EduPortas

My prediction is:
1: Add 8k RED raw to high end MILC's such as the Z9 or its successor. 6k to lower tier stuff such as the Z6 line...
2: Develop a cine line of their own in tandem with a RED line but a few differences, a bit like Lumix SL2 and Leica S1R (see what I did there?) ie, just boxed and badged slightly differently.
3: The next RED camera will have Z Mount as will any/all future RED cameras and RF for one final fling...if at all, before cutting Canon completely out of the loop.
Summary:
Nikon have come back strong in the last couple of years, especially with the Z9, Z8, Zf and probably Z6iii and I expect that market share and their image to continue to improve.
I expect them to push now into the video/cine market much more than they have with just hybrid MILC cameras and develop a dedicated cine line akin to Sony, so FX3, FX6, FX9, Burano... 
The appeal and their market will be to 'prosumers', hybrid event shooter people like me, indie filmmakers and the commercial market plus maybe some 'Hollywood' budget level productions, but won't oust Arri or Sony from that perch, ie, will be niche in that regard.
Nothing else makes any sense to me.
But what do I know, I ain't exactly Quasimodo. (Got to be a boxing fan to get that one) 😜

Was this guy responsible for the genius idea of putting a CFE card inside Red mini mag and charge 10x? 

What the... HECK????
That makes no sense at all, unless they're planning to just let RED slowly die??
But when I read the article myself, I see it in a completely different manner:
1) will take time to integrate Nikon and RED together, might be years. There is a lot to do! So with all the other stuff on their plate, perhaps a Z Mount Cinema Camera won't be the first thing out the gate, maybe it will be one more cycle down the road. (maybe they want to make a BIG impact with it when they release it? Have awesome AF with RED)
2) they want to keep their loyal RED customers happy during these turbulent times, so "for now" they'll reassure them by keeping RF mount 
There is a very cool mod for a Fujifilm camera however:
https://www.newsshooter.com/2024/04/16/old-fast-glass-ofg-custom-65-rehoused-fujifilm-gfx-100-ii-cinema-camera/ 
 

I agree on the focus on the influencer kids.
In terms of if Nikon should let RED die, that's a tough call.  They could retain the R&D benefits of the RED team (which is likely to have a very very different internal culture to the rest of Nikon and would be best kept separated) but without the RED guys talking directly to folks in Hollywood their ability to do R&D would be drastically reduced.
RED definitely are a minor player, but they're not without any contacts.

That’s what I suspect also.
Not that I was ever invested or even interested in RED.
But I do hope we see the tech become part of Nikon hybrid ASAP and they bring out their own cinema line a la FX3 and FX30 mold.
I could go any way right now (as in next year) and that is currently Nikon for stills and Lumix for video, but really want it all with one brand for a variety of reasons.
Fortunately, because E Mount adapts almost natively to Z Mount, Nikon and Sony have the highest level of cross compatibility in the hybrid game right now.
I’m interested in raw but would rather dip my toe than go all in so if the RED raw became available to certain existing bodies by firmware such as the Z9…
Well I am already strongly considering trading 2 ‘lesser’ Nikon Z bodies for a single Z9 and if…if….RED raw came to Z6iii, it would probably be a done deal for me and I’d be all in on Nikon bodies and E Mount glass.

You said it man, Nikon N3 and N30 are practically a given.
That's would place them in a very attractive position for these new "professional content creators".

You're totally right, friend. That makes all the diff in the world for such a small device.

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately.
Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here.
They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel).
We'll see.

I guess you're in the 1% who actually liked the horrendously artificial movement fluidity of the movie.
And that's coming from a guy who has read every Tolkien book and movie ever produced (yes including the animated ones).
The contraste between the CGI and the real-life characters of The Hobbit is jarring and imposible to "un-see".
Progress is great except when it makes something worse, friend. 

Ay caramba!
It's real easy: "worse" means the technical aspect of the film makes it harder to watch bc it distracts you from the story.
That's why 24fps is the standard for cinema. If you're willing to deviate from that standard you better have a very good reason to do so.
The Hobbit DID NOT have a valid reason for doing this 48p stuff. None. Jackson learned this lesson the hard way.  

I guess you're in the 1% who actually liked the horrendously artificial movement fluidity of the movie.
And that's coming from a guy who has read every Tolkien book and movie ever produced (yes including the animated ones).
The contraste between the CGI and the real-life characters of The Hobbit is jarring and imposible to "un-see".
Progress is great except when it makes something worse, friend. 

it is interesting to see how people are locked in the stereotypic ideas. 
24p for cinema, 30p for tv broadcast, 60p for sports. 
right now, holly wood block busters are typically action packed, green screen vfx focused. so high res high fr are actually very suitable for hollywood features, these are more sports like than classic drama dialogue center like. 
the classic drama which emphasizes on dialogue is moving into the broadcast or streaming service. so if 24p is critical for this kind of drama, actually 24p should be used for soap opera on tv or netflix. 
in summary, the paradigm has shifted.
60p should be for hollywood feature cinema
24p should be for tv soap opera, netfix
30p is still for news. 
 
 

The futurists are certainly free to have their preferences & do whatever they want in this age - but this properly matches the aesthetics to the general subjects. In this case -- the traditional approach is the superior one 😞 .
HFR Lotr was dreadful and a total disaster. Most viewers (in US at least) only saw it projected at 24P.
The reality that these days a bunch of people can't tell the difference between any of this is meaningless to me when it comes to what I choose to make. How many people are falling off heights to their deaths taking selfies every year?
All of the disposable content, trends and mindless bs that western social media encourages & runs on doesn't automatically fall under the category of 'progress' -- sorry.

No.
60p = sports
30p = TV
24 = cinema
Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

No.
60p = sports
30p = TV
24 = cinema
Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

No.
60p = sports
30p = TV
24 = cinema
Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

No.
60p = sports
30p = TV
24 = cinema
Sorry Tony, some things will never change. 

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately.
Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here.
They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel).
We'll see.

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately.
Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here.
They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel).
We'll see.

One of the weirder moves in the YouTube sphere lately.
Prob some kind of lawsuit by an ex-employee or something, seeing the way the channel imploded was not amicable at all. Management, talent, producers, the new guys. It was all really embarrassing considering they were one of the premier tech channels out here.
They basically deleted their history as a brand (no one really visits their site, and if they did it was thanks to the YT channel).
We'll see.

Modern fast lenses were originally requested by journalists. Specially zooms.
At large apertures you solve two problems:
1) Poor lighting 
2) Unpleasing backgrounds usually encountered at press conferences, the average street, and most offices. 
The "cinema look" was not even a thing in video up until about 2010, since most video productions were a variation of journalism: documentaries, long form news stories, tv broadcasts. All of those requiere deep DOF about 99% of the time.
As you say: if you know what you're doing you actually want to show the background of your shot. Say, asking your subject to stand for the interview in front of the coffee shop were most patrons are visible vs. asking the interviewy to stand in front of a wall of the coffee shop.
So the question is: ¿does this particular background need to be softened or not?
 
 

Modern fast lenses were originally requested by journalists. Specially zooms.
At large apertures you solve two problems:
1) Poor lighting 
2) Unpleasing backgrounds usually encountered at press conferences, the average street, and most offices. 
The "cinema look" was not even a thing in video up until about 2010, since most video productions were a variation of journalism: documentaries, long form news stories, tv broadcasts. All of those requiere deep DOF about 99% of the time.
As you say: if you know what you're doing you actually want to show the background of your shot. Say, asking your subject to stand for the interview in front of the coffee shop were most patrons are visible vs. asking the interviewy to stand in front of a wall of the coffee shop.
So the question is: ¿does this particular background need to be softened or not?
 
 

Just out of curiosity and as a fellow teacher, how are you implementing two cameras for an English class?
 
 

Bleh. I find no pleasure in shooting with my phone. It's just there to register. Besides, holding the phone to take a picture or shoot video doesn't look cool :p
A dedicated camera or videocamera requieres more work, yes, but there's an artisan's process that offers "something" that's not just there with the phone.
The technical aspect of our job can be spiritually rewarding.

Sometimes, not even that.
Met one of my former wedding clients at another wedding last weekend and 3 years after theirs, they have not even watched their wedding film a single time.
So in some cases, we could present just a thumbnail and 10 minutes of blank content… 🤔🤨😂