Nikon buys Red?

[Snowfun]

33 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

sport vs spectacle conundrum.

Or, indeed, the sport vs a certain brand of sunglasses debacle? 

[Clark Nikolai]

9 hours ago, kye said:

I've stopped trying to understand the younger generations in terms of tastes etc..  The other day we went out to a nearby community event and my daughter (20) came, and was rocking one of these:

[ Ilford Pixi-D ]

I couldn't find anything online about it other than online stores and Reddit comments telling people "you're in the wrong place - you have a digital camera".

It looks cute. I think it might be mostly a fashion accessory (but it also takes pictures). I like how it's small. It's kind of wild that a camera "for kids" is 44 Megapixel. Odd that there's no bluetooth to transfer to your smart phone or tablet.

I'm an adult and I would consider this for some situations like travelling and my photos aren't so important.

[mercer]

12 hours ago, D Verco said:

Lol what. Only some of Nikon's sensors are Sony designed. Others like the z9 are designed by Nikon and then manufactured by Sony. 

Haha, actually the Z9 is supposedly a stock Sony sensor with a couple tweaks. I assume it's like the whole D850 debacle Nikon found themselves in. And I don't know what difference it makes who designed the sensor? If Sony owns a patent for their AF, and Nikon wants to use it, Nikon would still have to pay a license fee for it... if they designed the sensor or not.

[mercer]

I wonder if Red (Nikon) is planning on reassuring their customer base after this news. I know I would need it, or a new release under the new management, before I invested anything into Red right now.

[kye]

7 hours ago, Clark Nikolai said:

It looks cute. I think it might be mostly a fashion accessory (but it also takes pictures). I like how it's small. It's kind of wild that a camera "for kids" is 44 Megapixel. Odd that there's no bluetooth to transfer to your smart phone or tablet.

I'm an adult and I would consider this for some situations like travelling and my photos aren't so important.

It's definitely cute, but I think it's probably not good.

I couldn't find any reviews or sample images, so I suspect it might even be a low-res sensor that just upscales to 44M in software.  It's probably the same sensor and firmware as those first generation 40+MP smartphones.  If retro is in, then a bit of blur is part of the style, not a failure of lens design or MTF curves!

[IronFilm]

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Transparency?

Armstrong colluded with the UCI to cover up his positive tests FFS.

Gee, I hope you never discover what the sports bureaucracy in other sports get up to.... 

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Not 100% of riders.

Name a Top 10 finisher (not just in the TdF but any Grand Tour, or heck, even any of the Classics) from that era who you're certain wasn't ever taking drugs?

I feel as a fan to be stressing and worrying over who was or wasn't is a futile exercise. Just enjoy the racing for what it is. (and got to admit, the racing during that era was a lot better!)

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

No, you’re trying to prove your own point that 100% of riders were using.

I never said that. 

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Floyd Landis’ TdF title in 2006 went to Oscar Periero just as Alberto Contador’s went to Andy Schleck in 2010 so that proves the point that they only had to go one place down to find a rider that they could give it to.

Oh sure, and Óscar Pereiro has never had any doping allegation scandals around him! /s 😅😂🤣 If you fully believe he's totally clean then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell 😉

This proves the point about how totally different Lance Armstrong has been treated, as a scapegoat and a punching bag for the entire world's media (not just cycling media) to beat up upon. 

(just to be clear btw, I'm no great fan of Lance Armstrong specifically! In fact his existence kinda annoyed me back then, as Armstrong prevented my favorite rider from winning any more TdF titles!! If not for Lance, then I think he'd have gone on to win even more titles than Lance did. Oh well)

(also just to be clear: yes, what he did is wrong. It's wrong to dope. But when you consider the broader context, I find it impossible to get as super hyped up furiously mad about it as so many others seem to be. It's merely disappointing, not some kind of greatest scandal since Watergate) 

[IronFilm]

9 minutes ago, mercer said:

I wonder if Red (Nikon) is planning on reassuring their customer base after this news. I know I would need it, or a new release under the new management, before I invested anything into Red right now.

What reassurances would you be needing? 

I'm not a RED user myself these days (although back when I was still more seriously aspiring to be a DP, I was the DP a fair few times with a RED camera), but if I was then I'd be seeing this as good news. 

Because now you've got a small niche player having the backing and support of a major global company. (well, by camera manufacturer standards) 

Hopefully some of Nikon's reliability and customer service abilities will rub off onto RED itself? Maybe Nikon's huge manufacturing capabilities will also lead to lower prices for future REDs? Maybe we'll see a sub US$4K Komodo?

 

[andrgl]

On 3/8/2024 at 11:16 AM, Andrew Reid said:

One day I think Sony will buy Nikon and ultimately control RED's product line.

This now seems very likely.

[mercer]

Here's an interesting video regarding the purchase...

For those that don't have the time, or inclination, to watch, he basically says that this purchase was so Nikon could get into the high end cinema market. He also claims it has nothing to do with the patent, but then kinda contradicts himself. Either way, it's a breakdown of what probably occurred over the past 2 years between Red and Nikon...

Trigger Warning: if you despise Red and believe their patent is complete BS, then you may want to skip this video.

[mercer]

30 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

What reassurances would you be needing? 

 

Well, I don't need any because I'm not a customer at any point in the near future, but if I was considering buying into the Red ecosystem, I'd like a bit more information from Nikon or "Red" before I made such a big purchase... another press release... a new Red camera with a Nikon badge on it... something to let me know that they're not just going to ingest the IP and scale back their new cinema division.

[IronFilm]

Over on Nikon Rumors, a commentator posted this summary:

Quote

 

I listened to a podcast with the president of the RED company:
-he can’t say much for now
-don’t expect changes for now it will take time to change anything
-there will be changes, that is inevitable, he is optimistic however and it’s going to be for the best
-passion for cameras will bring the 2 different cultures together
-this has nothing to do with the patent lawsuit
-RED was feeling quite limited, and they can’t do design everything in-house , the market is too small , a lot of competition. Partnerships was one of the solution. The 2 companies have something the other wants
-economy of scale is what he is expecting, and Red won’t feel limited by lack of resources anymore.
-he was impressed by the Z9 and the motion trigger tech(auto-capture)
-he wants to keep his freedom and RED’s freedom

http://disq.us/p/2y0773n 

 

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

something to let me know that they're not just going to ingest the IP and scale back their new cinema division.

Doubt it, that would be a big waste of the $$$$ they spent to buy RED. 

[PannySVHS]

I think I know the reason, why Nikon bought Red. I'm very sure they did it just to piss this guy off. He sounds like someone just cut his mullet off. 😊 I like Mike. But seeing and especially hearing him was hillarious. "I am pissed."😂 He just bought an Epic btw.

 

[JulioD]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Over on Nikon Rumors, a commentator posted this 

 

Ooohhhh remember when RED did this??

https://www.engadget.com/2018-02-13-foxconn-red-8k-cameras.html
 

and it turned out to be…nothing?

This whole synergy making things better cheaper is just corporate BS

 

[Davide DB]

It is economy of scale, baby!

I see nothing mysterious in this. Nikon just before the move to mirroless was almost given up for dead (it had just lost a very important piece of its business in lithography of electronic components). Now it's out of the picture, but I don't think its Z line has changed things all that much.

So in a very high-tech market with a very small (declining) number of units sold, it is increasingly difficult to find the funds for the necessary technological investments. Sony has a diversified business and can rely on revenues and technologies from so many other markets.

Red in my opinion did not fare any better. It remained a mystery to me how such a small company could make a living in this industry. Where was it getting the money for technology investments. By the way, in Europe Red was getting progressively gnawed off the market by Arri.

So big fish eat little fish. It's a win-win deal for both of them even while keeping their respective brands separate.

The exchange of technologies will be there. Even without fantasy Red by Nikon stickers or the like.

Nikon acquires several patents and technology (raw and global shutter) and enters the cinema market.

Red accesses Nikon's technology and more of its production capacity.

If in a few years we essentially have a Nikon camera inside a Red cube marked Red no one will ever know. Then of course there are a whole series of probable ripple effects in the patent war and on trade agreements with other brands.

[kye]

6 hours ago, JulioD said:

This whole synergy making things better cheaper is just corporate BS

Not always, but sadly it's hard to do.

The challenge is that for synergies to emerge the management from the more powerful company needs to have the humility to recognise that they don't know all the answers and that there are better ways of doing things.  Unfortunately, "not invented here" is a very common mindset and different is eradicated rather than celebrated.

[sanveer]

A few years ago, Nikon was talking about a 1inch sensor they developed which was absolutely class leading. Wat above and beyond anything else in the 1inch sensor space, and better than many FullFrame sensors. And then, like the mythical Organic Sensor of Panasonic, it vanished into thin air.

Sony seems to be the RED of the Image Sensor world. I am guessing they have way too many patents regarding sensors, and they and a few others prevent anyone else from creating something absolutely crazy.

I mentioned this, because its curious how such promising sensors, that should be in modern cinema cameras, never really come to fruition. RED has been bullying the industry on RAW video, and a few others on sensor and hardware development? 

 

https://nikonrumors.com/2021/02/17/nikon-announced-the-development-of-a-new-1-inch-17-84mp-stacked-cmos-4k-1000-fps-sensor.aspx/

 

[John Matthews]

1 hour ago, sanveer said:

I mentioned this, because its curious how such promising sensors, that should be in modern cinema cameras, never really come to fruition. RED has been bullying the industry on RAW video, and a few others on sensor and hardware development? 

This is actually a great point. Maybe Nikon hopes to have more leverage in sensor negotiations with Sony or anyone else.

[sanveer]

56 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

This is actually a great point. Maybe Nikon hopes to have more leverage in sensor negotiations with Sony or anyone else.

I also read that Sony was fabbing their new sensors at TSMC, so its most likely a matter of patents, and not so much anything else.

These kind of monopolies, in general are bad. I suspect that they are among the reasons for the downfall of many companies that rely on such sensor makers, who restrict patent use (remember the debate, for the longest, that suspected that Panasonic was restricted in its access to PDAF, since it made video powehouses, and that's why we had the terrible Depth-from-Defocus (DFD), for the longest).

 

[John Matthews]

Redcode RAW was initially implemented in the early 2010s, but the filing was December 28th 2007. I imagine the patent will only last a few more years. This must have also played a role in the acquisition. Nikon will have a very short window to leverage it.

[Nath]

38 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

Redcode RAW was initially implemented in the early 2010s, but the filing was December 28th 2007. I imagine the patent will only last a few more years. This must have also played a role in the acquisition. Nikon will have a very short window to leverage it.

 

This or Jannard had really a short window to cash out his market advantage now .