Updated: wording in first paragraph, addendum
RED, the video/cinema camera company started by Oakley founder Jim Jannard, is going to be fully acquired by Nikon. RED and its 220 employees will now be a subsidiary of the Japanese company. Both companies issued press releases today announcing the completion of the agreement, but with almost no detail. As a lawyer reminded me, if the deal is for more than US$223m (2023 adjusted number), it won’t formally close until Nikon has made a Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act filing that allows time for an antitrust review. Nikon would not be allowed to integrate operations until at least the initial review period is complete.
I happened to be with Nikon employees at WPPI just after the deal was announced. I’m not going to divulge any specific information from those conversations, but rather make an observation. Pretty much since the Z9 first was announced, I’ve witnessed a ressurection of energy, enthusiasm, and excitement at NikonUSA. That got another boost with last night’s announcement.
And they have a right to be stirred, as video has been one of the big question marks as to where Nikon might head, and now we have the start of an answer. Nikon will probably still need a tweener product to bridge the Z System and RED system, but the Z8 and Z9 currently are already solid hybrid still/video cameras, though they lean more towards stills than video.
More importantly, the RED acquisition puts Nikon back in Hollywood, where it once had a great influence from the optics standpoint, but which has very much declined over the years to the point of irrelevance these days. And hey Sony, Nikon has a global shutter camera now ;~).
A lot of people are speculating on the details of what happens next. RED, for instance, has a deal with Canon where Canon gets access to the RED raw video patents in exchange for RED using the RF mount in their cameras. That’s likely to eventually go away, though I doubt anything will happen in the short term.
Meanwhile, there’s the issue of Nikkor lenses for video. Technically, we have two dramatically different video lenses from Nikon at the moment (12-28mm f/3.5-5.6 VR DX, and 58mm f/0.95 NOCT S). It’s reasonable to assume, however, that we’ll see more on that front in the not too distant future, but there’s work to be done on both the RED and Nikon side before that is likely to show up.
I first heard about Nikon trying to find a bigger entrance into video through acquisition about two years ago. Three names kept coming up in that respect (JVC, Blackmagic Design, and RED). While I think most users thought that a Sony-style approach of just building more video focused cameras off the still models (e.g. the recent Sony FX models) was what would happen, I don’t know that there would be enough initial volume all by itself for Nikon to pursue that strategy of following Sony (or Canon’s strategy with their Cinema RF line).
The RED acquisition solves the problem initially by putting Nikon in a well-established, low volume, high-priced market that demands excellence. If you think about it, the RED Raptor and Komodo live at the top of the video world, the Z8 and Z9 live at the top of the stills world. That makes a solid technology base from which to move downward from in order to provide volume as the tech matures.
What the RED acquisition doesn’t solve is this: the entry feeder system that generates future users.
It’s a long leap from an iPhone to a RED Raptor or Komodo. It’s a long leap from an iPhone to Z8 or Z9. So how does Nikon pull in new users from the young that want to go beyond what the product they grew up with does?
I’m pretty sure the answer lives in APS-C (or as Nikon calls it, DX). That’s because of cost and size, first and foremost. You don’t go from carrying a phone in your pocket to a 35 pound bag-a-gear on your back in one step ;~). You also don’t go from letting the phone make all the decisions and heavy lifting to dealing with 2+ billion customization possibilities in one step, either. Finally, you don’t go from the modest phone sensor costs to global shutter full frame sensor costs in one step.
Thus my comment: the answer lies in APS-C done right. We’ll see how fast Nikon figures that out.
Update: My last three paragraphs seem to be generating a lot of email, most agreeing with my assessment. Now that Nikon has made the move to be both a stills and video company, there’s a lot of room for new product that provides better entry as well as bridges between the two. To me, Nikon’s move here is one seeking growth, and some of that growth will come from as-yet-unrealized products.
