Sony to take over Nikon?

Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly taking
over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business is
more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image sensor
and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still a great
plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top image sensors
(see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue its business?
Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look too good. -
Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

"GTO" wrote in message
m...
Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly
taking over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business
is more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image
sensor and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still a
great plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top image
sensors (see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue its
business? Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look too
good. - Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

You're looking at a site that counts "clicks" on a Web site. How that
actually transfers to how well a company is doing I'm not sure. Generally,
any device as complicated as a digital camera is going to use components
manufactured by somebody else. Using your logic, Dell would be bought out
by Seagate, assuming they use mostly Seagate drives in their computers.

Canon, Nikon and Sony have been around for a long time. I seriously doubt
any one of them will be bought out by the other. And, you can't just look
at the surface. These companies have been finding their niches over the
years. Let's not forget that Nikon and Canon still sell a lot of 35mm and
specialized cameras, and before the consumer digital camera became popular
Sony was mostly known for excellence in professional video, not still
cameras.

Assuming you are right, Nikon would be selling out not because they have to,
but because they want to. I don't think they need to be "rescued."

BTW, if customer interest determined how well a company was doing, Ferrari
would be the largest automobile manufacturer in the world.

"GTO" wrote in message
m...
Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly
taking over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business
is more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image
sensor and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still a
great plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top image
sensors (see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue its
business? Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look too
good. - Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

Nikon is owned by Mitsubishi. I don't think Mitsubishi will let go of them
very easily. Nikon is big in the DSLR market and Sony will love to be a
source to sell millions of sensors to them.
John

"GTO" wrote in message
m...
Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly
taking over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business
is more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image
sensor and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still a
great plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top image
sensors (see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue its
business? Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look too
good. - Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

Nikon is owned by Mitsubishi. I don't think Mitsubishi will let go of them
very easily. Nikon is big in the DSLR market and Sony will love to be a
source to sell millions of sensors to them.
John

Possible. Of course, Mitsubishi might just want to get the right price for
Nikon's camera division. After all, Nikon is not that big of an acquisition
and many companies have a huge pocket book (such as SONY) (see
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/port.../05_f3_c_e.pdf for
the finacial wealth of Nikon). Nikon's Coolpix business is a decent
competition to SONY's digicam business. And SONY is very strong selling
consumer electronics to end-users. Components, also an important part of
SONY, are most likely of secondary concern. We might see similar transitions
in the camera business like in the computer industry (see Digital -
Compaq - HP).

Gregor

"JohnR66" wrote in message
...
"GTO" wrote in message
m...
Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly
taking over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business
is more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image
sensor and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still
a great plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top
image sensors (see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue
its business? Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look
too good. - Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

Nikon is owned by Mitsubishi. I don't think Mitsubishi will let go of them
very easily. Nikon is big in the DSLR market and Sony will love to be a
source to sell millions of sensors to them.
John

You're looking at a site that counts "clicks" on a Web site. How that
actually transfers to how well a company is doing I'm not sure.
Generally,
any device as complicated as a digital camera is going to use components
manufactured by somebody else. Using your logic, Dell would be bought out
by Seagate, assuming they use mostly Seagate drives in their computers.


A well-visited site can be a reasonable indicator. After all, Nikon sells to
end-users and most end-users buying digital cameras are also using computers
to browse the internet. Of course, dpreview is just one data point. But do
you know of one that shows Nikon ahead and Canon second? - BTW, Dell is
boxing PCs and sells them to end-users. They are not doing much R&D. Compaq
compared better to Nikon than Dell. And HP swallowed Compaq just recently
and almost suffocated in the progress.

Canon, Nikon and Sony have been around for a long time. I seriously doubt
any one of them will be bought out by the other. And, you can't just look
at the surface. These companies have been finding their niches over the
years. Let's not forget that Nikon and Canon still sell a lot of 35mm and
specialized cameras, and before the consumer digital camera became popular
Sony was mostly known for excellence in professional video, not still
cameras.


Today, an great outfit can quickly become a buying target whether or not the
business is already around for the last 100 years. Today, I doubt that Canon
can (or wants to) purchase Nikon's camera group, although Canon's digital
camera effort is three times as big as the one Nikon has, if I remember this
correctly. SONY on the other hand is huge in the consumer electronics
business. To my knowledge, it is the only company that can actually develop
something the market does not ask for, but which often will be accepted by
the consumers after introduction. The others usually produce what the market
asks for, hence are market-driven companies.

Assuming you are right, Nikon would be selling out not because they have
to,
but because they want to. I don't think they need to be "rescued."


Yes. That's probably correct. Nikon showed losses last year but seems to
recover.

BTW, if customer interest determined how well a company was doing, Ferrari
would be the largest automobile manufacturer in the world.



Can't follow this argument. I didn't buy a Ferrari but I bought four Nikon
cameras and many lenses.

Gregor

Yes. That's probably correct. Nikon showed losses last year but seems to
recover.

Just for clarification, Nikon had a net income last year but reported
ordinary income losses.

Yes. That's probably correct. Nikon showed losses last year but seems to
recover.

Just for clarification, Nikon had a net income last year but reported
ordinary income losses.

The high cost and low availability of image sensors and electronics is
a temporary problem. Sensors will be as cheap as er chips in a couple
of years time and Nikon will be making money just as they did with
film cameras. That is if they can survive without a full frame sensor.

Graham


"GTO" wrote in message
m...
Knowing that Nikon's top model (D2X) is using a SONY image sensor and
looking at the statistics at dpreview, which shows SONY being slowly
taking
over Nikon's second place behind Canon in customer interest (see
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/stats.asp), I started thinking about the
future of Nikon's camera business. Success in the digital camera business
is
more and more dictated by the quality and availability of the image sensor
and the electronics supporting it. Of course, good glass is still a great
plus, but optics is probably better understood than making top image
sensors
(see the grim future of Leica). Now, how does Nikon rescue its business?
Trying to stay competitive with Canon? Hmm, does not look too good. -
Selling the camera business to SONY? Why not?

Gregor

"gsum" wrote in message
...
The high cost and low availability of image sensors and electronics is
a temporary problem. Sensors will be as cheap as er chips in a couple
of years time and Nikon will be making money just as they did with
film cameras. That is if they can survive without a full frame sensor.

A full frame sensor is a constant thread, but it's always wailed by people
who won't pay $10K plus for a dSLR. Even Canon is not heading for a full
frame sensor in their consumer/prosumer line. Ok a few amateurs have bought
1Dmk.II but the economy of scale is not likely in a full frame sensor, how
many units have to be made for the R&D costs and other factors to cause the
price to drop to the consumer level? If Canon were planning one why are they
producing more EF-S mounts lenses? APS-C is here to stay on the consumer
level.