ELNikkor

That D850 and lenses will not become obsolete ever, and will probably outlast its owners.

rcarol

In spite of the fact that Olympus has been sold, it lives on.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

And just what exactly is the Keiretsu going to do? Buy a million units of their own cameras? Invent a million new customers for a luxury good most everyone thinks is a waste of money and effort to use? Sell at a loss against the likes of Sony, that as a total business is 4x bigger than all the combined units of Canon?

Good luck on inventing new customers. Everyday the DSLRinosaurs beat their scales saying they'd rather watch the meteor hit than buy a mirrorless.

It's one thing to be falling behind in a growing market, i.e., the digital transition of 2000 - 2010. It's quite another to be falling even further behind as the market contracts by 80%, ala 2011 - 2021.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

You are worrying too much. Both Olympus and Nikon still exist right now and will continue to exist until either the market dries up a lot more or they make a fatal business decision. Even if both got out of the business today, it would still take sometime to actually close it down. And then there would still be all the remaining inventory and used equipment to work with for more than a decade. The switch from film to digital took out a lot of good camera companies. The continued improvements in smartphone cameras may still take some more of the camera market (I think camera sales are close to where it will remain for a while). If Olympus really does go under, I will use my Olympus bodies until they fail and then put my Olympus lenses on a Panasonic body. Life will go on.

Nickaroo

I agree with your statements Paul. But, I feel that Nikon, Canon, and Sony could afford to bring down the prices of their Lenses. Third Party Lens producers have hurt the Big 3, consider Sigma's Art Lineup. I understand that research and development costs are expensive, but there is no reason that a 600mm f/4 Lens should cost $13,000. These Companies are making it too hard for the average person to buy their products. Throw a Car payment and a House payment along with Insurances and there is no way that a Person is going to be able to throw money into something that takes Photos. These Companies want to make people feel as if they are a pro and will end up getting that incredible shot of something and be able to have it printed to sell. There are a lot of Starving Artists and Photographers out there that do really Creative work. And then throw Johnny and Little Susie in the mix and Parents can't afford to buy them equipment. Most Schools today do not even offer a class in Photography. One final note, look at what Sports Illustrated did to their Staff of Pros. Even Nat. Geo. uses Freelancers, so becoming a money producing Photographer is next to impossible. I will always do it because I have a passion for it, along with Golf. But, I'am also on the sidelines in Ann Arbor popping the shutter for Football and the other 3 major sports. I just feel that they need to lower prices and stuff will be in more hands.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The average person doesn't need a 600mm f/4 lens. Have you noticed the top tier bodies enter the market at about $6500 model after model after model? Not economic conditions, nor market conditions, nor inflation ever changes that initial price. Pretty much the same for 500mm and 600mm prime lenses.

Interchangeable lens cameras and their lenses are professional equipment for organizations and some individuals. They're high-end luxury goods for everyone else who is willing to buy new. They're built to last and only fools (aka the idle rich) replace a top-line model with a minor incremental upgrade every other year. Lower the prices by 80% and you won't get back the 80% of the market that has vanished forever over these past 10 years. That market that is gone is grabbing their phones from their back pocket, snapping whatever is happening at the moment, posting to the internet, and moving on to the next thing, not trying to find an exposure with a misplaced focus point and waiting to get home to see of Topaz AI can recover anything useful.

DJCard Loc: Northern Kentucky

I enjoy my Nikon equipment and will continue to use Nikon as long they continue to make the kind of equipment I have fun using. I sold my Canon 5D IV after several months because I prefer the color rendition, menu setup, and ergonomics of my Nikons.

baer

Me too
I still use my FtN and F4

baer

Nikon since 1969
I also have a 4x5 speed graphic

Nickaroo

Once again you really made a great point. I have a 600mm f/4, a 300mm f/2.8, and the 500mm f/4 along with a 200mm-400mm all Nikon Lenses. I have had these Lenses for quite some time now, I would venture to say that they average around 8-9yrs. old. But, you did make a good point about the unusual group that buys new just because of some non-monumental feature. Isn't that the way the World turns nowadays?

reverand

I have a Nikon F, a Nikkormatic (inherited from my father when he died), 2 Nikon F2s, a Nikon D750, and my current camera, a D850. I think I bought the first Nikon F back in 1968. The first Nikon F2 I bought around 1975. One of the Nikon F2s had to be sent out for repair when the film counter stopped working. I also lost the battery plug on the bottom of that Nikon F2, and it had to be replaced. Aside from that, the cameras have been working perfectly--FOR FIFTY YEARS. And in fact, the lenses I bought for my original Nikon F actually work on my D850 (although they are no longer automatic, and they have to be focused manually, you know, like in the old days when we all focused manually-how hard can it be).

If somehow Nikon had dropped out of the market, or had stopped making a good product, I'd be worried. But the D850 is one of the top cameras, and Nikon is also competitive in the mirrorless market.

I don't think they're going to go away.

BartHx

I started my Nikon collection with the Nikon F Photomic in the late 60s. My uncle introduced me to Nikon with his viewfinder model in the early 60s. I have a large drawer full of Nikon bodies and lenses. Somehow I never seem to be able to get rid of old cameras or lenses -- just in case. Anybody need a Miranda D with an automatic lens?

texasdigital Loc: Conroe, Texas

Far be it for me to even act like I'm an expert in Japanese affairs, I'm not and I'm sure not many on this forum are either. But, if I understand the concept of Keiretsu correctly, they are the money machine. I'm not sure it is their function to directly involve themselves in the business, rather they bankroll what the company believes is the correct path.

It is true that Nikon is behind the ball on mirrorless cameras, yet another example of their failure to detect the pulse of the industry. They also have not kept up with Canon’s innovations in body and lens technology. While the glass is good, the electronics aren’t always competitive.

Unfortunately, while Nikon slept on their laurels, Canon leaped ahead. You appear to be a die-hard Canon user and I detect a certain smug delight that Nikon is suffering so. Yet, what Canon did to Nikon, Sony is about to do to Canon. But long before Sony began to seriously compete with Canon and Nikon, they were known for the image sensors which became the heart of most DSLRs. Now enter the mirrorless and things just keep getting better for Sony.

Speaking of mirrorless, there appears to be several advantages to this system, at least from the prospective of those converting. My issue is all my bodies are DSLR and since I am not a professional photographer nor am I wealthy enough to fling money about willy-nilly, I see no reason for the time being to divest myself of the gear I have. I’ve tried to buy wisely within the manufacture group I’ve chosen to support, but in my case, money IS an object. As already stated, I’ve invested in quality Nikon lenses as I believe the heart of any camera are its lens.

The bottom-line, though, is I cannot afford to switch to Canon or Sony without taking a huge hit with my current inventory. Now, if the engineers come up with really good adapters that would allow me to mount my Nikon lenses on Sony, I might consider saving for their flagship Sony Alpha 1 or may even a Canon EOS-1D X Mark III, even though it’s not mirrorless.

However, can professional level photography be accomplished with Nikon? Of course it can! For example, look at Moose Peterson’s work, not to mention Joe McNally. In my opinion, Canon’s ability to capture a significant part of the market is not only their technological innovation, but also their brilliant marketing. They are everywhere that matters to pro and semi-pro photographers. If only Nikon would have thought to put their accolades within the pages of National Geographic. And let’s not forget the white lenses … genius! Whether you can achieve better photographs using a white lens is debatable, but the perception is you can and unless you own a white lens then you can never climb the stairs to professional immortality.

So, I’ve said a lot, and maybe too much. Much of my writing is my mind wandering and I’m simply expressing my two cents … right or wrong.

Now my next subject might be about the future of professional photography. With the advent of modern cameras by all manufactures and the price point being such that the average Joe can afford a decent setup, I sense that professionals must fight much harder to separate themselves from beginners and serious amateurs. Add into the mix the myriad of computer image software programs and oh my, what is a professional to do? It’s difficult to get value for their work when so many amateurs are selling their products for pennies on the dollar, or worst, for free.

Once again, my two cents.

Carnpo Loc: North Carolina

I chose my first Nikon in early 70s. I now have myself a Nikon Museum. They all work. I am retired and 73 years old. When I croak my Grandson will have them all. Only one will be Mirrorless. The S2 which looks and function like new.

(Download)

baron_silverton Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Hi Paul,

You make good points as always - I would add that Nikon has significantly down sized their operations cutting massive overhead costs out of the equation - overhead costs that its not clear actually did anything for them - not R&D costs, but mostly expensive Japanese production facilities etc.

Also, you point out that they only sold 1 mirrorless to Canon and Sony's 5 and yes this is not a good sign, but it is also true that the bulk of Nikon users are still DSLR users that have yet to switch - most of these will likely switch to Nikon once Nikon has produced a mirrorless that truly competes with a D850 etc. - like the person who started this chain - I sure they as a D850 user will go mirrorless if a rumored Z8 that surpasses the D850 in every way were to be offered.

A semblance of evidence for this is already emerging - although the Z6II and Z7II have gotten much better, they still lack a couple integral elements to make them D850 worthy - mainly in the area of autofocus and subject tracking. Even still, Nikon saw an uptick of sales percentage wise on the generation II cameras indicating that there is a market waiting in the permafrost (so to speak) that they have now tapped but have still not exploited.

If the Z9 delivers as promised (and I admit this is an IF - if it doesn't then I agree the game will be close to over) and it has state of the art AF including Eye AF equal to Canon and Sony and subject tracking also equal then the Z system will have arrived and there will no longer be that 'one thing' that is always pointed to as to why Sony and Canon are better - autofocus. Then, once this tech trickles down in the next generation to the Z6/7III or the fabled but hopefully real Z8, I think Nikon will have a renaissance of sales of their mirrorless cameras - even to rival that of Sony. We know that Nikon was the second highest seller of digital cameras (total sales) below Canon in 2019 but most of them were DSLR's - when all those (or most of them) folks switch to Nikon mirrorless then Nikon should have a solid position in the market competing with Sony for #2.

Obviously, they will never catch Canon and neither will Sony - unless Canon does something really stupid which is doubtful.

So far, I have to say, I am quite impressed with the RF system - the innovations that Canon have produced in recent times combined with some awesome lenses has solidified their #1 position even further - and good for them - they deserve it.

I also have to admit, I do not understand this alleged Nikon retro DX camera that is rumored to be released in a week or so - this is NOT the direction that I think they should head in, and I am scratching my head about it - I hope they prove me wrong but I doubt it. Nevertheless, if the Z9 performs as promised and the next generation of mirrorless gets this new tech, I think Nikon will definitely survive and do fairly well between the increased sales and the significantly reduced costs they now enjoy.

In all cases, as I am sure you agree, it is in the best interest of all of us camera consumers for Nikon to survive - it helps to keep Sony and Canon innovating and helps to keep prices competitive, so for these reasons I know you are rooting for Nikon just as the rest of us are.

Thanks Paul for your insightful comments as always :)
-B