Nikon, a leading optics producer, stops making rifle scopes

[flamin lib]

and red dot sights for guns. Once existing inventory is gone there will be no more production.

In a time when other camera makers are looking for additional revenue streams Nikon is listening to the wildlife photographers who are clients and withdrawing from the firearms market.

Nikon will continue producing binoculars, telescopes and spotting scopes for birding but discontinue all rifle optics.

Whoda' thought a bunch of birders could quietly shift a major optics manufacturer.

[krispos42]

1. Link? n/t

[Surf Fishing Guru]

2. Link?

Read an article on Truth About Guns a week ago.

I wouldn't put much coin on flaminlib's reason; Nikon never had much market share and like most big behemoth companies they moved slowly to market moves in their side/narrow product lines.

They haven't done any of the big gun trade shows for a while, the writing has been on the wall.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/nikon-is-exiting-the-rifle-scope-business

[friendly_iconoclast]

3. Carl Zeiss, Leica, and Pentax also make rifle scopes, and show no signs of stopping

And a quick Google shows no evidence of pressure on any of them to get out of the rifle scope business.
So yeah, the OP's claim about the actual reason for Nikon's decision is bullshit.

This illustrates an old axiom, and an observation

The most effective propaganda will have a kernel of truth that is spun by the propagandist for their own ends,
whether those ends be a paycheck, or the promotion of a cause (as is the case here).

The paid propagandists/advertisers will generally do a better job of it, as they usually know
how to motivate people and edit copy.

Having a 'true believer' write the material is problematic,
as they tend to write for the occupants of an uncritcal bubble, not a skeptical readership.

In those circles, awkward questions are rarely asked and inconvenient truths are elided.

Instead, the ethos is: If it sounds like it's good for <The Cause>, it's true...or at least I'll pretend it is.
'Higher truths', and all that...

To the outsider, it come across as more than a little cultish- Trumpist propaganda is probably
the most obvious other example.

[flamin lib]

4. I have been an insider in the camera industry since

1975. Seen boom, bust, boom and now bust again. I also know a bit about guns.

All the camera makers are trying to scrounge every % of loss reduction they can because they are trying to justify their existence to the home Corporation. This ain't about market share, it's about market segment. Nikon has some share of the optical market in telescopes, binoculars, microscopes and targeting optics; in all segments. The telephoto segment for wildlife photography is larger than that of wildlife hunters. When the larger segment takes the time and energy to make a statement, the company listens.

It's not the end of all hunting scopes and Nikon won't stop making cameras. It's a reality that the gun community at large doesn't pay much attention to but it is an indication of shifting ideology, an evolution in priorities.

[friendly_iconoclast]

5. "Time and energy to make a statement"? The last such 'statement' was in 2013, AFAICT

Google it. There was a spate of articles in early to mid-2013, but nothing after that.

Occam's Razor says it's more likely due to lack of market share, as I repeat- no other dual manufacturer
is getting out of the business.

And, yep- Nikon's market estimate for next year is way down:

https://www.nikon.com/news/2019/20191107_1_e.pdf

After a poor 2018

https://digital-photography-school.com/massive-decline-in-digital-camera-sales-plus-nikon-sees-market-share-decrease/

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/gun-control-nikon-withdrawing-from-the-rifle-scope-business

...The site reached out to Nikon for confirmation on the rumor, which it received – along with an explanation for the decision. "TTAG spoke to Nikon’s advertising agency who confirmed the news. We’re told that this is a business decision Nikon has made based on their position in the highly competitive optics market."

The site reached out to Nikon for confirmation on the rumor, which it received – along with an explanation for the decision. "TTAG spoke to Nikon’s advertising agency who confirmed the news. We’re told that this is a business decision Nikon has made based on their position in the highly competitive optics market."

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=nikon+market+share

That's evidence vs. vague, wish-fufilling claims

I'm sure the fact that Nikon got out of the gun optics business makes you happy, and I've no doubt
*you* firmly believe that pressure from wildlife photographers caused it-

but the overwhelming likelihood remains that Nikon got out simply because they couldn't make
a go of it selling rifle scopes, while other large optical companies can.

[Marengo]

10. Oh, so it's a bit now is it? I remember a time when you claimed quite a bit more, a claim which...

Was quickly shot to pieces if you’ll pardon the pun. Good times....well, not for you at any rate.

[DashOneBravo]

6. Nikon bino's

I’ve got a set of Nikon Trailblazer binoculars that we’ve had for several years. The gf and I both use them and they are excellent.

I use them for deer hunting and she uses them to watch for coyotes. She’s lost two dogs to them.

[link:https://m.

|

[spin]

11. My cat was laying on the couch looking out the window. ...

When the pack started howling she turned and looked at me like she was asking, “What the hell is that noise?”

[DashOneBravo]

12. Yeah we hear that a couple of times a week

They are actually cowards around humans. Even in a pack, if you jump up or make a loud noise, they haul ass.

But they are a terror for cats and small dogs

[Straw Man]

7. Can you cite ...

... examples of pressure from wildlife photographers?

[friendly_iconoclast]

8. The OP is merely a proclamation of faith, and an example of confirmation bias

The only evidence of pressure on Nikon I could find was a few online articles from 2013, then nothing.

There may actually be more recent evidence to be had- but if so, it seems our interlocutor couldn't be
arsed to, y'know, produce any to back up his claim.

But hey, it got a few marks to buy in so it's all good.

That's the thing about True Believers- if it sounds true to them, it *must* be true-
even if it is patently ludicrous to the non-brainwashed.

It's common all over the political spectrum-another recent (and hilarious) example:

Link to tweet

Team Trump
?Verified account @TeamTrump

Team Trump Retweeted The Washington Post

Washington Post claims - without evidence - that @realDonaldTrump shared a “doctored” photo.

Team Trump added,
The Washington Post
Verified account @washingtonpost
Trump tweets doctored photo of his head on Sylvester Stallone’s body, unclear why https://wapo.st/2OnTxzp
9:52 AM - 27 Nov 2019

...
Kevin M. Kruse
?Verified account @KevinMKruse
Nov 28
Replying to @TeamTrump @realDonaldTrump

So you’re claiming that Trump actually has Sylvester Stone’s body from Rocky III?

Did they attach his head at Walter Reed?



Pé Resists
? @4everNeverTrump
Nov 27
Replying to @TeamTrump @realDonaldTrump

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” — George Orwell


The Pythia
👁️ ??????ά???
? @TiredDonkey
Nov 28
Replying to @TeamTrump @realDonaldTrump

The photo of Stallone was flipped horizontally, Stallone's head was cropped off and replaced with Trump's head, then the background was replaced. If you had any experience with photo retouch you would see the edits

[The Mouth]

9. That's because Teh Gunz, they are bad

and if you don't hate hate hate gunz then you are an evil Republican. Any data to the contrary is put out by the NRA
/sarc