Talk:Nikon

message: I believe the name Nikon comes from Nippon Koroku or similar meaning Japan Camera Company, but I'm not sure of the correct spelling. Lee M 19:04, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The change in name came well after the war. Offhand I don't know when so I'm making no change. "Nippon Kogaku" may have been the name inscribed on the products but a correct transcription from the Japanese would be "Nippon Kōgaku" so that's what I've corrected it to. Hoary 14:47, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikon name 

message: Thought Nikonos underwater cameras went out of production. Could be wrong. Fg2 07:33, Aug 9, 2004 (UTC)
: Yes, it's out of production. (But -- since Wikipedia isn't a camera retailer or wholesaler -- how does this make it "obsolete"?) Hoary 14:47, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikonos: Current or obsolete? 

message: The list of Nikon products is large and somewhat tedious. Can we spin this off into a separate article "Nikon products"? ...Ah, I just found the old page "List of Nikon products" which was merged into this article. However at the time of merger (in 2004) that article was only a stub, it's now become quite substantial. Does anyone else think the page should be revived, or should we just let sleeping dogs lie? Tocharianne 17:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spin-off the product list? 

message: Have you noticed that every single film in hollywood only uses Nikon cameras? never do you see a canon, what is that about and can we add it to the article. only if the film has in sports do you see canons in the bg, but from jurasic park to the omen you only see Nikons.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 17:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nikon and Hollywood

message: We really need to say more about Nikon's microscopes - Nikon are one of the Big Four (well, only four, really) microscope makers, along with Zeiss, Leica and Olympus. They really do make exceedingly good scopes - i have a few hundred thousand pounds' worth of their kit sitting a few metres away from me.
-- Tom Anderson 2007-01-11 19:45 +0000 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.40.81.29 (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Microscopes! 

message: Propose to merge Speedlight, a relatively trivial and short trade name, into this article. Decoratrix 02:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge--PremKudvaTalk 06:37, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't merge  There can be much written about the Nikon flash systems, just as there is an article about the Canon EOS flash system (Speedlite). --rogerd 02:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have expanded the Speedlight article and will be making further expansions as time permits. There is a separate article on the Nikon SB-800 that I feel should be merged into the Speedlight article. --rogerd 09:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Do not merge - The article needs to be expanded to be similar to the Canon Speedlite article. ɤіɡʍаɦɤʘʟʟ 23:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger of [[Speedlight]] into this article

message: User:Sellco has suggested that the external link http://www.aboutnikon.info may be appropriate for inclusion in this article. — Dave (Talk | contribs) 20:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed external link

message: I removed picture of a Nikon D700 with lens and Motorrad-67 put it back, commenting, "[T]hen why not delete all photos of cameras?" Nice idea, but really now.... Articles should only have pictures which support understanding of the topic. The topic here is "Nikon." We have illustrations of an unadorned D3 body, and an outfitted D200. There's nothing more you can learn about "Nikon" from a picture of a lesser-outfitted D700 here. --Stybn (talk) 01:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant images

message: See Talk:Nikon/History for some old page history that used to be at the title Nikon. Most of it has been history merged, but some of the history cannot be placed anywhere else. Graham87 14:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some old page history 

message: I've made a new page under Nikon Ohi Factory. Please have a look and expand if possible, the info can be merged too if it can't stand alone.
What do u think of a new section for NASA space cameras. Nikon has a signification involvement with NASA since the early Nikon Photomic FTN used in Apollo 15 to the latest order for Nikon D2xs. kchanyr 19:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikon Ohi Plant and NASA space cameras

message: 1) The first line of this section -- "Nikon created some of the first digital SLRs (DSLRs) as research projects for NASA in 1991.[5]" -- seems clearly wrong. The article cited says the camera in question was developed by NASA, not Nikon. I think it's clear that NASA simply took a Nikon camera body and did their own digital modifications to it. If Nikon was involved at all, it was only peripherally. 
2) The following sentence -- "After a late-1990s partnership with Kodak to produce digital SLR cameras based on existing Nikon film bodies, Nikon released the Nikon D1 SLR under its own name in 1999" -- is also wrong and incomplete. Nikon and Kodak did not really have a partnership -- Kodak simply bought Nikon bodies from Nikon USA and modified them in its own facilities. (see this article, based on interviews with Kodak's Professional Digital Still Camera personnel: 
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6463-7191)
On the other hand, Nikon *did* have a partnership to develop pro digital SLR still cameras, called the E2/E3, with Fujifilm *before* the D1 was introduced, so the D1 was not Nikon's first DSLR released under its own name. See Nikon's corporate history (for the year 1995):
http://nikon.com/about/info/history/products/index.htm
Evillager (talk) 17:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for all the great info. Please feel free to incorporate it into the article. --Stybn (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History -- Digital Photography 

message: Nikon stocks a full line of excellent rifle scopes. Why no mention of them in the sport optics section?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sillyak (talk • contribs) 05:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the rifle scope links since they were linkspam. Wikipedia is not a directory to help someone find rifle scopes. Article and links should be info on the company, not how to buy their products. Products should be referenced to neutral third party info on them. 70.208.4.8 (talk) 21:05, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no mention of rifle scopes? 

message: http://www.nikoninstruments.com/
--222.64.222.202 (talk) 11:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A red link has been created based on the following..... 

message: Cleaned up allot of WP:PEACOCK and unreferenced statements. Tagged others since there are long sections of claims and analysis with nary reference in sight. 70.208.4.8 (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: References needed

message: Should Nikon Professional Services (NPS) be included in the realm of this article? AFAIK it is not a subsidiary, but it does, in some ways behave like one.
J Y Chan 16:40, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nikon Professional Services is a really important item. Very useful and active service for professionals. Was Nikon the first company starting such a global and extensive service?  77.12.112.68 (talk) 12:11, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPS 

message: I want only to know what is the different between D90 and D5000  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.19.48.32 (talk) 06:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikon DLSR 

message: An editor introduced a section on Nikon sponsoring a football time. I removed it on the grounds that Nikon has many sponsors many things. A Nikon webpage includes information about how to request sponsorship. The editor reinserted the material. I looked at the editor's contributions, and the editor's significant focus is Galatasaray SK. I removed the material a second time with an edit comment to seek consensus on the talk page. The editor reverted without coming to this talk page.
I believe the material is WP:UNDUE. Nikon's interests are widespread, it sponsors many activities and events, and this particular sponsorship does not seem that significant outside of soccer/football. Nikon has become the official photo/camera sponsor of the team. The soccerex site states, "The Japanese firm has been a strong supporter of football, with many years of involvement in the Asian game through partnerships with events such as the Asian Cup and Asian Champions League." Although it may be the first Turkish sponsorship or first team sponsorship, the impact appears to be more about G SK than Nikon.
:Commenting on the agreement, Nikon Middle East FZE Managing Director Takashi Yoshida emphasized the global importance of the sponsorship agreement and said: “We are glad and honored to become an official sponsor of Galatasaray which is one of the most successfull and well-known football clubs not only in Turkey, but also among Europe and the Middle-East countries with its supporters, increasing day by day. Turkey has been the strategically very important market for Nikon with its young and hardworking population. As Nikon family, we chose Galatasaray which we are perfectly sure about its brand value and we believe that we are going to implement such good and successfull works together with passion, friendship and precision. As Galatasaray chose us, we chose Galatasaray as our partner. We say ‘I am Galatasaray’ and we support our team.”LardoBalsamico (talk) 02:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Should I add more than this?LardoBalsamico (talk) 02:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nikon sponsorship of Galatasaray SK Football Team 

message: Ads aren't favored by me: Often sponsorship is mostly that. 
But many other articles about companies partly widely list sponsorships, so there has to be a balance, even between different companies (articles).
Old and irrelevant items have to be removed, additionally everything violating WP:WEIGHT and WP:VALID, even compared with others, e.g. ExxonMobil. A good example is Boeing. Tagremover (talk) 15:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Sponsorship statements are needed for the [[WP:BALANCE]], especially when comparing companies

message: There is a voting between 3 proposals, additional variants possible. Decision probably in the second half of February? Tagremover (talk) 09:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template talk:Nikon DSLR cameras|Voting]] about new [[Template:Nikon DSLR cameras]] proposals 

message: I think it's incorrect to say that Mitsubishi Group is Nikon's "parent" company.  Mitsubishi Group, according to their own web site, doesn't own the companies that are a part of it.  It is a consortium,  not a corporation.  "Membership" is about subscription to a shared business philosophy, not about ownership.  Nikon is an independently owned company, it has no parent company.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.9.117 (talk) 10:42, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to Mitsubishi 

message: *Strong Support A camera, much less a lens model, by itself isn't notable or worthy of standalone status unless it's a technological breakthrough. This is a standard camera lens, even if rare, and is 40 yrs old. Should be merged... Veryproicelandic (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Nikon Nikkor 28-45 mm f/ 4.5 into Nikon 

message: Why does a significant portion of this article consist of product listings? This seems contrary to WP:NOTCATALOG. --NeilN talk to me 13:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Product listings 

message: I changed the Japanese version of the company name so that it no longer links the characters to Wikitionary. Linking each character seems confusing because it suggests that each kanji and kana is at the same level of structure in the term. Fried Gold (talk) 22:26, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Un-[[template:linktext|linktext]]-ing the company name 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Nikon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140826180802/http://www.oltununkalbi.com:80/haber-49-nikon-strengthens-digital-focus-for-2006.html to http://www.oltununkalbi.com/haber-49-nikon-strengthens-digital-focus-for-2006.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: :Nevertheless, Nikon is the only[citation needed] major camera manufacturer still making film SLRs. The remaining model is the professional Nikon F6 with the last amateur model, FM10, having been discontinued.
As far as I know the Nikon FM10 has never been manufactured by Nikon (its seems page confirms this), being a Nikon labeled Cosina built camera.  Please also provide a citation for the FM10 being discontinued, this camera is still available new from several sellers, and even got a price bump last year. My understanding (which could be completely wrong, it is hard to keep up on this) is that it is not discontinued.69.140.167.14 (talk) 03:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  FM10 discontinued? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Nikon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150502221904/http://www.trustadvisory.info:80/allindia_2014.html to http://www.trustadvisory.info/allindia_2014.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In 1917 it was empire of japan and the capital was Tokyo City Abdullah Al Manjur (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  1917 

message: According to the list, the F-301 is entry-level (lowest), and the F-501 is high-end (just below the F-4). Those cameras are distinct only by the 501 having the autofocus. It seems very unlikely anybody with some knowledge would make that distinction due to the AF. On the contrary, AF was long considered an amateur feature by many professionals. They stuck to the F3 for a long time or till the transition to digital. In MF (truly professional equipment) AF was only available recently, and nobody would have considered a Hasselblad "entry-level" or anything like this. In short, that classification is nonsense, making the whole section suspicious.2001:7D0:88A6:3A00:284B:AE78:30CB:C1C2 (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories