< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon cuts their annual profit forecast

Pin It

nikon-logo

Today Nikon released their third quarter financial results and financial estimation for the year ending March 31, 2013. Here is the recap from Bloomberg:

  • Camera price declines prompted a cut in Nikon's annual profit forecast. Junichi Itoh, Nikon's CFO said this: "Tough competition for entry-level single-lens-reflex models has led to a large price decline since around mid- November. Demand in Europe is starting to slow, while business in China was worse than expected the past quarter"
  • Nikon's net income will probably be 38 billion yen ($405 million) for the year - 37% less than the previously forecasted 60 billion yen.
  • Nikon also cut its second-half dividend estimate to 12 yen per share, down from 22 yen.

Update: as a result of the latest financial results, the stock of Nikon Corp. fell 19% - the biggest drop since 1985.

Summary for the 3rd quarter of the year ending March 31, 2013 for Nikon Imaging Company:

Inventory level at the end of 1st half of fiscal year was raised to cope with the Thai floods risk. As Q3 started seeing the reduction of the inventory, the market condition got abruptly worsened from late November. That led a substantial reduction of assumed unit price of Digital camera ― Interchangeable Lens Type, resulting in deterioration of the Q3 operating income ratio compared to 1st half.

Nikon-Q3-2012-financial-results

Summary of financial estimation for the year ending March 31, 2013 for Nikon Imaging Company:

Due to sluggish economy, sales volume forecast is cut 100k units for digital camera with interchangeable lenses and 200k units for interchangeable lenses.

Financial-estimation-for-the-year-ending-March-31-2013-for-Nikon-Imaging-Company

This entry was posted in Other Nikon stuff and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Foolishcfo

    You have to sell a lot of Coolpix cameras to cover the profit on the mythical D400.

  • kayaker353

    If they came out with a new 80 to 400, I could help them.

    • http://Flickr.com/inthemist InTheMist

      Right. The enthusiast telephoto offering is so pathetic. Old and/or incomplete.

  • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

    GIVE US A D400 THEN!!!

    • King of Swaziland

      We want to be #1 in Cameras.

      We don’t want to fill out our product line.

      Harmony…

    • ActionJunky

      If they scratched off the D7000 or D600 logo and replaced it with D500, would you be happy?

      • ActionJunky

        Or D400

      • js200022

        He is asking for a prosumer camera, not for a plasticky consumer one.

  • Pat Mann

    I’m in for a D400, 400 f/5.6 AF-S VR, 23mm f/1.4 DX, 18 f/3.5 PC DX, 60mm f/1.4. Waiting . . . .

    • Laurentiu Ilie

      I am also waiting for Nikon to wake-up.
      Where are our high-end DX cameras and lenses?

      I am very interested in a D400, 50-135 f/2.8 AF-S VR DX, 16-50 f/2.8 AF-S VR DX, 24mm f/1.8 DX, 16mm f/1.8 DX.

      Not very interested in CX system.

      However, a 24mpx FF camera with a good AF (speed, AF points spread, QA), 1/250 sync flash, 1/8000, 6+ fps, 1.2 and 1.5 crop factor, could be interesting.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=572614912 Jay Donahue

        you nailed it with that DX lens wish list. hope nikon marketing is paying attention.

      • Antonio

        I really like that… only, i’d make it a 35-135 f/2.8 :D (would be a nice combo with a 10-24, the gap from 24 to 35 is small enough to manage in all ocasions :)

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      DX PC? LOL

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      DX PC? LOL

    • Deep_Lurker

      It might be more sensible for Nikon to produce a set of f/4 DX zooms – better than the consumer kit zooms, but smaller, lighter, and less expensive than f/2.8 lenses.

      A personal wish of mine is for a 70mm f/1.8 DX (or maybe 65mm, but not shorter than that).

      A “so crazy it just might work” idea might be for Nikon to re-introduce the old 35-70mm f/2.8D, at the old price of ~$700.

  • Fred Flintstone

    Thom Hogan’s latest article seems to sum up the sentiment pretty well, not sure if Nikon care though

    • http://loewald.com/ Tonio Loewald

      It’s not like Nikon has some other way of making money. They need to get a clue.

      • RxGus

        Maybe you aren’t aware: but Nikon actually makes most of their money on scientific lenses, microscopes, and semiconductors…

        They have a lot of other ways of making money

  • Sheldon

    This concerns me a great deal. I think the Tsunami began a cascade of difficulties at Nikon which were most clearly evinced by the quality control issues with the D800 and D600. A company like Nikon does not make these kinds of missteps absent extenuating circumstances. I purchased my first D800 in the first batch of pre-orders and ended up going through that plus three more before I got a good one a week ago. My point being that confidence in the brand has been shaken. That is not only bad for those of us who are heavily invested in Nikon, it is bad for all pro-level DSLR shooters as a faltering Nikon reduces competition and therefore incentives for innovation in the market. We all need Coke to have Pepsi, Microsoft to have Apple, Apple to have Google etc. Otherwise we end up with the post office. Not to be seen on a Saturday near you.

    • jake

      basically agreed but it was because of thai flood issue not the tsunami.

      • Carlos Penderas

        It was actually both. The main Nikon production facility in Japan was closed for some time due to the earthquake/tsunami.

      • Carlos Penderas

        It was actually both. The main Nikon production facility in Japan was closed for some time due to the earthquake/tsunami.

    • Sheldon

      Thank you Jake and Carlos for clarifying. I stand corrected and really appreciate the comments. I hate getting facts wrong. There is too much of that on the internet. Thanks for setting me straight.

    • saywhatuwill

      Even though the D800 dropped $200 in price the past few months I still am very wary of buying one. I’ve been eyeing it since it came out and have been ready to pull the trigger so many times, then I thought about how I might end up with a lemon. No thanks. At this rate I might as well wait for a successor or even the D4x.

      • KnightPhoto

        D800′s are fine now…

  • JimP

    I’m entering my second year of boycotting Nikon-specific photo products. Give me a D400 and the floodgates will open; no D400 and I’m likely gone after twenty years. It would appear that Nikon would rather give away CX systems than look after their high end DX customers.

    • M

      Here’s a cookie.

    • Mansgame

      High end DX is dead dead dead. Maybe Pentax will have it.

    • twoomy

      Considering that you’re boycotting a camera that doesn’t and will not exist, I guess Nikon will be okay.

    • Rob

      So what do you take photos with?

      • KnightPhoto

        He’s a D300 and 500mm shooter, and a good one at that ;-)

        • http://www.facebook.com/rob.ueberfeldt Rob Ueberfeldt

          How can he be a D300 and 500mm shooter and entering his second year of boycotting Nikon-specific photo products? I guess he is boycotting the purchase of anything new from Nikon and still using their old gear? Sounds like he is confused to me.

  • nawab

    all because Nikon came up with the CX format and the recently building CX lens lineup with ever increasing discounts to entice buyers. No one needed them, just curiosity. A policy gone wrong. People could always invest in very good coolpix cameras and they could fortify with more advanced upgrades when they needed portable compacts. Probably even dx or full frame format coolpixes. Then the entry dslrs got so cheap, there were too many options to confuse starters.

    • bartolomeow

      Maybe Nikon needs to start copying that big Fruity American Tech Company and that big Korean Coglomerate Mafia Mega-Corporation and… start making tablets and smartphones! Diversify!

  • Giraffe

    Nikon is really shooting itself in the foot here.
    I have a D200, plus a number of lenses (including high-quality DX-only lenses) and other accessories. The D300 and D300s didn’t seem to justify an update from the D200, and I have been waiting for a D400 for a while now for better low-light performance and autofocus, in particular. Nothing new on the horizon, apparently.
    However, based on what I read about the Olympus OM-D, I picked one up last fall as a high-quality snapshooter and like it quite a bit. As Nikon seems to want to force me — who has spent thousands of dollars on a high-quality DX system — into getting FX in order to get a solid body with the “pro” level autofocus, I’m thinking about going whole hog into M4/3. The picture quality from the OM-D is quite nice, but the autofocus still isn’t there, particularly tracking. But, at least it seems that Panasonic and Olympus are dedicated to building the system, and the cost of going over to M4/3 is less than going FX in either Nikon or Canon.

    • 5DollarFootlong

      The jump from D200 to D300 is more significant than a potential jump from a D300 to D400. The prices the D300′s are going for nowadays simply makes them the best buy of the Nikon lot. Definitely recommend it to you.
      Remember the D300 is still a perfectly usable camera with excellent results. Only those whom have no skill blame the equipment.

      • Giraffe

        I agree — the D300 is a perfectly usable camera with excellent results. However, the D200 is also a perfectly usable camera with excellent results (hence I didn’t hop on the D300 bandwagon when it came out about 18 months after I bought my D200). However, my D200 is now over 6 years old (!) and the D300, even the D300s, is essentially a five-year old camera. The D300 may be a “perfectly usable camera,” but I just don’t see the point in spending over $1,500 for such an old design.
        In that regard, Nikon is perhaps right, and I should pony up the additional $500 for a D600. However, my 17-55 f2.8 (which I love) and 12-24 f4 (which is fine for my purposes) won’t get the most out of the D600. Getting the D600 and replacing those lenses with FX equivalents means essentially starting over and will cost me over $4,000. And even spending that kind of money I still have a plastic-build body with Nikon’s second-tier autofocus system. I’d have to spend another $1,000 for the D800 to get the pro build quality and top autofocus system, but I’m also paying for more mpix than I really need for my purposes and I have a relatively low continuous shooting frame rate. A D4 would be great, performance wise, but the cost and size of that machine are prohibitive for me, essentially a serious enthusiast photographer. Once I’m spending that kind of money anyway and essentially starting over, why wouldn’t I look at Canon? Or even Sony? I am former Minolta Maxxum user and still have some decent Minolta Maxxum legacy lenses lying around (loved that system, and couldn’t bear to part with it, even after I went digital) that would get me started on even an FX Sony SLR.
        In reality, what I am much more likely to do is take the $2,000 that I might have spent on a D400 and buy some of the best M4/3 lenses available (Oly prime at the wide angle and the Panasonic fast zoom) and a decent Oly flash. On the other hand, if Nikon came out with a D400 — a D300s with better low light performance, a bump in resolution, and Nikon’s best autofocus system — I would buy that immediately, and over the next few years, likely start switching over my DX lenses to FX lenses as funds permit as my serious system, and the M4/3 camera would remain the family walkaround camera — compact, light, easy to carry, but capable of very good photos as the need arises.
        So Nikon’s strategy is essentially alienating me as a user, losing both the sale of a new D400 and several high-dollar (and high-profit) lenses over the next several years.

    • twoomy

      I have an Olympus OM-D and have since sold all of my Nikon DX gear. M43 image quality is almost as good as DX and the gear is much smaller and fun to carry around. The only reason I stay with Nikon is for the ultra-high res FX image quality. They may be thinking that DX will be no-man’s-land in the near future, for right or for wrong.

      • chad

        Totally agree. I use to have a bunch of DX. But the moment I used the OMD, I said to my self DX is dead. The OMD does 99% of what DX can do at a much smaller package. Much more stylish as well. After a year of m/43 gear, I happened to to own the Iphone5. Hell phone camera quality has gone a whole way. I have since sold all my m/43 and moved to FX. So for me, it’s either all out FX when i want to get serious or the Iphone 5 for convenience. Nothing in between.

        • Aldo

          Man I took some pictures with the Iphone 5 before I returned it for the galaxy s3… I have to agree with you the image quality of that thing is amazing for what it is…really outstanding.

    • photoguy1001

      Having owned a D200 and currently using a D300,D300s and D800 I have to say that the D200 does not offer much these days and I am glad I traded it in. There is a vast difference in noise levels from the D200 to the D300s and again from the D300s to the D800! Nikon is a great product but the D200 is old technology at this point and any newer technology will blow the image quality of a 200 out of the water!

  • http://twitter.com/ottbreezes Steven

    Perhaps its not surprising. Most amature photographers these days are quite happy with the results they are getting from their phones and the fact that they don’t have to carry yet another device. Nikon (and many other mfgs) likely were hoping that ‘the masses’ would want to buy “high quality” PS cameras like such as the Nikon 1. I think we now know that isn’t panning out so well. As a prosumer I view these cameras as toys, which may well produce very good quality images but lack the interface I need when taking pictures. As Thom has been saying (no actually screaming) Nikon has been totally ignoring their base which is the DX line. Instead in the past year Nikon has brought out several new FX cameras and lenses that are out of the reach of vast majority of their customers (take the D800 & 800mm for example). My advice to Nikon is to start making products that their customers want and will buy. How about a D400 and/or D7100 along with a few reasonably affordable prime DX lenses like a 12mm, 300mm f4 VR and 400mm f5.6 /w VR. Also, please, with sugar on top, no more do-it-all zooms.

    • RxGus

      I like my 18-200… (now 28-300). But I need primes to fill the gaps left by the convenience of a super zoom.

  • Fred

    This needs to be taken within context. All the major players (Canon, Sony) have reported loss or have miss projections. It’s a bad year to be a camera maker.

    • Thom Hogan

      There’s a bit of a difference that is important. Canon and Nikon have reported lower than expected profits, but they reported profits. The other Japanese camera makers have reported losses in cameras.

      A lot of the problem for all the companies is where the pressure is being applied: compacts. If you remove compacts from the lineups of the money losing companies, they become very small groups, most probably still losing money, and no obvious way they can scale back up.

      Canon and Nikon are unique in that they have a very large volume of interchangeable lens cameras, and those are clear profit makers for them. It wouldn’t be pretty for either company to give up compact cameras (Nikon’s advertising would probably disappear, and they have a lineup that is designed to thrive on the up-sell).

      Moreover, it isn’t a “bad year,” it’s a bad several years, with no end to the badness in sight. The camera makers have been through this before: when film camera sales were disrupted by instant photography and disposable cameras, it was a long battle against a down market. This marginalized Minolta, Pentax, and Olympus, to the point where two of them didn’t survive the transition to digital and all three (now Sony, Ricoh, and Olympus) are still gasping for profitability.

      The problem, as I pointed out long ago, is that you have to realize that this was going to be the cycle, and you need to reinvent the camera and start a new cycle. Digital restarted the camera cycle, but the just-convert-film-to-digital-cameras era is essentially now over.

      Nikon is the vulnerable company here. They’re the only one where cameras are their primary business. Their choices are: (1) struggle and succumb to the trend; (2) find a new growth product/industry to participate in; or (3) reinvent the camera market and trigger a new cycle.

      • photoguy1001

        I agree with you Thom. My feeling is that they need a good pocket camera that will allow instant posting to facebook.etc..This instant access it why the cell phone companies are walking away with market share..As for a high end dx why not that too! As a pro I jumped from my trusty D300s to a D800 but can see why a new robust DX with a high frames per sec would be very useful. Just make it good in higher ISO range and it’s a instant winner and seller!

      • Marco

        I’m no photographer expert but from a business perspective seems Nikon has the edge on the low full frame segment today. All the reviews I saw, the D600 has a clear advantage to Canon’s 6D. This should raise a lot of desire into many amateur photographers out there, me included. So, does it make sense to ignore this entire problem with the oil and dust and jeopardize the potential sales they have currently? Wouldn’t it be more wise to address the problem, issue a report like Canon does frequently (e.g. Rebel IV recall in August) and clarify the problem? Maybe there is no problem at all, just rumors… But as Nikon keeps silent no one is sure and silence many times says more than anything else.

        • Thom Hogan

          Absolutely.

          Nikon used to be a leader in steppers (semiconductor equipment). The Economist pointed out why they failed to hold market: poor quality and crummy customer support. Sound familiar?

          People get on my case for me being on Nikon’s case. But I actually want to see them succeed, not fail. The one thing that Nikon can’t afford to lose is its loyal camera customers.

          • Giraffe

            I agree with you as well, Thom. I posted below about wanting a replacement for my well-liked D200 with more up-to-date sensor technology than the aged D300.
            While I have a fair amount invested in DX, I will admit to being tempted by the D600 lens package deals that Nikon was hocking before Christmas.

            However, the quality control issues concerned me a bit. Yes, I know they likely would have been resolved eventually, but if I’m going to have to wait (for repairs or professional cleaning) anyway, why not just wait longer for either (i) the price to drop again; or (ii) to see what else Nikon (or even Canon or Sony or the M4/3 crowd) has coming down the pipe. Now that I have had the time to think over what might have been something of an impulse buy due to the “great deal,” I have decided that the D600 is not what I want, and even if that package deal were to surface again, I would not buy it.

            It really is unfortunate; I really like my D200. When I switched from Minolta Maxxum film cameras to the world of DSLRs, I basically had to choose between Nikon and Canon (at the time, Sony had just purchased Minolta, and there was only one warmed-over Sony Alpha model available). I initially chose the D200 and 17-55 f2.8 combo over the Canon 5D and 24-105 f4 primarily because I liked the handling, build, and feel of the controls on the D200 better than on the 5D. (I lived in NYC at the time and played with both cameras at B&H.) Canon was running fantastic rebates at the time, and the 5D combo would have only been a few hundred dollars more than the D200 combo, which I felt was negligable when buying into a new system. The fact that the Nikon had better autofocus and a higher frame rate sealed the deal for me.
            Fast forward a little over six years. Now I want a D200 body with 2013 sensor and autofocus technology. I want to be able to use my expensive DX 17-55 f2.8 (which I love) and 12-24 f4 (which is good for its purposes) lenses. After all, isn’t that why we buy into interchangeable lens “systems”? To be able to use lenses and other accessories over time?
            But Nikon doesn’t seem to care or even acknowledge my existence. The current D7000 is not a suitable replacement for the D200 in terms of body quality and controls. The D300 is nearly as antiquated as my D200. I didn’t buy it four or five years ago when it first came out to replace my D200, why would I buy it now, when the sensors on entry-level DSLRs outperform it?
            Nikon doesn’t seem to realize that, if I’m going to be forced to look at full frame and replace the (expensive) lenses I use most, I’m going to look at all my options, including Canon and Sony.
            Unfortunately for Nikon, their support (or lack thereof) of higher-end DX users like me is making me regret not going with the 5D and the EOS system all those years ago. Combined with Nikon’s well-known quality control issues, and Canon’s lens lineup that caters more to users like me (a selection of f4 “pro-build” lenses! fast wide-angle primes!), Canon honestly looks like a more promising alternative at this point.

  • Stephen White

    #Corrections
    Title should read “annual”.

    • Fred Flintstone

      Or anal, as in where DX users can stick their D400 :-0

  • Ernest Koe

    typo in title “anual” should be “annual”

  • Pat

    AF-S 80-400 f/4-5.6 Nano VR for $2000 would be an instant sell out , if Nikon is looking for revenue and profits.

    16-35 f/2.8 Nano VR for $2000 would be an instant sell out as well.

    The D400 would sell for even higher volume.

  • Pat

    AF-S 80-400 f/4-5.6 Nano VR for $2000 would be an instant sell out , if Nikon is looking for revenue and profits.

    16-35 f/2.8 Nano VR for $2000 would be an instant sell out as well.

    The D400 would sell for even higher volume.

  • http://www.facebook.com/muganhorse Davidvictormeldrew Idontbeliev

    Agree with others Nikon could have been if better shape if:-

    1) Introduce a D400 2 years ago with pro body AF 7fps and 16mp – even though it may have dented D7000 sales -> would have meant more sales of accessories, lenses.

    2) Introduce a D700s couple of years ago with D3s video – even though it may have dented D3s sales..

    3) Updated the 2 ancient high volume lenses 80-400 and 300 F4 AFS.

    4) Nikon 1 system good; but should have had a more serious mirrorless system in 1.5x crop format.

    What Nikon is missing now is 3) & 4), a D400 (although D7100 would be good as well), RX1, RX100, Dx lenses and in the long term a D4x (high res) and equivalent Canon 1D C.

    Also updating binoculars to VR and adding some Digital ones would be good along.

    Good that they have updated their Field-scopes with VR though.

    • 800mm f/2.8 DX VR

      You mean a D400 with 12fps

  • PoppyPics

    DX market needs your attention, bodies and lenses. At a price we want! If not dslr’s are going away like the film version cameras. What happened to Kodak should be a warning guys. Wake up marketing!!!!!!!!

  • Marco

    I have some money saved to buy a D600 but all these articles about the oil and dust are putting that on hold since it was released. I’m a amateur photographer and I understand that we can clean the sensor and all of those things but not receiving any feedback from Nikon, this is what concerns me more! It seems that Nikon just completely ignores customer comments / complaints and perhaps believes it will disappear… People with some money to spend will first research before buying x.xxx USD on a camera. And if they see this kind of issues for sure they’ll not jump and ignore that stuff. Well, not me and I’ve been saving this money for a couple of years now for “that camera” :) . And I’m not buying anything else so I’ll just keep waiting to see how this problem will be solved.

    • Aldo

      I thought you were a dx die hard? go buy a full frame sir you will enjoy the results. Don’t worry about the oil, worry about taking pictures.

      • Cheesus

        I’d be very worried about taking pictures if I thought there would be oil spots on them.

        • Aldo

          I would be more worried if the camara failed catastrophically. Any spots at corners are easily fixed therefore no worries.

          • Cheesus

            Sorry, I expect to not have to fix anything on a product. Especially a new one at a high price. Regardless of it being easy. And sloppy errors do not inspire confidence. Therefore worries.

            I have no problem sitting back and taking pictures, but Nikon has spoiled it for people snapping with the D600.

            • Aldo

              Given that excess oil wears off at 3k shots it doesnt seem too bad imo.

            • Cheesus

              That is supposed to inspire confidence?

              Don’t get me wrong dude, give them a free pass if you want. If you like the D600, you like it. But if a company wants to take a lot of money from me, I’m not just going to throw away my first 10 days of shooting with a product waiting for the problem to to away. My friend bought one and I was set to as well, then he had this problem.

              Like if I bought a new car and they told me that the engine ran properly after the first 3000 clicks, I probably wouldn’t put much faith in their quality control.

            • Aldo

              I understand your sentiment… but you need to evaluate the nature of this issue and decide if its a dealbreaker for you, not to mention not every single camera has it. Like when you buy a new car you may get nasty smells from excess silicone from engine seals/gaskets or lubricants for a few hundred miles. Thats different than a dective fuel pump that may cause the car to explode. If you like the d600 and hate the possibility of spots, wait for a better batch… the price may even go down. I just don’t think it is an issue significant enough to discard the camera all together. For me the camera has other disadvantages when applied in my profession such as clustered focusing points and flash sync speed. The no aperture change in live view sucks too but it wouldnt affect me.. you see imo these are real issues/shortcomings to consider when buying this camera.

            • Cheesus

              No one said those shortcomings shouldn’t be considered. Nor does that preclude one from looking at shortcomings in quality control. Consumers need to demand the best from manufacturers, in everything. Not just things which can be catastrophic. And if they don’t trust the manufacturer, walk away or wait for things to come back to standard.

            • Aldo

              You can walk away… or be rocking images with that amazing sensor… I guess I’m just a trooper who doesnt like waiting on others. If i see the chance to make things work i go for it.

            • Fritz

              First you said to just worry about taking pictures, now you say the large sensor is something to behold of. Make up your mind.

            • Aldo Ivan

              nothing to make up my mind about… you get two for the price of one. worry about taking pictures and yes this is a great sensor… should you like this camera, go for it and don’t worry much about the oil on the sensor…. that was the whole point of my posts =]… read up ^

            • Joybean

              He means that either worry about the camera or don’t. The large sensor with oil on it is kind of an annoying large sensor. Wake up.

            • Aldo

              it’s annoying if the most exciting part about your picture are the oil spots. It’s excess oil… it goes away… not all cameras have it… deal with it… it will not ruin your camera… idk in what language I have to say it to be understood. Basically your photography will benefit more than it would degrade should you decide to get this camera because the sensor would be an upgrade to any dx that you have. I’m the one who has been trying to wake up people here.

            • Aldo Ivan

              nothing to make up my mind about… you get two for the price of one. worry about taking pictures and yes this is a great sensor… should you like this camera, go for it and don’t worry much about the oil on the sensor…. that was the whole point of my posts =]… read up ^

            • Cheesus

              No one said those shortcomings shouldn’t be considered. Nor does that preclude one from looking at shortcomings in quality control. Consumers need to demand the best from manufacturers, in everything. Not just things which can be catastrophic. And if they don’t trust the manufacturer, walk away or wait for things to come back to standard.

  • krr

    where is the news on a d600 firmware update? i want it!

  • Cleetus

    I guess piecing out wifi modules and GPS modules as accessories instead what would have been much appreciated inclusions in a camera didn’t work out so well for them.

    • PeterO

      …nor did the overpriced grips.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Oliveira.Igor Igor Oliveira

    Easyyy… A digital FM Body, something like a Leica would be the most wanted camera for all of us.

  • TheFullFrame.COM

    The problem lies in that DX is DYING for the pro-sumer and high end DSLR bodies. I know many people have invested in DX lenses and bodies over the past 20 years, but as manufacturing costs of larger full frame sensors become cheaper, DX becomes almost a silly option. Expect most if not all DSLR’s in ten years to be solely FX. This will be universal across mostcamera manufacturers (or at least Canon and Nikon). Nikon and it’s consumers happen to be in a transition phase. DX will live with the micro four-thirds and portable options. You’ll see.

    • cgw

      Malarkey. If DX is dying, so is Nikon–one of many issues troubling Hogan that should be scaring you. That’s where the market is for DSLRs, not FX, not soon, not until we see FX bodies at or near the D7000 2010 roll-out price. That’s not happening. Nikon’s running out of markets not hurt by global recession. The financial statements don’t lie. Natural and economic disasters aside, Nikon is looking rudderless. Predictions aren’t very consoling–or meaningful

    • Thom Hogan

      Everyone keeps talking about full frame sensors becoming cheaper, and they are, slowly. But full frame will always have the problem of being big. It consumes more silicon, it consumes more time, it has lower yields. DX/APS will always have a price advantage over full frame because of that. m4/3 will always have a price advantage over DX/APS because of that. CX will always a price advantage over m4/3, though Nikon is pricing the damned things like their sensors are made of gold.

      The question has been and always will be: where is the sweet spot for the mass market? Full frame is not the sweet spot. Those that believe that full frame will save the camera industry better be prepared for a very small camera industry.

  • btdown

    Can I get my goddamn d700+ already? Or are there another 12 coolpix or cx models that have to be birthed first?

  • btdown

    Can I get my goddamn d700+ already? Or are there another 12 coolpix or cx models that have to be birthed first?

  • twoomy

    Hmmmm… While most are complaining of the lack of a pro DX D400, I’m also thinking that the D600 and D800 problems aren’t helping. They are good cameras, but with everybody talking about AF problems and oil splatter on the sensor and how horrible Nikon support centers are at resolving any problems, it’s a wonder they aren’t selling as much as they could.

    • Aldo

      the clustered focusing points and the 200 max sync speed put the d600 out of choice for me.

  • Basil

    Nikon 1 series could foul some, but, at the end of the day, it could not compete with Oly or NEX. Also the all-mighty d800 is 400Euro cheaper (some kind of permanent rebate in Romania) compared with launch price – excluding the hypothesys that Nikon wants to make 400Euro gifts to every single buyer, the reason might be that people do not buy the camera. Also the price of the d600 sometimes is droping near the 5d 2 price – some reason as above.

    Nevertheless, it could be just some financial engineering targeting some obscure goals that only a few know about…

  • Rafi

    adding to the chorus, but also frustrated by the QC issues Nikon faced. I know I myself returned a D600, not willing to spend 2K for a new camera with dust/oil issues. D800 with focus issue. I dont know how much money was lost to those factors.

  • Chuck E.

    It would take a huge price discount to get me back in the Uppity MP game again. I would love to own a D800 or even a D600 but not at the current price points. Lower prices = more sales = keep the worker bees busy!

  • Mansgame

    You see what happens Larry? You see what happens when you F@#$ a stranger in the A@@?? You see what happens when you send out cameras with green screens and focus issues and not do anything about it? You see what happens when you send out cameras that have dust all over the sensor and you deny anything is wrong? You see what happens when you tout the video features of a camera but leave no way to control the aperture while shooting?

    • KnightPhoto

      The aperture thing is just engineering design. D7000/600 use the mirror kicker to move the aperture lever. It’s not a software limitation, and there will be no firmware update to provide it. The one announcement I can think of that Nikon Rumors was way off. The big bodies have a separate unit (motor?) to control the aperture lever, not tied to the mirror kicker.

      Now if we have a whole new lineup of E lenses coming (electronic aperture) like the PC-E’s and 800mm, well that won’t be a problem any more.

    • KnightPhoto

      The aperture thing is just engineering design. D7000/600 use the mirror kicker to move the aperture lever. It’s not a software limitation, and there will be no firmware update to provide it. The one announcement I can think of that Nikon Rumors was way off. The big bodies have a separate unit (motor?) to control the aperture lever, not tied to the mirror kicker.

      Now if we have a whole new lineup of E lenses coming (electronic aperture) like the PC-E’s and 800mm, well that won’t be a problem any more.

  • nikolas

    How does Nikon expect to make any money when they build almost nothing? Nikon 1 was and still is a joke. Lots of patents for fast glass but nothing ever comes out. I said it before, this company is going to BR land.

  • FUCKNIKONRUMORS

    Who cares, you NAZIs just delete peoples comments anyways. Stupid faggots.

  • ghjkhl

    It too bad. I wanted to see nikon do well. Guess the D800 couldn’t carry the profits.

  • Rock Kenwell

    Well, I switched to Cannon

  • Bratislav ILIC

    Anyone noticed DSC sales?
    It seams that Nikon 1 sales are better than DLSR and Coolpix combined…

  • regevens

    Prosumer D400 where is it? Listen to us nikon

  • grant torres

    “business in China was worse than expected the past quarter.” Well the mighty Chinese consumers have spoken, boycotting Japanese products over some disputed islands. I hope they kiss and make up and make some parts of the world less jittery.

  • josephline

    … Jeeze … from the looks of this thread, it seems that many of you really need to stop taking photographs (presuming that you do, anyway), being so artistically … *crippled* … by the *current* Nikon you now have – the very one you clamored for 18 months ago. This place is a scream.

  • Ramon

    Arrogance, and quality and usability issues killed Nokia. Nikon is following? They are making all the worst mistakes you should not do. Just keep up the quality and make cameras and lenses people do want, god dammit! D7000 already with focus issues, how can it still continue? D800 with focus issues and far too much pixels for most of us. D600 with dust issues and not enough prolike user interface and features. Forgetting old customers and firmware updates (like in Nikon 1 V1) that could be easily done concerning the bery bad usability issues, but are not done. They fail in SO many things that it is unbelievable. Don’t do the Nokia thing Nikon!

    Once you loose your good imago it is very very difficult, if not impossible to get it back. Anyway it is going to be very very expensive. I bought a used D700. There were no other options for me. After having a bad copy of D7000 just did not want to fight with the camera and Nikon again…

  • dddd

    nikon is a fail. should have release d400 long time ago. d600 was overpriced at launch. no mirrorless like e-x1 or x100s. no phase shift focusing.
    etc… nikon should reconsider their strategy and do business right, not fool themselves with ideas such as lets not canibalize dslr sales with mirorless – if you won’t somebody else will. wake up nikon!

  • Alwyn

    That’s what they get for dropping their standards at Nikon. I bought into Nikon because of the quality at the time. With the D600, D7000 and D800 quality control seemed to have gone out the window. If this is indicative of the future at Nikon then they can bring out a D400, D7100, D9000, D4x or whatever they like, but I’m not spending my hard earned cash on it and I’m sure I’m not alone. And ignoring problems and customers won’t get them very far either

  • http://twitter.com/prevedovich Prevedovich

    All that they need to do is to fix the “bugs” in the current products.

    1. D600 should have raw FullHD output and better video compression (update firmware), otherwise GH3 is better.

    2. Nikon should produce D800 without left defocus issue or people will buy 5D M3.

    By the way, I do not think that D400 would have better than D600 noise/fps performance. So “the cheapest FullFrame” is a better choice for the same price.

    • fo demo

      The 5D MarkIII had a light leak issue which they recommended consumers to use black tape to fix so you argument is invalid.

      • http://twitter.com/prevedovich Prevedovich

        Not every 5D3 sample, but it really has… It produces – 0.5 EV shift that can be adjusted on camera or in PP. It is not a big deal. Much easier than to gradually sharp from left to right.

        Moreover, Nikon does not have a high ISO/fps camera for weddings with a $3000 tag.

        As to video quality, GH3 is competitive to Canon C300 monster. Nikon and Canon DSLRs are 2-4 years behind GH3 video performance. And the price is very sweet! I have waited for D600 firmware update and I have A HARD feeling of moving to GH3. Even if Nikon will produce a decent HYBRID camera in 1-2 years GH4 will be a better choice anyway. And I need to work today, but not in 2 years from now.

  • Angry Nikon User

    No wonder less demand less profit. People are already move to Canon, As Nikon didn’t make his homework very well. we can see on D600, suck sensor problem till now haven’t acknowledge it’s seem to don’t care to it’s customer.
    Just my wild vision.

  • Back to top