People claim to know but it is officially a secret.Do we even have an idea who makes RED sensors?
Upvote
0
People claim to know but it is officially a secret.Do we even have an idea who makes RED sensors?
The patents should start expiring as early as next year.Depends on when that contract expires… but if soon, you might see internal compressed raw dropped from future Canon models.
If I were Nikon I would do this ASAP.Canon doesn't need to worry about REDRaw going into Nikon Cameras
RED is not in the league of ARRI and Sony is not in the league of RED.That gets Nikon to the league of ARRI and Sony
That might work the other way around. The Canon logo has been around since before anyone at RED was born.So what’s the consensus here? Will Canon pay up or change the color of their logo?
Well Nikon has had yellow for a long time - maybe if they snap up Blue they can charge a licensing fee for ALL the primary colors!That might work the other way around. The Canon logo has been around since before anyone at RED was born.
Do we even have an idea who makes RED sensors?
I suspect it varies from product to product. We know that OnSemi is currently Arri's supplier, but RED keeps it a secret.People claim to know but it is officially a secret.
Canon has long been careful to avoid too direct competition with Sony in Broadcast and ARRI in cinema, because they make lenses for both and as many here have noted, Lenses are where Canon makes the most profit. I would not be at all surprised to see Canon continue to make lenses that fit on RED cameras (even if RED moves to Z mount, which I doubt). If they have been able to manage that coexistence with Sony and ARRI (and RED) for all these years, Nikon shouldn't be too big a challenge. It will be an interesting transition to watch, but Nikon can't just dump Canon lenses off of RED and walk away. That type of lens is years in the making and most are rented, so existing rental inventory is a big deal.Canon's so-called cinema cameras are mostly used for live/stage productions, such as sports, concerts, award shows, interviews, etc., corporate video work, vignettes, and documentary production. These are things where the post time and budget are very limited or almost non-existent, so they have essentially jumped into the market position once occupied by Canon's video DSLRs and before that, their DV cameras.
That's a lazy and uninformed answer.The shareholders get rich.
That would be a good strategy but we have yet to see Canon make mirrorless lenses for other mounts.I would not be at all surprised to see Canon continue to make lenses that fit on RED cameras
Jim Jinnard is 72 and not in the best of health.That's a lazy and uninformed answer.
RED was founded in 2005. Given their leadership and name recognition within the industry, I'm sure that if the owners simply wanted to cash out, they would have done so long ago. This is likely far from the first opportunity they've had.
Moreover, as a privately held company, RED could not be forced into a "hostile takeover" as publicly traded companies can.
This is, of course, all speculation, as I have no inside knowledge of RED. Being a still photo hobbyist, I don't even usually pay much attention to cinema cameras. But I've worked in technology companies of all sizes, from 5-person startups to global household names, for more than 35 years. In my experience, when a privately held company that's been around as long as RED and is in a market leadership position, decides to sell, it's because the owners recognize one or more significant barriers to achieving the "next level" of growth, and seek a partnership that will help them overcome those barriers.
Both the Nikon and RED press releases (which, no doubt, were coordinated) mention Nikon's expertise in product development, image processing, optical technology (of course!), and user interface. That's likely all that those of us in the outside world can know at this time. For more information, we'll just have to keep watching how the products evolve in the future.
Depending on how you define 'mirrorless lenses', their cine lenses feature PL mount versions and their broadcast lenses feature the B4 mount. For photo centric mirrorless lenses, Canon only does EF-M and RF versions.That would be a good strategy but we have yet to see Canon make mirrorless lenses for other mounts. [...]
MITI is not a carmaker, but rather the Japan Ministry of International Trade and Industry. As far as I can see, the Mitsubishi connection to Nikon has no relevance to any of the discussion but I did own a Mitsubishi diesel pickup for several years and it was a good little truck.I take it that you have never owned one of their cars.
Canon does make PL mount lenses and Canon cinema cameras support PL lenses. In broadcast, this page of lenses is made to go on cameras that Canon does not make. https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/pro/lenses/broadcast-lenses . Go back and reread what I said. Canon is careful not to compete too directly with ARRI in CINEMA cameras and Sony in BROADCAST cameras. In fact, Canon does not even make broadcast cameras other than run and gun models for ENG and their cinema cameras are in the lower fringe. In Broadcast lenses, they are king and those puppies are expensive.That would be a good strategy but we have yet to see Canon make mirrorless lenses for other mounts.
Sony does not really support EF lenses as well as they used to and they started making their own cinema lenses.