If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
They were warned quite a few times that dumping on their long term users
was a BAD idea... https://www.dpreview.com/news/472631...he-end-of-2017 Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
In article , Noons
wrote: They were warned quite a few times that dumping on their long term users was a BAD idea... https://www.dpreview.com/news/472631...l-sales-operat ions-in-brazil-at-the-end-of-2017 Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... That the sales outlet provide the warranty is common practice in most parts of the world, including the EU and there is really no need to have outlet that cannibalizes on the local distributors market share. Nikon will sell cameras to Brazilian outlets that will provide warranty under Brazilian law, and Nikon will repair them.: "The company's other business segments, including customer service and technical assistance, will continue to operate normally in Brazil." https://nikonrumors.com/2017/11/06/n...-of-sales-oper ations-in-brazil.aspx/ So they close down their "company store"... Big deal! -- teleportation kills |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On Tue, 7 Nov 2017 11:01:57 +1100, Noons
wrote: They were warned quite a few times that dumping on their long term users was a BAD idea... https://www.dpreview.com/news/472631...he-end-of-2017 Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... I don't know the details of what Nikon is doing in Brazil but I expect a major factor in whatever they are doing is the horrendous state of the economy and internal conditions within Brazil. See http://www.heritage.org/index/country/brazil "A political crisis that, along with declines in commodity prices, contributed to a sharp contraction of the economy has undermined consumer and investor confidence. Brazil’s fiscal condition has been severely compromised by a combination of high inflation, political paralysis, and widening budget deficits that have elevated the burden of public debt. The state’s interference in the economy has been heavy. The efficiency and overall quality of government services remain poor despite high government spending. Implementation of any reform program has proven difficult. Barriers to entrepreneurial activity include burdensome taxes, inefficient regulation, poor access to long-term financing, and a rigid labor market. The judicial system remains vulnerable to corruption. .... and look at the economic data for the last few years: https://www.focus-economics.com/countries/brazil -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On 7/11/2017 2:41 @wiz, Davoud wrote:
Noons: Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... Are you saying that Nikon no longer builds good cameras? No. They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs. The "D" in front is just for marketing. The 850 is soooo expensive it might have been useful at another time when folks were suckers enough to waste $$$ on the "mine has more megapixels than yours" nonsense. Nowadays? No way! And there is a little bit more about photography than just the cameras. Lenses come to mind... I find that rather to be very unlikely. So what's the real reason for Nikon's decline? Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
In article , Noons
wrote: Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... Are you saying that Nikon no longer builds good cameras? No. They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs. The "D" in front is just for marketing. nonsense. the d is for digital. there weren't digital cameras 55 years ago. 55 years ago, there was the nikon f, which was nice in its day, but primitive compared to even the 1980s, nevermind now. The 850 is soooo expensive it might have been useful at another time when folks were suckers enough to waste $$$ on the "mine has more megapixels than yours" nonsense. Nowadays? No way! considering what it can do, it's cheap. And there is a little bit more about photography than just the cameras. Lenses come to mind... nikon lenses are quite good. I find that rather to be very unlikely. So what's the real reason for Nikon's decline? Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? nonsense. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On 11/8/2017 8:41 PM, Rich A wrote:
On Monday, November 6, 2017 at 7:02:01 PM UTC-5, Noons wrote: They were warned quite a few times that dumping on their long term users was a BAD idea... https://www.dpreview.com/news/472631...he-end-of-2017 Buh-bye, Nikon. You were once good, but... The goal with Nikon, since they are losing customers to Canon and Sony is to maximize income from existing uses. There is nothing else they can do. You need to take Management 101 -- PeterN |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On 8/11/2017 1:52 @wiz, nospam wrote:
No. They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs. The "D" in front is just for marketing. nonsense. the d is for digital. there weren't digital cameras 55 years ago. But there were slrs. And that is old news. Nowadays? No way! considering what it can do, it's cheap. Like I said: nowadays? No way! nikon lenses are quite good. when they work... Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? nonsense. Good. Keep using their crap. I won't. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On Nov 8, 2017, Noons wrote
(in article ): On 8/11/2017 1:52 @wiz, nospam wrote: No. They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs. The "D" in front is just for marketing. nonsense. the d is for digital. there weren't digital cameras 55 years ago. But there were slrs. And that is old news. Nowadays? No way! considering what it can do, it's cheap. Like I said: nowadays? No way! nikon lenses are quite good. when they work... Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? nonsense. Good. Keep using their crap. I won't. Oh! Well! I made my move to Fujifilm 30 months ago. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
In article , Noons
wrote: No. They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs. The "D" in front is just for marketing. nonsense. the d is for digital. there weren't digital cameras 55 years ago. But there were slrs. And that is old news. slrs are very useful, with the results from today's slrs blowing away anything from 55 years ago, including medium format. Nowadays? No way! considering what it can do, it's cheap. Like I said: nowadays? No way! yes way. nikon lenses are quite good. when they work... they work quite well, so well in fact, that someone designed an adapter so that nikon lenses could be used on canon cameras *and* converts the electrical signals, not just the usual metal ring that is just a mount. Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? nonsense. Good. Keep using their crap. I won't. your loss. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Ah well...
On 11/9/2017 2:07 AM, Noons wrote:
On 8/11/2017 1:52 @wiz, nospam wrote: No.Â* They build the same boring old cameras that were great news 55 years ago: slrs.Â* The "D" in front is just for marketing. nonsense. the d is for digital. there weren't digital cameras 55 years ago. But there were slrs.Â* And that is old news. Nowadays?Â* No way! considering what it can do, it's cheap. Like I said: nowadays? No way! nikon lenses are quite good. when they work... Aww, let me see... Lack of modern products at a reasonable price, capable of keeping them afloat while other companies sell a better product and stay on the market? nonsense. Good.Â* Keep using their crap. I won't. That's your choice. I own a bunch of Nikon lenses, some of them dating back to about 1974. IIRC one lens I purchased was defective. It was replaced on the spot. I recently had an issue with my D500, which is now out of warranty. Nikon took care of the repair, at no cost. The original reasons I went with Nikon we at that time, they were the only ones making a zoom lens in a range that I considered perfect for snapshots of my kids. (43-86 f3.5, yes I know it is considered a crap lens, but it was perfect for my use.) and the Nikon repair facility was about ten minutes from my house. I had tested other systems, and just didn't like the feel, or couldn't afford them. -- PeterN |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|