KOMODO....

[Mark L. Pederson]

If someone can’t tell the difference between the pocket 6k/Red/Varicam/Arri image feel and colors then he should definitely buy a pocket 6k. But there’s no conspiracy behind the fact that trained pro eyes choose the Alexa for 90% of the solid productions despite the lower specs on paper. I’m amazed to see people throwing all these cameras in the same bag for comparison, just based on what numbers they read. The Pocket 6k color science is really weak, the skin tones are not nice (the raw files are available online). You get what you pay for. I just hope the Komodo will get a better IQ than those cameras it’s compared to.

THIS 1000 times. And add to this that certain market segments don't care about some features that are precious to others (codecs/RAW/high frame-rates, etc). Which was the point I was trying to make with my post about "what if" the Komodo did not have all the functionality as other sub-$10K cameras .... but had a better image. And when people make comments about "diminishing returns" with respect to image quality ... they really need to take a hard look at the the still camera market. Sure, there will always be a "that's good enough" user for some types of content - like my iPhone works for "home movies" of my sons - but in a world where the amount of motion content created exponentially grows every year ... the bar will continue to raise for image quality. The competition in motion content creation isn't gonna diminish anytime soon.

 

[Matt stambaugh]

I really am hoping Komodo can eliminate all of the problems I have. I'm on the tail of my wedding career and working hard on becoming a more established DP in my area. I've gone through a ton of cameras and always land on RED as being my end game. Currently have the Gemini and the colors and sensor just work. That's it. I'll pay for that. I have a pocket 4k camera as a backup and man I am really disappointed with it. The image is nowhere near what I get from the Gemini. The canon c200 in 4k 4.2.0 is a MUCH better picture overall than even the pocket 4k in braw IMO.

Insert Komodo. I would rather pay 6,000 than 2000 for a sub-par camera that might get me by. I'll make up the difference relatively quickly and be on my way to a much happier mindset and workflow.

On a side note- Jarred, let me use two Komodo's and my Gemini for one of my final weddings at the end of October. I'll totally do a review for events

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I was going to ask the same thing. I think that's where the disconnect is between what he's been saying and what others, including myself, have been saying.
Are you judging mid-tier by price, performance, or both? At what price point does the high-end start in your opinion?

Would I be right in assuming that you classify "mid-tier" as some of the more video/broadcast cameras on the market? With similar performance to some cinema cameras but focused towards broadcast applications in both usability and camera features?

I classify mid-tier in this discussion through the lens of cinema cameras. Z Cam and BMD aims for cinema camera workflows and if they are not mid-tier within that market, who is? I would include the EVA1 and Ursa Mini G2 as well as the Kinefinity cameras. But it would be interesting to hear what you would classify as mid-tier cinema cameras. I place them there based on performance versus price-point. A mid-tier camera is more budget-friendly but still delivers good images. Anyone who says that these cameras can't deliver good images would be nuts.

If someone can’t tell the difference between the pocket 6k/Red/Varicam/Arri image feel and colors then he should definitely buy a pocket 6k. But there’s no conspiracy behind the fact that trained pro eyes choose the Alexa for 90% of the solid productions despite the lower specs on paper. I’m amazed to see people throwing all these cameras in the same bag for comparison, just based on what numbers they read. The Pocket 6k color science is really weak, the skin tones are not nice (the raw files are available online). You get what you pay for. I just hope the Komodo will get a better IQ than those cameras it’s compared to.

I'm more amazed that most people seem to think that the discussion is about what is best. Of course the Alexa has best colors, Red has best resolution (and workflow in my opinion), but that's not what this is about. It's about factoring in the price-point in relation to the quality they give you. Any experienced professional will be able to spot differences between Dragon 6K and Pocket 6K, especially when working with the material in post, but that is totally irrelevant really. The question here is if the distribution images give such a perceivable difference between the two that it justifies going from $2500 to $15000.

Komodo is aimed at those on a budget, those who don't have the luxury problem of choosing between Alexa, Sony and Red, FF, s35, Helium, Gemini, Monstro and so on in order to just find what's best. Sometimes it seems that people have way deeper pockets than is reasonable in small businesses. The Pocket 6K gives a lot of quality for companies on smaller budgets and the Komodo would hopefully be a good addition to this lineup of cinema cameras on the market, for this group of people. That Alexa is better in terms of colors, DR etc. is not what this is about.

Even so, we end up pixel peeping distribution results like in these videos. And this is what I've mentioned about diminishing returns. It's getting harder and harder to actually pinpoint differences between systems that throwing money on a specific system begins to feel irrational for anyone who doesn't have an unlimited pool of money.

Even though this video is about the irrelevance of resolution, which I don't think is as easy as he is a bit biased about, the video itself is a good case in showing the problem of actually spotting what is what.
[video]http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ResDemoPt1.html[/video]

And this is more recent with the more mid-tier lineup of cameras around.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

And when people make comments about "diminishing returns" with respect to image quality ... they really need to take a hard look at the the still camera market.

Yes, take a look at the still camera market, where the only thing that's really different between cameras is their functionality, not their image quality since the image quality is so good across all brands that I don't know any professional still photographer who would seriously attempt at trying to compare images and spot which sensor is which. Resolution towards print is the only thing that is a factor, a factor that doesn't exist for film and television where the common standard is 4K distribution. Canon, for example, has the same sensor in a different number of cameras with a vastly different price-point, but a similar still image shot between the cameras is close to impossible to spot any difference between. The difference occurs when you take the different cameras to situations where the pro and consumer-grade can't match, such as high stills per second action photography, fast processing etc.

And this is what I mean with diminishing returns in image quality. The still photography market is saturated with sensors that are so good that the differences aren't really between sensors but through functionality and abilities of different cameras. They have begun to compete more in terms of video capabilities than still photography.

If cinema cameras start to reach this level of image quality between both expensive and in-expensive systems, the only difference between them is the functionality and ability of the systems, not the image. Such as how high FPS count at FF is possible? How robust is the camera brain and built quality? What has happened to the still photography diminishing returns in picture quality is what's coming to cinema cameras.

Yedlin has another video on this subject that I feel is more to the point than his resolution bashing.
[video]http://yedlin.net/DisplayPrepDemo/DispPrep_v2_websize_20mbps.html[/video]

 

[Ugo Del]

Sometimes it seems that people have way deeper pockets than is reasonable in small businesses.

I guess you're talking for yourself ^^ It's been years reading your rants against Red everytime there is a price drop or a new upgrade, and it seems you always gave your money right away for those.
There is another possibility for people too: just relax, and buy used from an older generation instead of jumping on anything new. For the price of a ready-to-shoot Komodo people can buy an Alexa Classic kit (or more), a Varicam LT or many Red models that people are throwing away with 15 hours on them after having filled their professional portfolio with 2 camera tests shooting leaves and slowmo kids in their backyard.
And they will lose a lot less money if they want to resale it.
That's what I call reasonable.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

I guess you're talking for yourself ^^ It's been years reading your rants against Red everytime there is a price drop or a new upgrade, and it seems you always gave your money right away for those.
There is another possibility for people too: just relax, and buy used from an older generation instead of jumping on anything new. For the price of a ready-to-shoot Komodo people can buy an Alexa Classic kit (or more), a Varicam LT or many Red models that people are throwing away with 15 hours on them after having filled their professional portfolio with 2 camera tests shooting leaves and slowmo kids in their backyard.
And they will lose a lot less money if they want to resale it.
That's what I call reasonable.

I'm a fan of what Red is doing, always been and the system with R3D has a workflow that fits my work best. That doesn't mean I'm biased towards Red over other brands and I much rather be the healthy critic than ranting biased praises. If Komodo ends up a blast I will give credit where credit is due, but I will never be part of a fan club mentality that constantly dismiss the progress of other brands just to justify why they bought a Red. I'm fine being the punching bag in discussions, it keeps my intellect in good health.

As for getting used cameras, sure, there's big value in that. However, as I mentioned earlier as well, getting a small body with similar image capabilities as older cameras might open up more options for the actual cinematography work than those old cameras. New cameras in smaller camera bodies can be put on gimbals, less expensive sliders, motion control systems, dolly's etc. Older cameras are pretty limiting on a budget. As well as when comparing the MX sensor to the Pocket 6K sensor, it is not better, so I won't say it's that clear cut reasonable to get an older system.

 

[Brian Boyer]

Would I be right in assuming that you classify "mid-tier" as some of the more video/broadcast cameras on the market? With similar performance to some cinema cameras but focused towards broadcast applications in both usability and camera features?

Nope...you would be incorrect. You're assuming? Seriously? All throughout my previous exchanges with you and others I've specifically stated "digital cinema camera" or "cinema camera" way more times than I'm willing to go back and count. It's uncanny how my being overtly explicit has no effect on you whatsoever.

You just filter things out willy-nilly in order to make a point. And, you didn't answer my question about where you think the high end price point starts.

Komodo is aimed at those on a budget, those who don't have the luxury problem of choosing between Alexa, Sony and Red, FF, s35, Helium, Gemini, Monstro and so on in order to just find what's best.

You state that as if it's fact but it's pure speculation at this point. If we don't yet know all it does or how much it costs (or even what the whole thing looks like), how can you claim to know for certain who it's for? You're going by form factor and price?

Your whole premise seems to be since it looks and costs like a Z CAM, it must be a Raven follow-up budget camera.

I remember Jarred mentioning on BMCuser when the Ursa Mini 4.6K was new that he was very interested in the BMD Micro Cinema Camera for the implications a camera of that size had for getting certain types of shots.

Maybe it didn't meet his expectations and he decided he could deliver that performance in a RED camera, only slightly bigger to accommodate RED-level image quality and functionality. Who knows?

And this is more recent with the more mid-tier lineup of cameras around.

Although your point is taken, he mishandled the Raven footage in that video. In the test results video he clearly states he used IPP2 with REDgamma4. I mentioned this in a comment but he has yet to respond.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ynhjKaTgLf4http://

 

[David Rasberry]

If someone can’t tell the difference between the pocket 6k/Red/Varicam/Arri image feel and colors then he should definitely buy a pocket 6k. But there’s no conspiracy behind the fact that trained pro eyes choose the Alexa for 90% of the solid productions despite the lower specs on paper. I’m amazed to see people throwing all these cameras in the same bag for comparison, just based on what numbers they read. The Pocket 6k color science is really weak, the skin tones are not nice (the raw files are available online). You get what you pay for. I just hope the Komodo will get a better IQ than those cameras it’s compared to.

I really am hoping Komodo can eliminate all of the problems I have. I'm on the tail of my wedding career and working hard on becoming a more established DP in my area. I've gone through a ton of cameras and always land on RED as being my end game. Currently have the Gemini and the colors and sensor just work. That's it. I'll pay for that. I have a pocket 4k camera as a backup and man I am really disappointed with it. The image is nowhere near what I get from the Gemini. The canon c200 in 4k 4.2.0 is a MUCH better picture overall than even the pocket 4k in braw IMO.

Insert Komodo. I would rather pay 6,000 than 2000 for a sub-par camera that might get me by. I'll make up the difference relatively quickly and be on my way to a much happier mindset and workflow.

On a side note- Jarred, let me use two Komodo's and my Gemini for one of my final weddings at the end of October. I'll totally do a review for events

BM’s color reproduction has always looked thin to me. Like it sits on the surface of the image instead of emanating from it. As a serious hobbyist I would pay the difference between either Pocket and Komodo in a heartbeat based on the far superior color and texture rendition of existing Red’s. I don’t think Komodo will disappoint in this respect.
Let me put this in perspective. Komodo will likely fall in a price range roughly equal to the annual maintenance costs of our two old Jaguars.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Yes, take a look at the still camera market, where the only thing that's really different between cameras is their functionality, not their image quality since the image quality is so good across all brands that I don't know any professional still photographer who would seriously attempt at trying to compare images and spot which sensor is which.

EVERY still photographer I know tests cameras and compares image quality and ALL of them factor other aspects of the image beyond resolution.

The still photography market is saturated with sensors that are so good that the differences aren't really between sensors but through functionality and abilities of different cameras. They have begun to compete more in terms of video capabilities than still photography.

AHHHHHHHHH!!! Now you get it. Precisely my point. Massive market .... these folks using DSLRs for motion content, right? No motion RAW. No internal ProRes. But lots of compromises on the MOTION IMAGE FIDELITY. Now imagine .... if a company made a camera for this massive market that put its focus on the MOTION IMAGE FIDELITY and was maybe more expensive that other sub-$10K cameras that had better specs on paper and this or that functionality that this massive market doesn't use ...?

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Nope...you would be incorrect. You're assuming? Seriously? All throughout my previous exchanges with you and others I've specifically stated "digital cinema camera" or "cinema camera" way more times than I'm willing to go back and count. It's uncanny how my being overtly explicit has no effect on you whatsoever.

You just filter things out willy-nilly in order to make a point. And, you didn't answer my question about where you think the high end price point starts.

You still haven't pointed out what you categorize as mid-tier. I have said numerous times that I consider $1000-$10000 to be mid-tier for camera brain only. And I base my categorization within digital cinema to be that of cost and performance. Would you seriously not call the Z Cam, Pocket 6K, Ursa, Kinfinity and so on, mid-tier? Where are those in your spectrum? I feel like I'm pretty clear with all this and the only willy-nillies are of your own complainings about me being vague when you don't actually clarify any better yourself. What is mid-tier in your opinion? Or rather, why does it matter that I call this spectrum mid-tier? It's not my point what-so-ever. You could call it the ice-cream-tier and my point would still be about the spectrum of cine-cameras between $1000-$10000.

You state that as if it's fact but it's pure speculation at this point. If we don't yet know all it does or how much it costs (or even what the whole thing looks like), how can you claim to know for certain who it's for? You're going by form factor and price?

Speculating what? That quote you referred to was about comparing specs and image quality alone without regard to price-points. And Jarred clearly stated in the first point that it's not under $5000, unless you own a Hydrogen, which clearly indicates a price-point being that the Hydrogen was around $1500. Jarred also mentioned Z Cam previously. There are hints all over towards where Komodo is placed and it's right there within the ice-cream-tier.

Your whole premise seems to be since it looks and costs like a Z CAM, it must be a Raven follow-up budget camera.

*sigh* no, because it's proposed price-point, it's proposed and hinted specifications, all hints at side-gear features and so on, places it pretty straight into the realm of the other mentioned cameras. Which market do you think it's aimed at? Do you think it's a unicorn camera that doesn't fit anywhere along the line of other cameras on the market? Your argument just seems to be that because we don't have the actual spec sheet, footage or files in our hands we cannot speculate in any rational way what-so-ever about what the camera is and where it fits the market.

I remember Jarred mentioning on BMCuser when the Ursa Mini 4.6K was new that he was very interested in the BMD Micro Cinema Camera for the implications a camera of that size had for getting certain types of shots. Maybe it didn't meet his expectations and he decided he could deliver that performance in a RED camera, only slightly bigger to accommodate RED-level image quality and functionality. Who knows?

So... it fits the ice-cream-tier of cameras then?

Although your point is taken, he mishandled the Raven footage in that video. In the test results video he clearly states he used IPP2 with REDgamma4. I mentioned this in a comment but he has yet to respond.

Most of the time, the actual tests done by these people are very badly handled. I would like to see tests where a 3D-rig is used to get the exact same footage between two cameras. Then color match and grade the footage for a final delivery where switching between the shots doesn't change a thing other than which camera that shot the footage. That way it would be clear just how similar people can get in-expensive and expensive brands.

EVERY still photographer I know tests cameras and compares image quality and ALL of them factor other aspects of the image beyond resolution.

Yes, my point was that we've hit a diminishing return with the images we get. We can pixel peep things to death but no one can actually see on still images from modern cameras which camera was used for a still image. This is my point, if there's no way to actually pinpoint which camera was used for a specific still, does it matter? Doesn't sensor size, lenses and such matter more? Does it matter if you take a still with a Sony A7 III or a Canon R when you can't spot the difference in the end? Both of these cameras perform well and is not limited like consumer-grade cameras. If I do a 3x4 print from both of these would you be able to point and say, "that's the Canon R and that's the A7 III"?

So if cinema cameras enter into this picture diminishing returns, it will definitely have an effect on how people view the market of these cameras. Previously, you couldn't get the quality of a Red or Arri without a Red or Arri, but that is slowly changing.

AHHHHHHHHH!!! Now you get it. Precisely my point. Massive market .... these folks using DSLRs for motion content, right? No motion RAW. No internal ProRes. But lots of compromises on the MOTION IMAGE FIDELITY. Now imagine .... if a company made a camera for this massive market that put its focus on the MOTION IMAGE FIDELITY and was maybe more expensive that other sub-$10K cameras that had better specs on paper and this or that functionality that this massive market doesn't use ...?

But I've also said that the competition isn't the current cameras on the market but what the follow up will be. I'm not talking about now I'm talking about next year, the year after that etc. We've seen more features previously only existing within high-end cameras to enter into these cameras while their sensor sizes and shooting resolution increase to the same level. Color science improving, cinema camera industry-standard features added etc.

There's a difference between looking back at the Canon 5D filming people, the original Pocket Cinema Camera and compare it to what Red and Arri had back then - And doing the same thing now, looking forward.

My question, the one I'm entertaining here, is: How do you think the camera market will be, both high and low in two years time? Put on your best speculative hat and entertain the thought based on what you see all around. Factor in things like the Yedlin videos, factor in that diminishing returns is a real thing. You could make a camera with a million megapixels, with a thousand frames per second and 50 stops of DR, it would not matter at a certain point. We will definitely see improvements to image quality all over the industry, but how far? When does more just become a ridiculous marketing word that no one buys anymore? We are not there, but it's not as clear cut as a few years ago, when Red, Arri and a few others were the only players able to deliver a certain quality.

So, is Komodo the answer to this? I hope it is, I hope Red does what they've always aimed to do... be disruptive.

 

[Bastien Tribalat]

In other news (that might be relevant for the Komodo discussion IF it does not indeed use Redcode) :
Blackmagic RAW is now compatible with Avid and Adobe AND Apple ProRes Raw is now compatible with Avid.
https://www.provideocoalition.com/a-lot-of-editing-news-coming-out-of-ibc-2019-this-morning/

EDIT :
AND it seems that Blackmagic has some 8K camera(s) in the pipes. Nothing announced at IBC but still.

 

[Brian Boyer]

I have said numerous times that I consider $1000-$10000 to be mid-tier for camera brain only.

Like I said, a disconnect. Given the entire spectrum of cinema cameras and their price points that have been released since the original R1 release, I'd say many, if not most, people here would still generally put the mid-tier at $10K - $20K. In light of price cuts to some of the cameras that were initially released in that range, I'd go as low as $8K.

Your $1K - $10K range explains your comment about the $16K C500 MKII being disruptive to RED's pricing. I couldn't figure out what you meant. Now I know you count everything north of $10K as the high end of cinema cameras.


Phil had this to say about it:

Prosumer/entry level professional is still very much the $15K-$20K territory as seen by recent announcements. As well all know though, camera technology has been advancing rapidly. It's tremendous what lower priced models can do these days, which really makes me wonder what the high end holds in the next year or two. You can make the argument that some of the entry level stuff is doing the job of Prosumer/entry level professional of yesteryear.

His price range is a little off from mine and he doesn't use the term mid-tier but I'd say we're closer to each other in our thinking on this matter than either of us is to you.

Speculating what?...Your argument just seems to be that because we don't have the actual spec sheet, footage or files in our hands we cannot speculate in any rational way what-so-ever about what the camera is and where it fits the market

Which is it? Are you speculating or aren't you. This is what I'm talking about. You directly quoted me saying you were speculating and then you immediately reply that I suggest you can't speculate...after you claim to not be speculating. My point was you were stating your speculation as fact.

I said we can't be certain yet. It's right there in the quote.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

In other news (that might be relevant for the Komodo discussion IF it does not indeed use Redcode) :
Blackmagic RAW is now compatible with Avid and Adobe AND Apple ProRes Raw is now compatible with Avid.

EDIT :
AND it seems that Blackmagic has some 8K camera(s) in the pipes. Nothing announced at IBC but still.
]

Yeah, things keep proving my points here.

 

[Mark L. Pederson]

Yeah, things keep proving my points here.

If only anyone could clearly understand any point you are trying make ... help me out here.

 

[Christoffer Glans]

Now I know you count everything north of $10K as the high end of cinema cameras.

Or rather, we're heading in that direction. Prices are dropping, while specs are increasing.

Phil had this to say about it:

His price range is a little off from mine and he doesn't use the term mid-tier but I'd say we're closer to each other in our thinking on this matter than either of us is to you.

And this is were my diminishing returns argument comes in. You can ten-fold improvements on cameras, but at a certain time it hits a wall and we question what we actually need to make images. I like to use the example of HDR images as an example. With unlimited stops you could shoot and make HDR imagery which lets you see everything from the darkest shadow to the brightest highlight but... to what end? Other than spectacle and a certain style?

My point is that when we hit a wall of diminishing returns in image quality it doesn't matter if the high-end keep improving image quality, because no one actually needs it for their creative work since there are no benifits to "more more more".
At this point, what can the high-end actually accomplish further beyond the low and mid-tier?

People seem to think that the development of image quality will keep continuing forever, but there is a limitation and it's quite irrational to just propose that increasing image quality gives you more. We are not at this wall yet, but we need to entertain the thought because we are close. Prices will drop, the "tiers" will change price-points and the "next big thing" will not be as big as people think and when they see it they will just utter "meh" because it's not the improvement they are used to.

Which is it? Are you speculating or aren't you. This is what I'm talking about. You directly quoted me saying you were speculating and then you immediately reply that I suggest you can't speculate...after you claim to not be speculating. My point was you were stating your speculation as fact.

I said we can't be certain yet. It's right there in the quote.

Where did I claim specifically that I don't speculate? We are both speculating, all are, but there's a difference to just pulling stuff out of thin air and basing it off the hints and clues spread around. Do deduce conclusions based on facts is not to propose facts, it is simply to speculate based on facts.

 

[Brian Boyer]

If only anyone could clearly understand any point you are trying make ... help me out here.

If it helps, I found a picture of it.

Of course, I kid.

 

[Rakesh Malik]

In other news (that might be relevant for the Komodo discussion IF it does not indeed use Redcode) :
Blackmagic RAW is now compatible with Avid and Adobe AND Apple ProRes Raw is now compatible with Avid.

Took 'em long enough!

EDIT :
AND it seems that Blackmagic has some 8K camera(s) in the pipes. Nothing announced at IBC but still.

Given the constellation of 8K post hardware that BMD demoed at NAB, I think it was a pretty clear statement that BMD has an 8K camera in the works. My guess is that when it can get the price point down to the ballpark of the Ursa Mini Pro's, then it will materialize. And fly off the shelves and into the hands of thousands of youtubers.

 

[Blair S. Paulsen]

This thread has spent far too many pages going in circles - and reaching conclusions not in evidence - but there are some fundamental points that have real merit.

1) The quality gap between motion imaging devices at various price points is shrinking fast. Video quality is a selling point in the relatively mature smartphone market and AI is getting better at overcoming the limitations of tiny optics - particularly with multiple lens designs. Any camera unable to clearly outperform an iPhone is unlikely to sell many units.

2) For every true professional cameraperson who cares about IQ, gradability, etc there's dozens, perhaps hundreds, of people buying cameras who just need it to be good enough. At the higher end, everything matters. In the market segment Komodo's anticipated price puts it, buyers typically want to get as close to the top dogs as possible, as cheaply as possible.

3) Many believe that the BMPCC6K has moved the cheese, somewhat like RED did to Sony a decade ago. Does this "new reality" make Komodo overpriced if, in fact, a ready to shoot rig is >$8K? Plenty of posts about that in this thread, despite the many unknowns at this juncture.

Cheers - #19

 

[Bastien Tribalat]

Took 'em long enough!



Given the constellation of 8K post hardware that BMD demoed at NAB, I think it was a pretty clear statement that BMD has an 8K camera in the works. My guess is that when it can get the price point down to the ballpark of the Ursa Mini Pro's, then it will materialize. And fly off the shelves and into the hands of thousands of youtubers.

Well sometimes there's a few good online shows on YouTube... Sometimes...

 

[Rakesh Malik]

Well sometimes there's a few good online shows on YouTube... Sometimes...

I think of them like so:

There are filmmakers who share their films on YouTube
There are people who make crappy videos for youtube viewers, some of which in spite of their crappy production values have interesting content

The latter are what I think of as youtubers, which makes them sound like some kind of digital root vegetable.