neuroanatomist said:
Aglet said:
So now <the D810> certainly IS competition for the 5d3 in more types of shooting.
Yet Nikon IS still predicting greater sales losses than Canon. Some competition... :
With the D810, Nikon does actually have a competitive offering for "excellent general purpose DSLR" against the 5D III.
To be frank, I don't think Nikon's sales problems have as much to do with their cameras, as with their execution and branding. I think there were plenty of mistakes made with the D800 and D600, missteps with things like AF issues, oil spots on the sensor, misplacement of buttons, funky ergonomics decisions, etc. These are all execution factors...things that irk the crap out of their existing customers, and maybe cost a few customers here and there. Their other issue is their marketing...Nikon is schizophrenic when it comes to naming...their naming is wacko, and (assuming they stick with what they finally have now) they are only just now barely getting a handle on it. Nikon also has the tendency to expend resources on extremely niche items, like the Df, or a gold plated, lizard gripped trophy camera. Those things are just a waste of money and resource, and just drag town their capacity potential.
All of that, when you put it all together, just comes off as really sloppy. They used to be a fully integrated company, and I think they had some really excellent products when they were. They they trimmed off a bunch of parts of their company, made alliances with companies like Sony, and then just got...sloppy. They slap stuff together, hurriedly almost, like the Df. Interesting concept, but clearly designed and aimed at the die-hard retro fan. As a truly viable commercial product? It's a nitemare! The controls are horrid. It's clunky. I couldn't give a crap what kind of IQ it had, it could have 16 stops of DR and I wouldn't want to touch it with a 10 foot pole. Nikon comes off as sloppy...and I think that hurts them.
There is value to having DR for certain things. Sony Exmor sensors are better at that, no question. I don't think that's ever been at issue, at least not since the clear evidence of the facts first came out years ago. That's what the DRiveling Fanatics just don't get...like Dilbert in the recent discussion about print and dynamic range. He clearly seems to think that everyone always shoots at ISO 100, and therefor is always capable of taking advantage of the improvements to DR. (He also really doesn't know the difference between bit depth, information precision, and dynamic range, it's all the same thing, so he misinterprets everything.) He misses the point entirely, like so many other DR fanatics out there...they are looking through the ISO 100 lens, and they can't imagine the simple concept of anyone ever using anything else.
Nikon has a good product...their problem is executing, from a business and marketing standpoint, such that they can't maximize the potential of their product. THAT is why they don't have good sales. I don't think the D800 could have toppled the 5D III, however the D810 solves most of the D800's problems, boosts the frame rate, and is really a solid competitor now. It still doesn't have Canon's Mark II Great Whites, but the Nikon 800mm f/5.6 is practically a direct ripoff of Canon's fluorite lens designs...so it probably won't be that long before Nikon updates the 600, 500, and the rest to use the same general design. It still has the sensor IQ benefit on top of all that. If Nikon figures out how to get their act together, in the long run, Canon (assuming they don't do something about their sensor IQ within the next couple of DSLR releases) is going to start losing customers. It really doesn't matter if the differences are huge, minor, or non-existent...all that matters is the PERCEPTIONS of existing or potential customers. A lot of people don't give a crap about Canon glass (or Nikon glass, for that matter)...the prefer Zeiss or Sigma. A lot of people don't give a crap about the 600RT, they already have a third party system they are happy with. A lot of people never shoot at high ISO...they use nothing but ISO 100 and shoot nothing but landscapes.
It seems impossible, and I think Canon is an excellent company with excellent products and execution. But the dominant company has failed in the past. Microsoft used to be one of the most profitable companies in the world, the single most profitable tech company in the world, and was at the pinnacle of the tech world. No one saw the Apple underdog with their iOS and iPhone coming. I still use Microsoft products myself (I gave Apple products a multi-year trial, and still really can't stand them), but there is no question that Microsoft tried to ride their past success for too long. Today, they are, by many, considered to be entirely irrelevant. They still exist, they still make great products (better products now than they had for over a decade, even), but they lost their status as the top tech company. If they hope to turn that around, it's going to be a very long, hard, expensive journey, and there is no question it will take a new CEO and probably an entirely new mindset to do it. Apple rakes in more revenue in a single quarter than Microsoft does in three or four quarters now. The underdog took over...and in a lot of respects their products are still inferior to the competition...they just have one feature no one else has: a gazillion apps. (Oh, and, a lot of sapphire...)
That's all it takes...that one feature. I don't think the DR difference is all that it's cracked up to be. We had a guy on the forums for a short while back who really laid into Neuro, kicked up a lot of dust and started a big old fight, then deleted his account. He completely ignored actual real-world evidence I provided that demonstrated how little the dynamic range difference actually means in actual practice in all but a select few unique shots. (I even pointed him back to it a couple times, and he still ignored it.) It doesn't matter how significant the difference is, it doesn't matter how often it can be used (I still believe that the majority of photographers use higher ISO settings.)
All that matters is the perception. Outside of CR and a couple forums on DPR, the perception is that Canon
has LOST. Past tense. That's a really BAD place for a company to be in. I like Canon. I think overall they make a better product, just like I think the Nokia Lumia is a better product than the iPhone. I think their system overall is better...better lenses, better flash, better ergonomics. But it doesn't matter. It doesn't even matter if it is Nikon that's the underdog...technically speaking, it isn't just one underdog this time...its a horde of unerdogs, all barking the Sony Exmor midnight song...marching on Castle Canon like a bunch of hellhounds. Canon is now perceived, by a growing number of photographers and a growing number of reviewers as having bad sensor IQ and crappy sensors. It's pretty much the only thing I hear or read anymore...everywhere you go on the net, there is a horde of Canon haters and a small cluster of Canon defenders duking it out...and the Canon haters are growing by leaps and bounds. Even the Canon holdouts and die-hard fans all probably "secretly" want D800 level IQ in their Canon cameras, regardless of what they may say publicly. Canon
has to address that.
Soon. Either with the 7D II, or with the 5D IV. If they do not, they will eventually become as irrelevant in the digital photography world as Microsoft did in the tech world. Their competitors aren't stopping or slowing down...they just keep marching on. Nikon could probably go bankrupt even, and it probably wouldn't matter. Sony Exmor sensors are finding their way into everything. And Sony keeps improving Exmor...it hasn't just been a stagnant sensor design since the D800 was introduced. Soon, Canon won't just be facing Nikon and Sony as competitors...it'll be nearly every other camera manufacturer on the planet, in every segment of the market. It won't happen suddenly, it won't happen in a year, but they will go into decline unless they step up their game and
compete on the sensor IQ front. Everyone wants Canon to make a better sensor. I DO MYSELF! AND I KNOW THEY HAVE THE PATENTS AND TECHNOLOGY TO DO IT, TOO!! And yet...they simply...aren't....
