Nikon buys Red?

[eatstoomuchjam]

I just watched the PetaPixel review.  That sucker has a 95mm front thread!  That's another minus when paired with a camera that has no internal ND filters - and last time I checked, nobody had any sort of clip-in inline filter for the K-X yet (or if there were any, they were expensive enough that I ignored them).  Kolari have one for the OG Komodo, but it doesn't fit the X. 

PP didn't mentioned whether the lens was parfocal - judging by the lack of back focus adjustment lever, I'm guessing it's not completely, potentially relying on autofocus for that (which isn't ideal when shooting Red, where the AF is right on the line of usable/unusable which means you get tempted to use it and then pissed off when it doesn't work right).

Also, it's focus-by-wire which, as long as it can be set to linear response in camera, is potentially OK, but it's going to piss off a lot of filmmakers.  That and zoom being by wire also might actually be some slight benefit here because it might mean that one can set them to work in the correct direction, unlike nearly every other Nikon lens ever made.

So basically, Komodo-X with Z mount, potentially cool.  Wonder if they'll offer a retrofit service and/or do the same for OG Komodo.

Komodo-X combo with this lens?  Hard pass from me.

[BTM_Pix]

 

[PPNS]

how a slightly different mirrorless mount changes everything is a bit beyond me, but then again i’m not a seller of av equipment

[BTM_Pix]

Giving them the benefit of the doubt - as CVP are not usually into the breathless hyperbolic nonsense- it is the greater flexibility of the Z mount over the RF mount that opens up new paths for more people to move into RED.

Both Z and RF can adapt EF with AF but the Z offers the same with F, E and even Leica M with adapters.

Stretching a point, even manual MFT lenses can be used with the K-X via an additional cheap E>Z adapter as most of them will cover Super35.

That’s a lot more existing lens collections that people can use and could tempt more people in who have been reluctant to lock themselves into RF.

But, yeah, whilst it’s very interesting (a compact cinema camera with compact M mount lenses with AF for example) and a more flexible option, it’s not really in the “this changes everything” territory.

Changing the mount AND a price cut further towards PYXIS territory would’ve been though !

[ND64]

Only Sony and Canon have fully functional AF for Cine cameras, and it only works with their own lenses. But with Z mount the AF capabilities will be available with lenses other than Nikkor. This "changes everything" for those people who invested in E mount lenses but want to use a cine camera other than FX6/Burano. Of course this would be less of a topic if Burano wasn't such a meh product, or Sony had a global shutter sensor in an affordable body. 

[IronFilm]

4 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

For most of the shoots I do, a 28-135 on the K-X wouldn't be ideal - but if you don't need anything wider than 37mm FF equivalent, it'll probably look great.

Maybe the Sony 18-110mm cine zoom with an E to Z Mount adapter?

  

3 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

So basically, Komodo-X with Z mount, potentially cool.  Wonder if they'll offer a retrofit service and/or do the same for OG Komodo.

They do.

  

3 hours ago, PPNS said:

how a slightly different mirrorless mount changes everything is a bit beyond me, but then again i’m not a seller of av equipment

At least two big factors:

1) there are a tonne of Sony E Mount users, now they can very easily transition over to RED

2) Nikon will bring better AF to RED than Canon ever would have 

 

[eatstoomuchjam]

1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

Maybe the Sony 18-110mm cine zoom with an E to Z Mount adapter?

I never tried that one, but the range sounds nice!

3 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Both Z and RF can adapt EF with AF but the Z offers the same with F, E and even Leica M with adapters.

Just to be clear, though, with the Komodo and/or Komodo-X with their current firmware, to say they offer AF is technically true, but if you're using it for anything you care about, you're probably going to suffer heartbreak.

Also, FWIW, there's a company who has announced a Leica M to Canon RF autofocus adapter.  It's anybody's guess what it will cost or if it will even ship, but... hopefully soon?

4 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Changing the mount AND a price cut further towards PYXIS territory would’ve been though !

The last price cut really generated rage in the userbase.  I suppose the question is whether they'd gain more customers through a price drop than they would lose future sales due to people angry that their $10k camera investment dropped 50% in just a few months.

[BTM_Pix]

51 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Just to be clear, though, with the Komodo and/or Komodo-X with their current firmware, to say they offer AF is technically true, but if you're using it for anything you care about, you're probably going to suffer heartbreak.

They are claiming improvements - which they say will come to the RF mount as well - so it remains to be seen although the difference between licensing a mount and getting assistance from a manufacturer as they were doing with Canon and the ownership change meaning that they are now a part of the company with far more expertise in AF than themselves is potentially very significant indeed.

The licensing with RF gave them the information of how to drive the lens to a certain position whereas now they can leverage Nikon's vastly superior understanding of the process of determining when and where to drive it, hence why they will be able to improve the situation for the RF mount as well.

 

51 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Also, FWIW, there's a company who has announced a Leica M to Canon RF autofocus adapter.  It's anybody's guess what it will cost or if it will even ship, but... hopefully soon?

It was rumoured last summer that Megadap (who make the E to Z adapter) were releasing one but no official confirmation or date as yet.

There is/was a reticence with 3rd parties to produce anything that used electronics for RF due to Canon's stance on outlawing them.

I think that may have softened somewhat recently but perhaps only through an official licensing agreement.

51 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

The last price cut really generated rage in the userbase.  I suppose the question is whether they'd gain more customers through a price drop than they would lose future sales due to people angry that their $10k camera investment dropped 50% in just a few months.

The new mount opens up a lot more new people to be enraged by them down the line!

I was only making the point that the new mount and a price cut towards PYXIS levels would go some way to justifying the "this changes everything" strap line rather than them actually doing it, particularly so soon after the last cut.

But at the same time, even with the last reduction its now found itself launching with a very strong presence at that new price in the new "stripped down" version of the BM Cine 12K.

They are very different cameras of course but if I was looking to spend £6K on a cinema camera then its hard to ignore the value on offer from the BM camera.

[ac6000cw]

2 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

The last price cut really generated rage in the userbase.  I suppose the question is whether they'd gain more customers through a price drop than they would lose future sales due to people angry that their $10k camera investment dropped 50% in just a few months.

I suspect Nikon might not care too much about grumpy existing RED customers, if the lower prices increase the total RED sales revenue (and they sell expensive Nikon 'cinema' lenses alongside them). Nikon seem to be pretty aggressive on camera body pricing/value these days, and also seem to be taking video seriously as a way of increasing sales and 'market presence'. It'll be interesting to see what their next move is in the 'cinema' market.

[eatstoomuchjam]

2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

They are claiming improvements - which they say will come to the RF mount as well - so it remains to be seen although the difference between licensing a mount and getting assistance from a manufacturer as they were doing with Canon and the ownership change meaning that they are now a part of the company with far more expertise in AF than themselves is potentially very significant indeed.

Yeah - I saw that they're releasing a firmware version 2.0 with that.  It remains to be seen - they sort of pulled a Fuji a while ago by releasing some firmware that they complained improved face detection AF.  Then some YouTubers tested it and declared it "fixed" or "better."  Then everybody else used it and collectively agreed that it isn't usable.  I'm sure those same YouTubers are really pumped now about how 2.0 will fix all the stuff they said was fixed in 1.2.5 (or whatever the version was).  😅

Anyway, control of the mount can only have so much to do with whether they can detect a face in the screen and correctly use PDAF points to focus to it, and then stick on it and not jump to other stuff or the background, etc.  It might have a bit to do with smoothness of the rack or whatever, but my complaints about bad AF are much more in the category of "why the fuck did it jump to the background and stay there instead of on the face that never left the frame?" and "stop pulsing, you're not CDAF."  It's hard to imagine that's the fault of the lens mount, but... I suppose we'll see!

2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

It was rumoured last summer that Megadap (who make the E to Z adapter) were releasing one but no official confirmation or date as yet.

Not strictly only rumors - the Megadap guy shared a picture of one he was working on - but as you said, there's not really been anything since then.  Hope springs eternal, though!  At least for now, I have focus gears and DJI lidar to give AF to my M lenses.

2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

They are very different cameras of course but if I was looking to spend £6K on a cinema camera then its hard to ignore the value on offer from the BM camera.

As you said, they're pretty different.  I'm not likely to give up my K-X or my Komodo if I get a cine 12k - and definitely not my Ronin 4D.  They all complement each other and I'd be apt to use various combinations of them on short film shoots.

36 minutes ago, ac6000cw said:

I suspect Nikon might not care too much about grumpy existing RED customers, if the lower prices increase the total RED sales revenue (and they sell expensive Nikon 'cinema' lenses alongside them). Nikon seem to be pretty aggressive on camera body pricing/value these days, and also seem to be taking video seriously as a way of increasing sales and 'market presence'. It'll be interesting to see what their next move is in the 'cinema' market.

It's hard to say.  Apparently their recent financial results were pretty bad.  The big question is whether they will want to keep the extremely high margin, but smaller customer base of Red or if they'll drop the margins in the hope of higher sales.  My guess is that they'll keep Red as a halo brand with high prices and dedicated cinema bodies - and that we'll see Redcode RAW on upcoming high-end Nikon-branded mirrorless bodies, as well as the SOOC colors converging between the two lineups.  It's a strategy that works really well for Canon so Nikon might want to emulate it.

[BTM_Pix]

49 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Then some YouTubers tested it and declared it "fixed" or "better."

Its a sad indictment of the state of the world we live in when you can't rely on YouTubers to competently and objectively test something thirty seconds after its been released 🙂

 

49 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Anyway, control of the mount can only have so much to do with whether they can detect a face in the screen and correctly use PDAF points to focus to it, and then stick on it and not jump to other stuff or the background, etc.  It might have a bit to do with smoothness of the rack or whatever, but my complaints about bad AF are much more in the category of "why the fuck did it jump to the background and stay there instead of on the face that never left the frame?" and "stop pulsing, you're not CDAF."  It's hard to imagine that's the fault of the lens mount, but... I suppose we'll see!

That was the point that I was making (badly) - the significance of the mount change is in terms of what is going on behind it now rather than the physical performance of it moving to a specific point.

Its like BM with MFT,EF and L mount in that they know how to move it but don't have the algorithms/techniques/will to determine the why and where effectively enough to get beyond single zone AF-S capability.

That was largely the same situation for RED with the RF mount (albeit not as rudimentary as only having simple AF-S) as the actual process of determining where to move effectively wasn't in their wheelhouse and/or list of priorities but its a different story with Nikon being onboard because they do have that expertise to integrate into the main code.

With them claiming that they will be able to bring these enhancements to the RF mount version by firmware then the presumption is that it is not being done by an additional processor.

 

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

I never tried that one, but the range sounds nice!

It's this:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1280873-REG/sony_selp18110g_e_mount_lens.html

It's a cine lens design spin on their much much much cheaper Sony 18-105mm F4 photography lens (one I've had for years and years, a great run and gun lens):

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1001011-REG/sony_selp18105g_18_105mm_f_4_g_lens.html 

Kinda wish I had this lens for my Fujfilm camera, maybe the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 is what I should give into temptation and get instead. Slightly more expensive, very slightly wider, somewhat less range, but a full stop faster. 

11 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Just to be clear, though, with the Komodo and/or Komodo-X with their current firmware, to say they offer AF is technically true, but if you're using it for anything you care about, you're probably going to suffer heartbreak.

I'd imagine Komodo users will be happy to simply get moderately good enough AF for simple sit down interviews. 

Means they won't have to:

1) rent an FX6/FX9 instead

2) or pay for a 1st AC for the day

3) or pull it themselves and have to divide focus (ha!) between being in focus vs camera operating vs directing vs lighting vs audio vs etc everything else they do when doing a simple OMB sit down interview 

11 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

The last price cut really generated rage in the userbase.  I suppose the question is whether they'd gain more customers through a price drop than they would lose future sales due to people angry that their $10k camera investment dropped 50% in just a few months.

It's been normal for years that RED would do massive price slashes to their cameras as they near their end of their lifecycle (or even early into it!). 

People should stop getting upset about it. 

Even ARRI does this now. 

https://ymcinema.com/2025/01/28/arri-unveils-new-alexa-35-entry-level-model-with-flexible-licensing-and-affordable-media/ 

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

They are claiming improvements - which they say will come to the RF mount as well - so it remains to be seen although the difference between licensing a mount and getting assistance from a manufacturer as they were doing with Canon and the ownership change meaning that they are now a part of the company with far more expertise in AF than themselves is potentially very significant indeed.

The licensing with RF gave them the information of how to drive the lens to a certain position whereas now they can leverage Nikon's vastly superior understanding of the process of determining when and where to drive it, hence why they will be able to improve the situation for the RF mount as well.

That's the expectation/hope. 

And I would personally be shocked if we don't eventually see RED cameras broadly roughly speaking "matching" Nikon mirrorless performance for video AF. 

The question is only if it happens this generation or in the next generation. 

As doing it this generation is severely limited by both the hardware architecture and the software architecture RED has been using. The hardware their current generation RED cameras are using might flat out prevent them from ever matching Nikon mirrorless video AF performance, or even coming vaguely close. But even if it's not a barrier, and it has enough horsepower to do it (and the right kind of horsepower), then the entire software architecture that RED is running on might require a total overhaul from scratch to allow good enough AF performance. And Nikon might feel that's not worth it for a generation of cameras that only has a limited lifespan left, and would rather put all those efforts into instead the next generation of RED cameras, and have an entire new software stack built for them to run. (perhaps sharing something with Nikon mirrorless, for productivity efficiencies)

In the long run I expect RED/Nikon to drop support for Canon RF Mount, it might even come as soon as their next generation of camera releases ("DSMC4" or whatever they call it, or Komodo Gen2, or whatever) which then will be only in PL / Z Mount. 

8 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

The big question is whether they will want to keep the extremely high margin, but smaller customer base of Red or if they'll drop the margins in the hope of higher sales.  My guess is that they'll keep Red as a halo brand with high prices and dedicated cinema bodies - and that we'll see Redcode RAW on upcoming high-end Nikon-branded mirrorless bodies, as well as the SOOC colors converging between the two lineups.  It's a strategy that works really well for Canon so Nikon might want to emulate it.

If I was to take a wild guess, that's what I'd think as well. Keep RED as the "luxury / prestige brand", but put in RED the good stuff from Nikon (such as lenses / AF), and put in Nikon the good stuff from RED (such as redcode raw, and matching color science. Make it super very easy to use a Nikon mirrorless with the RED cine cameras. Such as a person might use a Sony FX30 with a FX9 camera, or a Canon R5C with a C400)

 

[eatstoomuchjam]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

I'd imagine Komodo users will be happy to simply get moderately good enough AF for simple sit down interviews.

As one, I'd say yes.  That would be an improvement over now.  I'll be delighted if Nikon are able to get AF on Red to even close to where it was on Sony/Canon 3-5 years ago.  Heck, even a face-only AF mode would be just fine.

[ND64]

49 minutes ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

I'll be delighted if Nikon are able to get AF on Red to even close to where it was on Sony/Canon 3-5 years ago

It can't be at Z9 level, but it looks better than 5 years old Sony

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DF__vsMRosw/

[eatstoomuchjam]

7 hours ago, ND64 said:

It can't be at Z9 level, but it looks better than 5 years old Sony

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DF__vsMRosw/

That does, indeed, look great, but also...
 

22 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

Yeah - I saw that they're releasing a firmware version 2.0 with that.  It remains to be seen - they sort of pulled a Fuji a while ago by releasing some firmware that they complained improved face detection AF.  Then some YouTubers tested it and declared it "fixed" or "better."  Then everybody else used it and collectively agreed that it isn't usable.  I'm sure those same YouTubers are really pumped now about how 2.0 will fix all the stuff they said was fixed in 1.2.5 (or whatever the version was).  😅

So rather than the handful of friendly influencers that have received the camera and done minimal tests, I'll hold off on judgment until I see it working on my own cameras (or since I'm 10,000km away from them right now, until there are real user reviews after the firmware is released to the public).

[Danyyyel]

On 2/13/2025 at 2:48 PM, eatstoomuchjam said:

I just watched the PetaPixel review.  That sucker has a 95mm front thread!  That's another minus when paired with a camera that has no internal ND filters - and last time I checked, nobody had any sort of clip-in inline filter for the K-X yet (or if there were any, they were expensive enough that I ignored them).  Kolari have one for the OG Komodo, but it doesn't fit the X. 

PP didn't mentioned whether the lens was parfocal - judging by the lack of back focus adjustment lever, I'm guessing it's not completely, potentially relying on autofocus for that (which isn't ideal when shooting Red, where the AF is right on the line of usable/unusable which means you get tempted to use it and then pissed off when it doesn't work right).

Also, it's focus-by-wire which, as long as it can be set to linear response in camera, is potentially OK, but it's going to piss off a lot of filmmakers.  That and zoom being by wire also might actually be some slight benefit here because it might mean that one can set them to work in the correct direction, unlike nearly every other Nikon lens ever made.

So basically, Komodo-X with Z mount, potentially cool.  Wonder if they'll offer a retrofit service and/or do the same for OG Komodo.

Komodo-X combo with this lens?  Hard pass from me.

I use 95mm filters on my Titlta Mirage matte box, Vasis and Tilta have a set of round 95mm in the 60 USD range.

[eatstoomuchjam]

21 hours ago, Danyyyel said:

Vasis and Tilta have a set of round 95mm in the 60 USD range.

The problem isn't that I don't know how to buy 95mm filters.  It's that they're really big and clumsy to work with.

[Ilkka Nissila]

On 2/14/2025 at 5:52 AM, IronFilm said:

It's been normal for years that RED would do massive price slashes to their cameras as they near their end of their lifecycle (or even early into it!). 

People should stop getting upset about it. 

Even ARRI does this now. 

https://ymcinema.com/2025/01/28/arri-unveils-new-alexa-35-entry-level-model-with-flexible-licensing-and-affordable-media/

Arri's Alexa 35 Base Model isn't a really price reduction of the Alexa 35 as it is missing many features which you can add via additional purchases. If you build up the features to match the full Alexa 35 the price ends up being about the same. 

 

[Ilkka Nissila]

On 2/13/2025 at 12:48 PM, eatstoomuchjam said:

PP didn't mentioned whether the lens was parfocal - judging by the lack of back focus adjustment lever, I'm guessing it's not completely, potentially relying on autofocus for that (which isn't ideal when shooting Red, where the AF is right on the line of usable/unusable which means you get tempted to use it and then pissed off when it doesn't work right).

Also, it's focus-by-wire which, as long as it can be set to linear response in camera, is potentially OK, but it's going to piss off a lot of filmmakers.  That and zoom being by wire also might actually be some slight benefit here because it might mean that one can set them to work in the correct direction, unlike nearly every other Nikon lens ever made.

Since RED is working with Nikon on the autofocus, it is likely it'll be similar to Nikon  camera AF if not now, in a model in the near future. The processor architecture might need to be changed to achieve parity with cameras like the Z9 so maybe a separate AF processor (Nikon's) and image processing pipeline (which would be RED's). Porting all the code across systems could take some time. As for whether AF will be good enough to use as the go-to focusing mode, eventually, I think it'll be, but perhaps not today, at least not for all uses.

 

Retaining the focus while zooming is achieved using software and the AF motor, which is probably sufficient for most AF users who may occasionally need to use manual focus and fix the distance while zooming (which the lens will then achieve using the AF motor). Those who want a parfocal implementation via a mechanical compensation system (instead of electronic) will choose a manual focus parfocal lens.

 

Focus ring direction can be set from the camera custom functions menu in Nikons, also how fast the ring affects focus, in most Z mount lenses and most Z cameras. I doubt, however, that the zoom direction can be changed, at least not now. The T/W switch on the lens barrel has fixed labels and those match the direction of turn of the zoom ring in Nikon's other zooms, so probably it is the same here. As for which is the correct direction of turn, for Nikon users Nikon has the correct direction which we are used to. Some other brands also have the same direction as Nikon, while others have different, so it's not like Nikon uses different orientations from all the other camera and lens manufacturers.

[eatstoomuchjam]

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

Since RED is working with Nikon on the autofocus, it is likely it'll be similar to Nikon  camera AF if not now, in a model in the near future. The processor architecture might need to be changed to achieve parity with cameras like the Z9 so maybe a separate AF processor (Nikon's) and image processing pipeline (which would be RED's). Porting all the code across systems could take some time. As for whether AF will be good enough to use as the go-to focusing mode, eventually, I think it'll be, but perhaps not today, at least not for all uses.

"Near future" in cinema camera terms is probably "more than a year" if it involves changing processors.  I'm talking about current capabilities of Red cameras.  The autofocus is better than a CDAF body, but not even remotely usable.  And judging by CVP's video with a preview of firmware 2.x, it will now probably be more usable in a subset of scenarios with existing RF mount cameras and slightly more usable than that on the Z mount models.  I think CVP said something about how the camera correctly tracked a walking person in only a few of their tests.  If 2.0 will be good enough for locking on a talking head and not getting distracted and drifting away to the background, at least that'll be something.

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

Retaining the focus while zooming is achieved using software and the AF motor, which is probably sufficient for most AF users who may occasionally need to use manual focus and fix the distance while zooming (which the lens will then achieve using the AF motor). Those who want a parfocal implementation via a mechanical compensation system (instead of electronic) will choose a manual focus parfocal lens.

It's sufficient for AF users who have a camera with useful AF.  It's far less sufficient if AF doesn't work well.  There are parfocal zooms that are also electronic.  Anyway, having bad AF and a lens that relies on AF to hold focus while zooming sounds like a recipe for awkward times on set.  

1 hour ago, Ilkka Nissila said:

As for which is the correct direction of turn, for Nikon users Nikon has the correct direction which we are used to. Some other brands also have the same direction as Nikon, while others have different, so it's not like Nikon uses different orientations from all the other camera and lens manufacturers.

Name another major brand that turns the same way as a Nikon.  Canon?  No.  Sony?  No.  Panasonic?  No.  Fuji? No. (excludes some of their vintage photo lenses)  Leica?  No. Olympus?  No.  Zeiss?  No.   Pentax?  Maybe?  Any cinema lens I've ever tried?  No.

So yes, Nikon does use a different direction to turn the focus and zoom rings from every other major vendor.  Just about the only time somebody makes a lens that turns in that direction these days, they make it for Nikon.

So as a person who doesn't use a single system, having a single system that has an obnoxious insistence on turning the opposite direction from every other lens that I might pick up or use means, to me, that brand is wrong.