[Nicolas06]

My future son-in-law has convinced my daughter a drone for the outdoor reception is good.

What the drone supposed to do honestly? It would fly around at head level or bellow to have nice angle of view and nobody will mess up with it ? And who will operate it? The photographer?

I am not sure I get the interrest of that to be honest.

[Nicolas06]

Tha being said 23% be\uting Sony means 77% didn't. Is the glass 1/4 full or 3/4s empty?

This is bit too black and white for me. I certainly don't think that 96-97% of the market couldn't be satisfied with Pentax and that the only reason Pentax has so low market share. If Pentax had 23% people would be saying to all over the place at that forum, saying how good it is that people finally seen the light blah blah blah

The same I don't think getting 23% of market share mean all people that brought it are perfectly satisfied (many there have complains against their Sony...) and that the 77% might not have been happier with a Sony in the end... Or Pentax

Most people don't have time/money/willingness to try everything in the market... And many things you don't realize if it is for you or not before trying it seriouly. Worse, most people are not even aware of what exist... I have a friend, for him, that Canon or nothing else. And we can hate him for that but by all other mean he is very nice and smart guy so that would be pretty silly for something like photography gear. It isn't like you couldn't take fantastic photos with some brand or if the photographer rather than the gear was the key factor

[Rondec]

And so how do you manage to upgrade the D610 without eating the D750 if you don't upgrade it too?

Because I mean the iso thing first is pure marketing. The 2 sensors perform the same on DxO. 1230 shots vs 900 is the same range. The 2016 metering is more than enough except for AF tracking. So basically it mean slightly better AF, articulating screen and better video.

If you upgrade, it is very diffcult to not have wifi at standard anyway, to not have a better performance sensor that would eat the D750 and well I admit the articulating screen or better video could be pure market segmentation but they are quite likely to be included. And the video would likely be better than current D750... That would let AF, and that would mean intentionnally not upgrading it. And even it would mean D750 would need an upgrade or have difficulty to justify the sale.

NIcolas, I think you can understand looking at this how Nikon has struggled in the current market. The D750 is priced at 2000 on B and H while the D610 is priced at 1500. They have sold concurrently for the life of the D750 (it was released several months after the D610, if I remember correctly).

Basically, Nikon is trying to hit a lot of different price points in the market place. The D750 is a slightly higher specified D610. If there was someone out there who was satisfied with 24 megapixels, but wanted a little faster frame rate, better auto focus and better video then the D750 is the camera for them. On the other hand, if someone doesn't care and just wants the cheapest full frame they can get, then the D610 is the way to go.

My feeling going forward is that Nikon is going to streamline the number of models they have. Maybe just three models -- a sports/high iso/high frame rate monster, an entry level, and a landscape camera with high megapixels. But we don't know how each individual camera has sold, so it is hard to say what should stay and what should go.

[Winder]

NIcolas, I think you can understand looking at this how Nikon has struggled in the current market. The D750 is priced at 2000 on B and H while the D610 is priced at 1500. They have sold concurrently for the life of the D750 (it was released several months after the D610, if I remember correctly).

Basically, Nikon is trying to hit a lot of different price points in the market place. The D750 is a slightly higher specified D610. If there was someone out there who was satisfied with 24 megapixels, but wanted a little faster frame rate, better auto focus and better video then the D750 is the camera for them. On the other hand, if someone doesn't care and just wants the cheapest full frame they can get, then the D610 is the way to go.

My feeling going forward is that Nikon is going to streamline the number of models they have. Maybe just three models -- a sports/high iso/high frame rate monster, an entry level, and a landscape camera with high megapixels. But we don't know how each individual camera has sold, so it is hard to say what should stay and what should go.

From a Nikon interview: Copied and Pasted From Nikon Rumors. (comments not mine)
The Nikon camera business is undergoing a major restructuring.
This is a quote: "bringing in multiple mirrorless cameras at an early stage" - to me this means announcing multiple mirrorless cameras soon.
Nikon is taking an aggressive approach to rebuild their camera business.
Nikon has no plans for closing domestic or overseas manufacturing plants at the present time.
In the future Nikon will concentrate their resources on medium to high-end DSLR cameras and lenses as well as mirrorless cameras.
Nikon will have fewer models in the future.
Nikon still wants to develop a high-end compact camera.

[lesmore49]

I used to follow...or at least attempt to follow the myriad of DSLR camera models different manufacturers had for sale. I gave up, what with so many new models being introduced on a regular basis. Canon has been the most difficult for me. I had the full frame line down pat, but the ASP-C line I could never sort out. Canon seems to have so many different cameras...one for every price range and niche and then some.

I long for the days of the 1960's, insofar as camera models went. Pentax had the basic S1a, upgraded SV and top of the line, Spotmatic....and they kept to this line for a number of years. Nikon was similar.

It was simple, which worked out well for a simple man like myself.

Now it seems new models just keep rolling out.

[TaoMaas]

Part of the equation for.. photography? hmmmmmmmm.... I think still shots are 100% of the equation for photography.

I specifically said the "imaging world"...which photography is a part of...and that part is shrinking.

I'm not sure where I'd ever need video when I'm trying to shoot still shots.. but Wedding photography maybe?

One section was business and private portraits. The business part was to create not only a great head shot, but to use the lighting set-up to also shoot an electronic business card while they had everything set up. It could be sent via email and would allow the "business card" to elaborate on what that person had to offer to the client. The personal portraits were done much the same way, but were intended to be put into electronic picture frames so that a parent (or whoever) could walk past the picture, touch it, and hear the person in the picture talk to them. Ever want to hear your kids when they were 5 yrs old again tell you how much they love you? Want to hear your grandmother tell you about her life? Yeah...that's the idea. It's not traditional photography, but it's where the market is headed.

Otherwise it seems to me like the whole seminar might have been to sell Fuji and Sony products haha

All the major manufacturers were represented at the seminar...except Pentax. That ought to scare you more than video. LOL

[Rondec]

From a Nikon interview: Copied and Pasted From Nikon Rumors. (comments not mine)
The Nikon camera business is undergoing a major restructuring.
This is a quote: "bringing in multiple mirrorless cameras at an early stage" - to me this means announcing multiple mirrorless cameras soon.
Nikon is taking an aggressive approach to rebuild their camera business.
Nikon has no plans for closing domestic or overseas manufacturing plants at the present time.
In the future Nikon will concentrate their resources on medium to high-end DSLR cameras and lenses as well as mirrorless cameras.
Nikon will have fewer models in the future.
Nikon still wants to develop a high-end compact camera.

I suppose.

I think the biggest thing going forward is don't release so many models and have real reasons for new releases rather than an artificial time in the year when it is time to update. People aren't buying the D5500, not because it has a mirror, but because they own a D5300 and it is fine for their needs for the time being. At least that's my perception. 25 percent of a lot smaller market is probably a problem if you don't close plants and slow releases. And that's the biggest problem, camera sales as a whole are just down. If Sony has a bigger share of that smaller market then I suppose they are winning, but it still isn't the glory days of seven or eight years ago and I doubt we'll go back to that point.

---

Last edited by Rondec; 04-16-2017 at 03:42 PM.

[Nicolas06]

I suppose.

I think the biggest thing going forward is don't release so many models and have real reasons for releases rather than an artificial time in the year when it is time to update. People aren't buying the D5500, not because it has a mirror, but because they own a D5300 and it is fine for their needs for the time being. At least that's my perception. 25 percent of a lot smaller market is probably a problem if you don't close plants and slow releases. And that's the biggest problem, camera sales as a whole are just down. If Sony has a bigger share of that smaller market then I suppose they are winning, but it still isn't the glory days of seven or eight years ago and I doubt we'll go back to that point.

In the end this is mostly the market has shifted. There maybe 20 time more camera sold than before, but that 19 camera out of 20 in a smartphone. A few other are in drones, actions cam or now cars.

The smartphone, being able to do everything with something that fit the pocket beat doing a single thing better and being bulky and heavy...

And the next innovations are more in interresting use of smartphones, drones, autonomous vehicules and even more, the software behind rather than high end cameras.

Among the remaining dedicated camera, mirrorless take a bigger and bigger share because they still manager to be noticably better than smartphone while keeping a smaller/lighter profile. And size/weight is a critical factor to most people. And in term of capability, recent mirrorless solved the AF issue, make it even better with eye AF, have more FPS and reactivity and manage to work better even with legagy DSLR lenses than a DSLR.

The reason DSLR are still used as much is inertia. But give it 10 years... And DSLR will be a niche, even among dedicated high end cameras.

[reh321]

....
The reason DSLR are still used as much is inertia. But give it 10 years... .....

Not my experience.
In Feb 2007 I was finally ready to go digital.
I wanted to carry less bulk, so instead of getting a DSLR to replace my SLR, I got a compact camera.
That experiment lasted nine months
By November 2007 I wrote this off as a failed experiment ... I missed the flexibility of my SLR
My daughter had broken the LCD on her camera, so I could justify giving my camera to her and getting a DSLR for me.
Today I will use my iPhone for cases when I just need a quick snap, but something where I need telephoto, or control motion, or, or {95% of my pictures} I use my K-30 or Q-7.

---------- Post added 04-16-17 at 09:01 PM ----------

Ever want to hear your kids when they were 5 yrs old again tell you how much they love you? Want to hear your grandmother tell you about her life? Yeah...that's the idea. It's not traditional photography, but it's where the market is headed.

Nope, I wasn't interested back when our children were young.
Many of my friends purchased a camcorder when their kids were born, but I just purchased a new pocket camera so I could take a picture anytime anywhere.

[monochrome]

Not my experience.
In Feb 2007 I was finally ready to go digital.
I wanted to carry less bulk, so instead of getting a DSLR to replace my SLR, I got a compact camera.
That experiment lasted nine months
By November 2007 I wrote this off as a failed experiment ... I missed the flexibility of my SLR
My daughter had broken the LCD on her camera, so I could justify giving my camera to her and getting a DSLR for me.
Today I will use my iPhone for cases when I just need a quick snap, but something where I need telephoto, or control motion, or, or {95% of my pictures} I use my K-30 or Q-7.

---------- Post added 04-16-17 at 09:01 PM ----------


Nope, I wasn't interested back when our children were young.
Many of my friends purchased a camcorder when their kids were born, but I just purchased a new pocket camera so I could take a picture anytime anywhere.

We had +100 VHS cassettes, converted them to DVD using some long-forgotten WinApp, put them on a shelf - and looked at a couple hours of Christmas movies both times we've 'acquired' a new child. I have my father's Super8's converted also. I wasn't as good an athlete as I recall.

OTOH we keep yards of binders full of prints in our family room and look at them constantly, scan them for blogs, show them to people, tell the stories behind the moments.

I don't believe the video files (or unprinted image files) will last as long.

[Winder]

I suppose.

I think the biggest thing going forward is don't release so many models and have real reasons for new releases rather than an artificial time in the year when it is time to update. People aren't buying the D5500, not because it has a mirror, but because they own a D5300 and it is fine for their needs for the time being. At least that's my perception. 25 percent of a lot smaller market is probably a problem if you don't close plants and slow releases. And that's the biggest problem, camera sales as a whole are just down. If Sony has a bigger share of that smaller market then I suppose they are winning, but it still isn't the glory days of seven or eight years ago and I doubt we'll go back to that point.

Nikon could do a lot, but so can Ricoh. Would USB 3.0 really have been that hard on the K-1? Its on the K-3. What about SDXC UHS-II? What about better tethering and better WiFi support? It almost seems like camera makers are going out of their way to avoid using new technology. These huge companies can't get basic mobile apps to work consistently. Nikon has finally implemented automatic lens calibration in its top of the line, but this is really pretty basic technology that should be standard for all DSLRs. I think part of the problem is that Japanese companies kind of suck at writing software. Look at Silkypix Studio Pro. Its does a great job, but the interface is awful, its clunky, slow, and not very intuitive relative to just about any of the other RAW developers. Now look at the software that comes in cameras. Look at the menus and the design. Japanese companies make great hardware and lousy software, but they wont outsource to someone who knows software and user interfaces. Look at what Magic Lantern is doing to Canon cameras.

[wildman]

Now look at the software that comes in cameras. Look at the menus and the design. Japanese companies make great hardware and lousy software, but they wont outsource to someone who knows software and user interfaces. Look at what Magic Lantern is doing to Canon cameras.

For the last fifty years or so Asian production has been successful based on the premise "give the market [primarily the Western market] what it wants".

The problem for photo hardware production now is that the market no longer knows what it wants.

The very definition of what "photography" means is shifting under our feet and no one knows where it's going to end up. That's very scary stuff if you are responsible for billions of dollars of invested capital, the economic well being of a 100,000 employees or even, to some extent, the national economy, the survival of the firm and, of course - the real bottom line, your own survival in the firm.

One thing for sure in the next few years - "heads will roll".

[mecrox]

For the last fifty years or so Asian production has been successful based on the basic premise "give the market [primarily the Western market] what it wants".
The problem for production now is that the market no longer knows what it wants.

The very definition of what "photography" means is shifting under our feet and no one knows where it's going to end up. That's very scary stuff if you are responsible for billions of dollars of invested capital, the economic well being of a 100,000 employees and the very survival of the firm it's self.

One thing for sure in the next few year - "heads will roll".

I guess one way to deal with this is to try to get your company into a position where it doesn't matter too much that consumers are fickle and uncertain. Maybe less than 10 per cent of your turnover depends on them, the rest comes from different sources perhaps direct selling to businesses. If Ricoh were able to get a really solid camera business going for sales to automotive, robotics, security and so on then the entire consumer side almost become an exercise in raising the company profile. Shop window stuff. Other outfits seem to have the same idea - medical divisions and so on. That's one reason "camera doom" can be a bit overdone. For a few outfits, though not all, consumer cameras are not as important as the owners of the cameras think they are. I think the whole of Sony cameras is still only around 5 per cent of the whole Sony corp, though not sure. Same for Ricoh. For other more industrial things, though, optics + high tech/software is a boom area at a guess.

[Rondec]

Nikon could do a lot, but so can Ricoh. Would USB 3.0 really have been that hard on the K-1? Its on the K-3. What about SDXC UHS-II? What about better tethering and better WiFi support? It almost seems like camera makers are going out of their way to avoid using new technology. These huge companies can't get basic mobile apps to work consistently. Nikon has finally implemented automatic lens calibration in its top of the line, but this is really pretty basic technology that should be standard for all DSLRs. I think part of the problem is that Japanese companies kind of suck at writing software. Look at Silkypix Studio Pro. Its does a great job, but the interface is awful, its clunky, slow, and not very intuitive relative to just about any of the other RAW developers. Now look at the software that comes in cameras. Look at the menus and the design. Japanese companies make great hardware and lousy software, but they wont outsource to someone who knows software and user interfaces. Look at what Magic Lantern is doing to Canon cameras.

Pentax was building to a price point. Anything that would bump the K-1 out of that price point was left out. Beyond which, if they added too many features, it would have take more time for release and they didn't have that.

But clearly Pentax could release a version 2 of the K-1 tomorrow and have significant improvements over the current model in many respects. But if you get to the place where you are bumping frame rates slightly or megapixels slightly or add an unsable iso level to the new camera, then I don't really view those as features that would sell the new model over the old one.

[wildman]

I guess one way to deal with this is to try to get your company into a position where it doesn't matter too much that consumers are fickle and uncertain.

I think this may be trivializing the problem a bit.

In production we are talking about real world tangible long term investments in plant, specialized tools, well paid specialized technical staff and highly trained production people with a high overhead cost just to maintain let alone produce. These sort of assets don't turn on a dime like purely financial assets can and do. Production is, by it's nature a relatively long term commitment to a rather narrow skill and tool set.

Just changing production so that "it doesn't matter too much that consumers are fickle and uncertain" may, in it's self, be a huge investment in time and money - think Kodak.