In a Japanese company culture, when a company loses money, the CEO is the first to take a pay cut before any worker is laid off. In American company culture, when the company loses money, the CEO gets a bonus and workers get laid off through no fault of theirs.
Nikon’s acquisition of Red seems reminiscent of when Sony bought Minolta’s camera decision. So it is possible that the Nikon will follow in Sony’s footsteps when it comes to product integration.
Nikon was in a very dark place just 4 years ago fighting for the company's survival. Hmmm, prior to the Z9 in 2021, Nikon was far behind the 8 ball. Hanging on for dear life with dying DSLRs they finally woke and saw their future was fading away. They definitely don't want to experience that again. This meshes with their low to no risk business culture of the 2000s. But that was then. Since the beaucoup success of the Z9 with all their updates, they realize they can be leading the curve instead of lagging it. Maybe that's what prompted them to buy Red in the 1st place. Will Nikon completely transform into an Apple? Hell no! A culture make take a generation to change, but they do realize that with baby steps they can change their future and the movie landscape we currently have. Why not leapfrog your competitors and let them chase you for a change. Innovation will always be a key for most companies. But they have to get this transformation right. Those that are first typically don't stay there for long as cheaper products or better products surpass the leader. If Nikon can smartly incorporate features/functionality from Red into their line-up they may surprise a lot of people in a good way. but they have to make sure everything is seamless and not some features slapped in. Nikon has taken a bold step into their future by thinking outside the box. They control their destiny! Can't wait for the future of Nikon camera/video cameras.
Why does one have to be friendly in business? Competence is far more important. It's a cutthroat environment. It's clear you've never run a business in your life, which would explain why you're broke.
The company you thought was about to go broke, is making aggressive moves. They are committed to growth from this merger. This is a company with their backs against the wall, willing to fight hard to get to the top. I wouldn't underestimate their desire to achieve their goals.
Nikon was in a very dark place just 4 years ago fighting for the company's survival. Hmmm, prior to the Z9 in 2021, Nikon was far behind the 8 ball. Hanging on for dear life with dying DSLRs they finally woke and saw their future was fading away. They definitely don't want to experience that again. This meshes with their low to no risk business culture of the 2000s. But that was then. Since the beaucoup success of the Z9 with all their updates, they realize they can be leading the curve instead of lagging it. Maybe that's what prompted them to buy Red in the 1st place. Will Nikon completely transform into an Apple? Hell no! A culture make take a generation to change, but they do realize that with baby steps they can change their future and the movie landscape we currently have. Why not leapfrog your competitors and let them chase you for a change. Innovation will always be a key for most companies. But they have to get this transformation right. Those that are first typically don't stay there for long as cheaper products or better products surpass the leader. If Nikon can smartly incorporate features/functionality from Red into their line-up they may surprise a lot of people in a good way. but they have to make sure everything is seamless and not some features slapped in. Nikon has taken a bold step into their future by thinking outside the box. They control their destiny! Can't wait for the future of Nikon camera/video cameras.
It is exciting times in camera land. We have DJI kicking at the heels of traditional camera makers, Fujifilm showing off how people want simple, fun camera and now Nikon aiming high. While Canon stays on their laurels that got them this point, releasing great tech but then artificially limiting them down the product line. Sony still innovating but showing signs of not doing as much as it can.
Let’s not forget that the CEO of RED started Oakley sunglasses, built a hugely successful company, then sold it off. When he was looking for another project he built red into a hugely successful company and sold it off. I think it’s great for both companies, RED gets an influx of funding and the technical and manufacturing expertise of a very well established Japanese company, Nikon gets the technology of one of the top cinema camera companies. It’s a win-win. I know the red people are all crying crocodile tears that they’re fancy cameras are now owned by a Mega corporation but let’s wait and see what actually happens when you have a really innovative company funded by one of the top three camera companies on the planet.
Incorrect. Jarred Land (the CEO) did NOT start Oakley. That was Jim Jannard who eventually walked away due to health issues, but left Jarred Land in charge. Jim still owned and had majority control of RED from distance; Jarred was just the “face” of the company up until the Nikon acquisition.
Jarred Land moved to an advisor position. James Jannard announced his retirement on October 24, 2019. He cited his age and "a few health issues" as reasons for stepping back, plus he's a billionaire after selling Oakley to Luxottica in 2007. He owns and enjoys the islands now. He is 74 years old. I think Chelsea is more on point.
Just to comment... Japanese "manager" titles often don't translate to English well, because they tend to use "manager" for everything (team manager, section manager, department manager, division manager, etc.). In English Mr. Keiji Oshi's previous title might have been better translated to "Director" -- and his rank would've been equivalent to a VP or even SVP. Also as.I understand Osihi-san's role wasn't mere "UX Planning", which again is a misnomer. I believe he was in charge of product development at Nikon, and the main person behind the flagship Z9.
Here in Australia we have different pronunciations. For instance, we have Zed not Zee in the alphabet. So instead of ZR for the camera, I can imagine the Nikon ZedRed instead. 😀
I'm an Aussie living in the US. But I love the sound of owning a Z-RED camera. Jurassic Park? Has a nice punch to me. Should I trademark it now before anyone trolls me?
Nikon was in a very dark place just 4 years ago fighting for the company's survival. Hmmm, prior to the Z9 in 2001, Nikon was far behind the 8 ball. Hanging on for dear life with dying DSLRs they finally woke and saw their future was fading away. They definitely don't want to experience that again. This meshes with their low to no risk business culture of the 2000s. But that was then. Since the beaucoup success of the Z9 with all their updates, they realize they can be leading the curve instead of lagging it. Maybe that's what prompted them to buy Red in the 1st place. Will Nikon completely transform into an Apple? Hell no! A culture make take a generation to change, but they do realize that with baby steps they can change their future and the movie landscape we currently have. Why not leapfrog your competitors and let them chase you for a change. Innovation will always be a key for most companies. But they have to get this transformation right. Those that are first typically don't stay there for long as cheaper products or better products surpass the leader. If Nikon can smartly incorporate features/functionality from Red into their line-up they may surprise a lot of people in a good way. but they have to make sure everything is seamless and not some features slapped in. Nikon has taken a bold step into their future by thinking outside the box. They control their destiny! Can't wait for the future of Nikon camera/video cameras.
I think it's definitely a great time for Nikon to buy RED. I can see them eventually moving the company to Japan. With Cinema of China now being the second biggest and gunning for hollywood's title as the biggest. Plus the boom of korean and japanese films in Western society. Buying a company is the easiest way for Nikon to jump into things. Oh and we can't forget how big RU-vid is and the fact every creator needs a cinema camera to record their kid or dog or cat 🤔
You may not know what a T-mount is if your information is comming from Tonny. He "forgot" to mention that many RED cameras are sold with T-mount, or that the mount is modular.
I would imagine the Nikon name will soon be on the body like, the Red Nikon? When will they be available to the public and what do you think the pricing range will start or???
In fairness Oishi seems very animated for a Japan native. If I were Nikon I would call it Red by Nikon and continue their cinema cameras as they have been. But also use the Red tech in there cinema focused Nikon cameras.
Japanese business last for centuries and they are not run like US business, they are one of the few country that have permanent employment policies once you are employed for a certain years. The Japanese companies take risk on long term research and development not seen by the public unlike the US companies that announce their research as a product and document their research and experiment live for the public to see so that they can use other peoples money for the development. That's why US companies looks like they take more risk because it's not their money they are spending.
They no longer have permanent employment policies, they have not had them for decades. And they have years of stagnation. They need to change. I hope they use RED to modernize but keep the good of Nikon culture, including discipline.
Sony wanted to kick start their camera business and bought Minolta, using their patents, technologies and expertise to get a head start. Nikon wants to get serious about video cameras and buys RED, to use their patents, technologies and expertise to get a head start. Never mind that they currently already are on level terms with other brands, having hybrid cameras that do 12Bit 8K RAW internal. This could be a huge thin for Nikon, to bring them to the place they feel they deserve in the market. They might have slept on the transition to mirrorless for a while, but man have they caught up quickly.
Nikon must get that first post-merger RED product spot on. If they do any less than that they will lose the RED customer base. My big question is, will Nikon continue the flexible lens mounts or will they roll Nikon only proprietary lens mounts?
I doubt much will change about the fundamental nature of most products, besides a Z mount V-Raptor and Komodo-X. Otherwise it will be a collaboration of technologies and R&D. Nikon bought Red for it to be the cinema division of Nikon, not to make the Red cinema cameras into weird hybrids all of the sudden. At most, we see Nikon’s version of the R5C in a couple years based on the Z8 and V-Raptor platforms.
The PL-to-Z adapters already exist, as do the Sony E-to-Z adapters. The only thing that would be lost switching to the Z-mount is the use of RF lenses, and only Canon makes fully functional RF lenses.
Nikon is an optics company first and a camera company second. They might keep interchangeable mounts. But its a safe bet that they’re going to make a cine-nikkor line, and maybe in a proprietary mount with some strong cost/performance incentives towards adoption. They want to tempt users away from the $20-50k cooke, zeiss, angenieux lens to something they make. (Maybe at a cheaper price point) And they’ll ditch RED’s goofy aesthetics for a more traditional black and red. But the fundamental product is not liable to change much at all, except maybe making cheaper models to lower the barrier to entry.
I dont know but Japanese culture is pretty radical in parts. Plus Nikon is pretty well known in the movie industry around the world, not just for cameras.
I love all the speculation. Here's my take. (I may be wrong, but...)I've been a part of buyouts like this. Nikon will kill RED. It's competition. Why fight when you can buy out? The appearance RED still existing is as a result of the former CEO now an advisor. Jarred and James will be the interface for "Hollywood" and that whole market. The Nikon badge will be on the camera. Perhaps Nikon RED-1 with RED in red and of course Nikon in white both on a black camera. (Nikon name will be more prominent). Nikon historically is not a camera company but a lens company. They made periscopes for subs as well as other lens products. They even made lenses for Canon in the early days of Canon. I predict whey will make cinema lenses for the new video cameras. Perhaps PL mount to compete with Fujinon, Ziess and yes, Canon. Keep in mind Nikon is part of the Mitsubishi group. That equals lots of money. Just my take. We will see. Either way Nikon is aiming to dominate. Think Samurai.
If by Hollywood, you're referring to the LA crowd, their growth is stagnating. Areas like Georgia and Texas are growing their film industry. What I wonder is how this has affected the industry, and if a culture change at Red will be as impactful. I also wonder how much growth exists in high end cinema vs videography, content creator, and the midrange streaming crowd. I could see Nikon making a run at the Blackmagic demographic. They could have products in every range from the startup YT creator to the seasoned creators, indie guys and pro cinema with all the demographics in between. Once you're in the Nikon ecosystem, you just upgrade.
I think they could use the RED technology and expertise for the JAPAN film industry, which has birthed some legendary filmmakers, and brilliant cinematographers. They can also use the RED technology in their Z camera range, now that would bring in a lot of new customers. Another thing that came to mind, they can do joint projects with other big mamoth companies like APPLE. I am guessing Hollywood filmmakers will approach them for the use of their RED technology, due to the brand and previous history of RED. So this could be a great thing.
Having been a 20 year Nikon shooter and have switched to canon recently to match my cinema camera look, The Nikon build quality is superior and any RED Cinema Cameras they build will be great. Nikon has incredible and sharp glass as well and the largest mount for lenses making PL and any others viable. I prefer the canon look for portraiture personally, but the cooler, more contrast, sharper RED/Nikon look is a good match. I'm looking forward to seeing what they create together.
I hope both make one another better in many ways. I’m long time fan/user of both brands. And pushed for Nikon glass mounting. Both have good interface but I would prefer red users interface. As much as I love Nikon just hope they don’t mess things up.
I really hope Nikon haven't taken over Red at a bad time given the huge product announcments by Black Magic today. Their prices, specifications and rate of development are going to be hard to compete with.
If they someone how put autofocus in those box cameras then they'll be ahead of the game. I see that was the only thing that'll justify a $6k box camera when I can get a $3k one that does almost as much.
Semantics, but Nikon is the same company that came out with the 850. It's no longer the same company that came out with the action camera, or the Nikon 1.
I feel like Nikon won't leave the red name behind. I think we'll see Nikon cameras with red technology and red will keep doing what they do, maybe we'll see more z-mount reds and a new color science as Nikon is capable of investing in this. I think Nikon is a company looking for relevance in the video market in the same light that RED looks to be seen in the same light as Arri. And I think the Nikon money might get Red there.
Re: Manager quip at the 4:20 ish mark. In a Japanese corporate matrix, a Manager is the equivalent of a Western corporate structure Vice President. It is an esteemed title and it takes a decade (or more) to achieve. The title “Manager” here in America is given to people who can count to 20 without using their toes.
To me, the whole thing feels like a pretty exciting new chapter for a great company that has floundered recently, and has had enough of it. I think Nikon feels like they’ve been outdone and doesn’t like it, especially when much of the competition now comes from Sony, which isn’t historically even an imaging company. Japanese companies are super savvy and clever. I bet the next several years will really put Nikon back in the forefront.
Too bad that Nikon couldn't have made a move to try to purchase DJI. That would solve a whole lot of problems especially for Public Safety but also for a lot of commercial drone flyers. With all the issues with the CCP and their drone technology and the spying fears, we are presently stuck in a world where we are forced to buy American made drones (and a few other countries) that are not half as good and cost twice as much! Hope Nikon hears this!!
Sadly I think they’re too focused on being an optics business. And if they did, we’d get all kinda of weirdness, like nikon optics on hasselblad cameras. (RIP bronica, which did it first.)
I have a mixture of feelings about this. In matter of in camera raw video recording patent, Nikon was fighting RED to open up that patent, that would unleash all camera makers a big innovative opportunity, but buying RED means they will just keep the patent for themselves, as Star Wars meme: NIKON! "You were the chosen one, it was said you were going to destroy it, not join them." That in camara RAW recording patent is quite a deal, holding many from bringing prices down. As consumers it will keep the same, was a good solution for Nikon since their last cameras are quite impresive in specs, now including in camera RAW recording will be HUGE, I might will look getting one. Hope they will give born to the best Hybrid Camera EVER. Bring 16bit Hybrid RAW, no matter the price and size.
Red cameras branded Nikon but with a red shutter button and red letters on their pro-video gear would be a nod to Red and keep the old brand of Red recognizable...I wonder if there will be those that leave the Red brand because of the takeover, unless they believe that Red as a brand still still exist albeit with the letters Nikon printed on the camera?
the same happened in software space, when the purely hardware Broadcom bought the Switzerland of enterprise software - VMware. The south Asia company bought itself a huge *(twice its size) California-based mammoth and cultures started clashing from day one.
Adapting too much from Red into Nikon would almost certainly be seen as "admitting failure", I don't see that happening. You almost never see two CEOs unless a company is getting ready for a succession or divesture of a division. Last major "dual" was Blackberry - lessons re-learned. I'm guessing the US guy wanted the title to stay, they needed him, and that's how that happened. Red will be completely dismantled and adsorbed before long. all they need in the US is the business represented and support structure for studios but nothing else. I doubt Red's assembly plant is anything great - it's their software that drives the system that Nikon needs.
The co-CEO thing is interesting, but very Japanese in how camera companies operate. There’s always a Japanese person closely tied to HQ who has ultimate authority for the foreign (US) division? Sometimes it isn’t even reflected in their official title, they might seem to be in a lower position or even sideways-connected in the org chart, but they’re the ones who call the shots. Besides maintaining control, this is also part of how Japanese companies develop their most promising managers by moving them through positions in their foreign subsidiaries and sales groups.
Wouldn't it be nice to have all Plena cine lenses? And now RED camera can have Nikon autofocus. But with the DJI Lidar system, not too sure how game changing or useful is great autofocus in RED cameras.
if RED and Nikon really do start to make good video cameras? Whoa! It will change everything. The Sony snobs will switch to Nikon and be like "Ah Sony is so yesteryear daddy-o" or whatever they say. I use a sony but its because its the best for vintage lenses.
Vintage? Sony is the most recent still photo camera maker. Nikon has far more vintage lenses you can use on the F mount, going back to the '60s. Sony DSLR/mirrorless glass is what... 2010?
@classic.cameras Okay, if you say so. I don't mix camera brands because it costs too much money to work in multiple systems. I'm personally not a fan of Sony's lack of ergonomics... their cameras look mostly like boxes, they don't make any with a built-in grip, and they're more expensive. The A1 is $1K more expensive than a Z9, and you then have to spend more for the grip. I'm not going to pay $1.5k extra, plus buying adapters. I'm happy with my Z9 and my Nikkor lenses. As far as vintage glass, it's manual focus, so the AF system isn't a concern. You just have to know how to focus manually.
A think Red’s clients will just love the new CEO 😁. The Co CEO will manage them while the Japanese CEO will run the company as operational head and translate for old boys at the home base. Have seen this over and over at Sony
I have to infer that Nikon realized that they were losing sales because they were perceived as stills only cameras (not reality, but perception) so “RED-ifying” their cameras while still offering cinema cameras seems like a likely route. I also wonder how much long time camera experts Nikon were bothered by radio/TV company Sony becoming the leader on “their turf”?
Nikon has always struggled to get a foothold in motion picture and broadcast equipment. While they flirted with cine optics in 8mm and 16mm, and even offered a few 8mm movie cameras, they never had broad success. In contrast, Fujica (fujifilm), and Canon were early adopters, and pursued those markets pretty aggressively to the point of being market leaders. So while respected, they never got a foothold in the amateur market. They also never produced cine lenses at scale for professionals outside of a handful of PL mount options, and perhaps some mitchell mount stuff in Japanese licensed clones of the mitchell 35 SS. What nikon lenses did make their way into proffessional equipment, were F-mount lenses adapted to hollywood equipment, or rehoused to mount in other systems. When it came to video cameras, nikon mostly dipped out of that market as well. So basically every chance nikon has had to get into motion picture markets, they’ve had a bad time. Not for lack of effort, but for lack of success. But for being a mostly optics focused company, to not have a broadcast lens offerings, or movie lens lineup, really hurts their business. So it’s definitely an attempt to widen their portfolio of lens markets, and get a foothold in an industry they’ve struggled to claw their way into. If ARRI, or Panavision had been for sale, they would have jumped on the opportunity. As for what that means for their stills business is debatable, but I think they’re more than happy to use RED as a vehicle to expand video equipment at higher price points, and sell more expensive optics. (Ideally to claw back some market share from Zeiss, Cooke, etc.)
I think that Nikon will use video technologies to improve Nikon cameras and make Red cameras all Z mount, improving profits both times, and maybe improve the Red software and UI, but not kill the Red name that they just paid a bunch of money for.
Hey, i don't think RED is going to change a lot, from the product stand point is designed by filmakers, the whole concept on RED gear is already kind of standard, innovation on this field means been in the edge, making products on the go to make some new shoots possible. Red is kind of the cool brand on the hood, the brand, the culture and the design and particular workflow you can achieve is why the people start using this gear. It is a very challenging acquisition, from the cultural stand point, will be interesting to see how it goes.
Since I spent most of my career in Silicon Valley, I've been through a number of acquisitions as a "worker bee." Most of the time it was the very people who created the products, the design engineers who were let go grinding any future development to a halt. I hope Nikon doesn't make this mistake.
Agree with most of your take especially those regarding the blending/clash of the corporate cultures. This leads me to ask - what was the motivation of the previous controlling shareholders (Founder) to sell to Nikon. Take the $ & run? Founder took it as far as he could -simply - from a capital context? The Founder truly bought into a bold new Nikon/Red business model - thereby exploding new technologies to the market? Or is he simply moving on to his next great idea?
These are great questions that I haven't been able to find the answers to. Red is a private company. Some rumors say Red was struggling financially, but that's impossible for me to verify.
Red has a personal touch with people who make movies. They know them and therefore their needs. Nikon are great at developing tech but maybe lack the ideas on what they should push the boundry with. So to me they will probably keep RED with the name and all. Just let them be a big extention of their R&D. Maybe they will put their Z mount on the RED cameras. Or maybe there's a Contract that lets RED develop lenses for the RF mount... Which would let Nikon compete in the lenses for Canon's cameras.
really interesting. thanks. i think it looks like they're setting up oishi as the fall guy in case american risk-taking culture doesn't pan out. he's a lower level guy they can afford to crush, or, if it does work out, their leadership will be lauded for being geniuses for picking just the right guy. the american co-ceo, will pass up the risky ideas to oishi. he'll be the interface between the Red corporate culture worker bees, and the new CEO. that's the guy who will be caught between a rock and a hard place, whenever things aren't going smooth. we'll see how long he last in that position.
What if they make an inexpensive system so that social media people can generate cinematic-quality videos? That is a new market with little competition.
AMERICA IT IS NOT A CULTURE, IN THE USA WE HAVE MANY ORIGINAL CULTURES, EXAMPLE, AZTECA, MAYA, NAVAJO, COMACHE, IBERIAN TRIBES, FRENCH TRIVES, ECT. SALUDOS IBERO
Thanks for you elegant response. Thank God I don't have to defend my comments, the Culture of you Iberian family defend me, AMERICA , Americus Vespucci, is just a name of a geography, the Cultures in the USA 🇺🇸 AND THE REST OF THE COUNTRIES IN AMERICA, created by you Iberoamerican daughter, wife, family give that legacy to you and me, don't forget Bernardo Conde De Galvez, don't forget the Nabajo, don't forget the Incas creator of the food Culture around the world. You Visigoth Iberian family is very special, defend them. Saludos
If they are ‘afraid’ to fail they should pull together the top cinematographers and managing part of Red and get feedback before making moves… They didn’t do that that I’m aware of so next they are going their own route. They did buy the company and they are a conservative brand but to make it their own they will redesign the outer frame and materials m and make the cameras look more like Nikon as far as the brain they will keep the insides almost the same with some tweeks. They will over time adapt the cinema aspect to their mirrorless like canon and Sony adding cinema cameras. Their ‘RED’ line will continue to advance the tech inside the cameras and they will start putting out cameras that look like the Sony Venice but that are basically Red inside. The Red utilitarian metal body and design might be relegated to a couple of cameras in a line that is utilitarian and will remain Red. That way if the Nikon version fails they can slowly transition back to the Red designs…
Chelsea is spot on regarding Japanese companies being risk-averse. They also have a significant attitude regarding their technical superiority in all things. Could you see the Lana and Lilly Wachowski meeting with Oishi? They will look at him like just another empty suit. Red cameras have a Canon mount, not Nikon; how is that going to work?
Nikon is the new owner of RED and Nikon must prove that it is the owner of RED even if RED continues to behave as before the merger (or maybe not). The previous CEO of RED may not have much to contribute in this change due to his high profile, Nikon needs it to be known that RED is now owned by Nikon and perhaps Jannard's personality is an obstacle. I'm just waiting for my Nikon camera with +16 stops of dynamic range and a competitive focus. Thanks!
I reckon the movie industry is money-driven business like any other business, so as long as RED deliver the same great hardware and services as before, I don't think a boring CEO would affect much. But yeah, the boring conservative Japanese management style has failed in some new businesses like F1 when both Toyota and Honda tried a go at it doing both constructor and engine - both brands failed bcos they just weren't dynamic enough to be competitive in THAT sport.
Perhaps a better way of looking at this is that the American CO-CEO will actually run RED’s day to day operations and the Japanese CEO will oversee the business and report back to HQ in Japan since Nikon’s most senior executives are unlikely to be proficient in the English language. It is actually very typical for Japanese corporations to post a Japanese person to oversee their foreign operating units. They don’t have the same level of trust in local managers as they do in one of their own who shares the same culture and language. That’s just the way it is and this applies across all industries in which Japanese companies are involved, i.e. it is in no way unique to Nikon.
I think trying to incorporate red into nikon cameras is going to be expensive for consumers. I can tell now that there may be a lot of conflict between red management and nikon management. That really worries me Tony. I can see where Nikon believes purchasing Red is a great idea. I don’t think Red has the same sentiment about Nikon. I would love for it to work but I think it’s going to be a struggle.
Not only are Japanese companies risk averse, they are very much failure averse. Remember when Datsun cars appeared on the market outside Japan? Once they were established in the market the name switched to the company's real name, Nissan (which, like Nikon, USAians won't pronounce correctly - but I digress). Similarly we had the IBM plug-compatible FACOM computers, later revealed as Fujitsu. And Fujitsu lost a huge copyright case for stealing the source to IBM's MVS operating system, but that's another story. Interestingly IBM provided said source code to their customers... In both cases the brand name disguised the origin so if they failed the parent company wouldn't lose face as they could pretend it wasn't them. When the multinational company I worked for "merged" with a Japanese one we went from being left alone if we did our numbers to daily (I kid you not) cash reporting. The parent was paranoid about solvency. Our nominal parent was in another country that then reported to Japan. The MD was a local, who had an "advisor" from the Japanese parent. I wonder who actually ran the company? 🤔 I have much more, but must resist the temptation to run off at the keyboard.
I bought a 1969 Datsun 2000 roadster as a young man. They made great cars, now Nissan is dog poop owned by a French company. Not all has gone well with Japanese companies. It's hard to see the future in automobiles. Luckily Honda and Toyota are sticking to their roots of making excellent cars. As for this merger/buyout, I am not the least bit excited. I see Sony as a company that is pushing hard to get more diverse (I hate that word diverse) products to market. Nikon was the best when it made better Leica cameras than Leica did. Read the history and you will be impressed with Nikon's rise in the photojournalism world. I even own a Nikon F2A made in 1979. What I see is the spirit of Red being extinguished. Red is a brand that means something where Nikon is just old.
I can't speak to the other stories you've said here, but I can tell you for sure that you are wrong about Datsun. Datsun was a presige brand in _Japan_ , the brand Nissan used to denote that this car was developed in house by Nissan themselves. The idea they would be less embarassed if the brand failed in foreign markets is back to front. They would be a lot more embarassed about it.
Doesn’t red own a proprietary video codec that’s borderline patent trolling? Does this mean Nikon will now be the only manufacturer with the compressed raw codec?
No, the patent is legit. They are willing to license, but big corporations many times RED size don't want to pay and prefer to use disinformation and give crap to their users as Canon did.
As with your previous videos,, you like to make up facts. The RED CEO was not ousted. That was part of the initial agreement. Nikon still needs Jarred for his contacts with all the Hollywood directors they work with
5 месяцев назад
well in the best case both nikon and red will be amazing in the future red with the budget and infrastructure of nikon could be simply amazing. i just hope the pricing of red will normalize, the silly raw patent should finally be ended in 2028, i also hope they go back to interchangeable mounts like in dsmc2 cameras ... i hope so much chages ... i was so often soooo close to buying a red but i simply hated all around the experience. the ssd lies, the extremely expensive accessories. I just had always the feeling, once you are a red customer they milk every cent out of you for the silliest stuff. like a top handle for 600 buck without any tech in that... nah ... i hope that all changes
Yeah there's a lot of negative sentiment around Red cameras. Many customers with bad experiences, and many people saying they exaggerate their figures for aspects like Dynamic Range. That definitely happens for every company and I don't have a good way to assess their overall customer satisfaction in comparison to the rest of the industry.
@@TonyAndChelsea not according to a few of your older videos from like 3-4 years ago that you stated the Nikon would be out of camera space in about 2 years back then. You must likely delete that video/s to save face.
Nikon's acquisition of Red puts them in a better position to either be merged or acquired by someone else. The camera/imaging business is saturated with many companies producing near equivalent performing technology. The only way to breakthrough and measurably increase market share is via mergers and acquisitions. Both Sony and Canon (and even Panasonic) have deep enough pockets to make a move.
@@UnconventionalReasoning Corporations at that level operate without prejudice and are neutral in cultural tradition. Their business practices are international in scope. That said, the 3 companies mentioned as potential buyers are Japanese as well.
@@jimbruton9482 Yes, the companies operate on the global stage, but the cultural approaches seem to be relevant. The companies with the largest share of the interchangeable lens cameras are all Japanese. Sony, Canon, or Panasonic gain very little by acquiring Nikon. Nikon would gain even less by being acquired.
They also prevent the founders from creating another camera company. I think Keiji will fit into Hollywood just fine! Stirppers and cocaine to start, then P. Diddy parties! I don't think Tommy Rios will last long as Co-CEO. Usually, the new owners will ask the original founders who they feel would be good to promote, so I think Tommy was Jim and/or Jarred's recommendation. It won't be long until their unique cultural identities will create fricition and Nikon will appoint yet another Nikon-long employee.
People buy RED camera's because of the product, I didnt even know the CEO's name or what he looked like, until this video... but then again, I have been in the market to buy a RED... Heh all the top people in RED, must have gotten some MATRIX insider info, because SORA is going to make professional cameras obsolete anyway. :P
Does ANYONE have ANY NEWS on the status of RED's patent on compressed RAW-Video? That's the main reason I've been following the Nikon/RED-Saga. I find it ridiculous that a company can obtain a patent on compressing a file format... It also seems hard to exactly pin down what the patent is protecting. The wording seems to be less than clear. Arri, for example, offers a way to compress their RAW video while it's being copied via a card reader. It just seems deliberately obtuse but word around the internet is that their litigiousness is the main reason for the slow integration of non-camera-proprietary RAW video formats like ProRes RAW. Right now RAW-Video is the only thing that brings my pretty well-specced machine to a grind (and that's before applying noise reduction). But ProRes RAW would unlock hardware acceleration and make working with those files a breeze. At ZERO additional cost!! The camera manufacturers wouldn't even need to retroactively make it available via firmware. I just want to be able transcode those Canon R5 RAW (Lite) video files to ProRes RAW on my computer before I start working. We've been transcoding our stills RAWs to DNG upon import to Lightroom for ages. Why isn't this happening for RAW video?
I think Nikon has to start producing it's own sensor out of red experience that would be major.. and soon they have to use the cinema experience and give it to the Z line that lacks image colour quality.. that would overthrown the market finally Sony is waiting too much and canon and Nikon are doing a very good path by now.. I myself wanted to buy a Sony but in the end I am not.. as for lack of innovation and a bump in definition, we are so tiered of Sony giving only 4k .. it's time for 6k and Sony deserve to loose market like it's happening right now!!!
Japanese culture is conservative and Hollywood culture is more liberal than the rest of America . Conservatives have patience and attention to detail , liberals let it fly to see what happens . I believe Red may lose some employees unwilling to accept the new ways of doing things and ultimately will be a better company . How Hollywood accepts this is unpredictable .
