< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon already sees “signs of recovery” in North America, Asia and China in their Q&A of financial results

nikon-logo
Nikon published their Q&A for the Q1 financial results. For the Imaging Business, Nikon already sees "signs of recovery" in North America, Asia and China. The company's strategy for the next few months will be cost cutting, generating sales by introducing new products (D750, SB-500) and concentrating on promotional activities:

Q: Please tell us about your outlook for the interchangeable lens-type digital camera market and the downward revision of the full-year sales volume forecast.

A: Although we started to see signs of recovery in North America, Asia and China in the first quarter, we forecast that recovery of the European market conditions will be delayed due to impacts of economic circumstances and the like. In reflection of these circumstances, we made a downward revision to our outlook for the overall market as well as our full-year sales volume forecast in the current fiscal year.

Q: What can you tell us about your future sales strategy in light of the market outlook?

A: Since the previous year until the first quarter of this fiscal year, we have implemented rigorous cost cuts as well as measures to improve profit margins. The effects of these efforts are reflected in the operating profit margin of the first quarter.

From the second quarter and onwards, we will carry out measures to secure the sales of the Digital cameras—Interchangeable Lens Type, which are our leading products, while leveraging the underlying cost cuts and profitability improvements that have been made continuously since the previous year.

Specifically, we will aim to ensure sales by introducing new products and carrying out promotional activities based on a sorting and differentiation of target products and regions in which we will focus our efforts.
Additionally, in terms of the compact digital camera market that has been shrinking significantly, we will ensure a continued surplus by promoting the light asset production and sales structure that we have implemented since the past.

Although the market as a whole is inclined toward shrinking, for our medium-term activities, we plan on carrying out market revitalization through efforts such as cultivating the underdeveloped regional markets and creating value driven by new concepts.

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

    The only way for Nikon to boost sales is to exploit their expeed 4 processor to its limits, offering a 4k capable DSLR packed in a weather sealed body with raw or miniraw video recording using the new 12mp Sony exmor sensor. On the photo side, they should bring the D400 on the market with very high frame rate, 24mp and AF reliability

    • saywhatuwill

      If Nikon brought out a D400 it won’t be named the D400. I think that naming convention is dead. It’ll most likely be the D9500 if it ever comes out. 4k, though, I think is for next year or the year after. They need products and features that will appeal to new and existing users.

    • Fark

      The broadcasting industry is barely at 1080p now. Going to 4k when there’s no broadly accepted standard, and the patents/software licences may be (I’m reasonably confident here but too lazy to Google) still comparatively expensive may not actually sell many cameras and probably do nothing but cut into margins.

      Four k will get here but I’d be astonished if they were even contemplating it. It’ll get here but probably not before the next product cycle.

      I’m sure they’re testing it but too many things need to be changed in the camera to support it well: it’ll be power hungry, heat, the I/O board will need to be a good one and not a cheap-o, et cetera.

      Be patient. It’ll get here. I suspect it’ll debut at the top of one of their product classes and not in the middle of the pack. So again, the next product lifecycle.

      • Jonathan

        Indeed. Even modern computers struggle some with 4K. Many TV stations only offer 720i not 1080p, so why rush into 4K? Not only that but 8K has already been developed, so why bother with 4K at all, just jump to 8K.

        • Fark

          I’m sure they’re doing no end of testing on new video capability as the hardware won’t suddenly design itself but there’s no impetus from an industry perspective to get it here-in-the-next-week-or-we’re-all-gonna-die.

          It’s still a nice to have and not need to have in 2014 as they’re not losing many if any sales over it.

          Everything from the sensor to the ADC to the GPU to the I/O board is involved. It’ll get here when it gets here.

        • Craig John

          Most of the HDTV stations/networks I watch are either 1080i or 720p. The blu-ray movies I watch are 1080p.

        • Andrew

          For years the 1080i/60p and 1080p/30p were the upper limit for DSLR. Expeed 4 enabled 1080p/60p. Nothing higher will be seen for at least a few years; expect maybe in the mirrorless market.

        • ZoetMB

          No, TV stations offer either 720p or 1080i, not 720i and 1080p – you have it backwards. Blu-ray offers 1080p. And “TV” 4K is not really 4K – it’s 3840 x 2160, the equivalent of 8.3MP. Due to marketing idiots, “Full HD” quotes the vertical dimension but “UHD” quotes the horizontal dimension and then exaggerates.

          But Netflix claims they’re going to offer 4K soon. The question is how compressed is it going to be.

          Theatrical 4K “full container” is 4096 x 2160, but it’s cropped to 4096 x 1716 for 2.39 aspect ratio and 3996 x 2160 for 1.85 AR films.

          8K has not really been developed. It’s used in scanners, but not any widely available pro cameras as yet as far as I’m aware.

          Personally, I think Nikon should release a camera that includes 4K video. And they should do so before Canon does (Canon already does so in the video-only market). Nikon should also release lenses that are suitable for video – smooth zoom and maintaining same focus throughout the zoom. I also think Nikon should develop their own (presumably better) equivalent of the Sony A7 series. The question there would be whether it’s still F-mount or whether they have to develop a new smaller mount. It’s not that I want mirrorless, but I really think the future for most photographers is going to be in smaller, lighter cameras. The size and weight of cameras has gotten ridiculous, IMO.

          My opinion is that if Nikon wants a big sales pickup, it’s not going to be by these new models with small iterations. It’s got to be by making revolutionary changes (and by fixing workflow), but I think they’re “camera shy” because of the Nikon 1 disasters.

      • neversink

        The computer equipment needed to process and view 4K is incredibly expensive. Let alone that until standards in 4K are agreed upon in the industry, from transmission signals and equipment, we won’t see much commercial 4K production. Yes, many TV stations are still using 720i, which looks fine on a TV.
        Who knows if 4K will even become an accepted industry standard? They may find another technology.

      • Theodoros Fotometria

        I guess Raw video is more important than 4K… Exactly like Raw stills of 10mp are more important than JPEG stills of 36mp…

    • fjfjjj

      “The only way for Nikon to boost sales”

      Yeah sure. I stopped reading right there.

    • Peter Drage

      4K is a marketing ploy by TV Makers to sell more TV’s. 3D TV’s ring any bells. Most commercial broadcasters are still 720p at best. The transmission requirements of 4K make it a non starter for the next 5 years + Where 4K is valuable is in high end pro production to allow zoom, crop etc down to 1080p but this as such a small market, akin to Medium Format, Nikon should think twice. I would rather see mirrorless developments, top notch build quality, some newer glass and something revolutionary rather than jumping on the 4K bandwagon.

      • saywhatuwill

        Unfortunately if the market “requires” 4k video to sell cameras then Nikon will need to follow suit. When the D700 came out it didn’t have video and the Canon 5D Mark II had it. Which one outsold the other by a lot? Which one was featured on a television show shooting an episode? I can assure you the company name didn’t start with “N.” Nikon may have been the first to come out with video on a DSLR but they were a little behind. Nowadays it’s really hard to sell cameras without including video. Look at the “outrage” when the Df came out. A lot of people said it was a non-purchase for them because it didn’t have video. You can be assured the D750 will have video, whether it’s 4k or not.

        • mikeswitz

          If you arfe saying Nikon needs to play you for a sucker, you are right. But do you really want to be a sucker?

    • Theodoros Fotometria

      What Nikon really needs, is to have an interchangeable lens mirrorless line (compatible via adapter with all their lenses) alongside their current DSLR line, with mount able to serve both FF & APS-c sensors… This would give them much more appeal to the video market, will provide a base for future interchangeable lens video cameras and would attract more pros to their line due to optimum compatibility with the new tech/view (like the new Cambo Actus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSVvDHPGbbA ) cameras that are coming… Nikon’s problem is not the quality of their products, it’s clearly their (current) inability to give solutions and future planning to the advanced photographer that likes to develop his abilities and skills!

      • MRomine

        A mirrorless body with an adaptor for the current line of lenses would not interest me. I don’t want to use heavy lenses on a small body. I want small and fast primes and perhaps fast zooms.

        • Theodoros Fotometria

          Obviously a new line would also be accompanied with a new line of lenses… But anyway, I don’t know a camera that would serve everybody in everything… I, myself cannot help not to hate an EVF… but OTOH, I love LV tethered shooting when it comes down to still life subjects and architecture… I would buy such a camera (without any dedicated lenses to it) only to use it with the Cambo above (and some MF format lenses to use on the front standard)…

    • br0xibear

      Here’s an interesting 4K discussion with Vincent LaForet, Philip Bloom, Garret Brown of Steadicam and Fabien Pisano of Sony.

      http://vimeo.com/91442061

      • KnightPhoto

        Thanks Broxi. Interesting 4K discussion. More about capture than delivery currently. Or tool to handle cropping, stabilization, and capturing the full length of a soccer stadium so that no play is ever missed, and not about mastering in 4K (except for feature films).

        Personally my infrastructure will have problems with 4K capture never mind, NLE, and there are no delivery mechanisms I could access. I’d still like it as a tool, but I’m not rushed as I have zero devices to even display it. We need the 4K monitors next.

        • br0xibear

          Hi KnightPhoto,
          I’m not a film maker, I don’t shoot video but I do find it interesting listening to the likes of Vincent LaForet and Philip Bloom who have vast amounts of experience in the field.
          Ultimately it’ll be the end user who decides if 4K happens or becomes another 3D.
          The most interesting part was Vincent LaForet talking about craft, and the fact that his favourite films are all pre cgi and filmed for real.

    • mikeswitz

      You have absolutely no idea of what you’re talking about. None.

    • Espen4u

      It seems that Nikon has warmed somewhat towards video in dslrs, but 4k will have to wait i guess.

  • Andrew Goh Wei Li

    and QC is important!

  • http://rkstephensphotography.smugmug.com/ James Stephens

    Any word whether the Nikon 1.4 III will be available on August 28 as originally stated?

  • I AM DELUDED

    “Signs of recovery”?

    Everyone else sees that the patient is terminally ill.

    • Jonathan

      Best comment I’ve seen on the internet today.

  • Jonathan

    They could boost sales a little, by bringing out a D300 REPLACEMENT! and a bunch of PRO level DX glass (not FX prices though). Save money by stopping the D3200 OR D5300 line, and stopping wasting time on all these 18-200 variations. Oh, and of course save money by getting things right the first time, instead of having to replace shutter mechanisms and such.

    • Fark

      Just bring out a pro level camera and pro level glass. Okay, how many tens of millions do you estimate will be involved in doing that over how many years?

      I think what killed the D300s replacement and the reason why Nikon was stuck with the D700 for so many years was the Tsunami and Thailand flood. The time to get out a D300s replacement passed probably because they were too busy rebuilding factories.

      I really don’t they were sitting around trying out how to be irritating. Let’s remember that Nikon was doing this massive song and dance the last year and a half the D700 was out telling everyone that no-one seriously needs more than 12 MP.

      Since then, Nikon, Canon and photographers themselves have clearly pivoted to pro = full frame. You’re asking them to invest a lot of cash into a format they’re defining as base to mid-market. In 2014 I cannot see the pro market investing in DX lenses in addition to full frame lenses.

      The problem with DX pro is what’s the price point. It needs to be at the top of the price point for DX. Okay, logical. But logically when you compare the offering to full frame, is the value there?

      Selling two versions of a 24mp camera — one FX and one DX– will just add overhead and slice the pie smaller.

      • amaas

        Oh, the value is there. Remember you’re comparing a D300 class machine (8+fps, 51 point AF, deep buffer, pro build & UI) with the D610 or Df, which come in between the D5300 and D7100 in terms of build, controls and features, at twice the cost of a D5300 kit due to being FX.

        Sure, the low-end FX bodies are a good value for the shooter who doesn’t need Pro build or performance, but they’d probably buy a D7100 if they went DX. The pro DX shooter right now has no option for a real upgrade with comparable performance and better IQ short of going to a D4 for twice the cost.

        • Fark

          D4 – 6,496.95

          D180 – 3,326.25
          D800e – 3,296.95
          DF – 2,876.07
          D610 – $1,699.00
          D7100 – 1,096.95

          1) Tell me how many MP the Pro DX camera will have?
          2) Tell me where you’d place the price point?

          It will be forced beneath 1500 to make a value proposition so adding pro build to the body without being able to charge for it basically kills the margins. Next, as was pointed out, there’s no pro lens support, making the exercise academic.

          • amaas

            24MP, like all other current DX bodies.

            Probably aim for a $1999-$2299 price point, between $200-400 more than the D300s was when new. This is quite achievable for a true D300s successor, which would have a real value advantage over the D600/Df which straddle that price point.

            Could do $2799-2999 if it came with an integrated grip, although I consider that config unlikely. I don’t think Nikon could do a $1500 or less pro DX body and have it sell, I’d expect that they want that price point for the D7200 when it arrives in a year or so and I don’t think they can provide much more than the D7100 offers today at that price point.

            Pro lens support is a must, but Nikon’s already got one of the zooms needed (the 16-85/4 VR we’ve seen the patent for). If there’s a 12-24 and 17-55 replacement in the works those would help a lot.

            • Jonathan

              I think 2.8 and other fast glass is really what is needed for DX. You need that extra light for lower ISO’s. My 17-50 sigma also outshines Nikon’s 17-55 for a significantly lower price point.

            • Fark

              So basically you want it to compete head to head with the forthcoming D750, with the only difference is that it won’t have any lenses for it.

              Um, no. That won’t happen.

              The price you are suggestion has nothing to support it. Why would you buy a 24mp camera that has a lower effective resolution than the others? Sorry.

              In 2014 a pro level DX is a DOA.

            • KnightPhoto

              Have you considered telephoto shooters in that statement?

            • Fark

              No.

            • amaas

              I want the pro DX body that is to the D750 as the D300 was to the D700. It doesn’t compete directly, but offers the same solution to DX shooters that the D750 offers to FX shooters.

              Frankly, I don’t see the D750 being a $2500 body if it’s done right. For a true D700 replacement it’s really going to have to come in a around D810 pricing (a bit lower, but maybe $300 lower, so $2999 at the low end).

          • Craig John

            The Nikon D610 is priced at $1,900 USD.

            The Pro DX camera could priced the same as the D610 ($1,700), the D750 at $2,500.

            Price positioning solved.

          • Craig John

            The Nikon D610 is priced at $1,900 USD.

            The Pro DX camera could priced the same as the D610 ($1,700), the D750 at $2,500.

            Price positioning solved.

          • Jonathan

            One things that is commonly forgotten in the FX, DX debate is the lenses. Not only is the D4 prohibitively expensive for the average D300 owner, who would otherwise use one, but the glass is 1.5-3x’s more expensive for FX. I don’t own any Nikon DX glass because it just doesn’t hold up and of course, they barely have any. My 3rd party glass is as good as and in some ways better than Nikon’s FX glass. To then have to pay significantly more for equivalent glass because they won’t update my camera, seems silly. I would like to go Full-Frame if the D750 is a real D700 successor and not crippled in some way, but the lens issue holds me back.

  • Herman

    You can earn my business by not screwing up the D750 like you did with the D800 with that awful grip and sub-part focusing system and not letting me shooting lower than full resolution 36MP raw and filling up my RAIDs. Maybe you can also try not to overshoot your market estimation on stuff like the Nikon 1 J1 that you made how many millions of them and ending up selling them for < $200 and still have inventory after the initial release how many months ago now? Oh and maybe by not messing with your customers' loyalty by proactively doing something about the D600 before people slap a class action lawsuit on you as well.

    • neversink

      Whine, Bitch, Moan — I love my D800 – it is a workhorse, and along with the D4, has made my clients happy. Kaching!!! Guess what – you guys will keep on whining, I will keep on shooting. Ciao.

    • Andrew

      A lot of research and development went into their Mirrorless (Nikon 1) products – that technology will be put to good use in the future. They simply need to use higher than 1 inch sensors like Sony is doing. Nikon’s willingness in selling older products for $200 or less is a good thing and makes them a good corporate citizen. Many companies simply destroy their inventory, is that what you want Nikon to do? But Nikon also sells lenses, so those purchasing the Nikon 1 J1 may end up giving Nikon more business. Plus, the Nikon 1 J1 may give Nikon a whole new class of customers. I like the new Nikon, taking risks and introducing newer products in rapid succession. Rapid change introduces new innovations and problems. And Nikon has had plenty of both! But in light of all that, Nikon is the #1 camera brand.

      • br0xibear

        “Nikon is the #1 camera brand”
        What do you base that on Andrew ?

    • mikeswitz

      …said the man who has never been the CEO of anything except his own camera gear.

      • fjfjjj

        …said a guy who believes that having been a CEO is the ultimate determiner of qualification to do business analysis.

        • mikeswitz

          …said the person who has no opinion on what “the ultimate determiner of qualification to do business analysis” is.

          • indi

            ….said the folks which is animated to buy all the nikon rubbish!!!

            • mikeswitz

              Is that some form of English?

          • fjfjjj

            I believe there is no ultimate determiner. Got a problem with that?

            • mikeswitz

              Yup!

        • indi

          @jfjjjffj:not only within this thread, i like your comments!! :-)

  • neversink

    Ever wonder why Nikon, at the top of its class in photography and imaging products has a slightly lower market cap than GoPro, which makes horrible cameras???
    My guess is that GoPro knows how to market. Their cameras probably have an incredible mark up as well as much lower production costs given the low IQ of these devices, as well as the potential mark-up on all the add-on peripherals they sell. And GoPro is ubiquitous. They are not just in camera stores, they are everywhere — in electronic outlets, bike stores, camping stores, boating stores, and even in some supermarkets.
    Nikon, on the other hand, is making top of the line equipment for their pro models and many of their consumer DSLRs. However, they do fall short on their P&S lines. And certainly, a Nikon camera is not a lifestyle statement like a GoPro camera is. They tried to use Ashton as a lifestyle image. it didn’t get Nikon very far. But Ashton, I am sure, made a killing.

    • Fark

      GoPro makes products that don’t need to have cross generation product line compatibility.

    • MonkeySpanner

      GoPro hit that sweet spot of price and marketing magic, along with a little luck from being adopted by the x-gamer types.

  • Jonathan

    Best way to cut costs is to eliminate the quality control department. Oh wait, I see they’ve already done that, hence the article… Hmmm… Next thing you can do is layoff the folks in market research who tell the company what it is that their customers want… wait…

    • Jonathan

      Yeah, that sounds about right.

  • MB

    “cultivating the underdeveloped regional markets” ???????
    In short Nikon does not have a clue on what to do …

  • Ineedmy Bobo

    I think we all have different ideas about what Nikon needs to do, but I for one would love to see Nikon take FX mirrorless before too many casual or landscape shooters switch to Fuji X, Sony FE, or M43. FX doesn’t have to be so big and as mirrorless technology keeps improving, our big ole SLR’s are becoming more and more like dinosaurs. (For the record, I am a happy D800 landscape shooter who also has experience with Fuji X and M43. I stick with Nikon only because of the resolution of the D800/D810 and the selection of lenses.)

    I’d love to see an enthusiasts FX mirrorless camera (competitive to the A7 or A7r) on-sensor PDAF for backwards compatibility with existing F-mount lenses via adapter. Then release several high-quality mirrorless lens options to show that you can actually make a high-res rig that isn’t so big and heavy. The more they wait, the more market share the other companies will get.

    • Ineedmy Bobo

      P.S. Sony’s got the camera, but they lack the lenses (and seemingly will always lack the lenses). Fuji, Panasonic, and Olympus have the systems and some really kick-ass lenses, but the sensors are smaller.

    • Eric Calabros

      Let me guess…hmmm.. serious landscape shooters use 14-24, right? Well, whats the point of having small/slim body if you gonna put a tank on it?

      • fjfjjj

        The new 12-24 will have a big ergonomic handgrip, and the “camera” won’t.

      • http://andreaslerchl.tumblr.com/ Andreas Lerchl

        Serious landscape shooters use the canon 17mm ts-e. But never mind Nikon, we need more consumer zooms and 50mm lenses!

      • Ineedmy Bobo

        Actually, my favorite Nikon WA is the newer 18-35mm. It’s amazingly light and small. I’ve shot with the 14-24 as well as the 16-35 and the older 17-35; they may be fine lenses, but I appreciate the lightness and small size of the 18-35mm for backpacking. Yes, you actually could make a high-res kit that isn’t so big and heavy.

  • fjfjjj

    Nikon realizes that consumers want to buy a big complicated camera that looks like a cross between a sportscar and a black trashbag with mediocre warranty service from a company which aggressively avoids responsibility for its mistakes and is thinking of shifting its focus to medical optics. Here’s to the recovery.

    • groucher

      Some consumers want big complicated cameras and some would like a compact lightweight DFm/DFe unpolluted by useless ‘features’. Nikon could make a lot of money by catering for the latter.

    • indi

      Could not have it expressed better! :-)

      • mikeswitz

        That is certainly true.

        • indi

          At least YOU very did understand – clever boy :-)

    • Andrew

      Canonica fjfjjj, you are a diligent saleswoman. Hope you get a bonus for all your hard work.

      • fjfjjj

        Nice try. I shoot mostly Nikon and Leica. Canon’s colors make me seasick.

        • Eric Calabros

          If you shoot Leica, Nikon colors should make you seasick too ;-)

          • indi

            Full ack

  • br0xibear

    “we have implemented rigorous cost cuts”
    I know R&D for imaging has been cut by 25%, using the word “rigorous” is interesting in itself, and makes you wonder what other type of cuts they have in mind ? I’m sure somebody at Nikon will have suggested ending the DX line and replacing their entry level range (D3000/D5000) with a new mirrorless system. Personally I think they have to bite the bullet at some point and just do it…I’m sure many will disagree, lol.

  • groucher

    Anyone else finding that being forced to log into Disqus to comment is a pain in the bum?

    • Eric Calabros

      Even with this pain wall we already have troll sharks circling around, but its much safer and better than that blood pool we had before

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ Nikon Rumors

      I will turn this off soon – the comments are out of control when there is a new announcement.

  • Craig John

    The most disconcerting comment in the interview is Nikon’s “Rigorous Cost Cuts”, which seems to be their QC department.

    If they want to increase sales/profits they could start with ending their penchant for “dumbing down” their own products. The D610 and DF were two or three updates away from being perfect cameras for their specific targets. Purge the 3300 and 5300 line. Quit thinking we all want 24+ MP in our camera bodies – take the hint from Sony’s a7s.

    Incorporate radio triggers into their flashes. Quit letting Sigma smoke their prime product line with performance and value. Release a new 135mm f/2 (with VR would be nice) with a fast AF-S that equals the 70-200G. Update the 24/1.4G and the 85/1.4G with a much faster AF-S system.

    Start taking cues from Fuji and Olympus M43 lines for their mirror less cameras. That whole segment is going to blow up in the next round or two of updates.

    That’s a good start.

    • Fra Lippi

      I hear so many people saying Nikon should stop selling the cheap DX cameras and focus on the expensive ones. But if that’s where Nikon is making the money, why would they stop? And if the only way to get into a Nikon DSLR is to pay out $3,000+ you can forget about attracting anyone who’s an amateur or student. And then there go your upgrades. Do you work for Canon or something?

      There’s already a company that specializes in selling small numbers of very expensive cameras – Leica. The market doesn’t need two.

      • Craig John

        Agree. Purge was the wrong term. They should ‘merge’ the D3300 and D5300 line to have one entry level camera.

  • Luis F. Vidal

    If Nikon wants to boost its sales they just need to do a couple of things:

    1) Cut all these madness with like 15 DSLR models and lower the prices. Kill the DX and point-and-shoot lines and drop the FX prices and give it to the people with just 3 models: entry, enthusiast and pro. Simple is always better. People have too many choices and gets confused, and end buying a supersmartphone with a crappy 20.1MP camera.

    2) Make what no one is doing. Create upgradable cameras. It’s a totally waste of technology to discard a perfect working camera because we want a new sensor with more MP. Just create cameras that can be upgraded with new sensors.

    3) Invest in aggressive marketing on those new products.

    • fjfjjj

      (2) is like industry-wide standardization on a single lens mount, iPhones with replaceable batteries, and manufacturer-endorsed inkjet cartridge refills. Never gonna happen. Okay, we do have bagless vacuum cleaners. Maybe there is some hope.

      • Eric Calabros

        It happened before: Richo GXR

        • Luis F. Vidal

          Didn’t know about those Ricoh GXR. Interesting!

    • Craig John

      No need to discard your cameras – resell to help fund the new camera. I’ve sold my D50, (2) D200, D3, a D3s, and a crap ton of lenses. At some point I’m going to sell my D600 and D610 (which replaced my D3 and D3s).

      …I just bought a minty used DF for $2,100 (arrived yesterday) with less than 9000 clicks. :D

      • neversink

        You replace your D3s with D600 and D610???? I’m flabbergasted.

        • Craig John

          Yup. I much prefer the smaller camera body of the D610 over the D3 and D3s 9 fps and hefty weight.

          • neversink

            If weight is an issue, why not go with a d810. Otherwise a D610 is a step down or two or three steps down from a D3s. But if works for you, enjoy!!!!

            • Craig John

              The D810 wasn’t available when I bought the used D600 for $1,300, and a new D610 for $1,900.

              No need for 36MP.

              What can the D810 do that the D610 can’t? Nothing, really, other that broadcast quality video, which I have no use for. I don’t even use video on my D610.

            • neversink

              Better dynamic range, low light, and color saturation…

            • Craig John

              Dynamic range? Minimal difference.

              Low Light? maybe a push, might favor the D610.

              Color saturation? Entirely moot. I process my raw files with Capture One Pro.

              I know the DxO mark numbers aren’t everything, but they give you a pretty good idea that the D810 is not stratospherically better the D610 in terms if image quality.

              Handling? The only thing the D610 is missing is a dedicated AF-L button. I’ve changed the AE-L button to be my AF-L button, as I rarely used the AE-L button anyway.

              Autofocus difference? Depends what you’re using the camera for suppose. I’ve been shooting in dark Wisconsin wedding venues, and have had little problems with the AF of the D610. The biggest crutch is trying nail focus on a fast moving subject in the dark with the slow focusing 85mm f/1.4G and the 35mm f/1.4G. Even my D3s had similar problems, so it’s nothing new. The D810 would struggle in the same situation.

              The only reason to get the D810 (for me) would be a need for 36MP sensor or the broadcast quality video – neither of which applies to me.

              For 80-85% of the commercial shooting jobs, the D610′s 24MP is perfect. Even the 1/200s flash sync works perfectly for my studio food photography work.

              Seriously, the best bang for the buck camera available right now is the D610. It’s strange (even comical) everyone poo-poos this amazingly versatile little camera, when really they should be embracing what an awesome kickass inexpensive little camera this thing really is.

              Here are the DxO Mark comparison between the D810 and the D610.

              http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D810-versus-Nikon-D610___963_915

    • rich

      you are thinking about yourself. Nikon sell more dx cameras then FX. they sell more coolpix then dx. Nikon losing coolpix and dx is the majority of their business and would be like fuji, a nitch. Without p&S people won’t upgrade to nikon dx, but go to another aps-c manufacturers. without dx people won’t upgrade to nikon FX.

      • Luis F. Vidal

        I think that if you have an affordable FX entry level camera, nobody would be interested in DX. PnS aren’t selling, new smartphones are killing that market. Low FX cameras and low lenses. The true photo interested people will buy your products. I think Nikon/Canon have too many models…

        • Nobody Cares

          I don’t think you can do FX for $500 and $600 (with a kit lens) and that’s a stretch for many entry level buyers. I like FX, but the lenses weigh more than a DX lenses and I know people who don’t like the weight of FX bodies, never mind an FX Zoom.

          • Luis F. Vidal

            Maybe killing DX is a too radical move…

      • Luis F. Vidal

        Talking about confused customers that compare DSLRs with smartphones cameras, this is what I am referring about: too many models = too much confusion. Point-n-Shoots are nowhere near. People are jumping from smartphones to DSLRs and when they reach to Nikon offerings they don’t know what to do:

        https://twitter.com/NikonUSA/status/502516070306312192

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

    Sounds like they must send their executives to the States to get MBAs…the whole article is nothing but the useful business jargon you hear from every publicly held corporation. It would be better and more honest if they just said “we don’t know, but we’re working on it”.

    • mikeswitz

      I think that’s what they said.;=p

  • Kynikos

    What I’d do if I was Nikon:

    –Stop making super zooms. Recall all unsold 18-200, 28-300 etc. Put them in a landfill.

    –Start a marketing campaign that says
    a) Superzooms just aren’t good enough for modern sensors (especially third party super zooms… third party… eewwwww… there’s never been a good third party lens, ever)
    b) Everyone from Sally Soccermom to Timmy Traveler and up either needs long primes (like the, wait for it kids, soon to be announced, honest! 300/4 VR) or the 80-400.
    Try to squeeze and extra thousand or three out of people with D3xxx and D5xxx.

    • Jonathan

      Minus the “never been a good third party lens, ever” bit. I agree. Get rid of the cheapy kit super zooms.

      • Kynikos

        Just writing Nikon ad copy. :)

        There’s a lot of good third-party stuff out there… more by the month almost. I have more of that than Nikkor, myself.

  • Brent Busch

    Build a proper D700 and D300s replacement and I’ll buy one of each!

    • Eric Calabros

      and because of your shopping, the Camera market will rise again

  • Chobot

    Nikon is doing excellent job. If you look at the lineup, D4s / D 810 / D610, all are really excellent cameras (even Df). Would there by excellent D750 ff, there I have to say Nikon really recover the mess with it’s lineup. and all of them are very well priced. I know i am going to buy D810 or D750. Well done Nikon. Hopefully, they will also fix QA and the policies towards quality and fixes.

  • whisky

    what if Sony designed & built all Nikon’s mirrorless bodies, and Nikon let Sony adopt the Nikon mount for all their cameras … a win/win/win? :)

  • Alasamorph

    “…economic circumstances and the like … we will ensure a continued surplus by promoting the light asset production and sales structure that we have implemented since the past … creating value driven by new concepts.”

    Hollow words. As long as Nikon continues to cite problems with the global economy, and focus on evolutionary changes to their product lineup — as opposed to revolutionary changes — they’re going to continue to have problems, IMO. The shift to medical is not going to be the panacea they’re hoping for, I don’t think.

  • Alasamorph

    My advice to Nikon:

    - Streamline your DSLR lineup down to no more than 5 models: 2 pro FX variants, 1 FX prosumer option (D750?) / 1 DX prosumer option (D400 replacement?), and one entry level FX model. (Do a special edition like the Df once in a while, if you must.) You don’t need 17+ DSLRs with varying (and overlapping) features and colors that only serve to confuse people.

    - Kill the 1 Series once and for all. Period.

    - Bite the bullet and transition all but one DX DSLR camera over to mirrorless. Offer 3 variants to start: prosumer, enthusiast, entry level. It’s about time you entered this playing field in a serious way. Sure, other manufacturers are losing money on mirrorless and it will cost money to get off the ground, but the writing is on the wall: long-term it’s the future, and others are gaining a foothold in it.

    - Design a modular camera system that can go anywhere in almost any environment and be highly configurable in terms of capability and online accessibility. Think GoPro, but better quality and with a better system. Bring it back as the Nikonos.

    - As Thom Hogan says repeatedly: Work to better integrate apps into cameras to streamline the uploading process. To some extent it really IS about the software.

    - Last, but not least (and this is an EASY solution): Do something about customer service. Namely, improve it. Position yourself as THE serious company when it comes to serious photography — just as Leica has positioned itself as the “luxury camera maker” — and design your PR accordingly.

  • Back to top