 |
North Sydney from Ridge Street. Canon EOS R5 with RF 100-500mm lens.I believe Nikon needs to concentrate on delivering a Z FX body as versatile and capable as the R5 and a Z FX lens as useful and capable as the RF 100-500mm L and not get distracted by frivolous side shows like the Zfc which will contribute nothing to Nikon's credibility as a maker of proper cameras. |
Nikon’s fortunes in the market place as a camera maker have been in decline for several years.
I am just an ordinary consumer with no connection to any entity that makes or sells photographic equipment. I just buy and use that equipment. I also evaluate whether that equipment meets my needs and I think about other consumers likely requirements.
In the second half of the 20th Century Nikon was arguably top dog in the camera and lens world for professionals and enthusiasts alike.
But top dogs are always subject to challenge.
In the camera world this has come from makers such as Canon and Sony with more diverse product ranges, deeper R&D budgets and greater capacity for technological development.
Nikon corporation operates several business units one of which is Imaging Products. This has been declining in relative importance over several years as camera sales have fallen world wide..
In an investor presentation in August 2020 Nikon senior executive Ishikazu Umatate said, among many other things that, to paraphrase:
It appears that the imaging products division which includes cameras and lenses is not moving enough product and is making a loss. This trend has become more marked with the transition from DSLRs to MILCs (mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras).
While Nikon was second to Canon in DSLR sales it has been reported that they have slipped to fifth behind Sony, Canon, Fujifilm and even Olympus (which has sold off its consumer imaging division) in MILC sales.
As the camera industry is moving inexorably to all mirrorless configurations this ranking is particularly troubling for Nikon as it means they have not been able to attract enough buyers to their mirrorless cameras and lenses.
So there is the problem.
What should they do about it ?
I no longer own any Nikon gear but over the years have bought, owned and used compacts, bridge cams, DSLRs and MILCs from Nikon so I am reasonably familiar with Nikon’s products and capabilities in the imaging arena.
My last two Nikons were a Z6 with the 24-70mm f4 lens and a Z50 with both the Z DX kit zooms. Both of these were quite decent cameras with decent performance, decently usable ergonomics and very good image quality.
But I sold them on because
a) It appeared Nikon’s commitment to the Z DX line was going nowhere.
b) Although the Z6 was good it could not match competitors from Canon and Sony for performance.
In addition Nikon kept promising new products but failing to deliver within the advertised timeline. This did not improve my confidence in the brand.
I have also been unimpressed by Nikon’s compacts and bridge cameras over a period of several years. All of these have in my estimation been second rate devices with compromised capability.
I keep a loose watching brief on Nikon reviewers, commentators and user forums.
Most of these have been asking Nikon to improve the autofocus performance of their Z mount MILCs, rollout more Z FX lenses and make a clear decision as to their intentions regarding the Z DX enterprise. Fairly basic requests one might have thought.
I have not been aware of any significant surge of requests from Nikon users for
a) a funky little DX MILC with lots of marked dials on top and no handle just like something from Fujifilm.
b) any kind of camera in seven different cool designer colors.
c) anything at all which diverts R&D resources away from the main game.
For Nikon the main game as I understand it has for a very long time been to produce the best cameras and lenses in the business for both enthusiasts and professionals. This, with a few deviations such as the doomed-from-the-start-and-weirdly-named “1” series and other wobbles is mostly what Nikon did in the days of film SLRs and Digital SLRs.
It appears that the Zfc is an unexpected little thing which
a) nobody asked for
b) comes in various funky colors which nobody requested and
c) is sucking R&D resources from the main imaging enterprise.
Who on planet Nikon thought this was a good idea ?
To which of Nikon’s problems was the Zfc thought to be an answer ?
Which usage case do Nikon’s product development people think the Zfc will manage better than a well implemented standard mainstream mode-dial-plus-control-dials model ?
You know, the kind of camera with which Nikon users are familiar ?
Does Nikon management think the Zfc will be just the thing for “Japanese-teenage-facebook-girl” as hinted at by the promotional photos ? Has nobody told them that “JTFG” switched to smartphones many years ago ?
Unfortunately Nikon has form in the offbeat cameras department. The FX Nikon df of 2013 did not generate much buyer response and produced no update version.
The entire line of Nikon 1 series models was ill conceived and weirdly designed. The 15.9mm diagonal sensor in these cameras was much more suitable for compacts and bridge cams with fixed zoom lenses.
In his initial review of the Zfc for Digital Photography Review (DPR) Richard Butler wrote:
“Nikon's Z fc is an APS-C mirrorless camera that combines Nikon's new Z lens mount with looks and controls that recall the company's classic FM and FE-series film SLRs.
The Z fc is the second crop-sensor Nikon camera to use the company's new Z-mount, built around the same 20.9MP sensor as the Nikon Z50, but it gains dedicated dials for ISO, shutter speed and exposure compensation to go with its throwback styling. Nikon says it's aiming the camera at a younger, style-conscious audience.”
So the Zfc is supposed to be a reprise of the classic FM and FE series film SLRs which were popular in the period 1977 to 1983 yet somehow they think it will also appeal to “a younger, style conscious audience”, a cohort which had not yet arrived on this earth when the FM and FE were popular.
This looks like conceptual and marketing confusion to me.
Preliminary notes on the ergonomics of the Zfc
All we have at the moment are photos however these do clearly reveal some key ergonomic features of the camera.
There are obvious similarities to some current Fujifilm models but also differences.
The Fuji models want to have a two way bet on both the faux traditional controls and also the front and rear dials which partly replicate the electronic interface seen on most current digital cameras.
The Zfc takes this one step further by adding an M-A-S-P-Auto lever thus making a three way bet between a mode plus dial interface, a faux traditional interface with marked dials and an electronic style interface with two unmarked dials.
I see many opportunities for confusion here.
There is no handle and no thumb support. Why do camera makers keep on doing this ??
An accessory handle may be available (but only in some regional markets, go figure) but why not build one in ???
With or without the accessory grip the front unmarked dial is overlaid by the right middle finger so the right hand must be shifted down to allow the index finger to operate the dial.
The rear unmarked dial is placed precisely where the right thumb wants to lie. In use I suspect this could prove really annoying. The fix might be some kind of custom thumb support which keeps the thumb away from that dial in the resting position.
But what is the point of all this ?
Someone thinks it looks nice ??
In their initial hands on review DPR says
“Nikon tells us that the Z fc was designed to be as compact and lightweight as possible, with the performance you would expect from a modern camera but with controls and ergonomics that might encourage you to slow down a bit. “
Did anybody, anywhere, ever ask for a camera which would “encourage” (which is code for “force”) the operator to slow down the capture process for no particular reason and no meaningful gain of any kind ?
The more I read about this camera he more confused I become as to Nikon’s reason for introducing it.
Is it possible that someone in Nikon’s product development department might have said….
…”..hey guys our sales are slipping badly but remember we done real good 40 years ago with them FM and FE models. How’s about we introduce a model which kinda, sorta, looks a bit like those cameras and see how we go with the retro romantic pitch with a splash of pink for the ladies”.
Could they possibly be that desperate ??
Could their corporate judgement be that far off base ??
Are they trying to recruit some Fuji enthusiasts who go for this type of design ?
If so why would any Fuji user switch over to Nikon DX ?? Fuji offers an extensive range of APSC/DX models and on my last count 37 dedicated APSC/DX lenses.
Nikon offers three Z DX lenses with one more promised.
Have they noticed that
a) Fuji is quietly edging away from the faux retro marked dials design style with recent models like the X-S10 and the medium format variants which utilise the more popular mode dial plus control dials.
b) one of the hottest sellers over the last year is the Canon EOS R5 which does not use marked dials at all. And yes the user can see the current mode, aperture, shutter speed, ISO, exposure compensation and battery status on the top plate of the body if they want that facility.
Conclusion
Clearly I think Nikon is going nowhere with the Zfc.
I struggle to see in what way the Zfc contributes to an overall Z DX strategy of any kind.
Buyers will decide the fate of the Zfc and in due course Nikon’s imaging division.
As usual, we shall see.