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

criscokkat

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2017
205
182
Madison, WI
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,567
643
119
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
312
14
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.
 

Chaitanya

EOS 6D MK II
Jun 27, 2013
1,052
149
33
Pune
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.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,476
1,080
Irving, Texas
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.
 
Last edited:

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,476
1,080
Irving, Texas
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.
 
Last edited:

RunAndGun

EOS RP
Dec 16, 2011
312
14
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.
 
Last edited:

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D MK IV
Jan 28, 2015
3,476
1,080
Irving, Texas
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

EOS 6D MK II
Jun 27, 2013
1,052
149
33
Pune
Here is an update, it is a new Red camera with RF mount:
 

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
127
66
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.