Nikon to start major cost cutting

Let's hope the cost cutting reaches customer level :D
 
It would seem the recent earthquake has hit them and their sub contractors harder than thy were suggesting. As tis seems to be based on a supply issue.
 
Unlike most of the other manufacturers, Nikon are mainly a consumer camera company, so a downturn or disaster threatens the very core of the company.
 
frod said:
Unlike most of the other manufacturers, Nikon are mainly a consumer camera company, so a downturn or disaster threatens the very core of the company.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find the Nikon Corporation are a little more than that. One thing they haven't done is put all their eggs in one basket.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
It would seem the recent earthquake has hit them and their sub contractors harder than thy were suggesting. As tis seems to be based on a supply issue.
Click to expand...

It's much deeper than that Terry, Nikon is in dire straits, and has been for some time - but so is every other camera company. More info from Thom Hogan here http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/grim-nikon-financials.html

The underlying problem is camera-phones that have wiped out the huge bread & butter compact camera business on which so much depended, and are heading further upmarket than anyone feared to believe. I don't think any of the big names* are in serious jeopardy just yet, but the upshot for us will be slower development of enthusiast products and higher prices. Canon saw this coming and have diversified into professional video with some success, but it's not a replacement of other lost business.

*While the traditional brands have no choice but to forge ahead regardless, others like Samsung have 'chosen' to exit because it's only a small and unprofitable part of their business. (It's interesting that the Samsung NX-1, highly innovative and universally praised, failed to make any impact whatsoever.) And Pentax is little more than an indulgence for parent company Ricoh. Ditto Fuji. Even Sony could simply have a change of heart and fall back on selling its excellent sensors to other manufacturers. The outlook is not bright.

ps Nikon is owned by Mitsubishi, or at least they have strong ties, so if push comes to shove ultimately Nikon should be more robust.
 
Last edited:
I'd say that of the major camera makes only Nikon & Canon "need" to keep making cameras, for Nikon and Canon the DSLR market is still theirs to lose and is a core part of their business, it does seem like Canon are a little more diversified though.

Fuji appear in their latest financials to be making plenty of money from their imaging division and while I'm aware they too aren't just a camera company id be stunned if they pulled out given the effort they've put in in just a few short years.

Sony however I could see stopping manufacture of cameras, we've seen it in other parts of their business where they've pulled out of computing and other electronics and seem happy to be building and selling components rather than final products, in the long-term I think Sony will pull out and focus on the sensor business as it seems to be making plenty of money for them across a whole swathe of the camera market (Smartphones, Compacts and DSLR/Mirrorless Sensors).
 
chrism_scotland said:
Sony however I could see stopping manufacture of cameras, we've seen it in other parts of their business where they've pulled out of computing and other electronics and seem happy to be building and selling components rather than final products, in the long-term I think Sony will pull out and focus on the sensor business as it seems to be making plenty of money for them across a whole swathe of the camera market (Smartphones, Compacts and DSLR/Mirrorless Sensors).
Click to expand...

As a Sony user I hope they stick at it. They have AFAIK the best selling mirrorless camera and just about every time something A7x related comes out we're told that orders exceed expectations plus they said long ago they wanted to be number x (I forget what) in the market and Japanese companies tend to be stubborn so maybe they'll hand on in there until they get to number x and if Nikon implodes or anything like it maybe they will. They do seem to be (arguably) one of the more innovative in the market at the moment. If that counts for anything.

Maybe Nikon should make a better effort in the CSC sector. These cameras are apparently easier and cheaper to make and for a company with cost and QC issues and a rising warranty bill maybe easier and cheaper to make would be a good path to go down. Cutting down on the plethora of products may also help.
 
chrism_scotland said:
I'd say that of the major camera makes only Nikon & Canon "need" to keep making cameras, for Nikon and Canon the DSLR market is still theirs to lose and is a core part of their business, it does seem like Canon are a little more diversified though.

Fuji appear in their latest financials to be making plenty of money from their imaging division and while I'm aware they too aren't just a camera company id be stunned if they pulled out given the effort they've put in in just a few short years.

Sony however I could see stopping manufacture of cameras, we've seen it in other parts of their business where they've pulled out of computing and other electronics and seem happy to be building and selling components rather than final products, in the long-term I think Sony will pull out and focus on the sensor business as it seems to be making plenty of money for them across a whole swathe of the camera market (Smartphones, Compacts and DSLR/Mirrorless Sensors).
Click to expand...

Cameras make good marketing material, as high-profile prestige 'halo' products that enhance the brand. Fuji is a good example of how its beautiful cameras create a better brand image for its otherwise fairly dull (but very profitable) products.

The fact that Fuji cameras are also profitable is double-good all round, but if they weren't, and it's pretty much impossible to put a value on halo products, then the accountants will keep asking difficult questions.
 
chrism_scotland said:
Sony however I could see stopping manufacture of cameras, we've seen it in other parts of their business where they've pulled out of computing and other electronics and seem happy to be building and selling components rather than final products, in the long-term I think Sony will pull out and focus on the sensor business as it seems to be making plenty of money for them across a whole swathe of the camera market (Smartphones, Compacts and DSLR/Mirrorless Sensors).
Click to expand...

It is interesting that you say that. They have invested a lot into their mirrorless system. While the FE mount is somewhat flawed (it is too small apparently for 35mm sensor) they have built the infrastructure around it so would expect them to stay on for a while. I don't like their products but that's irrelevant here.

If the market continues to shrink, Canon and Nikon should really start thinking about interchangeable lens mounts to better leverage the existing user base, a bit like what metabones adapter does on sonys with Canon glass.

bythom_nikon_quarterly_med-2.jpeg


This tells me Nikon (and others) must get out of loss making compact sector or maybe shift to surveillance, action cams, etc. dSLRs + Lenses appear to be a far more stable market and could even turn around with the help of groundbraking innovation and once the global economy starts to improve again.
 
Last edited:
Blank_Canvas said:
I think you'll find the Nikon Corporation are a little more than that. One thing they haven't done is put all their eggs in one basket.
Click to expand...
No, I think you'll find they are attempting to pivot back into semiconductors and medical, and are currently pinning a lot of optimism on the former as the latter has been something of a disaster. Even if they meet their forecasts (they rarely do) they will still be a camera company.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
While the FE mount is somewhat flawed (it is too small apparently for 35mm sensor)
Click to expand...

Doesn't seem to stop my A7 working perfectly and I'd expect to see a problem pretty quickly if the mount was too small. In fact it's the best camera I've ever owned, the image quality is simply outstanding and the lenses are some of the best you can buy.
 
The doom mongers predicted the demise of Hasselblad with the advent of digital photography. They are still going strong. As far as camera manufacturers go Sony lag behind in the Nikon / Camera stakes in terms of camera sales. They don't even have a particularly good selection of lenses as a system. Until such times as anything mirrorless even comes close to a Nikon D5 or Canon 1DX Mk 2 there will always be a market. However, I do believe Fuji is the one to watch.....
 
Blank_Canvas said:
The doom mongers predicted the demise of Hasselblad with the advent of digital photography. They are still going strong. As far as camera manufacturers go Sony lag behind in the Nikon / Camera stakes in terms of camera sales. They don't even have a particularly good selection of lenses as a system. Until such times as anything mirrorless even comes close to a Nikon D5 or Canon 1DX Mk 2 there will always be a market. However, I do believe Fuji is the one to watch.....
Click to expand...

My last half hearted post on Sony...

AF offerings in native mount and off the top of my head so there may be one or two more and note that a couple may be announced lenses that have not hit the shops yet - 25, 28, 35 (x2) 50 (x2) 85 (x2) 90mm, 16-35, 28-70, 24-70 (x2) 70-200 (x2) 70-300, 24-240mm.

MF offerings - a few in FE mount and then...

...there's the option of adapted lenses.

I suppose it all hangs on what you decide and define as a good selection but for the age of the system I think the range offered is as of today actually rather respectable.
 
Camera makers were not exactly fast in producing decent digital cameras, even though the film bubble had well and truly burst.
they tried to ignore the advent of camera phones, as if they did not believe that their world had changed.
Real people just want the ability to take reasonable pictures to illustrate their online life, and phones serve that exceedingly well.
They neither consider themselves to be nor want to be "photographers"


Aspiring photographers have always been a miniscule minority.
True, lots of people bought top compacts and Dslrs. In the same way they bought nice watches and other designer accoutrements. But why would any one expect those people to buy out dated stuff like actual cameras.
Phones are where it is at for most people.
Photographers who clunk about with heavy kit are deeply out of fashion.
 
Last edited:
You're right. I still use my dslr and lenses because it's a hobby and I enjoy it. I have a rx100 that I use as a pcoket camera. I offer the rx100 to my wife and she says it's too big and she'll just use her camera phone instead. I know plenty of other people that think the same way.
People used to own a camera as it was the only way to take a photo. Now camera phones are more than good enough for their uses (viewed on the phone screen / on instagram etc..).
 
Camera phone technology seems to be moving faster than actual camera technology. I was recently commissioned to shoot the Samsung Galaxy S7 as part of the O2 launch campaign and was blown away by it. It's more than good enough for general snapshots and in the lowlight conditions I used it in it coped extremely well. I shot my Nikon as well on one day and a Fuji X along it in the other and on screen the results are difficult to tell apart - let's face it most photographs these days are viewed onscreen rather than on a print, and a small screen at that.
Ok, so there were clear differences if you pixel peeped but most people don't do that.
The main thing is though that two thirds of the U.K. now own a smartphone which they pay for monthly and a camera of increasing capability is built into this device. So unless you are a photographic enthusiast or pro (or part of the 33% who don't own one) then why spend money on an actual camera?
 
But people still say "Wow, that's a good photo, you must have an expensive camera". So people do acknowledge that to get better images you need a proper camera. They just can't be bothered to carry one around, which is why the Fuji X series does so well.

I can much more development in the mirror less market, and SLR's only for those people that need FF image quality, or for sports/wildlife where you need specialised lenses.
 
Jelster said:
But people still say "Wow, that's a good photo, you must have an expensive camera".
Click to expand...

I read about this all the time on here but in 35 years of professional photography I've never heard anyone say that to me.
 
Last edited:
still reeling from the massive tzunami that hit their factory some years ago?
 
More recently there was an earthquake, too. But they're really battling on four fronts, a gradually contracting high end DSLR/lens market, a collapsing compact market, a clear systemic quality control problem, and the aforementioned natural disasters.
 
dinorock said:
still reeling from the massive tzunami that hit their factory some years ago?
Click to expand...

That is probably still showing on their balance sheet as an ongoing cost. At least that part that was not covered by insurance.
Rather than spend that money on re-establishing Compact manufacture and bottom end Dslrs perhaps they should have invested in superior camera phones.

When fashions change in line with technology it is best to move on...
At one time corsets and crinolines were necessary to every woman, and highly profitable, Apart for theatre use who makes them now.
 
Last edited:
Terrywoodenpic said:
That is probably still showing on their balance sheet as an ongoing cost. At least that part that was not covered by insurance.
Rather than spend that money on re-establishing Compact manufacture and bottom end Dslrs perhaps they should have invested in superior camera phones.

When fashions change in line with technology it is best to move on...
At one time corsets and crinolines were necessary to every woman, and highly profitable, Apart for theatre use who makes them now.
Click to expand...
not sure i agree that the sale of cameras is a fashion.
 
dinorock said:
not sure i agree that the sale of cameras is a fashion.
Click to expand...

Then say a "trending" ... most people are not photographers. There is little to be gained by "most people" today in owning a dedicated camera, it is simply added clutter and inconvenient to cart about. Large phones are difficult enough...
 
I genuinely wonder what will happen when we move to composite cameras on the smartphones. We already see Leica pack in 2, but what when they cover the whole backside of the phone with cameras? Will they be able to use computation to get better and more flexible image than current dSLRs? Surely that would be the time Can-nikon would totally wet their pants and just as well I would want to have sold off all my current gear. Interesting time are coming.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I genuinely wonder what will happen when we move to composite cameras on the smartphones. We already see Leica pack in 2, but what when they cover the whole backside of the phone with cameras? Will they be able to use computation to get better and more flexible image than current dSLRs? Surely that would be the time Can-nikon would totally wet their pants and just as well I would want to have sold off all my current gear. Interesting time are coming.
Click to expand...

Whilst the processor technology is out there, quality images are always going to rely on quality lenses, even the most basic 50mm lens has five elements, although mobile phone nano lens technology is improving and I've read some interesting articles lately. I'm sure in the next 10-20 years we are going to see a massive changes in technology. Whilst mobiles phones are great for happy snaps I can't see many enthusiasts or pro's gifting their Nikon's and Canon's to a museum anytime soon.
 
The thing that gets me, I can record 4k on my iphone with it's tiny format 12MP sensor. Why can't I record 4k on my D7200 with it's DX 24.2MP sensor?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Whilst the processor technology is out there, quality images are always going to rely on quality lenses, even the most basic 50mm lens has five elements, although mobile phone nano lens technology is improving and I've read some interesting articles lately. I'm sure in the next 10-20 years we are going to see a massive changes in technology. Whilst mobiles phones are great for happy snaps I can't see many enthusiasts or pro's gifting their Nikon's and Canon's to a museum anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I think there's plenty of life yet in DSLRs, and increasingly, it will be the camera that makes the difference - it will not be all about the person behind it.

People love shallow DoF bokeh effects with super-blurred backgrounds - what has become known as 'the professional look' that wedding couples seek and is driving the resurgence of fast prime lenses. You just can't get that with a cameraphone, not without messing about in software, taking time and effort and skill (in short supply amongst cameraphone users, it's all about convenience) - and it rarely looks that good.

Plenty of other no-go areas for the cameraphone too - long lenses for sport and wildlife, flash and studio work, low-light and high ISO, very fast shutter speeds, very long shutter speeds, macro, not to mention those times when only the best image quality will do :D
 
Last edited:
Cameras will survive. But they'll become increasingly expensive as the mass of photograph takers use their phones and other multi-purpose devices.

It might seem bizarre to users of this forum, but the majority of people ant something convenient and simple to use. And they don't give a toss about image quality. They're not even bothered if a picture is in focus half the time so long as the subject is recognisable.
 
Ed Sutton said:
Cameras will survive. But they'll become increasingly expensive as the mass of photograph takers use their phones and other multi-purpose devices.
Click to expand...

Agree.

It might seem bizarre to users of this forum, but the majority of people ant something convenient and simple to use. And they don't give a toss about image quality. They're not even bothered if a picture is in focus half the time so long as the subject is recognisable.
Click to expand...

Yes, convenience and connectivity is what drives cameraphone use. I think 'enthusiast cameras' could mostly do a lot more on the connectivity front - easy sharing on social media - and that is coming I think. On the other hand, trying to compete with phonecams on convenience is a hopeless quest.

But phonecam users are certainly concerned about image quality and sharp focus. It's just that phonecam image quality is plenty 'good enough' now and it's actually quite hard to take a picture that's out of focus - depth-of-field is vast with small sensored cameras and their very short focal length lenses. I found this thread enlightening, a bit of a shock TBH - an iPhone 6 vs Nikon D800. Click on the link in the first post https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/iphone-6s-vs-nikon-d800.605640/ Anyone that thinks DSLRs etc will prevail on the basis of superior image quality alone - that bastion of enthusiast photography - will be as surprised as I was :eek:
 
Personally I look forward to when smartphones can cover 95% of what I want to do, I don't think it will be long now, certainly within the next decade.
 
HoppyUK said:
But phonecam users are certainly concerned about image quality and sharp focus. It's just that phonecam image quality is plenty 'good enough' now and it's actually quite hard to take a picture that's out of focus - depth-of-field is vast with small sensored cameras and their very short focal length lenses.
Click to expand...

I think that depends on the circles you move in. ;) I see a lot of pictures taken by anglers and there are plenty of out of focus shots regardless of what sort of camera/phone they use. Admittedly more are blurred through camera shake (phone shake :D) but these soft images still get praised - and printed!

HoppyUK said:
I found this thread enlightening, a bit of a shock TBH - an iPhone 6 vs Nikon D800. Click on the link in the first post https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/iphone-6s-vs-nikon-d800.605640/ Anyone that thinks DSLRs etc will prevail on the basis of superior image quality alone - that bastion of enthusiast photography - will be as surprised as I was :eek:
Click to expand...

I've been of the opinion that I could do the majority of my photography with a compact since the advent of the Fuji X10. Where small sensors still fall down for me is in low light/high ISO situations. But they improve in that area all the time.
 
These galleries of pictures were taken in the Galaxy S7:

http://www.theviewfromthenorth.org/crossness-pumping-station

http://www.theviewfromthenorth.org/london-road-fire-station-samsung

For the fire station ones I used a tripod for some of them but I didn't bother at Crossness. The ones I took on my own IPhone 5s look awful by comparison. When viewed at 100% there isn't the detail that there is from my Fuji and Nikon pictures, but even printed A3 they look quite good - not that many camera phone pictures ever get printed, let alone that big.

The point I'm trying to make is that for the majority of people a camera phone is more than enough camera, and a very capable second camera for enthusiasts if you can live without a zoom.
 
HoppyUK said:
I think there's plenty of life yet in DSLRs, and increasingly, it will be the camera that makes the difference - it will not be all about the person behind it.

People love shallow DoF bokeh effects with super-blurred backgrounds - what has become known as 'the professional look' that wedding couples seek and is driving the resurgence of fast prime lenses. You just can't get that with a cameraphone, not without messing about in software, taking time and effort and skill (in short supply amongst cameraphone users, it's all about convenience) - and it rarely looks that good.

Plenty of other no-go areas for the cameraphone too - long lenses for sport and wildlife, flash and studio work, low-light and high ISO, very fast shutter speeds, very long shutter speeds, macro, not to mention those times when only the best image quality will do :D
Click to expand...


You just can't get that with a cameraphone,


ha ha my camera phone has "PRO" mode ;);)
 
viewfromthenorth said:
These galleries of pictures were taken in the Galaxy S7:

http://www.theviewfromthenorth.org/crossness-pumping-station

http://www.theviewfromthenorth.org/london-road-fire-station-samsung

For the fire station ones I used a tripod for some of them but I didn't bother at Crossness. The ones I took on my own IPhone 5s look awful by comparison. When viewed at 100% there isn't the detail that there is from my Fuji and Nikon pictures, but even printed A3 they look quite good - not that many camera phone pictures ever get printed, let alone that big.

The point I'm trying to make is that for the majority of people a camera phone is more than enough camera, and a very capable second camera for enthusiasts if you can live without a zoom.
Click to expand...

Excellent sets of photographs of very interesting subjects... they do not need any qualification as to how or what was used to take them.
So what that they have a limited magnification before detail breaks up.
on any printed page or screen they would be fine anyway.
As you have shown, if you want to inspect geater detail you only need to take additional close ups to show it.
Greater enlargement of an original is a clumsy way to show detail, and is in most cases inconvenient as well.

Those shots show what the thread has been talking about excedingly well.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top