Nikon Changing their Lineup?

Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
647
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
How about equipping phones with 4g/5g cellular modems so photos can be uploaded to social media directly from the camera? Use a custom Android OS so social media apps can be added directly to the camera as well as cloud services and maybe a mini browser. The camera can no longer exist apart from the connected world. It needs to be part of that ecosystem and be intuitive to get a photo from the camera to social media, printing service or cloud service. Clunky, hard to configure apps to bridge the camera to the Internet aren’t going to gain consumer support but a device that is easy and fun to use and provides positive feedback (likes on FB), would probably do pretty well. Just my $0.02 from listening to people say what they don’t like about their camera - that it is literally is a disconnected black box that does not fulfill the instant gratification people have come to need from an addiction to social media
Agreed. Until the legacy camera industry stops thinking about more megapixels and iterative updates, they will continue to have a dying market mostly made up of older hobbyists. Some look at the transition to FF mirrorless as a major change, but the reality is that m4/3rd's started this shift back around 2010. Walled garden or otherwise, the moment that a company like Apple decides to create a 21st century camera beyond the capabilities of a smartphone, I feel for Nikon et. al. Yes, there is a need for the performance current cameras offer, but in terms of convenience, Nikon still thinks the answer is Snapbridge. Why can I not get a battery grip that contains a cell phone chip and can be programmed on a tablet or computer to send my images to where I want them on the web without having to drain either my phone or camera's battery? Or how about NFC so I can pick an image and send it to somebody's phone or tablet instantly? I think that to some degree, the legacy camera companies have us in a walled garden. Take your camera to a wedding and try sharing images quickly and easily with friends or family. Not so easy. I am not sure why performance and convenience cannot coexist in a modern camera.

--Ken
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
2,917
Location
London
Apple’s financials vs Nikon, Canon are a simple proof point.
They understand customer uses and that an average picture shared immediately is better that a top quality picture shared two hours later.
Nikon and Canon moved from film to digital using the same paradigm, they are not digital native, look at canon still trying to protect its paper based businesses (printer and copiers).
They are not agile.
They are not software companies.
They do not understand digital.

Apple does and looks for profitable segments, high margins with a repeat business and annual phone replacement cycles.
There is no way the camera vendors can compete.
Apple is the one company that put a computer in people’s pockets and included a gsm modem.
Their smartphones are as expensive as other people’s computers.
They destroyed the established competition (blackberry, Nokia).
And it’s not like they were first to market with 5G either.
They stop investing in product categories as soon as they become features of a new one (iPod into iPhone for instance).

The connectivity gap that Canon and Nikon experience is also because they have no software platform where independent developers can monetise their apps.
Samsung tried with some innovative cross over phones/cameras hybrid on android, they failed and focused on phones and tablets. They even pulled out of computers.

Sony on the other hand is the camera manufacturer that is closer to an Apple philosophy, it is paying off for them on the camera front but failed on the phone and laptop front.

I don’t see an upside for the traditional camera vendors.
I
Of course it's not equivalent; Indeed, I explicitly mentioned that.

My childhood friend sent something to friends and she used the Apple ecosystem, aka walled garden, to create it. The people she sent it to that aren't Apple users couldn't review it. That's one heck of an ecosystem (expressed in my most sarcastic tone), especially considering that most people aren't Apple users and that she couldn't figure out how to send it so non-Apple users could review it. When it comes to the walled garden, the wall is certainly an apt metaphor; I'm far from convinced about the garden being an apt metaphor.
Could it be user error?
We are a MacOS company and a lot of our clients are not.
We do not have these issues.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
17,854
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
Could it be user error?
You apparently missed the part when I explained that "she couldn't figure out how to send it so non-Apple users could review it." It doesn't matter whether it was user error; it matters that it wasn't simple enough for someone with a college degree to quickly figure it out. Her garden remained walled when she wanted everyone to be able look over the wall and couldn't figure out how to make it happen.
 
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
28,057
Location
Moscow, Idaho
You apparently missed the part when I explained that "she couldn't figure out how to send it so non-Apple users could review it." It doesn't matter whether it was user error; it matters that it wasn't simple enough for someone with a college degree to quickly figure it out. Her garden remained walled when she wanted everyone to be able look over the wall and couldn't figure out how to make it happen.
I don't see that as an Apple issue at all—rather it is a a limitation of the operator.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
17,854
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
I don't see that as an Apple issue at all—rather it is a a limitation of the operator.
Considering that I don't know the specifics of the situation, at the very least I consider it perhaps both an Apple issue and a limitation of the operator. Without further details, I don't understand how anybody could reasonably conclude that Apple or the operator is the sole cause of the problem.
 
Two things: first, this probably is not the thread in which to get into an Apple/Mac versus Microsoft/Windows or iOS versus Android discussion, as such things usually do not end well for either side..... Each system has its own appeal and merits. Some people are never going to figure out how the other system works, and that's fine as long as they're happy with whatever they are using.

Secondly, it occurs to me that more than likely one thing which is keeping camera manufacturers back from putting a modem into their camera bodies is that this would then require the user to establish and pay for a monthly cellular plan of some sort....i.e., adding a phone line so that they could indeed take advantage of the modem included within the camera. This is going to work just fine, be the norm and perfectly acceptable when someone is buying a new cell phone which is already meant to be a communication device that also happens to have a camera included in it. However..... maybe it would not be quite as acceptable to many consumers when it's a modem added into the body of a mirrorless or DSLR camera body.... Who's going to be making phone calls with their Nikon Z or their Sony A7? Sure, the idea of being able to take a photo with my A7R IV and immediately zap it off via cellular to a friend in email or text or to my computer for later review is appealing at first, until I stop and think about it. Is it really necessary that I be able to do this? Do I want to have another phone line/phone bill added to my monthly expenditures? Thanks just the same, I'll save that quickie process for my iPhone and when I want to send an interesting image off immediately to a friend, I'll just set aside the larger camera for a moment and pull out the iPhone.....
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
678
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
You apparently missed the part when I explained that "she couldn't figure out how to send it so non-Apple users could review it." It doesn't matter whether it was user error; it matters that it wasn't simple enough for someone with a college degree to quickly figure it out. Her garden remained walled when she wanted everyone to be able look over the wall and couldn't figure out how to make it happen.
May I say this is also generational.
I was brought up with film. I was also brought up with landline and payphones, before cell phones were even a thought. OK maybe a Startrek SciFi dream.
The teenagers in the high school yearbook class were brought up with a smart phone in their hands.
One day, one of the students asked me to take a pic with her phone. duh what??? :confused: SHE had to teach me to take a pic with her phone.
The younger generation brought up with a cell phone in their hands, can navigate and use the phone WAY better than me.
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
647
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
Two things: first, this probably is not the thread in which to get into an Apple/Mac versus Microsoft/Windows or iOS versus Android discussion, as such things usually do not end well for either side..... Each system has its own appeal and merits. Some people are never going to figure out how the other system works, and that's fine as long as they're happy with whatever they are using.

Secondly, it occurs to me that more than likely one thing which is keeping camera manufacturers back from putting a modem into their camera bodies is that this would then require the user to establish and pay for a monthly cellular plan of some sort....i.e., adding a phone line so that they could indeed take advantage of the modem included within the camera. This is going to work just fine, be the norm and perfectly acceptable when someone is buying a new cell phone which is already meant to be a communication device that also happens to have a camera included in it. However..... maybe it would not be quite as acceptable to many consumers when it's a modem added into the body of a mirrorless or DSLR camera body.... Who's going to be making phone calls with their Nikon Z or their Sony A7? Sure, the idea of being able to take a photo with my A7R IV and immediately zap it off via cellular to a friend in email or text or to my computer for later review is appealing at first, until I stop and think about it. Is it really necessary that I be able to do this? Do I want to have another phone line/phone bill added to my monthly expenditures? Thanks just the same, I'll save that quickie process for my iPhone and when I want to send an interesting image off immediately to a friend, I'll just set aside the larger camera for a moment and pull out the iPhone.....
I can add a non-phone device to my Verizon plan for $10/mo. with a 1GB data allowance. I do not know if Verizon will allow me to turn on and turn off that device on my plan each month, but when speed and convenience are also important in addition to IQ (at least more than what a phone can deliver), I personally would not find this charge to be a barrier.

The sad thing is that unless you were to make some large prints, I suspect that most folks would have lost their interest in what you shot with your DSLR when the images were finally available. This happened to me at two family weddings two years ago, and it has happened at work. I share you questioning about everything needing to be ASAP, but there are times when it would be nice to have the option.

--Ken
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
678
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I can add a non-phone device to my Verizon plan for $10/mo. with a 1GB data allowance. I do not know if Verizon will allow me to turn on and turn off that device on my plan each month, but when speed and convenience are also important in addition to IQ (at least more than what a phone can deliver), I personally would not find this charge to be a barrier.

The sad thing is that unless you were to make some large prints, I suspect that most folks would have lost their interest in what you shot with your DSLR when the images were finally available. This happened to me at two family weddings two years ago, and it has happened at work. I share you questioning about everything needing to be ASAP, but there are times when it would be nice to have the option.

--Ken
I think the ease and speed that people can share their smart phone pics has made this a norm.
Then I had people question WHY I had to "waste time" editing the photos that I take, before sharing them. ARGH
 
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
647
Location
Puget Sound
Real Name
Ken
I think the ease and speed that people can share their smart phone pics has made this a norm.
Then I had people question WHY I had to "waste time" editing the photos that I take, before sharing them. ARGH
I pretty much stopped offering or being "voluntold" to shoot family events unless I want to do something with the photos myself. It often takes me several hours to work on a large event to get everything cropped and cleaned up to my satisfaction, and then when I post them to a gallery, both in high resolution and low resolution (for prints and for emailing), nobody even bothers to view or download copies. I have come to accept that in the age of the smartphone, images can have many purposes and not all of them involve quality, especially since digital technology has brought the cost down to almost zero.

--Ken
 
I can add a non-phone device to my Verizon plan for $10/mo. with a 1GB data allowance. I do not know if Verizon will allow me to turn on and turn off that device on my plan each month, but when speed and convenience are also important in addition to IQ (at least more than what a phone can deliver), I personally would not find this charge to be a barrier.

The sad thing is that unless you were to make some large prints, I suspect that most folks would have lost their interest in what you shot with your DSLR when the images were finally available. This happened to me at two family weddings two years ago, and it has happened at work. I share you questioning about everything needing to be ASAP, but there are times when it would be nice to have the option.

--Ken
Sure, with my AT&T plan I also can add certain other non-phone devices to my plan for an extra $10/month......but as far as I know, the only such devices which are currently allowed would be tablets and such, which are not all that dissimilar from a cellular phone. They can come with a modem already installed. I have my two iPads with cellular data as part of my overall AT&T plan along with my iPhone. Right now, of course, since no camera manufacturer is offering a DSLR, mirrorless or P&S camera with a modem inside, the question is rather moot as to whether said device would then be allowed to be added to a cellular plan for an extra $10.00/month. My guess is that there would be a change in the price structuring.....
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
2,917
Location
London
You apparently missed the part when I explained that "she couldn't figure out how to send it so non-Apple users could review it." It doesn't matter whether it was user error; it matters that it wasn't simple enough for someone with a college degree to quickly figure it out. Her garden remained walled when she wanted everyone to be able look over the wall and couldn't figure out how to make it happen.
I saw that.
I was being diplomatic and emphasised that it likely was user error.
Without knowing the circumstances it is difficult to blame Apple for the undesired outcome.
When I worked for Lexmark and HP we saw numerous well educated users who failed to print because they had not switched on the printer.
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
2,917
Location
London
Two things: first, this probably is not the thread in which to get into an Apple/Mac versus Microsoft/Windows or iOS versus Android discussion, as such things usually do not end well for either side..... Each system has its own appeal and merits. Some people are never going to figure out how the other system works, and that's fine as long as they're happy with whatever they are using.

Secondly, it occurs to me that more than likely one thing which is keeping camera manufacturers back from putting a modem into their camera bodies is that this would then require the user to establish and pay for a monthly cellular plan of some sort....i.e., adding a phone line so that they could indeed take advantage of the modem included within the camera. This is going to work just fine, be the norm and perfectly acceptable when someone is buying a new cell phone which is already meant to be a communication device that also happens to have a camera included in it. However..... maybe it would not be quite as acceptable to many consumers when it's a modem added into the body of a mirrorless or DSLR camera body.... Who's going to be making phone calls with their Nikon Z or their Sony A7? Sure, the idea of being able to take a photo with my A7R IV and immediately zap it off via cellular to a friend in email or text or to my computer for later review is appealing at first, until I stop and think about it. Is it really necessary that I be able to do this? Do I want to have another phone line/phone bill added to my monthly expenditures? Thanks just the same, I'll save that quickie process for my iPhone and when I want to send an interesting image off immediately to a friend, I'll just set aside the larger camera for a moment and pull out the iPhone.....
Right, this should not be a discussion on the comparative merits of OSes.
It should remain a discussion on the competitive advantage connected technologies and global ecosystems have over digital camera business models.
Your point about modem integration is correct, there are several examples supporting this.
HP and other laptop vendors tried to promote laptops with WAN and 3G (then 4G) SIM card integration.
These models were always niche.
Apple offers Apple Watch with 4G included and these have marginal appeal.
They all hoped that eSIM would allow a breakthrough but it has not.
Now they hope that 5G with its direct IoT connectivity approach may be the solution.
We shall see.
Unlike camera manufacturers they have worked and developed alliances with network operators, application developers, component manufacturers, channel partners, VARs, SIs, they have been lobbying governments.
The scale of their efforts is several magnitudes above what Nikon and to a certain extent Canon can do.
To your last point, you are right, Samsung offered phones that integrate cameras and cameras that integrate phones, under the Galaxy brand name as well if I remember correctly.
They killed off their cameras with phones and are doing well with their phones.
And also spot on with regards to generation.
Digital natives have new ways to use technology and develop new products suited to their needs.
As they are becoming managers and entrepreneurs themselves they shape the market.
There is a funny example given by many, the hand sign for making a phone call has changed from using the little finger and thumb in the shape of an old phone handset to a flat hand in the shape of a smartphone.
:)
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
17,854
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
The following is exactly the kind of situation I was thinking of when I mentioned the limitations of Apple's ecosystem:

"iCloud started out as a very restricted and limited online storage service for users of Apple Macs, iPhones and iPads. It was OK at best, but rivals like Dropbox, Google Drive and others had so many extra features and functions that some Apple users preferred them. iCloud was just too limited.

Apple has tweaked its online storage service and has steadily opened it up. It used to be so locked down that you could barely use it, but now it is getting more like its rivals.

You can even share files! With non-Mac users too!"

That article was written just three years ago and it took me all of 30 seconds to find it. Clearly, the implication was that if you were using that part of Apple's ecosystem, there was a time when it wasn't possible to use it to share docs with non-Apple users. It reminded me of another friend awhile back who raved about his iCloud system for use at his home but regretted that he couldn't use it to share photos with friends that weren't Apple users. And by the way, I'm not comparing Apple to any other ecosystem; instead, I'm simply providing an example for the purpose of discussion that all ecosystems are not particularly beneficial when communicating with people that have not opted into that ecosystem.

http://www.rawinfopages.com/mac/how-to-share-files-stored-on-icloud-with-everyone
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
2,134
Location
Winter Haven, florida
Excuse me, I have to answer my camera. It is ringing.
IMHO camera manufacturers should slow down on the megapixel race and integrate these cameras seamlessly into the cellphone environment. In many situations our large, expensive, heavy cameras are actually less appealing than the simple cell phone picture. When I take a picture with my dslr, it is not available to others until it is processed, uploaded and shared. For me that is usually a day or more. My cellphone pictures are available immediately.
Presently my nikon and sony systems try- but are clunky, slow and not intuitive.
Link my camera with my cellphone- seamlessly- and they have a system that young people may be interested in.
Gary
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
17,854
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
Link my camera with my cellphone- seamlessly- and they have a system that young people may be interested in.
It's not just young people that would find that appealing. As an example, show me a grandparent that doesn't want to immediately, easily and intuitively send a photo to their grandchildren. As another example, when I'm traveling I have to get out my cell phone to quickly send a photo of a beautiful waterfall to my friend because I can't do it using only my stand-alone camera. And I hate using a cell phone to take a photo when I'm outside because the reflections so often prevent me from seeing the scene on the phone's display.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
2,917
Location
London
That is one the cameras with phone that Samsung offered:
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_s4_zoom-5447.php
and its replacement the K Zoom
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_k_zoom-6210.php
It turned out there was no market for these.

With light drones, go pros and smartphones most of the use scenarios are covered.
Not all, but most.
Some interesting facts:
https://focus.mylio.com/tech-today/how-many-photos-will-be-taken-in-2020
https://review42.com/smartphone-statistics/

Fascinating Facts:
  • The average user will tap, swipe, and click their phone 2,617 times a day.
  • 47% of US smartphone users say they couldn’t live without their devices.
  • 95% of adults in South Korea own a smartphone.
  • The average time spent on smartphones is 2hrs 51mins a day, or 171 mins per day.
  • Worldwide, more people now own a cell phone than a toothbrush.
  • There will be 2.87 billion smartphone users worldwide in 2020.
57% of users will not recommend a business with a poorly designed mobile site.

The best for last:
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,884
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
I kinda agree.
But if someone is going to publicly take apart a financial statement, and make a case of it, they "should" know what they are doing.
If they don't know what they are doing, they put their credibility into question. What else are they saying, and don't know what they are talking about?

As you say they will need a "bridge" camera to bridge the gap between the phone camera and their high end amateur/pro cameras. That is a HUGE gap between a phone camera and a $3,000 camera like a D850/Z7 + cost of the lens. Even a $2,000+ D750/Z6 + lens leaves a huge gap.
I certainly can't argue with your point about the financial analysis piece of Cristina's presentation. I have little expertise in this area and didn't understand his discussion on impairment versus depreciation or how it applied to the direction that Nikon is probably heading. Nevertheless, I think that he is probably right about where Nikon thinks it needs to put its focus, i.e., on the advanced hobbyist and pro. With the cameras in the phones getting better and better it is pretty apparent that the market for consumer cameras and lens is going to continue to shrink. I also fully agree with your point that Nikon needs a bridge system since the jump from a phone camera to a Z 6, 7 or 850 is just too big a jump in both complexity and cost for most folks to take on all at once. With that in mind, I think that they are going to need to simplify their line of bridge cameras and lens and then promote them. On the promotion end, I think that Nikon needs a professionally developed marketing campaign that explains why the bridge cameras they settle on will give consumers better results than a top notch phone camera. They face a daunting task in this market but they make some very nice products and hopefully they will survive.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 8, 2019
Messages
678
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I pretty much stopped offering or being "voluntold" to shoot family events unless I want to do something with the photos myself. It often takes me several hours to work on a large event to get everything cropped and cleaned up to my satisfaction, and then when I post them to a gallery, both in high resolution and low resolution (for prints and for emailing), nobody even bothers to view or download copies. I have come to accept that in the age of the smartphone, images can have many purposes and not all of them involve quality, especially since digital technology has brought the cost down to almost zero.

--Ken
I tell people that ask/complain, that it takes me three to four plus hours of edit work for every hour of shooting time.
A good chunk of time is simply culling 500-800 shots of a game, down to about 100-150 that I will then work on, and cull again to get down to less than 100 that I post. And since I am not paid to shoot, the editing is not a priority, it gets done when I can do it.

In three years, NOT ONE parent has paid me for the pictures that I shoot and post of their kid.
Expectation and free picture sharing has devalued pictures.

Something interesting that I learned. For team sports, I normally shoot plays, so you can see the player AND the play, for context. Some parents don't care about the play shots, they just want their kid. So I will sometimes make two crops of the same frame; #1 is the play with multiple players, #2 tight crop of an individual player.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom