1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Size yes, cost not necessarily. Fuji lenses for example tend to be similar cost (or more) to the equivalent FX Nikon lens.

    You sound like you are gloating about that ... sorry but (and yes this comes from a fan of Nikon's current cameras though in the past I have bought Canon, Olympus and Minolta) it will be a sad day should Nikon fail - and they are a LONG way from that. You may have missed it, but most of the write downs (the reported losses are actually not making as much profit as predicted rather than loosing money) were NOT in the camera division.

    You complain they are too slow to react, yet the dropping the DL cameras is actually a reaction to not being able to produce something competitive. I imagine further culls will come and some people will be sad that their favourite products end. There is going to be a period of pain and Nikon do need to make changes - mostly in the software side and perhaps marketing and customer service - but hopefully a leaner, stronger company will come out at the end.
     
    JJ! and chuckles like this.
  2. minnnt

    minnnt

    Messages:
    17,335
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    What fast EF-S primes do Canon have that are 28mm equivalent? The only reason Fuji/M4/3 have them is because they're a one sized sensor system. (With exception to the MF system)
     
    snerkler and Eloise like this.
  3. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    625
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Far too late, they should have known the costs up front way before. Announcing the DL line and then a year later having to cancel it, that’s just embarrassing and show’s them to be incompetent. It may sound like I'm Nikon bashing and in a way I am, I've always had Nikon DSLR's and it really annoys me at some of the things they done and the situation they have got themselves into.

    They don't, but they are not the ones in abit of trouble. If I was Nikon I wouldn't be looking over to what Canon are doing but try listening to your customers.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  4. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    13,547
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    As westerners it can be difficult for us to understand Japanese companies / managers. They can have different priorities and thought processes and can often make different decisions, decisions which to us may seem strange or indeed daft...

    I used to deal with Japanese companies, less so now, and often their decisions seem to be based on not losing face and that can involve not listening to what advisors are saying, not looking at the competition and continuing on a buisiness course which to us seems suicidal or indeed illegal. Changing course may be seen as admitting they were wrong and listening to advice and acting upon it could be seen as admitting weakness or ineptitude.

    I hope Nikon survive.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  5. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    You're not wrong ... but there have been several unexpected factors in the last 12 months ... better they cut their losses (if it was too late) than chasing bad after worse. Hopefully this may lead to some hard questions being asked of Nikon's management.
     
  6. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Watching the last Samurai might give some indication of the problems Japanese management face... (Sorry hope that didn't come across as racist)
     
  7. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    13,547
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    My gf works for a Japanese company and deals with Japanese directors day to day, they're a nightmare.
     
  8. chuckles

    chuckles

    Messages:
    3,872
    Name:
    Barry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    But, are you still talking primes? There can't be that kind of demand if Canon produce only 2 - assuming like-for-like needs and requirements. It seems that the market research Nikon has done is now being poo-pooed by the nay-sayers! Do you see the same demand from Canon crop users across the Internet?

    I still hold to the argument that if you want quality then you use FX lenses. I see no merit in doubling production lines - Canon haven't! Not that I hold much store by that but I'm thinking commercially. I also hold to the idea that much of Canon's photographic ventures/expertise/investment is bouyed through it's other capital ventures.

    At least if you own Nikon and have both DX and FX bodies you can make do with one set of lenses as opposed to the other lot who would need two :)
     
  9. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    2,769
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Nikon show no innovation?

    Have they not made one of the smallest FX cameras on the market which I belive was DSLR of the year (D750) and now have again won DSLR of the year with the D500?

    Both these cameras to me shows that Nikon still have a bright future ahead of them
     
    Eloise and chuckles like this.
  10. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    13,547
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    In ff land there are more choices but for aps-c there are certainly fewer... especially if you're looking for a wider than 30mm f1.4/1.8 prime to use on an aps-c camera. ff ones if they exist will possibly be bigger and more expensive.

    This may not actually matter though as don't the vast majority just buy the camera and kit lens? I've no idea what percentage of aps-c buyers are like us lot here with multiple lenses.
     
  11. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    13,547
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Your view is nice but at odds with the reality of Nikon's current position.
     
    Fuguru likes this.
  12. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    625
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I agree, for me Nikon bodies have been better than Canon's for a number of years. But it's not translating into sales and marketshare, so something is missing here. You can have the most amazing camera that trumps anything else in the market but if it's not selling it means nothing.
     
    Eloise likes this.
  13. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't think JJ is at odds with reality ... the cameras are good they just aren't outselling Canon despite being good. Thats down to marketing (IMO) and possibly reputation of after sales service though that appears to be more a Nikon USA issue than Nikon generally.

    Nikon are also failing at keeping moving with the software side (SnapBridge for starters - great idea bad implementation).
     
  14. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    7,383
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Clearly both Canon and Nikon feel that DX primes are not warranted/cost effective, it's not as though the f1.8 FF primes are big and heavy. How much weight would they save? Probably less than 50g or so, is that worth having a totally different set of lenses for?

    Out if interest, do Canon users also moan about not having EF-S primes?
     
    chuckles likes this.
  15. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    2,769
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I was just trying to look at the positives lol

    Reality is overrated.
     
    Willo likes this.
  16. chuckles

    chuckles

    Messages:
    3,872
    Name:
    Barry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    It may be a supply problem too.... No John Lewis store has the range of Nikon kit it once had, nor Dixons Group et al.

    Hey, there may be a whole raft of reasons for this - I don't know. Simply perhaps there's not the turnover for Nikon as there once was, therefore don't stock - rinse and repeat!

    A long way from they've pulled the plug on the DL range ... but why throw good money after bad? [Leyland should've done that with the Allegro :p ]
     
  17. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    625
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I see where both of you are coming from, but say you’re a DX shooter and you don’t have a massive budget or you’re a street tog and you want a camera that is small and light. One lens you’ll probably want is a 35mm eqv. You will have 2 choices which would be 24mm 1.4 or 1.8, 1.4 is discounted on price and weight which leaves the 1.8 which is £600, fairly big and heavy for a crop lens.

    Looking at other systems, they will have that 35mm evq lens which will be smaller and cheaper. Even Canon has a 24mm pancake lens for £150 (albeit 2.8) for crop. The 35mm should be a standard in all lens line ups. If you want a prime below 28mm then you’re hosed.

    As to whether Canon users want faster primes? No idea, don’t hang out those reprobates ;)
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  18. StewartR

    StewartR Advertiser

    Messages:
    9,140
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Does everybody here read Thom Hogan? His coverage of Nikon is consistently informed and intelligent.
    http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/

    Here's his commentary on Nikon software, which to my mind is absolutely bang on:
     
    Eloise likes this.
  19. chuckles

    chuckles

    Messages:
    3,872
    Name:
    Barry
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I still reckon it's a lot to expect.... thinking out loud here. Why would I want a D500? Decent, robust body, function and superb sensor; more than likely wildlife or Sport with some 'reach' Why would I want a D3300, D5600? probably because I'm starting out so would prefer to cover all F/Ls with (cheaper) zooms.... As a beginner I probably wouldn't know about or have been offered Primes in the shops I visit or mail order.

    So the D500 user probably would go after a (Pro) Prime with a view to later upgrade - certainly wouldn't worry about weight or other penalties.

    Personally, think Nikon have the lens options pretty well balanced. And I can still use my pre 1970's 85mm f1.8 on my D800 (and D7100) - I truly hope they don't fold! A true system :)
     
  20. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    625
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    But what if that D3xxx, D5xxx, D7xxx user got abit more into photographer and wanted a 35mm or below prime? They have no options apart from moving system.
     
  21. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Canon's 24mm isn't a 35mm equivalent though it would be 38.5mm. Canon don't even have a "standard" equivalent for their EF-S

    Nikon offer you a 10.5mm wide (albeit fisheye); 35mm (50mm equivalent) and 40mm and 85mm "macro" lenses. A wider, non-fisheye lens is whats missing ... around 16-18mm f/1.8 or so. But then would it sell except in a small quantity to the enthusiasts in forums like here. People who are buying the level of a D500 wouldn't buy a D500 if they were wanting wide angle ... yes Nikon are "forcing" people into FX but is that a bad thing?
     
    chuckles likes this.
  22. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Essentially what Nikon should do is abandon the D3xxx and D7xxx and introduced a D8x00 as a full frame. Then the upgrade option IS full frame! :)

    Though there are a lot of zoom options available too.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  23. minnnt

    minnnt

    Messages:
    17,335
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Of course they have options. FX glass.

    Buy a 20mm f1.8 lens. Simple.

    Have you actually seen the cost of a fast decent Fuji prime?
     
    chuckles and boyfalldown like this.
  24. Fuguru

    Fuguru

    Messages:
    2,124
    Name:
    Riz
    Edit My Images:
    No
    We can all speculate all we want but the hard facts & figures speak for themselves. Nikon have been going down hill for years in terms of profits, after all that's why they are in the market, to make money.
    Having to cut staff numbers and close down certain operations isn't a positive at all.
    Yes I agree Nikon make good cameras & lenses some of which win awards of the year etc but it doesn't seem to be helping Nikon's profits one bit.
    Then Nikon are trying to go into the action Camera market to take on GoPro? What were they thinking? That market is also shrinking!!

    It will be sad if Nikon do go as I prefer them over Canon minus the QC issues! Lol

    :eek:
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
  25. boyfalldown

    boyfalldown

    Messages:
    14,623
    Name:
    Hugh
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Not sure if this has been posted already but Nikon are part of the Mitsubishi group. I struggle to see they'd let this go unless there was a coherent plan to come back
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
    snerkler likes this.
  26. Greggster

    Greggster Edward Woodward

    Messages:
    1,580
    Name:
    Gregg
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Don't get us started on Mitsubishi
     
    Fuguru likes this.
  27. boyfalldown

    boyfalldown

    Messages:
    14,623
    Name:
    Hugh
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I suspect thats because the majority of people who buy their entry level systems are looking for the ease provided by a zoom and they know they wouldn't sell many. DX users buying bodies like the d500 will be able to make an informed choice when buying
     
    chuckles and snerkler like this.
  28. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    7,383
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There's always the 24mm f2.8d. Still can be found new, and plenty of used around. Light at 270g too.
     
  29. Willo

    Willo

    Messages:
    625
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Unfortunatley it won't AF on a D3xxxx or D5xxxx.
     
    snerkler likes this.
  30. frod

    frod

    Messages:
    392
    Name:
    Kev
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Not sure why Fuji prime lenses keep being brought up as comparison to Nikon DX. The only DX lens that bears comparison to XF Fuji's is the 17-55 DX.

    Nikon's other DX lenses are roughly on a par with the Fuji XC zooms.
     
  31. StewartR

    StewartR Advertiser

    Messages:
    9,140
    Name:
    Stewart (duh)
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    That's the whole point though. Fuji have a comprehensive range of high quality DX lenses and Nikon don't.
     
  32. frod

    frod

    Messages:
    392
    Name:
    Kev
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    it's probably worth thinking about how Fuji aren't utilising their APS-C system to drive sales to their GFX system as well, except through customer satisfaction, perhaps.
     
  33. minnnt

    minnnt

    Messages:
    17,335
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Lols. At a cost of £6200 for the body only I'm not surprised. :LOL:
     
  34. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    7,383
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But Fuji don't have FF, if they did maybe they'd also just make FF primes that are compatible with both.
     
    Eloise and chuckles like this.
  35. Mr Perceptive

    Mr Perceptive

    Messages:
    2,341
    Name:
    David
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Which would defeat the object of a small compact system, and make the glass bigger, just like the Sony A7R's and therefore be very little different from a regular DSLR in format. Just not going to happen!!!
     
  36. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    We're going around in a circle... Fuji don't do FF because it would make the glass bigger (if they weren't building two sets of glass) and Nikon don't do many high end DX lenses because they also do full frame!

    Because what's being said is to make high quality DX lenses means they wouldn't be cheaper than FX lenses, just like Fuji lenses aren't cheaper than an equivalent Nikon (FX) lens.
     
  37. Kaolin

    Kaolin

    Messages:
    798
    Name:
    Gareth
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Not sure I see the circle. I own both FX and DX Nikon bodies but purchased Fuji XE1&2 because of the availability of small high quality bodies and lens. Nikon have no equivalent of a Fuji 14mm or even the 18-55mm (The Nikon versions are bigger and I doubt they are as sharp. I use the XE2 as a 'normal' holiday family camera and the XE1 is IR modified and replaced a D70. I would have preferred to purchase Nikon cameras and lens to fulfil these roles but nothing was available. I was also interested in the wide angle DL, now another non Nikon purchase.
     
  38. snerkler

    snerkler

    Messages:
    7,383
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I think you missed my point ;)
     
  39. Eloise

    Eloise

    Messages:
    258
    Name:
    Eloise
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    @Kaolin well my point was two fold. (And you have to realise that these comments were in response to some specific points people raised).

    First off, Fuji have a full range of "crop" lenses but that's because they ONLY have DX cameras. Olympus and Panasonic obviously also have their m43 lenses, but they have no other format.

    On the other hand Sony have a wider range of crop lenses for E mount, but many predate full frame E mount and I wouldn't describe it as a "full range" in any case. Pentax and Canon (as well as Sony A mount) are the other manufacturers and they don't have a full range of lenses for crop sensor either.

    There are a couple of "holes" in Nikon's DX range, but they are hardly worse than any comparable situation. A wide angle rectilinear lens is missing.

    Second it was claimed that if Nikon had a DX range they would be cheaper (as well as smaller / lighter) than the Nikon FX offerings, but based on the evidence of Fuji high quality DX lenses wouldn't be cheap and wouldn't be significantly lighter.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2017
    chuckles and snerkler like this.
  40. redhed17

    redhed17

    Messages:
    4,260
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't think Nikon listen to their customers much, which is part of their problems imho. Cameras and lenses people want that don't appear, and cameras and lenses appearing which few seem to have been asking for. When they have had problems with cameras, which they have had a number of over the last few years, they ignore the problems until sheer weight of numbers forces them to do something. Hardly endearing them to their customers. :rolleyes: Having so many problems hints at cost cutting on the design and/or quality control side, and using users as testers. Again, not treating users well.

    The delay of these DL cameras for so long, with little information, and then to be cancelled seems a bit disrespectful to their users, and potential users. Other manufacturers may be doing similar things, but I'm a Nikon user and mainly concern myself with what happens with them.

    I do see other manufacturers adding features through firmware updates, which kind of gives the impression that they 'care' about their customers. :(
     

Share This Page