Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/05/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>Not sure if Nikon is such a loaded company. As far as I know, from its >annual reports in the recent years, Nikon has been in the red for many >years. The camera division has been losing money for many years, and the >stepper division, which used to be profitable, is a big money-loser now, due >to the Asian economic crisis of the 1997, and increased competition. > > > Well, I am surprised that Nikon is in the red. Every other serious photographer I meet in my part of town totes a Nikon. If Nikon is losing money, then I can only speculate that it is due to some of these reasons: 1. Overconfidence. In the 50s, Nikon rose to the ranks of PRO equipment when war photographers covering Nam and of course the many others as well who made Nikon legendary. I remembered that very soon during and after the 60s, any pro and serious amateur worth his salt would be using Nikon. Even the president of my school photography club advised, "Get a Nikon F....and if that is too expensive, by hook or by crook, go for the Nikkormat. You will never regret it!" Yes, too many good years, rest on your laurels, count your blessings, sip more sake, and soon without you knowing your competitor has overtaken you. So... exit Nikon, and welcome....Canon! 2. Cockiness Has anyone tried to write to Nikon Kogaku asking a question, requesting for some product information, or lodged a complain? Ever got a decent answer? Nah... they don't reply, Makes you feel like a nobody. You think those gurus at N.K. cannot read English? Sure they can. Why waste time and postage communicating with you? Nikon is not consumer friendly. Period. Maybe you pros have better luck. 3. Seppuku/Hara-Kiri. Nikon lens from circa half century ago can fit the latest whizz bang F-*** Nikon camera. There are tons of Nikon used equipment out there. There are also tons of Nikon compatible equipment out there. Some of them are actually price-wise better quality than their Nikon equivalent. Sometimes Nikon has no equivalent. My latest Tamron 28-200 Zoom is one such example. I can carry my F90 + 50/1.8 Nikon (of course at $90 new, who can resist?) and Tamron zoom and that's good enough for my photographic requirements. Nikon has yet to convince me to buy their latest three zoom lenses. Canon made a remarkable change. They jilted all their original F lens users some years back and then produced a new series capable of using their USM lenses. Bad divorce case but remarried sexier and prettier spouse. ;-). After some time, who's complaining? Nikon is capable of doing the same or even better. Produce the same line of Nikon products (for the loyalists) and also produce a new line of lenses and cameras similar to the Canon USM model. I think inbuilt lens motors will be the thing for the future. Just my guess, do not take this as a formula for instant success. 4. APS system This has been around for at least 4-5 years. Hardly a success. The people involved do not know whether to laugh or to cry. My camera dealer tells me that hardly any are now buying APS system cameras. It's a bad dream that won't go away. Nikon put its foot into it and is now sweating it out. Were any of you out there consulted on whether APS would suit your needs? I do not think so. The system appears to have been concocted by an ultra secret group of business gurus who were out to kill 35mm format. Good for us leicaphiles that they failed. I am not surprised that they did. I still remembered some big time writer in Pop. Photo making a statement that APS gave better resolution than 135 format! The 35mm (135) format originally designed by Oscar Barnack has beaten all odds and is still going strong! The future bodes well for those who can improve on the utilisation and performance of 135 format and in the area of MF photography. Dan K.