Why is there always rumors about Nikon?

[astroNikon]

I never see rumors about Canon . .

All you have to do is look for them:
http://www.canonrumors.com/

OMG

Canon is buying itself ?!?!
a hostile takeover !!
Canon Inc. to Acquire Own Shares

 

[astroNikon]

for reference about battery power and longevity

The SONY A6500 battery is
Capacity 1020 mAh
Output Voltage 7.2V
Minimum Capacity 7.3Wh (1020mAh)
Dimensions (W x H x D) 1.2 x 0.8 x 1.8" / 3.1 x 1.8 x 4.5 cm
Weight 1.5 oz / 42.5 g

and the "Pro" a9
Capacity 2280 mAh
Output Voltage 7.2 V
Dimensions 1.5 x 0.9 x 2.0" / 38.7 x 22.7 x 51.7 mm
Weight 2.9 oz / 83 g

and the grip on the a9 is of course much larger than on the a6500.

The Battery for a D7x00, d6x0, d750, d8x0, d500 is
Amp-Hours 1900.00 mAh
Chemistry Lithium-Ion
Output Voltage 7.0 VDC
Dimensions (W x H x D) 1.5 x 2.2 x 0.9" / 3.8 x 5.7 x 2.2 cm
Weight 3.1 oz / 88 g

Nikon D5500 14a battery
7.2V
1230 mAh (14 -non-A is 1030mAh)
8.9 Wh
2.1 x 1.5 x 0.6 inches
0.1 pounds / 1.6 oz

 

[Solarflare]

Meh.

It was a horrible translation of a japanese posting that had no merit to it either.

Really speculation based on badly translated speculation.

So the source of these rumors is simply that some people are trying hard to prove something thats not happening.

 

[Overread]

Because most internet news-websites/blogs work by reporting on things that sound interesting to generate hits. Most just want hits because that turns into advertising revenue from clicks on their site.

So a lot of sites exist purely to generate "rumours".
They don't have to show sources; be accountable or anything - heck some of the worst just repeat whatever they find in forums that looks interesting.


Now I'm not saying that all news sites are like this; but many are.

 

[Solarflare]

Nikon DOES need to bring out a Mirrorless camera that is competitive.

I thought so too for the longest time. But frankly recently the whole mirrorless deal looks more like a fashion trend than anything else to me.

Theres two aspects I always thought need to be realized before mirrorless would be a real advantage:

- The autofocus problem. How to autofocus as well as a DSLR if you only have the sensor itself. Now that problem can basically been seen as solved now, even if in extremely low light DSLRs still seem to have an edge. Its nice though that mirrorless always allow you to put the focus point anywhere in the image.

- The steep angle on incidence problem. I always thought solving this would give mirrorless cameras an edge with wide angle lenses. This problem however was never addressed by anyone but Leica. And Leica doesnt capitalize on their knowhow, either. Thus mirrorless doesnt actually have much of an advantage with wide angle lenses; they too have to make them retrofocus, just like with SLRs, because the sensor cant handle anything else.

On top of that, I learned that bright wide angle lenses have to be made retrofocus anyway. They are just geometrically not possible otherwise. Near symmetrical Biogon type designs (as opposed to Distagon/retrofocus) only can give you so much maximum aperture, which the wider they get decreases quite rapidly.

- Additionally, EVF has one problem that cannot be removed: continued use of current. And quite a lot of current, too. This generally puts heat stress on the sensor, potentially decreasing image quality especially for longer exposures, and it limits the number of shots you can get from one battery. This is especially bad if the photographer looks through the viewfinder for extended times, such as with wildlife.

- Finally, switching to a mirrorless mount is impossible for Nikon without dropping one of the most important advantages they have - the superior glas in a mount thats in principle (with the so-called AI conversion) backward compatible to the 1950s.

Thus, overall I would prefer if Nikon didnt. They most likely will, though. If it makes sense or not - the market dictates it.

SONY is definitely the leader in mirrorless cameras and neither Nikon nor Canon competes well against them.

Really its not much of a stretch to compare the statement "being leader in mirrorless cameras" with a statement like "leader in red colored cars". Your car color doesnt matter if you want to get from A to B, and mirrorless or SLR doesnt matter to the final image either.

Also no, I dont think Sony does the best mirrorless cameras. Quite frankly I would put them on one of the last spots for cameras. They think if a camera has a great looking spec sheet, their work is done. Correspondingly, they have poor service, their lens selection is disappointing, and they also put too little value in ergonomics.

I think if it bugs you so much (based on all of your other postings about this) you should just sell out of Nikon and get Sony or Fuji. Then you won't have to worry about it so much and you can shoot more.

Now that part of your posting I agree with.

On the positive side, if Nikon were to disappear tomorrow (very, very unlikely) your gear would continue to work as it always has.

Well, hardware usually works, yes - but theres no guarantee for that.

But if I have any trouble, with Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm or any other good company I can get service.

With a company thats gone, I would have to rely on the used market instead. Which is a limited resource that vanishes over time.

 

[table1349]

Are DLSRs dead ??
Can you identify the make and model of cameras here ?
View attachment 141232

1 little, 2 little, 3 little Canons. 4 little, 5 little, 6 little, Canons. 7 little, 8 little, 9, little Canons. Oops, who let the Nikon in?

 

[chuasam]

Did you know that the Swedish Volvo cars is a Chinese company?

Yes.
Did you know that Hasselblad is owned by DJI (another Chinese Company)
The Japanese government wanted Fuji to bail Nikon out to avoid being taken over by a Chinese company as a point of national pride.

 

[pixmedic]

Did you know that the Swedish Volvo cars is a Chinese company?

Yes.
Did you know that Hasselblad is owned by DJI (another Chinese Company)
The Japanese government wanted Fuji to bail Nikon out to avoid being taken over by a Chinese company as a point of national pride.

maybe this is why Nikon isnt really doing much in the mirrorless market.
what if Fuji buys into nikon and they basically merge. Fukon? Fujikon? Nikuji?
the conglomorate would already have a mirrorless setup in the fuji camp, and the dslr section covered with Nikon.
could be quite the power couple.

 

[Derrel]

Mirrorless and the positives and negatives of it--well-discussed by solarflare above.

 

[astroNikon]

Did you know that the Swedish Volvo cars is a Chinese company?

Yes.
Did you know that Hasselblad is owned by DJI (another Chinese Company)
The Japanese government wanted Fuji to bail Nikon out to avoid being taken over by a Chinese company as a point of national pride.

Yes, I'm well aware of Hasselblad being owned by DJI ==> Hassleblad bought by Chinese drone mfr

A Chinese company may well buy Nikon for the name. But I doubt they would want to buy the entire structure. They would get all the manufacturing plants, employees, etc. For a Chinese company that would want to pull all production into china that is a waste of investment money (not that companies waste money buying other companies). They would get into DSLRs and without knowing the exact details of what Mirrorless are in the pipeline, most would argue buying a DSLR company would be a decreasing investment.

Plus, what about the other sectors that they are in. Nikon would not want to sell the lithography business to Chinese. If DJI threw away the contracts with SONY that could be devastating. Plus the medical, etc businesses that they serve. And keep in mind, the Japanese gov't and investors would still have to approve any such purchase.

And for those out of the loop, SONY recently released the a9, which by specs and all the reviews I've seen/read puts them at the top of the Mirrorless heap. SONY has an advantage of course, they make most of the sensor chips out there. FujiFilm makes their own and they have APS-C and a Medium format camera too.

 

[fmw]

Nikon DOES need to bring out a Mirrorless camera that is competitive.

I thought so too for the longest time. But frankly recently the whole mirrorless deal looks more like a fashion trend than anything else to me.

Theres two aspects I always thought need to be realized before mirrorless would be a real advantage:

- The autofocus problem. How to autofocus as well as a DSLR if you only have the sensor itself. Now that problem can basically been seen as solved now, even if in extremely low light DSLRs still seem to have an edge. Its nice though that mirrorless always allow you to put the focus point anywhere in the image.

- The steep angle on incidence problem. I always thought solving this would give mirrorless cameras an edge with wide angle lenses. This problem however was never addressed by anyone but Leica. And Leica doesnt capitalize on their knowhow, either. Thus mirrorless doesnt actually have much of an advantage with wide angle lenses; they too have to make them retrofocus, just like with SLRs, because the sensor cant handle anything else.

Leica isn't the only company with a pure wide angle lens.

You missed the major advantage of the mirrorless which is smaller size and weight. It is exactly why I moved to mirrorless. I don't care whether a mirrorless focuses as fast as a DSLR or not. I have yet to encounter a situation where it mattered. I may but it won't be often. Autofocus times are now less that 1/10 second on some modern mirrorless. I think this is a complaint that has expired.

Using retrofocus lenses isn't a disadvantage because they are also used on DSLR's.

- Additionally, EVF has one problem that cannot be removed: continued use of current. And quite a lot of current, too. This generally puts heat stress on the sensor, potentially decreasing image quality especially for longer exposures, and it limits the number of shots you can get from one battery. This is especially bad if the photographer looks through the viewfinder for extended times, such as with wildlife.

My mirrorless cameras don't turn on the EVF until I put my eye up to it.

- Finally, switching to a mirrorless mount is impossible for Nikon without dropping one of the most important advantages they have - the superior glas in a mount thats in principle (with the so-called AI conversion) backward compatible to the 1950s.

They have already done that with the Nikon 1 lenses.

Thus, overall I would prefer if Nikon didnt. They most likely will, though. If it makes sense or not - the market dictates it.

Nothing wrong with disliking mirrorless cameras. People should use what they like.

 

[BananaRepublic]

The people who are employed to write and report rumours are called hacks who have columns or blogs or some space to fill in return for money.

 

[table1349]

Seriously, just this week there was a rumor that Fuji is buying Nikon, or "helping" Nikon. It seems like every other month there is some sort of rumor about Nikon closing its doors, selling, merging, etc.

Why is that?

Someone told me it's because Nikon sits in the #2 spot and Canon is in the #1 spot and they want Nikon to fail and shut down. Wouldn't Canon become a monopoly in the DSLR market if Nikon would cease operations?

I mean should we be worried? Or is just flat out total BS that people are spreading or lost in translations that people are taking way out of context in hopes it would somehow harm Nikon?

It's a total soap opera![/QUOTE

People are employed to write and report rumours are hacks who have columns or blogs or some space to fill in return for money

Oh, you mean Forum Members.

 

[astroNikon]

- Finally, switching to a mirrorless mount is impossible for Nikon without dropping one of the most important advantages they have - the superior glas in a mount thats in principle (with the so-called AI conversion) backward compatible to the 1950s.

They have already done that with the Nikon 1 lenses.

You forgot to add that the "absolute" statement is incorrect. Not all older Nikon lenses are great on a modern high megapixel sensor.
Other companies, such as Canon, got to the point where they changed the mount of their main cameras. Switching mounts is important for making jumps in technology. Nikon has been hesitant just like Microsoft keeps some backwards compatibility compared to Apple who doesn't care.

 

[Solarflare]

You missed the major advantage of the mirrorless which is smaller size and weight.

I didnt miss it - that part is just complete bullocks. The laws of optics dont care at all if you have a mirror box or not. The only place at which you can gain in size and weight in this respect is with wide angle lenses. Depending upon how well your sensor can handle steep angles of incidence.

Otherwise mirrorless is smaller simply because the sensors are often smaller. And if they arent, as with the Sony FE cameras, you just have a poorly balanced system with little grip, and EVERY lens you have has to be bigger than their DSLR counterpart to compensate for the missing mirror box. Meaning your camera weights the same and your lens bag just got heavier.

The other exception is Leica M because for that you only get prime lenses with manual focus - which can be made really small. Even more so because Leica, as said before, can handle light at steep angles pretty well.

Using retrofocus lenses isn't a disadvantage because they are also used on DSLR's.

I didnt said retrofocus lenses are a disadvatage to mirrorless, I said mirrorless will have to use retrofocus wide angle lenses as well, because symmetric wide angle lenses quickly run out of possible maximum aperture and then you have to go for retrofocus anyway.

Nothing wrong with disliking mirrorless cameras.

I never said anywhere I wouldnt like mirrorless ? I thought for a long time it will be the future. Well, I still think it will become really successful, very likely dominant, possibly even killing of SLRs in the end. But I dont think it will be for the reasons people think it will.

I like the Fujifilm X and G systems because they are really well done, with good glas, and in 5-10 years the X system will very likely be as good as DSLRs in respect to lens choices (in fact it might be superior overall in that category, the average lens quality for Fujifilm X is very good), flash support, and overall performance - minus the fact it obviously will still only be APS-C.

And the Fujifilm G system already looks extremely competitive right now in pricing, useability and performance to all other digital format systems.

Personally I think all Nikon has to do is allow EVF during lifeview, with all the possible features, and to allow to permanently lock the mirror up, which would be a requirement for certain wide angle lenses - then you can haven have 100% of the advantage of mirrorless on a DSLR but still keep the OVF for when you need its advantages.