# Is RED about to announce the first RF mount video camera?



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 28, 2019)

> Newsshooter has reported a RED leak/teaser for an upcoming camera called the Komodo. What’s interesting about the camera is one of the teaser images shows what looks to be an RF lens mount.
> RED President Jarred Land has declared what this camera is NOT, but no information on what it is.
> 
> It is not DSMC3
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 28, 2019)

Beating Canon to an RF mount video camera would be interesting.


----------



## uri.raz (Jul 28, 2019)

RED already reverse engineered the RF protocols? That was quick...


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 28, 2019)

uri.raz said:


> RED already reverse engineered the RF protocols? That was quick...


Canon will license their lens protocols if you want to pay the price. Red are the kind of company that will pay the price and Canon are willing to license to. If Canon can get lens acceptance into a wider range of video cameras being used by high end shooters they expand their own C line market.


----------



## Tom W (Jul 28, 2019)

Interesting....


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 28, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Canon will license their lens protocols if you want to pay the price. Red are the kind of company that will pay the price and Canon are willing to license to.



IIRC, it was posted on this site that Canon will license it to Japanese companies only, e.g. not Zeiss. AFAIK, RED is a U.S. company.


----------



## C Tographer (Jul 28, 2019)

We don't know if Red licensed the RF mount, or just reverse engineered it.

Either way, Red is taking away some of Canon's thunder by releasing the world's first RF video camera.

From the photos, the Red Komodo appears to have a smaller Super 35 sensor, not full-frame. That points to it being a video camera, not a stills camera.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 28, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> IIRC, it was posted on this site that Canon will license it to Japanese companies only, e.g. not Zeiss. AFAIK, RED is a U.S. company.


But may license it to Cosina ( Headquartered in ‎Nakano, Japan), which manufactures all Zeiss lenses in Japan. From B&H: "Though no longer physically manufactured in Germany, the current offerings from Zeiss are manufactured in Japan under the supervision of Zeiss technicians whose job it is maintain a century old reputation of building the finest optics. "

Cosina also makes lenses for Leica, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, and some Canon EOS EF/EFs lenses.

There are Zeiss lenses with Canon mounts. Red is an American company.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 28, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> We don't know if Red licensed the RF mount, or just reverse engineered it.
> 
> Either way, Red is taking away some of Canon's thunder by releasing the world's first RF video camera.
> 
> From the photos, the Red Komodo appears to have a smaller Super 35 sensor, not full-frame. That points to it being a video camera, not a stills camera.


Red is an American company (Irvine, CA). If reverse engineered and unlicensed, they have violated patent laws. They licensed the mount. The movie houses like Canon glass.

BTW: Red is suing Sony (still ongoing) over violating some of it's 4K tech patents (3 of them). The suit (filed in 2013) demands Sony not only stop using the tech Red invented, but also destroy all cameras manufactured with it. Uh oh.  "What's interesting about this case is that patent issues or licensing could be one of the reasons most companies have not tackled RAW compression in their motion picture cameras. Canon and Arri are both sending out uncompressed RAW to third-party recorders (and avoiding recording internally altogether), and Blackmagic, Digital Bolex, Ikonoskop, and Aaton are all recording uncompressed CinemaDNG internally to SSDs. CinemaDNG is an open format from Adobe, but recently they developed a compressed JPEG option for their stills DNG archive format. We'll see if that finds its way into motion cameras and if that development potentially infringes on any RED patents." (year 2013 for perspective) https://nofilmschool.com/2013/02/red-ceo-jim-jannard-lawsuit-sony-raw-compression

Red has been in 4K since 2005.

Speculation: Maybe Red and Canon are exchanging licenses? Give us your RF mount and we'll give you some 4K tech. Revenge by Red? What better way to destroy Red's (and Canon's) nemesis? Especially if those patents by RED are running out soon. RED doesn't make lenses. RED makes mounts available for Canon, Nikon, Leica, and ARRI PL. No Sony mount is offered by RED.

Yes, I am aware that the suit has to do with movie cameras but still....

So for those who say Canon could do what Sony has done in it's mirrorless cameras, maybe so. But maybe Canon has had trouble bringing something to market due to patent issues. More kudos to Canon for not stealing tech as RED alleges Sony to have done. Untwist yer pantaloons.


----------



## miketcool (Jul 29, 2019)

Red and Canon merger?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 29, 2019)

miketcool said:


> Red and Canon merger?


Doubtful.


----------



## LDS (Jul 29, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> If reverse engineered and unlicensed, they have violated patent laws



Did Canon patent the RF mount and protocol? Because if so when the patent expires anybody can make RF lenses and use the protocol for free. If Canon didn't patent it, patent laws don't apply.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 29, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Red is an American company (Irvine, CA). If reverse engineered and unlicensed, they have violated patent laws. They licensed the mount. The movie houses like Canon glass.
> 
> BTW: Red is suing Sony (still ongoing) over violating some of it's 4K tech patents (3 of them). The suit (filed in 2013) demands Sony not only stop using the tech Red invented, but also destroy all cameras manufactured with it. Uh oh.  "What's interesting about this case is that patent issues or licensing could be one of the reasons most companies have not tackled RAW compression in their motion picture cameras. Canon and Arri are both sending out uncompressed RAW to third-party recorders (and avoiding recording internally altogether), and Blackmagic, Digital Bolex, Ikonoskop, and Aaton are all recording uncompressed CinemaDNG internally to SSDs. CinemaDNG is an open format from Adobe, but recently they developed a compressed JPEG option for their stills DNG archive format. We'll see if that finds its way into motion cameras and if that development potentially infringes on any RED patents." (year 2013 for perspective) https://nofilmschool.com/2013/02/red-ceo-jim-jannard-lawsuit-sony-raw-compression
> 
> ...


Even if the patents would be running out(apprx 20 years from the date they are awarded) the lawsuits have been filed long for infringing products while they had their IP. So Sony still would be liable to pay massive damages caused with infringing on IP. It certainly would a big blow as Sony would have to issue a recall on discontinued products and pay fines for each non returned products which could certainly put a massive dent in Sony's pocket.


----------



## C Tographer (Jul 29, 2019)

Maybe Sony wants to be the last camera company in the world.

The camera market was killed by the smartphone market, but most of the tiny cameras inside those smartphones are made by Sony. Sony has eaten everyone elses lunch.

So if Canon + Red teamed up to battle against Sony, then let the show begin.


----------



## LDS (Jul 29, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> but most of the tiny cameras inside those smartphones are made by Sony



Apple just bought the Intel cellular modem business. And it already designs its own ARM CPUs. Just wait it decides it needs to control its own imaging sensors...


----------



## Kit. (Jul 29, 2019)

C Tographer said:


> The camera market was killed by the smartphone market, but most of the tiny cameras inside those smartphones are made by Sony.


Quite a lot are made by Samsung.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 29, 2019)

LDS said:


> Did Canon patent the RF mount and protocol? Because if so when the patent expires anybody can make RF lenses and use the protocol for free. If Canon didn't patent it, patent laws don't apply.


I have no idea. I do think it is interesting RED doesn't offer anything in a Sony mount. I don't know if they ever have.


----------



## Trey T (Jul 29, 2019)

So Jarred Land could simply say, fake news.


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Jul 29, 2019)

Kit. said:


> Quite a lot are made by Samsung.



Correct, market split is pretty even. Sony had to hit the smart phone market to keep up with Samsung. Samsung tossed away their camera division and threw all their eggs into the smartphone basket.


----------



## jayphotoworks (Jul 29, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> I have no idea. I do think it is interesting RED doesn't offer anything in a Sony mount. I don't know if they ever have.



They've never had a Sony mount. They've offered mounts in Canon, Nikon, Leica M, PL, but not Sony. The Leica M mount (which doesn't support all lenses) is 28mm which is almost physically at the limit for the existing design, far away from the 18mm E mount. I'm curious if their eventual DSMC3 will support the newer mirrorless mount FFDs, but I'm really surprised that RED will have the first RF cine cam before even Canon. But there has been rumblings in the news of a potential partnership with RED and Foxconn to eventually create 8K cameras at 1/3 of the current prices, and maybe there has been a push to move into lower cost professional cine cams in general, not just with Foxconn.

But a few things will be certain.. After you pre-order it, expect to wait at least 12+ months to actually get it in your hands and if you want HDMI/XLR or even a display, it will be at least another $2-3k USD. If you think about it, what portion of video shooters actually have a stable of RF lenses to get started right away? I would have thought an E mount would have probably have been a better bet, but probably out of the question with the RED/Sony spat ongoing.. but anyhow, RED has a specific audience and will probably not have an appreciable impact on the mainstream camera market.


----------



## criscokkat (Jul 29, 2019)

Red has plenty of juicy cinema patents, and some chip designs/code to help offload that data fast. I wouldn't be surprised if a patent swap happened. But Canon has been building glass for the R mount that is probably coveted by more than one film maker. I found it odd that the current rumors of the C500 don't include an RF mount. Maybe it does, and both Canon and Red will show off their versions in September at IBC.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> IIRC, it was posted on this site that Canon will license it to Japanese companies only, e.g. not Zeiss. AFAIK, RED is a U.S. company.


I think there is a difference between licensing the protocol for use in a body and licensing it to allow lens manufacturing.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 29, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> Even if the patents would be running out(apprx 20 years from the date they are awarded) the lawsuits have been filed long for infringing products while they had their IP. So Sony still would be liable to pay massive damages caused with infringing on IP. It certainly would a big blow as Sony would have to issue a recall on discontinued products and pay fines for each non returned products which could certainly put a massive dent in Sony's pocket.



How would a recall even work? Hypothetically speaking, say it plays out in court and it’s ruled that Sony did violate/infringe upon RED patents and the ruling states Sony must get back all the products covered. Sony can’t just walk into someone’s house or place of business and take them back. And you have, probably, a good portion of products that they couldn’t track down anyway, because they’ve been bought and sold on the used market and possibly multiple times on top of that.

I haven’t read the suite, so I don’t know what products it may cover, but none of their cameras record RAW internally(while Canon does have one ), they use (mostly) external Sony recorders.


----------



## Antono Refa (Jul 29, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I think there is a difference between licensing the protocol for use in a body and licensing it to allow lens manufacturing.



RED competes with Canon on cinema bodies same as Zeiss compete with Canon on lenses.


----------



## Cryhavoc (Jul 29, 2019)

Remember that RED has Canon listed as an approved third party vendor/partner. Perhaps they took it a step further and are working on more and more ventures.






RED.com







www.red.com


----------



## Chaitanya (Jul 29, 2019)

RunAndGun said:


> How would a recall even work? Hypothetically speaking, say it plays out in court and it’s ruled that Sony did violate/infringe upon RED patents and the ruling states Sony must get back all the products covered. Sony can’t just walk into someone’s house or place of business and take them back. And you have, probably, a good portion of products that they couldn’t track down anyway, because they’ve been bought and sold on the used market and possibly multiple times on top of that.
> 
> I haven’t read the suite, so I don’t know what products it may cover, but none of their cameras record RAW internally(while Canon does have one ), they use (mostly) external Sony recorders.


So Sony would have to send out PR and letters to orignal owners recalling sold cameras. In case the cameras cannot be tracked down for disposal there is a fine set by court for every unit of untraceble product which needs to be paid. Considering this high end video cameras with internal raw recording in compressed format the number of said cameras would be really tiny and much easier to track down(than apple having to recall iphone 5 or 6 for some lawsuit where complaintent was demanding a total recall when iphone 8 were released). Also as @CanonFanBoy mentioned there might be a cross licensing deal between Red and Canon or simply to get around the patent Canon is dumping data to external recorder.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 29, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> RED competes with Canon on cinema bodies same as Zeiss compete with Canon on lenses.


Of course, but the bean counters have done the numbers and clearly they came to the conclusion that they believed the agreement would benefit Canon.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 29, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Of course, but the bean counters have done the numbers and clearly they came to the conclusion that they believed the agreement would benefit Canon.


Yes. In whatever the case, it probably has nothing to do with Canon's 4k in the future concerning their MILC cameras that will offer 4k. Just my wild speculation for the night. Whether tech from RED gave Sony an R&D boost in their later production of mirrorless MILCs with 4k, or not, is an unknown I think. Fun to speculate, and it was fun to stumble across that information (drama) in the industry (new news to me).  There's no telling, but I can't help but wonder if RED has some tech that will help Canon in the MILC market and whether Canon will be licensing anything from them. I don't shoot video, so not really a concern for me.

Of course, there is always the possibility that Sony violated the patents inadvertently if at all.


----------



## syder (Jul 30, 2019)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Canon and Arri are both sending out uncompressed RAW to third-party recorders (and avoiding recording internally altogether),



Nope. C200 records Canon RAW light to internal CFAST.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 30, 2019)

syder said:


> Nope. C200 records Canon RAW light to internal CFAST.


The quote is from 2013. Not 2019. I don't think the C200 came along until 2017. 2013 is noted in my comments for perspective. CanonFanboy didn't say it. Nofilmschool.com did, back in 2013. I provided a link at the end of the quote to the article. As far as I can tell the lawsuit is still ongoing. The C200 is irrelevant to the conversation.


----------



## RunAndGun (Jul 30, 2019)

Chaitanya said:


> So Sony would have to send out PR and letters to orignal owners recalling sold cameras. In case the cameras cannot be tracked down for disposal there is a fine set by court for every unit of untraceble product which needs to be paid. Considering this high end video cameras with internal raw recording in compressed format the number of said cameras would be really tiny and much easier to track down(than apple having to recall iphone 5 or 6 for some lawsuit where complaintent was demanding a total recall when iphone 8 were released). Also as @CanonFanBoy mentioned there might be a cross licensing deal between Red and Canon or simply to get around the patent Canon is dumping data to external recorder.



I guess what I’m getting at, more than “where are the cameras?”, is how would Sony actually get the cameras(or whatever) back if the owner is unwilling to part with it? I don’t think there is any law or legal way/precedent for them to forcefully take the camera(or other equipment) back from a legal owner in an instance like this. And speaking for myself as an F55 owner, Sony contacting me and saying, “Hey we need that camera back or we owe RED a bunch of money”, they’re not getting it. And no one else is either, because these cameras are hugely popular in the network sports world and make us all a lot of money. Outside of dealers with un-sold stock and possibly rental houses, they’d probably just get laughed at, unless they said, we will give you a one-for-one swap for a Venice(which wouldn’t happen). Even offering owners full retail cost reimbursement(which wouldn’t happen), probably wouldn’t get them many back, unless someone has been thinking about getting out anyway.

Of course, all of this is just speculative, because I have no idea exactly what falls under the shadow of RED’s claims.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 31, 2019)

RunAndGun said:


> I guess what I’m getting at, more than “where are the cameras?”, is how would Sony actually get the cameras(or whatever) back if the owner is unwilling to part with it? I don’t think there is any law or legal way/precedent for them to forcefully take the camera(or other equipment) back from a legal owner in an instance like this. And speaking for myself as an F55 owner, Sony contacting me and saying, “Hey we need that camera back or we owe RED a bunch of money”, they’re not getting it. And no one else is either, because these cameras are hugely popular in the network sports world and make us all a lot of money. Outside of dealers with un-sold stock and possibly rental houses, they’d probably just get laughed at, unless they said, we will give you a one-for-one swap for a Venice(which wouldn’t happen). Even offering owners full retail cost reimbursement(which wouldn’t happen), probably wouldn’t get them many back, unless someone has been thinking about getting out anyway.
> 
> Of course, all of this is just speculative, because I have no idea exactly what falls under the shadow of RED’s claims.


I think that's what the fines are for... unreturned cameras. At least, that's what I think he was saying. You wouldn't be required to return it AFAIK.


----------



## Chaitanya (Aug 14, 2019)

Here is an update, it is a new Red camera with RF mount:








The upcoming RED Komodo compact camera will be 6k - Photo Rumors


Another RED Komodo compact camera teaser from the company’s founder James Jannard indicates that the new camera will be 6k (see also this post): View this post on Instagram Really really happy what Canon has done with the new R / RF mount. More data more options more control. Loving this...




photorumors.com


----------



## uri.raz (Aug 14, 2019)

RunAndGun said:


> I guess what I’m getting at, more than “where are the cameras?”, is how would Sony actually get the cameras(or whatever) back if the owner is unwilling to part with it? I don’t think there is any law or legal way/precedent for them to forcefully take the camera (or other equipment) back from a legal owner in an instance like this.



Happened to a friend of mine, who owned a store. A manufacturer asked to return a bunch of merchandise, as a court ruled it was infringing on another manufacturer's copyright and ordered a recall. My friend replied he's sorry, but he already sold it. I asked him if he wasn't afraid the lie would be discovered, and he said the product became so rare, it would sell before anyone had opportunity to check up on him, and he was right.


----------



## filmmakerken (Oct 13, 2020)

Red announced a 6K Komodo with (manual) RF lens mount today.


----------

