Nikon have lost the plot

It's not just the seemingly exotic stuff. Take the Canon EF 100-400 L IS Mk II; a lovely lens by all accounts, but its still around the £1800 mark new (unless you get a cashback deal), and it's still only f/5.6 at the 400 end! Compare that to the Sigma and Tamron 100-400 equivalent at sub £700. OK, they're f/6.3 at the top end and may not quite have the same AF success rate, but at over £1000 cheaper what's the average keen amateur going to do? I'd have loved the Canon version, but just couldn't justify the extra £1000 for the amount I'd actually use it.

If I were a pro and could benefit from the difference, then I'd bite the bullet. However, as there are probably fewer pros around these days, and money seems tighter for those that are, camera manufacturers may well have to rethink their business model in the coming years.
 
SFTPhotography said:
A7R3 and A7R4...

£200 cheaper (now) and a few more MP and one less card slot. You make your choices and pay the money....
Click to expand...

Yup.

Its cheaper only because Nikon isnt selling as many as they thought they would, what it does show is Nikons new system depreciates fast and theyve been very arrogant. I think the same thing will happen with the D780 so them pricing high initially is very stupid if they need funds. Especially with the Z6 being the better value camera.

With Sony you have a much wider choice of native lenses, accessories and better AF with a real 10fps not a very slow 5.5fps. Thats why they have held their value.
 
twist said:
Yup.

Its cheaper only because Nikon isnt selling as many as they thought they would, what it does show is Nikons new system depreciates fast and theyve been very arrogant. I think the same thing will happen with the D780 so them pricing high initially is very stupid if they need funds.

With Sony you have a much wider choice of native lenses, accessories and better AF with a real 10fps not a very slow 5.5fps. Thats why they have held their value.
Click to expand...
I’m a heavily invested F mount shooter but by the time I have to switch to mirrorless I will be genuinely surprised if Nikon is still an available option. I don’t see the current Z system as a serious competitor to Sony more an alternative choice.
 
Brazo said:
I’m a heavily invested F mount shooter but by the time I have to switch to mirrorless I will be genuinely surprised if Nikon is still an available option. I don’t see the current Z system as a serious competitor to Sony more an alternative choice.
Click to expand...
I don't see why Nikon can't be a serious competitor IF they can stay in business long enough. Personally I wouldn't be bothered if Nikon became more niche like Leica, as long as they don't follow Leica prices ;)
 
twist said:
Yup.

Its cheaper only because Nikon isnt selling as many as they thought they would, what it does show is Nikons new system depreciates fast and theyve been very arrogant. I think the same thing will happen with the D780 so them pricing high initially is very stupid if they need funds. Especially with the Z6 being the better value camera.

With Sony you have a much wider choice of native lenses, accessories and better AF with a real 10fps not a very slow 5.5fps. Thats why they have held their value.
Click to expand...

Native lenses yes - but Nikon offer a Z to F mount adapter that works well with the large F mount lens range. That said Sony can draw on the Metabones and Canon Family. The new Sony R4 with the 60.1mp though rather renders the Z7 a bit obsolete....

They'll find a few Putz's who'll pay the high opening prices for the cameras and the rest of us can wait...

I am inclined to buy Nikon as I've had a lot of gear from them and it's always been reliable and trouble free.
 
If you think that lens is expensive, have a look at some of the binocular prices.

The high end watch market is artificially inflated by controlling the numbers released. Rolex have done a de Beers on the watch market - creating waiting lists that in reality shouldn't be there. I have a friend who is an AD, what Rolex sends them for stock is unselected, they have to have what is released.... in turn the ADs maintain their market by creating a waiting list for the 'desireable' sports models - you try it, go into your nearest Rolex dealer and see if you can buy a Sub, especially a Hulk.... it would be interesting to read your stories when you get back... yes Sir, we can put you on the waiting list, by the way, does Mrs. XXXX require a new diamond necklace, or this nice nice emerald ring perhaps? Buy the necklace / ring and you might jump up the waiting list a notch or two... buy nothing else and you will never move off the bottom.

Another example: Sub Mariner, Explorer or GMT that kind of calibre. Retail is around the £8000 mark, Chrono24 or Watchfinder or ... you can buy an unworn, full set (boxes and cards) for £12,000. Watchfinder will typically take £2000 of that. So, if you are the authorised dealer, who do you sell your one Sub Mariner to? The man who walked in off the street for £8000, or Watchfinder for £10,000?

You work it out... and that is without the witholding of spares so you have to send the watch back to Rolex for an inflated price service. I can see the bubble bursting before too long and a lot of people catching a cold.
 
Something to take into account - as alluded too already - that you're likely paying a realistic cost now, rather than one kept low by mass-market sales figures. These cameras and lenses are now enjoying much smaller production runs than 15 years ago when compacts sucked & cameras in phones were laughable.
 
Could be any number of reasons for the cost other than the desire to sell at a premium. Development costs (ie of the lens and the new SR lens element akin with any patents they apply for) can be high and need to be amortised over the anticipated production run (which isn’t going to be hundreds of thousands of units), assembly in Japan comes at a price, small batch sizes of components are always more expensive than large batches, potentially higher levels of testing required which could result in rework, snake oil lens coatings won’t be cheap, etc etc

Also, I imagine that the intended market for this is the pro market, and therefore they are likely to be rented, owned by large media groups or available for use at big events - 2020 is an Olympic year and Nikon will have a big presence as they always do https://petapixel.com/2018/02/12/canons-nikons-crazy-dslr-stockpiles-2018-olympics/

Of course I’m quite sure that retired American dentists and other well heeled types will be all over this as well!
 
Lensflare said:
You work it out... and that is without the witholding of spares so you have to send the watch back to Rolex for an inflated price service. I can see the bubble bursting before too long and a lot of people catching a cold.
Click to expand...

We seem to be in a bubble so it there's no reason for companies to hold back.

However regarding spares, I thought there were protections against this with right to repair under EU law?
 
I don't know whether Nikon are trying to reposition themselves as a luxury brand, or the prices they charge are close to what it costs them to produce the goods. :thinking:
snerkler said:
I don't see why Nikon can't be a serious competitor IF they can stay in business long enough. Personally I wouldn't be bothered if Nikon became more niche like Leica, as long as they don't follow Leica prices ;)
Click to expand...
I think that is how you stay in business if you are niche, charge higher prices. That is what Nikon is trying to do, charge more for something in a similar range to what has gone before. :rolleyes:
 
SFTPhotography said:
Native lenses yes - but Nikon offer a Z to F mount adapter that works well with the large F mount lens range. That said Sony can draw on the Metabones and Canon Family. The new Sony R4 with the 60.1mp though rather renders the Z7 a bit obsolete....

They'll find a few Putz's who'll pay the high opening prices for the cameras and the rest of us can wait...

I am inclined to buy Nikon as I've had a lot of gear from them and it's always been reliable and trouble free.
Click to expand...
Sony can also draw on the huge A mount (Minolta and Sony) back catalogue but tbh adapted lenses are just fiddly at best and I don’t see it as an advantage for any system.
 
Lensflare said:
If you think that lens is expensive, have a look at some of the binocular prices.

The high end watch market is artificially inflated by controlling the numbers released. Rolex have done a de Beers on the watch market - creating waiting lists that in reality shouldn't be there. I have a friend who is an AD, what Rolex sends them for stock is unselected, they have to have what is released.... in turn the ADs maintain their market by creating a waiting list for the 'desireable' sports models - you try it, go into your nearest Rolex dealer and see if you can buy a Sub, especially a Hulk.... it would be interesting to read your stories when you get back... yes Sir, we can put you on the waiting list, by the way, does Mrs. XXXX require a new diamond necklace, or this nice nice emerald ring perhaps? Buy the necklace / ring and you might jump up the waiting list a notch or two... buy nothing else and you will never move off the bottom.

Another example: Sub Mariner, Explorer or GMT that kind of calibre. Retail is around the £8000 mark, Chrono24 or Watchfinder or ... you can buy an unworn, full set (boxes and cards) for £12,000. Watchfinder will typically take £2000 of that. So, if you are the authorised dealer, who do you sell your one Sub Mariner to? The man who walked in off the street for £8000, or Watchfinder for £10,000?

You work it out... and that is without the witholding of spares so you have to send the watch back to Rolex for an inflated price service. I can see the bubble bursting before too long and a lot of people catching a cold.
Click to expand...

there has been a cooling of prices the past few months especially on the Rolex SS models but it still has a way to go. I hate the full Rolex thing and the way they are controlling things and have stayed away from them due to this. I can buy higher quality watches for that money and as i dont sell watches the depreciation on other makes doesnt bother me.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
there has been a cooling of prices the past few months especially on the Rolex SS models but it still has a way to go. I hate the full Rolex thing and the way they are controlling things and have stayed away from them due to this. I can buy higher quality watches for that money and as i dont sell watches the depreciation on other makes doesnt bother me.
Click to expand...

I like my Seadweller :D
 
I don't mind if a watch isn't all that accurate. A few minutes a day off? Who cares? Not me. I like mechanical watches and for me a part of the charm is checking it and winding it up at bed time or in the morning.

I have some nice watches but just for fun I recently bought some cheap Chinese automatic mechanical watches and surprise surprise… they're perfect :D Also I've had a Sekonda for over 40 years and that too is still working fine.

Sorry to go off topic :D
 
woof woof said:
Also I've had a Sekonda for over 40 years and that too is still working fine.
Click to expand...
My Sekonda was only slightly younger and still working well when I gave it to a charity shop. So much for the idea that the Soviets couldn't do precision right!
 
markyboy.1967 said:
nothing wrong with their watches mate its the company i dislike for their controlling behaviour.
Click to expand...

It's a bit like Porsche. Try, not that a new Gt3 or any special edition car is in my price point, getting one from a main dealer without a mark up or having to buy one at a massively inflated price point. Porsche deliberate build less cars than they can sell to keep prices up - if you are in the market for a new Cayman GT4, etc it's nigh on impossible to secure a car at the RRP

It's a thing companies do when they have the most desirable product to sell in the market place.
 
Last edited:
AndrewFlannigan said:
My Sekonda was only slightly younger and still working well when I gave it to a charity shop. So much for the idea that the Soviets couldn't do precision right!
Click to expand...

I used to wear a nice Swiss watch to work. I'd sometimes take it off and put it in my tool case then forget and close the lid and crack the glass. I must have done that 3 or 4 times so I bought the Sekonda to wear to work but I must have learned my lesson as I never forgot it was in my tool case again.
 
SFTPhotography said:
It's a bit like Porsche. Try, not that a new Gt3 or any special edition car is in my price point, getting one from a main dealer without a mark up or having to buy one at a massively inflated price point. Porsche deliberate build less cars than they can sell to keep prices up

It's a thing companies do when they have the most desirable product to sell in the market place.
Click to expand...

When i buy a watch i want the full luxury buying experience not feel like i need to jump through hoops, have to buy other watches and itens from the dealer and spend many many thousands just for a dealer to say i can get on his 3 year waiting list. If i do get lucky they will then keep my warranty card to stop me selling it—— its not their bloody watch and when i buy i want the full package including tags and warranty cards. At the moment i can walk into my normal watch shop and be greeted like rotalty whether buying or not, im often shown watches they know i wont buy and can spend 2hrs looking and taking watches with a glass of champagne.
 
Stu Meech said:
Nikon sell a telephoto lens for the pile it high, sell it cheap market tho - at around £500 for a 70-300. This is a pro lens marketed at pro market and they are selling it at a price that they either think it will sell at or make the best return for them.
Click to expand...

what nikon 70-300 do you call a pro lens ?
i think there all consumer / hobbyist quality
 
This thread is bizarre. Moaning about a lens costing £9,000 which does the same job as one costing £2,500 but not batting an eyelid about watches costing even more when there are watches that tell the time perfectly well for 20 quid or less. :ROFLMAO:
 
Ed Sutton said:
This thread is bizarre. Moaning about a lens costing £9,000 which does the same job as one costing £2,500 but not batting an eyelid about watches costing even more when there are watches that tell the time perfectly well for 20 quid or less. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I’ve got a lovely Breitling hardly wear it, wearing my Apple Watch most of the time. Seems silly really doesn’t it :eek:
 
simonbarker said:
We seem to be in a bubble so it there's no reason for companies to hold back.

However regarding spares, I thought there were protections against this with right to repair under EU law?
Click to expand...


Switzerland is NOT in the EU. ;) They have escaped that particular noose. There are lots of EU laws that certain EU countries choose to 'not enforce'.
 
SFTPhotography said:
It's a bit like Porsche. Try, not that a new Gt3 or any special edition car is in my price point, getting one from a main dealer without a mark up or having to buy one at a massively inflated price point. Porsche deliberate build less cars than they can sell to keep prices up - if you are in the market for a new Cayman GT4, etc it's nigh on impossible to secure a car at the RRP

It's a thing companies do when they have the most desirable product to sell in the market place.
Click to expand...


Started by Enzo Ferrari - he used to ask his customers who would want to buy a.... his market research. Then he had the philosophy of building ONE FEWER car than he had customers for..... consumerism at its best.
 
Ed Sutton said:
This thread is bizarre. Moaning about a lens costing £9,000 which does the same job as one costing £2,500 but not batting an eyelid about watches costing even more when there are watches that tell the time perfectly well for 20 quid or less. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

There is one aspect of the whole thing you have left out, perhaps deliberately, desire. Pander to consumers' desire, indeed marketing is the art of creating that desire in consumers in the first place. Nobody needs them, originally they did, for accurate navigation, hence the Admiralty promoting the competition to design and create an accurate timepiece for the Navy. History tells us that Mr. Harrison won that particular competition, from then on chronometer making became desirable. The Rolex thing started in London too, originally a British company that then moved to Switzerland.
 
Lensflare said:
There is one aspect of the whole thing you have left out, perhaps deliberately, desire. Pander to consumers' desire, indeed marketing is the art of creating that desire in consumers in the first place. Nobody needs them, originally they did, for accurate navigation, hence the Admiralty promoting the competition to design and create an accurate timepiece for the Navy. History tells us that Mr. Harrison won that particular competition, from then on chronometer making became desirable. The Rolex thing started in London too, originally a British company that then moved to Switzerland.
Click to expand...
My point was about the moan, not the reasons for ownership.

Maybe Nikon is taking the Leica route towards a high price niche brand, or maybe it's simply the pricing reflects the current market requirements. Time will tell.
 
As for watches, I have a Citizen eco-drive chronometer; I've owned it for over 3 years, the crystal glass face has not got a single scratch on it despite me wearing it each day for work. It's solar powered so doesn't need the battery changing and it connects to the atomic clock in the early hours of each morning to set the time, so it's never more than a second out, and it automatically adjusts when the hour goes back or forward and sorts the date out each month, even during a leap year.

It should have been £400 but I shopped around and paid £299 for it brand new and boxed, and I think it's been worth every penny of that to me, even if it broke tomorrow. To put that in perspective, could you even get a Rolex Oyster or Omega Seamaster serviced at an authorised dealers for £299? Also, how accurate is your Omega, Rolex, Tag Heuer, Patek Philippe, etc? I have a friend who likes and owns some 'premium brand' watches and he tells me it's not about the accuracy... but it should be really, shouldn't it... after all, what use is a watch unless it tells the right time? It would be better off as a non runner, wouldn't it... at least it would be spot on twice a day then! ;)

Each to their own, if I was a multi millionaire then I'd probably buy a Rolex Oyster Perpetual Day Date for 'best'. However, if what's been said here is correct, I doubt it would be a new one from an authorised dealer, as I never pay full asking price for any premium product, and I don't intend to break the habit of a lifetime for a watch, no matter how pretty and sparkly it might be.
 
Last edited:
If the OP is happy with his F mount Sigma, I don't understand what the big hoo-hah is tbh
 
Mr Badger said:
Each to their own, if I was a multi millionaire then I'd probably buy a Rolex Oyster Perpetual Day Date for 'best'. However, if what's been said here is correct, I doubt it would be a new one from an authorised dealer, as I never pay full asking price for any premium product, and I don't intend to break the habit of a lifetime for a watch, no matter how pretty and sparkly it might be.
Click to expand...
One thing I like about older watches is the size. Most new models I otherwise like the look of seem to have dials the diameter of a dinner plate. What's that about? There seems to be very little choice if you want something like a 36mm dial, which used to be standard.
 
Retune said:
One thing I like about older watches is the size. Most new models I otherwise like the look of seem to have dials the diameter of a dinner plate. What's that about? There seems to be very little choice if you want something like a 36mm dial, which used to be standard.
Click to expand...

I bought a watch for my wife last year and while I was there I had a squint at the mens watches and I was pleased to see they were a little smaller, the sales lady said the new ones are. They're still way too big for me though and I do wonder how people wear a shirt and jacket with these grandfather clock sized things on their wrists, I suppose the shirt and jacket have to stop short of the watch or crumple up before it.
 
Ed Sutton said:
This thread is bizarre. Moaning about a lens costing £9,000 which does the same job as one costing £2,500 but not batting an eyelid about watches costing even more when there are watches that tell the time perfectly well for 20 quid or less. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Well in case is watches one is simply for practical purposes and the other is jewellery.
The lens in question is not jewellery and will never be or even a collectors item for that matter.
Closest thing to jewellery on camera market is the Leicas.

Which brings nicely on to the next post...

snerkler said:
I don't see why Nikon can't be a serious competitor IF they can stay in business long enough. Personally I wouldn't be bothered if Nikon became more niche like Leica, as long as they don't follow Leica prices ;)
Click to expand...

They'll never be Leica or even Pentax. I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax out lived Nikon.
 
markyboy.1967 said:
I don’t have the Sigma any more as I awaited the Nikon version but it’s not offering much over the much older Sigma.
Click to expand...

The reason to buy 1st party especially for professionals is for the better compatibility, optics, support and Pro service.

From what I hear/read sigma is just as reliable as any other native lens and sigma's support is better. optically I guess we'll have to wait and Pro support might still be in Nikon's favour.
 
This is a slightly funny tangent. I still happily wear the Animal watch I bought around 2000 for £25. Yes, I've had a couple of slightly more interesting watches since, but could never imagine investing real money in something like that - it seems so trivial.
 
Well, it looks very easy choice for you. Sigma 120-300 works well in your words and is within your price range. It is not the right format of the lens for me, but if I was more into wildlife or sports I would seriously look into it.
Nikon may go crazy with prices if they wish. They had either used some uber exotic materials in the lens or simply don't want to sell or make too many for whatever reason.

Wait until you have to deal with the crazy people at Canon UK large format printer division / service. You can't even submit a driver bug report to these loons without attaching proof of purchase and a cheque for probably £1000. I know they are not the same as camera division, but any more of this b******t from Canon and I will switch to Sony outright and make it very public.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Well, it looks very easy choice for you. Sigma 120-300 works well in your words and is within your price range. It is not the right format of the lens for me, but if I was more into wildlife or sports I would seriously look into it.
Nikon may go crazy with prices if they wish. They had either used some uber exotic materials in the lens or simply don't want to sell or make too many for whatever reason.

Wait until you have to deal with the crazy people at Canon UK large format printer division / service. You can't even submit a driver bug report to these loons without attaching proof of purchase and a cheque for probably £1000. I know they are not the same as camera division, but any more of this b******t from Canon and I will switch to Sony outright and make it very public.
Click to expand...

Just buy the Fuji 50mp medium format thing. You keep your equipment a long time so overall costs through the life of the gear won’t be so bad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top