Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Nikon in difficulty?  (Read 22485 times)

hogloff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #200 on: December 11, 2016, 10:16:45 AM »

Hi Tony,

That's a lot of beans for two cents; almost an entire hill of 'em!

I think I might add another single cent to your heap: I see the problem only partly as due to smartphones etc. making better cameras a bit redundant. I think what's happening (happened?) is that the people who were once interested in photography by seeing interesting/exciting/novel images in a magazine or in an advert, are now totally immune. We pretty much all suffer from total visual overkill. You can see whichever sort of pic you want amost immediately on the Internet. The thrill has gone.

What were once deemed interesting pictures that one might want to make too are no longer able to excite, let along push one to go spend magabucks in pursuit of doing the same.

I suspect that photographers, as in keen, will die out altogether in a few years. There is no longer a cachet.

From the cultural equivalent of a rock-star in the sixties, we are nothing, even at the top. All the point has gone. That ground has already been carpet-bombed. After Columbus, it no longer mattered, unless you drift into another thread here.

There is at least a magnitude more images being taken today than the hey day in the film era...so your theory people are getting board of photography does not hold water.

It's just a natural progression with new technology. The Internet along with services like Facebook etc... Have come in and replaced the physical printed photo. The convenience and portability of cell phones with cameras and the instant post to the Internet is what is hurting traditional camera makers.

Why the likes of Canon or Sony don't merge instant Internet access into their cameras is head scratching to me. Surely this would not add much to the cost of a camera and these cameras are basically computers now so it would not be a stretch. I'm sure it's coming and I look towards Sony to lead the way with Canikon being dragged in like what is happening with mirrorless.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10130
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #201 on: December 11, 2016, 07:21:15 PM »

Why the likes of Canon or Sony don't merge instant Internet access into their cameras is head scratching to me. Surely this would not add much to the cost of a camera and these cameras are basically computers now so it would not be a stretch. I'm sure it's coming and I look towards Sony to lead the way with Canikon being dragged in like what is happening with mirrorless.

Probably the (I would think mistaken) belief that most people are not willing to pay another 50 US$ monthly for one more 4G subscription dedicated to a camera with a UI worse than that of the smartphone they already own?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9533
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #202 on: December 11, 2016, 10:45:07 PM »

The impression that I've received over many years of travelling with a camera and talking to other travellers I've met who have been carrying a DSLR of some type, is that most people expect the camera do all the processing of the images they take. In other words, they shoot in jpeg mode.

It's a minority who shoot in RAW mode and who desire complete control over the processing of the images they take and the appearance of the final results in print or on a display screen.

In the days of film, most people who owned a film camera didn't have their own darkroom. They took their exposed film to a shop that developed the film and produced postcard-size prints. If they wanted an enlarged print, they'd get the shop to produce it. That's what I also used to do years ago, most of the time. I never owned my own darkroom, although my father did, and I have childhood memories of producing prints in my father's darkroom.

When computer technology developed to a certain level and the Photoshop program appeared, the chemical 'Darkroom' was converted to the clean and less messy 'Lightroom', with very much enhanced features. That was a vast technological improvement.

However, the fact is that serious photographers have always been in the minority, just as painters of art have always been in the minority.
Those who would have shot in jpeg mode with their DSLRs, are the sorts people who would be most attracted to the simplicity of using an iPhone or iPad.

When I take a photo, I want the maximum amount of detail and color that technology allows, across the whole dynamic range of the scene,  (within reasonable constraints of weight and cost of equipment). This allows for extended opportunities in cropping and processing, even years later. This is what appeals to me. I'm not much interested in sharing iPhone images of the food I ate at a particular restaurant, unless the food contains some interesting detail of small insects nibbling away, in which case I would need better equipment than an iPhone to reveal the detail of such insects.  ;D
« Last Edit: December 11, 2016, 10:51:55 PM by Ray »
Logged

Yashika

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #203 on: December 12, 2016, 09:07:06 PM »

...When I take a photo, I want the maximum amount of detail and color that technology allows, across the whole dynamic range of the scene,  (within reasonable constraints of weight and cost of equipment). This allows for extended opportunities in cropping and processing, even years later. This is what appeals to me. I'm not much interested in sharing iPhone images of the food I ate at a particular restaurant, unless the food contains some interesting detail of small insects nibbling away, in which case I would need better equipment than an iPhone to reveal the detail of such insects.  ;D

8)
Logged

Yashika

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #204 on: December 12, 2016, 09:11:34 PM »

The question this thread is addressing is, 'Is Nikon in difficulty?' Not 'Does Nikon make the best gear?'


In thoughtful consideration, you are right.

If reader wants to talk about biggest company overall, best revenue potential, Sony is in good position with Canon closely behind.

If reader wants to talk about best prime lenses, matched with best cameras, for best images possible today in DSLR format--best to start a new Nikon products thread.

Thank you.
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #205 on: December 12, 2016, 09:15:22 PM »


That's  pretty much what I've been saying. No-one's going to survive as anything more than a niche player if all they do is assemble dedicated stills cameras. That's a shrinking market, which has been shrinking for a while now, and will soon pretty much be restricted to high-end use by advanced enthusiasts and professionals alone. The best they can hope for is to end up somewhat like Leica - a small, niche player, which releases high-quality products and survives off its reputation, but which does not release any ground-breaking  products or technologies and has little hope of future growth or expansion.

On the other hand, the demand for sensors has never been higher. Almost every device has some sort of imaging sensor on board. And these sensors are increasing in size and capability, as costs come down. Everyone wants better low-light performance, higher resolution, higher DR and higher frame rate - and, as these improve, more applications open up. Anyone who designs and makes high-end sensors on a commercial scale has a bright future.

Same goes for optics and processors. Every optical system needs these - optics to produce an image and processors to convert sensor data into an image and interpret its contents. Nikon produces good optics, but fails to leverage this capability in the wider market - all they make is lenses for Nikon-branded products, when they're capable of so much more. Nikon can design processors and does a good job with sensor data conversion, but are far behind everyone else when it comes to actually interpreting image contents (the AI side of things). This is likely related to their reluctance to produce mirrorless cameras or otherwise move beyond SLR technology. Intelligent image acquisition systems require a through-the-sensor approach to work, but have far more potential than current 'dumb' systems. Sony's eye focus is just the start of it. The more advanced and capable the AI becomes, the more Nikon's weakness in this area will be exposed.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2016, 09:24:17 PM by shadowblade »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9533
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #206 on: December 13, 2016, 08:39:41 AM »

That's  pretty much what I've been saying. No-one's going to survive as anything more than a niche player if all they do is assemble dedicated stills cameras. That's a shrinking market, which has been shrinking for a while now, and will soon pretty much be restricted to high-end use by advanced enthusiasts and professionals alone. The best they can hope for is to end up somewhat like Leica - a small, niche player, which releases high-quality products and survives off its reputation, but which does not release any ground-breaking  products or technologies and has little hope of future growth or expansion.

All I want is a Nikon FX DSLR composed of D7200 pixels, with a few additional features such as UHD video capability of professional quality. That'll satisfy my requirements for many years. I'd be prepared to pay a premium for such a camera.  ;)
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10130
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #207 on: December 13, 2016, 08:43:47 AM »

On the other hand, the demand for sensors has never been higher. Almost every device has some sort of imaging sensor on board. And these sensors are increasing in size and capability, as costs come down. Everyone wants better low-light performance, higher resolution, higher DR and higher frame rate - and, as these improve, more applications open up. Anyone who designs and makes high-end sensors on a commercial scale has a bright future.

Where does that leave Sony imaging that doesn't even have the skills to design sensors? ;)

Btw, have you read this great piece of news with LG TVs being mad at LG's panel division for selling their best OLED panels to Sony?

We live in a complex world, don't we?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #208 on: December 13, 2016, 08:58:20 AM »

Where does that leave Sony imaging that doesn't even have the skills to design sensors? ;)

Btw, have you read this great piece of news with LG TVs being mad at LG's panel division for selling their best OLED panels to Sony?

We live in a complex world, don't we?

Cheers,
Bernard

Sony makes and designs sensors. No-one really considers the different divisions of Sony - or any other large corporation - to be separate companies running independently anyway. That they're technically separate companies is mostly just an organisational, legal and nomenclature issue, in the same way as the Air Force, Marines, Navy and Army are technically different entities. In reality, they all work together for a common goal under the same overall leadership.
Logged

pegelli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1248
    • http://pegelli.smugmug.com/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #209 on: December 13, 2016, 09:18:55 AM »

If reader wants to talk about best prime lenses, matched with best cameras, for best images possible today in DSLR format--best to start a new Nikon products thread.
Pls. don't start any more threads on that, plenty fanboy pissing contests can be found on LL using the search function. Some are more useless then others  ;)
Logged
pieter, aka pegelli

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10130
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #210 on: December 13, 2016, 09:28:06 AM »

Sony makes and designs sensors. No-one really considers the different divisions of Sony - or any other large corporation - to be separate companies running independently anyway. That they're technically separate companies is mostly just an organisational, legal and nomenclature issue,...

You don't. There is plenty of evidence that creating different business units has a very real impact on the way companies operate.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #211 on: December 13, 2016, 09:32:45 AM »

You don't. There is plenty of evidence that creating different business units has a very real impact on the way companies operate.

Cheers,
Bernard

Yep, but not in the sense that they move in completely different directions, stop collaborating with each other and start hindering each other. Not when the top levels of management - the directors and main stakeholders, not the CEOs of the individual subsidiary companies - are largely the same between the various branches.
Logged

Rory

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 460
    • Recent images
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #212 on: December 13, 2016, 12:31:52 PM »

Yep, but not in the sense that they move in completely different directions, stop collaborating with each other and start hindering each other. Not when the top levels of management - the directors and main stakeholders, not the CEOs of the individual subsidiary companies - are largely the same between the various branches.

Hmmm.  I think microsoft's past behavior makes a strong case against your assertion.
Logged

Manoli

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1370
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #213 on: December 13, 2016, 12:50:34 PM »

Hmmm.  I think microsoft's past behavior makes a strong case against your assertion.

Last time I looked, Microsoft wasn't a Japanese company.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10130
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #214 on: December 13, 2016, 05:59:20 PM »

Yep, but not in the sense that they move in completely different directions, stop collaborating with each other and start hindering each other. Not when the top levels of management - the directors and main stakeholders, not the CEOs of the individual subsidiary companies - are largely the same between the various branches.

Sony is a great company for which I have a huge admiration. For many reasons I won't describe here.

It is also a company that has taken very clear decisions in terms of autonomy, responsibility and profitability of their different business units. They know they can't have it both ways.

In a world where imaging sensors are quickly becoming a commodity, volumes and cash flow are more than ever important to generate the revenue needed to stay ahead considering the huge cost of R&D and manufacturing units.

So breaking the relationship with your largest customer in the high end sensors segment wouldn't make much sense at all, would it?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #215 on: December 13, 2016, 08:30:49 PM »

Sony is a great company for which I have a huge admiration. For many reasons I won't describe here.

It is also a company that has taken very clear decisions in terms of autonomy, responsibility and profitability of their different business units. They know they can't have it both ways.

In a world where imaging sensors are quickly becoming a commodity, volumes and cash flow are more than ever important to generate the revenue needed to stay ahead considering the huge cost of R&D and manufacturing units.

So breaking the relationship with your largest customer in the high end sensors segment wouldn't make much sense at all, would it?

Cheers,
Bernard

Depends what level the move is planned at.

It's no different to planning at any other large organisation - a government or a military force, for example.

Some things are planned and executed at low level - the level of a single branch of a government department, or at company or battalion level, or at the level of a single store or local office of a corporation. These will be in pursuit of overall goals from above, but will not be directed or planned from above (often being local and opportunistic), although they may obtain support from above if the higher levels see it worthwhile to invest in it. This may be anything from hiring new staff in order to open a new ward at a single hospital, planning an attack to capture a bunker in a sector allocated to the battalion or organising a local promotion or sale at one store to take advantage of a local festival. Support from above may be financial (giving the hospital more funds to pursue its goal), logistical (allocating more fuel and ammunition to the battalion, or diverting more stock to the store) or direct (allocating temporary staff to the hospital or store to support the move, or providing support from divisional- or corps-level artillery for the attack). Or it may not be present at all and be a purely local effort. In either case, the planning and execution of the operation take place entirely at that level, without explicit orders from higher up. These operations may advance the organisation as a whole, or they may just make life easier for the local or low-level branch.

Some things are planned and executed at a higher level - a government department, at division, corps or army level in a military force or at the level of a single company within a multinational conglomerate. A transport department may decide to prioritise rail instead of road, hurting the subsidiary freeways department but fulfilling their goal of moving more people. A hard-pressed division may leave a battalion to hold the line while it retreats - the battalion is all but certain to be wiped out, but its sacrifice allows the division, and others, to survive. A company may decide to close down a store, or even a chain of stores selling one range of its products, which is either no longer profitable or whose resources could be better allocated elsewhere - it may hurt the store, but help the company as a whole.

And some things are planned and executed at the very highest levels - an entire government, a theatre of battle or even an entire military force (which may consist of multiple allied forces) or at the level of an entire multinational corporation. This may be something like slashing the education budget to pay for further investment elsewhere, withholding resources (both personnel and fuel/ammunition) to a particular theatre in order to attack harder, or blunt an enemy attack, in another, or getting your sensor division to stop selling sensors to the rival you're trying to take over, now that your camera division has a product that's competitive with your rival's products and could use those sensors (and the rival's lack of said sensors) to take the rival down a peg and potentially leave them vulnerable to a takeover. Each of these moves will hurt some of their subsidiaries - the education department which has had its budget slashed, the army group which has to give up offensive operations, or even withdraw from a sector, the division which is certain to suffer heavy casualties in the initial attack or the subsidiary company which has to give up some of its sales - but, ultimately, serves the purpose of the organisation as a whole.

And there are many more levels between these. All of them involve doing things that hurt certain subsidiaries, but, ultimately, advance the goals of the organisation as a whole. Just like sacrificial pawns in chess. Constantly attacking everywhere, with little coordination between individual elements and no overall strategy, is no way to win.
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #216 on: December 13, 2016, 08:46:01 PM »

In a world where imaging sensors are quickly becoming a commodity,

They're not a commodity when you need the best one and your sales rely largely on having the best sensor in the market. For high-resolution sensors, there's no current competitor for Sony. No-one else other than Canon has made one in full-frame size, and Canon's 50MP sensor is way behind performance-wise (although the next generation is likely to be much better). The D810 with any other, non-Sony sensor currently on the market would be a painful joke, either lacking the resolution or the DR to make the impact it has. Sony has a monopoly on this, and they have every reason to abuse it while they can.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10130
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #217 on: December 13, 2016, 10:26:20 PM »

They're not a commodity when you need the best one and your sales rely largely on having the best sensor in the market. For high-resolution sensors, there's no current competitor for Sony. No-one else other than Canon has made one in full-frame size, and Canon's 50MP sensor is way behind performance-wise (although the next generation is likely to be much better). The D810 with any other, non-Sony sensor currently on the market would be a painful joke, either lacking the resolution or the DR to make the impact it has. Sony has a monopoly on this, and they have every reason to abuse it while they can.

No, the D810 with the current generation of Canon, CMOIS or Samsung sensors would be very close to what it is today. You probably have never shot with one, there is a lot more to the D810 than its sensor.

Yes, its ISO64 DR is outstanding, mostly thanks to Nikon's image processing technology more than thanks to the base Sony sensor (that is excellent but not that much better anymore than the best competitors).

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged
A few images online here!

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1802
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #218 on: December 14, 2016, 09:09:49 PM »

No, the D810 with the current generation of Canon, CMOIS or Samsung sensors would be very close to what it is today. You probably have never shot with one, there is a lot more to the D810 than its sensor.

Yes, its ISO64 DR is outstanding, mostly thanks to Nikon's image processing technology more than thanks to the base Sony sensor (that is excellent but not that much better anymore than the best competitors).

Cheers,
Bernard

You keep on maintaining that the Sony sensor is 'not much better than anything else out there' and that 'sensors are a commodity'. List some examples.

Everything else is either of much lower resolution (24MP as opposed to Sony's 42MP) or seriously lacking in DR and high-ISO performance (Canon 5Ds). There's nothing else out there with the combination of high resolition, high DR and high ISO capability.

Would the D800 and D810 have been so successful with a 24MP sensor? No way. It would be nothing more than a D610 with a slightly better AF system, or a worse version of the D750

And, yes, I have shot with the D810. Wildlife, not landscapes (I need my tilt-shifts), since the sensor provides good cropability combined with decent AF. I don't see anything in it apart from the sensor that every other SLR in its price range doesn't also offer. Without the sensor, there would be no reason to choose the D810 over any of the other 24MP, decent-but-not-sports-focussed-AF full-frame bodies out there.
Logged

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10521
    • Echophoto
Re: Nikon in difficulty?
« Reply #219 on: December 15, 2016, 01:26:46 AM »

Hi,

Check on this link:
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%201DX%20Mark%20II,Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Canon%20EOS%205DS%20R,Leica%20M%20Typ%20240,Nikon%20D810,Sony%20ILCE-7RII

or this one, that is simpler:
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV,Leica%20M%20Typ%20240,Nikon%20D810,Sony%20ILCE-7RII

I would suggest that Nikon makes a bit better job on extracting DR than Sony. Both companies play tricks.

But, the Canon and CMOSIS designed for Leica sensors are way behind.

The comparison on the MFD side may be interesting to:
http://photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica%20S%20Typ%20006,Leica%20S%20Typ%20007,Pentax%20645Z,Phase%20One%20IQ260

Keep in mind the IQ260 has a much larger sensor than the others…

Best regards
Erik

You keep on maintaining that the Sony sensor is 'not much better than anything else out there' and that 'sensors are a commodity'. List some examples.

Everything else is either of much lower resolution (24MP as opposed to Sony's 42MP) or seriously lacking in DR and high-ISO performance (Canon 5Ds). There's nothing else out there with the combination of high resolition, high DR and high ISO capability.

Would the D800 and D810 have been so successful with a 24MP sensor? No way. It would be nothing more than a D610 with a slightly better AF system, or a worse version of the D750

And, yes, I have shot with the D810. Wildlife, not landscapes (I need my tilt-shifts), since the sensor provides good cropability combined with decent AF. I don't see anything in it apart from the sensor that every other SLR in its price range doesn't also offer. Without the sensor, there would be no reason to choose the D810 over any of the other 24MP, decent-but-not-sports-focussed-AF full-frame bodies out there.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13   Go Up