ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (05/31/85)
The latest issue of Popular Photography carried coverage of the PMA trade show. A casual scan revealed NOT ONE SINGLE NEW PRODUCT FROM NIKON. It looks like they're either (a) quietly getting all their ducks in a row for some new whiz-bang product announcement, or (b) quietly going out of business. Anyone know which?
dberg@noscvax.UUCP (David I. Berg) (06/04/85)
> The latest issue of Popular Photography carried coverage of the > PMA trade show. A casual scan revealed NOT ONE SINGLE NEW PRODUCT > FROM NIKON. It looks like they're either (a) quietly getting all > their ducks in a row for some new whiz-bang product announcement, or > (b) quietly going out of business. Anyone know which? I had heard about three years ago that Nikon was not in the best of economic shape beacuse they refused to "keep up with the Jonses" in the low-priced "pop" camera market. As a result their primary target market was becoming saturated and they were not developing any new markets. Now, I can under- stand them wanting to keep their image as "a cut above the rest", but when the trade off is being cut off from the rest, they are cutting off their nose to spite their face. I don't know if this is their true present situation or not? Their latest offering (the FA) seems to be a very attractive camera, with competition only from Olympus (so far). If they are in trouble, this may be enough to keep them afloat. -- David I. Berg (dberg) ARINC Research Corporation San Diego, CA ihnp4 \ MILNET dberg@nosc akgua \ UUCP decvax >------------!sdcsvax!noscvax!dberg dcdwest / ucbvax /
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/06/85)
> I had heard about three years ago that Nikon was not in the best of economic > shape beacuse they refused to "keep up with the Jonses" ... Nikon seems not to have kept up with the development of "high tech" cameras, which might be part of the problem. Back when I bought my new camera, I had been using a Nikon F for many years, and thus had a (natural) bias for Nikon; but shortly before I decided to buy a new Nikon, I happened to notice an article on Canon's use of microprocessors somewhere, and thus started looking at the Canons too. Eventually this changed my opinion, and I came to believe Nikon might be too conservative in their use of new technology. Now, I earnestly hope my saying this won't start a "flame war" in here, of all places. I will certainly agree with any Nikon advocates who feel that Nikon's conservative approach does have definite advantages; I also talked to Canon owners who complained that Canon changed designs so radically that they were left "stranded" with a camera for which few accessories existed, something Nikon has avoided by their more conservative approach to change. Thus, I can see that in many ways, Nikon may be taking a very good approach. At the same time, I suspect that the perception I had is not that uncommon in the marketplace; this may be partly why. [In fact, maybe Nikon is "retooling" now to move into the new technology? I find it hard to believe that a company as successful and well-established would be likely just to vanish quietly.] I think it would probably help Nikon if they were to come out with some new cameras that were NOT the "low priced 'pop' cameras" mentioned in the referenced article (and which I have read are themselves experiencing a big slowdown in sales), but which did use the newer technology. The electronic cameras are just tools, and as such have advantages and disadvantages over the manual ones; but it would seem better to provide a larger tool set than a smaller one. -- Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Zl FB vf n xvyyre junyr."
hofbauer@utcsri.UUCP (John Hofbauer) (06/07/85)
As a longtime Nikon owner I'm quite pleased by their conservatism. While Canon obsoleted several lens mounts in rapid succession in the early '70s Nikon very carefully engineered the AI mount so that virtually all old lenses could be upgraded for minimal cost. Furthermore, the Nikon FA as electronically advanced as any camera on the market. I personally don't care much for whizbang cameras. It's only a tool, as good or bad as the person wielding it. As far as I'm concerned there have only been two significant advances in camera design in the last 50 years: interchangable lenses and thru-the-lens metering. Anything else I can live without. I'm not surprised by Nikon's recent lack of activity. They have the most complete line of lenses of all the major camera makers and there are no obvious holes that need plugging. Most of their recent new offerings have been in the wide-angle to medium telephoto zoom lens category which is the current hot area of photo marketing. Nikon is taking a well-deserved rest while the others are furiously running to catch up. John Hofbauer
ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (06/09/85)
As a long-time Nikon owner (since 1965!), I am also pleased by their conservatism. I'm worried, though, that they may be in the process of being squeezed out by Minolta and Canon.
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/11/85)
>Nikon is taking a well-deserved rest while the others are furiously running >to catch up. Ha! Ha! You must not get the same TV commercials there we get here... Nikon just started a massive advertising campaign on our local TV stations... advertising what? Their new just-like-Canon's mass-market point-and-shoot camera. -- Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Erny vfgf qba'g hfr Xbqnpuebzr."