< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon cuts yearly forecasts after reporting lower sales and income in first quarter

nikon-price-increase
Nikon announced their financial results for the first quarter of the year ending in March, 2015: both sales and income fell significantly due to "sluggish markets in Europe and Americas". As a result, yearly sales and income forecasts were reduced. Here are the details:

Summary for the first quarter of the year ending March 31, 2015 (Imaging Products Business)

Nikon-Q1-financial-results

  • Sales and income reduced 52.8 billion yen and 2.7 billion yen on the year
  • Failed to reach the forecast approximately by 10 billion yen, but the operating income surpassed the forecast due to implementation of cost reduction measures.

Summary of estimation for the year ending March 31, 2015 (Imaging Products Business)

Nikon-financial-estimates-for-2015

  • Sales plan is revised as European markets are expected to be severer than assumed. The revision pushes down both sales and operating income by 6% and 12%, respectively, from the previous forecast.

This is Nikon's stock chart for the past 12 months:

Nikon-stock-chart

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

    If they were to release a D300 replacement, that would really help to turn things around!

    • anon

      But when they do people on here will complain it’s too expensive, want it to make their coffee, wash their cloths and wait for the next model to do that.

      • Aggi

        True, I’m guessing the new body will be a pro spec DX camera @ $2500 Euro – Canon and Nikon are pretty much in lock step with one another. I can just hear the outrage now when the 7Dmk2 is $2800 !!!

        • KnightPhoto

          Hey Aggi – you may be onto something, as you say… what if the newly rumoured 24mp body is DX ;-)

      • Mark

        There are lots of people in that boat. The D300 and D300s were great sellers for Nikon, there hasn’t been anything to replace then in 5-7 years. I bought the D300 when it came out in 2007 and want to replace it, but nothing replaces it. For travel, prefer the lightweight, lower cost, further reach of the DX vs the FX. But I want the professional features. Things like the weather proofing, has saved me in the field. I just want a refresh of it, that provides the new features of the D5300(24M, no filter, built-in gps) with the pro features of the D300 at about the $1700-$1800 price point, and that would be an instant purchase for me. The D800 is basically double the price.

    • Ian Lindo

      Seriously?

      I can’t tell if this comment is a joke or not. I mean, are the people clamoring for the D300s replacements really so disillusioned and self absorbed that they think of themselves as the central pillar to Nikon’s finances?

      • anon

        From the sounds of it, yup! I think John said it in jest though.

        • John Tangney

          It’s not in jest! DX cameras far outsell FX cameras and there is a very large pent up demand for a new DX camera at a level of the D300. The D7100 is good (I have one), but would still jump for a higher frame rate, bigger buffer, AF-On button, and other things the D7100 is missing. If they put all that in a D7xxx or D9xxx, then great, as I could care less what they call it, but a Pro level DX from Nikon is way overdue! (I admit that a D700 replacement would also be well received, but it would still not sell in the numbers as a DX.)

          • broxibear

            Hi John,
            I have a question, it sounds as if you’re invested in the DX system. If Nikon anounced they were stopping the DX range and would not be making any more lenses or bodies, would you stay with Nikon and move to FX or would you look at another system ?
            I’m curious as to what the reaction would be if this happened.

            • John Tangney

              While most of my lenses are FX, I would probably at that point strongly consider going m4/3. The only FX camera that would be of any interest to me would be the D810, as its DX crop area is still about 16 MP. My main interest is travel photography, and within that, I have a strong preference for wildlife, so the extra “reach” of DX is important to me. Plus, as I am now in my 60’s, the idea of moving to a larger, heavier camera is not appealing!

          • jaygreen55

            Don’t you think that both the D800 and DF are replacements for the D700. How are they not??

      • Photo-Jack

        it’s by far not just the D300 successor what Nikon obviously fore goes again. The only thing what really deserves the term sluggish is their product philosophy.
        What are they trying to accomplish with just another D610 iteration, which, I bet, won’t again be as professional as the D700 was? Why the heck does every body needs a different batterypack in the light of shrinking handcarry allowance on flights and different remotecontrols as well.
        The price / usability ration of Nikon 1 is out of this world; Nikon A needed to be dumped as it didn’t find market acceptance while there is not any serious Nikon offer in the mirrorless department in sight.
        Aside from extremely pricy telephotos there is about a handful lenses left meeting the resolution of a D810, to get a 24 or 17mm TC one have to buy into a Canon body on side while the Nikon 24TC IQ is even met by Samyang setting in advance that tC work is hardly done handhold and thus stopping down to f 8 isn’t a problem. Sigma art bolws the Nikon 58mm and 35mm out of the water and a lot of other lenses often requested are waing for an update forever. And because Nikon wants to go on sleeping, they rather take measures to prevent 3rd party sales like e.g. screens (fully ignoring the trend of manual focus)
        The fact that Canon sleeps as well, will not make Nikon sales better. But if Nikon revenues continue sinking Nikon gets up to be bought off in the near future. What a pitty!

        • Ranty McRanterson

          Wow, I had no idea you were ‘Jonny Ives & Steve Jobs’ all rolled into one guy, I guess Nikon’s entire history of lens & camera manufacturing for pro photographers is so not worth anything, perhaps you’ve got too many pixel stuck up your ass to really know what you’re talking about…

          • KnightPhoto

            Good name anyway Ranty!

      • Me

        The D700 ding-a-lings certainly think the world rotates because of them.

    • G_J

      Nah, they need another 18-xx lens. They do so well with those, it will definitely pull them out of the crapper!
      … a D300/D700 replacement, high end DX zooms… no one wants those!

      • MonkeySpanner

        Nikon, I think, is abandoning DX. They have not released a high end DX lens in years. All consumer crap. The 35mm f/1.8 was actually a good move – but then silence.

    • MonkeySpanner

      A true D300 replacement would be a very expensive body. I don’t think another expensive body in the product catalog is going to save Nikon.

      • Cyrille Berger

        Actually, expensive bodies are probably their main hope for survival. The time when they where selling gazillions of P&S cameras is gone, and will never come back. If they want to survive in the photography market, they are going to target customers who are not likely to switch to a smartphone, aka, enthusiasts and pro. And it seems likely that a D300 is something some of those people want.

        • MonkeySpanner

          I agree the age of the p&s is gone. But surely there is some room for a body less than $3000.

  • Guest

    Mea Culpa – couldn’t afford the $12K and $19K lenses.

  • porsupah

    In the third row of these charts, “Digital Camera – Interchangeable Lens Type”, would I be correct in assuming that covers DSLRs and MILCs together – there’s no splitting out of the two families here?

    If there’s any comfort to be gained in this gruesome forecast, it’s that interchangeable lens cameras are still expected to sell well; it’s the compacts that are, to nobody’s surprise, getting hammered by the rise of highly capable and flexible smartphones.

    • ronin

      The key phrase being “expected to sell well.”

      They’ve been setting and missing expectations for years. As have all the camera manufacturers. I’m sure people secretly laugh at the latest “revised” Nikon expectations.

      • Ignorance Blitz

        Until you learn something about how world economies work and how re-alignments due to disruptive technologies occur, I’d say hold off your ‘typing fingers’ !!

  • noxin

    Time for some more rebates!!!

  • http://MDougherty.com/ Mike D

    When Nikon looked like it would not update the old 80-400 a couple years ago, I bought a Sony A77 with 70-400. Nikon did introduce a new 80-400 but I had already bought the Sony 70-400. Now it doesn’t look like Nikon will update the D300 so I just bought the newly introduced A77 Mark II. Of course I had to buy the new 70-400 II to go with it. I’ve been buying Nikon equipment since 1968 and 2 years ago was the first time I strayed and bought Sony equipment instead (except for some Nikon mount Sigma lenses). That’s 2 bodies and 2 relatively expensive lenses that Nikon did not sell. Nikon has forgotten that the advanced amateur is their real bread and butter and has kind of forgotten about us. I do have a couple of D7100s but the next lens I purchase probably will not be a Nikon lens.

    • anon

      Lol no the vast majority of both Canon and Nikon’s bread and butter come from consumer level cameras.

      You may feel like you’re spending lots of money but the reality is for every enthusiast camera we sell, we sell 3-4 entry level cameras that make almost twice the profit.The further you go up the ladder with gear the slimmer the margins get.

      • http://MDougherty.com/ Mike D

        I do know several retired “baby boomers” who have bought entry level DSLRs thinking that they would get back into photography like they were in the 1960’s. The DSLRs again end up in their closet as they pull out their smartphones. I suspect they won’t be buying any new lenses for their new camera. I also see the neatly piled boxes 6 feet high of hundreds of new Nikon kits at Costco.

    • Plug

      I haven’t jumped ship but am in a related situation, Nikon have done nothing to persuade me to spend anything in the last two years after 30 years of regular spending I am retired, relatively wealthy and want to spend but they give me no reason to upgrade. When there is a body that I want, I’m careful not say need, then I will buy it but also a plethora of lenses including, for example, a 500mm f4 and other high worth glass.
      For those who say that the main profit driver is consumer level bodies, yes that is true but the brand’s reputation is based and formed elsewhere. Maintaining that reputation is likely crucial. I am relatively often asked by friends, colleagues etc. for advice about what camera to buy. I have always said Nikon but should I continue to do so as my belief in them drops? I probably shall but Nikon should pay attention to the wider Nikon amateur enthusiast community.

      • rt-photography

        I dont live in the US, but its completely dominated by canon. its like a 85/15% for canon. and I see endless posts of people selling all their nikon gear to move to canon and some videographers are moving to panasonic.
        I do also look to see how many canon ads there are but I noticed its lenses and cameras here and there. not complete gear being sold. flashes cameras lenses together.

        • Eric Calabros

          No, its like %30 Nikon and %50 Canon. less than 2:1

          • rt-photography

            I dont live in the US. internet is INTL. people post from around the world. the website is US but not necessarily the people. there is no competition at all. it saddens me nikon isnt waking up.

            • Eric Calabros

              Its about all camera makers, gaining market share in a declining market is good news if happens, but doeent solve the problem

            • broxibear

              Hi Eric,
              The problem as far as I’m concerned is really simple, the solution is far from simple.
              The vast majority of people who used to buy cameras to take photographs now no longer buy cameras, they use their phones…they’re not coming back. The very small number of enthusiasts/professionals who spend large amounts of money on equipment is also becoming smaller and fragmented because of mirrorless and the ever increasing costs of DSLRs.
              From my personal perspective as a professional photographer I think Nikon has to stop trying to provide cameras in every section, and concentrate on better, higher quality products in a few.

              They could scrap the D3000 – D5000 range altogether, just have one higher end DX range if they intend to keep with DX. And they could simplify the FX range.
              To make up for losing the entry level DSLRs, they need to look at which cameras people are buying instead and compete against those with better products. The competition being the Sony NEX range, the Fuji X range…after mobile phones that is where the next largest market is going to be.
              The other thing they could do is enter the mobile phone market, that doesn’t mean making their own phone, although they could, but maybe partnering with a manufacturer to provide the camera components.
              As I said, not a simple solution…but it’s a different photographic world that it was 15 years ago.

            • Jeffy Pop

              I get what your saying but the D3X00 series makes Nikon huge amount of cash, if you’re buying for a newbie ( typically a child ), the cost of a mirrorless is 2 or 3 times the cost!

            • broxibear

              The market for entry level DSLRs is shrinking as mirrorless cameras expand.
              Here in the UK the Nikon D3300 with 18-55mm VR is £414, the Sony Alpha A5000 with 16-50mm is £320, Fujifilm X-A1 with 16-50mm is £360. That is the type of competition Nikon has.

            • Eric Calabros

              I wonder how Sony can make profit with that price

            • broxibear

              I don’t think it’ll be long before Sony brings out an A7 type camera in the £500 price range either…it’s just a matter of when.

            • HF

              Either you sell few expensive ones, or large amounts of cheaper ones. But to be honest, I always wonder how they make profit by using prices like this, too. Most of their native FE-lenses aren’t cheap, however.

            • http://MDougherty.com/ Mike D

              Mirror-less cameras are a lot less expensive to produce. No mirror box with lots of part and pieces.

            • Me

              People keep saying that that Mirrorless is growing by leaps and bounds…

              … but it isn’t. Look at the sales figures.

              AND, the only two manufacturers who haven’t drunk the Kool-Aid – Canon and Nikon – are the only two profitable camera companies.

              Mirrorless will grow but not this product cycle. Give it three or so years. Given the dismal sales returns for mirrorless, I can see why the big two are waiting before betting the farm.

              They will but introducing new product lines when at the moment is understandably not their chief concerns. Be patient!

            • broxibear

              Well put it this way…

              “Nikon suffered a 31% drop in global sales of interchangeable-lens digital cameras in the three months to 30 June”, “Sales of interchangeable lenses fell 28%, while demand for Nikon’s fixed-lens compact cameras crashed 43%.”
              http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/540882/nikon-system-camera-sales-fall-31

              “Demand for compact system cameras rose
              12.8% in the first half of 2014, as DSLR shipments fell 21.7%, compared
              to the same period last year.”,
              http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/photo-news/540874/mirrorless-camera-demand-soars-as-dslrs-suffer-22-drop

            • Eric Calabros

              I want to know that 12.8% belongs to who. Fuji? Oly? Pany? None of them has shown growth in their imaging. even in Sony report they claimed Cost Reduction the reason for higher profit, that of course buried under IP&S section which includes video and broadcast gear

            • broxibear

              The figures come from CIPA, here’s a link to all their graphs and numbers

              http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

            • Eric Calabros

              Wow.. Now I see why they blamed Europe: in Jan-Jun period near %32 reduction in DSLR unit sales, but %28 growth in mirrorless!

            • Didiergm

              Very true and the internet is (to my surpise) rather full of pro photographers (lots in the wedding department) turning to Fuji X coming from either Nikon or Canon. With one universal comment “I could happilly carry all my gear for 12 hours in a row and still work the next day”. That has happened since fuji has launched their X-T1. (which is what the Df should have been, up to the price tag)

            • Didiergm

              ONLY if you buy the latest and greatest. For a child you say … I only bought second hand for my kids and they were still over the moon.

            • HF

              You are referring to enthusiasts, are very very small minority out of all camera buyers. I told this elsewhere already: as I teach at an university I ask all my new engineering students (about 500 now) the same question (do you own a DSLR, mirror-less, did you buy one…, out of curiosity). The vast majority doesn’t know the difference between the cameras types. They buy what their father had, if they do, but only a handful bought one at all within last couple of years. They think cell phones to be good enough. These are engineering students, but they don’t care at all, I was very frustrated.

            • Aeroengineer

              I think there is a parallel here with cell phones. In the days of wireline telephony, a lot of attention was paid to audio quality. No question that wireless is vastly superior in many ways, but audio quality and reliability have suffered greatly. But many users have no idea how clear it used to be. I think that is coming true with cameras. Ease of use and convenience of cell phone cameras, when high enough, trumps quality for most people. And resets expectations over the long term.

        • whisky

          i hope a lot more people dump their Nikon gear for Canon. i could buy a Nikon 300/400mm 2.8 VRII at dollar store pricing. :)

          • rt-photography

            haha..that new 400 2.8 is a crazy price jump. thats ridiculous.

            I want a 300 f/4 AFS when nikon release a new one. also a 135 dc.but what im really wiaitng for is how sigmas art 85 1.4 will deliver.

            • jk

              yeah I am also waiting for new AF-S300mm f4 and 400mm f4, I don’t need f2.8.
              I also want a new 105mm f2DC with aF-S.
              Nikon also needs to re-design the 200mm f4 Micro with AF-S and VR.

            • rt-photography

              yep the DC lenses have been neglected. love the build quality of those lenses. metal tank like crinkled finish.

              ill even take a 400 f5.6 thats very sharp from open aperture.

            • KnightPhoto

              Your point about the 400 f/2.8 FL pricing is unrealistic. The new Nikon is $750 more than the equivalent Canon. Which is of course nothing at that level and likely reflects a new introduction by Nikon whereas the new Canon has been available for 1-2 years already.

              I want a new 300 f/4 DO as well, but if really is “DO” that ain’t going to be cheap so brace yourself ;-)

            • rt-photography

              I dont want a 300 f/4 DO. I want a 300 AFS they have out. just waiting for nikon to get a new one out with VR so I can get a used one. I owned that lens before. its really stellar. very sharp wide open, very close minimum focus, fast AF, shitty tripod collar though.

              your opinion about the 400 is yours. I say the price jump is crazy. but yet again Id prefer a 400 f/5.6 similar to canons. I might get the 400 f3.5 if I can find a decent price on it.

              doesnt mean if nikon makes new lenses then all of a sudden the older lenses are all shit and shame on them for making them? they are very much still relevant today.

          • Nervous Tension

            Ha! I’ve been scanning ‘used’ listing for a while now just to catch the fool who is willing to sell to switch!!!

        • HF

          How do you know it’s dominated by Canon? I have the opposite experience (and I’m part in a local photo community, too, including sales representatives for a large urban region), more Nikon is sold, here. Some are additionally buying Sony as a second body (A7, A6000), but they are not ready to dump DSLR. I doubt one can extrapolate most personal experiences towards larger areas.

          • rt-photography

            when know and work along side pros, are active in many facebook groups, active in photography forums, you can clearly see.when I shoot brides at the salon for hair makeup, you see other photogs. its very clear.

            in the dslr video sector for weddings, there is no competition. 85/15 for canon. in stills the figures are a little different. probably around 70/30 for canon.

            I dont doubt what you say, im telling you how it is in my country. you can accept it or not.

            • QDB

              You might wanna watch again some replays of 2014 World Cup, it’s been a while since I saw so FEW white lenses around the field. Also, Asia seems to be dominated by Nikon, Here in Poland for every 1 DSLR from Canon 7 or 8 Nikons are sold. There are more markets like this. Altho Canon is still worlds biggest camera seller it’s not by much.

            • rt-photography

              I will take your word for it because I didnt see a single game as I am not a soccer fan at all. but in the olympics, it was a completely different story. all white lenses.

              you did see this, yes?
              http://petapixel.com/2014/02/06/getty-images-sports-photographer-robert-cianflone-reporting-sochi/

              im glad to hear your country sells more nikon than canon.

              the simple fact is canon sells more. but it matters not. all I know is that nikons revenue is hurting, stock is at its lowest for three years now and bottom line, nikons mistakes have hurt them.

              I have a lot of pro gear invested in nikon and not moving anywhere. the stubborn fools need to wake up though.

            • jk

              yeah sports are boring.

            • rt-photography

              I didnt say sports are boring. dont misquote me ;)

              I said im not a soccer fan. im sure there are some sports you dont like?

            • jk

              in Asia probably Sony is no1 now, I fly over to HK, China, Thailand, Malaysia, Japan, Korea, and India, I see many many Sonys, Fujis Panny and Samsung. they do not use Nikon Canon, I think because they are small people.

            • broxibear

              Here’s an interesting article about Canon v Nikon in sports photography…

              http://camyx.com/exposure/2014/06/canon-vs-nikon-war-major-sports-events/

            • HF

              Nice article!

          • jk

            the biggest issue with Nikon system and its marketing is that there is no serious hybrid body in current Nikon line up. the D810 needed 4k and better audio level control.

        • Mixed Message

          Most agencies buy the equipment for their staff – and every decade or so, as Canon & Nikon ‘leap-frog’ the other with improvements in AF or IQ they invest into one system or another, and still others bought into one system early ( i.e. Canon & video ) and save thousands of dollars by not switching back and forth, though they do hope their system will come out with something suitable !!!

          Do you remember when Nikon F3 was the ONLY camera pro’s used, did Canon disappear as a camera maker? I’m actually seeing more and more Nikon’s being used in North America today than even a couple of years ago.

      • HF

        I bought the D810 and I’m very impressed by this cameras. For me it is worth it. Where should I jump ship to? Canon? Not really. Mirrorless FF is still not where I want it (Sony has interesting offerings, but battery life, focus tracking, lack of native lenses (especially fast lenses) and size (too small for me) didn’t convince me, for people shooting stills only it may be sufficient with adapted lenses). There is no perfect camera in my opinion and will never be. And all those available, be it Canon, Sony, Nikon… are able to take great pictures.

        • rt-photography

          my point is not for people to jump ship. I want nikon to grow. they are stubborn to make changes and only when theyre down will change their ways. they made a lot of mistakes the last few years, and the stocks show it. lowest in three years 4 revenues that are down. something has to give.

        • jk

          the D810 is an amazing camera as it is, but it needs 4k to be able to be even competitive in current 2014 serious camera market.
          I am sure the A99ii and A88 will have that.
          So without 4k the D810 becomes outdated very very soon, that’s what I am concerned about.
          I am hoping the D5 will get 4k and EVF.

          • HF

            Probably. I’m not using video at all, so I don’t care. 36MP 4K is quite a challenge, too. Maybe, a wise move would be to use a 16MP sensor in the same body with the same AF system and 4K as a complementary camera. I would by it (not because of the 4K, but because of the 16MP sensor).

      • Hyper Bolic

        Just a quick refresher course :
        Nikon D3300/D5300/D7100 best in class at price point !
        D810 Best Sensor in the world !
        D4s Best Pro level Low-Light Performance !

        You stated you’ve already collected top Nikkor glass, so what is it exactly that Nikon won’t make for you???

        • Plug

          Thankyou for asking. I go to Africa a lot and wildlife is my passion. I have a D300s and a D800. Lenses: Zeiss 15mm, Nikkors 24-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 300 f2.8, TC14 II. For birds in flight the 300 is unwieldy and a little short and as I age I want to change my set up. Specifically replacing the 300 with an f4 VR version when it appears, hopefully soon, and gaining reach with a 500 f4 although that is heavy. All my lenses are FX but the combination of FX and DX bodies gives great flexibility. Think of it this way. Compare the combination of my D800 with 500mm f4 and 5 fps to a top end DX body with 300mm f4 and, say, 8 fps, 24mp, huge buffer,ruggedness, much more maneuverable and only a slight loss in reach. And the ability to mount the 500 with TC14 gives huge reach. I do not see the benefit of making the adjustment with the D7100. For Africa it is possibly not robust enough, the buffer is too small and a greater frame rate would be nice.

    • Eric Calabros

      Appearantly people like you are not too many, cause sales of Sony cameras (especiallly DSLRs) is not good at all

      • jk

        wrong, in Asia, it is selling like pancakes, I have all 3 A7 series and D810/Df, and I am sure it is very well received in Germany too. but what I really want is hybrid pro level FX mirrorless from Nikon that takes all my Zeiss and Nikon F mount primes.

        • Latow

          My god man! Do any of these cameras ever get used? Do you spend half a day figuring which body to ‘take for a walk today’?

          Any photographer need but one camera & lens, anything more without a purposeful need is describing a collector!

      • http://MDougherty.com/ Mike D

        You are correct. Sony A mount bodies don’t seem to be getting any traction even though they have some great technology. However, I suspect their mirrorless are gaining traction. I have more friends switching to Fuji mirrorless than staying with Nikon DSLRs.

  • Chris

    Mirrorless

    • Sandy Bartlett

      No. Cell phones. The mirrorless companies are doing worse, at least Nikon posted a profit. The world camera market is in free fall, pretty much across the board.

    • MonkeySpanner

      aps-c and/or FX mirrorless.

  • Merv S

    In the larger scheme of things…even Samsung missed their targets and in the first quarter, HTC had a net loss but was able to turn things around in the second quarter.due to their new smartphone release.

    It’s not looking good for the tech or electronics sector unless it is Apple or Google.

  • David G.

    Again ?

  • Captain Megaton

    That looks very, very bad.

    • Ms.KrystalMeth

      Dire Situation. Only hope, is for Canon to swoop in and take over. Canon! We Build Cameras like it was 2008.

  • Ms.KrystalMeth

    I told you ALL…Don’t bring out that dreadful Df and 58mm lens. Two major bombs! Canon is coming with their claws sharpen’d and going to take over very soon, with the new Canon 7d markll.. 18.2mp. 5.5minutes of video!

    • Justin Case

      You ought to stop smoking that stuff! You might also want to check out Canon, Fuji, etc, etc sales figures for the last quarter!

      • rt-photography

        yep, DF/58 way overpriced for what they give. I can add a few more products to those two.

        • jk

          the 58 is overpriced but the Df is not.

        • two cents

          They may be overpriced but they are not over-rated!

          • rt-photography

            lets agree to disagree.

      • http://www.gradyphoto.com/ Pete Grady

        Yes, exactly. None of the camera manufacturers are doing REALY well.

    • jk

      Df is actually a great camera, I hated it when it was first out because it had no video. but I bought it for the d4s sensor and I like it, not love it but it is a very good reliable camera, just wish it had dual card slots, though.

  • Photoretouchpro

    Make that a D700 replacement too!

    • david

      how about a 17mm t/s lens and slower telephotos that canon does for those of us who are not super rich

      • Nit Picker

        WTF, if you’re willing to spend on a 17 T/S you can surely afford the AF-S 400 G !!!

    • BlufPoker

      Won’t help a dam* thing. :)
      I’ll keep laughing at those whiners that want a D700 replacement.

    • BlufPoker

      Won’t help a dam* thing. :)
      I’ll keep laughing at those whiners that want a D700 replacement.

  • rt-photography

    no wonder.

    1-crazy high prices. shitty economy. nikon 1V3, 58mm, DF, huge price jump from previous gen lenses (ex 85 1.4 AFD/G- 70-200 VR1 VS vr2-28-70 vs 24-70-13year old tech 17-35 sells for $1800 vs when announced for $1400-400 2.8 is 33% more-80-400 v1 vs v2 $1000 bump)

    2 -3rd party equipment are all stealing a HUGE chunk from nikon. no need to pay nikon prices for quality pro gear.

    -GRIPS stealing a huge market from nikon. I dont know any pro I worked with who bought a nikon battery grip for the past few years. I have two for my D600 (1 as a spare JIC)

    – FLASHES- too many options available for less than half nikons flagship. photokina will have some amazing tech coming in from 3rd party vendors. I cant wait.

    -BATTERIES havent bought a nikon battery in the longest time. all today are decoded and work great. D3/D3s/D600. low price great battery life.

    -CHARGERS same as above. I have the original nikon chargers but ought extra aftermarket just in case.

    – replacement hoods ,lens camera caps, eyecups. low cost work great. never bought nikon

    -LENSES-this is a big one. sigma taking initiative and tokina/tamron showing they are also capable. waiting for sigmas 24-70/85 1.4/135 1.8/24 1.4. for dslr video market samyang/rokinon are selling lenses by the bucket loads.

    4-not releasing products people want D710/D400 WA zoom/prime for DXers. flashes with wireless triggering like the canon 600EX-RT which sells for the same price.

    5-the dslr video market is completely dominated by canon

    6-QC is crap CS is crap

    this decline will continue for at least another quarter before nikon wakes up.

    • fhg

      You’re right about the insane pricing. I remember being in disbelief when the V3 was announced. The balls it takes to announce a camera like that at that price, crazy!

      • rt-photography

        it is crazy. I think they are rude to ask so much money for such a camera.

        Imo the reason is to recoup money from their factory flood.

      • Ian Kirk

        I am looking to buy a V3 and the new 70300CX lens – I’m even prepared to pay the ridiculously high retail price – but no retailer has them in stock and all are quoting 3months delivery!

        • MonkeySpanner

          I agree – that lens is the ONLY reason anyone should consider the V3 – or the 1 system in general.

      • david

        even when you look on ebay for camera gear, those sellers from japan seem to believe that the world is swimming in money. their asking prices are considerably higher then anyone else.

        • joec

          Maybe it’s because the overall economy is doing great, and just the vast majority of americans aren’t benefiting from it?

    • Marcel Speta

      very well analysed. But none of us would wish Nikon’s fall. This would hurt all of us… and honestly i do not want to switch to Canon, i do not like their ergonomy at all. I am not saying their products are crap, but just doesn’t suit to me.
      Also very high pricing is the fact not only at Nikon, look at Canon as well…. they all got insane… especially latest 400/2.8 … great lens no doubt, but the price? …. or Canons 200-400 with integrated TC…again great lens, but …. wouldn’t they sold more stuff just keeping the price as before (at least)?
      Nowadays there are very advanced technologies available, people has less working hard (theoretically), but everything is more and more expensive, people has to work hard anyways and there is high unemployment rate also…. weird age….

      • rt-photography

        I too dont want nikon to fall. I hate canon. the colors the way it feels in hand is nothing like nikon. but nikon wont make the changes till they are down. they are very stubborn in their ways. they have changed from who they were. they ask for more money but give less. plastic lenses, plastic filter threads, cheap lens hoods, slow autofocus. higehr prices. it screams ripoff to me.

        the new 400 prime is a CRAZY price increase. theyre just crazy. I believe a company has a right to ask for more money for newer gear but the price jump is not realistic. 33% price increase for the new 400 2.8 is absurd and ridiculous.

        people may say, yea, but this and yea but that. bottom line, technology evolves. meaning this new flagship tech sells for the same price as last years smartphone with the new tech in it. so it should sell for more in proportion to inflation. the canon 200-400 should be selling for $8000 not $12000. id rather buy a 300 2.8 with converters and save the money.

        how the hell is the price jump of $1000 from the 80-400 to the new 80-400 justified? how the hell does a 80-200 AFS sell for $1400, a 70-200VR1 sell for $1650 and the new VR2 sell for $2400? it also has a huge flaw with focus breathing and minimum focus. the 70-200VR2 should be flawless in everything for that price, yet its only better in shrpness and bokeh. andthe 70-200VR1 is no slouch. so how is this justified.

        economy is bad, prices are up with gear. its not in proportion to the economy. unemployment is very high and people are trying to make ends meat and these guys just bump prices higher and higher.

      • Saki Sue

        Now everyone, take a deep breath! Why can’t any of you just rent the 400mm when you actually need it? Must you really walk around with that huge ego filling piece of glass all the time?

        • rt-photography

          very few can afford the 400 2.8 and thats not the issue. even the previous gen was a huge price tag for the vast majority. the point is the crazy price increase. 33% is really extreme . it should be 10-15% at max.

          • KnightPhoto

            You are familiar with how much Canon increased their super-telephoto prices for their new line? Hint it wasn’t 15% at max.

            I suppose you and I are arguing which came first the chicken or the egg on pricing! Mine is that given the worldwide serious decline in the camera and lens markets, prices have to go up or the companies will not survive. In that context the business people at Nikon are doing all the right things:
            – raising price points any chance they get;
            – reduce costs;
            – this results in continued profitability;
            – allowing them to diversify into other more profitable markets (medical).
            Companies have to be profitable in order to survive. The camera market decline is more or less permanent, it’s not directly driven by the poor economy despite what Nikon is saying this time around about Europe.

            • rt-photography

              I PROMISE you, the stock will stay as it is more or less (to me ups and down means little. I look annually) it will be the 5th bad quarterly revenue in a row.

              watch 3rd party companies take an even greater chunk from nikon. its inevitable.

              the need for nonstop rebates is proof enough they arent selling. it used to be around twice a year in the past. I think we had 4 since the beginning of the year.

              so no problem. lets raise prices. and lets meet here after their next bearish quarterly revenue report, deal?

        • Marcel Speta

          first this is great lens for so many purposes that yes, this is one of the a must lens. I have 300/2.8 VRII so i am happy, but sometimes 400mm would be better.
          second – can you imagine that there are countries where you simply can’t rent this lens, because even local Nikon doesn’t have it? Like here where i am living?
          third – rental is so expensive that for me it doesn’t worth it even if this kind of service is available…

          I am shooting wildlife (beside other themes) and it has nothing to do with ego, it’s just tool providing me certain service.

          Btw, i had Audi S8 it cost 129k € … current latest Audi S8 cost the same and it is better car than the previous model… why this same schema can not be applied to lenses? …. that’s probably the point.

    • anon

      You’re saying this like Canon doesn’t ream people in the same fashion. At least Nikon gives you extra bits with almost all their lenses except for the bottom of the line kit lenses.

      Tbh you sound tightfisted rather than someone that actually has an interest in Nikon’s future you might as well switch to Canon – But wait! They pull the same shit too except worse the 24-70 f/2.8 II they made is $1000 more than what the old one was worth.

      You complain that the 24-70 from Nikon is old tech but as far as I can tell it’s more than sharp enough on my D800, it was only recently that 3rd party offerings and Canon managed to release something that was remotely as good.

      As I wrote somewhere before DX is an entry into FX Nikon already made that decision a long time ago and that’s where they have focused their attention on as far as high end lens development. You’re in the same situation with Canon.

      • rt-photography

        im more of loyal fan than you are. more worried about nikons future than you because I make a living off their gear. my concern is with nikon making bad decisions that you arent seeing. youre only seeing now. I see the future. they are stubborn. they need to change their ways.

        companies only know how to change when their pockets are hurting bad. its not by negative comments here complaining, its not about anything else but stockholders not being happy and forcing them to make a change.

        its the way its going to have to be. they will need to hurt to wake up. no other way.

        btw, I meant old tech about the 17-35 AFS that sold for $1400 when they launched it. now its $1800. how the hell does a old lens sell for more than it did when it was laucnhed? for $200 more get the 14-24 then.

        in fact my point of high prices is correct. if you know youre suffereing with sales then why are your prices so high. lower it a little, and get people to see nikons prices are cheaper than canons and let the money decide.

        • Ian Lindo

          “btw, I meant old tech about the 17-35 AFS that sold for $1400 when they launched it. now its $1800. how the hell does a old lens sell for more than it did when it was laucnhed?”

          Inflation.

          • rt-photography

            yes, Im aware they are more expensive than nikon. but nikon is hurting more. canon will be fine because it has backup. it has a bigger market share as well. nikon isnt as big as canon so when it takes it a hit, its impact is different.

            Bottom line Ian, just look at the posts here and realize people are not happy.

            Ian the tokina 16-28 goes head to head with the 14-24 AFS for $650. the 17-35 AFS isnt a relevant lens in terms of IQ today. no way in hell would a sane person by a 14yo lens for that amount of money. price should go up, but it shouldnt have passed more than $1500. its old tech and doesnt stand on the level of the 14-24 for $200 more, or even the 16-35VR. its just ridiculous. its a good lens, but was made just at the time of digital and CA is apparent at open apertures. my friend has this lens (friend who works with me when we shoot weddings. he has both the 17-35/14-24) I dont like WA zooms and have the tamron 17-35 which is no slouch.

            compare the two here. handheld at high speeds. nikon 17-35 vs tamron 17-35. full files. tamron is sharper. I will do a tripod test very soon. and will include the sigma 17-35 HSM as well.

            https://www.mediafire.com/folder/knhqkuak1x86g/17-35_tamron_vs_nikon

            • KnightPhoto

              Your price expectations are out of line – prices have to go up for camera companies to survive.

              The rest of what you say makes some sense about gear, but with expecting lower prices and continued innovation in a declining market is plumb unrealistic.

              If Nikon is only going to sell 150,000 D4 cameras in that body’s lifetime compared to a much higher number of D3 sold over its lifetime, well guess what we have the new price point of the D4S $6,500 whereas the D3 was $5,000. D5 will be even more.

              Continue this argument for any new lens, camera, etc. Less sales = more dollars per unit. It’s a problem with your expectations.

            • rt-photography

              so im going to come with the opposite mindset than yours. more sales if the price is within reach, then more people have it, less profit per camera but when more people have it, those people get more people to buy. free advertising. I say, lower it a bit, make it attainable and sell more. btw, this is not only for the D4/s cameras, but all their gear. the prices are so high and proof that its so because there are no sales. people cant afford these crazy priced products. lenses camera, flash, or even grips. yes grips are selling for 5 times what a great 3rd party grip sells for. 5 times!!

              how does it sound reasonable when people have no money to buy and youre saying, yea lets raise the prices. so even less people will buy. when you only have X amount to spend, that is your budget, either youll buy used (and nikon sees none of that money) or youll look for an alternative (3rd party) or lower it and sell for less of a profit but get your products out to the customers. which ultimately is what they need to do. slow down 3rd party sales.

            • Conjecture

              “the tokina 16-28 goes head to head with the 14-24 AFS for $650.”

              …NOT EVEN FUCKING CLOSE MY FRIEND

              …and stop comparing lenses designed and built for film cameras to newer glass!

            • rt-photography

              dont get upset that a 3rd party can be a great lens. dont be a childish fanboy. btw, we are not friends.

    • Real World

      Sounds to me like you’re an accident waiting too happen… when all this third party stuff bricks your Nikon.

      For that matter why not just switch to that third party DSLR; oh wait, no such thing!

      • rt-photography

        but there is buying used cameras so nikon sees none of the money. D3 D3s D600 all used or grey with mack diamond vip warranty, which basically is an all risk warranty for 3 years. and still cheaper than nikon.

        bricking huh? I would have no issue buying a third party lens. 3rd party products is eating a huge chunk of their sales.

        youre user name is real world. I guess your “Real world” means sniffing something. I live in the real world where the economy is pretty bad and nikons greed clearly shows. if you have endless money great for you.
        now piss off

  • jgh

    Nikon has to be sitting on a ton of unsold stock. And I wonder what they plan to do with all these returned D600s? Take them out to a landfill and bury them, use them for parts? What can Nikon do to turn things around?

    • Steve

      ebay is flooded with D600’s; that’s were they go

  • Eric Calabros

    %31 reduction in DSLRs, %43 reduction in campacts. Its kind of bungee jumping

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      A bungee jump implies a bounce back… Unless you mean the rootless kind of bungee jumping…

  • Ian Lindo

    Can’t wait to read all the comments from people who think that the only reason Nikon – or any camera brand, for that matter – is hurting in sales, is that they do not release that one magical unicorn camera which would be 100% tailored to their specific needs.

    • rt-photography

      its partly because of that, but many other reasons as well.

      but they are missing a D300/D700 replacements

      amongst other things. 300/4 AFS VR- fisheye 15mm. maybe a fisheye zoom like canon. wireless triggering in flash. WA zoom/primes for dx.

      • Ian Lindo

        I agree that a replacement for the D300 or D700 would be welcome but…a fisheye zoom? Really? Those are very much specialty tools, as the fisheye effect requires quite a bit of careful consideration. I don’t really know of anyone who lusts after fisheye lenses like Canon’s 8-15…but I know of MANY Canon shooters who lust after Nikon’s 14-24.

        • rt-photography

          its a tool for a different view. very versatile. the 16mm nikon fisheye isnt really that great. the sigma is a bit better.

          canons WA zooms are crap imo. tokina 16-28 2.8 destroys the 16-35 2.8LII

          • Ian Lindo

            I’m not sure how versatile a fisheye lens really is. That warped effect is extremely dramatic and irreversible (maybe you could apply some heavy handed perspective correction but I can’t imagine what that’d do to the detail and sharpness of your photograph).

            It’d be nice if Nikon had one though. Perhaps the ultimate tool for some. But at the end of the day, I don’t think fisheye lenses will ever be as popular as more conventional focal lengths, or even simple wide-angle lenses that are not fisheyes (like the 14-24)

            • rt-photography

              when I shoot weddings, I try to give my couple a variety of perspectives. wide, mid, tele, low high and this also includes some fisheye images. I think fisheyes are niche tool for different unique shots. but couples always enjoy the “atmosphere ” shots it can do. also for a super wide shot of the first dance with the lights on them. really stellar.

              yes the 14-24 at 14 is very unique. I try not to shoot people below 24mm though. perspective distorts too much. not aesthetic.

        • http://gplimages.com/ TheFantasticG

          If they released a Nikon equiv to the Canon 65mm MP-E macro lens…. There would be a 180 degree turn in the profits. Infact, I dare say, their sales would explode 200% upward!!!

      • Ian Lindo

        I also agree that DX wide-angles would be nice. Something to equal 35, 28 or 24mm on DX without having to purchase more expensive FX lenses would be rather welcome, but because WA’s are harder to design, I think that’s part of the reason they don’t bother much with WA lenses that only cover the DX image circle.

        • rt-photography

          could be. but they havent touched DX WA in a long time. they clearly need some new stuff. that nikon 12-24 f/4 is crap. always was.

        • Reality Checker

          See the problem here… it will cost just as much to design, manufacture and sell as ANY of the FX lenses – so nowhere near the numbers required to justify such a venture would be sold!

          I think the writings on the wall, DX in dSLR’s is dead, a format left to the mirrorless & phones!

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      WTFBBQ!!!1111 you mean the D400 won’t singlehandedly bring nikon back into pre iPhone condition?

  • JP

    They figured out that nobody needs 18-xx zooms?

  • d810_shooter

    this explains why we might get the D700 replacement after all. taking your money for a D710 and losing a potential D4 sales is still better than going bust.

    conversely, if Nikon isn’t going bust, you would never ever see a D700-esque camera again.

    • I AM INFALLIBLE

      It won’t happen.

      Launching a D700 or D300s replacement after all this time would be a massive loss of face for Nikon’s management.

      • mikeswitz

        Do you really believe this “loss of face” Charlie Chan bullshit from the 40’s. It’s all about loss of money, not face.

    • http://flickr.com/ggbourne Gareth

      The D700 replacement was called the D800.

  • fjfjjj

    “Sales and income both fell due to weak innovation and declining reputation.” There, fixed it.

    • http://nanchatte.wordpress.com Graxxor Anandro Vidhelssen

      I think you summed it up. I went to Yodobashi and found myself playing with Fuji and other “minor” brands… If I were starting out today, I can honestly say I wouldn’t buy Nikon… And this is coming from someone raised on Nikon who moved to the D70 from the F5 because, at the end of the day, all my photons were being digitized anyway, and film scanning is such a chore.

      WIFI, GPS, Touchscreen focus, pixel peeping zoom. Gimmicks some people may think, but I would very much like to not have to splash out 60 on a wifi “dangly dongle” or a gas guzzling eye-fi sd card. And the sluggish cursor driven focus point square really does take the biscuit in live view…. Come on Nikon, where’s your R&D.

      • http://gplimages.com/ TheFantasticG

        “I would very much like to not have to splash out 60 on a wifi “dangly dongle” or a gas guzzling eye-fi sd card.”

        Which I had to do for my D7000 because it came with neither feature :(

  • sladko

    So it seems they should (simply/just) do what Markov mentioned in the other thread and which was honored from the Admin as a “featured comment”!!!.

    Dump and stop production of all…

    mirrorless guinea pigs cx, s, j, v series all the big mistakes
    compact cameras

    lens whcih fill up the stocks (how many nikon 18-….kit zooms do they have and produce???)

    only one 18-…..kit lens not more but a good one like fujis 18-55 2.8-4
    sometimes less is more!!!

    dont overprice products not worth

    listen to your customers, produce products that are highely seeked and wanted

    more transparency in general strategy, lens roadmap, moves etc.. let people and customers participate in your thoughts if youre offer the products the people want nobody has people will buy and if you let participate the people in your moves/make them more understandable and you give them a certain satisfaction and trustworthy feeling would lead to long term customer retention ……longterm successfull / profits etc..

    stop produce such a huge amount of outdated accessories you dont will earn much money with it…..not external advices internal features is the way to go nowadays…..wifi, gps built in in every cam….(increase the releasing price for every cam 100-150 euros higher in order to get still some money…

    have a look what other companies competitors doing and offering what you dont have….e.g. Canon ex-rt 600 speedlite radio triggering flash, mpe 65 lens with 1-5 magnification, 8-15 f4 fisheye zoom lens , 17 tse f4 tilt and shift lens etc.

    so where is the sb 920 radio triggering flash, the 17 tilt and shift lens etc….???

    Concentrate on APS-C and esp. Fx

    concentrate on your lens line up & flash system (new lens, refrehs old outdated and underperforming lens) aim is to have the broadest and best performing lens line up and flash system of all camera companies, so you have to put money R&D on this….
    e.g.

    new

    16 or 17mm tilt shift lens
    longer macro lens than 105 150, 180 or 200
    a lens like the canon 65 mpe
    fisheyezoom lens 8-15 like canon

    update/refresh outdated lens

    nikkor 16mm 2.8 fisheye

    nikon 105 f2dc
    nikon 135 f2 dc
    nikkor 200 f4 micro

    etc….

    Cheapest cam/entry nikon cam

    coolpix a successor may two versions one with fixed prime lens one with pancake zoom

    interchangeable cams dx and fx…have a look at the other thread markov’s post dont wanna repeat this….was excellent written, make sense may it is nikons solution !!!! THIS GUY IS AMAZING!

    For me it seems it is relatively easy if you made the right decisions esp. with regard to midterm and longterm you will be successful if you offer the products nobody has, broadest widest lens lineup, concentrate on your main field but one problem is the stock exhcange and shareholders which expect these thinking and continously higer growing numbers …shortterm dominating thiniking (cfos, ceos) in the whole business world quarteerly sales, profits…for them annually numbers are even longterm ;)…and the other big probelm for me is nikon is no real from the buttom-up raised camera company…..it is a collection of so called markeitng experts, gurus, cfos, ceos, controllers, financial & business admin people which use several technical parts different af systems, bodies etc. to create products, update the old lines etc the leading departmetn , markeint , ceos etc, dont use their own products and or they probabyl have no time for this sadly….i am missing more engineers, photogrpahers, product developers and their impacts on the (final) decision making for porducts, updates, lens line up etc…it seems they are in the absolute minority and if so their thoughts and opinions, advices are not taken into account form the ceos, business, marketing departments which have the power/make the final decision of products….

    My mentioned and Markovs thoughts and moves are drastic / massive and risky but Nikon is at a crossroad……where sometimes such huge decision and moves are needed /being necessary in order to survive in the business and being much more successful in the future / the new king……in a way it seems easy what nikon just have to do in order to survive and may have a better future….but they lose time and time and the horizon gets darker and darker…..maybe the cfos, ceos and nikon wholes working staff have no or less identification with the brand nikon and cams…..if nikon is falling the cfo and ceos etc, will get a job simply somewhere else….so why should we care about it/nikon and make such moves???

    not the best english i know but i hope you get my main points at least… i’m from romania……;)

  • Don’t loose grip.

    I think they need to start getting ahead of the competition. Include wifi, gps and some more in every new model is the least they could do. Their strategy of making subtle changes every now and then and renaming the camera isn’t going to work in the long run.

    Release something like Sony did with the A7 lineup, where D810 is the master of resolution, D610 is the entry level, and something in between where they allow 4K video support. Maybe we’ll see that in the next generation.

    Perhaps and updated Df with video mode and the full set of features of the D8xx lineup. Not holding it back by offering cheaper autofocus module, lack of video mode etc.

    I think they’re going to get lower and lower sales by doing what they do now. But didn’t they just changed the CEO? Like lots Japanese companies it seems to be a lot of people running the board for an eternity.
    Make a big change by replacing at least 50 % of the board with young people from school, other industries or recruiting from abroad. Get some new ideas and start evolving. (This feels like Apple’s history way back before Mr. Jobs started and got it into higher gears.)

  • HotDuckZ
  • Melting Ice

    Eye-watering prices, poor quality control, anti-customer policies, crippled products, poor market research, poor service…………

    Can’t imagine why Nikon’s finances are plummeting.

  • Remedy

    I suggest even more ignorance towards their customers and even more drastic price increase on all products. That helps… as “proven” by reality.

    People for years yell for:
    1. D300s replacement
    2. Nikkor 300mm f4 replacement
    3. CHEAP (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) 70-200 f4
    4. ANY (!!!!!!!!!!!) wide angle and ultra wide angle primes for DX
    5. lower Mpx full frame camera (for fcks sake you had fantastic sensor from D3s!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! – use it!!!!!!!)
    etc.
    For the love of the Lord listen to the customer’s needs. Nothing more, nothing less, it’s not quantum physics!

    • I am Cadaverous

      Ah, but Mr Nikon knows that really, we don’t need any of those and saves us from ourselves.

  • Eric Bowles

    Interesting forecast from Nikon. It looks like they see the 3rd quarter and beyond stabilizing with improvements in DSLR sales. They also show Nikon gaining market share – most of the decline is based on a decline in the market.

    That suggests to me that they have a new DX body – something with some volume rather than a new FX body. The D9300 idea seems to make sense.

    It’s good to see profit margins improving. The lack of write offs and no need to dump excess inventory appear to improve profitability.

  • Nikon User

    Stop wasting time on the V4 and J5 rubbish.

    Give me my D700 upgrade!

    Where are my DX fast primes not in SKY HIGH prices that only holywood stars can afford???

  • Jack

    Things must be really bad…it seems Nikon did not post a Q&A of their financial results conference for the first time.

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      Usually the Q&A come out few days later. I will post them online once they do.

  • fourtis

    It’s just the consequence of listening only to international Financial couselors and NOT to their own customers.
    All effects have causes .

  • Horshack

    Nikon is still stuck in the protectionist mode of trying not to compete with itself, for example by crippling the AF on the Df to prevent cannibalization of D4/D4s sales or limiting the buffer depth of the D7100. They need to realize their true competitors are outside Nikon’s walls and so each body must stand on its own and be competitive.

    • MonkeySpanner

      Very well put. Limiting buffer on D7100 really baffles me.

  • Clubber Lang

    Nowadays your market consists of pros and enthusiasts with a very slim market in between. Companies that can’t adapt to this situation will most likely not survive this new era in photography.

  • FigtreeclimberneedsD400

    Nikon is doomed! To save themselves they need to produce the D300s replacement and fast DX primes soon. Ignore Ken Rockwell, he only spouts silly things.

    • mikeswitz

      Really, what an original thought. You must be right because their market share is shrinking. Oh, wait…….

  • rhlpetrus

    Truth is, camera market has been destroyed by smartphones, ML is stabilizing at low volumes, compacts have stumbled by almost 75% in 4 years and DSLRs by 36% since peak in 2012 (shipments, 1st semester each year, CIPA). Not sure what’s to be done, maybe just stick to what you do best, launch a decent APS-C ML system, since that’s where there is some growth 2014/2013 and brace for financial turmoil for a few years, until things clear up.

    http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54179535

  • MB

    “Sales plan is revised as European markets are expected to be severer”.
    Cute … so it is customers to blame for not buying not Nikon for not offering interesting enough products …

  • catinhat

    This is not a growth market, it is a replacement market. Everyone who wanted a good camera probably has one by now, and I would bet that an average camera in people’s hands is at least 5 years old. There are a few who would update and sell every couple of years, but the majority is perfectly satisfied with what they have already. A typical soccer mom with her D3XXX or D5XXX series camera won’t be tempted to update until her camera breaks, and this is the segment where the volume is. Even the enthusiasts and hobbyists, unless they have unlimited disposable income, aren’t going to upgrade in large numbers every time Nikon makes a minor tweak in this or that. We have long reached the point of “good enough”, and Nikon, Canon, and everyone else out there should consolidate their lineups and focus on quality and not on volume. They should also release the models people have been clamoring for for years now, i.e. the mythical D400 and a true D700 successor. The lineup Nikon had 5 years ago with D3s, D3x, D700 and D300 was a lot more logical than the hodge-podge they have now. It’s been a good move to go from D800+D800e to the single D810 model, but now they need a high speed low megapixel counterpart for that camera with the same exact body and in the same price bracket. I doubt the camera they are about to announce will be that, instead I expect just another camera option which will attract only a small number of people.

    • MonkeySpanner

      I don’t expect any body in the $2-$3K range is a “profit leader”. Nikon needs more innovative products in your “soccer mom” category to temp upgrades in that group of people.

    • http://flickr.com/ggbourne Gareth

      “now they need a high speed low megapixel counterpart for that camera with the same exact body and in the same price bracket.”

      Why would they do that? It would just heavily cannibalise sales of the D4 and / or the D810.

      • catinhat

        I disagree. People who needed a D4 already bought a D4 or D4s. They might be looking for a backup but can’t splurge on a second D4. There are many people who want something close to D4 but can’t swallow the price tag. I’m quite sure that Nikon sold D700 to many people who would never ever buy a new D3 or D3s. As for D810, not everyone needs the resolution, some people want bigger pixels, faster FPS, and cleaner high ISO combined with the rugged and functional design. The D810, D610 and Df are all not that for a variety of reasons. So, Nikon is not making a sale to the folks who would buy an updated D700 (which is what it really is) but are not interested in their current offerings and oftentimes either continue using their older cameras, buy a used TOL body, or look at other brands. In neither case does Nikon make any money off of such users. It is really the same exact situation with the non-show of the D400: they either continue shooting their D300s or look at the options beyond Nikon. So, if Nikon is worried about cannibalizing their other cameras, I would think they should worry far more about users leaving them altogether, or just sitting on their wallets. Just my 2c.

        • http://flickr.com/ggbourne Gareth

          You have a very odd view.

          If there were two cameras – D4s and the mythical D710 – and they were incredibly similar in specifications: same sensor, auto-focus (as in D810), same metering, etc. but the D4s did 12fps and the D710 did 9fps then there would be a lot of people who would have bought the D4s who would buy the D710. Sales of D4s would just dry up to people who would otherwise have bought one.

          It’s pointless saying “people who need one have already bought one” because clearly not everyone has.

          What Nikon want to ensure is that if you need D4s features then you buy a D4s, and not something that costs half the price. Same with the D810 vs D610.

          If you are a pro shooter, and you can afford a D4s then it’s likely that you had a D4, or a D3s, or a D3, and there is your back up camera.

          You seem to think that there are a lot of people who are “stuck” on a D700, and I don’t see that at all. D700 users have lots of upgrade options, including the D800/D800e/D810, the Df, the D610, and the D4/D4s. The idea that there is room in the market for something between the D610 and the D810 doesn’t really make sense from a business / market point of view.

          Nikon need to expand their addressable market. Adding yet another $2000+ camera body doesn’t do that. There are only so many people who are minded to spend that much, or more, on a camera body.

          • catinhat

            I agree with you that Nikon probably won’t fix their financial problems by introducing $2-3K cameras, but, on the other hand, beggars can’t be choosers, and that’s what camera companies, — not just Nikon, — are in this market. Every little bit would help.
            The other aspect of it is that the D700/D800 market is the enthusiast market which is most likely quite a bit larger than the pro market. What’s more, even full-time pros probably often can’t justify a $6K camera. I have seen many posts from pros who continue using their D700 or even D300 because they are reliable and get the job done.
            I would not be surprised to find out than Nikon is selling an order of magnitude more $3K camera bodies than $6K ones. So, even if the profit margin on the TOL cameras is higher, they actually might be making more money on the lower end bodies based on the volume. Unfortunately, I don’t know where to find the actual data.
            The main point here is that to make users open their wallets they need to offer what users actually want. Nikon management seems to still believe that they can force users into this or that particular option, which is probably very shortsighted. And the irony of it all is that about 5 years ago Nikon had a highly successful and popular lineup, and all they really needed to do was to continue building on that success.

            • http://flickr.com/ggbourne Gareth

              All companies “force” users to this-or-that option, because no company can build *all* the variables that people want. It’s just not feasible. Canon only have a limited range of options, which Nikon mostly mirror.

              You’re right that Nikon need to get people to open their wallets, however what they want is more people to be able to open their wallets for a Nikon product, and to give them a reason to buy it.

              The only reason people don’t think the D800 was a D700 successor was simple because of the pixel count, but completely ignoring how it was positioned (and priced) in the market.

              Nikon, now, need to change the market.

  • Man in black

    Selling gears is a burning thing
    And it makes a fiery ring
    They’ve all but lost that wild desire
    and we fell into a ring of fire

    We fell into a burning ring of fire
    We went down, down, down and the flames went higher
    And it burns, burns, burns, the ring of fire
    The ring of fire…

    We sat lofty goals we’d never meet
    The smell of money burnt is so sweet
    An iphone owned by every child
    Oh, how the fire went wild

    //

  • MonkeySpanner

    How about making it possible to stick with a DX body and get high quality equipment for it? Make a high quality weather sealed 50-200 f/4 DX lens – that doesn’t cost an arm + leg. I don’t want to buy a 70-200 f/4 Nikkor for an FX body – 70mm is a weird place to start on DX for a standard tele zoom. Make some wide primes for DX. Fact is – it is difficult to have an upgrade path in Nikon without going FX. But many people do not want to buy FX bodies, or big, expensive FX lenses.

    • anon

      I’ve written this before but Nikon already made the decision that their ‘pro’ high end system is in full frame. DX at the time was a stop gap measure for Nikon to develop their own full frame technology. Even Nikon’s rival hasn’t seen the need to make full line of specialist crop lenses as the gains are not worth the development costs.

      As soon as the D3 was available the writing was on the wall for DX as a ‘pro’ format, Nikon basically focused all their energies in to a fully fleshed out line up of FX lenses.
      I’m not implying that it’s not possible to create pro images on DX or it can’t be used professionally it’s just the business decision that Nikon made.

  • CV

    If you increase prices ~>10% in Europe… you’ll sell less. It’s that simple.

    €1850 for a 70-200 is something… but all of sudden they hiked it to €2050. Guess what…

  • Competitors Advice

    The Df, D810, and D4s are not going to change things for Nikon. The D810 and the D4s came too soon after the D800 and D4.
    Increasing the price for their prices was another mistake.

    IMHO – Nikon should cut the sales of point and shoot, take mirrorless serious and focus on the enthousiast and prosumer market.

    • MonkeySpanner

      The problem with “taking mirrorless seriously” is that if they do – it is admitting that they are on the same level as DSLRs. For now, Nikon is banking on people not being convinced by the mirrorless systems and choosing instead a DSLR. I think this is a crash course. It will eventually end when mirrorless meet, then exceed DSLRs in the few remaining (though important) tasks the DSLRs currently do better.
      I for one would love to see an aps-c mirrorless with focusing as good as the 1 system. I don’t think Nikon should make the tiny mirrorless bodies, like Sony and m4/3. They should do what they are good at – making bodies that are rugged with a good user interface. But again – this is a dangerous course for Nikon as doing this would be an endorsement that all the mirrorless competitors have potentially systems just as good.

  • Gerd

    I have waiting for 2 months on a 600 euro lens ??
    If they want more profit , that’s not the way to go !!

  • br

    Yeah, sluggish markets…isn’t that always an excuse for a company that has no clue what they are doing? Only sluggishness for me is that Nikon isn’t making a product I want to buy. Bought my Tamron 150-600 and money for the D300 replacement has been burning a hole in my pocket for years now. Keep going with high priced full frame cameras and $10,000+ lenses and it will just be more of the same.

  • Captain Megaton

    The forecast is for 1/4 to almost 1/2 less unit sales compared to the same period last year. The only bright spots are a) still making a profit and b) margins are up very slightly.

    So Nikon resigns themselves to selling fewer cameras in future. The company lowers operating costs, constantly refreshes product models, and concentrates on high-margin items like the 58/1.4.

  • PGi

    Thom predicted this long time ago, Nikon never realizes going cheap easy way to start medical business will not help it.
    Nikon really needs a core business other than the dslr, which is clearly going to die out very soon.

    • anon

      Nikon’s core business isn’t DSLRs. Their business is optics and imaging – still cameras are a small part of a bigger business.

      • SteveHood

        Still cameras represent 75% of the their revenue/profilt. Nikon has the most to loose from any camera downturn.

    • MonkeySpanner

      Market for DSLR (and mirrorless) will not die out. It will just contract. That is until next great technology comes out, then it will explode again – just like it did with the digital transition.

  • Anton PupkIn

    Nikon has an extremely indistinct line of compacts. They don’t have any advantage in any specs against any other manufacturer.

  • Back to top