How did Nikon take a back seat to Canon?

It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.
It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.
-Rich

RichA writes:

It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.

How did it happen?

I'm not an expert in the field, but Canon's been doing digital imaging
with CMOS imagers quite a long time before digital cameras caught on.

Does Nikon even have a line of pro video cameras? High speed copiers?

I suspect the answer to question question lies in the the intellectual
capital in those product lines which positioned Canon very well for
this shift in technologies.

But this should be an interesting thread.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/

"RichA" wrote ...

No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.

---------------------------

I agree. It also seems clear Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, and all the others
haven't recovered that fumble.

Rob

It's pure marketing, only Canon owners feel they have to upgrade their dSLR
cameras every 9 months. It's all hype ooooooo the XT has 8 megapixels, big
deal that's not really all that big a jump from 6.3 mp. Mind you you'll
never have to clean dust off of a Canon sensor, as the camera will be
discontinued by then.

HYPE!!!!!

This is one of those threads where Nikon people are going to support Nikon
and Canon people are going to support Canon. I don't think Nikon has
dropped the ball, but it depends on how you look at it, and it's all very
subjective. Each company obviously has a plan and a niche. I still use old
Nikon F's that dates back to the late 60's for film work -- and the cameras
work perfectly. To me, that says a lot about a company, so I will continue
to stand by Nikon, not to mention the fact that I can use those older lenses
on my new D70. That means a lot to me as a consumer. I don't put down
Canon cameras, and feel they have a good product and reputation. I just
don't think their cameras are "that" much better than Nikon's, assuming they
are better.


"RichA" wrote in message
...
It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.
It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.
-Rich

RichA wrote:
It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.

I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.

- Siddhartha

"RichA" wrote in message
...
It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.
It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.
-Rich

You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
marketing hook line and sinker.
The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon releases
more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are there fewer
shooters with more cameras......?
I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's guess....
I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
too.
Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.

RichA wrote:

It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level, Nikon DSLRs
lag behind Canons.

I'm probably being trolled here, but why do you believe this?

Andrew.

.. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.

Don't you just love it when Like for Like is compared

The D100 should be compared to Canons D60.

The D60 was replaced very quickly because of its faults.

The D100 has never been replaced and it still sells well.

Paul, a Canon user

"Nicholas Childs" wrote in message
...

"RichA" wrote in message
...
It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.
It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.
-Rich

You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
marketing hook line and sinker.
The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon
releases more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are
there fewer shooters with more cameras......?
I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's
guess....
I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
too.
Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.

And of course don't forget that 72% of statistics are made up.