Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Nikon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 1, 2003, 10:30 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
marokero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 769
Default open presidential position at Nikon Imaging


Article from Popular Photography & Imaging, October 2003 issue, page 52

"Digital SLR prices would continue to drop, but not to the level of film SLRs..."

Huh, the Digital Rebel w/ lens is already in the same price range as a new F100 w/o lens. Granted they are far apart in quality and professionalism, but he doesn't have a point anymore.

According to Kimura the recent D2h is an amateur camera... and future pro bodies will not be able to use the DX lenses. That's very nice. In one fell swoop he managed to amateurize the current PRO line of Nikon DSLR's, and also kill off the future of the DX line of lenses. Is this numbnut for real? How much did Canon pay him to say that? :roll:
marokero is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 1, 2003, 10:55 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

No, the d2h was being built long before this quote was made. Heck, wasn't it anounced before this quote was made. The Nikon bashers out there have been sturing it up saying that Nikon is never going to produce a full frame sensor based camera. He needed to combat that.

What he is saying is that the DX lens line is designed for amerture cameras. The DX lens line don't project an image that can cover the entire sensor of a full-frame sensor. That the DX lens line won't work on a full-frame based camera is clear and has been for awhile. This is how the DX line will be cheaper than the full frame lenses. Less materials.

If they really are aiming those lenses to the amature market, that would worry me. I would worry about quality of build and optics, but I wouldn't write them off. I certainly would like to get a decent wide angle lens, around 25mm, but to get that after the crop factor I need a 15mm lens. Now that will be expensive. But if Canon made a lens which only worked for their smaller sensor size which was up to my quality standards and was reasonably priced (not as a long term lens investment but as a much shorter term purchase) then I'd consider getting it.

I would have to agree with him that DSLRs won't get as low as film cameras. Unless you think that film cameras are over priced (which they may be, I truly have no idea.) The sensor is probably the single most expensive part in a DSLR. That has to add something to the cost of the camera.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 6:31 AM   #3
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
No, the d2h was being built long before this quote was made
All the more of a reason for him not to say that... Marokero is right! What he said was degrading to the potential D2h buyer even though the camera is nowhere amateurish.


... He's way off on price too (just wait and see for the next Canon offense), the 10D is already 'OLD' judging from the D30-D60-10D history. The competition is not sitting still (at least I'm not if I am @ Canon or some other outfit planning to counter the next D100)! Nikon is playing defense which is wrong!!! By the time everyone own the EF mount it won't matter much... This is Intel strategy at it finest! They can build the best G5, but the populace will buy Wintel (ie body=CPU, lens=software), and as volume mounts prices go even lower, which makes it even harder for them to compete. Each sale lost to the EF mount will be twice as hard for them to get back! Just look @ you and me, by the time we're ready to upgrade, a Nikon body will have to be at least twice as good to win us over. We have the domino effect also, Sigma, Tamron or other who cater to the EF clientele with their ultrasonic lenses (ie more sale for them in the EF mounts from the Digital Rebel for example).

Their Coolpix line are getting clobbered too... Check out the 5700 which pretty much stood still (with some underminings I might add), in the mean time we have the D7-> D7i -> D7Hi -> A1 from Minolta, and the onslauht of F707 -> F717 -> F828 from Sony. ops:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 12:08 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

We donít know the context of the quote. I assumed the man is making a comment about the future. People have said "Nikon will not/never make a full frame DLSR" for ages now. Personally, I don't care... I don't really care if my camera full frame or not. But to many people it does legitimately matter. So he was addressing this issue by talking about their future cameras. I didnít take this statement to mean, ďthe camera that just came out is an amateur cameraĒ. I notice you didnít take it to mean that the D1x, D1h and D1 are all amateur cameras as well. But itís the same logic (a past camera which is not full frame is an amateur camera). That logic means that Nikon has never produced a professional DSLR!

So, NHL, you believe that DSLRs with the same features (same/better metering, AF system, frames per second, body design, everything that matters) will be cheaper (taking into account inflation, of course)? Iíll agree that eventually they will get close. But you seem to be saying that they should be there now. How? Unless they are selling it at a loss (to make it up in lenses, same strategy console game manufactures do with their systems. They make it up in a slice from every game sold) or they are are over pricing the film cameras and could afford to go lower. I would be surprised that the markup on a film camera would overcome the cost of the sensor and extra hardware/software/firmware costs of a digital.

The other reason is that they are selling with ďyou donít have to pay for filmĒ logic. So the high cost is eventually paid for by the lack of spending on film. Eventually, film will (basically) go away and that justification for a higher price will go away. But that wonít be for awhile (5 years? 10 years?) And they will still have to deal with the higher cost of production.

I do completely agree that Nikon is in trouble, though. Personally, I didnít purchase the 10D because it was cheaper than the D100 (or S2 Pro) or because it had slightly more resolution. I purchased it because Canonís long lenses are cheaper and have IS (long term) and because the 100-400L beats the 80-400 AF (short term.) Nikon has to push IS through their lens line and drop their prices. I believe that optical quality is basically the same for both companies, so other things are going to win out (like price, weight, features) (BTW, has anyone seen a recent review comparing longer prime lenses across brands? I havenít looked for one, but I havenít seen one mentioned either. I just assume that by now their lenses are basically equal optically.)

The ďtwice as good to win us overĒ has always been true. If you make money at it, then that is more likely to matter (I can make more money using equipment X, then they could switch.) Personally, I donít expect to ever change because what would be the reason? It would have to be something stunning (a 10 F-stop sensitive sensor, for ISO3200 looks a good at ISO100, for examples) that would make me want to go through the hassle of selling and retraining. The 10D is more camera (in most ways) that I need now and in some of the ways that Iíd like better (better AF, better shutter button, better view finder) they already exist in more expensive camerasÖ so there is only cost, not invocation, that keeps me from those.

I donít watch the consumer cameras, but I have to partially agree. Nikon seems to have given up the prosumer market. They have produced several lower end cameras (5400, for example) but I donít know how well those are doing to comment. They aimed for bulk sales to a lower end market. You could say Canon is doing the same thingÖ just in the DLSR market! The added bonus is the required lens purchases give Canon more money.

That Pres. says they have to turn models around faster. They certainly do. Now weíll have to see if they can do it (and keep up quality.) And they have to price more in line with the market, not based on their history/name. The market needs a healthy Nikon to keep Canon honest. Do we all remember how Intel priced itís chips before AMD was real competition? When the Pentium Pro was the only server chip, I still remember that the 200mhz chip didnít see a price drop in almost 2 years! 2 years!! (They just added more cache and kept the price the same.) We donít want the same problem in the Camera market. We need competition in the DSLR market so Canon keeps dropping the price. What Iím waiting to see is the upgrade to the 10D. Not that Iíll buy it, but what price will it come out at? I assume basically what the 10D is at out. They have a low tier product (300D), a mid one (10D), a fast photojournalis/sports model (1D) and a high level pro model (1Ds). What other market do they need for a DSLR? I guess they could merge the high level and fast shoting model (but to do that they need a high resolution, fast sensor and support hardwareÖ doesnít exist yet.)

Ok, this is long enough. Iíll get back to real work.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 7:19 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
marokero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 769
Default

Okay, maybe I didn't see this coming, maybe I was under the impression Nikon would stick to their DX sized sensors for the future. But now I know not to buy DX lenses, and instead am thinking of adding a film camera to my arsenal With the money I would've spent on the 12-24mm f/4 I can buy an F100 and a 50mm f/1.8. At least film is a more stable platform right now and for the forseeable future, I'll wait for that coveted FF DSLR from Nikon to become available and at a reasonable price, only then I'll buy digital again. The D100 is still paying off my bills, but it needs a companion during weddings... the F5 I use (in my sig) is not exactly mine (nor is the 300 f/2.8 AF-S), that's why I want the F100 for myself
marokero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 2, 2003, 11:13 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
koruvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 439
Default

marokero,

I agree. After a year of using digital I too just switched back to film. I loved my 5700 but looking at how fast digital is moving, I can't keep up money-wise. Digital cameras, no matter the level are a commodity, not an investment. That is a shame.

Maybe in 5 years from now I'll buy a DSLR body but, untill then I'll get the lenses as needed and stick with my new F80. I don't see film disappearing for a very long time. The F80 can easily match a mid-level DSLR which costs $3500ish Canadian. By the time I spend that extra $3500 I will have taken approx. 6300 shots, developed 175 rolls and 4x6 prints for each shot taken. I like digital but, you are only paying for the convenience at this time.

The above meets my needs, not yours and I don't wish to start a film vs. digital war or sound negative (no pun intended )...and as you will notice, I still have a digital P&S in my sig.
koruvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 12:50 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

koruvs

You won't, I shot digital because I'm learning. I can learn so much faster with the instant feedback. This is something you don't need (clearly, as you know what you're doing!) And I don't think about the film costs adding up.

A semipro friend of mine shoots about 50-70% film still. As he puts it "I take the digital out on cloudy days when the lower dynamic range of the D100 doesn't matter because the lower, even light means the dynamic range isn't there to capture (his film camera is, I believe, either an F100 or F5)

I'm just surprised that the 5700 you owned doesn't do what you need. Did you need a faster or longer lens? Better manual focus? I just wonder what it didn't do. I have no problem with saying "I don't want to upgrade every few years to make up for the shortcomings of current digitals." That makes perfect sense to me. You'd have to get a lot of extra revenue from that new camera (that the old couldn't provide) to justify getting it. It sounds like it's a business for you, so this really matters. It's a hobby for me so I can spend as much as I want for my own enjoyment (some buy fancy cars, I purchased a good camera gear.)

The F80 will let you build up a collection of good lenses and then move up to a DSLR when they are good enough. That is why investing in good glass is rarely a bad thing (assuming you have the cash.)

Good luck with it, and I hope you stick around here. You know a lot and we learn a lot from you.

marokero

They are going to stick with it, but for their amature DSLR bodies. If those aren't good enough for you (I don't mean tha badly, the really might not be) then I wouldn't touch DX with a 10 foot pole. But if an improved D100 would make you happy, then a DX lens would last you a long time. The downside is that they are over priced. They have less materials and smaller lenses (therefor cheaper to make and fewer bad parts) but they are priced like a full sized lens. That is just wrong.

I'm not sure what you consider to be "reasonable" but I expect full frame to be expensive. Until there is a technology shift, full frame sensors are expensive to build. You get fewer samples per wafer of silicon and one mistake costs you a lot of materials. It is the major reason the 1Ds is so expensive.

Keep borrowing the F5... is an amazing camera (as I'm sure you know!) What I'd give to get its innards backed by a good 6-10MB sensor. Ahh... (Eric goes on dreaming....)

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 1:26 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
koruvs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 439
Default

Eric,

75% of what I know I have learned through Steve's site and the posts from people like you in this forum. Tremendous help and I appreciate it beyond words.

I credit digital for the ability to test out settings, programmed and manual alike on various subjects.

The 5700 was lacking in a few areas, for me anyway. Speed somewhat was a factor. Lens range was great, though a wider angle like 20mm* would not be possible. Also a Manual focus ring...the 5700 has no numerical read out on the zoom either eg: I had to push 5 light clicks on the + (zoom) to = 50mm...guess work Also, and this is a concern for me, the longevity of CD-R is debated and truely unknown. My sons first 10 months are on CD-R...on the proven track negatives last decades as long as you keep them in a safe place.

And yes, absolutely I will stay around this forum, I love to send/receive help when I have the time between family and work!

My next lenses with be the following, when I can afford them, for now my zoom is attached to my legs

20mm prime (approx.) for landscapes
80mm prime (approx.) for portraits
24 or 28mm to 100mm+ zoom (F2.8 ) general use

-=-
koruvs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 1:44 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
marokero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 769
Default

Eric, you're right about the DX lenses being as expensive than their full frame cousins. Nikon said they'd be cheaper but so far I haven't seen the savings. The F5 is okay, but it's to big for me, I want something smaller and lighter, and the F100 will fit the bill nicely
marokero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2003, 6:28 AM   #10
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
So, NHL, you believe that DSLRs with the same features (same/better metering, AF system, frames per second, body design, everything that matters) will be cheaper (taking into account inflation, of course)?
o D30 - 3.3Mp @ $3300 (2000)
o D60 - 6.3Mp @ $2000 (2002)
o 10D - 6.3Mp @ $1499 (2003)
---> doesn't this looks like Moore's Law to you? Progress doesn't stop because we've made our choice...

If you look at the F828 with 8Mp selling for $1200 MSRP, and the potential cameras using the same sensor coming on-line within the next few months (the CP5700, D7, and E20 all shared some flavor of the previous F717 sensors). I hardly doubt that the next 10D would not be around where the 300D is now, with the Digital Rebel moving down market even further!

You can definetly see where Canon is heading... Even though of questionable quality how can they give away the EF-S 18-55mm for only $100 while you pay through the nose for a Dx? If anyone think of the camera only they are missing the boat! See the Fuji S2 and the Kodak DCS14n (although previous DCS also have Canon mount) Nikon mount alliance is a threat to Canon and they got to nip it in the bud... now, before it's too late!!! Remember they are also countering attacks from Kodak/Oly cheaper 4/3 digital lenses that's trying to build a base (or the Pentax *ist for that matter). Nikon is not their only target (even though a few here only think in term of pro gear). The 'EF' camera mount is what they are after... Body sales automatically follow once the base is built-up, look @ You and me, or numerous others tentalized by the 300D's price, we're their 'lock-in' customers. :lol: :lol: :lol:

BTW don't forget the other expensive 550EX flash and accessories ties-in, heck Canon even charge $20 for a lens hood while other manufacturers also include a high-quality lens case for free!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:42 AM.