It’s becoming increasingly clear that Nikon’s lawyers have been sending letters to Chinese lens makers. At least three now publicly admit to having received some form of a “license the mount (e.g. pay us) or else” letter. The Viltrox suit previously mentioned is now in progress in Chinese courts. Meanwhile, Sirui apparently has withdrawn their Z-mount autofocus lenses in China (half of which are APS-C, or DX, and fill clear gaps in Nikon’s DX lineup). Mieke also seems to have withdrawn their autofocus lenses.
None of the Japanese camera makers seems happy with the recent onslaught of Chinese optics that keep getting progressively better. CIPA and camera makers are reporting attachment rates—number of lenses sold per body—going down.
In the case of Nikon, they’re sending mixed signals more visibly than a teenager trying to find a date to the prom. Nikon made a big thing about higher end cameras being their goal, and then came out with the Z50II and Z5II and found that they’re selling so many entry bodies that it’s lowered their average selling cost. And then the Chinese come along and sell those new low-end camera buyers low-cost lenses. "Oh woe is me” say the beancounters. “You’re doing it to yourself” says I.
We did eventually get two more Nikon DX lenses to go with the quite great Z50II. But that still only makes a total of seven, and there are clear gaps in what’s available. Of course customers are going to build out their lens sets by looking elsewhere. Meanwhile, we see something similar with the Z5II: it finally received a 24-105mm f/4-7.1 companion, but there are probably only four FX primes and five FX zooms that track well with the Z5II's size and price point. Of course customers will go elsewhere when you leave a partial vacuum.
Stopping low-cost Chinese lenses in the mount doesn’t solve a problem for Nikon. Instead, it creates a new one: after two years of customers thinkng that the Z-mount is open, they are now starting to believe that the mount is closed. This has some contemplating buying cameras with more open mount stances, particularly from the two companies that Nikon most fears in terms of market share: Fujifilm and Sony. How do you say “oopsie” in Japanese? And how deep will you need to bow?
Don’t get me wrong. Nikon should protect their patents. However, in doing so they need to be doing one of two things to fully succeed: (1) produce every lens that’s needed in the system; or (2) find a FRAND (fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory) licensing solution that treats everyone equally and encourages third-party lenses filling in the system quickly. Nikon is currently doing (3) micromanaging in ways that they think benefit Nikon but are rattling customers. Plus, once Nikon picks #1 and/or #2, they need to communicate that clearly to the customer.
Cameras are a consumer business, and cameras (other than perhaps compacts) are systems, and these systems only benefit if they fill out quickly and fully.
Let me approach the issue from my point of view. I’m a key influencer when it comes to cameras, and particularly Nikon ones. I can’t begin to tell you how many people I’ve gotten started with something like a Nikon Z50II, one or two of Nikon’s DX zooms, and then finding one or two primes that fill in the holes in the all-Nikon approach (which right now means fast Chinese DX primes). If Nikon wants to take the Chinese lenses off the table, influencers such as myself start pointing out that Fujifilm X may be a better starting point, simply because it offers more optical choices (i.e. is a more filled out system, seems to have no third-party constraint, and thus might be more conducive to whatever you want to do in the future).
I’m not sure that Nikon understands who they’re in competition with. For about two decades, the choice was Canon or Nikon. Sometimes Canon won, sometimes Nikon won. Between the two, they controlled 75 to 85% of the market in any year. As Nikon started retreating from peak camera, Canon didn’t, so Nikon simply isn’t competing with them any more: Canon wants to (and mostly does) own 50% of the market, and Nikon has now drifted down to one-fifth the volume of their former rival. Nikon now finds themselves tucked into a market share war between Fujifilm just below them, and Sony a fair way above them. Drifting below Fujifilm would make Nikon a marginal brand, I believe. Nikon instead needs to grow volume and erode Sony. But neither Fujifilm nor Sony appear to be limiting Chinese lenses (even though they too are starting to feel the sting of lost lens sales). (I’m really going to have to look up the Japanese word for “oopsie,” aren’t I?)
Everything’s exacerbated by the fact that all the camera companies are having difficulties in launching their next cameras, thus they want to sell as many lenses as possible to make up some slack. The miniscule camera market doesn’t have the clout to get new sensors and ASICs on fab in a timely fashion, let alone buy enough DRAM and other short-supply parts for all their future cameras. Since the pandemic, parts supply has been a real problem for the camera makers. Now with AI gobbling up chips coupled with plant disruptions due to the new-fangled tariff war and a host of other issues, this has put every camera introduction I’m aware of behind schedule. Four products that I had been told were scheduled for late 2025 or early 2026 now are tentatively “second half 2026” announcements.
Nikon, I believe, has misinterpreted this as a “we need to circle our wagons” event. Perhaps they think that they can keep sales up by selling more lenses, but not in the way they seem to be going about it. I’ve written for decades about business frictions and their impacts. Nikon just upgraded from drum to disc brakes and is generating more friction than ever. Lens mount licensing needs to get resolved, stat.
I’ll have more to say about this in my WPPI commentary on byThom. I spent part of my time at the trade show tracking down Chinese lens makers and asking some pointed questions.