Nikon Re-Thinkng "1 System" Citing Poor Sales

Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Messages
5,262
Location
NJ
Panther - They need to rethink it. The sensor is too small with no dividends for reducing the size of the camera body. I never could understand why they went in that direction.
Most people tend to use a body in combination with lenses. It's when you start to put the lenses on that the benefit of the One system becomes visible. I can walk around with an entire set of lenses in the pockets of my cargo pants and not even feel them. This is something that Nikon consistently seems to neglect to mention when marketing the 1 series.

The problem Nikon faces is mostly that people look at the numbers and dismiss the cameras because of it. Where in reality they handle fairly well, are made very well (with a nice heavy feel to it).

Nikon's problems are:
  • They waited with *starting* to develop a mirrorless system not just when their competition introduced their lines, but even beyond that until mirrorless was eating away SLR market share. Then, and only then did Nikon get off their lazy ***, but of course it would then take another year or two to bring it to the market.
  • Unwilling to market as a "cheaper slr" is one thing. Selling it at premium prices is another. While I can understand a decision to sell it at entry level prices or even *slightly* above it, the market predictably punished Nikon for the ridiculous introduction prices
  • Nothing sells like having a few pro's advertise it. Let Chase Jarvis, McNally and Peterson shoot it and demo it.

The lack of succes of the One series has everything to do with management and nothing with the camera. Look how well the iPhone sells; and sensor is tiny! Sensor size is not the issue. It's wrong timing, wrong pricing, wrong marketing. But Nikon management knows better than to bring that up. Their jobs are much safer if they can blame "the market"
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
7,361
Location
Texas (KSKF)
Lurker,
If I may be so bold, I'd like to add to your list this:

- The 18.5 ƒ1.8 should have been released when the system (J1/V1) was first announced.

Nikon 1 system (IMHO) went for too long without a fast prime (ƒ2.0 or faster).
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,700
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
Lurker - Your points about their marketing and high price are certainly valid points. However, you get portability with other manufacturers without, relatively speaking, the low light penalties from an ultra small sensor. Since the smaller sensor in the Nikon product didn't result in a smaller camera body vis-à-vis the competition, my opinion is that using an ultra small sensor has no tangible product value from a marketing, sales or image quality standpoint. The iPhone sells well because it combines a variety of features. The Nikon product is a standalone camera and its image and video quality has to compete against other mirrorless systems in its class.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,122
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
Lurker - Your points about their marketing and high price are certainly valid points. However, you get portability with other manufacturers without, relatively speaking, the low light penalties from an ultra small sensor. Since the smaller sensor in the Nikon product didn't result in a smaller camera body vis-à-vis the competition, my opinion is that using an ultra small sensor has no tangible product value from a marketing, sales or image quality standpoint. The iPhone sells well because it combines a variety of features. The Nikon product is a standalone camera and its image and video quality has to compete against other mirrorless systems in its class.
I disagree. I own a V1 and a Panasonic G5 - the m4/3 system, while itself rather compact compared to APS-C based systems - is still a bit heavier and bulkier than the 1-series. So the benefits are definitely there.

Most importantly, however, is that the 1-series can use the F-mount lenses via adapter with good AF performance. I like to use my V1 as a 2.7x TC on all my long lenses! That's a unique selling point that Nikon needs to take advantage of.

Cheers

Mike
 
Joined
Mar 25, 2011
Messages
2,131
Location
London
I disagree. I own a V1 and a Panasonic G5 - the m4/3 system, while itself rather compact compared to APS-C based systems - is still a bit heavier and bulkier than the 1-series. So the benefits are definitely there.

Most importantly, however, is that the 1-series can use the F-mount lenses via adapter with good AF performance. I like to use my V1 as a 2.7x TC on all my long lenses! That's a unique selling point that Nikon needs to take advantage of.

Cheers

Mike

With all due respect and for the sake of argument, positioning the compatibility with the F-mount could be a limiting factor in the sense that it mostly targets the existing users of Nikon DSLRs.
Which means that they are cannibalizing their own existing client base.

Sony (and others) have expanded the category by following a completely different strategy of targeting brand new customers.

Just my thoughts.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2005
Messages
2,868
Location
Sudbury, Massachusetts
Panther - They need to rethink it. The sensor is too small with no dividends for reducing the size of the camera body. I never could understand why they went in that direction.
The dividend is in fact the small body. I love my V2 and I believe that may people dis the system without ever trying one. The size of the V2 make it the camera I take when I don't think I'll want a camera.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,122
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
The dividend is in fact the small body. I love my V2 and I believe that may people dis the system without ever trying one. The size of the V2 make it the camera I take when I don't think I'll want a camera.
+1 - my V1 is always in the bag!

The only gripe I have about the 1-series is the ridiculous price point Nikon chose. If they had positioned the system below the entry level DSLRs they would have sold a lot more!

Mike
 
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
7,361
Location
Texas (KSKF)
Agree, the price was ridiculously uncompetitive. I invested in the system once the price moved below £300 for the V1.
Exactly,
I purchased my old J1 at premium release price. Lessoned learned is that if I go back to the "1" system, I won't buy at the release price.

(So I'm currently waiting for the APS-C based "Coolpix A" to come down in price too)
 
Joined
Jan 9, 2011
Messages
3,019
Location
Iowa
Its about fads or whats "in" now. When cell phones were new, they were huge & cool. Then they went all the way to tiny. Now the bigger the screen, the better. So here we go again.
I tried M43 & wasnt impressed as many were & still are. Just to small & fiddly for me. & the IQ was great in good light. But so is my cell phone camera.
 
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
1,700
Location
Fairfax, Virginia
Panther - The mirrorless cameras are designed to be carried around for use when a photo opportunity presents itself. I've watched my daughter use her point and shoot in a variety of lighting situations including dim light and I have no doubt that the mirrorless cameras will be used similarly. From a marketing standpoint I just don't see how you can market the tiny Nikon sensor vis-à-vis the competition.

I also took a look at the sizes of the various mirrorless cameras and it looks like the J3 really delivers on the promise of a smaller body. I was surprised to see its improvement over the j1. If the price of the initial offerings had been more realistic, then Nikon might be able to really market the smaller body but I guess its too late.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Messages
1,329
Location
Brooklyn NYC USA
The sensor size is important, but quality of sensor itself is significant. Nikon already has very good line of V lenses. What they need - V4 sensor as good as Sony's RX100. Test image made by Sony RX100, ISO 3200(3200!), crop. LZ.
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

DSC00023 - Copy by longzoom, on Flickry Sony RX100, ISO 3200 (
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

DSC00023 by longzoom, on Flickr.
 

Attachments

Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Messages
7,361
Location
Texas (KSKF)
The sensor size is important, but quality of sensor itself is significant. Nikon already has very good line of V lenses. What they need - V4 sensor as good as Sony's RX100.
I don't think the CX sensor is that bad - here's a SOOC ISO 3200 shot from my old J1 :smile:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Nikon 1 J1 ISO 3200 Straight Out Of Camera by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,122
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
Panther - The mirrorless cameras are designed to be carried around for use when a photo opportunity presents itself. I've watched my daughter use her point and shoot in a variety of lighting situations including dim light and I have no doubt that the mirrorless cameras will be used similarly. From a marketing standpoint I just don't see how you can market the tiny Nikon sensor vis-à-vis the competition.
I don't understand why you are so critical of the 1-series sensor - it's clearly better than any compact camera up to the same sensor size (except the Sony RX-100, which is admittedly impressive).

It's also about as good as the D80/D200 sensor was, which we were all happy with only a few years ago!

Sure, if you throw larger sensors into the mix you get better IQ - but then you also carry more bulk, in particular heavier lenses.

I think the 1-series is just fine technically. It's simply priced too high to be competitive! But when I got my V1 with 10-30 & 30-110 kit for $399 I thought I got a hell of a deal :biggrin:

Mike
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
105
Location
Lincs, UK
I think they just pitched the initial launch prices way too high, family photographers dismissed it on price, serious amateurs swerved it by and large. The sensors fine, they just haven't a clue how to market what they have created. They need to sell the J series cheaper as compacts with loads of options to develop your system if you want to and the V series they need to target existing DSLR users with its unique properties ie utilising their existing lens collection, but still at realistic prices.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
2,551
Location
Chester, Virginia, USA
I looked at the first Nikon 1 when I was looking at mirrorless and the thing that put me off on one was when I picked it up.

It had too much of a cheap plastic feel to it. I sat it back down and kept on looking.
 
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