Jump to content
nathlas

RED Komodo

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Jonesy Jones said:

I still can’t figure out what happens to the rest of Reds cameras. This cam does much or most of what they do. And in some ways more. I mean I’m looking forward to it as well but what’s the catch.

I've been following it pretty closely and have been wondering that myself. I thought it was going to be sensor size, but that proved to be incorrect. As far as I can tell, the main differences will be:

- High Frame Rates - Most Red cameras can do 96fps in 6k (Komodo will top out at 40 or 50fps) and 120-150fps in 4k. The specs haven't been released yet, but I'd be surprised if Komodo matched this.

- Modularity - All of Red's other cameras can be built out based on the production. Whereas Komodo is pretty much just itself - it can't really be anything more than what it is, which probably means it won't be used as many A-Cams on most of the shows/movies that Red cameras are used on now. They need all the extra inputs and outputs that DSMC2 provides.

- Fixed Mount - Totally fine with me since I love the RF Mount, but having an RF Mount and not user-swappable PL and EF mounts probably means many bigger productions will opt for DSMC2 and not use adapters. 

But really that seems to be about it, all of which is fine for small crews, owner/operators, small production companies, etc. 

Also, with a global shutter mode and Red IQ, I bet they will sell dozens of these to action movies and tv shows to use as crash cams and b, c, d, e, f, g etc cams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
1 hour ago, currensheldon said:

I've been following it pretty closely and have been wondering that myself. I thought it was going to be sensor size, but that proved to be incorrect. As far as I can tell, the main differences will be:

- High Frame Rates - Most Red cameras can do 96fps in 6k (Komodo will top out at 40 or 50fps) and 120-150fps in 4k. The specs haven't been released yet, but I'd be surprised if Komodo matched this.

- Modularity - All of Red's other cameras can be built out based on the production. Whereas Komodo is pretty much just itself - it can't really be anything more than what it is, which probably means it won't be used as many A-Cams on most of the shows/movies that Red cameras are used on now. They need all the extra inputs and outputs that DSMC2 provides.

- Fixed Mount - Totally fine with me since I love the RF Mount, but having an RF Mount and not user-swappable PL and EF mounts probably means many bigger productions will opt for DSMC2 and not use adapters. 

But really that seems to be about it, all of which is fine for small crews, owner/operators, small production companies, etc. 

Also, with a global shutter mode and Red IQ, I bet they will sell dozens of these to action movies and tv shows to use as crash cams and b, c, d, e, f, g etc cams. 

Yeah I think modularity is a big one. I have been lukewarm on RED and their shadiness as of late - with their mini mags and their whole patent issues - but I do have to admit, the modularity of a RED is very appealing to me. Being able to just grab a camera with everything attached and with no cables dangling everywhere is what has always attracted me to them. Obviously, Komodo's price makes it something that hobbyist like me might be able to actually afford - but the lack of modularity doesn't make me as excited of owning a RED as its bigger brothers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, currensheldon said:

But really that seems to be about it, all of which is fine for small crews, owner/operators, small production companies, etc. 

Also, with a global shutter mode and Red IQ, I bet they will sell dozens of these to action movies and tv shows to use as crash cams and b, c, d, e, f, g etc cams. 

I think it might be positioned as an accessible lower end to the RED brand.

In the sense that if you're shooting with h264 h265 cameras, probably in 10-bit or more, if you want to upgrade then you can go RAW with the BM / Z-Cam offerings, but if you wanted to go "up" from there it was a pretty big leap to the entry level RED / ARRI cameras, and the various RAW offerings in that gap from other manufacturers (eg, Canon) were kind of patchy and odd.

This lowers the entry-level to the RED ecosystem (the Raven might have done this too, not really sure) and allows people to get into the RED world and start getting used to the terminology and various other things.  In a sense (almost) all future high-end film-makers will start somewhere below these price points and will start shooting with what they can afford and upgrading as they get better, get more work and charge higher rates, and upgrade their gear.  Having an entry-level offering allows those price-conscious people to step into your world rather than ARRI or another competitor.

Why do you think that Resolve has a free version?

For big budget productions there are only really two post-colour / processing solutions, DaVinci Resolve and Baselight.  In this sense it's a bit like RED and ARRI.  Google this forum and see how many times Baselight has been mentioned, but at this point Resolve is a familiar name to most film-maker you tubers.  RED would do well to adopt the same strategy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RED’s vision to have an affordable entry line goes way back to when they were talking about 4K for $4K.

That never quite materialized but it seems now they finally might achieve it with 6K for $6K.

It still does seem kinda too good to be true so the skeptic in me is either anticipating a price hike or specs not being met and indeed in any case a very limited number of actual production units.

Their last mainstream project, the Hydrogen smartphone was a total flop with long delays, promised specs not being met and then ultimately the project being killed.

Wishing them the best on this one as I really want a Komodo with those specs and price point but time will tell if that’s really the case..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, kye said:

if you want to upgrade then you can go RAW with the BM / Z-Cam offerings, but if you wanted to go "up" from there it was a pretty big leap to the entry level RED / ARRI cameras

The leap in price from an URSA Mini 4.6K to a secondhand RED Scarlet MX wasn't much, if anything at all. 

And at the moment ARR ALEXA Classic prices are only a few hundred dollars more than an URSA Mini Pro G2!

 

6 hours ago, kye said:

and the various RAW offerings in that gap from other manufacturers (eg, Canon) were kind of patchy and odd.


Sony always had raw options at "affordable" prices below RED/ARRI
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

The leap in price from an URSA Mini 4.6K to a secondhand RED Scarlet MX wasn't much, if anything at all. 


Sony always had raw options at "affordable" prices below RED/ARRI

This is interesting.  You're probably right (I'm not the expert in the various product lines) however, my comments were mostly reflective of what I see on the YouTube circuit.  Those people don't talk about Sony cine cameras, they don't talk about Ursas, they talk about DSLR, mirrorless, and RED/ARRI.  Kind of like how people have heard of Lamborghini and Ferrari but not so much Maserati or Konnigsegg etc...

The people doing this stuff serviously should, of course, be going UMP and FS5/FS7 etc, but the PR tells a very different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronFilm said:

The leap in price from an URSA Mini 4.6K to a secondhand RED Scarlet MX wasn't much, if anything at all. 

And at the moment ARR ALEXA Classic prices are only a few hundred dollars more than an URSA Mini Pro G2!

 


Sony always had raw options at "affordable" prices below RED/ARRI
 

Not sure why you would still want a scarlet mx though, I would rather shoot ump then scarlet mx on any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does seem that Red is aiming for a more introductory camera to hook users. No doubt that once I used Redcode, it's hard to go back to h264/h265. The C200's cinema raw lite is also amazing, but definitely costs a lot more to use than Redcode due to only 3:1 or 4:1 compression (Redcode 5k still looks incredible at 11:1 - 14:1) and is much more processor intensive on my Mac. 

So, once you see the quality and flexibility you can get with a high-end raw codec, using something else is a bit disappointing. Makes sense to hook lower budget users. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, kye said:

For big budget productions there are only really two post-colour / processing solutions, DaVinci Resolve and Baselight.  In this sense it's a bit like RED and ARRI.  Google this forum and see how many times Baselight has been mentioned, but at this point Resolve is a familiar name to most film-maker you tubers.  RED would do well to adopt the same strategy.

Red wouldn't be able to.  A lot of Red's marketing is based on marketing (anyone want 10x marked up prices of REd branded SSD's?)....  RED is too small and don't have the leverage that blackmagic does.  Blackmagic has resolve and has experience catering to the non-budget film makers and low budget film makers for a while now.  Red is relying on their reputation.  In their market segment which they help started - mid to higher end production; ARRI is kicking their butt; very few people shot on RED now.  It's ARRI.  Red is now trying to go into Blackmagic's market with the Komodo.  However, I don't think the market is big enough to sustain two major companies not to mention, at any time now, Sony can completely wipe both blackmagic and RED away by creating a competing camera; they just don't think the market is big enough for them to really care. 

When the sales of their A7 cameras start slowing down, we'll see Sony slowly start to encroach on both RED and blackmagic.  Remember, within only a few years, sony took away both canon and nikon's marketshare.  Both of these companies were a lot bigger and more entrenched than RED or Blackmagic.  Just like the REd phone, Komodo is RED's last grasp for market share.  Just like the Red phone, it's not going to work. 

Red is slowly becoming a joke.  It's hard for us "video enthusiast" to see that because we knew about red when they first helped start the film to digital revolution for mid to higher end productions.  But if you step back with fresh eyes, Red just like their Red Phone, is a joke - it's just a matter of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, eleison said:

Just like the Red phone, it's not going to work. 

You have literally no way of knowing this.

RED has forced users to use over-priced accessories, they have a patent that stifles competition, and they're of questionable moral character, their marketing is mostly hype, but that doesn't mean that the cameras aren't capable of great imagery.

Komodo directly addresses two of the biggest drawbacks - price and proprietary media, and they still hold the trump card of real compressed raw. Add on top of that PDAF and a mirrorless mount - there's no direct competition. Who are you to say that this won't grow their business?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, eleison said:

Red wouldn't be able to. 

I'm not sure that I understand your post, but in terms of what I was suggesting, I think they're perfectly capable of creating a low-cost lower-functionality product that will be suitable for lower and mid tier film-makers and will compete for film-makers who are progressing up the ladder as they build their businesses.

RED have lots of hype, that's for sure, but in todays world that counts for a lot.  They've also taken a number of products through the complete product development cycle and deliver very nice images, so they've proven they can make cameras.

The rest is debatable, of course..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EthanAlexander said:

You have literally no way of knowing this.

RED has forced users to use over-priced accessories, they have a patent that stifles competition, and they're of questionable moral character, their marketing is mostly hype, but that doesn't mean that the cameras aren't capable of great imagery.

Komodo directly addresses two of the biggest drawbacks - price and proprietary media, and they still hold the trump card of real compressed raw. Add on top of that PDAF and a mirrorless mount - there's no direct competition. Who are you to say that this won't grow their business?

 

 

You are right.  One of their biggest drawbacks is price.  How does a company lower price?  Make things a commodity.  Use the economics of scale.  Sony, when they think it's time and when they think it's financially worth it, will create cameras that enthusiastic AND the serious cinematographers will want to buy.  Right now, the "cinema field" is not that important to Sony.  They are letting the smaller companies have this market segment while they are making $$$$ in the enthusiasts and advance hobbyist segment via their a7 and a6000 line.  They are also letting the smaller companies experiment to see what features are important.  

Sooner or later, Sony will create a camera that appeals to an even bigger audience including the serious cinematographers.  They have too because introducing "professional" features to a product stimulates sales.  They cannot let their mirror-less camera's sales stagnant.  That's not how business work.  They will create a camera that will be mass marketed and using the economics of scale will be cheaper than anything that RED can do.  That was what happened in the DSLR field (I think Sony introduced the first full frame camera under $1k during a time when everyone thought full frame cameras were for professionals only). 

Remember Sony is light years ahead of RED in sensor technology (does RED even design their own chip???).  RED's trump card of compressed RAW.  Is that really important?  I see within the next few years, there will be hardware good enough to have save uncompressed raw.  Also, while not 100% raw, braw has shown that companies can get by without using compress raw.  Sony is a huge company, they can easily create their own version of cameras that use braw like codecs. They could also license compress raw from RED if they think it's in Sony's best interest to do so -- which they haven't.

PDAF and mirrorless mount - been there, done that.  Those two items are not exclusive to RED.  I think sony has a patent on PDAF or at least aspects of PDAF but I'm not 100% sure.   This is one of the reason Panasonic has such bad autofocusing because they are forced to used CDAF. 

At the end of the day, RED is nothing. They are an emperor without clothes.  I can see them NOT existing within the next 10 years.. perhaps not even the next 5 years.

46 minutes ago, kye said:

I'm not sure that I understand your post, but in terms of what I was suggesting, I think they're perfectly capable of creating a low-cost lower-functionality product that will be suitable for lower and mid tier film-makers and will compete for film-makers who are progressing up the ladder as they build their businesses.

 

... but business don't exist in a vacuum.  The question then becomes can RED create products that can compete with Sony?  They can't because RED is a small company without the economics of scale.  Sony sells bucket loads more cameras -- how hard do you think it will be for sony to create camera's that compete with RED?  Not too hard.  They have proven they can take on "establish players" like canon and Nikon before and sony definitely has the resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, eleison said:

... but business don't exist in a vacuum.  The question then becomes can RED create products that can compete with Sony?  They can't because RED is a small company without the economics of scale.  Sony sells bucket loads more cameras -- how hard do you think it will be for sony to create camera's that compete with RED?  Not too hard.  They have proven they can take on "establish players" like canon and Nikon before and sony definitely has the resources.

They don't, that's absolutely true.  You're also right about Sony probably being able to eat REDs lunch if they wanted to.

All your points are valid and will apply to a level-headed purchaser, and that's definitely an ingredient in product and market success, but that's not quite the whole picture.  The other part is the marketing game, and for that RED have a reputation that Sony don't.  You don't even have to go to YT where people are making "I bought a RED" "I spent $15,000 on a camera" clickbait videos about RED cameras but there's scarcely a mention of UMP or Sony anywhere, even in this thread there have been a few people saying that their interest in the Komodo (at least partly) includes the name.  For this reason I think there might be some success by having an entry-level product, even if it might get killed by Sony products in every other way possible (which is probably debatable as different people have different criteria).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, kye said:

They don't, that's absolutely true.  You're also right about Sony probably being able to eat REDs lunch if they wanted to.

All your points are valid and will apply to a level-headed purchaser, and that's definitely an ingredient in product and market success, but that's not quite the whole picture.  The other part is the marketing game, and for that RED have a reputation that Sony don't.  You don't even have to go to YT where people are making "I bought a RED" "I spent $15,000 on a camera" clickbait videos about RED cameras but there's scarcely a mention of UMP or Sony anywhere, even in this thread there have been a few people saying that their interest in the Komodo (at least partly) includes the name.  For this reason I think there might be some success by having an entry-level product, even if it might get killed by Sony products in every other way possible (which is probably debatable as different people have different criteria).

I feel the market place for digital cameras is made up of people not buying on hype (e.g., I cannot name camera products that have succeed based on hype).  The clothing industry (where Jannard first made his money selling expensive Oakley sun glasses) is a different story.  But the clothing industry and the digital camera industry are vastly different in my opinion.  However, I think this was the reason why RED ceo's were unabashedly willing to slap their RED logo on products and charge 2-5x as much for RED accessories which were basically re-branded products with very little value added except for the brand logo.  It's the same mentally.  It may work for a while, but ultimately people notice -- especially technology based people. 

 

RED does have a reputation.   But that reputation is based on things that they did aprox 10 years ago.  Amazing spider, The Hobbit, the girl with the dragon tatoo, etc.  films that were shot on a RED camera........ 10 years ago.  Very few high production hollywood movies are shot with red now (it's arri).  They use to be a major player in sundance, not any more.  RED had the first mover advantage.  To people who don't know better, it has the reputation of being good, and expensive.  That is why you have click bait YT videos regarding RED "I spent $15000 on a camera".  For people in the know, it's more about arri alexa... but arri alexa doesn't have that reputation..  They didn't have the first mover advantage -- and too be honest, I really don't think they market themselves that much.

 

https://nofilmschool.com/infographic-camera-lenses-sundance
https://ymcinema.com/2019/06/17/red-arri-and-others-cinema-cameras-market-overview/

 

At the end of the day, who knows what can happen?  I could be totally wrong.  Unlike some people though, I don't care if someone bought a red.  When people hype themselves by saying they have a RED, I just roll my eyes and think to myself, come back to me when you have an Arri alexa lf.  Now that's a youtube video I want to see ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, eleison said:

I feel the market place for digital cameras is made up of people not buying on hype (e.g., I cannot name camera products that have succeed based on hype).  The clothing industry (where Jannard first made his money selling expensive Oakley sun glasses) is a different story.  But the clothing industry and the digital camera industry are vastly different in my opinion.  However, I think this was the reason why RED ceo's were unabashedly willing to slap their RED logo on products and charge 2-5x as much for RED accessories which were basically re-branded products with very little value added except for the brand logo.  It's the same mentally.  It may work for a while, but ultimately people notice -- especially technology based people. 

 

RED does have a reputation.   But that reputation is based on things that they did aprox 10 years ago.  Amazing spider, The Hobbit, the girl with the dragon tatoo, etc.  films that were shot on a RED camera........ 10 years ago.  Very few high production hollywood movies are shot with red now (it's arri).  They use to be a major player in sundance, not any more.  RED had the first mover advantage.  To people who don't know better, it has the reputation of being good, and expensive.  That is why you have click bait YT videos regarding RED "I spent $15000 on a camera".  For people in the know, it's more about arri alexa... but arri alexa doesn't have that reputation..  They didn't have the first mover advantage -- and too be honest, I really don't think they market themselves that much.

 

https://nofilmschool.com/infographic-camera-lenses-sundance
https://ymcinema.com/2019/06/17/red-arri-and-others-cinema-cameras-market-overview/

 

At the end of the day, who knows what can happen?  I could be totally wrong.  Unlike some people though, I don't care if someone bought a red.  When people hype themselves by saying they have a RED, I just roll my eyes and think to myself, come back to me when you have an Arri alexa lf.  Now that's a youtube video I want to see ?

I agree.

It's an interesting parallel between cameras and clothing/fashion where hype is well and truly a force.  Another hype/first-mover parallel in the camera industry is GoPro.  Their entire advantage was marketing (which they did very well) but essentially just reselling technology already developed and available in China with a brand-name markup.  Eventually technology semi-caught up and the other players also caught up, but hype is still alive and well, and GoPro still has brand awareness and market share despite companies like Yi having relatively comparable products.  GoPro is floundering in recent years, but that's more due to the Karma PR disaster and the action camera market being pretty well saturated now.

In terms of what this means for RED, who knows.  But I still hold that good marketing will sell units (how many units is unknown, and of course if it's a great product then that's will definitely help) and I doubt that the $2-5k RAW cinema camera market is flooded, so that's unlikely to be a factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, kye said:

This is interesting.  You're probably right (I'm not the expert in the various product lines) however, my comments were mostly reflective of what I see on the YouTube circuit.  Those people don't talk about Sony cine cameras, they don't talk about Ursas, they talk about DSLR, mirrorless, and RED/ARRI.  Kind of like how people have heard of Lamborghini and Ferrari but not so much Maserati or Konnigsegg etc...

The people doing this stuff serviously should, of course, be going UMP and FS5/FS7 etc, but the PR tells a very different story.

Depends on what YT channels you listen to, lots do discuss the URSA range. 

But then again many run of the mill channels only talk about the low end mirrorless they can get themselves, or the highest of high end stuff they lust over. And forget about the world in between!. 

 

19 hours ago, zerocool22 said:

Not sure why you would still want a scarlet mx though, I would rather shoot ump then scarlet mx on any day.

I agree!!

But lots of people are wowed by "RED", and are biased towards buying a RED instead. 

Just pointing out they're quite easily within reach if you look at DSMC1 bodies (let alone original R1 bodies!!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, currensheldon said:

It does seem that Red is aiming for a more introductory camera to hook users.

Wasn't that the purpose of Raven? Wonder why they discontinued it. 

 

10 hours ago, EthanAlexander said:

RED has forced users to use over-priced accessories, they have a patent that stifles competition, and they're of questionable moral character, their marketing is mostly hype, but that doesn't mean that the cameras aren't capable of great imagery.


Their patent won't last forever: 
1) Will eventually be overturned.
2) Will expire eventually in a handful more years anyway
3) We'll get acceptable workarounds to legally dodge around the patent instead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...