[shoplink 28077 ebay]
[/shoplink]
A couple of years ago nobody would have ever questioned the leadership of Canon and Nikon in the system camera market. But things are quickly changing and Nikon reported a huge loss and forceast drop at their latest financial report. Why should we care?
1) First question is if Nikon will try to compete against Sony’s A7 series or not by proposing a sort of mirrorless [shoplink 28078 ebay]FM camera[/shoplink]. I guess we will see soon at Photokina if Nikon will finally react.
2) In the meantime their latest D610 with Sony’s 24MP sensor sells for $1399 only on [shoplink 28077 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]. May be a sign that they are trying to force sales. And I bet we will see soon Full Frame cameras for just $1,000 too.
3) Will Nikon still try to rely on Sony sensors or try to break boundaries with something more revolutionary made from their own house or non-Sony partners?
My bet is that Sony will surpass Nikon in terms of system camera sales in two years from now… 🙂
0 Responses
@admin the D610 has 24mp not 36.
Correct, and the description should read the A7 sensor not A7r.
So they put the A7 sensor in the D610 before the A7 was released?
The sensor was originally from the A99, then the D600, then the A7, then the D610.
Yep sorry. Made a lapsus. Sorry!
Haha, sony have financial crisis for many years, please DO NOT over read this, since Nikon still makes profits. Plus D610 has 24mp
Sony financial crisis, not so much: http://online.wsj.com/articles/sonys-sales-of-playstation-4-videogame-consoles-reach-10-million-1407870780
A “Game Changer” for Sony literally~=D
Sorry. Lapsus. Fixed it now!
That is a good price for the 610.
On point 3 above, Nikon already uses sensors of its own design from other chip fabricators. I believe the D7100 uses a non-Sony sensor.
there is a typo on your bet too…”two years”…i think you meant twenty..LOL…
There is a very serious chance that Nikon won’t be around in the same form in twenty years. And, by the way, this is the second serious financial crisis for Nikon in the last decade. The first time, Japan had to bail them out.
Nikon deserved it. I left Nikon in 2011, and never looked back since. They have really angered their own supportive customers with their D800/D600 fiasco (AF module for the D800 and oil&dust issue for the D600). Screw them.
Well it’s not like Sony is saintly (see f60 flash fiasco and defective iISO adapter).
Like I said earlier: “All claims are hugely exaggerated on internet message boards, seems like people live for nitpicking and complaining no matter how big or small the issue.” This is a textbook example, great job Christopher!
oh maxy are you butt hurt ? contrary to the hugely exaggerated claims on internet forums often by fanboys of other brands and shills. The issues affected only a small number of users and the D600 & D800 have been huge sellers in the FF market.
All companies have dodgy quality control at times, lets face it Sony have had no shortage of issues over the years. Recently Olympus “pro” lens the 12-40 was falling off its mount, Panasonic had dodgy EVF in some GH3 and so on.
All claims are hugely exaggerated on internet message boards, seems like people live for nitpicking and complaining no matter how big or small the issue. And yes, every manufacturer has had quality control lapses. Some have addressed them better than others. And some not at all.
Nikon doesn’t have a fab so they can’t make sensors completely in-house. But they could partner with a number of different manufacturers which they already do – Sony, Aptina, and Toshiba and perhaps some others for the smaller sensors.
No big Deal, it’s just matching 610’s price to 6D’s price: 610 got just a bit lower than 6D. Sony A7 body is already selling below their price level on eBay
It would be a sad day if Nikon goes down…
Camera companies need both a successful DSLR, and CSC line of cameras in order to meet the need the diverse needs of ILCE users.
Sony figured this out three or four years ago when ended its production of conventional DSLR cameras and it launched both a radically evolved DSLR platform (SLT), and a mirror-less line.
Because of these changes Sony’s mirror-less, and DSLR (SLT) are growing rapidly. Their imaging division has posted a profit of 17.4 billion vs Nikon’s loss
Nikon hasn’t adapted to this market reality, and are currently suffering. They will likely collapse if they don’t implement drastic changes, but I don’t think they will.
Nikon and Canon seem to both be stuck in the “protect DSLR sales” mentality but with those declining, that’s not a good strategy. The question is, will they both wake up and realize this? it isn’t that just about everybody is telling them that but rather will these stubborn companies listen. Calgary’s The Camera Store” did an interesting video on exactly this last week:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncfmin-hrCs
That is an awesome find.
Saw this video a few days ago, these guys are speaking candidly about the state of affairs in the camera business. I think they are right that Sony (and a few others ‘not the big two’) are playing out a good strategy, the big companies should take note.
Nice shirt!
Sony made a loss in their camera lens department the lmaging products and soloutions covers much more than cameras and lenses
Good information, and I hope Nikon gets back on track. Nikon is currently producing some great cameras; D4, D810 & D610. So they are doing somethings right, but seem to lack a long term strategy. If Nikon failed it would be a catastrophe, similar to the collapse of Kodak.
Sony will never surpass Nikon in sales because they don’t have the same level of options being offered for Interchangeable lenses systems and because professional users don’t want to go uncovered with a manufacturer that doesn’t offer things like NPS and on-site support in major sports events.
But, if Sony changes the way they’re doing things (like increasing lens options with key alternatives to current high end lenses at competitive prices) I see something happenning.
Most users don’t want to switch because Sony doesn’t offer f4 alternative to their current f2.8 lenses, and in the professional field, they don’t offer the same level of options of telephoto lenses at competitive prices. Even more, they don’t have a true high end dslr shaped camera for sports, something like the d4s.
So, resuming, I want Sony to offer more for less, and following this scenario, there will be more people that want the same thing. Until then, Nikon will be above Sony forever.
In addition to what you say, they need a true support network for pros. CPS and NPS have their flaws but they are generally there for working pros with expedited repairs, loaners, on-site support at major events, etc. Sony is sometimes that way on the pro video side but haven’t adopted that for still camera gear, especially not the professional services part. Sony makes lots of neat stuff but in the camera world but doesn’t support it at the level needed for pros. When I am on a pro shoot with a D800 (now D810) and something goes wrong where I don’t have a replacement, I can have a loaner onsite within 24 hours from NPS. That’s not the case for my a7R unless I buy one with overnight delivery. When a D800 breaks, I can get the repair turned around in 4 days. When an a7 breaks, it’s hard to know how long it will be gone.
Sony has too many bodies and not enough reasonably priced native lenses- way too many expensive Zeiss branded lens that are not good value. The bodies are innovative and good value on the other hand. Need more Sony branded lenses that give people a reason to switch. A Sony branded 24-70 f2.8 instead of a Zeiss branded f4 would be nice. A Sony FE 35mm f1.8 with OSS instead of Zeiss 2.8 would be nice. With the emphasis on video in the A7s all lenses should have OSS. Such a miserable lens lineup. Only hope is for Sigma and Tamron to start making some stabilized FE lenses. They will probably be good value and appealing, unlike the Sony/Zeiss lenses.
Sony Zeiss branding = Canon L branding. The Sony Zeiss 24-70 is a Sony 24-70. Supposedly Sony is working on a 24-105 f4 which should be more budget friendly than the 24-70 2.8.
Most of the Sony offering is perfectly reasonably priced. For example, the APS-C e-mount is very competitive, when compared to other mirror-lens brands.
Blaw Blaw Blaw, what a bunch of crap.
Except, the number of sales is much more affected by the average joe than professionals.
oh, yes, number of sales is affected by professionals more than you think. I was at a party, and one girl asked which camera to buy. This guy told her to either get Canon or Nikon.. why? because most number of professionals use them in the field. So, basically, people follow trends. And if you see in a game, some guy with a big lens with a strap with Canon or Nikon brand on it, I’m really sure, people will think about it…
”if a professional is making a living with such brand, It must be a certified and proven brand!!”
But I use Sony, and most people are like what? why don’t you use Canon or Nikon… I tell them, why not Panasonic or Pentax? They say, the photog who took my wedding shots was using Canon/Nikon. So again, what professionals use, does matter more than you may think.
So the 610 is about the same price as the V3 kit in the US? LOL!
You’d think that by now, new FF DSLRs would cost less than $1000, especially since the pixel count has plateaued at 20-25MP. I would assume that by now the fabrication process has matured enough for the yields to drive prices way down.
Lots of assumptions, all wrong.
Each new sensor requires new fabrication process. The MP count has nothing to do with it. The yields start out low, then gain % after all kinks are worked out. It has always been this way.
You are saying that yields have not improved over the last ten years? Or technology hasn’t matured? We had a 2000US FF camera with a stabilized sensor and one of the best OVFs (even by today’s standard) 5 years ago.
Before the fanboys get all carried away and start creaming their undies, just remember one thing that the A7 doesn’t have: lenses. Two decent lenses in the 35mm and 55mm does not make it a machine to topple Nikon. Until that point comes, please go back in your boxes and don’t embarrass yourselves any further please.
The Sony/Zeiss FE lens lineup is absolute garbage from a videographers perspective. The upcoming ENG style lens looks interesting but will cost a fortune. If you’re gonna emphasize video you’ve got to start putting OSS in all your lenses.
So you use Nikon to shoot video?
not the said person, but why not? have you even LOOKED at the quality of D8xx series videos in youtube or somewhere? Even with compression, the video quality is better than that of 5Dm3. Maybe A7s is good for video, but that’s about the only sony that is actually usable for video.
I must admit that though only really practical for tripod mounted use , I was actually very impressed with the uncompressed HDMI out video from my D800. Though for video I find that my GH3 does a great job and much more manageable in use.
I have see youtube videos shot with the D800 & D810 and they were good but not exceptional, certainly no better than the Sony full sized cameras or the 5DM3. The most common (that I’ve seen in use) DSLR camera for video is the 5DM3. As for real video cameras mostly Sony and Canon, but never Nikon. Although I have seen video cameras using Nikon lenses.
If you’re a videographer, go use rokkors. Certain rokkors of the same era are color-matched.
You should know this, if you’re really a videographer.
First There is an other very good lens: the 70-200mm F4 lens, and there is the Zeiss zoom lens, so maybe 4 good lenses? I know it is not as much as Nikon has, but it is twice as much as you say…
Then The A7 can adapt tons of lenses, including all Amount lenses. These lenses will have all AF when adapted, there are some very good (and expensive) lenses for the A-mount. Then you can adapt all the lenses from DSLRs to the A7,including some very high quality Zeiss MF lenses.
Then you can adapt all rangefinder lenses to the A7. So in the end you have morel lenses to choose from then you have for the Canon and Nikon put together!
The Zeiss 24-70mm is a very disappointing lens for its price point, the 55mm is a real winner and my current favorite lens.The 35mm F2.8 wins on size alone but compared to my Nikon 35mm F1.8G which is £180 cheaper and over a stop faster it loses out in just about every area
With regards to adapted lenses you rapidly lose out in any size advantage once you bolt DSLR lenses to the adapter. The rangefinder lenses you mention also need adapters and while they are indeed smaller , they cover a very narrow range of focal lengths and there are sometimes serious issues with the wider options.
So, you picked all the negatives. On one side Sony loses because the 35mm 2.8 is too expensive, on the other, if you adapt lenses, Sony loses because there’s no size advantage. Rangefinder lenses go from 12mm to easily 135mm, btw. And only some of the wide angle options have issues.
All of the UWA rangefinder lenses have issues , many of the wide angles and sure if you want to bolt it on an adapter use MF and don’t mind the limited range of focal lengths fine. As long as you do not go wider than 24mm . And do not go longer than 135mm and do not want or need a decent choice of zoom lenses RF glass is awesome.
The 35mm FE only win is in size , the cheaper faster Nikon 35mm F1.8g is better in ever other way. I do not see the point in adapting most lenses. The major advantage of the A7r over the D800/E/D810 is its size. Why would I bolt my Nikon lenses onto my A7r with an adapter to save 400g on a FF set up.
I own, and I like it. I find most of the reviewers are biased. I’ve been using it on the A7, and I really have no complaints. Maybe you should rent it before you pass judgement. Relying on todays reviewers is just a bad idea.
I already own the lens .Relying on forum posters is the real bad idea loll
Adapt lenses to shoot manual focus subjects sure… oh wait! they all have to still right? oh……
No, they don’t need to sit still. You just need to learn how to use MF.
You are only embarrassing yourself. Sony has an APS-C e-mount system, as well as another mount. Meanwhile, as long as you are willing to use MF, the a7 becomes the camera with the most lenses available.
1 – The admin didn’t seem to paint sony’s staggering financial woes as a “crisis” despite the layoffs, store closures and real estate fire sale to stay afloat. I find it curious that there is such a different standard.
2 – If Nikon were to close up shop, it would be bad for Sony camera consumers and all photographers in general. Less competition is bad for a consumer (see the state of either the cell phone service industry or the cable tv/internet industry in the US). Lack of Nikon sensor sales means either higher prices for Sony sensors /cameras or lower revenue /profits for Sony (or both).
Hopefully Nikon will persevere. To hedge their bets, Sony should start r&d on a 1st party Nikon to e-mount converter with full AF & communications.
Not really a double standard, but a practical consideration. If Canon, Sony, Panasonic or Olympus went out of the camera business, all they would lose is their CAMERA business. They all have other product in their portfolios that are actually profitable and in the case of the latter three help underwrite the losses from their camera business, so a loss for them is upsetting but less of a threat than for Nikon who is the only “pure camera” maker in the mix. If Nikon goes out of business, EVERYTHING is gone.
At least they make microscopes, and binoculars.
…and sunglasses!
http://nikonlenswear.us/products
Let’s just hope their sunglass division survives!!
LOL! Good one.
.
Apart from sunglasses Nikon also makes precision scanners, measuring equipment for industries and in bioscience field.
That’s a good point, Nikon is far less diversified. My opinion on the double standard of the financial reporting remains however.
1. Not sure what standards you are trying to hold admin to. It is a rumours site in the end and he clearly states what is his opinion. Btw, he did post about Sony’s woes on several occasions, so what is your standard?
2. Not necessarily. While there’s no argument that competition is good, the idea here is for Sony to eat the Nikon market, so no higher prices.
And, agreed, hopefully Nikon will persevere.
– I know it’s a rumors site and I respect the job the admin generally does, but this is a news report not a rumor. The Sony financial reporting had a much more positive spin, whereas Nikon is in crisis mode. Sony was hemorrhaging enormous amounts of money and was staying afloat due to one-time write-offs and sales.
– It would be better for Nikon to survive at its current market level (since they purchase Sony sensors, which in turn leads to more money for sensor R&D, which benefits alpha shooters) and for Sony / Nikon to take more of a bite from Canon. Canon owns about 90% of the camera market and makes a lot of its revenue from its other businesses so it can stand to lose ground in the camera division.
“Canon owns about 90% of the camera market…”
I’d love to see some evidence of that.
Lol, I meant to write that Canon & Nikon own about 90%
They might do that in USA, perhaps? But certainly not world wide, the figures I have seen have been more like 65%.
.
I read it on Canon watch or canon rumors, but now that you mention it I’m not certain if it was worldwide or domestic to the USA.
The D610 isn’t actually being sold by Nikon for $1399.
I’s another one of this site’s shady sleaze-bay deals.
If those deals go sour, will SAR make buyers whole?
I didn’t think so.
Exactly. This site is notorious for this kind of mis-information. Beststopdeals is not an authorized Nikon dealer. The current list can be easily found on Nikon’s website. SAR has no idea where this camera may come from and is either grey market or diverted inventory. Good luck getting it repaired if needed.
These posts smack of ignorant fanboyism.
Controversy generates more traffic. This site has really become a cynical profiteering enterprise.
Than leave, no one forces you to come here.
Maybe this site has to generate some income to sustain it, or you think it is all for free? Did you notice that this is a rumors site at all?
Doesn’t excuse bad conduct.
There’s a fundamental problem with Nikon that always slips under the carpet in these discussions …. Nikon is a ONE TRICK PONEY!! All they make is cameras so there’s no “other products” to underwrite a loss in their camera sales. The profit makers are the DSLRs and the market for them is steadily shrinking. In a situation like that, if you are an OTP like Nikon, you need to change your act really fast or the market quickly leaves you behind. Nikon has not done that (nor has Canon). They’ve made a so-so attempt with the V series – a great idea, poorly executed and badly marketed – not enough by a country mile. As I’ve commented elsewhere, if CaNikon don’t wake up and smell the coffee pretty damned soon they are at serious risk of becoming history’s biggest “buggy whips” makers.
Well they also make semiconductor photo-lithography equipment but that business is struggling a bit too as they didn’t keep up with ASML.
Badly marketed…? In China I see them selling like hotcakes at offline dealers, many ill-informed amateurs spent their money which could’ve been used to buy half-frame at practically the same price. When you “word” it properly, and they believe it, half-frame, 1″, it makes no difference to them. They buy the smaller body.
The V series only real problem was with initial pricing , it is only with the very latest gen mirrorless cameras from other brands that the AF performance of even the V1 has been caught up with. As sensor tech advances I can see real potential for the 1″ market as the smaller sensor allows for the potential for some very interesting products.
Which one trick precision equipment, instruments products, ophthalmic lens, or camera and lenses?
Not sure where the “huge loss” description comes from. Nikon is projected to
make $518 million USD for the full fiscal year ending in March 2015.
Correct. Their sales are down but they are still making a profit. Big difference.
Now that doesn’t mean Nikon shouldn’t adjust or make some changes…but they are not losing money. And we will see what Nikon has in store for us. Their D810 appears to be a big hit.
You have to be desperate, stupid, or most likely both to buy from a 98.7% Ebay seller.
There is absolutely nothing mysterious about this. It’s just the usual gray market stuff. For instance, in Japan you get the body for about 140-150kYEN (just about 1400$) from an AUTHORIZED dealer.
I bought from one before. He gave me what I ordered.
You gotta look at where the bad ratings are coming from, is it an attitude problem, shipping, or is it really the product itself?
Lol, the CameraTVstore guy calls for something… really? Rotfl
Nikon doesn´t sell the D610 (that has a 24mp sensor, btw) for that price – it´s a (not very trustworthy) ebay seller that is not authorized by nikon.
Nikon makes a huge loss? Really? Is the rest of the industry doing so much better?
Admin is full of crap!
I must say, I valued this site much more before reading this admin’s post. It really comes off as an worst case sony fanboy. Heck, Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji have their models better than Sony. New A99m2 ? but where’s the lenses, and at what cost? For Nikon I can get a quality 1.4 glass much cheaper than for Sony.
Not sure where you live, but in the US, the above is at least false for the 50’s, and 85’s. The compact f/1.4 50’s are similar in quality and price, the 58mm Nikkor is actually more expenive than its Sony Zeiss 50mm conterpart and worse in many respects too. The 85’s are equally priced and similar in quality.
I did love this site but, I agree, this post does decrease the value of this site. It sounds more like you say, a Sony fanboy who is using misleading date to make in invalid point. I don’t consider any post that uses grey market or unauthorized dealer prices as a legitimate price gauge. but that is just MY opinion, surely many people on here will disagree.
Do you really think Admin is a sony fanboy? I think he is smart marketer.
The same guys own SAR and 43Rumors and couple of other sites. Their primary aim is to increase traffic to their website and clicks to their affiliate links.
In fact controversial posts like this one will bring more traffic to his website.
Admin knows what he is doing. 😉
True, the whole standalone camera market is shrinking. If anything, Sony should be worrying about the competition in making sensors for iPhones and Androids than destroying Nikon.
It is unfortunate that to generate visitors so many camera sites assume that their readership wants to read nothing but adoration and fanboy platitudes. I like the Sony products I own but I have no hesitation pointing out where they have gone wrong, same with Nikon or any other product I buy.
The truth is Canon are the only company doing better than Nikon with regards to making profits.All the big players in mirrorless have lost often huge amounts of money in their respective camera divisions including Sony. Olympus have lost so much for so long the last I heard was they were going to hide their camera division inside another profitable section to conceal the true numbers.
The camera market as a whole is in decline , obviously Nikon whose core business. photography makes up the vast bulk of their income will have to rethink things as we move forward.
You have obviously been stranded on a deserted island for sometime. If you bother to look at any recent profit results form Sony you will see that they are doing fine. With their imaging division being one of their best performing….Catch up dude….
As relating to your Moderated post below…
It is nice to see you are using old out of date figures to prove your point (particularly an article quoting figures from 2011?!?)….Please check your facts…Images sectors income is currently up (9.1 – 17.4 billion Yen) even with overall sales down as of July 2014 (nothing to do with asset sales as the imaging division has not sold any assets). This is contrast to every other manufacture (even Canon) whose incomes have all dropped…If you want to talk about Sony’s overall profitability….Their Smart phone division is not as profitable this quarter as forecast. But pretty much all other divisions have growing profitability…The PS4 is selling far in excess of predictions…Meaning by Sony’s own admission they are currently doing very well…..
Moderated here typically means did not fit admins agenda. The Sony imaging division numbers listed cover far more than just camera sales . I am not interested in sales of PS4 or whatever this is allegedly a camera website devoted to Sony cameras not PS4s
The data presented is from May this year:
https://fstoppers.com/gear/sony-imaging-posts-loss-third-straight-fiscal-year-9349
No… the data is from 31st March (figures which relate to 2013). The article was written in May… As mentioned your figures are out of date. You need to be looking at data released end of July 2014. Covering Q1 of 2014…Why reference data that is not applicable.
The figures are covering the last full year of business and include data up to March 2014 , not 2011 you mention. The imaging division does not just cover cameras. One quarter is not representative of the sate of play of Sony. As with all the major mirrorless players, mirrorless so far is more a financial disaster than boom.
Well it is good to see you finally agree that the figures you quote are out of date…
not 2011 you mention..” In 2011, imaging saw a loss of over 38%”…
As already mentioned. If you look at up to date figures you will see the the imaging division is now making a nice profit…Not sure how many other ways that can be explained…. I suggest you go have a look at your 2008 tax return to analyse how your finances are currently doing………
Indeed.
Rumor is a d700 replacement coming soon for Nikon. Full frame with fast frame rate and focus… Perhaps a more budget oriented d4s.
Doubt Nikon is ready to push mirrorless, I think they will join Sony’s economical full frame push as a way to sell lenses and bodies. But will stick within their dSLR tradition.
That’d make plenty of sense. Most of us would be keen to adopt a sub-$1000 full frame DSLR. I’m amazed that were still using APS-C sized sensors in DSLR.
Well, I’m game to believe anything at the moment- regardless of the quality of the above information. How much more can manufacturers pack into cameras- seriously! 36MP, 24MP….meh. Even 50- most people don’t care and less people are buying.
The Ebay post you referenced is for grey market products so the price is more likely reflective of that then Nikon giving a great deal to get sales.
Get ready for mass consolidation of businesses. The first official Canikonympus is almost ready to be unveiled. It will have an OVF, sony sensor, 5 axis and be the size of a matchbox.
Nikon video mode is dead !!!! Nikon thinks all people just take care of still . Wake up Nikon !!!
The video might not get as much attention it gets in canon or other cameras, but the video quality is nevertheless pretty good in the FF lineup. D8xx has pretty good video quality. I think the new nikon FF will have better video options, as it has articulated LCD, like D5300.
Could be that there are people interested in video. In all the photo communities I were part of, nobody cared. But maybe times have changed. Some statistics would be interesting.
In my world all photogs around me care video, in fact many of us think video part of camera is more important than stills part of it these days
Typical ignorant trolling. If you visit Nikon’s official homepage they have been prominently featuring “Nikon Cinema.”
Nikon cinema?give me a break no one wants the crap
my guess is that this is because of the D600 disaster. Just imagine, any D600 user can now request a replacement for their oil-spitting D600 (in form of a brand new D610). How many users might have requested this swap? My guess is many…even those that didnt mind the oil issue (why not getting a new camera for free,right?)
“My bet is that Sony will surpass Nikon in terms of system camera sales in two years from now…”
Only if Nikon goes out of business, in which case the Sony camera division, financed by image sensor sales to Nikon, will suffer the same fate.
However, I love your senseless enthusiasm.
Sony’s Semiconductor isn’t part of Sony Imaging and only a fraction of the Semiconductor sales is to Nikon, the majority to Apple and Samsung.
Numbers (in $) please !
Dude…it’s not rocket science. Sony is the world largest image sensor manufacturer. With most smart phones using Sony sensors. How many smart phones are sold world wide every year…300million units estimated for 2014 up from 240 million units in 2013 (source Pocketnow) Sony’s imaging division is doing just fine….Good times for Sony
You don’t need to be an Einstein to figure it out.
Sony sells literally hundreds of millions of sensors to cellphone and tablet manufacturers (Apple, Samsung, LG, Sony Mobile themselves), still camera manufacturers like Sony Imaging (compact cameras, SLT and E mount), Olympus, Fujifilm, Panasonic, Samsung, Ricoh (Pentax etc.), Automotive manufacturers, webcam, action cam and surveillance cam manufacturers, video camera manufacturers, industrial parties etc.
A total capacity of 75 million CMOS sensors and 12 million CCD sensors … per month.
http://www.sony.net/pressroom/basic/products/semicon_20140731E.pdf
Nikon only buys for their compacts and the D800 and D6x0. That’s a relatively tiny volume.
The total projected sales of ILC’s and compact cameras combined for FY2014 is less than 40 million units, Nikon has far less than half of that and the amount of Nikon cameras using Sony sensors less again.
http://2.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS560x560~forums/53828111/d74ff95ba5a3424889c6a4ab70c7619a (source: CIPA).
Based on average prices of sensors per class (FF being relatively very low volume sellers, compact high volume sellers), Nikon likely contributes to less than 4% of the sensor unit sales and less than 10% of the sales in dollars.
Yeah but die hard Nikon fans do not seem to see it
Its all you really need to know. Nikon generates higher revenue, but Sony generates more profit. Nikon’s market share is contracting, and Sony’s share is growing.
Sony’s earns twice the profit per camera sale by avoiding the trap of producing low end sub$300.00 plastic DSLR kits for Walmart, and Staples .
If nikon goes under. Consumers will still buy cameras. With every possibility that they may be Sony cameras or another manufacturer using a sony sensors….
No, your logic is wrong. Sony does not need Nikon. Sony’s biggest customers are those htc Apple etc, not Nikon.
Boy there’s some great deals on used cameras… I’d doubt seriously if I ever purchase a new camera again. Not until they release an a900Ti.
And the A900Ti will be released at the same time pigs fly. The A900 is a fine camera, not the latest but still very able to get the job done. It may well be all the camera you will ever need (depending on your age :)).
The real problem, of course, is the quality of cellphone cameras sucking most of the oxygen out of this space. While photo nerds will sniff, the vast majority of people find them good enough. So as the pie dramatically shrinks, companies who focus heavily on camera sales will see their world collapse.
If you look at the sickest players in this segment like Olympus, Pentax, and Nikon they’re dependent on others pretty much for their sensors. For example, while the basic tech in Sony’s e and a-mount bodies is the same, I believe there are differences in the sensors. So Nikon couldn’t have been the first out with a mirrorless FF unless Sony went first to them. They’re also dependent on Sony offering them sensors at favorable terms. Even though Sony’s sensor and camera businesses are separate on paper, there’s no real firewall between them so they are free to collaborate.
I agree that neither Canon nor Nikon have come out with a decent mirrorless response which is hurting their sales. I find the Nikon 1 system particularly interesting because using a 1″ sensor gives it the potential of the true compact gold standard of being pocketable (like Sony’s RX100s). However, they’ve botched the Nikon 1 on so many levels it’s an epic failure they constantly dump at fire-sale prices. The Nikon 1 doesn’t fully meet it’s size potential, uses the rubbish Aptina 1″ sensor (instead of Sony’s far better one), magnifies the lousy ergonomics that plague compacts, then has the IQ disadvantages physics dictates for the light gathering ability of a 1″ sensor, and compounds all these problems by being grossly over-priced.
Not only are cell phones more convenient but even if you have a super-sharp picture without noise, posting it e.g on Facebook totally butchers it because of heavy compression artifacts (which are ironically less apparent on phones). So even if there was a camera that would make sharing quality pictures super-easy for non-nerds, the way people consume photos have changed so much that the perceived advantages don’t even matter.
is the d610 honest price 1300$. Is time to stop thieves camera price for a standard massive electronic production!
It has always been as cheap as that at least in Japan and in Hong Kong.
And look how well Nikon is doing….
>My bet is that Sony will surpass Nikon in terms of system camera sales in two years from now
What use would it be if those ‘system cameras’ are E-Mount mirrorless, not SLT?
When SLT sales get higher than Nikon DLSR, that would truly be an achievement. If ever.
Sony is only 7% of the market so far.
Agreed..Sony’s future is FE mirror-less…
That statement is absurd. SLT has plenty of room to grow.
Sony future is pushing the SLT to its limits, and all SLT cameras will eventually outperform all current DSLRs. Why, because 82% of us still use DSLRs.
The SLT platform generates 50% more profit per fiscal quarter, and it’s actually growing faster than the FE by a wide margin.
FE is only a CSC.
As I said FE mirror-less is the future…. Please read…
Both Mounts are the future.
Yeah but the A will also become true mirrorless pretty soon.
I don’t think so. The next generation mirror only uses 20% of incoming of light, and Sony low light sensitivity breakthroughs are making the anti-SLT argument irrelevant.
Sony’s next generation sensors (now used in cars) are 300 to 400% more sensitive. It’ll be awesome when the A99II or A99III will be able to shoot at ISO 12,800 to 25,600 clean, while its competitors are stuck at 3,200 to 6,400.
Sony advances in PDAF are outstanding. The A77II is a proof of concept, of what the SLT can do. Once this new PDAF system transitions to the A99II you may see a A99II capable of delivering full focused 12fps.
A99 lagging behind in fps is due to main sensor, this has nothing to do with PDAF
It won’t. A6000-like AF is made up of teeny-tiny sensors, which won’t be good in low light, and you can’t make them bigger, because of where they are, on the image sensor. Mirrorless isn’t going to match DLSR in AF any time soon without some kind of breakthrough, and A6000 is not it.
A6000 has better ISO performance than thev A77II Work that out
The difference like all of the reviewers say is negligable. Plus overall the A77II performance is definately outstanding its AF system is incredible, and it can take 12 fully focused pictures per second even in low light.
The A77II ergonimics are excellent and very professional. Its an extremly light camera, and screams professional.
I’ve used both, and I actually bought the A77II with its outstanding 16-50mm lens.
The A6000 is a amatures camera, for those who cannot afford professional products.
Thanks shane and im glad you went the A77II as id like to ugrade my A77 one day .Ok so the trade off is worth it ,Thats good to know .
Read carefully: not ISO performance, but AF performance in low light
Ahhh I got confused their .Ok yes I see .
The slt design will die out pretty soon. The alpha A mount will also have to become true mirrorless in next or two generations after it with the a6000 kind of af system.
+1 thy will them make sensor shift z axis
Where do you get profits numbers per mount (A vs E) and growth numbers per mount?
Sony doesn’t release those details in their financial statements.
Its already posted below, and yes they do. I go to plenty of launch presentations in TO, Canada, and see the figures every couple of months. The A-Mount is earning generating far more revenue, and profit than the E-Mount. Its also growing, and DSLR users form other platforms generally prefer to adopt it than CSC.
Look below and you’ll see LUCID has already posted the figures.
No, he posted the usual presentations per division, in this case IP&S as a whole and a sheet that describes the market in Japan as a whole, not just Sony, nor worldwide (see also mirrorless listed in 2009, when Sony introduced the E mount may 2010. That was Panasonic’s share). That sheet gets posted a lot and misinterpreted just as much.
Sony never specified between the A and E mount in numbers and that’s where his claims are.
No, he posted the usual presentations per division, in this case IP&S as a whole and a sheet that describes the market in Japan as a whole, not just Sony, nor worldwide (see also mirrorless listed in 2009, when Sony introduced the E mount may 2010. That was Panasonic’s share). That sheet gets posted a lot and misinterpreted just as much.
On top of that, she sheet that divides the market into different camera segments, does not tell us anything about profitibility of each segment and it shows a faster growth of mirrorless towards the end, the opposite of the claim.
Sony never specified between the A and E mount in numbers and the posted graphs do not give us any information on the subject to support the claims.
I don’t care either way as I enjoy both formats, but if there’s any evidence to support any of the claims made, I’m always interested.
Well said Zohee, I cant believe how many times that link has been posted as evidence of Sony’s success no matter how often people coorrect them.
What did you agree with? E-Mount = FE, it’s the same mount.
Sony is the only one offering Full Frame mirror-less. 100% market share which will only grow in users…
And they’ll seize 40% of the APS-C, and likely up to 14% of DSLR sales.
So it’s the DSLR market where they need to put their main effort to up their market share, if they are serious about competing with Canon/Nikon, not just being relegated to the mirrorless league
Or let the DSLR market continue to decline (As we see threatening Nikon’s existence as a company) and invest more in the future….
DSLR market is part of the future. It won’t be as big as it used to be, parts of it gobbled up by smartphones and mirrorless, but it is not going anywhere. And its high-margin too, since DSLRs are expensive.
Yeah it will be ‘retro’….
No, it will be the professional / higher enthusiast segment.
Just like diamond encrusted Hasselblads….coooool
Troll! Get off my Internets.
Ah yes….the last words of the forum poster who has run out of ideas….
Sony is actually over 8.5% of DSLR sales, and it’s growing.
Good to know, thank you. Can I see the source of this number?
The A77II launch presentation. I’ll reconfirm it on 26 Aug 14
In Hong Kong, Korea , Germany , etc Sony is already no one. And in Japan and China Sony has just surpassed Nikon and it is no two Japan and in China.
That is nonsense I posted why earlier today but admin has went the final fanboy hurdle and started to delete posts that do not fit with his agenda. I will simply say look at the latest CIPA stats for Japan DSLR’s have 61% of the ilc market.Nikon’s share of the DSLR market in Japan is 42.5% , that alone gives them 26% of the overall interchangeable lens market.
Sony’s share of the mirrorless market in Japan when last stated { link below} ,was 26.5% which is just over 10% of the full interchangeable lens camera market.In japan there share of DSLR market was below 4% giving them a total market share of the interchangeable lens camera market of approx 13% almost exactly half of Nikon’s share
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/japan-2013-overall-sales-numbers-sony-dslrslt-presence-shrinks-mirrorless-share-increases/
As a former Canon and Nikon user, I do worry for Nikon in the long run. I think Nikon had a slight edge in image quality, but the Sony FE systems all but caught up. In addition, Sony is pushing the boundaries on other fronts like AF without a mirror, video, and low light. I worry about Nikon, but any care whether they or Canon survives are all but gone. All 3 Sony A7 and the Sony A6000 has given me 100% faith in Sony’s direction forward. I was on the fence with about Sony when all I had was the NEX-7, but Sony showed me it will push the boundaries on all fronts, not just size. They need to keep pushing to get better with lenses, but so far, I am quite happy with my primes for FE and zooms (such as 55-210 and 10-18) on APS-C E.
While the A6000 does not match my old Nikon FF’s AF, it’s simply stunning in the fact that it works so well in a mirrorless. As much as I liked Nikon in the past, I simply don’t care what they’re doing anymore. Sony A9 with full sealing and the AF of the A6000 will seal the deal.
“My bet is that Sony will surpass Nikon in terms of system camera sales in two years from now…”
A totally unsupported claim !
It is an opinion…It doesn’t requires ‘support’….What are you the statistics police??
Oh in most part of this world Nikon is already no3, and it is way behind canon and now struggling to sell any camera in any market. Once I get used to the size and weight of my a7r, there is no way going back to ugly bulky Nikon d810 crap,which actually shares the same Sony 36mp chip but with lower grade brain borrowed from Fujitsu.
Sony has some great products out right now…however, no need to bash the Nikon D810. The d810 is an amazing camera in its own right, arguably right now the best DSLR out there, and probably the best overall camera available right now.
As for the comparison of D810 with A7r, there’s really no contest performance wise. The D810 has a far quieter shutter, and doesn’t suffer from the shutter shock of the A7r. Couple that with superior AF, and fast FPS, and the D810 outshines the A7r. Really, the only advantage of the A7r is size, and that’s not insignificant for many. And sure, Sony will catch up in the AF and shutter departement over time. But for now the D810 reigns supreme. Nikon really delivered a winner to the market, and many people are noticing.
There are two major parts where te A7r wins: Size and price.
Both are great cameras, attracting a different kind of photographer. In the end none of these will be selling in large numbers as not many people want to spend over $1000 for a camera. When a brand comes with a FF camera for less then $1000 that will be a real winner…
I have the D810. Best camera I ever owned. Compared it to the A7r which I wanted to buy and went out with the DSLR. I like the form factor (perfect size for me), button layout, responsiveness, IQ, performance. No match for mirror less in many areas. But as I stated before, A8 or A9 will certainly be very interesting cameras. I only wish mirror less would be made a little larger to balance fast zooms and to be easier to handle. Most mirror less are too small for me.
Sony tried this when it bought Konica Minolta several years ago, offering great products at great prices. It sought to displace Nikon in the DSLR world. It failed.
Sony wants to make and sell image sensors, and they are world leaders doing that. They also show off a few new camera concepts to stir the imagination of camera makers and camera users, but they are careful not to upset any of their image sensor customers, including Nikon.
“Please Note: This camera may be an imported model. These models are identical to their USA counterparts and are produced in the same factories. They come with the same plugs and English manuals. The key difference is that imported models do not carry a USA manufacturer warranty card. However, your purchase is covered by a BestStopDeals store warranty which covers you for one-year. Please view our terms and conditions below for details.”
While Nikon could lose their market leader position, I doubt Nikon will have any serious financial trouble. Nikon though an independent company, is a part of Mitsubishi group. They can easily pump huge amount cash into any new venture they want to.
Nikon has never been the market leader, Canon has been and probably will be with Sony.
Just based on personal experience, in the 1980s the photo students I knew wanted Nikon. In my circles–so not to say everywhere–people seemed start going for Canon before Nikon around 2000-2003.
Nikon is to smart I think. They sit and watch where really things are going, and when it will be clear they will come out with a killer mirrorless system. And I’m a m4/3 guy
Err… they launched a mirrorless system already, remember?
and it sucks:)
The Nikon 1″ cameras are superb performers, with AF every bit as good as the A6000. Excellent ergonomics very fast performance { shit to shot etc}. There are 2 issues one the sensor in the Nikon 1″ is not as good as the Sony one, and launch prices were too high.
Though I do not own one I have used my pals one often ,the adapter for Nikon DSLR glass works very well I have tried out most of my Nikon glass on it . It looks pretty crazy when you have a 300mm F2.8 mounted on but the effective 810mm AOV is pretty cool.
Though sensor tech moves forward for all formats .I honestly think that as a 1″ sensor advances it has amazing potential to allow for all sorts of interesting cameras. Between the three 1″ camera makers we have the superb pocket sized RX100 series, the well featured RX10, the new Panasonic with 4K and 400mm effective AOV. Nikon have a water proof model , native lenses covering from 18mm -810mm FF AOV they even have an F1.2 lens.
Many argue that their chosen small format is already good enough.The next generation of sensors offer the opportunity for the 1″ sensors to be good enough for nearly every use. I wouldnt mock the 1″ sensor just yet.
Well their one is doomed and your micro is also doomed, I think tiny sendor systems like those will not survive in the long run
Don’t think the small sensored ILS are doomed, many people will like them. So when they start making cameras like the Panasonic GM1 and the Samsung NX mini there will be a market for that…
Look at the two “”smart”Companies: Canon and Nikon. Thew DSLR sales are now 4 times higher then mirrorless systems (and they practicly own that market with together more then 80% of the market) But while waiting, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and the rest are perfecting their mirrorless cameras, while Canon and Nikon will come to late in the game, wit a camera that is not as mature as the others.At thismoment Sony, Olympus and Panasonic have together the largest part of the mirrorless market, Canon and Nicon are a very small player their and when they don’t come soon with a great product they won’t get a large part of the market at all…
Nikon and Canon mirrorless sell more than Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Samsung. They are #2 and #3 behind Sony. And Nikon and Canon are GAINING mirrorless marketshare on the other guys (save Sony).
Well Nikon is already a bit behind Sony in most part of the world.
But the real big issue with Nikon is Nikon does not have any solid income source, the camera division is about 75 percent of entire Nikon. Nikon needs solid core business like the strong medical division for fuji or Olympus.
Who do you think manufactures the devices that make the sensors? Nikon.
OR maybe if they where already owned my a huge company like say Mitsubishi.
Please list the most part of the world where Nikon is selling less than Sony.
Sony will surpass Nikon only when Sony has as many lenses as Nikon and when it’s customer support will be at least as good as Nikon’s.
i think the litmus test isn’t who makes the most, its who sells the most. its a harsh business world. nikon is still popular, but they need to do something to save their skin
Sure, but when your ONLY response to “where are the lenses?” is “We have an adapter, use it!” is equally bad as Nikon’s …. IMHO.
Nikon AF cameras are what? 30 years old or so? Andhow many lenses do they have. Look at the Sony E-mount it is 4 years old and allready have 19 lenses of their own brand.And at the end of next year that will be around 30 lenses. So question is: do you need all the lenses Nikon/Canon have or is it enough to have the lenses people realy want? Don’t get me wrong the E-mount is far from ready at the moment, it do need more lenses, but they are comming! And yes I do believe that in a year or five mirrorless will be bigger then DSLRs in sales. It takes time for people to switch from one system to an other, but you have in mirrorless options from the small sensored Pentax Q, the 1″ cameras m43 sized sensors , APS and even FF sensors, that are more options then DSLRs can offer!
No… no…let’s talk FE not E.. E lenses are for crop sensors (NEX-6,NEX-7,etc). Don’t take me wrong – I do like A7 series, I just commented on the company’s attitude on the subject.
Yeah, sure, I can get an adapter, and then what? carry a lot of heavy Canon lenses? What’s the point?
The whole reason Sony released the A7 series cameras in the first place was to take advantage of the excellent Leica lenses, Leica makes great lenses but crappy cameras. Nearly everyone I know who owns an A7 camera uses it with a Leica lens. According to the Metabonnes wholesaler I spoke with, E mount adapters are selling like hotcakes. If one needs excellent lenses, there are always Leica and Zeiss, and if one needs autofocus, there are plenty of good A mount lenses too
Care to tell how many ppl actually buy Leica lenses? I mean sure, they’re great, but you can get very good optics for much much cheaper under the nikon and canon camps. Look how cheap the 1.8 50 and 85 primes are.
Ahh so that’s why they made official adaptors Sony branded adaptors and ensured we wouldn’t run into any issue with optical quality. And there was me naively thinking they made it to sell Sony bodies and Sony lenses…
I think in this day and age, there is no set rule that one has to use the same brand lenses as the camera bodies, whoever think that they have to would diminish like Nikon
Problem is the Sony A series cameras can use all the DSLR lenses including the very best, I myself is using mostly EF and Nikon mount lenses on my A7r and A7s.
You get worse performance and worse image quality with adapters. Plus you have more fragility and you lose the point of having such a tiny body. It’s not a practical professional solution.
So not true, I don’t see any image quality difference between using the Otus on my Canon 5D mk III, if there’s any, it would be better with the A7r as it has much higher resolution. A lot of professionals are shooting with huge cine lenses with the A7 and A7s, there’s nothing impractical about it.
If Nikon files for bankruptcy, it’ll be quickly bought by Apple/Google/Microsoft etc., so Nikon will live very long. Same as Minolta/Sony.
Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi Group.
Nikon isn’t going anywhere. Relax guys.
touché!
Sony will buy Nikon.
I agree. They could toss/disgard the Nikon bodies, and port Nikon’s entire lense profolio to the Ful Frame A-Mount and E-Mount or they could modernize Nikon’s cameras to include a 4K, Pellicle mirror, and EVF, and continue selling them along side the A-Mounts. Kinda like Chevorolet, and Pontiac or Volks Wagon, and Audi.
I dont think mitsubishi is going to sell nikon to anyone.
times of DSLR is over. Nikon needs to compete with bigger sensor mirrorless now or they die. Their 1 series was just a pathetic overpriced fail…
i wish wish wish the “1” series had not been so stupid. when i read the interview with the nikon executive saying they were not intending to compete in the professional market with mirrorless, i wanted to throw up my hands and give up. now i use sony
Not so fast. They still work very well and many people like the form factor of the larger DSLR. I still prefer it compared to my mirror less, which I use mainly when hiking in the mountains. My D810 is just splendid and I don’t want to miss the shooting experience with it. Tracking pets works still much better with it than with the A7-series, too. But no doubt, within some unknown period of time mirror less take over.
And yet the series 1 sells more than Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung, and Fuji in most markets.
Mirrorless vendors have never been profitable with their photographic line. Nikon is still making a profit. Why would jumping to a profitless line be a salvation?
that says self-dreaming hugging the no1. crown is a bad thing. you need to innovative to compete in market to sustain the business. not just always release a series of incremental camera gears.
In the past we have Kodak scared of its own invention of ‘digital camera’, worried it will kill it own film camera, so Kodak now are wiped put from the market! it could be a golden opportunity to glory if Kodak made the right decision at that time. In reality Kodak are not, so from Glory-to-Hell!
Now we have seen Canikon have done not thing so far, because both of them so scare to create new system which are could cannibalize their existing eco-system. and Sony have started on this, it is pretty pain decision foreseen it could make some impact on Amount. End of day, a company will run the business and put more interest on the eco-system that can produce revenue $$. It is not too late to kill one of its eco-system and maintain the one that produce $$, happy path could both eco-system ruins rivals market. I had says many time new player will over take Canikon Crown, just matter of time, the day will come! DigitalcameraStore have the similar talk in their latest video about the Pre-Photokina thought.
Sony makes the worlds best image sensors.
Other people make cameras.
The question is: Who is Mitsubishi selling Nikon to? It would not surprise me if Sony would buy Nikon. Nikon and Minolta both share a lot of similar DNA, with the screwdriver AF and a traditional (electronic-mechanical) lens mount, with connections to Leica and Zeiss.
Bold claim does attract traffic but it is still false claim. While it is true Nikon’s FY2015Q1 revenue is 30% below forecast, they did make money with the reduced revenue. In fact their Q1 gross margin is slightly higher than forecast due to cost control.
Nikon deserves it.
1 – their customer service is terrible. Just compare it to what Fuji is doing and really no brainer how big the difference is. They really do not care about their customers. No firmware updates, just trying to sell new cameras instead of improving the current ones. Same as Canon….
2 – terrible quality control. Bought D600, then sold because of sensor oil/dust issues. Bought therefore D800,two times exchanged, because of the left focus problem. The one I have now still focuses totally unreliable at wide aparatures.
3 – on purpose underdevelope their cameras. The tech moved far away – big difference between what can be produced and what is produced. The prices not equal to tech they are offering. For example they developed the 36mpx sensor, but forgot to develope AF system that will be suitable for it.
I am not brand loyalist, have canon, nikon, sony and fuji. Still keeping my D800 for specific work, but hope in future I can move away from Nikon/Canon. I hate how they think that the whole market belongs to them and that they can do everything they want.
Canon was always the choise of filmmakers/photographers because of their hybrid system cameras – 5dII,5Diii. But they also on purpose underdevelope they product, see MagicLantern. And because they are trying to protect their Cinema line – C100,C300,C500- and do not plan on change their minds and develop a really good hybrid camera they will probably follow the Nikons current situation. But they are a bit more lucky, because of the Magic Lantern hack. Without that Canon would be not comparable to Sony A7s.
That said Canon and Nikon deserves what they get/will get. Big losses in profit. They had a chance to stay on top, but both of them decided not to stay there. It is really only they problem.
Forgot to add that Sony also made a mistake… In they lens line/quality, but that is another story…
But most people I know who own the A7 camera don’t actually use E mount lenses, they use Leica’s. I think Sony’s aim is to sell as many camera as possible, most people change their cameras every 2 years but kept their old lenses without needing to get any new ones. And nowadays with all the lens adapters and speed boosters, I don’t really need to buy Canon lenses for my 5D mk III, all my Zeiss lenses are F mount, and I can use them for my A7, GH4 and Blackmagic cameras too
Fair enough, but for a lot of pros (who don’t have a ready supply of vintage MF lenses gathering dust), adaptability doesn’t make up for the lack native lenses. Sure, you can technically adapt, but it’s not like you’ll be shooting the footie with an a7r and 20-200L…
Most of my manual focus lenses were newly bought, including the F mount Zeiss Otus, movies makers don’t use auto focus anyway, and I’ve seen more and more still photographers shooting movies nowadays. I’ve done still fashion, portraits and architectural shoots with all brands of lenses with my A7r cameras and had no problems. In fact I’m using my Canon 1Ds and 5D mk III less and less nowadays. But if I decide to use my Canon cameras, I can still use those lenses too, the only camera I don’t need is a Nikon one. If I need zoom lenses with autofocus, I can use the Sony A mount ones, they can focus much faster than the E mount lenses with the Sony adapter. To me, mirrorless is a good investment, most of the lenses I get nowadays can be used between my Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Blackmagic cameras, some even with more benefits with the Metabones speedboosters. Just think about it, I can use my Zeiss lenses on 10 of my cameras, how can that not be a good investment?
Would love to see some of your work with Zeiss Otus. As a professional photographer, I’m surprised you don’t have a Discus account and website signature.
Firstly, Sony isn’t in great shape financially. How soon you forget eh?
Secondly, a weak market is worse for everyone. It’s not a zero sum game. Nikon don’t need to fail for Sony to thrive and vice versa.
Thirdly, Nikon make the best DSLR’s in the market. The highest resolution, the best low light, the nicest hardware. DSLR’s are a shrinking niche but they’re not going to die. Mirrorless camera are like iPads, DSLR’s are like desktops. Every story about the death of DSLR’s is as silly as discussing the death of radio.
Finally unless Sony learn from companies like Nikon how to build a UI and what makes a camer work we are in trouble. The lack of lenses is another huge issue. Sony are a long way from being able to replace Canon and Nikon as serious tools.
To add to that, Sony reported losses, too: http://newcameranews.com/2014/05/15/sony-reports-third-year-of-losses-shelves-lenses/.
“Originally, we had planned to launch a full catalog of fast primes and zooms for APS-C and Full Frame this summer, each a complete lineup optimized for their sensor size and with SteadyShot optical image stabilization on each lens and worth 3-4 stops. The primes were all faster than F1.8 and the zooms were all F2.0 constant aperture. All lenses had metal barrels, aperture rings, long throw helicoids, aspherical elements, and metal lens hoods. But our current financial situation makes these products unfeasible at the moment, and until our financial situation improves, we have to put these plans on the shelf.”
LMAO, of course you do know that that site is a satirical web site.. you didn’t really think that the Sony mgr’s name was Mavica Vaio? or maybe you did?
I know, was just kidding! Almost every camera company has difficulties making profit theses days. Larger companies have more leeway, though, as they have other branches to cover up losses.
newb, thats a troll site.
These D610s are used cameras with 100s of shutter counts.
Lots of bad, failed, used and non working D610s from this seller – http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback2&userid=beststopdeals&iid=-1&de=off&items=25&which=negative&interval=30&_trkparms=negative_30