Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan • Hacker News Board

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#181

Post by incanus77 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:08 PM UTC

rangibaby wrote: post #50

Aeolun wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only speak to my own experience, but that isn’t necessarily be true. There’s a scale, and ‘made in Japan’ seems to so far be better than not. That said, if they can halve their prices by building in Thailand, maybe customers will forgive them. Since the only thing left is the high end market though, I’m not sure cutting prices is most relevant now though.

Their shift to Thailand has happened over many years, since around 2015 the only camera bodies they have made in Japan were their flagship digital (and one film) models.

Same for lenses — I have a couple dozen, including a handful of the pro-series “gold ring” lenses. The latter are made in Japan, all others (consumer grade) were made in Thailand, other than some of the older 80s-era manual lenses.

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#182

Post by ulfw » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:12 PM UTC

rob74 wrote: post #84

numair wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is already super-popular among large Japanese companies. Uniqlo was built on that tactic.

I think there are a lot of "first-world" companies that have copied this approach. See also "Design and Quality: IKEA of Sweden. Made in [insert cheap-manufacturing country here]."

I've never met anyone who equated 'quality' with IKEA. Cheap, yes. Practical, maybe. Convenient, certainly.

But quality? Sorry but haha. No.

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#183

Post by mmaunder » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:12 PM UTC

Is it possible to capture raw photons using a digital sensor, right before they would have entered a lens front element. Then simulate lens refraction through multiple elements in software? This would allow you to change out lenses in post production. Anyone done any work on this?

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#184

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:13 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #159

Dirlewanger wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there really that many watchmakers on their deathbeds? Every couple of months I'll spend several hours wasting time looking for watch styles I like and I'm amazed at how many traditional watchmakers are still out there, some with 0 smartwatch offerings.

I'm amazed at how many traditional watchmakers are still out there There has been massive consolidation in that market and most of those brands you see are all owned by one of maybe three conglomerates.

Most watches are identified by their movement (guts), as opposed to the branding you see on the face.

The people who make movements are a much smaller bunch.

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#185

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

tmalsburg2 wrote: post #158

varjag wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have some of the finest scientists and engineers in the world, as well as a gigantic portfolio of patents. They aren't going away. Kodak would like to have a word.

And some long-forgotten German manufacturers as well.

I have a great Junghans watch.

I also have a couple of Japan-only Casio/Oceanus watches.

I haven't worn any of them in quite some time.

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#186

Post by reaperducer » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:15 PM UTC

hef19898 wrote: post #18

robotmay wrote: post #11

Oof, that's not a good sign. For me, Japan is the place for the best camera and lens manufacturing. Most of the makers seem to split their manufacturing between Japan for their quality models/lenses and cheaper countries for the consumer stuff, which I think is a valid compromise. But this feels short-sighted on Nikon's part and rather like they have already failed. Perhaps instead of relocating their production they…

Cameras =!= Lenses. I always found Nikon cameras more my taste than canon. But that is just taste, in terms of quality, in the sense of the pictures, I never saw a difference. Not back the day when we still developed our black and white pictures ourselves and not now with digital cameras. Lenses on the other hand a different thing altogether. There I saw defferences between the "cheaper" Sigma and the premium Nikkor…

There I saw defferences between the "cheaper" Sigma and the premium Nikkor ones

I've always wondered what the difference is between Sigma and a brand like Canon or Nikon.

I used to have both Canon and Sigma lenses. The Sigmas felt different, and the pictures they produced had a different "look" for what was supposed to be an equivalent lens. My eye isn't trained for these sorts of things, so I was never able to quantify it.

What is it that Sigma does that makes its lenses cheaper than the others?

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#187

Post by michaelt » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:16 PM UTC

formerly_proven wrote: post #56

robotmay wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a couple of lens advancements I've seen recently that I found particularly interesting: Canon putting Fresnel elements in their lenses to reduce size/weight: https://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/400mm-f4-do-is-ii.htm Canon making an f/11 800mm super telephoto lens that can still autofocus thanks to the new mirrorless camera bodies: https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/800mm.htm I think we'll see a b…

> At the moment lens prices are pretty bonkers but I think that Canon f/11 lens is a great indicator; it's basically less than 1/10th of the cost of a traditional 800mm lens and does more than enough for most people. But that tradeoff seems hardly new to me. Consumer 70-300 for ~300 $ vs. Pro 70-200 for 2000+ $. The "only" difference is build quality and the pro lens being 2-3 stops brighter. Price difference: ~10x.

> the pro lens being 2-3 stops brighter

Is it brighter for the same camera body, aperture and depth of field?

If so, what would one look for in a lens's specifications to describe this difference?

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#188

Post by ChrisMarshallNY » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:16 PM UTC

warkdarrior wrote: post #176

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been seeing a lot of Apple Watches on wrists, lately. Lots of AirPods, too. But that is anecdotal, from a limited geographic perspective.

Completely different markets: good Swiss watches start at $2-3k and go up, way, way up. Apple watches are sub-$1k for the majority of models.

Yeah, but those manufacturers are not a huge market.

For a time, a fair number of people didn't wear watches at all, and used their phones.

Those are the people that I'm seeing with Apple Watches (and other devices, like FitBits).

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#189

Post by hef19898 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:16 PM UTC

m463 wrote: post #111

robotmay wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think camera bodies make a much larger difference these days than lenses, actually. Obviously the lens still makes a notable difference, and for certain forms, like wildlife photography, the lens requirements are inescapable. The new models out in the past few years have absolutely incredible low-light performance that completely change the lens landscape, even; you can now ditch the requirement of carrying a hefty…

> I think camera bodies make a much larger difference these days than lenses, actually. They always have. Yet strangely you can buy an L lens and it may outlast a whole series of bodies. (if we continue to have DSLRs that is).

Oh yeah, that's true! Also worked well between analog and digital SLRs in Nikon's case. After accounting for different film/sensor sizes. My old Sigma is showing its age so, last time I tried.

Re: Nikon Is ending 70 years of camera production in Japan

#190

Post by orthoxerox » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 5:18 PM UTC

geerlingguy wrote: post #87

wegs wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have some of the finest scientists and engineers in the world, as well as a gigantic portfolio of patents. They aren't going away. Those are exactly quickly going away. Engineers and scientists need to get paid and want job stability, while patents have a 20-year lifespan. Nikon was on top of the world in 2008 with the D300 and the D90, but the technologies that made those possible were patented years prior. R…

Nikon needs a new D3/D700-tier body to get back into the game. Right now their bodies are just 'competitive' with Canon and Sony FF bodies... back when the D3 sensor came out, it put the final nail in the coffin for most analog film shooters.

Nikon needs a buyer. It converted into a camera company during the DSLR boom when phones and compact cameras couldn't take good enough pictures.

Now phones have eaten both compact cameras and hobbyist DSLR markets. Prosumer and professional DSLRs/ILCs are a niche market and Nikon is becoming a niche company.

If your hobby is shooting sports, wildlife or stars (big balls of gas), buy an ILC. If all you need is a travel camera, an iPhone is a damn good one and it's smart enough to beat 9 out of 10 humans fiddling arround in Lightroom.