I’ve been attending photography-related tradeshows for nearly a decade now. Over the years, I’ve noticed that Canon generally has the flagship location, Nikon is situated in the second-best location and Sony is somewhere in a second tier location. Last week, however, that order of operation changed and PhotoPlus gave us a metaphorical glimpse into the state of the camera industry as a whole.
For the past several years, Canon’s massive booth has been located front and center and the main entrance to the PhotoPlus Expo show floor. Likewise, Nikon has been in position inside the alternative main entranceway just to the right of Canon’s booth. No doubt, these are the most expensive booth areas on the entire show floor. Sony has been positioned on the second row, sort of between Canon and Nikon for several years.
This year, however, Sony and Nikon traded spots. As you walk in the main doors, Canon has its traditional location and Sony is “the other” anchor booth at the front of the expo floor. Moreover, Nikon was positioned on the floor in the area in which we have been accustomed to seeing Sony.
This change was striking as I walked in the doors. Of course, Nikon’s booth was just a few steps beyond the Sony and Canon booths but the switcheroo was significant nonetheless. The Nikon booth had a fantastic history of Nikon cameras in celebration of Nikon’s 100th anniversary. The celebration of Nikon’s history added a bit of irony to the metaphorical changing of guard at hand – out with the old and in with the new.
I talked to Sony reps who seemed rather proud of the fact that this simple swapping of floor space was a metaphor of sorts for the state of the camera industry. Sony reps that I spoke with took Nikon to task over its lethargic approach to mirrorless cameras over the years and suggested that the Nikon D850 is outshined by the new Sony A7R III.
Whether the Sony A7R III bests the Nikon D850 is a question that will likely be the subject of many heated debates. However, Sony is clearly making moves in the camera industry in a way that the establishment of Nikon and Canon cannot – or, perhaps, will not.
jean pierre (pete) guaron says
SerIously? Out of all the reasons advanced by different people, for choosing different cameras by brand name, this would be about the most esoteric and irrelevant one I’ve come across. Out there, in the real world, there are several billion people taking photographs. Statistically, almost NONE of them have ever heard of Photoplus 2017 – let alone been anywhere near it.
If this is a drop in the bucket, it’s not even wetting the bottom of the bucket.
Fred says
Having taken my first photograph as a four year old with a Leica M3, having been a Nikon pro (as in, on-salary as such) for ~13 years, and presently owning Nikon FF + D3400 (not to mention F Photomic, F2as, etc.), Canon M5 , and Sony A7 II + A5000 — i.e., having no particular dog in this race — I might be in a good position to suggest, Pete, that you seem to have completely missed Eric’s point.
Also, I know that I am not a particularly happy camper to feel it ‘necessary’ to own a four camera brand kit (including Pentax, going where??) in order to be able to assemble a modular “bring everything I need, but nothing I don’t” carry kit for any circumstances which little compromises image quality and KEEPS AS TOTE-ABLE AS PRACTICALLY POSSIBLE… while avoiding the tiring, intimidating, or otherwise counter-productive effects of huge DSLRs or getting weighty enough MILCs with “Holy Trinity” — in fact, mostly *convenience zoom*, vs. primes — carry kits.
Nikon fails, sometimes egregiously, to meet it’s past standards (mostly long gone) for consistent, ALL AROUND image quality (“rendering”?) in practical lenses; for a full 21st Century camera body concept; and for expected levels of quality control, corporate ethics, and user support.
Canon has been effectively crippled by its own success in marketing & selling less than modern & fully competitive cameras, best image quality & video function-wise, specifically — to wit, circa late ‘naughts’ level “read noise” due to an obsolescent lack of sensor/conversion chip integration in a 2017 6D Mk II?!… too few megapixels for practical, 20 mp+ crops, plus an inefficient video codec and unsatisfactory video IQ/features (at high cost) for the vast majority of *prospective* users in their D5 IV… etc.
Sony’s issues can be summed up as immature menus, ergonomics, & control facilities; a history of pro-hindering, laggard camera function responsiveness; irrational physical scale factors & lack of consistent, competitive border-to-border IQ, or even just plain out of last century modernity, in lenses at typically higher than Canikon prices… w/ a virtual abandonment of useful [prime!] lens development for their nearly FF-priced, APS-C *video centric* bodies. As a stills-centric, out & about on-bike & on-foot photographer in semi-retirement, I retain the humbly-featured, but 9-ounce loaded, IQ competitive A5000/LCDVF-equipped, “FF complement”… AND a uniquely SMALL quality-primes-centric Canon mirrorless system, all w/ sundry adapted lenses (Zeiss, Pentax, et.al.) for the above reasons.
It should be pretty obvious why I am less than altogether happy with this situation. But I don’t have any meaningful use for the typical zooms-centric IQ level philosophies anymore (if ever!), or for *elaborate* high cost factor 4K complications & overheating. I love cheap featherweight plastic zooms for their BEST uses and where competitive ultralight lenses do not exist (!)… as in, not even very close — EF-M 11-22; 4.4-ounce 1.2:1 28mm macro plus circa 9-12.5 ounce EF *stabilized*
primes (Canon); 14.6-ounce AF-P 70-300mm DX [+ FF, BTW] ED VR (Nikon), etc.
Meanwhile, Nikon, who CAN do anything they WANT to do, and when. they want to (and need) to do it, builds a VERY meaningfully improved D3400 that kills it for APS-C IQ and dynamic range at sensible ISOs, then DOESN’T TELL ANYBODY ABOUT THAT… and alienates the Nikon savvy user who BUYS that camera for just that unsung advantage + AF-P compatibility by penny-pinching away D3300 features — including AF-D metering capability, for krissakes (!), to no meaningful cost of manufacture advantage! Geez, Louise! As if brain dead…
Ergo, I get to buy my flawless new factory refurb D3400 for about $200 net.
Nikon has brought its own “extraordinary losses”, a factory closing & now second tier marketing woes unto itself. …Blaming smartphones with the same sort of delusional, self-righteous, self-justifying fractured logic that the Vatican used — for one, non-politically motivated, well vetted example, moderators — to blame its notorious, fully verified worldwide scandals and failings in follow-up on “permissiveness”, etc., in the part of society that doesn’t care to turn to them as moral exemplars. Not so dissimilar, and pretty pathetic in either case. At least the Vatican manages to keep it’s ‘market share’ substantially intact while it’s competitors fade; which you can’t say for Nikon.
John Rapley says
In marketing you can’t underestimate the importance of perception, and being seen as the second place (almost equal place) with the market leader, rather than “the boy out the back” is important to both Sony and Nikon
Herb Rubenstein says
Dear Fred,
Your erudite, self aggrandizing, verbose evaluation of the 3 major camera manufacturers is a non-communicative diatribe.
Robert Vente says
Oh all this ‘super important’ quibbling amongst ourselves. Anybody played with the D850? Or for light travel: The FujifilmX-T2?
Two camera’s that will quiet you down, just enjoy…