Is Nikon being mismanaged?

[arthurking83]

I'm just curious as to what other people seem to think of Nikon as a company .. ie. the implied level of care for what the customer wants/needs, or their levels of service, product placement ... etc.

Reason for the thread title, is due to a curiosity for CaptureNX2, which Nikon apparently no longer support, nor update now that they have a full release version of CaptureNX-D.

This isn't a place to discuss whether the software is good or bad for your application, there will never be agreement on this as we all want different things in software.
But this is more about how people, or more specifically ... us dedicated Nikon centric types, view the company's recent performances.

I personally have no problem with the products Nikon have on offer at the moment.
It does seem a bit strange that they haven't replaced the D300s with an equivalent model yet(after 6 years with the same camera!)
But of their other products, I don't seem to have the same level of anxiety that all other Nikon owners seem to feel.(that comment is heavily tongue in cheek too tho).
It seems everywhere you look on the internet, on topics of Nikon related chat, 'everyone' seem to have this opinion that Nikon are not producing the products that everyone wants(or needs).

There is way too much chatter on many other fora that Nikon are falling behind all other manufacturers due to their lack of a proper mirrorless camera, or the lack of a D700 replacement and or whatever.
My personal take on this is that it's a load of garbage .. and I think Nikon are at least clever enough to know when to release the right camera type at the right moment .. for them! .. ie. not for us.
Most of the comments of this type will be from disgruntled (former?) owners that probably don't really know what they want anyhow .. or just want something different, no matter what is currently on offer.
I'm yet to read any posts that reflect this attitude on AP tho .. this is really only on other fora that I generally browse through on occasion.

My main beef with Nikon is centred mainly around their software strategy.
They gave us(Nikon software devotees) something to play with and like for it's simplicity, then took it away, without any subsequent management system.
ie. no simple and easy manner to access the files, we'd already created, into the future. Converting them to a non raw format is not a solution, it's more of a problem than anything else.
And with no direct revelation on what their overall vision for the future of their software will be, we're left in the lurch(based on the current interoperability of Nikon's software).

What got me to start this thread tho is another curiosity on Nikon's current software management, or plan, or strategy.. etc.
They said with the release of CNX-D, that once it goes into release status, CaptureNX2 will no longer be supported.
That's fair enough, and hopefully they will replace it with a proper version of CNX-D one day into the future.
What's surprising, amazing, and curious .... deceptive even!! .. is that they still have it for sale on their website.

There is no mention that it's no longer going to be supported, or updated, and as yet have posted any relevant info pointing to this fact on the CaptureNX2 micro site, nor any longer on the CNX-D site.
(it only said so on the CNX-D beta site).

To my mind this is actually deceptive, in that they are willingly selling a product that is already in a 'discontinued' status.
What of their support level for CNX2? ... what if I buy a copy now, and in a few days have issues with it on my newly built PC? What if there's a bug they can only fix with an update(which they've already said they won't do)?
What if I bought a D810 and want to open my raw files with CNX2, thinking that it's a Nikon, through Nikon software .. etc. I'd be mightily pissed off, if I were a total newbie to Nikon .. not having been explained to me that their current flagship software is in a theoretically discontinued status.
I can understand that it could take a little while to update the website pages and systems and whatnot. It's now getting close to a full month tho .. so really no excuses here.

In terms of management, it is looking like Nikon is totally lost. It's been far too long now for any excuses of bad managers that have been severely punished(D800/D600 fiascos) and that new management are at the helm but that the flow on effects need some time to take effect.
The camera line seems ok to me, if Nikon seem to think that this is what customers are buying .. then all well and good.
I'm not a firm believer in Thom's (http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/) take on Nikon's woes(ie that they need a lot more small compact Dx primes to come good! :confused013)
I like Thom, and many times he seems to make sense with what he writes(especially on the topic of smarter cameras ... programmable/connectable/more usable/etc), but I don't think Nikon's primary target is the high end enthusiast amateur.
You would expect that the largest market would be the lower end, very consumer oriented crowd(you know the 18-xxx type lens owners). Any guesses as to why they keep on iterating new versions of 18-xxx kit type lenses!
Sorry Thom, but small Dx only primes (I think) will be more of a limitation/handicap on resources than the panacea for any woes Nikon may be going through.
Nup! more small lightweight primes for Fx is probably a better long term strategy for Nikon to look into.
135 format digital cameras have come down in price to sane levels(thanks in no part to Sony! :th3:), and for proper cameras to compete against the onslaught of the phonecam they need real advantages.

Word has it on Nikonrumors that Nikon have a new Fx camera in the pipeline for this September(Photokina).
You'd think that coming from Nikonrumors it would be more of a certainty to be real .. Nikon's current fixation for Fx cameras make this doubly so too.
On a personal level, I don't care for it either way. In fact as it currently stands, I'm not particularly interested in any new cameras(yet) although I'd love the electronic first curtain of the D810 in some situations .. not enough tho to warrant the update from a D800E.
My main concern is software. Until more is known about where CNX-D is going(to begin with) or they work with other software vendors to allow cooperation with CaptureNX2 edited images .. what I'm doing now is my future plan.
Tried various software again .. LR5 .. yuk! .. C1Pro .. more yuk!
16bit D800 TIFF files for long term storage :eek: ... daftness on a monumental scale!

Anyhow, curious as to what other people think of Nikon's current direction(s) too.
Good? bad? ugly? .. don't care?

[I @ M]

Funny you should mention this ------ :D

I was having similar thoughts the other day and specifically along the software side of things which will be confirmed in a phone call ( hopefully Monday ) by Nikon Aus. There is a bit of generalisation involved but under Aus consumer protection just about anything sold from a $50.00 printer to a $500,000.00 car must have support in the way of service and parts for a period of 10 years from the time of sale ( not release date ) and I believe that there are people looking into whether that extends to a software product as well.

I too do not like the way that Nikon are retailing an effectively discontinued product but then again the same can be said of many products "dumped" on the Australian market which are the end of life items that have already been replaced in overseas markets.

Much can be said ( and already is ) by the usual internet motor mouths who probably can't afford, do not know how to use or just like to see their words in print about the lack of xxx camera body or xxx -xxx F/.095 lens and in all seriousness those cretins are about as useful as dust bunnies at F1/16 when it comes to determining which products Nikon should release next.

They are the ones bemoaning that there has never been a successor to the D700 ferchrisakes or that the D300/s suddenly stopped being a good camera because there isn't a D400 yet.

Nikon as a company have made some bad decisions I feel in the way they have handled addressing product quality aberrations ( magnified by 100x if you listen to the nob heads on the net ) and overall they are displaying an elevated level of consumer friendliness apathy to me still.

No, I don't like the way they are handling things in general but at the moment I see them as still a long way behind other manufacturers in many fields, not just cameras and software, in their poor dealing with consumers.

God help em it they descend to the depths of Adobe or Volkswagen -----

[Cage]

I registered my new D800 with Nikon Life about three months ago. Still no confirmation.

Three weeks ago I inquired about a spare part. Also no reply.

From personal experience, in Nikon speak, 'customer service' is an oxymoron.

[bitsnpieces]

I registered my new D800 with Nikon Life about three months ago. Still no confirmation.

Three weeks ago I inquired about a spare part. Also no reply.

From personal experience, in Nikon speak, 'customer service' is an oxymoron.

Sony bought out Nikon? :lol: Then again, after reading the above, I wonder who started this trend?

I feel like one reason why companies do this is because they want to make a push on the consumers to go into the next level, believe the past is nice, but the future is the way to go, regardless of those who are unable to or not ready to, they just want to start making the push. And then everything else from plans, future goals, etc, stem from this.

But then again, Sony and Nikon are two different companies - yet at the same time, in general, the world of business can be fairly similar across the board.

This is just my 2 cents from Sony's PS2 to PS3, and now PS3 to PS4 - no backward compatibility; and what I said above is the reason why - they believe out with the old, in with the new, and the new is so worth it, you won't remember the old.

I wouldn't be surprised that Nikon is starting to head in that path (in relation to their cameras) as a way of saving resources from the old products and support, to focus on the new (which means less man power needed, less workers required, more money for them).
Again, yes, there are those who may still want the old stuff, or only need that stuff, but at the end of the day, it's all about pushing out their new products, so they want that to be the focus in the end.

[arthurking83]

.......

This is just my 2 cents from Sony's PS2 to PS3, and now PS3 to PS4 - no backward compatibility; and what I said above is the reason why - they believe out with the old, in with the new, and the new is so worth it, you won't remember the old.

.....

Nikon's only legacy over the past 50 years is that the vast majority of their lenses are compatible with the vast majority of their cameras, there are a few exceptions here and there but this is the primary reason for their existence.

Fooling around with this formula in the photography world is a recipe for disaster for long term strategy.
The lack of backward compatibility can be a trigger for collapse.
(with games it's different because the latest games are what makes the #1 idol in this genre so popular!!)

With photography, the popular .... (or iconic, or idolised or whatever) person became popular due to their portfolio. A term which implies a collection of images stored by some means.
If this is electronically stored, then access to this store should be assured and uninterrupted with any changes to the application that created the portfolio.

While the new software from Nikon can see the images as they have been edited by the old software ... you can no longer do anything with those already edited images, other than to edit them all over again!
You don't lose access to your images per se, you lose access to the work you have put into them.
What's more annoying is that with the already free software available from Nikon, all edits are carried over to the new software .. but this is both meaningless and not worthy of claiming(as it's so basic in it's effect).

What is really ironic about this mess is that you can get free software easily off the net somewhere that allows you to 'convert' the (old software)edited raw file into at least a jpg file(which is better than nothing at all!!
Which begs the question, if a non interested thirdparty software author can do this so easily and cheaply and freely .. why can't Nikon! :rolleyes:

This is what I mean about management incompetence from Nikon. It's not just the fact they have totally destroyed what little faith remained in them on the software front .. they don't even have the capacity to seek out alternatives to minimise or eliminate the negative impact management decisions are having the company reputation.

In the old days, Nikon had their original raw editing software (Nikon Capture), then about 2006 they changed this to the new software(CaptureNX) which evolved into CaptureNX2.
Throughout this evolution, backward compatibility was assured. If you edited your raw file 15 years ago with Nikon Capture, you could open it faithfully in CaptureNX and subsequently in CaptureNX2 and you could just convert it again to a standard format(ie. jpg or tiff) for viewing printing sharing etc).
This is what they killed off now.

But like I said, they explicitly stated that once the new software went 'release' (ie non beta) they would stop both development and support for the older software(which is fair enough) .. and yet they still have the temerity to continue selling the old non supported software!

In less than 2 years, a new Windows OS will be revealed to the world(apparently, beta release will be early next year).
Nikon's stance re CNX2 means that it won't be supported on the next Windows release(I have no idea on what that means for Apple systems .. if anyone uses it on that stuff).

The old management's style was to keep on selling old stuff even tho they know it can't compete against the latest stuff from other vendors.
ie. you can still officially purchase a D5100 or D3100, even tho they're both dinosaur products in real terms.
Massive stuff up on Nikon's part there .. quite simply, bad management. These are 2010 model cameras at best, and in terms of features probably more like 100 years old compared to other currently available products from other brands!
These should have been sold off for $99 years before the current D3300/5300's came to light.

[swifty]

At the risk of stereotyping, I was going to give an anecdote about a recent frustrating experience dealing with a Japanese manufacturer of professional equipment I use at my workplace. But I think I'll refrain because I think it can be difficult to understand how some Japanese company hierarchies work without cultural insights.
I'm lucky I don't deal with Nikon's software side of things but I'm afraid you're just going to get what Nikon gives you.
Is it a mismanagement issue? Probably, if you judge it from a western perspective but certainly cultural differences exists in the way things are handled and it just might not be to y/our liking.
Look at the D600 debacle for instance.

[arthurking83]

I don't think the issue(of mismanagement) is all to do with cultural anomalies.
Nik software is an example of this.
Back then, Nikon had the foresight to overlook Japanese developers in preference to a company such as Nik.
Nik is a European company(founded in Germany) that produced niche products. (nowadays it may work and feel mainstream, but back then it was unique!)

Enter CaptureNX! A ripper way to edit your images with the U-Point tools. No matter how you look at it, editing images in a localised manner doesn't get any easier than that.
In those days Nikon took a punt, produced some fine software for us Nikon raw file users, and in the end they won.
Then a debacle happened.
Of course we don't know the full story of what happened, but why Nikon only became a minority shareholder is beyond belief.
In that sense, Nikon's overall strategy can only be described as idiotic and backward thinking.
Software in a digital world is everything!(as proven by all manner of software vendors .. including those annoying Instagram like apps!)

Even when Nikon were managing themselves in a coherent manner, they still manage to blunder it up completely .. enter Google and the rest is history.

Nikon(and not just Nikon, but all camera makers) still don't realise where future income growth really lies! .. SOFTWARE!(see Adobe's practises to confirm that).

It's really not hard to figure it out.
Nikon should have spent the $2billion it has in cash reserves to purchase Adobe(plain and simple).
Work with them to get the best quality images from their raw(NEF) files, that could potentially be miles ahead of any other camera!
People then harp on about how much better their Nikon files look with Adobe software compared to their Canon/Sony/Fuji/etc files .. and these people slowly migrate towards Nikon cameras, just for that extra bit of uberness(is that even a word?) that they all seem to think they need.

Canon is all about hardware!
They make all manner of hardware products. Shoot with a Canon .. print with a Canon .. send it by fax to another Canon fax printer copier .. etc.
Nikon is just a camera company. They're talking about moving into medical products .. already dominated by Olympus and others. While this branching off can have benefits in optical terms(ie. better lenses) .. it doesn't really help the camera(body) business.

As for my software hopes .. overall it doesn't really matter all that much.
My trial of Lr 5 runs out soon as well as CaptureOne. They work reasonably well, and I guess I could use either one .. I just have to get used to the look of the images I guess.

The other night, i was playing with them all again on a particular image .. comparing the final converted image of each editor.
CNX-D actually can do ok in terms of creating a final output ... the issue is the operation of the software during this time.
It's so full of bugs (such as can't remember any of my edits now!!) and so slow(took over 5mins to render a sharp image from full view to 100% view to look at any quality differences in an image).

I reckon if they open up the NEF format to all and sundry, which allows other software to correctly render Picture Controls in these other programs, I know I(at least) would have less of a hard time switching software.
The issue isn't really about what I want from software anyhow .. these are just some examples.
The issue is, that years ago Nikon were on a winning path.
While many complained that the software was slow or clunky, I think these complaints are at the user's end .. not just the software(ie. some configuration problem).
Only when my entire PC ruins slowly, as in it's now bloated with a lot of crap I've loaded/uninstalled etc .. does NX2 now run slowly for me .. but everything runs slower than it used too.
On my fresh or near fresh PC installation, I've never seen any slowness from NX2.
Overall tho the idea of, and usage of NX and NX2 were sound. They eventually had Nik create some Color Efex plugin too. Again, this appeared that there was some form of coherent approach to managing this other side of the business.

Then bang! .. back into the dark ages on the software front for Nikon. This is especially worrisome considering that software is what digital imaging is all about!

And remember that the software issue isn't simply about the new software being of a poor standard. You'd expect that with a few tweaks and fiddles with bugs and features at some point it may actually work ok.
The big problem is access to your collection of already edited images.
No other software can render the raw files based on CNX2 edits. Just like no other software can render Lr5 or C1 raw edits.
So if C1 or Adobe just decided to cease support and updates of their respective software, even tho you still have the raw file, the edits will be gone once the software is no longer usable.
Apple Aperture users face similar tribulations .. although I read that Adobe is working on a migration tool. They may do well to make one for ex CNX2 users too! ;)
(I did write that there is a simple workaround to generate a jpg file from a CNX2 edited raw file .. but this is not ideal .. just a workaround).

IF(big if!) Nikon does get back into the software arena with an OK product, which is doubtful, the problem is that the damage is almost certainly done already.
I'd expect that many others have already moved on to Lr/C1/etc .. and no matter what else Nikon does, the ill will they've generated with this backward step to NX-D won't be forgotten for a long time.
Any future plan for other software will need to be announced now!

The other question is, are these same managers also running the camera body business too? .. and what damages are they planning on for that division! :D
D800 .. D600 .. and now software. Nikon don't seem to understand the general concern they're creating.

Anyhow, like you said in your backup thread Swifty .. they are afterall only images, so it not a life and death situation for many of us.(it may be for Nikon tho, if they keep up the good work! :p)

[swifty]

I don't disagree with what you're saying AK.
Actually my only contribution was to say that feedback from the end-user is stubbornly ineffectively communicated to the powers that be and specifically in my case this has to do with the hierarchical (possibly cultural) structure of one Japanese company I had to deal with. Not saying other Japanese companies are like this, just my limited experience.

[Tannin]

Interesting thread. From this Canon user's perspective, Nikon get high marks for their product planning and development. Nikon has been much better at releasing new, fit-for-purpose bodies over the last five years or so, and has comprehensively addressed its lens range problems with a series of (to the best of my knowledge) excellent and much-needed products. (Nikon users, you may laugh to read that, but whatever your complaints about Nikon's recent product releases, they have certainly been better planned and better targeted to what photographers actually want than Canon's.)

Nikon's great weak point has always been attitudinal, not technical. All large companies grow arrogant and egotistical and lose grass roots understanding of basics like respect for customers, that's a given, but Nikon has traditionally been much worse in this regard; much more prone to present you, the user and customer, with a take-it-or-leave-it decision, often an unreasonable one. In Nikon's eyes, they are doing you a favour by letting you buy your way into grace .. er ... I mean into Nikon ownership. Whenever a company gets like that, sooner or later, it leads to tears and, eventually, commercial losses, though sometimes it takes a long time. This attitude thing, to my way of thinking, is the key differentiator between Nikon and Canon these days. (Canon attitude ain't perfect, but they really do try hard to get it right, and quite often succeed.)

On the other hand, Nikon's product development people keep putting runs on the board while Canon's lot seem to have comprehensively lost their way. (Or all been re-deployed over to the movie camera department.) We are seeing a series of quite brilliant new Canon lenses - and most of them well thought out, not just technically impressive - but the bodies are going nowhere. There is, apparently, a new 7D replacement due this year, and possibly another major new one as well. These will be, to my mind, crucial. We haven't seen a really good new Canon body that advanced the art enough to be worth mentioning since the 5D III, which is quite old now. Contrast with Nikonland where the lineup is impressive right across the board and good new products seem to happen regularly.

[arthurking83]

..... Nikon get high marks for their product planning and development. ......

I know I type a lot, so it may have been missed, but in terms of products, the camera body lineup can't really be flawed!
As digital SLR's go, you get a pretty good range to choose from now.

The only concern is that in this lineup, there are still 3 D3xxx models(which are each a generation ahead of each other .. and hence fighting for the same market space.
Same with the D5xxx series .. three of them still current in the lineup .. just makes for a confusing product selection option.

The problem isn't just that the product range is oversaturated in this strange manner .. it's also that they're too close to each other in terms of price(I think separated by <$200 or so in USD terms).

It probably looks good in consumer offering viewpoint .. that they have a camera for almost every price point, but it also makes it more confusing, with the possibility of the lower priced product stealing sales from the newer slightly higher priced product. It surely can't cost more to manufacture the newer product, and if so be more than only a few dollars for a new widget or something.
You'd expect that profit for the company will suffer .. etc, etc. (as it surely has going by their current financial figures).

Something that I reckon would spark some interest in the DSLR market(to a limited degree tho) a really cheap 135 format camera.
Not the Df. this is a limited camera form. it would really only appeal to enthusiasts with clouded eyes .. once they have them that's it .. they most likely won't every want or need to change.
But an EM equivalent!
Now that the 135 format sensor matured, produced in the millions of units thanks to various models using it .. stuff it into a D5xxx or D3xxx body, limited uber functions that not everybody has to have. Small lightweight(which seems to be a preoccupation) .. use whatever viewfinder system that makes excited doesn't really matter .. get more folks interested in cheap full frame lenses .. etc.


Also, a strange thought process that Nikon seem to have an affliction with.
Lenses!
I can imagine a 300mm f/4 with a good stabilisation system would sell quite well(I know I'd be seriously interested) .. but they deem it a higher priority to update an already updated lens in the 400/2.8 that costs well over $10K(I think 12 or something similarly unobtainable).

Sales of the AF-S 300/4 appear to be in the order of about 49-50K units since 2000(there have been two variants and the earlier one sold fewer units than the latter model).

of the historical records I could find, the earlier AF-S version of the 400/2.8 it appears that about 4000 units were sold in a 6 year period
and that with the VR update they seem to have sold(or at least produced) nearly 7000 more in the past 7 years.
Total production/sales of 400/2.8's since '98 have been in the order of 11K.(safe to call it 10K in the same period as the AF-S 300/4)

New fluorite version of this lens was only released this year .. so no production/sales data is available(unless someone has some).

I can't imagine that they're profit on the 400/2.8 is 10x that of the 300/4.
It's obvious to see that the VR update to the 400/2.8 nearly doubled it's 'need' factor .. and as a fantastic feature is bound to do.
Imagine the production figures a reasonably priced full featured 300/4 VRIII lens would give them .. especially at a time when camera sales have dipped to such depths!

Other lenses that could do with an update are the 105 and 135 portrait lenes. They still appear to work well with current cameras, but are old tech, and sound a bit dated.
Long micro lens(or macro if you prefer). While many folks like their 105VR .. I'm not totally enthralled by it. Sigma's totally kill it for IQ, Tamron's beat it for value for money .. they need a new micro.

A couple of cheaper Fx kit lenses could help them spark a revival of fortunes. They went 18-xxx mm kit lenses crazy in the last few years .. producing every 5mm incremental extension known to mankind at the tele end of the lens. I can't imagine that reaped them lots of profits!

As for whether Canon or Nikon produces the right selection of camera bodies at any given moment, is one of those balancing thingamybob things that tip with the slightest quiver of a vibration to the other side.
I'm sure Canon will have a more appropriate selection of variance to their lineup in the coming year or two. It'll have more Megapixels on one hand, and then more high ISO on the other.

I can't imagine that the increasing sales figures of mirrorless cameras is a major cause of this indecisiveness on the part of the manufacturers.
Do they go one way, or do they stay the course?
Mirrorless sales figures seem to be increasing by about 10% per annum.
Even tho DSLR production figures are dropping, the base unit figures are still in the order of 4-5x greater for DSLR units .. so there's still a good market to concentrate on in DSLR in pure numerical terms.