Nikon slipping behind....

Well, I'm not sure I want to start yet another brand thread, but thought I'd
share the following:

Walked into the local camera shop today. The counterman silently shoves
this piece of paper down the counter to me. It's printed on both sides;
one side is the financial statement for the last year/quarter for Nikon,
and the other side the same for Canon. Bottom line: Nikon - ; Canon +.

He said that he's been following this for a while, and observed that Nikon
has quietly been bleeding red ink for some time now. Then he opined that
Nikon needs a "white knight", and mentioned Fuji as a good match. The next
thought for both of us was: would that be Fujikon, or Niji? We both
blurted this at the same moment, and cracked up laughing.... <grin>

The conclusion that seems easy to draw is that Nikon's focus has been
building quality cameras and lenses, such that they can stand up to
professional use. And they seem to have done this without due thought to
future technological advances, else they'd have been much more aggressive
in competing with Canon's technology. From this, I've some thoughts:

One of the primary drivers of product quality for the past couple of decades
has been the advances in material science. Engineers in very many fields
have watched this with glee, correctly anticipating that a hefty amount of
engineering design that wasn't feasible for production would be made so by
the coming availability of suitable materials. It can be observed that
there has been an exceedingly short period of time between breakthrough
advances and the use thereof in marketed product.

The reason for this is that the engineers have long known almost entirely
how to utilize these advances, both in terms of product and manufacturing
process. Thus most firms have been able to move quickly to take advantage
of this prepared ramp-up. I have to believe that this must have been true
of both of these companies. So I have to assume that somehow Canon was
able to win something at Nikon's expense, such that Nikon could not remain
competitive. Wonder what that was?

In any case, I've no brand loyalty here, and would as readily engage in
collecting Nikon F bodies and selected lenses as I would those of other
marques. If I had unlimited discretionary income, that is.... <grin>

Now, lessee... Starting with Nikon, we would acquire all the manual focus
F bodies, each with a complete range of accessories; the complete range of
the S series rangefinders, perhaps doubling up on the SP for a user as
well, and a range of the finest primes. As we will eschew autofocus, we
will also eschew zooms....

And then we can go to the head of the line, and continue with Leica. Not
sure I really want to go that far back, but a pristine 3G with a range of
lenses would be nice. Then we would collect at least one each of the M
series, with attention paid to the magnification factor of the view finder
where relevant...

< walks off mumbling to self....> LOL!!!!

Any thoughts?

Bill Tallman

 

From: "William D. Tallman"

What I've been told by contract pros working for both Nikon and Canon is that
Canon is a much larger, more diversified company, so when one part of the
business sags a bit another division keeps the profits flowing and they are
able to invest more on research than Nikon. Also, this lets them leverage
technology between various divisions better than Nikon.

Dunno how true this is but that's what one hears from professional
photographers.

 

Canon do printers, flat bed scanners, photocopiers whereas nikon only does
the photog stuff.

Consequently canon have had a higher brand profile and advertsing budget.
Seen a nikon advert tv advert lately?

 

Pure horse manure. The stepper division of Nikon has financial
troubles, the camera division is booming. Should I care if Nikon
drops the steppers?

 

In addition. Nikon makes microscopes and other optical medical equipment.
I've seen their name in the vision business along with Hoya, Pentax and
Zeiss. I think they make optical equipment for the electronics industry. I
believe Canon does or did as well.

Canon is also into professional video equipment. I recall having my eye
checked a Canon device, but Nikon seems to have the much larger share of
that business.
John

 

Canon is in so many areas of high tech that they are gaining new
technologies from themselves. Thus they are able to turn a profit faster
when something migrates from their scientific division to the commercial end
of the business. The use of polycarbonates is only part of the story -
although a big part. In one step Canon both improved camera bodies and made
them lighter, and cheaper to manufacture.
I doubt Nikon is going under, and there is already a strong connection
to Fuji. THe two companies are part of the same cartel. I suspect the D70
will improve Nikon's current standings, at least until Canon ups the ante --
which I suspect will be before Photokina.

 

What is pure horse manure? That Nikon is suffering from red ink? I doubt
that the report was manufactured, though it could have been, I suppose.

Their site does state that the stepper division's share of revenues has
dropped from nearly half to less than 30%. Don't know exactly what that
means, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the camera division is booming.
It could only mean that the camera division has taken up the slack,
although the instruments division seems to be holding steady.

However...

<snip>
[Forbes Magazine; Nov 12, 2003]
Nikon Corp down 1.27 percent at 1,480 yen after the camera maker on Tuesday
posted a recurring loss of 515 million yen for the first half of the
business year, hit by a higher yen and sluggish demand for its chip-making
equipment and film cameras.

So your explanation is plausible, but does not invalidate my post. And
besides, I use only the purest aardvark droppings in my work!!

Bill Tallman

 

No, that it's going to influence the photography division.

Have you tried to actually READ the financial report beyond the
general figures? It's quite clear, the stepper division is what's troubling
them, the photography division is enjoying a large increase in sales,
which I predict this year will be a lot larger due to the introduction of
the D70.

Like I said, keep reading...

Pardonnez moi!

 

Nikon also make optical equipment for the land surveying and
construction sectors. Canon don't.

 

Did you go into the shop to look at cameras, or to discuss economics?

People who place priority on quality and ruggedness continue to buy
Nikons. Those who place priority on technology continue to buy Canon.
It has been that way for decades. Nikon doesn't need to "compete with
Canon's technology," because that's not what Nikon customers want (I
certainly don't buy Nikons because I want the latest technology). And
Canon doesn't have to care about ruggedness or quality, because its
customers want mainly to have the latest technology. Both companies
have their respective markets. I see no reason to expect that this will
change in the foreseeable future.

Leica is another point on the spectrum. Canon is at the technology end
of the spectrum, with emphasis on the latest gadgets and advances, which
take priority over build quality and product lifetimes. Nikon is in the
middle, with a much more conservative approach, better build quality,
longer product lifetimes, but a considerable lag in adopting the latest
technologies (when it adopts them at all). Leica is at the furthest
extreme of this conservative trend, with time-proven designs that do not
change for decades, built to last for half a century or more, and almost
no new technology at all, ever (except for optical advances).

Each type of camera has its market. I prefer Nikon and Leica. To me,
Nikon is almost dangerously avant-garde, and Leica is more reassuringly
constant. Canon is not even in the running, as I had my fill of the
perpetual upgrade cycle and cheap bells and whistles in the computer
world, and I don't plan to repeat that experience in the photo world.

The mass and non-professional market tends to be particularly impressed
by bells and whistles, which is why Canon is consistently a winner from
a business standpoint.

 

Nikon is more diversified than it appears, but its other activities tend
to be highly focused on professionals and specialists, too--it doesn't
have too many mass-market consumer activities, unlike Canon.

 

Nikon also is a (very) big player in the market of the machines that
make microchips. (a lithographical/optical process like printing)
That's a really big market with only a few companies. ASML from Holland
the most well-known probably. (but that may be because I'm Dutch... )
In fact, I think there's a patent-war going on at the moment between
ASML and Nikon.

Lourens

 

Nikon's problems with digital camera sales are just the canary. Nokia is
expected to offer a 4-5 meg phone camera with built-in zoom and flash by the
end of 2005. Digital camera sales in Japan are already being hit hard by the
shift to cell phones. It'll only get worse. Nikon,Canon,Pentax etc are all
unlikely to be making consumer cameras five years out.

Nick

 

Nikon reported poor digital sales.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/FB11Dh03.html

Nick

 

Financial statements from large corporations are notorious for being
manipulated to suit some end.

 

But the Bank of Japan (i.e., the Japanese government) will never allow
Nikon to fold. Every company in Japan is allowed huge, low- or
no-interest loans for the protection of the Japanese economy. Exports
are highly rated by the government/banking industry in Japan....to let
one company put another company out of business in Japan is not in the
best interest of Japan. In the U.S. we have 'tariffs' for some
industry protection: in Japan, the strong yen is the protection for
many industries.

Care to see which camera will last longer: a Canon 10D or a Nikon F5.


Which will be obsolete sooner?

= = =

 

William,

In the 80's I was technical leader for a precision optical product and had
some dealings with both Canon and Nikon. Our technical and marketing team
saw a big difference in the mindset of the two. It's Canon's approach to
innovation that is key. As a result of what we saw, I am not surprised to
see Canon moving forward relative to Nikon. Nikon is much more fixed in
their ways and slow to see the value in innovations.

FWIW, I have Nikon gear and am too established to spend the money changing.
So, I am not some Canon owner promoting my own camera choice. My views are,
I think, pretty objective.

Canon has overcome many of the traditional Japanese barriers to change and I
view them as an admirable company. The incorporation of aspheric lens
elements in optical designs, ultra quiet motors for in lens focusing, and
image stabilization are just three examples where Canon beat Nikon to the
market. It has been widely shown that the first innovator to the market
gets the lion's share of the prize. The rewards earned in the marketplace,
the more money is available to fuel the next generation of change. Canon's
approach to innovation also opens it to effectively widen their product
field as they apply the same new ideas to a wider number of payoffs. So, as
long as they keep up the superior innovation, the larger the gap to Nikon,
Minolta etc.

Canon is just plain better at seeing and developing innovations. They were
also more honest in respecting our patents and paying royalties than any
other company.

PSsquare

 

Nikon has to keep the steppers! BTW, what the heck are steppers?

 

"> >>You know, the last time I shot with a financial statement, either + or -, my
pictures came out blurry, or maybe they did not come out at all. If you
shoot financial statements, be sure that the debits are next to the windows
so it may take some repositioning of subjects. I have found that a nice
cash flow analysis added to the financial statement gives you just the right
amount of apparent magnification to shoot wildlife without a converter.

Damn, glad I never shot with an Enron or Worldcom or my pictures would be
totally lost, no one would be ultimately responsible and there would be no
recourse since the owners knew someone in high places. Now that Halliburton
Reflex Digicam is doing great now with a rosy tint to the pictures, a
battery which not only can tolerate overcharging, but loves it, and the
pictures are guaranteed to be good since the possibility of anyone else
developing them or supplying the software has been taken out of the
inefficient bid process for vendors and suppliers. Yep, that Halliburton
Reflex is an up and comer and you should see the advertisement where some
Vice President slips by a smash shot into the corner while Agassi is not
looking and without his Canon.

MG

 

Bob wrote:

Used in the manufacture of semiconductors. Called "steppers" as the
system moves the wafer under the lens and exposes it from a single mask
'stepwise' to make copies of the exposure over the surface of the wafer.
(eg, an 8 inch wafer will yield hundreds of semiconductor 'chips')

Same as the printing term "step and repeat"

Cheers,
Alan