Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

KOMODO....

Status
Not open for further replies.
You bring up some valid and interesting points Mark.

Image quality, just as you said can be quite subjective.

Specs are _sometimes_ but not always a way of trying to frame objective concepts :

X Stops above middle gray, y stops below middle gray
Color gamut
Bit Depth
Resolution / result ratio (Moire) (nyquist principle)
Rolling shutter readout time (this wasn’t mentioned as a “spec number” per se before recently (integration time)

I think one key point for the entry level market is that it either has to deliver at a sub $2900 price for a camera body to be entry level “dabbler” buy - this was set 10 years ago by the 5D Mark 2 and hasn’t changed too much since (except maybe getting lower once in a while)

Or it has to pack a ton of specs and capabilities...

Or it has to do both... lower price and higher abilities with possibly some caveats...

A lot of this has to do with what Red’s desired TAM is.

If they’re looking for a higher volume TAM, things will have to be spicy in a self-cannibalizing way.

They could take the Red Raven as a runout on potential for price, but that was a very different time than today.

Komodo will need image quality, high frame rates at 4K acquisition, and strong feature set including redcode raw to live up to the potential I believe it has.

I think it will deliver unless something totally crazy happens like it’s deeply feature set crippled to protect legacy customers and it only records HEVC and tops out at 6K 25fps / 4K 50fps, or is limited to redcode 12:1
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Well ... "competing specs" is ONE part of the equation - the BIGGER part of the equation is ... "competing image quality". Just look at the options and prices in still camera market.

And SOME specs are more important to SOME users over others.

BM delivers a good value for the price for sure - but many folks can't handle the moire/aliasing, etc. - if you ONLY looked at the specs of the BM 6K Pocket camera and the price - you would think everyone would just stop making cameras and that would be the only camera, right?

So ... what if KOMODO did NOT "out spec" a ZCAM or BM 6K pocket camera in every spec (codecs/RAW/etc) - but the image quality was FAR superior???

Think about this .... if you looked at every single MOTION camera that is running at this very second - shooting content this very second all around the world .... the vast majority are shooting for the internet (youtube, etc).

And they are shooting on DSLRs.
DSLRs that are not even shooting motion RAW, are using internal H264/5 and also recording externally to 4K UHD to various codecs.

My gut is that Komodo is for that market - and I think a lot of folks are having wildly unrealistic expectations. I don't think this will be a B-camera for high-end digital cinema. I think Gemini Ranger is a killer "B-Cam" for any high end production.

But I have been wrong before.
Click to expand...

Of course, some specs are more important for some than others. But it's not that simple that it's only based on price. There's a comparison video between one of the other brands cheap cameras compared to Dragon 6K and the Dragon falls apart so extremely bad in low-light that it's not even usable compared to the cheaper one. So what is "superior" in image quality is also subjective. Some want to shoot with the low light OLPF while others want more highlight protection than the Standard OLPF. There are also those who fix common issues on a specific brand, like the re-built sensor filter for BMD Ursa cameras to get better moire handling. People do what they can to get superior images out of the system they have.

The thing, though, is that we've reached a diminishing return for image quality. We can pixel peep our way to a conclusion about who's best, but all brands give you enough for most kinds of cinematography. It all depends on whether or not you're an expert of that specific system you're using. People learn to compensate for what's missing in their system. More expensive systems handle more areas of the images in a way that makes you less focused on compensating the cons, like, you don't have to care as much with highlights on a Red compared to a BMD pocket.

So it all comes down to what a certain system gives you within a certain price-point and how that compares to others.

If you learn to compensate the cons of a Pocket 6K, you will be able to get images just as good as shooting on a Dragon 6K. So the bottom line is; how much is a system worth based on how much you need to compensate for its drawbacks? And as diminishing returns are increasing, is it worth spending thousands and thousands of dollars on systems that generally aren't that far off from the less expensive ones?

People who invest in cameras can spend more on other things like good lighting gear, good sliders, motion controls, gimbals and so on, rather than putting everything into a system that might not be worth the small advancement in picture quality.

Then there's the fact that a camera is more than the image quality. Of course, some people just want something good straight out of the camera, but even youtubers are concerned with reliable quality for their videos. Many of them have better production quality than most broadcast networks. Komodo has a higher price point than the others, but what sets it apart is if it has Redcode RAW at low compression, IPP2 with good highlight protection, genlockability, SDI-Out, etc. that sets it closer to industry needs than the DSLR equivalents like the S1H. I much rather want it to have all that and be s35mm than not have those things and be full-frame like the S1H.

If Komodo was priced at $2500 like the Pocket 6K, then it would be another story. The demands on Komodo's abilities would be much less crucial. But at a $5000 price-point there has to be some improvements over the others. Red cannot just survive on having a premium mid-tier price because it has a Red logo on it. Maybe the only thing it really has over the others is a Red sensor, R3D and better highlight protection over 14 stops. That would certainly be worth the increase in price. But is matching the competition the way to win against the competition? Having a Komodo perform at s35+, 6K with R3D IPP2 at 5:1 compression with 50 FPS FF and good highlights over 14 stops would kill all competition both in terms of camera body practicality and image quality.

The thing I feel will be Red's best weapon against the competition is R3D and image quality. Those two are pretty powerful features for a $5000 pricetag. If the camera can do even more than that, it will kill the competition.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
Well ... "competing specs" is ONE part of the equation - the BIGGER part of the equation is ... "competing image quality". Just look at the options and prices in still camera market.

And SOME specs are more important to SOME users over others.

BM delivers a good value for the price for sure - but many folks can't handle the moire/aliasing, etc. - if you ONLY looked at the specs of the BM 6K Pocket camera and the price - you would think everyone would just stop making cameras and that would be the only camera, right?

So ... what if KOMODO did NOT "out spec" a ZCAM or BM 6K pocket camera in every spec (codecs/RAW/etc) - but the image quality was FAR superior???

Think about this .... if you looked at every single MOTION camera that is running at this very second - shooting content this very second all around the world .... the vast majority are shooting for the internet (youtube, etc).

And they are shooting on DSLRs.
DSLRs that are not even shooting motion RAW, are using internal H264/5 and also recording externally to 4K UHD to various codecs.

My gut is that Komodo is for that market - and I think a lot of folks are having wildly unrealistic expectations. I don't think this will be a B-camera for high-end digital cinema. I think Gemini Ranger is a killer "B-Cam" for any high end production.

But I have been wrong before.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, which is why if Komodo can deliver Epic Dragon or Epic MX level DR within an .R3D, then that's already winning.

Even if it's just 24 or 48fps at 6K, and maybe 60fps at 4K.

That's enough.

It would be a tiny Epic MX or Epic Dragon.

I mean that's amazing.

But yeah would not be a Gemini, Helium or Monstro - that's the next step up.

And what your saying is 100% true.

Specs are one thing. But color workflow and image quality are another.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
There's a third plausible option; they want to push more people into Red so that future sales of Red's higher-end models are secured through it. (snip)
Click to expand...

My theoretical option #1 noted "provide an entry point into the RED ecosystem". I deliberately bundled the higher volume sales goal with the lowered cost of entry benefit as I believe they are intertwined. This is based on my supposition that higher volumes are required to reduce unit costs sufficiently for RED to sell cameras at a lower price and still make a buck.

More to the point, how does RED envision their future as a camera maker? How do they see Komodo in that light?

Cheers - #19
 
It seems the Pocket 6K, like the other Pockets before it, is aimed at DSLR/mirrorless camera users. I think BMD is mainly trying to entice those among them looking to improve their production value to "step up" to proper cinema camera specs and features for their projects while keeping the size, weight, function, and form factor familiar.

If BMD is right about that, I don't see Komodo attracting too many DSLR/mirrorless users with a tiny box format.

Interestingly, I was minding my own business last week and ran across two different Pocket 6K reviews on YouTube that both recommended against buying it for vlogging (how maybe the majority of YouTubers roll) due to the fixed screen on the back. That right there is a large segment that could skip right over it.

Besides, we have no idea what BMD's margins are on their cameras. Packing all these higher-end features in at such low prices might keep them razor thin, with BMD banking on selling a ton.

If the margins are small enough, it doesn't seem like there would be much room (or incentive) for prices to drop significantly or cause the current camera landscape to shift all that dramatically.

If that's the case, and if a $16K C500 MKII and new RED Gemini and Helium Rangers for sale are any indication, Komodo will be a solid performer but probably not the whiz-bang camera for ~$6.5K some people think/hope it will be.
 
Brian Boyer said:
Komodo will be a solid performer but probably not the whiz-bang camera for ~$6.5K some people think/hope it will be.
Click to expand...

The Pocket 6K is pretty whiz-bang for $2500 and the Z Cam E2-F8 is pretty whiz-bang for $6000. Same with the S1H for $4000. If Komodo can't match those whiz-bangs, who would want to buy something that underperforms against cheaper whiz-bangs? It doesn't matter "what" the Pocket 6K is or is aimed at, does it give you good images and the performance you need? It's also important to remember that Z Cam, BMD, Panasonic and Red all need side-gear to perform well in real productions, but when they are all kitted, they're no toys. If people are budget-minded and invest in something that will later be upgraded or replaced, the best investment is the one that cost the least and gives the most. In the range of $1000-$10000 camera gear, the Pocket 6K is already a winner, it's even the number 1 seller at B&H, even though it's out of stock.

No one will buy a Komodo if it underperforms against that, because at this range, people are actually looking carefully into their wallets. Over this range, people will get something better.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
The Pocket 6K is pretty whiz-bang for $2500 and the Z Cam E2-F8 is pretty whiz-bang for $6000. Same with the S1H for $4000. If Komodo can't match those whiz-bangs, who would want to buy something that underperforms against cheaper whiz-bangs?
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to match any whiz-bangs if it has it's own whiz-boom. "under-performs" defined by what segment of what user? Have you ever looked at how many still camera choices there are? Lots of different whiz-bangs and different prices, eh?

Christoffer Glans said:
It doesn't matter "what" the Pocket 6K is or is aimed at, does it give you good images and the performance you need?
Click to expand...

Exactly. It may be pretty whiz-bang - but if the images and performance are not up to your needs or standards ... then you can pay more money and get a different whiz-bang.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
If Komodo can't match those whiz-bangs, who would want to buy something that underperforms against cheaper whiz-bangs?
Click to expand...

RED isn't going to whiz-bang Komodo to the point of making their other cameras irrelevant (just as the Pocket 6K, S1H or Z CAMs haven't). Some people in this thread have suggested/hoped they might. Dragon-X might have the hardest time, as you've surmised, but it's also the oldest sensor.

It would more than likely be retired first, anyway.
 
Nick Morrison said:
I agree with you, which is why if Komodo can deliver Epic Dragon or Epic MX level DR within an .R3D, then that's already winning.
Click to expand...

MX level DR would be a deal breaker for me. Dragon DR and performance are what I had hoped MX would have when I got my Scarlet...even with the noise floor so many people whined about.
 
Christoffer Glans said:
The Pocket 6K is pretty whiz-bang for $2500 and the Z Cam E2-F8 is pretty whiz-bang for $6000. Same with the S1H for $4000. If Komodo can't match those whiz-bangs, who would want to buy something that underperforms against cheaper whiz-bangs? It doesn't matter "what" the Pocket 6K is or is aimed at, does it give you good images and the performance you need? It's also important to remember that Z Cam, BMD, Panasonic and Red all need side-gear to perform well in real productions, but when they are all kitted, they're no toys. If people are budget-minded and invest in something that will later be upgraded or replaced, the best investment is the one that cost the least and gives the most. In the range of $1000-$10000 camera gear, the Pocket 6K is already a winner, it's even the number 1 seller at B&H, even though it's out of stock.

No one will buy a Komodo if it underperforms against that, because at this range, people are actually looking carefully into their wallets. Over this range, people will get something better.
Click to expand...


There are many different segments of the market.

I am interested in Komodo as a multi-unit B or C or D cam on Monstro shoots. Give me Dragon or better sensor performance, low power consumption, 48-60 fps, IPP2, 4" cube form factor, changeable or adaptable mount, and priced around $5K base.

For that usage i am not interested in Pocket 6K or Zcam or S1H due to added complexity of different footage formats and looks. I'd either rent additional Monstro bodies as needed or perhaps buy some Komodos.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
It doesn't have to match any whiz-bangs if it has it's own whiz-boom. "under-performs" defined by what segment of what user? Have you ever looked at how many still camera choices there are? Lots of different whiz-bangs and different prices, eh?
It may be pretty whiz-bang - but if the images and performance are not up to your needs or standards ... then you can pay more money and get a different whiz-bang.
Click to expand...

Agreed. BM has progressed by leaps and bounds , but I would still pick Red color science and overall IQ any day, even at a significant premium. Having lived with a global shutter camera for a few years, I much prefer the time coherent image. Rolling shutter, aliasing, and moire are anathema to me. Higher resolution helps, but does not cure, the latter two in the absence of an OLPF. Red’s motion quality is superior too, if not quite global shutter coherent.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
It doesn't have to match any whiz-bangs if it has it's own whiz-boom. "under-performs" defined by what segment of what user? Have you ever looked at how many still camera choices there are? Lots of different whiz-bangs and different prices, eh?
Click to expand...

"Under-performs" means that if it delivers under others specs or pretty much the same, but cost way more, it underperforms against its price-point and no rational person would buy it over other options.

Mark L. Pederson said:
Exactly. It may be pretty whiz-bang - but if the images and performance are not up to your needs or standards ... then you can pay more money and get a different whiz-bang.
Click to expand...

But this is not true for this segment of the camera market. That mentality might work higher up where a camera investment is at such a high cost that people won't care for a $5000 difference between different systems. At the mid-tier however, choices that differ even $1000 matters. To go from the Pocket 6K $2500 to a Komodo at $6000 if the specs are almost the same, it won't matter if the Komodo has one stop more DR, R3D etc. because it's not the same as the high-tier market.


Brian Boyer said:
RED isn't going to whiz-bang Komodo to the point of making their other cameras irrelevant (just as the Pocket 6K, S1H or Z CAMs haven't). Some people in this thread have suggested/hoped they might. Dragon-X might have the hardest time, as you've surmised, but it's also the oldest sensor.

It would more than likely be retired first, anyway.
Click to expand...

Here in lies the problem for Red, because the other brands are starting to catch up with cameras far cheaper, as we discussed before. The Pocket 6K, S1H and Z Cam's aren't really the actual competition or threat, it's that they are already out and they are probably already working on improvements for their next iteration. Just think about the Hydrogen, Red tried to push out a phone with a special sauce at a premium price on a market where price actually matters. All others had phones with similar performance, some slightly under, but still close to the Hydrogen.

The Pocket S1H and Z Cam's are also not a threat to Red cameras that exist right now, because those cameras exist in a premium cine-gear price-class. No one who can afford a high-end Red and earn money on it daily will go with a cheap option, but the Komodo is not in that tier, it's trying to exist within the mid-tier and that means the competition right now, before the Komodo is even out, already has a good stance against it. The Pocket 6K is pretty close to the Dragon 6K and if the Komodo isn't supposed to compete against the DSMC2 Dragon 5K, then that risks it becoming the Hydrogen of the mid-tier camera range.

Because of this, it makes little sense to cap the performance of the Komodo, just to not compete with Red's own lineup. It will make a camera that is over-priced within the group that actually cares for performance by the dollar, those who try to find the best balance between cost and performance and see little reason to go with something expensive if something like the Pocket 6K end up matching against the Komodo.

How much whiz-bang will Red need to justify it's price-tag is the only thing that will matter for this group in the industry.

Brian Boyer said:
MX level DR would be a deal breaker for me. Dragon DR and performance are what I had hoped MX would have when I got my Scarlet...even with the noise floor so many people whined about.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the MX has probably the same DR and highlight performance as the Pocket 6K, that would be a bad thing for Komodo.
 
David Rasberry said:
Higher resolution helps, but does not cure, the latter two in the absence of an OLPF.
Click to expand...

Someone somewhere built an OLPF for the Ursa Mini that works. Their Ursa Mini G2 also has an 11 ms shutter, something that might end up in the Pocket one day. Bottom line is that there are solutions for a system that's a fraction of what a Red cost, if that's what's holding you back. Their color science is improving as well.
 
I think a lot of people pooping on the P6k as a competitor to Komodo probably haven't used it or the p4k. What I'm seeing out of the p4k is discernibly better than MX (even with Ipp2), so Komodo would have to be at least Dragon-equivalent in terms of image to stand out.

Also, as long as GioScope Chip 11 (of 16) is mid-grey at "default" ISO, exposing/working with .r3ds is going to be more nuanced/less intuitive than BRAW. In that regard, the pockets are like Alexa; you picked it up, expose via false colour, and the resulting files make the most effective use of the DR. It's very straight-forward/bulletproof.

In my opinion, so far nothing known about Komodo makes it better than a Pocket 6k*, except the RF mount. That is *not* worth double~triple the price to me. Put another way; if Komodo isn't better than a Dragon-X, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being a lower-volume niche C/Crash/gimbal/flight cam on bigger RED productions, not the huge seller a "$6k RED" would've been a couple years ago.



*everything is subject to change (we still don't really know anything about Komodo... e.g. if it has Dual Pixel AF and 6k 60p, you could slap a focal reducer on there and that'd basically make it a C500mk2 competitor... heh.)
 
Christoffer Glans said:
Someone somewhere built an OLPF for the Ursa Mini that works. Their Ursa Mini G2 also has an 11 ms shutter, something that might end up in the Pocket one day. Bottom line is that there are solutions for a system that's a fraction of what a Red cost, if that's what's holding you back. Their color science is improving as well.
Click to expand...

RawLite https://rawlite.com/ has them and they where used in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JllrjJ_XpQ and the G2 shutter times are: 7,7ms 4,6K, 6,5ms UHD, 3,15ms HD
 
Mike P. said:
I think a lot of people pooping on the P6k as a competitor to Komodo probably haven't used it or the p4k. What I'm seeing out of the p4k is discernibly better than MX (even with Ipp2), so Komodo would have to be at least Dragon-equivalent in terms of image to stand out.

Also, as long as GioScope Chip 11 (of 16) is mid-grey at "default" ISO, exposing/working with .r3ds is going to be more nuanced/less intuitive than BRAW. In that regard, the pockets are like Alexa; you picked it up, expose via false colour, and the resulting files make the most effective use of the DR. It's very straight-forward/bulletproof.

In my opinion, so far nothing known about Komodo makes it better than a Pocket 6k*, except the RF mount. That is *not* worth double~triple the price to me. Put another way; if Komodo isn't better than a Dragon-X, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being a lower-volume niche C/Crash/gimbal/flight cam on bigger RED productions, not the huge seller a "$6k RED" would've been a couple years ago.



*everything is subject to change (we still don't really know anything about Komodo... e.g. if it has Dual Pixel AF and 6k 60p, you could slap a focal reducer on there and that'd basically make it a C500mk2 competitor... heh.)
Click to expand...

Exactly my point. There's a difference between bashing the competitors based on their specs and reputation, but actually judging the cameras by their own merits and working with the material in post gives a whole other perspective. The Pocket 6K is no Dragon 6K, that's for sure, but it's so close, too close to be ignored. And this is just the first version of their s35 6K.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top