High end Nik*n lens made by Canon?

[S230]

Not sure if this is true but would like to find out and hoping someone here can verify this for me. Someone had told me that some of Nik*n's top lens are made by Canon. is this true?

This is probably not surprising becasue companies share some patients. Some of the technology such as anti-shake is made by Min*lta.

[CoolToolGuy]

I doubt that these two rivals would allow the other one to produce an entire lens (but I could be wrong). However, it is very possible that Canon makes lens elements or other parts that Ni*on uses to make their lenses.

My 2 cents.

Have Fun,

[Tom W]

Agree with Rick here - Canon may make some exotic elements for Nikon, but I wouldn't expect them to make complete lenses for Nikon. It would make for some interesting internet debate if Canon did, though. Especially if Canon manufactured one or two of Nikon's ultrawides.

BTW, Canon does make Flourite lens elements for Takahashi's telescopes.

[lostdoggy]

A long long time ago before Canon became famous and started to build cameras Canon made lenses for Germany bodies and at one time I believe they also made Nikon lenses for nikon, but that was history. Then again who knows. At one time Sigma made lenses for both Nikon and Canon with Nikon and Canon names and whos to say they don't now.

correction Canon made camera bodies first then lenses. The 1st body used Nikkor lenses.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/history/canon_story/1933_1936/1933_1936.html

[S230]

This is certainly interesting information to know. Never even thought that Canon used Nikkor Lens. :)
Thanks.

I did find additional information supporting the fact and is interesting to point out that both companies make good products. Nikkor is excellent for it's lens and Canon for the body.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/nikon_canon.htm

[mstshtml]

BTW, Canon does make Flourite lens elements for Takahashi's telescopes.

Takahashi....my dream scope

[Andy_T]

This is certainly interesting information to know. Never even thought that Canon used Nikkor Lens. :)


You can also use Nikkor lenses on your Canon DSLR with a 30$ adapter...

Best regards,
Andy

[kram]

This is probably not surprising becasue companies share some patients.

Well, not really true. All of us here are strictly Canon patients :)

Sorry, not meaning to pick on the spelling but struck me as funny.....

[S230]

Well, not really true. All of us here are strictly Canon patients :)

Sorry, not meaning to pick on the spelling but struck me as funny.....np... my fault for not using spell checker. :)

[Mathiau]

it would almost be like Intel having shares in AMD....

i could see it as possible.

[Tee Why]

doubt it

[CyberDyneSystems]

This gets posted every now and then, and no it's not true.
The exact opposite appears regularly on Nikon forums as well,. (Nikon makes Canon lenses) it's just the work of trolls and sleazy camera salesmen (or uneducated ones that work at Ritz)

[BradT0517]

Personally I would buy stock in my opponent for two reason one I can benifit from there profit and two It would give me a head start in buying them out lol

[MacktheKnife]

Andy, More info on adpt to use Nikon lenses, on Canon bodies?


I am old Nikon shooter with at least $3000 worth of Nikon glass on hand.

About to jump ship and buy a new 30D body. Help

MacktheKnife

Another expensive hobby

[MrChad]

Seeing that Nikon is one of the premier mfg. of lens elements in the world it wouldn't surprise me if Canon might not source some lens elements from Nikon.

Lens Works III makes no claim of Canon making lens elements, simply just designing a good prototype for mfg.

[Mike Reynolds]

I would not be surprized as rival motorcycle companies joined forces as Suzuki's DRZ 400 abnd LTZ400 are both available in Kawasaki trim

[Monito]

Nikon's sensors are made by Sony. Now that Sony is a DSLR rival, it's an open question what Nikon's business plan is going to be. If Nikon wants to get into full-frame, then Sony will be there six months later. Hard to imagine Nikon paying Sony for more than six months of exclusivity. Or maybe Nikon will go to a different sensor chip fab.

[S230]

Nikon's sensors are made by Sony. Now that Sony is a DSLR rival, it's an open question what Nikon's business plan is going to be. If Nikon wants to get into full-frame, then Sony will be there six months later. Hard to imagine Nikon paying Sony for more than six months of exclusivity. Or maybe Nikon will go to a different sensor chip fab.It would be really funny if Nikon decides to have their sensors made by Canon one of these days.

[Anh Bi]

I foresee Nikon using Fujifilm sensors in their bodies in the near future.
Heck, all Fujifilm DSLR are based on Nikon bodies already. This will be an interesting outcome.

[Geoffery]

Both Canon and Nikon made their own lens elements in their own lens making factory. Some of the technologies used in Nikon lenses are Canon's patents; such as SWM and VR, which are just different names to USM and IS.

Though both companies might deny nor admit to these, the conclusion came from the facts that Canon has registered patents on these technologies with the US Patents while Nikon does not have any.

It is also interesting that AF Nikkor lenses below 300mm featuring AF-S (SWM) only surfaced after Year 2000 onwards while the first AF-S came earlier in late 1996 via the 300mm and 400mm (non-VR types) super telephotos. And the Nikon 80-400mm was the company's first ever VR lens but it does not feature AF-S. This gave further hints that Nikon doesn't own the patents to ultrasonic motors, preventing it from utilising it in the VR 80-400mm zoom lens.

Also, all other companies are already leasing Canon's EOS System technologies/patents when it comes to designing new lenses/mounts. Among them are Hasselblad's H2D/H3D MF, Mamiya ZD System, Olympus/Panasonic/Leica 4/3 System and the discontinued Contax N 35mm System - the fully-electronic mount system pioneered in the EOS series since 1987.

[MrChad]

Both Canon and Nikon made their own lens elements in their own lens making factory. Some of the technologies used in Nikon lenses are Canon's patents; such as SWM and VR, which are just different names to USM and IS.

Though both companies might deny nor admit to these, the conclusion came from the facts that Canon has registered patents on these technologies with the US Patents while Nikon does not have any.

It is also interesting that AF Nikkor lenses below 300mm featuring AF-S (SWM) only surfaced after Year 2000 onwards while the first AF-S came earlier in late 1996 via the 300mm and 400mm (non-VR types) super telephotos. And the Nikon 80-400mm was the company's first ever VR lens but it does not feature AF-S. This gave further hints that Nikon doesn't own the patents to ultrasonic motors, preventing it from utilising it in the VR 80-400mm zoom lens.

Also, all other companies are already leasing Canon's EOS System technologies/patents when it comes to designing new lenses/mounts. Among them are Hasselblad's H2D/H3D MF, Mamiya ZD System, Olympus/Panasonic/Leica 4/3 System and the discontinued Contax N 35mm System - the fully-electronic mount system pioneered in the EOS series since 1987.

I'm not so sure about the IS technology. Canon had the first interchangable IS lens but Nikon had the first IS system in one of their fixed lens camera I believe.

[Geoffery]

Wrong. Canon first showed its IS technology with a prototype EF 300mm f/2.8L USM at Photokina 1992 while Nikon debuted its compact camera with stabilizing technology a year later.

[wsmith]

Fuji will provide Olympus with a half frame 12Mpix sensor for the top of its line.
Fuji already makes a D200 based DSLR with Nikon mount.
However, Mitsubishi owns Nikon and Mitsubishi makes sensors for mobile phones and army.
Mitsubishi makes Cmos and CCD dual type sensors just like Fuji Film but does not infringe any patent since Fuji Film never mentioned its use on cell phones.
If Nikon wants sensors, it has where to pick them simple and dual sensor like Fuji once they get the licence for cameras.
Also Sharp, Panasonic, Samsung and Kodak are known to be good at CCD and Cmos sensors.

[MrChad]

Fuji will provide Olympus with a half frame 12Mpix sensor for the top of its line.
Fuji already makes a D200 based DSLR with Nikon mount.
However, Mitsubishi owns Nikon and Mitsubishi makes sensors for mobile phones and army.
Mitsubishi makes Cmos and CCD dual type sensors just like Fuji Film but does not infringe any patent since Fuji Film never mentioned its use on cell phones.
If Nikon wants sensors, it has where to pick them simple and dual sensor like Fuji once they get the licence for cameras.
Also Sharp, Panasonic, Samsung and Kodak are known to be good at CCD and Cmos sensors.

http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfolio/about/index.htm
Would that make Mitsubishi the majority share holder or parent company? I've heard so many things about Nikon as being a private company this, owned by that...

...perhaps this is true but when ever I read investor data or find an article about the returns or year end results in the WSJ no one ever references Mitsubishi as a parent company or majority share holder.

I just want to be sure we aren't spreading the great internet un-truths here as can so often happen.

Everything I can find to date states Nikon is an independant publically traded company that you are more then welcome to buy shares in. And the corp. profile states nothing obvious to me that they are or are not owned by Mitsubishi....if anything maybe Nippon but that's a fairly vague statement as well as the Nippon name is associated with almost anything mfg. in Japan. Sort of like Acme in the states...but their is a Nippon associated with Denon electronics brand...

Edit:

http://www.mitsubishi.com/php/users/category_search.php?lang=1

Ok, apparently I have learned something new again today yet....the prior statement is correct.
For some reason I feel better now knowing this isn't typical internet imagi-knowledge. My apologies to wsmith for doubting.

Edit again...if any ever reads to the bottom of this blather....

About Canon Inc.
Canon Inc. (NYSE: CAJ), headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, is a leader in the fields of professional and consumer imaging equipment and information systems. Canon's extensive range of products includes copiers, inkjet and laser printers, cameras, video equipment, medical equipment and semiconductor-manufacturing equipment. Originally established in 1937 as a camera manufacturer, Canon has successfully diversified and globalized to become a worldwide industry leader in professional and consumer imaging systems and solutions. With over 100,000 employees worldwide, Canon has manufacturing and marketing subsidiaries in Japan, the Americas, Europe, Asia and Oceania; and a global R&D network with companies based in the United States, Europe, Asia and Australia. Canon's consolidated net sales for fiscal 2004 (ended December 31, 2004) totalled $33.3 billion (at an exchange rate of 104 yen = US$1). Visit the Canon Inc. website at: www.canon.com/index.html

All the debate about L glass and the big money for Canon is in office copier and toner sale, who knew :P Well actually I did know this. I think I read an analysis report once that stated the camera business accounts for like 75% of the market image for Canon and only 7.5% of the total corp. sales. Obviously I made up these exact figures but I hope you get the point....

[wsmith]

http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfolio/about/index.htm
Would that make Mitsubishi the majority share holder or parent company? I've heard so many things about Nikon as being a private company this, owned by that...

...perhaps this is true but when ever I read investor data or find an article about the returns or year end results in the WSJ no one ever references Mitsubishi as a parent company or majority share holder.

In fact you are not completely wrong, and I am not completely right.
Mitsubishi does not own Nikon, but Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi trust and Mitsubishi is some kind of trustee brand, not that much an tight oligopoly as you may call it outside Japan. For instance, Mitsubishi cars and trucks is controlled by Daimler.
These kind of japanese companies appeared or have been rebuilt since WWII despite the american anti-trust law that dismembered them, and especially Mitsubishi. All are established on oligopolistic ground to share common knowledge and unused capacities. They use one or several banks as a kind of holding and for business and trade. This by no means compares to Sony or Canon for instance and they aren't the companies of one man but those of many.
These oligopolies were very much harmed by the bankrupcy in banking in Japan at the end of the 90s. This is very true about Mitsubishi, who had to reorganize and whose bank failed to keep control for instanceof their car maker.

[EORI]

This here is an interesting dialogue about Japanese conglomerates. Let me add some additional information.

The Mitsubishi group, through minor shareholdings, informal committees, and executive exchanges, continue to maintain close ties. These groupings are known as keiretsu (affiliations), and before the war, zaibatsu (industrial conglomerate). You can see a list of Mitsubishi companies here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi#The_Mitsubishi_companies They meet every Friday each month: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Kinyokai

Thus, when Daimler-Chrysler sold all of their share interest in Mitsubishi Motors a while back, it was the group banks and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (from which Motors originally spun off in the early '70s) that provided the necessary funding to not only buy back shares, but to keep Motors solvent.

Canon, on the other hand, is part of the Fuyo Group. You can see the list of members here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuyo_Group . As you can see, Mizuho Bank (formerly Fuji), Nissan, Yamaha, and even Ricoh, are members.

As the other poster indicated, Nikon presumably could and has tapped into the huge resources and expertise that their sister companies have to develop or procure their own sensor. However, one would believe that if Nikon and the Mitsubishi group had the wherewithal to develop their own image sensor for cameras, they would already have done so. I agree with the other poster's assessment that Nikon will ultimately turn to Fujifilms for sensor technology. If there's a sensor that can take on Canon's proprietary CMOS, I believe it's Fujifilm's.

[MrChad]

This here is an interesting dialogue about Japanese conglomerates. Let me add some additional information.

The Mitsubishi group, through minor shareholdings, informal committees, and executive exchanges, continue to maintain close ties. These groupings are known as keiretsu (affiliations), and before the war, zaibatsu (industrial conglomerate). You can see a list of Mitsubishi companies here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi#The_Mitsubishi_companies They meet every Friday each month: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Kinyokai

Thus, when Daimler-Chrysler sold all of their share interest in Mitsubishi Motors a while back, it was the group banks and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (from which Motors originally spun off in the early '70s) that provided the necessary funding to not only buy back shares, but to keep Motors solvent.

Canon, on the other hand, is part of the Fuyo Group. You can see the list of members here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuyo_Group . As you can see, Mizuho Bank (formerly Fuji), Nissan, Yamaha, and even Ricoh, are members.

As the other poster indicated, Nikon presumably could and has tapped into the huge resources and expertise that their sister companies have to develop or procure their own sensor. However, one would believe that if Nikon and the Mitsubishi group had the wherewithal to develop their own image sensor for cameras, they would already have done so. I agree with the other poster's assessment that Nikon will ultimately turn to Fujifilms for sensor technology. If there's a sensor that can take on Canon's proprietary CMOS, I believe it's Fujifilm's.

I'm confused after reading the link is Fuji Bank related to Mitsu as well? Wouldn't that make Canon and Nikon ultimately owned by the same money?

[EORI]

Mitsubishi Group = Nikon
Fuyo Group = Canon

They are two separate groups. There are several more such industrial groupings that can be found in Japan, such as Sumitomo, Mitsui, etc.

[TTLImaging]

ok here goes... Nikon VR= canon IS patent. Nikon AF-S = Canon USM patent. They do not share internal optical elements. Nikon is only company to use pure silica as there ED elements, much like canon's Flourite elements. Nikon is an optics company that hapens to make cameras. Canon is an imaging company that happens to build optics. Sorry but 0 to the truth in canon grinding glass for nikon. Still would like to see several nikon lenses available in an EF mount though....

[MrChad]

If you check out the virtual plant tour on the Canon museum they walk you through the making of a 500mm EF IS USM lens.

The header note for the melting of the glass states the glass making is not done at the Utima--whatever plant.

Since they don't give the name of a canon plant or plants for the glass I would assume there may be a 3rd party plant somewhere the makes only raw glass. Asashi, NIkon?

I don't know, maybe Canon does make their own glass?

[Proctorr]

No...Canon definitely doesn't make their lenses. Nikon is used by NASA in space and Canon's flourite elements shatter on liftoff.

[blackshadow]

No...Canon definitely doesn't make their lenses. Nikon is used by NASA in space and Canon's flourite elements shatter on liftoff.

My BS detector just went off big time!

[S230]

I did a search and it's sad but I think it's true that Nik*n was used in the Discovery shuttle. I think it was just the lens but using Kodak body. Not sure why Canon was not used.
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2005/0907_nasa_01.htm

I also looked at another web site and do not see any Canon in their camera inventory.
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/sql.htm
I see the following: Hasselblad, Linhof, Maurer, Ansco, Nikon, Rolleiflex, Skylab, Sony, Kodak.

[ak_powder_monkey]

Aren't some high end nikon lenses made by tamron?

[Proctorr]

I did a search and it's sad but I think it's true that Nik*n was used in the Discovery shuttle. I think it was just the lens but using Kodak body. Not sure why Canon was not used.
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2005/0907_nasa_01.htm

I also looked at another web site and do not see any Canon in their camera inventory.
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/sql.htm
I see the following: Hasselblad, Linhof, Maurer, Ansco, Nikon, Rolleiflex, Skylab, Sony, Kodak.

Nikon lenses are used in Space along with Nikon-Kodak hybrid bodies designed specifically for NASA. I am pretty sure they use Nikon because they don't use flourite in their lenses and that the Canon lenses will shatter upon liftoff.

Here's a picture using the 300 2.8 and the Kodak-Nikon hybrid body in space (I believe on ISS):

http://k43.pbase.com/u6/nero_design/upload/35240835.NASA_cam_01.jpg

Imagine the 400 F2.8...weightless in space :)

[S230]

Nikon lenses are used in Space along with Nikon-Kodak hybrid bodies designed specifically for NASA. I am pretty sure they use Nikon because they don't use flourite in their lenses and that the Canon lenses will shatter upon liftoff.

Here's a picture using the 300 2.8 and the Kodak-Nikon hybrid body in space (I believe on ISS):

http://k43.pbase.com/u6/nero_design/upload/35240835.NASA_cam_01.jpg

Imagine the 400 F2.8...weightless in space :)I thought you were kidding in your earlier post when you said shatter upon lift off. Never knew about that. Thanks.

[Monito]

Nikon lenses are used in Space along with Nikon-Kodak hybrid bodies designed specifically for NASA. I am pretty sure they use Nikon because they don't use flourite in their lenses and that the Canon lenses will shatter upon liftoff.

This is undoubtedly nonsense. Canon fluorite lenses (not so common as they used to be) are used by professionals on aircraft and helicopters and hovercraft and off-road vehicles and camels. The real reason is undoubtedly that Nikon underbid Canon in an effort to get some prestige points. Hasselblad, by their own statements, lost money on every piece of equipment they made for NASA. Same undoubtedly applies to Nikon.

[ScottE]

What amazes me is the Kodak DSLR. Kodak had such a bad reputation for image quality on their DSLRs that they dropped out of the market. If NASA chose an obsolete Kodak DSLR it is obvious that quality was not the main criteria for the decision.

[wsmith]

What amazes me is the Kodak DSLR. Kodak had such a bad reputation for image quality on their DSLRs that they dropped out of the market. If NASA chose an obsolete Kodak DSLR it is obvious that quality was not the main criteria for the decision.
These bodies used FF CCD sensors and it is well known that CCD has two disadvantages against Cmos that become unbearable when the sensor becomes bigger. CCD consumes a lot more energy than Cmos technology so it heats, which creates noise, and it's even hotter when it's big. Another disadvantage is that the data is collected through the entire line of photosites so more of them result in worse noise and manufacturing defaults unable to be filtered out like on Cmos single collector system.

No...Canon definitely doesn't make their lenses. Nikon is used by NASA in space and Canon's flourite elements shatter on liftoff.
The problem is that : not quality but the fact that Canon doesn't make its glass and as far as i know, Nikon does and is a world specialist.

You may have heard of Hoya taking Pentax. Hoya owns Tokina, and now Pentax. Hoya provides for 40% or so they say, of the glass used for lenses in the World. This is takes into account the ophtalmic glass for glasses.
Making glass and manufacturing lenses may be just two businesses that could be or may not be owned by the same brand.
Other brands are Essilor, which makes quite only ophtalmic lenses, Nikon, who also makes ophtamlic lenses for glasses and other some small manufacturers.
In fact Essilor or Hoya are the first producers (Essilor leads in ophtalmics), next to Sola and Nikon fourth. Essilor has 50% shares in Nikon Optics, which makes ophtalic lenses only, like Sola has shares in Zeiss ophtalmic business. However Nikon is definitely a glass manufacturer, like Essilor, Hoya or Sola. Nikon is even considered as the top leader in quality and technology.
The glass business isn't limited to providing the material but also all the lens technology and manufacturing.

So Canon may have good lenses well built but their lenses may not be the best to compete the best that Nikon can make out of his own glass. However, for instance, some great pair of ophtalmic lenses for glasses from Nikon may cost some 2000 dollars or euros. Imagine how much some of the same quality will cost mounted into a 13 lenses L zoom with much bigger lenses. 20 times more or even a lot more.
The lenses found even on the best Nikon or Canon lenses for photography are quite common technology, standard quality. The point in this business is to find the best optical formula with the less expensive optical material, fit into the smallest size. Also the manufacturing, the building precision and quality counts. Canon may be very good at this and best the others, and then only need to buy some plant to make its own lenses out of the glass it has to buy, or even buy its lenses and even manufacture lenses for other. They don't need to be in control and I am quite sure this business works with cross manufacturing.

[Kickstart]

CCD consumes a lot more energy than Cmos technology so it heats, which creates noise, and it's even hotter when it's big.

What about doing something like the Minolta RD3000 which used 2 seperate CCDs and joined the images together in camera.

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Minolta_RD-3000

Complex way of doing things, but might solve some of the issues (although it might be cheaper to just buy Canon sensors).

You may have heard of Hoya taking Pentax. Hoya owns Tokina, and now Pentax. Hoya provides for 40% or so they say, of the glass used for lenses in the World.

Is that 40% including the Pentax share?

All the best

Keith

[Cyl0n]

it would almost be like Intel having shares in AMD....

i could see it as possible.


MS invests in Apple.....

[rmford]

Apple runs on int- oh, wait. that happened...