sales. There is eccessive moving stuff around on mid-range gear. They need to get real data and ask their existing users what would make them upgrade. I like that Nikon's designers are doing what they like and users get really cool stuff from them. But the ecosystem that would allow them to excel is not there, probably due to a management that is not agile and too conservative. They also need to improve their software: they are not realizing the potential of a more open software environment, both in allowing third-party companies full access to RAW specifications, and making the UI more customizable and modular. There they need to team up with excellent software experts instead of playing the protective game. What if users were allowed to tweak the algorithms? What are the chances that users could come up with superior results in areas that were neglected by the engineers, or came up with new apps that added functions that Nikon did not think of? I think they are quite high actually, and would benefit the brand value, particularly among the tech-savvy crowd.
-
They also need to improve their software: they are not realizing the potential of a more open software environment, both in allowing third-party companies full access to RAW specifications, and making the UI more customizable and modular. There they need to team up with excellent software experts instead of playing the protective game. What if users were allowed to tweak the algorithms? What are the chances that users could come up with superior results in areas that were neglected by the engineers, or came up with new apps that added functions that Nikon did not think of? I think they are quite high actually, and would benefit the brand value, particularly among the tech-savvy crowd.
This is actually a great idea! As it seems like more and more people move away from using their gear for photography purposes and use it more and more for testing and discussing test results. Noise level in shadows at 100% crop etc, etc :o There is a large group of people out there that think they know so much better than the designers and engineers so let them have a go at it. The worst thing that could happen is that they improve an already good product. I think the majority of the internett "engineers" would have a big problem coming up with viable ideas, though. Regarding Sony, I feel that most of the reasons why people choose to go there is because they are trying to downsize their gear. After they have done that, they use most of their time trying to figure out how to adapt second party lenses to their camera. The native lenses are of course too big and even bigger than the ones they have migrated from. And so the cycle keeps on spinning ::) Comparing camera systems without considering that people may have different needs than one self is a suicide mission. The outcome is set once the discussion start.
I personally think Nikon should keep on producing market leading products as they have done up til now and innovate on their home turf, rather than imitate away from home. I have seen the the "other side of light" and it was not pretty ;)
-
lots of people are using Sony for video that's why :o :o :o
-
Smaller system
You don't migrate from one full frame system to another to get smaller lenses, not even to DX. If you want smaller lenses you have to go to m43, with more noise. The size gain from going APS-C/DX is too small, imho. Some native Sony FE lenses are smaller, some not. Adapting lenses is easy, no big deal to figure out.
EVF
If Nikon had offered an FX camera with an EVF in 2014, I could have stayed with Nikon. Three years later on there is still no Nikon FX camera with an EVF. I can't properly focus an OVF and have wasted a lot of money on alt focus screens etc. to no avail. FM2 has a much better viewfinder than any DSLR. Go figure. :o It might be possible that Nikon could make a DSLR with an OVF to my liking, but so far no cigar, not even close. Should be on their things to fix list, but too late for me now. I have switched to Sony. Some people switch to Sony to get a full frame system with a viewfinder providing a (10x) focus magnifier. That's what I did. I'm not the only one. And no, liveview doesn't cut it.
Video AF
Sony and Canon have good video AF, something that Nikon has to fix ASAP. They didn't fix that with the otherwise excellent (from specs) D7500 either. :o The next iteration is two years away. :o
Apps in the camera
Sony offers apps for their cameras. The API for that is being reverse engineered, and focus stacking is one useful thing, that has come out of that, though still a proof of concept. Sony could do much more with the in camera apps. Focus stacking is just one small thing that an AF-S or AF-P lens can do. They do that already with CamRanger. Creating an open API for camera apps just one thing Nikon could do, and quickly lead.
-
Nikon should improve manual focusing on both the body and lens side. The bodies should have interchangeable focusing screens optimized for different aperture ranges, with and without manual focus aids and the screen position should be accurate. On the lens side, many "affordable" Nikon lenses have poor manual focus rings and I don't believe this has to be so at all. The 35/1.4, 58/1.4, 85/1.4, 105/1.4, and 200/2 I find to have fine manual focus rings, but e.g. 20/1.8 not so much. I am quite puzzled why they put the ring in there at all if its use has to be so difficult. If Nikon do not offer really good video/live view AF, they should at least work on the manual focus of the lenses so that they can be used reliably.
My experience is that with FX and Katz Eye focusing screen for the D700, I had no issue focusing the 28/2 ZF for example, manually, even wide open. Focusing angle lenses is one of the more challenging tasks in DSLR use, in my experience. I think it can be done a lot better than it is done by Nikon today.
For me focusing manually on a A7R II EVF didn't result in correctly focused shots when testing it with a 135/2 Apo Sonnar. I wasn't even able to get it close and was puzzled by the results. I cannot zoom in to focus when hand holding to photograph a person as I need to be able to monitor the overall composition and see the image as a whole without distractions. I am able to get correctly focused shots using my Nikons using the focus confirmation dot; with that lens on the D8x0 it works well.
-
Nikon should improve manual focusing on both the body and lens side. The bodies should have interchangeable focusing screens optimized for different aperture ranges, with and without manual focus aids and the screen position should be accurate. On the lens side, many "affordable" Nikon lenses have poor manual focus rings and I don't believe this has to be so at all. The 35/1.4, 58/1.4, 85/1.4, 105/1.4, and 200/2 I find to have fine manual focus rings, but e.g. 20/1.8 not so much. I am quite puzzled why they put the ring in there at all if its use has to be so difficult. If Nikon do not offer really good video/live view AF, they should at least work on the manual focus of the lenses so that they can be used reliably.
My experience is that with FX and Katz Eye focusing screen for the D700, I had no issue focusing the 28/2 ZF for example, manually, even wide open. Focusing angle lenses is one of the more challenging tasks in DSLR use, in my experience. I think it can be done a lot better than it is done by Nikon today.
For me focusing manually on a A7R II EVF didn't result in correctly focused shots when testing it with a 135/2 Apo Sonnar. I wasn't even able to get it close and was puzzled by the results. I cannot zoom in to focus when hand holding to photograph a person as I need to be able to monitor the overall composition and see the image as a whole without distractions. I am able to get correctly focused shots using my Nikons using the focus confirmation dot; with that lens on the D8x0 it works well.
The 10x magnifier definitely is for static subjects, good point. E.g. landscape, architecture and macro.
The D700 was so to speak the last OVF DSLR that worked well for me. I guess a 12mp FX sensor isn't too taxing on focusing ability. The D800 was a disaster for me.
Good mechanics cost. The Nikon 14-24/2.8 has nice MF feel, the Nikon 28/1.8 not so much, same as the 20/1.8, I guess. Depending on the implementation, focus by wire could solve it for cheaper lenses. The focus ring would need to have no acceleration and only a linear response to be good. The lowly Sony 50/1.8 FE has a much better focus feel (Ai like) than the expensive Sony/Zeiss 55/1.8 FE. :o
-
Two months, one single format, one single country. Some statistics, huh. A much more useful statistic would be to look at total sales of all interchangeable lens cameras in 2016 (or the past 12 months) in all countries combined.
Many Nikon FX users are waiting for the updates to D610, D750, D810 and perhaps Df. Now that they have seen what is in the D500/D5 there is probably few who want to buy another Multi-CAM 3500 camera if it is not for budget reasons.
Yeah but, "Many Nikon users" are always waiting for something new, the D500 is a good example of that. A lot of the less faithful bought outside of the Nikon offerings when there appeared to be no D300 replacement coming. I think that Nikon's success or failure is less about what Sony does and more about what Nikon does.
Nikon reminds me of a world class race horse with the mounted jockey holding it back from pacing in front of the competition.
-
Nikon reminds me of a world class race horse with the mounted jockey holding it back from pacing in front of the competition.
I don't think Nikon is holding back.
There can be reasons why it might make sense not to make a camera like the D500; for example, along with a high end DX camera, the question of high end DX lenses pops up again. To satisfy all users, some additional DX high end wide angle primes would be needed, and a modern revision of the 17-55/2.8, with nano coating, perhaps VR etc. To simplify the product lineup Nikon may not have been eager to make the D500; only when Canon forced them to with the introduction of the 7D Mark II, did it seem that the project was put back on the agenda. The 7D Mark II itself took many years to make; Canon wasn't in any hurry, either. FX only would make the product lineup simpler in some way. But some users are very enthusiastic about DX and many people prefer it for budget reasons as well as the obvious telephoto action photography application. There are advantages to DX and disadvantages. For Nikon it would have been simpler to have one format for the high end, in some ways.
Along with making the D500, in my opinion, comes the responsibility to fullfill any lens needs that its users may have. E.g., wide angle primes with fast maximum aperture and no extra flare or ghosting due to oversize FX coverage. In my opinion this should be par for the course even without the D500. Many D7x00 users use it for family photography indoors and can use fast lenses. Today that means 11-16/2.8 Tokina and 18-35/1.8 Sigma, basically.
So, if Nikon makes DX and FX mirrorless cameras, then they would have five lens lineups to maintain (CX, two DX, two FX). Consolidating the product line makes perfect sense from a practical point of view, but of course users should be consulted as well.
-
I wouldn't mind if they make an F mount mirrorless and avoid another line of lenses, sensor size may be either DX / FX with capability to meter with manual lenses
-
I don't think Nikon is holding back.
There can be reasons why it might make sense not to make a camera like the D500; for example, along with a high end DX camera, the question of high end DX lenses pops up again. To satisfy all users, some additional DX high end wide angle primes would be needed, and a modern revision of the 17-55/2.8, with nano coating, perhaps VR etc. To simplify the product lineup Nikon may not have been eager to make the D500; only when Canon forced them to with the introduction of the 7D Mark II, did it seem that the project was put back on the agenda. The 7D Mark II itself took many years to make; Canon wasn't in any hurry, either. FX only would make the product lineup simpler in some way. But some users are very enthusiastic about DX and many people prefer it for budget reasons as well as the obvious telephoto action photography application. There are advantages to DX and disadvantages. For Nikon it would have been simpler to have one format for the high end, in some ways.
Along with making the D500, in my opinion, comes the responsibility to fullfill any lens needs that its users may have. E.g., wide angle primes with fast maximum aperture and no extra flare or ghosting due to oversize FX coverage. In my opinion this should be par for the course even without the D500. Many D7x00 users use it for family photography indoors and can use fast lenses. Today that means 11-16/2.8 Tokina and 18-35/1.8 Sigma, basically.
So, if Nikon makes DX and FX mirrorless cameras, then they would have five lens lineups to maintain (CX, two DX, two FX). Consolidating the product line makes perfect sense from a practical point of view, but of course users should be consulted as well.
Of course they're holding back. Where are the DX lenses to fill out the DX user photographer's needs. Why did it take them so long to release a D300 replacement?
Where is the universally accepted Nikon software? Why is SnapBridge a joke? Why are cell phones grabbing camera company market share?
Bean counters are running the entire Nikon show, IMO. Of course you may have an entirely different take on things. If so, go for it, I am certainly no expert.
Please don't misunderstand, I would love to see Nikon thrive but I don't think they are doing that.
-
I have a bad taste in my mouth from Sony defects from about 1985 to 1992. Example: a Sony 707 ESD CD player. I the D/A converter failed and I waited (13) Thirteen months for the repair. Two XBR TV monitors with cold solder joints plus a friend had another he repaired. Cold solder joint in an RCA jack in a Sony 508 ESD CD player. I fixed that one myself. XBR and ESD were their top of the line in each category.
Dave Hartman
-
I have a bad taste in my mouth from Sony defects from about 1985 to 1992. Example: a Sony 707 ESD CD player. I the D/A converter failed and I waited (13) Thirteen months for the repair. Two XBR TV monitors with cold solder joints plus a friend had another he repaired. Cold solder joint in an RCA jack in a Sony 508 ESD CD player. I fixed that one myself. XBR and ESD were their top of the line in each category.
Dave Hartman
It took Nikon quite some time to even acknowledge the D600 oil splatter issue and the D800 left side AF issue.
-
Bad service is not a competition. Sometimes one has a difficult to diagnose and correct problem and then it takes time to find a solution. I am sure that all companies that stay in business for decades or more have had some problems in their history. I've had nothing but the best experiences with Nikon service. I was expecting there would probably be problems with manufacturing after the 2011 earthquake, tsunami and flooding and my only surprise is that Nikon managed to get through, even if stumbling a bit. I try to give them a bit of latitude as perfection is difficult to reach and companies are made of human beings. It helps if one can try to stay focused on the photographic goals that one has rather than the gear.
-
It helps if one can try to stay focused on the photographic goals that one has rather than the gear.
Exactly.
-
Hi,
here in germany sony has a very bad service regarding all(!) sectors like tv, hifi and photo regarding my own experience as reseller. Asking a guy who is selling sony cameras: Half a year after release of a new camera they can not offer any spare parts and are changing the damaged camera to a newer model. Bad if the customer bought 50 of them to have exactly the same camera everywhere so that every employee can use them. They now use Nikon. ;) Bad service is a real problem! I have to handle such problems and Sony is here in germany the looser on this sector. The only reason why i will never buy a Sony A7. ;)
Harald
-
Hi,
here in germany sony has a very bad service regarding all(!) sectors like tv, hifi and photo regarding my own experience as reseller. Asking a guy who is selling sony cameras: Half a year after release of a new camera they can not offer any spare parts and are changing the damaged camera to a newer model. Bad if the customer bought 50 of them to have exactly the same camera everywhere so that every employee can use them. They now use Nikon. ;) Bad service is a real problem! I have to handle such problems and Sony is here in germany the looser on this sector. The only reason why i will never buy a Sony A7. ;)
Harald
Here in the USA Nikon's service reputation is less than stellar. There are many people that won't buy Nikon refurbished gear because they have had too many problems with that gear. One would think that Nikon refurbished gear would be reliable, but often it is not. Worse, Nikon won't sell some parts to third party repair facilities, leaving gear owners little choice. If your camera or lens wasn't purchased in the USA Nikon USA will not service it. Nikon's customers are not the enemy.
Not to start a flame war here, but compare Nikon's service reputation with Apple's, and you will see what customer service is all about.
-
It helps if one can try to stay focused on the photographic goals that one has rather than the gear.
Exactly, again :)
-
It helps if one can try to stay focused on the photographic goals that one has rather than the gear.
While I don't necessarily disagree with what you said, you are known to buy the newest models yourself.
Sony is innovating and that is getting attention. That should not surprise anyone.
-
Apple takes considerable profit from the sales of each phone so they ought to be able to provide great service. However, that hasn't been my experience. My iPhone 6's camera stopped focusing in a few months after purchase. Repair was not done, instead they charged me 370€ for a replacement. I had insurance but it took quite a lot of fighting to get the repair covered. Before, my iPad 2 stopped being usable over time as updates to the software made it so slow it was no longer was usable. In my opinion this qualifies as extraordinarily poor service.
-
Sony certainly keeps on pushing the mirrorless bar with the just announced high-end A9 (https://www.dpreview.com/news/1308959313/sony-announces-a9-24mp-20fps-high-end-full-frame-sports-camera)
-
While I don't necessarily disagree with what you said, you are known to buy the newest models yourself.
I don't bitch about the equipment or its manufacturer all the time though. And I spend far more time planning, shooting and editing than thinking about equipment, as hard as it might be to believe. What I meant is if your focus is on the project you can usually work around the limitations (perceived or otherwise) of the equipment. It seems forum discussion focus is all too often on complaining about products and manufacturers and voicing out the lack of some product or how poorly it was supposedly designed or featured. This is not necessarily very helpful to achieving one's goals. I think it would be better that we discussed more on how to work around the limitations of the equipment rather than just complaining. But maybe I just notice those discussions more than others.
-
Sony certainly keeps on pushing the mirrorless bar with the just announced high-end A9 (https://www.dpreview.com/news/1308959313/sony-announces-a9-24mp-20fps-high-end-full-frame-sports-camera)
An example of not holding back
If that camera is expected to sell they will need to add pro service
-
An example of not holding back
If that camera is expected to sell they will need to add pro service
Sony is setting up a pro service right now. That was addressed specifically at their press conference.
-
Apple takes considerable profit from the sales of each phone so they ought to be able to provide great service. However, that hasn't been my experience. My iPhone 6's camera stopped focusing in a few months after purchase. Repair was not done, instead they charged me 370€ for a replacement. I had insurance but it took quite a lot of fighting to get the repair covered. Before, my iPad 2 stopped being usable over time as updates to the software made it so slow it was no longer was usable. In my opinion this qualifies as extraordinarily poor service.
Not every incident has a positive outcome with any company, but overall Apple has a stellar service reputation. They had that reputation before they released the iPhone or iPad. You don't have to like Apple products to see that they are very successful at customer service. Nikon could take a page from that book.
-
Again a blanket statement that might not be universally applicable. For example, in my country, Apple has a questionable support. Nikon does well in the support sector, though. The times I used my NPS membership to get fast-lane service in countries outside my own, for example Czech Republic and South Africa, the experience has been the same.
-
Again a blanket statement that might not be universally applicable. For example, in my country, Apple has a questionable support. Nikon does well in the support sector, though. The times I used my NPS membership to get fast-lane service in countries outside my own, for example Czech Republic and South Africa, the experience has been the same.
Fair enough. I have no personal experience with Apple or Nikon service outside of the US.
-
In the event it hasnt been posted elsewhere - 20 fps??
http://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/4/19/15356680/new-sony-a9-mirrorless-camera-announced-specs-price-release-date
-
We'll see its true capabilities in due time. Specs did look good though. Alas no support for GPS?
-
I am going to have to side with BW here - and believe this is a good thing for me in terms of Nikon gear becoming cheaper on the second hand market :)
Bjørn you are right - a white paper doesn't say it all - one doesn't shoot a white paper - you shoot photos. And the photos will be all telling.
if I was the praying kind - I would have prayed Nikon wakes up a bit with this release.
-
20 fps if there is a fair breeze from south-east and its high tide and full moon. According to the many footnotes..
I was born on low tide, so no wonder why I am so negative ;)
-
I don't even need to touch a camera to know my preferred format is 36x24mm not 24x16mm. This is about the focal length of the lenses used for a particular purpose on the given format.
Dave Hartman
Not that I wouldn't use 24x16mm or 6x4.5cm. 36x24mm is the sweet spot for me.
-
Bringing up special treatment for NPS members is not the answer to criticism of Nikon support, because that membership cannot be bought. I'm sure NPS is good, otherwise they would lose out in the professional market. But for long-term success, the experience of regular consumers is equally, if not more important.
-
I can only speak of what I know from personal experience.
-
I am not an NPS member and my experiences with Nikon service have nevertheless been excellent.
-
I am an NPS member and I am not happy with the service that Nikon provides in The Netherlands. Not to mention how disappointed I was last year at Photokina when I realised that they weren't offering the customary cleaning of gear. And, finally in the past I used to receive invitations for cleaning of gear in the neighborhood where I live and that has seized to exist.
I guess it differs from country to country...
-
I am an NPS member and I am not happy with the service that Nikon provides in The Netherlands. Not to mention how disappointed I was last year at Photokina when I realised that they weren't offering the customary cleaning of gear. And, finally in the past I used to receive invitations for cleaning of gear in the neighborhood where I live and that has seized to exist.
I guess it differs from country to country...
When tightening of the belt occurs, service is usually the first casualty. Service costs money, and if those in charge think that they can get away with doing less of it in a shrinking market, then that is exactly what you can expect.