[Rondec]

Smart phones are trying to achieve large sensor image quality and from my perspective are still pretty far away. Their reasons for selling are ease of use and the fact that they offer a "free" camera in a device that people are already going to get for its smart phone features. It is pretty clear that compact cameras are suffering as a result.

That isn't Nikon's issue.

Nikon has had plenty of false starts. They had the whole 1 series that Nikon had to have invested some money in and it is dead in the water. I'm not totally sure why, except that I guess it had too small a sensor for how big the camera bodies and lenses were. Not totally sure. It seemed like a decent camera system. Probably the bigger factor is just that there is a need to release new cameras on a schedule, even if they don't really offer new features. As much as we hate that Ricoh is constantly generating new camera bodies, it is probably better to space them out more and actually release a new camera when you actually have real improvements to add. The goal for every camera maker is to have the last generation camera body sell out before the next one is released. I'm sure most don't achieve that, but Nikon seems pretty far away from that goal.

Hopefully they have a plan going forward, but I'm afraid it does mean the loss of jobs and probably cutting back a fair amount in certain areas, at least in the short term.

[ffking]

I don't know if you can blame marketing; I mean, you could throw 10,000 marketers at the horse & buggy and you couldn't get it to replace 2% of the cars on the road. The fact that the camera comes with your phone is a pretty big disincentive to buy a separate one for a lot of people.

The strange thing in a way is that ILCs were ever marketed tor bought by anyone other than people interested in photography rather than just taking pictures - they've always involved a certain amount of faffing - but that's the price you pay for control over the end result, and that's what photographers want. Photographers, OTOH are, and always will be, a small subset of those taking photographs.

[RobA_Oz]

I don't know if you can blame marketing; I mean, you could throw 10,000 marketers at the horse & buggy and you couldn't get it to replace 2% of the cars on the road. The fact that the camera comes with your phone is a pretty big disincentive to buy a separate one for a lot of people.

Yes, so if that's the case, then it's the product, which is why I said it's either one or the other. Nonetheless, we know that the phone camera comes with a lot of limitations: the task for marketing is to present a case that convinces enough people to part with some more money, because those limitations have sufficient importance to warrant it.

Now, having just watched a lot of people on holiday holding up phones and tablets to photograph things they thought worthy of capturing along the way, I realise that task isn't an easy one, because those people think their phone camera and its digital zoom works well enough for their purpose. If camera makers are going to break people out of that thought process, then they need to convince them that their photos are somehow unworthy.

It's not impossible: look at how coffee culture has developed in the last 40 years. Some people still like instant coffee, and some will drink it if there's nothing else available, but those who appreciate good coffee aren't satisfied by it. Analogies like that are fraught, of course, but you get the point. No camera-maker is telling people their phone cameras produce crap pictures (ignore the fact that some aren't: we're talking marketing here) so naturally a lot of people don't even consider that things could easily be better. Every camera manufacturer is intent on market share, rather than growing the market. In a shrinking market, that's not a recipe for longevity.

[monochrome]

Smart phones are trying to achieve large sensor image quality and from my perspective are still pretty far away. Their reasons for selling are ease of use and the fact that they offer a "free" camera in a device that people are already going to get for its smart phone features. It is pretty clear that compact cameras are suffering as a result.

That isn't Nikon's issue.

Nikon has had plenty of false starts. They had the whole 1 series that Nikon had to have invested some money in and it is dead in the water. I'm not totally sure why, except that I guess it had too small a sensor for how big the camera bodies and lenses were. Not totally sure. It seemed like a decent camera system. Probably the bigger factor is just that there is a need to release new cameras on a schedule, even if they don't really offer new features. As much as we hate that Ricoh is constantly generating new camera bodies, it is probably better to space them out more and actually release a new camera when you actually have real improvements to add. The goal for every camera maker is to have the last generation camera body sell out before the next one is released. I'm sure most don't achieve that, but Nikon seems pretty far away from that goal.

Hopefully they have a plan going forward, but I'm afraid it does mean the loss of jobs and probably cutting back a fair amount in certain areas, at least in the short term.

Sooner or later we’ll stop calling them phones. People buy them to text and post images to social media sites. The camera is a primary function along with the touch screen, but the subjective quality of the image (the camera) is nearly irrelevant.

.

[Rondec]

Sooner or later we’ll stop calling them phones. People buy them to text and post images to social media sites. The camera is a primary function along with the touch screen, but the subjective quality of the image (the camera) is nearly irrelevant.

.

I find it annoying the plethora of articles the claim that this phone camera or that app allow phone cameras to reach the level of a larger sensor camera's performance.

Many are OK at web sizes in decent light, but even there (and I assume they are posting the best case images), I see the flaws -- distortion, oversaturation, sharpening artifacts, etc. I guess a lot of folks aren't bothered by those, but phone cameras still have a long ways to go.

But as you say, the biggest reason to use one is the ease of posting to social media sites.

[beholder3]

Many are OK at web sizes in decent light, but even there (and I assume they are posting the best case images), I see the flaws -- distortion, oversaturation, sharpening artifacts, etc. I guess a lot of folks aren't bothered by those, but phone cameras still have a long ways to go.

Millions if not billions of people consume photos via their smartphones mostly or only.
Even what to probably refer to as "web size" is too high quality requirement then, assuming you mean something on a PC screen about 15-20cm width.
People today consume images at smaller size than polaroids were.

There is a huge two-class-market here with 1,000 buyers:

• 998 people watch photos at max with 12cm width and dont want to spend a lot of money or time to learn or lug around complicated extra toys. They do not care about "oversaturation" or "sharpening artifacts" and probaly couldnt see them even if you told them. Change lenses? How old school is that? Not worth it. Cool looking software filters to slap on in app is important.
• 2 people want to "print large" and worry about distortion and chromatic aberrations and are willing to spend a lot of money on an expesnive and high class camera such the K-S2.

The first group is growing. The second group is shrinking.

[Wheatfield]

We are talking about the mass market of "a nice relaxed overland flight with the family/children". The word "advanced" all by itself would be a no-no for advertising. And the jet fighter plane is a complete fail there. It is by all accounts sub-par in its market appeal.
This is purely ignorance on the side of the manufacturer of the jet fighter plane, not on side of the market, if he ignores the market requirements.

Nobody in the biology market cared if the Dodo was "more advanced" than a cockroach.

You seem to have missed my point. So it goes.

[BrianR]

Nikon has had plenty of false starts. They had the whole 1 series that Nikon had to have invested some money in and it is dead in the water. I'm not totally sure why, except that I guess it had too small a sensor for how big the camera bodies and lenses were. Not totally sure. It seemed like a decent camera system.

The body of the J line isn't much larger than the Q. With the 10/2.8mm lens, the J1 fits pretty comfortably in my jeans pocket. There are a couple of very compact zooms that would also fit the bill, but there isn't a huge lens selection overall and they certainly could have used more compact pocketable options. Auto-focus is blisteringly fast, and it is nice to use. It has some silly design decisions, like the absurd flash system, and the high price on release didn't help. I don't think subsequent additions to the line were priced much lower either.

A bit of a shame to see systems fade away, it's nice to have distinct options.

[Wheatfield]

Which is the starting point for Nikon's explanation of why their compact lines have failed, of course, effectively "It's not our products that are inadequate: it's your limited understanding of their benefits". While that may be true in a broad sense, in a business context, if fault is to be found, it's either with their range of cameras, or their marketing.

That’s one misinterpretatation, but it has nothing to do with what Nikon is saying.

[monochrome]

I find it annoying the plethora of articles the claim that this phone camera or that app allow phone cameras to reach the level of a larger sensor camera's performance.

Many are OK at web sizes in decent light, but even there (and I assume they are posting the best case images), I see the flaws -- distortion, oversaturation, sharpening artifacts, etc. I guess a lot of folks aren't bothered by those, but phone cameras still have a long ways to go.

But as you say, the biggest reason to use one is the ease of posting to social media sites.

Imagine what I could have done with a K-1 + 24-70 or KP + DA21. But it wouldn’t look that much better on the twins’ iCloud family shared host.

[Rondec]

Imagine what I could have done with a K-1 + 24-70 or KP + DA21. But it wouldn’t look that much better on the twins’ iCloud family shared host.

I don't know that I agree. First of all, snap shots are snap shots and if there is a place where folks are least likely to see benefit from having a larger sensor, it is in snap shot situations. You probably aren't going to print that photo 8 by 10 and it is a wonderful moment. The other thing is what everyone says, which is that the best camera is the one you have with you. You aren't going to have a KP and DA 21 with you all of the time and so an iphone is better.

To me, it isn't one or the other -- I use both. I just know as well that for shots that I want to print bigger it is probably worth the effort to lug my SLR along with me.

[normhead]

I don't know that I agree. First of all, snap shots are snap shots and if there is a place where folks are least likely to see benefit from having a larger sensor, it is in snap shot situations. You probably aren't going to print that photo 8 by 10 and it is a wonderful moment. The other thing is what everyone says, which is that the best camera is the one you have with you. You aren't going to have a KP and DA 21 with you all of the time and so an iphone is better.

To me, it isn't one or the other -- I use both. I just know as well that for shots that I want to print bigger it is probably worth the effort to lug my SLR along with me.

Anyone who's good at this knows the strengths and weaknesses of each format and picks up the camera they want, that is most appropriate to what they are doing. No one who knows what they are doing is going to say that small format cameras can do what large format cameras can or vice versa.

There's a couple of shots out there in the woods, I'm going to have to take my Q or XP-1 for. The DOF on the K-3 or K-1 just isn't good enough and I want the whole frame in focus. A Small sensor will give me a fighting chance. Once you've done it a few times you just don't even take those shots with a DSLR. You bring your small sensor camera on the next walk and take it then,

The other side of this is that a lot of people never take an image with their DSLR they couldn't have taken with a phone. They should be using phones. More portable etc. Are there any WR phones?

[CarlJF]

They had the whole 1 series that Nikon had to have invested some money in and it is dead in the water. I'm not totally sure why, except that I guess it had too small a sensor for how big the camera bodies and lenses were. Not totally sure.

Take one in your hands and you'll understand why. They feel like a cheap 50$ P&S. It's kind of a turn off for many people willing to spend a good amount of money on an alternative system.

[Rondec]

Anyone who's good at this knows the strengths and weaknesses of each format and picks up the camera they want, that is most appropriate to what they are doing. No one who knows what they are doing is going to say that small format cameras can do what large format cameras can or vice versa.

There's a couple of shots out there in the woods, I'm going to have to take my Q or XP-1 for. The DOF on the K-3 or K-1 just isn't good enough and I want the whole frame in focus. A Small sensor will give me a fighting chance. Once you've done it a few times you just don't even take those shots with a DSLR. You bring your small sensor camera on the next walk and take it then,

The other side of this is that a lot of people never take an image with their DSLR they couldn't have taken with a phone. They should be using phones. More portable etc. Are there any WR phones?

You say that, but a K-1 with a 28mm at f13 should give the same results as an iphone 7 camera. Of course you can stop down ore if you like although at a certain point you won't be getting 36 megapixels of goodness any more due to diffraction. But certainly you aren't going to get worse results on the K-1 than you will with your iphone.

[Jeff Lopez]

Some company should stick a LTE chip inside a camera.. I wouldnt be surprised it would be Sony, the Play apps are inside already..
Samsung NX1 would do nicely too.
You see, if camera manuf. are going to war against smartphones, they will have to use the same sword.