Nikon Rumors - Nikon investing $160 million in new lens factory

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Wade Abadie

Well-known member
Supporting Member
Marketplace
Just figured I would pass this along…

 
"...The company will focus on high-end lenses domestically and make the factory more resistant to fluctuations in demand by being able to flexibly change production items...."
Nikon are obviously confident in sustained demand for their Z Nikkors, even after these heady times of the DSLR>Mirrorless Transition.

The CEO of Sigma commented on the possible trends of the optics market [emphasis added]:
"Last year was not so bad," he says, when asked about the state of the market: "It looks like the trend of the shrinking market has hit the bottom." But he suggests this may not continue: "For the time being, many photographers are now switching from DSLR to mirrorless, which will sustain the market. However, after they switch to mirrorless cameras, I worry that the market could shrink in the coming years."

 
The move, probably resulting from the recent change in Nikon management structure, is interesting in that even if Nikon can finance the investment at as low an interest rate as 5% $800,000 a year is needed to service the interest cost.
Reduced costs from more efficient manufacturing, selling off redundant buildings and maybe higher margins for Nikon will play their parts in streamlining high end lens production with improving efficiency in perhaps 2-3 years time.
Canon has in recent times sold many, many more high lenses such as 600 f4 than Nikon.
IMO Nikon needs to resolve this aspect of limited supply to become a more effective high end sports and wildlife equipment player.
 
Nikon has struggled to keep up with demands of new lenses and we've all seen long wait times for their best selling lenses. If this new factory allows them to steady that out it will be a benefit to us all. But it's encouraging to me that Nikon is investing serious coin to modernize their lens production capability - I think it bodes well for future lenses as well as the health of the company.
 
Interesting given the Yen is so weak right now. We expected our trip there in April to be super expensive and were shocked how little it was. In fact I kept the leftover Yen on my Wise card, a multi currency card good for travel or purchasing services in foreign countries, figuring it will recover some in the future.
 
Last edited:
Nikon has made some good moves in the last few years. I think the mirrorless market has room for expansion. I for one am an enthusiast who's hasn't made the switch but plan to. They are producing stellar equipment.
I wonder how their acquisition of Red will play into their growth plans. Maybe they need this new facility to maximize that as well.
 
"...The company will focus on high-end lenses domestically and make the factory more resistant to fluctuations in demand by being able to flexibly change production items...."
Nikon are obviously confident in sustained demand for their Z Nikkors, even after these heady times of the DSLR>Mirrorless Transition.

The CEO of Sigma commented on the possible trends of the optics market [emphasis added]:
"Last year was not so bad," he says, when asked about the state of the market: "It looks like the trend of the shrinking market has hit the bottom." But he suggests this may not continue: "For the time being, many photographers are now switching from DSLR to mirrorless, which will sustain the market. However, after they switch to mirrorless cameras, I worry that the market could shrink in the coming years."

Glass has always had a very high margin content providing the major bottom line contribution, usually we see around 5 or so lenses sold to every camera body sold.

From a investors perspective and some forward thinking i am guessing glass can be made more universal as have Tamron and Sigma done for years, they have also been a PRICE security defense wall for Nikon Canon Sony glass.

Colour management is critical be it cameras or glass, different colours appeal to different people, how to offer that diverse colour range needs can be seen in different brands of lenses and cameras, you have Sony, Canon Nikon, Fuji, Sigma Tamron, it seems all bases are covered, what do they have in common, there all Japanese and collectively dominate the global industry, is there a industry alliance, who knows.

Tamron and Sigma may be growth effected- vulnerable first if the lower priced products coming out of China keep coming and no doubt getting better, a welcomed thing for so many people, not everyone needs exotic needle sharp gear. Box shifter major retailers will keep pushing these lines, they will secure market share with unit sales or obtaining greater margins for higher end brands, all a bit like the supermarket industry. Will Nikon Canon Sony ever go full retail directly, watch this space.

Currently i sense Nikon Canon Sony are moving up stream, Tamron and Sigma will need to shift further up stream as well as the tide of new technology and budget products keeps getting higher.

In Ways Fuji is in a innovative league of its own, my opinion only. Fuji is a highly underrated innovative product line, their key is excellent colour management and they defiantly make excellent glass. Small Light compact savvy products to affordable MF.

It seems Glass and Colour management is the life raft so to speak, we say date the camera marry the glass don't we LOL.

Nikon taking up a new manufacturing facility has many other reasons behind it as well.

We know RED is part of the longer term Nikon strategic plan for cameras, optics as well as entering the overall higher end video product market.

The big three players seem to be shifting from higher unit volume with lower price points to lower volume higher price point, to achieve this you need to offer quality innovation Niche products that work.

Nikon is predominately an optics company.

Camera bodies as a pool is becoming very competitive if your not a savvy software orientated company its going to be a tough gig.

Camera bodies are essentially becoming more like lap tops, phones I Pads full of feature buzz rich tech savvy things like Apps presets customizable software and auto features that are impressive and in many cases make traditional skill sets some what obsolete.

The growth market in cameras seems to be involved around Ai, phones, drones, Go Pro products, and above all VIDEO,
Nikon focusing on and investing in new upstream optics manufacturing facilities complimented with excellent colour management, that combination will be hard to attack.

Only an opinion
 
Last edited:
Their obituary has been prematurely written more than once in recent years.
Well as i recall the Japanese business approach is usually based on a a long term strategy regardless of trends up or down.
I do feel the industry collectively is really one, i am surprised as to how Nikon lost so much market share especially to Sony, at least its with in house of the alliance.

But hey Nikon must have or has access to deep pockets, building a new Head office, making a new acquisition, now a new factory, gee all these inflated prices for goods must really be paying off LOL.

Only an opinion
 
After launching a Restructuring Program in 2015, it took Nikon a few years to divest the big investments of its Imaging Division dedicated to mass produce Consumer Entry cameras, as well as wind down production of F mount lenses and high end DSLRs.

Nikon keeps stating the company's future emphasis is on the high-end, more profitable markets, particularly optics. These include microscope lenses and industrial instruments, besides the Z Nikkors for its MILCs. Cine lenses are also a high probability now that Nikon owns RED.

It's further likely the significant investments in Robotics, since 2015, are improving the efficiency and quality of the in-house manufacturing of Nikon products, alongside selling robotic imaging technology. Robotic manufacturing will include producing lenses in its new factory.

"Nikon's grabbing RED out of nowhere for next to nothing is producing even more product envy at Canon/Panasonic/Sony, as well as a little bit of panic. A Nikon that emphasizes high end across both still and video yet undercuts the others in price while pushing the envelope on performance is very, very scary. To explain why, I have to use the smartphone market as an example: Apple is not the largest volume producer with iPhone worldwide, yet Apple scoops up far more of the profits in the smartphone arena than the others combined. High end done right is the Golden Egg in tech, and Nikon suddenly seems to be figuring that out (again)....."

 
Last edited:
The topic of ILC market share covers at least two complex markets - annual sales of cameras and optics for Consumer and High-End (Hobbyist and Pro), but they are reported as a single percentage in CIPA data. It's not clear what percentage of these recent sales Nikon holds of the total sales of High-End ILCs and lenses.

It's very well known that Nikon made its mistakes falling behind in AF tech in the late 1980s / 90s; then again they lost the initiative after the D1 (1999) with high end DSLRs, until the D3 launched in 2007. Nevertheless, ILC market share has been, and still is dominated primarily by the sales of low end Consumer camera kits, with tight profit margins....entry models and kit lenses for apparently a high proportion of single-event (buy once) buyers.

Superseded by smartphone sales, this big market sector has always dwarfed the population of High-end customers, who upgrade cameras and maintain multiple lens systems : repeating buyers (GAS addicts inclusive!). The Z30, Z50, Zfc and Z5 are today's entry cameras, but are still relatively advanced technology, and it appears Nikon ranks these models as enablers to attract the Emerging Hobbyist.
 
Last edited:
By divesting of its massive investment producing consumer DSLRs and point&shoot cameras, Nikon had to sacrifice a sizable share of the Consumer market. Judging from recent reports, the Imaging Division is thriving, fattening on profits on the conversion to mirrorless particularly, including growing demand for video products.

Furthermore, both Canon and Nikon hold a huge stake in their accumulated penetration of the gear relied upon by active photographers. This is their potential market(s), tightly linked to brand specific investments. It includes the invisible millions of photographers using older cameras and lenses (many F and EF systems). In Nikon's case, these established photographers add up to a big latent market for attractive new products, such as the Zf and Z8 as well as new Z lenses.
 
Last edited:
I think many people don’t realize just how potent these new models are and don’t realize what can be done especially in terms of action and wildlife etc. As some do they will likely want to move to better models as I did. The big complaints I hear from many is that the high end models are too complicated and bulky. This is why my wife, and excellent photographer moved to an iPhone. Then there are those like me who will likely never try to make a living of photography but love the challenge and enjoy complexity and technilogical advancement
 
Maybe it is as simple as being a profitable company :)
Nothing wrong in being simply profitable, its what excites shareholders to stay and or even invest more.

Profitability must be tied to a degree of growth to survive, unless you have a patented product monopoly of some sort.

Nikon has done a bad job of transitioning from one era to another, never the less they have finally gotten to where they are now despite the painful experience for customers subjected to product initial under development, QC and supply issues, least not forgetting loss of market share.

Growing of market share, that's the next challenge, profit is one thing growth is another.
Growth can come from mergers acquisition or innovation.

Bottom line, when you look at where Nikon was a few years back with higher unit volume and market share, reasonable steady profits, till mirror less hit the pavement big time led by Sony.

The industry has lost over 50% of the global market for many reasons regardless of it being DSLRS or Mirror less............yet profitability today is showing as doing very well and in cases well ahead or on track, doesn't that mean costs have been cut be it product redesign, outsourcing, pushing production, add to this margins and prices that have been raised, that's ok short term to fill up the war chest and meter out throwing a bone to feed the investors occasionally, but it gets to a point where cost cutting and margin hikes can only do so much........your back to needing Growth and Innovation, something every one else is looking for as well.

So my punt is now its time for the old rule of the big need to get bigger the small need to adapt or get out, also what i feel is its the prime time to keep the door open for opportunity to buy market share, consolidate the industry somewhat, mergers or acquisition can very well be a good thing, certainly for the balance sheets.

Being profitable rich and powerful doesn't always mean you survive, its the adaptable that do, look at nature and the universe.

What is ahead is of everything is the arrival of people generational change, internet demands, coupled with Ai, and new innovative ideas shaping our future.
Hardware anyone can make, software is a skill and key, sadly it drives our way of life.

Is a safe haven for now unique light compact powerful glass or in general good optics everyone needs or is looking for especially as videography which is growing quickly.

Interesting times ahead.

Only an opinion
 
Last edited:
Nothing wrong in being simply profitable, its what excites shareholders to stay and or even invest more.

Profitability must be tied to a degree of growth to survive, unless you have a patented product monopoly of some sort.

Nikon has done a bad job of transitioning from one era to another, never the less they have finally gotten to where they are now despite the painful experience for customers subjected to product initial under development, QC and supply issues, least not forgetting loss of market share.

Growing of market share, that's the next challenge, profit is one thing growth is another.
Growth can come from mergers acquisition or innovation.

Bottom line, when you look at where Nikon was a few years back with higher unit volume and market share, reasonable steady profits, till mirror less hit the pavement big time led by Sony.

The industry has lost over 50% of the global market for many reasons regardless of it being DSLRS or Mirror less............yet profitability today is showing as doing very well and in cases well ahead or on track, doesn't that mean costs have been cut be it product redesign, outsourcing, pushing production, add to this margins and prices that have been raised, that's ok short term to fill up the war chest and meter out throwing a bone to feed the investors occasionally, but it gets to a point where cost cutting and margin hikes can only do so much........your back to needing Growth and Innovation, something every one else is looking for as well.

So my punt is now its time for the old rule of the big need to get bigger the small need to adapt or get out, also what i feel is its the prime time to keep the door open for opportunity to buy market share, consolidate the industry somewhat, mergers or acquisition can very well be a good thing, certainly for the balance sheets.

Being profitable rich and powerful doesn't always mean you survive, its the adaptable that do, look at nature and the universe.

What is ahead is of everything is the arrival of people generational change, internet demands, coupled with Ai, and new innovative ideas shaping our future.
Hardware anyone can make, software is a skill and key, sadly it drives our way of life.

Is a safe haven for now unique light compact powerful glass or in general good optics everyone needs or is looking for especially as videography which is growing quickly.

Interesting times ahead.

Only an opinion
I agree.
 
Nikon's new factory expresses growth hope and prosperity to the economy, shareholders and defiantly serves one up to the opposition.
The New factory no doubt will have efficient sate of the art production capability, HOPEFULLY QC standards will be maintained unlike the Z8 Z9 experiences.

Capacity and consistency along with cost saving further enhances contribution to the balance sheet......at least that's the logical rational.

Reskinning with Tamron for mid to lower end units all makes sense, pity it took so long for Nikon to think of that.

I certainly hope Nikon QC standards are maintained unlike the Camera bodies of recent times, with the lenses i hope supply, and some better pricing becomes available.

Only an opinion
 
Last edited:
I've not read any reliable data confirming QC problems in the manufacturing of Z lenses: nor cameras either.
Going back more than 2 decades, there was evidence that a few G Type Nikkors suffered variation in image quality. Yes, one was the 80-400 G. Another was the 24-120 f4G.
There was the VR glitch in one batch of the 300 f4E PF, circa 2016-7, but unclear if this was software bugs or mechanical
 
I remember the VR glitch in the 300pf. I had that lens and the main thing I remember was the de-center issue. I don’t recall problems with the VR but likely how I used it I mainly remember poor options for pro-Sumer grade cameras. The terrible buffers etc in the d7kxxx line up. I very nearly went to Canon then the d500 came out.
 
Back
Top