Is D50 too little, too late?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is the
20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than D70!

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon lazy
going forward. Comments anyone?

Cheers
Musty.

Musty wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is the
20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than D70!

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon lazy
going forward. Comments anyone?

Wrong comparison, IMO. The D50 is not a direct competitor to the Rebel.
I think it's a competitor to higher end prosumer cameras. It competes
against the Coolpix 8400/8800, the CyberShot F828, the FinePix S20, etc.
I think that's where the D50 will find its market. It offers a lot of
the simplicity of the P&S with some of the flexibility of a dSLR. It's a
camera to bridge the gap, to pull the prosumer users into the dSLR market.

Well, that's how I would market it. I think it could do extremely well
if marketed that way.

Randy.

"Musty" wrote:

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon lazy
going forward. Comments anyone?

Canon never has been complacent and never has considered Nikon their direct
competition. Back in the day, in the SLR market, their competition was
Minolta and Pentax, Nikon was a niche market product. Today, although they
have a 60%+ market share in the DSLR market, their concern is properly
directed at the potential of Sony and Kodak, Nikon is still an amusing
footnote.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:21:43 -0400, "Randy W. Sims"
wrote:

Musty wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is the
20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than D70!

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon lazy
going forward. Comments anyone?

Wrong comparison, IMO. The D50 is not a direct competitor to the Rebel.
I think it's a competitor to higher end prosumer cameras. It competes
against the Coolpix 8400/8800, the CyberShot F828, the FinePix S20, etc.
I think that's where the D50 will find its market.

I think you just hurt Nikon's feelings immesurably.
They have to be aiming it at the Rebel XT crowd because the D70
is too expensive.
-Rich

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:21:43 -0400, "Randy W. Sims"
wrote:

Musty wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is
the
20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than
D70!

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon
lazy
going forward. Comments anyone?

Wrong comparison, IMO. The D50 is not a direct competitor to the Rebel.
I think it's a competitor to higher end prosumer cameras. It competes
against the Coolpix 8400/8800, the CyberShot F828, the FinePix S20, etc.
I think that's where the D50 will find its market.

I think you just hurt Nikon's feelings immesurably.
They have to be aiming it at the Rebel XT crowd because the D70
is too expensive.
-Rich

I agree with Rich. The reason is that the D50 is a DSLR, so its competition
is DSLR. The market is the "affordable" DSLR which includes the XT
(basically same price). The sub $1000 DSLR market is the biggest money
maker - Canon saw it, now Nikon are seeing it.

Musty.

Musty wrote:
"RichA" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:21:43 -0400, "Randy W. Sims"
wrote:


Musty wrote:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is

the

20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than

D70!

I am a 20D owner, but this is the kind of stuff that could make Canon

lazy

going forward. Comments anyone?

Wrong comparison, IMO. The D50 is not a direct competitor to the Rebel.
I think it's a competitor to higher end prosumer cameras. It competes
against the Coolpix 8400/8800, the CyberShot F828, the FinePix S20, etc.
I think that's where the D50 will find its market.

I think you just hurt Nikon's feelings immesurably.
They have to be aiming it at the Rebel XT crowd because the D70
is too expensive.
-Rich


I agree with Rich. The reason is that the D50 is a DSLR, so its competition
is DSLR. The market is the "affordable" DSLR which includes the XT
(basically same price). The sub $1000 DSLR market is the biggest money
maker - Canon saw it, now Nikon are seeing it.

I don't know. I just wonder how many consumers know the difference. I
imagine most people think in terms of "how much bang can I get for X
dollars?" At this level (sub $1000 USD), I think most people just
compare the available cameras against what they can afford. I know of a
couple of people who recently made purchases this way, looking at
available cameras in a certain price range. They didn't know enough to
make the distinction. They just wanted the best they could afford. (They
made bad decisions, but that's irrelevant.)

That's admittedly an uninformed and dim view; it's just my impression.
I've done the same thing before myself in other areas.

Randy.

"Musty" wrote in message
...
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042004nikond50.asp

I am wondering what Nikon is trying to achieve with the D50. Where is the
20D competition??

The Rebel XT seems more compelling than this camera if you look at
price/features. It has a slower max shutter and lower frame rate than D70!

The D50 is a competitor to the Digital Rebel (EOS-300D)
The D70/D70s is a competitor to the Digital Rebel XT (EOS-350D)
The D100 is a competitor (a weak competitor) to the EOS-20D
The D2x is a competitor to the EOS-1D Mark II

Nikon needs the successor to the D100 very badly, since this is a high
volume segment for which they have no compelling product.

They also need a competitor to the EOS-1Ds Mark II, but until they can get a
larger sensor, this is a segment that will continue to be owned by Canon.

"jfitz" wrote in message
...

Canon never has been complacent and never has considered Nikon their
direct
competition. Back in the day, in the SLR market, their competition was
Minolta and Pentax, Nikon was a niche market product. Today, although
they
have a 60%+ market share in the DSLR market, their concern is properly
directed at the potential of Sony and Kodak, Nikon is still an amusing
footnote.

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. Nikon is the only credible competition
in digital SLRs. Between Nikon and Canon, you've got 98% of the market, with
Fuji, Kodak, Konica-Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Sigma, etc., fighting for 2%.

In terms of point and shoot digitals cameras, you're correct, since Nikon is
no longer a major market share holder in that market.

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
ink.net...
"jfitz" wrote in message
...

Canon never has been complacent and never has considered Nikon their
direct
competition. Back in the day, in the SLR market, their competition was
Minolta and Pentax, Nikon was a niche market product. Today, although
they
have a 60%+ market share in the DSLR market, their concern is properly
directed at the potential of Sony and Kodak, Nikon is still an amusing
footnote.

That's a pretty ridiculous statement. Nikon is the only credible
competition
in digital SLRs. Between Nikon and Canon, you've got 98% of the market,
with
Fuji, Kodak, Konica-Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Sigma, etc., fighting for
2%.

In terms of point and shoot digitals cameras, you're correct, since Nikon
is
no longer a major market share holder in that market.



I don't know the statistics for Nikon's share of the DSLR market - but
unless they come up with something pronto they will lose a lot of whatever
they have.

The D70 has kept them afloat for the last year - a triumph of hype over
substance, since its pretty noisy and had poor resolution (at least, the two
that I tried)

Now Canon have released the 350D - is their really any need to buy a D70?.
I think Nikon's desperation at the arrival of the 350D is manifested by
their ridiculous re-launch of the D70s! - surely a strong contender for the
most pointless product launch ever?

As for the D50 - again, why bother?.

what they needed was an 8mp + competitor to Canon, without that they will
just continue to sink.

I agree with Rich. The reason is that the D50 is a DSLR, so its
competition
is DSLR. The market is the "affordable" DSLR which includes the XT
(basically same price). The sub $1000 DSLR market is the biggest
money
maker - Canon saw it, now Nikon are seeing it.

I don't know. I just wonder how many consumers know the difference. I
imagine most people think in terms of "how much bang can I get for X
dollars?" At this level (sub $1000 USD), I think most people just
compare the available cameras against what they can afford.

Yes, but if they aren't specifically thinking that being a DSLR is a
significant thing in itself, then no DSLR is going to compete well. I
mean, I don't care how good the D50 or Rebel XT or whatever is - if you
aren't specifically wanting the advantages of a DSLR, none of these will
compare well to what you can get for just $500 in the "point & shoot"
world. If you want a powerful lens, you can get a superfast 12x zoom
with image stabilization for under $500. If you want high resolution,
you can get 7 MP for under $500. If you want virtually instantaneous
autofocus, you can have that under $500. Realistically, what, aside
from "DSLR-ness", could any $1000 DSLR offer that would compete with any
of this? Mind you, I'm not saying that "DSLR-ness" is not significant -
I am among those who had considered $500-$600 "point & shoot" cameras
before deciding to get a DSLR. But no way would I have done so without
being convinced that merely being a DSLR was worth the few extra hundred
I paid for my *ist DS (versus, say, the Panasonic FZ5).

--------------
Marc Sabatella


The Outside Shore
Music, art, & educational materials:
http://www.outsideshore.com/