Nikon to buy 100% of RED

NorBro said:
Cameras have pretty much everything these days so the list is really just...everything. lol

Per usual, strengths and weaknesses will exist but I expect great things to come from this for Nikon.
Click to expand...

Here area few examples off the top of my head, and I'm sure I'll think of more later:
  1. 4K DCI
  2. True 24 FPS
  3. Shutter angle
  4. Synchro scan
  5. Under cranking
  6. Waveform scopes
  7. Loadable LUTs
  8. Multiple sensor gain circuits (to eliminate the need for ND filters)
  9. Dynamic focus peaking intensity (based on the focal length and F-stop metadata)
  10. Auto white balance lock
  11. XLR with clean preamps
  12. 32-bit floating point audio
  13. Mic & line level switch
 
RED has more than half of those so should be expected unless they remove features.

They could of course now make a bunch of cameras and sprinkle in specs here and there.

Always wanted 32-bit in-camera but I don't know if the big three would upset the audio companies like that.
 
Got to say, this changes everything. Before, I had no interest in buying either a Nikon or a red camera. And now I have no interest in buying either a Nikon or a red camera
 
perhaps we all only rent in life; some a little longer than others but eventually the rental is passed on one way or another :violin:
 
Matt Gottshalk said:
Redâs âpatentâ on compressed raw was BS. Nikon had the money and gumption to call them on it.
Click to expand...

Excuse me? Did Apple not have the money and gumption when they sued RED to overturn their patent protections and lost? Doesn't Nikon shelling out money to buy RED imply that they acknowledge RED's value?
 
I think we can only really judge these things based on whether it works for us (personally) or not.
I have never been a RED user, just too pricy for me. But I have owned a few Nikon cameras over the years. Including the old FE I still own and a few of their DSLRs. I would prefer RED stay an independent American company, but that's just my own personal ideology. For all I know this could end up being a positive for me. RED was never of any use to me. Had they released their 3K for $3K camera back in the day, maybe it would have been. Maybe Nikon will do something with it where it is useful to me. Maybe not. Time will tell. If nothing really changes than nothing really changes and what difference does it make to me?

I don't think RED would made this move if it wasn't beneficial for them. So good for them I guess.
 
I think this happened because it resolved the patten raw issue. Instead of paying RED they now own them so legal issue goes away. Since Red is a higher end cinema camera I would not expect that any tech or camera would be offered through Nikon for lower end. I would expect both companies will operate as they have as separate entities.
 
Peter C. said:
I think this happened because it resolved the patten raw issue. Instead of paying RED they now own them so legal issue goes away. Since Red is a higher end cinema camera I would not expect that any tech or camera would be offered through Nikon for lower end. I would expect both companies will operate as they have as separate entities.
Click to expand...

i very much expect a red camera that talks to Nikon z lenses and probably gains some af tech
 
Peter C. said:
I think this happened because it resolved the patten raw issue. Instead of paying RED they now own them so legal issue goes away. Since Red is a higher end cinema camera I would not expect that any tech or camera would be offered through Nikon for lower end. I would expect both companies will operate as they have as separate entities.
Click to expand...

A lot of good conversation on this topic over at reduser, but in the interest of presenting the facts amongst all of the chatter and noise I thought I'd drop a note here on the patent "issues".

The case was dropped. It was dismissed without prejudice. The lawsuit never made it to a jury trial. Essentially neither side won, as a joint motion from both Red and Nikon was filed to dismiss the lawsuit.

So there were no legal or patent issues that affected the acquisition of RED by Nikon, except maybe the two companies got to know each other better throughout that initial legal process.
 
DustinSchmidt said:
A lot of good conversation on this topic over at reduser, but in the interest of presenting the facts amongst all of the chatter and noise I thought I'd drop a note here on the patent "issues".

The case was dropped. It was dismissed without prejudice. The lawsuit never made it to a jury trial. Essentially neither side won, as a joint motion from both Red and Nikon was filed to dismiss the lawsuit.

So there were no legal or patent issues that affected the acquisition of RED by Nikon, except maybe the two companies got to know each other better throughout that initial legal process.
Click to expand...
You're right. After I wrote that post I watched a video that explained the lawsuit in more detail. It's hard not to speculate but often the behind the scene strategies of these camera companies is hard to comprehend. It might be like you said during the course of the lawsuit that Nikon gained an appreciation for RED's compression technology and that Nikon might want it for themselves or be able to license it to other camera manufactures who want to offer internal raw compression. But it still could be why the lawsuit was dropped because Nikon offered to buy them and that made both sides happy to settle the issue out of court.

I do still find the acquisition odd for a number of reasons:
1. Isn't Nikon itself in financial difficulty?

2. Why would Nikon want to enter the Hollywood Cine arena? Both Arri and Sony are the dominate players and there isn't a lot of room for competition. It's late in the game and that's not Nikon specialty.

3. Doesn't RED use Canon lens mount and batteries? Seems like it would have made more sense for Canon to acquire them but I guess since they own their own cinema line there's no point.

So the only thing I'm left is that Japanese camera companies copy each other. So both Canon and Sony have their higher end cinema line and Nikon decided it would be easier to buy one instead of trying to develop it themselves.

As RED users is this going to mean Nikon going to change the mount and battery to their system or are they going to treat RED as hands off and run independent of Nikon? But that's also wouldn't make sense why would Nikon buy them and then not integrate them. Honestly I don't think it's a good fit and most likely won't work in the long term.
 
Last edited:
I think the bigger picture is it was time. It was absolutely the time to sell and get out right now for RED.

Whether Nikon acquired it, or Mitsubishi supplied the money, or multiple people pitched in, it was time.

And now the Japanese have even more control so it's a win-win for both.

For lens mounts, I still expect the RF mount to be licensed (and the usual PL and Z will be available as well, maybe interchangeably like in the past).

And for batteries, every camera that needs the bigger batteries always has support for all kinds of options/companies. (Meaning you didn't have to use RED batteries for the newer cameras like you don't with ARRI, Blackmagic, etc).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top