"[Nikon's] not going to be around in 5 years"

PB_PM

Recent polls showed that the percentage of people under 30 that have dedicated cameras is dropping significantly. That is the future of the camera industry! Maybe not in 5 years, as the article suggests, but unless the camera makers change their tune, their long term health is in danger.

Golf007sd

5 Years ago, I did not even have a DSLR...what does that say about the stat/poll you are referring to? Look at where I'm now....food for thought buddy.

PB_PM

As I noted, we make up a small percentage of buyers, always have, always will be. 8 years ago I'd never used an SLR either, but that's not really the point is it?

Golf007sd

....we make up a small percentage of buyers, always have, always will be.

I agree with you on that point. Many, will not fully get involved in the world of D-SLR like you and I, or many of the pro-active photographers in the beginning, But the underlying message in the article entitled: "Point, shoot, collapse: Why big camera companies are the next BlackBerry" is simply rubbish. My comments are to the article.

I truly do not know where my passion for photography will be 5 years from now, much less 8. But so far, it is going strong and I'm loving it. I kick myself in the ass for not getting into it sooner.

For me, photography is a healthy hobby...I welcome it. I feel so good when I run into another photographer and we start to talk about photography, the gears, etc..etc. I wish you had been with me in Colorado when Admaz, kkanuck and I were on a shuttle bus on our way down a hill where I came across a fellow Nikon owner with a D7100. On the 10-15 minute drive back down the hill, I had the attention of about 10 people as I educated them on how a D-SLR's works and the advantage of having one. This leads me to this point: if we want the world of D-SLR to grow, we too have a task to perform as well. We must share our passion and knowledge with those around us; so that those that have been on the sidelines can join. Hence, our Forum: Such kind actions should ensure the world of D-SLR to thrive well for all of us regardless of the gear manufacture.

kenadams

I rememer that nine years ago I was sifting through the photo mags because I needed a camera. They were still reviewing analog SLRs. The Canon 300D must have been out already, but it wa unreachable to me back then. I eventually settled for my dad's XE-1 - the minolta film classic, not the new Fuji mirrorless ;-)

When I finally got a D80 in 2007, DSLRs were only emerging on the broader range of tourist spots. You saw them, but they were still few. I got some looks everytime I brought it out.

Fast forward to the present - everybody and their ten year olds has a DSLR. This above all tells me how cheap tey have become. People still to a degree equal bigger with better. But it also tells me how fast digital moves. When I gladly accepted my dad's old analog Minolta, my brother bought a P&S with a stunning 1.3Mpx and shit for colours. It must have been at 700€ or so.

My point here, educate the people all you want about DSLRs, because otherwise in 10 years nobody may even remember what they were...

TaoTeJared

Here is food for thought - I can not get the Nokia where I live from any carrier - and we have them all even in the "sticks" / "flyover land". On the flip side, the local camera shop got the D800 before B&H and the other big stores.

Today's modern portable electronics, such as the cellphone, have merged numerous end user gadgets into one: a clock, but we still have watch on our hand; stop watch and timers, but their are still people that buy stop watch's and timers for cooking; a built-in calendar, but we still buy calendars to put up on our walls and office desks....I will stop here because their are plenty of more correlation I can make, but I hope you get my meaning and direction of looking from the outside in.

I agree with the historic perspective. One other thing to chew on - Statements like "The focus on hardware, which has driven [Canon and Nikon] to success over fifty years – the ground has shifted underneath them and it’s all software.....Nokia, with its eye-opening 41 Megapixel" assumes that phones will be the same.

The amount of devices I have seen designs and prototypes for would lead me to believe that over the next 10-15 years, many cell phones will probably be very different and will not include the "smartphone" design. I do think we will see an emergence of a new type of smart device not based just on phones but on wireless devices controlled by a central device. Imagine a device with camera, video and the like unit accessories. We are starting to see some of it with the varied Bluetooth accessories like exercise devices and the like.

Also what will shift next is the quality of viewing images where cellphone images will look much worse than they do now. 4k displays, higher resolution screens, with better color will also be the future. There is much opportunity for companies to take advantage of the new technologies.

DaveyJ

Great comment by SpraynPray!! I am in agreement there for sure. I do see TaoTeJared's point about Nikon's position in reference to the USA'a financial situation. Maybe somebody in the futre will make a great mirrorless camera and I will switch. My guess is I will never see that in my lifetime. I certainly do feel Nikon will still be with us in five and even ten years PLUS!

donaldejose

Nikon will be here in five years . . . some of us won't!

Ade

The D-SLR is here to stay, much like exotic sports cars. Hence, even though their might be a small portion of the consumer market that will buy or invest in such line of equipment...it will still be around...be it Nikon, Canon, Lecia, Fuji, Sony, Pentax, Phase One, Hasselblad.

Golf isn't it ironic that out of the 8 companies you mentioned above as examples that "D-SLR is here to stay", 5 of them do not make any consumer DSLRs today?

From the list only Nikon, Canon and Pentax make consumer DSLRs. And actually Pentax no longer exists as a company, only a brand name Ricoh purchased from Hoya, and they are investing in alternatives like the Q-series mirrorless.

So really only Nikon and Canon are left. How long can they hold out?

kanuck

Interesting article and discussion. I think its a reasonable statement although I am sure it is false. I think the natural disasters that affected Japan really hurt the company and the Japanese Yen considerably. Couple that with the stiff competition from mirror less cameras, smart phones, and intriguing releases from companies such as Sony (new A7r released next week), it puts Nikon in a further bind to compete while staying profitable. Obviously the following for Nikon and their products will always remain strong, and if Leica as a company survived (1997-2005) then so will Nikon. As much as I love Leica, I will always be devoted to Nikon and I am certain the company will be around at least for the rest of my life time.

kyoshinikon

I foresee a niche market approaching. With that being said Nikon isn't solely camera manufacturer but an optics company with their most public and mass produced product being cameras. Out where I live live DSLR's ear not only sold like hotcakes but upgraded way too often by the consumers who grab them. Serious shooters seem to be much more cautious about moving up as they are concerned with a different set of problems...

Golf007sd

@Ade: It all depends on how you define yourself as a "consumer" and what the "consumer" needs are in a relations to a digital camera body. The company's names I used were made in order to show that "big camera companies" (noted in the title of the article) like the ones I mentioned are here to stay...much like D-SLR's are. I'm more optimistic than pessimistic about the D-SLR world.

The world of photography has made a clear shift from film to digital. For the end user, seeking to get into photography will likely get a P&S to startup. If the equipment delivers on what the consumer wants, and his or her passion has grown for photography, the D-SLR is the next camera equipment ...not a cell phone with a lens on it. Hence, the foolish attempt in trying to build a bridge that image quality, P&S and D-SLR will be overlooked by the consumer.

Again....the article is trying to forecast what the digital photography market for investors....this site is not a photography site nor is it's target reader. It's sole purpose is to inform investors no how to allocate their capital in stocks openly traded. As a person that follows the capital markets, I know the underlying message in the direction they are trying to steer the reader. They know nothing about the photographer or the "consumer" seeking to get into the world of photography. Mathew, moreover, Chris attempt in trying to build a bridge that the P&S or D-SLR will be heading in the direction of Blackberry is a far stretch. In fact, the argument that Research In Motion (a.k.a. RIMM now know as Blackberry BBRY as of Jan 2013) was ever interested in the image taking bussiness is totally missleading and those of us that follow the market know this. Please keep that in mind...if you are an investor or follow the capital markets.

shawnino

@golf007sd I don't think the article's claim was that Blackberry was in the business of capturing images. The parallel the author/interviewee was trying to draw (right or wrong) is that, 5-10 years ago, a Blackberry was The Thing To Have(tm), and now the world has passed them by.

I posted the article simply asking the question if the world was in the process of passing Nikon by. I don't claim it is. I hope it's not. I wanted the opinions of people here because, as a community, you guys really know you're stuff.

Golf007sd

Any company that stops innovating and fails to offer their consumer base what they seek will find itself loosing market share. The camera manufactures continue to bring to market numorus digital device at various price point, targeting different photographer needs and want. Nikon has shown this over the past year, despite the flaws in the manufacturing process of the D600. Hence, the new D610.

I strongly believe that Nikon, Canon and other "big camera" companies will be alive and well in the next 5-10 years. Will their profit margins and market share be the same...that is a different question.

Question: Would the author make the same argument that Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc. will not be around due to the impact Apple has made in the PC industry?

PB_PM

The decline of those PC makers has more to do with tablets and smartphones than Apple itself (less than 10% of global PC shipments are Mac's). The reason is that people simply aren't buying desktop and notebook PC's in large numbers anymore, because tablets are more than good enough for most of the market. Those makers that are fading either don't make tablets/smartphones, or the ones they make are not compelling to consumers.

It's really the same thing we've seen happen to point and shoot cameras. New devices (smartphones) have come in and replace old ones (P&S).

Golf007sd

I agree with your remarks.

Yet, many that own a tablet and/or smartphone, also have within their line of electronics hardware a laptop or desktop for their editing needs. I would also stipulate that they have a digital camera for their photography needs. Thus, the market for such device will still be active in the years to come.

Ade

Question: Would the author make the same argument that Dell, HP, Toshiba, etc. will not be around due to the impact Apple has made in the PC industry?

In fact, yes. I.e., they may exit the PC industry and move on to other ventures.

- HP two years ago decided to exit its struggling PC business and transition to a software and services company, as IBM did in 2004. HP's investors got spooked, the CEO promptly got fired, replaced by Meg Whitman (from eBay). Initially Ms. Whitman decided to keep the PC business, but this year HP's 10-K filings hint that HP might dispose of the PC business after all. Then the following month Whitman announced that HP is shifting resources from PCs to tablets.

- Toshiba is in a similar situation. While publicly vowing to keep their PC & TV businesses, Toshiba's new CEO has also spoken about the possibility of exiting the PC market. Then this summer Toshiba announced that they will shrink their PC & TV business with $300 million in cost cutting in the next two years.

- Dell is the interesting case. As you may know, as of this quarter Dell is no longer a public company. Just like HP and Toshiba, Michael Dell's public position is that the company will remain in the PC business. But Dell's profit slumped 72% last quarter due to the shrinking PC business. That's 7 consecutive quarters where Dell's profits have fallen.

Can Dell stay on? Maybe, but many analysts have indeed speculated that after going private Dell might exit the PC business by selling it to Samsung. Ironically, there have been insider rumors that Samsung might also exit the PC business (which, predictably by now, Samsung denies).

The camera market is changing rapidly like the PC market. If Nikon and Canon fail to make the right adjustments now, they will be in a very rough reality in 5 years' time.

Golf007sd

@Ade: To much speculation on your forecast of HP and Toshiba. Time will tell. But, I'm willing to put money down that in 5 years HP, Toshiba, and Dell will still be selling PC's to the public at large....much like Nikon, Canon, and the other companies I mentioned earlier, selling camera equipment.

Lets renew this topic in 5 years and see where the chips have fallen.

Thanks for your input and feedback....cheers.

kenadams

Since this is a rumors thread, forum and website, this is all speculative obviously. Some of it more than the other though. But to simply ignore all facts and obvious trends... Is nikoning your way out of this argument.;-)

PB_PM

Which trends? The trend of tanking point and shoot sales? This one is obvious to everyone, even the camera makers. Or do you mean the supposed trend towards mirrorless cameras? People these days are talking about the trend to mirrorless cameras, yet mirrorless camera sales have fallen at a higher rate than DSLRs. A trend that is all talk, coming from a vocal minority, is all that the mirrorless "trend" appears to be in real terms. As a result, this "trend" that people talk about does not hold much weight in my eyes.

I see the value in mirrorless cameras, I tried a few, but in the end I sold them and kept my "big, heavy" DSLR camera system. So much for a trend, then again I've never considered myself a trendy person.

kenadams

First off, the first 35mm camera was, in fact, a mirrorless camera. That's not a trend. Second, it only makes sense they come back now that you can not have a mirror and still see through the lens. I'm not talking about last year's sales. I'm also not necessarily talking about mirrorless cameras in their current state since they will evolve further, don't you worry, so don't give me the slow autofocus discussion.

Less mechanics, small size and weight - what's not to like? A lot of consumers seem to agree with this, and so are the camera makers. DSLRs will be around for a while, no doubt, but for how long?

If, as a company, you're only reacting to what you can see on the streets, you'll go under. So if I say trend, I mean the development side. Think ahead, *create* the trend. Computer chips, sensors, all evolving. No more need for clunky mechanics (don't get me wrong, I love my Minoltas, I love my F100, but the future is elsewhere).

spraynpray

I am pretty 'meh' about mirrorless or any smaller or lighter camera because I believe a certain amount of weight and size improves handling (access to controls) and damps out the shakes to a large extent and that size and weight requirement is not met by any of the more compact designs.

Just my two cents.

donaldejose

I think Nikon is losing sales for two reasons both of which are market changes and not Nikon's fault.

First, cell phones and cell phone cameras are getting better and better. Many people take all their photos on cell phones and view them on cell phones. Compact camera use is declining and will continue to decline.

Second, DSLRs have been "good enough" for most people's uses when they reached 12mp sensors. Only those who make poster size or larger enlargements need more megapixels and only those shooting sports in low light need higher ISO and only those very serious photographers need more dynamic range. For most of us shooting well lit still objects the last generation of Nikon DSLRs (D3, D700, D7000, D5200, D3100) was enough to get the job done. Of course, those making a living with their camera will be attracted to and purchase the newest gear if it offers significant additional capabilities.

A similar thing is happening to PC sales. Tablets perform many of the functions people once needed a PC or a laptop to perform. Also, the last generation of PCs have enough power for most users daily tasks so there is not great benefit realized by purchasing the latest fastest PC.

Both the traditional PC and the traditional camera market are shrinking.

PB_PM

Exactly. Cameras hit a wall, they are good enough, so people who used to upgrade every few years no longer feel the need to do so. Either that or do to economic changes they simply cannot afford to. Sure you see people, like us here, upgrade more often, but that is hardly a true representation of the mass market.

donaldejose

I have heard people who own a D800 say "this is my last camera." They cannot envision ever needing more and they likely will not shoot enough to wear out the shutter or break any part. I think that is right. 24mp on both DX and FX is more than sufficient for any "normal" purposes and the current ability to shoot at 3,200 ISO is fast enough for most situations. Only the "fringe" on the bell shaped curve of photographers really need more.

However, we don't know what we don't know. There may be some technological advance in the future which offers clearly superior images in some way.