You may some day. It's easy to get so caught up in generalized absolutes e. Even if you have done that and find the prints slightly wanting, FX isn't an automatic choice. I know many pros that shoot DX. I've done it myself whenever I'm not doing landscape photography 45mp in the D is hard for a landscape photographer to pass over, though or indoor sports the D5's high ISO capability is unmatched for indoor sports work.
Before reading the appropriate section below, may I suggest your first read this article? Which Nikkors Have Fluorine Coating? What Matters Most? New or Old for the Exotic Telephotos? What is Micro Contrast? What is Tack Sharp? Nikon Rumors. Skip to content. Quick Sony A1 vs. Nikon Z9 specifications comparison ». This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff. Bookmark the permalink.
Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment. Nikon's management has talked about "targeting high-end," but what I see in the sales and upgrade numbers is this:. Take off the bottom bullet, and that's Nikon's high end. The products that Nikon says they want to emphasize moving forward.
Note the one thing I didn't write in any of those bullets: clearly outselling previous models. That's the thing that worries me most: Nikon's bean counters may think that this is just the price to pay for being past Peak DSLR, but I see it differently: I'm not seeing any strong influx of new customers to Nikon, but rather an outflow that started out weak a few years ago and is now growing.
They need to change that and turn things around, frankly. Otherwise we'll just continue a slow progression of decline in unit volume. At some point, that will trigger additional write-downs and that will only increase the rate of decline. Olympus went through something very similar to what is happening at Nikon.
At one point early in the century, Olympus was the number three seller of digital cameras compacts, ILC, everything ; and yes, they outsold Nikon in unit volume. That didn't last. Olympus slowly wrote off non-performing assets and downsized while trying to maintain the higher end models. The Olympus mirrorless group now needs about k units a year to keep in the black, and they've been right at that mark for the last couple of years.
But they're not growing. In Silicon Valley culture we call that a Zombie company: not growing, but not cash poor, so able to basically to continue to walk around looking alive. But in terms of ROI? Basically zero, sometimes negative, so it's tough to change the Zombie fate as no one wants to put more money into zero ROI. I certainly don't want to see a Zombie future for Nikon. But for Nikon not to suffer the same fate we're going to need to see something change, and change sooner rather than later.
There's no "Switch to Nikon" message out of the company let alone a well-marketed reason why. Bean counting decisions, as was made on the D, just generate negative friction that the camera then has to overcome and again, no well marketed message coming from Nikon to do so.
And then we have the non-existent DLs, the choking of CX, no new mirrorless plan in evidence, and more. Management in Tokyo appears to me to be locking in a future that isn't great for us Nikon users. And that will keep most of us loyal Nikon DSLR users around and upgrading when they do it right, just as they have with the D8xx series.
But where's the upside in all that? There isn't one. Nikon needs an answer that restarts growth. It's not that they haven't been looking for one. They've just been looking for it in all the wrong places KeyMission, anyone? We're half way through a RomCom movie and our protagonist is making all the wrong decisions that keeps them from getting what they want. Will we get to Act 3 and the happily-ever-after result, or are we actually watching a Tragedy?
Nikon again needs some better products that catch new users in the lower price ranges and feed them upward, and it needs to convince more people to switch to Nikon than are switching from Nikon. Which Nikkors Have Fluorine Coating? What Matters Most?
0コメント