Nikon buys Red?

[Emanuel]

Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, etc., who cares? They are all face of the same coin IMHO.

Only rare ones remain for now to my book, for some reason I am a Blackmagic customer and happy camper TBH : )

To me, they are the flagship of this business today, for us indies of such particular industry as the segment of this craft is :- )

[ND64]

1 hour ago, Django said:

I think if we look at the Komodo which is around the price of a C70, uses RF mount and has AF, it gives us basis to speculate that future entry level RED cams with Nikon

Nikon is going to release a Komodo competitor next month: Z6m3 with 6k30p raw 😄

[kye]

8 hours ago, Clark Nikolai said:

At some point both costs of SSDs will be so low and data transfer rates will be so high (Thunderbolt 4, etc.) that it won't matter much in practical terms if raw files are not compressed. I could see new cameras saving internally in uncompressed raw, (ProResRaw or uncompressed BRaw) which would not be subject to the patent.

At one time shooting HD was super expensive, now it's super cheap, the same with 4K and other things. If the cost of media is within the budget of a production, and the transfer times for copying the cards is short enough for the shooting schedule, then it doesn't matter.

This is true, but it is mostly offset by the increase in resolution.

1080p was ~2MP and I remember the data rates and processing requirements being huge at the time.  Now we have 8K ~36MP and the data rates and processing requirements are huge for todays computers.

It's tempting to say that we won't go past 8K and computers will keep up, but people have been saying this since 1080p and it's gone up 18X since then.  The next shifts will be into VR, where you need to shoot in a huge amount more than your delivery resolution so I see no end in sight to the increases.

[Danyyyel]

15 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

Nikon is going to release a Komodo competitor next month: Z6m3 with 6k30p raw 😄

I see Nikon differentiating factor will be mainly the form factor. If you want a hybrid camera that will need some  rigging to be pro video camera complete, you will have the z6iii or Z8. For proper video camera, you will have a komodo with XLR input, more than two audio input, timecode, big battery, multiple monitoring possibility.

I see Nikon moving at least the Komodo as an Sony FX6 style camera, With dials for audio etc. I don't know if the Nikon flange distance can be enough for a internal ND. But I think, at least for RED ussers, their will be less resistance to moving the Komodo to a more all rounder Cinema/Eng format than the higher models that are more cinema box models. 

In the longer term I see RED becoming basically a R&D center for red/Nikon video. The manufacturing of at least the lower end models will be done in Nikon facilities. 

[Danyyyel]

15 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

Nikon is going to release a Komodo competitor next month: Z6m3 with 6k30p raw 😄

I wanted to add.

In the longer term I see RED becoming basically a R&D center for red/Nikon video. The manufacturing of at least the lower end models will be done in Nikon facilities. Red will still design the sensors for at RED cameras, and perhaps some Nikon cameras. While Nikon the Xspeed chip and other things like viewfinder etc. This will bring immense economies of scale. If next Nikon camera has a 8k and 6k FF global shutter sensor sensor, that can be also used in RED cameras. Rather than a few thousands sensor for RED, they would beneficiate from the fabrication of hundred of thousands of chip, same if they use lets say a new Xspeed 8 sensor. 

I don't think Nikon will stop using Sony sensors in most of its cameras, but in some of the higher end. Like a 24 megapixel global shutter sensor in a Z9h to compete against the Sony A9iii. I can totally see this. 

[Danyyyel]

13 hours ago, kye said:

This is true, but it is mostly offset by the increase in resolution.

1080p was ~2MP and I remember the data rates and processing requirements being huge at the time.  Now we have 8K ~36MP and the data rates and processing requirements are huge for todays computers.

It's tempting to say that we won't go past 8K and computers will keep up, but people have been saying this since 1080p and it's gone up 18X since then.  The next shifts will be into VR, where you need to shoot in a huge amount more than your delivery resolution so I see no end in sight to the increases.

I know a lot of people still watching 720p on their TV, or even SD, without any problem. I personally, don't think the likes of 8k will be sought by customers, but they will get it because as today you nearly can't find a 720p television even if you wanted to. My guess people are more keen and see more qualitative difference in the size of display rather than pixel. 

I think the shift into VR is a bit of a pipe dream. I see it more in gaming, and these are more about gpu speed and 3d generation. 

[Clark Nikolai]

15 hours ago, kye said:

This is true, but it is mostly offset by the increase in resolution.

I had another thought. Since the patent (if I understand right), is for 4K and above compressed raw recorded internally, then a camera could be made that recorded internally to 3.99K compressed raw and so not violate the patent. Many people only shoot 4K to stabilize in post and to punch in and deliver in HD.

[MrSMW]

Not sure about that…

Most 4k, 6k and 8k sensors are not quite as wide as their designation so there is probably something that prevents 3.999999999 as being ‘4’ in the small print.

 

 

[KnightsFan]

On 3/12/2024 at 11:14 AM, Clark Nikolai said:

I had another thought. Since the patent (if I understand right), is for 4K and above compressed raw recorded internally, then a camera could be made that recorded internally to 3.99K compressed raw and so not violate the patent. Many people only shoot 4K to stabilize in post and to punch in and deliver in HD.

I think the patent says 2k, not 4k and I don't think many people want to shoot <2k even for compressed raw. https://patents.google.com/patent/US8872933B2/en

(A rumored reason is that the SI-2K, which existed prior to Red's patent, shot 1920x1080 cineform raw. Red added 80 pixels and stepped into history).

[ND64]

"In my opinion, the enthusiasm is because Atomos have a chance with Nikon to renegotiate or nullify their onerous licensing agreement for RAW recording. The agreement with RED in 2019 was necessary as Atomos were being sued for the use of compressed RAW codecs like ProRes RAW in their portable recorders, so now have to pay RED royalties on every sale (although the exact terms of the deal aren’t public)."

But if Nikon decides to Not defend RED patent, there will be a lot of cameras in the market with internal raw. Canon will introduce 8:1 compression, Sony will introduce a new Sony-exclusive raw codec and call it XcR, Panasonic S5m3 will record ProresRAW. And then, who would need/buy a monitor recorder? 

[D Verco]

The red guy already said in a YouTube video that they've licensed raw to all the major brands. We just haven't seen the releases yet. 

[Ilkka Nissila]

7 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

"In my opinion, the enthusiasm is because Atomos have a chance with Nikon to renegotiate or nullify their onerous licensing agreement for RAW recording. The agreement with RED in 2019 was necessary as Atomos were being sued for the use of compressed RAW codecs like ProRes RAW in their portable recorders, so now have to pay RED royalties on every sale (although the exact terms of the deal aren’t public)."

But if Nikon decides to Not defend RED patent, there will be a lot of cameras in the market with internal raw. Canon will introduce 8:1 compression, Sony will introduce a new Sony-exclusive raw codec and call it XcR, Panasonic S5m3 will record ProresRAW. And then, who would need/buy a monitor recorder? 

A lot of people use external monitors because it allows them to see the image properly without having to look through a hole for a long time and inadvertently shaking the camera from time to time by the eyebrows/forehead/glasses touching it. The recording function is useful because fast and high capacity storage for an external recorder can be an order of magnitude cheaper than for a camera. It also reduces the likelihood of overheating as the card inside the camera does get hot if used for longer takes at high data rates and it and the processor contribute to overall camera internal temperature. At events such as sports or big concerts I rarely see people use the EVF even when it is present. This is probably because it is more relaxing and easier to work with a tripod-based long focal length setup, you don't have to position your eye so precisely and the bigger screen gives leeway to change posture.

 

Wanting to do spontaneous, high-quality video is like desiring cheap intergalactic space flight. It's just not in the cards a lot of the time. 😉

 

I can see the integral recording reduce the risk of cable falling off and terminating the recording accidentally. But then if the camera stops or malfunctions because of overheating, the outcome could be the same or worse (if the camera needs to cool down it takes more time than plugging in the cable). 

[Danyyyel]

Just now, Eric Calabros said:

"In my opinion, the enthusiasm is because Atomos have a chance with Nikon to renegotiate or nullify their onerous licensing agreement for RAW recording. The agreement with RED in 2019 was necessary as Atomos were being sued for the use of compressed RAW codecs like ProRes RAW in their portable recorders, so now have to pay RED royalties on every sale (although the exact terms of the deal aren’t public)."

But if Nikon decides to Not defend RED patent, there will be a lot of cameras in the market with internal raw. Canon will introduce 8:1 compression, Sony will introduce a new Sony-exclusive raw codec and call it XcR, Panasonic S5m3 will record ProresRAW. And then, who would need/buy a monitor recorder? 

Their are two thing that can be vital for them. 

First Atomos could literally be dead if Nikon opens the patent, as other brands would start to launch their cameras with internal RAW and as you say, who will need an external recorder.

Secondly, something I didn't believe before, Nikon could license the REDraw only to external recorders. They keep the internal raw for their cameras, and give the license of RED RAW to the likes of Atomos to undermine the likes of Apple prores raw and BM raw, and try to make RED raw a defacto standard Raw video format, that could be useful even after the patent doesn't hold anymore.  

Jeromy Young has already worked with Nikon for 10 bit video and Raw video in the Z6. So it is easy to see a series of Ninja V etc coming out with Redraw rather than prores raw tomorrow!!! That would open Red raw to much more users while still giving Nikon some advantages. 

[mercer]

I'm not sure internal raw video will have the impact that people think it will have. Time and time again you see people on this forum or on YouTube say... I've been shooting IPB instead of all-i because of the data rates.

When the GH5 came out, so many people chose the lower quality 4K over the all-i 4K. And when reports that the all-i 1080p was as good, or better than the IPB 4K, they still chose the 4K.

When the OG BMPCC came out, ProRes was often used over raw on so many videos because the shooter couldn't tell that much of a difference so it wasn't worth the storage for them to shoot raw.

One of the greatest features of the GH6 and subsequently the S5iiX was internal ProRes HQ, but the file sizes are large... some people had already moved onto the S5 and they weren't going back to the micro4/3 just for ProRes but then when the S5ii and S5iiX came out, it seems that more people chose the S5ii to save some money.

Look at the P4K... BRaw was all forum members talked about for the better part of a year and then the S5 or whatever camera was released and people got tired of the form factor of the P4K and moved on because they didn't really need raw video for their event work, or whatever.

For me, I'd rather have internal ProRes or Raw than any other feature including FF, AF or IBIS... I don't think others feel the same way once they realize the amount of storage needed, even with compressed raw formats.

Raw Video is amazing but it isn't for everybody.

[mercer]

Another example was the C200... that was released in 2017... I think? I had just started shooting ML Raw on a 5D Mark iii and I was blown away that Canon was releasing an official raw format in their base cinema camera. But most people were extremely pissed off due to the huge file sizes, expensive CFast cards and lack of codec options. 

[ND64]

14 minutes ago, mercer said:

Raw Video is amazing but it isn't for everybody.

It isn't for everybody because there is no high compression, yet. NRAW supports 12:1 or 1 bit per pixel. Its just 600mb/s for 6k30p, but Nikon's current options are only 4.5:1 and 7.5:1. 

[mercer]

8 minutes ago, Eric Calabros said:

It isn't for everybody because there is no high compression, yet. NRAW supports 12:1 or 1 bit per pixel. Its just 600mb/s for 6k30p, but Nikon's current options are only 4.5:1 and 7.5:1. 

BRaw had it and it wasn't enough to keep people interested. Even internal ProRes Raw in the Z8 didn't force people to switch systems to get an internal compressed raw format. But with the price of storage coming down and if it opens up into more cameras of choice, then perhaps you're right. It'll be interesting to see how this unfolds. 

[eatstoomuchjam]

Even if file sizes were totally the same, not every project needs or wants raw.  If you need any sort of fast turnaround, a raw workflow is usually incompatible with it.  It's great to have options, though!

Anybody who has had anything more than a superficial interaction with Atomos will be thrilled to never do any business with them again.  With or without Young, they are are garbage company.

[mercer]

I still suspect it will be a novelty, though. For years, all we've heard are rants about internal, compressed raw and those fuckers at Red but I think when everybody has the opportunity to shoot with it, they'll move onto needing 8K 120p and internal compressed raw will become a lot less important.

But it's highly unlikely that Nikon won't enforce their new patent. I assume they'll probably license it like Red did, but look how long it took these companies to pay licensing fees for ProRes.

[eatstoomuchjam]

I, for one, can say that I enjoy having internal raw available (even if I don't always use it) and that I have little or no use for 8kp120.  

I'd also say "Nikon won't enforce their new patent" and "they'll probably license it" are completely incompatible statements.  If they don't enforce it, other companies would be stupid to pay for a license.  Even if Nikon fought to invalidate the patent in the past, now that they own it, there's a decent chance that their opinions on the validity of the patent have evolved.