A Z9 Oops?

What's fascinating is that when RED filed their lawsuit, Nikon's stock price jumped (up).

Bit of an oddity. If Nikon 'got' the software from intoPIX.... and installed it in the Z9.

 

Surely the supplier is liable not the effective user.

 

or is it like unknowingly receiving stolen goods? Hard Luck!

It is, as Red asserts, knowingly implementing unlicensed technology in their, Nikon, products.

unlicensed technology

 

Hummm... If I buy a stolen painting from you and I sell it to a n other. Who is going to prison?

Oh...:(

Hummm... If I buy a stolen painting from you and I sell it to a n other. Who is going to prison?

I suppose all 3 parties if guilt is proven.

Hummm... If I buy a stolen painting from you and I sell it to a n other. Who is going to prison?

You.

I should do too, but you certainly will also.

"knowingly", remember. Red mentions "Nikon’s willful and deliberate infringement".

From the official complaint: "Despite this knowledge, Nikon continues to infringe the asserted patents and continues to intend that other using, testing, assembling, distributing, repairing, or otherwise handling the accused products continue to infringe the asserted patents". Et cetera.

 

But mind you, ever since Edison, infringing patents and sueing for the same has been a 'business model'. (You must know that Thomas Edison invented just about nothing. He was very good at stealing other people's inventions.) George Eastman's "Research Department", before he hired Mees, existed of one person searching the world for other people's inventions he could use and lawyers who would handle the ensuing patent law suits. Good friend of Edison, he was.

I wouldn't be surprised if Red just waited for the opportunity to maximize the potential harm for Nikon, and thus their readiness to pay.

Edited May 30, 2022 by q.g._de_bakker

Blame or guilt on Nikon's part is suggested by the repeated insistance by Red that Nikon knew quite well that Red was engaged in law suits against other companies for infringements on the same patents. There is no escape for Nikon, except if they could demonstrate that they, in fact, do not use any of what Red has patented. Similar art, but different in significant ways.

 

But we're not going to decide this case here, so let's wait and see.

Edited May 30, 2022 by q.g._de_bakker

The plaintiff in many (maybe most) lawsuits is chosen by the plaintiff's lawyers less for their "blame" or "guilt" in the matter and much more for their ability to pay. Nikon can submit a brief to the court claiming that, having licensed the software in good faith, they are wrongfully accused and the company that licensed it and accepted money for that should be the defendant. Whether that is successful depends on the judge - there are way too many cases where a judge, for reasons unknown, has allowed a lawsuit to proceed as filed. If that happens, it becomes Nikon's decision to estimate whether they can win in court, and whether it will cost more to win than to settle. Quite often, a ruling to include a bystander as a defendant gets overturned on appeal, but all that costs money and poor publicity, since most of us humans tend to think "guilty until proven innocent." There was a company that manufactured child safety seats for automobiles, and after the seat failed in a number of accidents, the parents sued the manufacturer, who, by that time, was penniless, and the supplier of the raw plastic from which the seats were made (a large corporation with money). The judge allowed it, and the plaintiffs won a huge judgement. On appeal, the plastic supplier was removed from the lawsuit and all liability.

Arca Swiss could be onto a field day........:eek:

Arca Swiss could be onto a field day........:eek:

It does look like they are too generous with their excellent clamp design that has been shamelessly "stolen" in countless ways by countless companies and the evidence of "theft" is ubiquitous. Perhaps it is too late to claim patent infringement now?

 

By the way, Z9 supposedly is the top selling pro mirrorless camera at this time and it is still constantly out of stock.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/nikon-z9-is-the-top-selling-pro-camera-with-57-of-the-market-but-how

Not sure they could easily enforce a very basic 45 degree dovetail 'groove' patent.

 

Is the patent for the clamp or the QR plates? or the matching pair?

 

There are a few 'clones' that don't fit properly and I wonder whether they are deliberately mis-sized to avoid being an accurate copy.... and a few makers over did it!.

 

5 mins on a simple milling machine would make most* Nikon feet Arca-Swiss 'compatible'.

 

If done neatly, I'm not sure it would even affect 2nd hand value either....:)

 

*Some are a bit skinny, but those feet are pretty poor anyway.

It seems likely the patents for the original Arca-Swiss design expired. Arca calls this QR system "classic" and they have a new, slightly modified dovetail that is incompatible with "classic" and knockoff plate (one has to be careful which one to buy, especially in the Arca-Swiss product catalog to avoid unpleasant surprises). I believe the modification was made to ensure that third-party plates do not fit (and there would then be a new patent to protect the new design, I believe). The issue then is that the "classic" design with all the compatible accessories surpasses Arca-Swiss's own importance in the market.

 

However, e.g. I've had incompatibilities especially with Novoflex Arca-Swiss compatible products and some other third-party variants such as Benro. Some Arca-Swiss "compatible" products are more compatible than others ...

Edited May 31, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

By the way, Z9 supposedly is the top selling pro mirrorless camera at this time and it is still constantly out of stock.

https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/nikon-z9-is-the-top-selling-pro-camera-with-57-of-the-market-but-how

 

Well, by "pro" some sites mean flagship cameras i.e. only cameras like the R3, A1, and Z9 would qualify. The Z9 is the least expensive of the three and so it's expected to sell a bit better. Also the A1 has been in the market for a longer time so the peak sales are in the past. The R3 is lower resolution which doesn't appeal to as large a market as the other two (mainly nature photographers want higher resolution, but also some fashion, product etc. photographers).

 

For what it's worth, I photographed three events in the spring that mostly were at high enough ISO to make the 45 MP sensor a disadvantage in terms of image quality over 20-24 MP sensors. So I might have preferred Nikon to make a Z9 with 24 MP but Nikon has to follow the market and in the past two years events have been close to non-existing while product and wildlife photography has been booming, so Nikon likely made the appropriate choice for their business. But it doesn't change the fact that having to photograph indoor dance at ISO 25600 and then lighten the images in post-processing is not going to make the 45 MP sensor shine.

Edited May 31, 2022 by ilkka_nissila

5 mins on a simple milling machine would make most* Nikon feet Arca-Swiss 'compatible'.

I am constantly annoyed that Nikon does not come with an "Arca Swiss style" foot like some other brands (such as Olympus), thus forcing the customer to seek a third-party solution. Now I am not sure this is Nikon's way of tip-toeing around a potential patent problem.

I am constantly annoyed that Nikon does not come with an "Arca Swiss style" foot like some other brands (such as Olympus), thus forcing the customer to seek a third-party solution. Now I am not sure this is Nikon's way of tip-toeing around a potential patent problem.

 

I read a comment from Nikon in an answer to this question stating they as a major camera manufacturer cannot choose a particular QR system over others because it would risk affecting the competitive landscape of the tripod (head) makers and favor some over the others, which could be seen as Nikon interfering with free competition. Although Arca-Swiss style QR plates are popular among nature photographers, I believe until quite recently brands such as Manfrotto were the most popular brand purchased and they used their own plates (which were different in many cases from head to head). In recent years they too have been introducing A-S compatible heads, but still it isn't a real standard that one could consider universal. Some A-S "compatible" accessories do not fit each other, and Arca-Swiss themselves have started to produce heads with incompatible QR systems. Today video has increasing importance also for still cameras and video heads typically have their own QR systems yet again (though there are a few heads with A-S compatible plates).

 

An ISO standard for quick release plates would come in handy and solve the problem (potentially).

At least they could make them parallel sided rather than the weird taper shape.

 

In-fact the real issue is that no QR plate I've met has two screws to fit both sockets on the foot base. No rotation is then possible. They might be around but I don't remember them!

 

Replacement feet seem to be order of the day and as Nikon know people are going to do this, they put little effort in themselves.

Video (fluid) heads often have long QR plates with two screws that can fit the two holes in the foot. Fluid heads are also excellent for long-lens work as they dampen vibration.

Fluid heads are also excellent for long-lens work as they dampen vibration.

:eek: No way. The Manfrotto fluid head I bought last year for video is large and klutzy and I plan to get rid of it - and its related appendages - soon. - Finally decided that I don't need these gadgets for some casual video work.

:eek: No way. The Manfrotto fluid head I bought last year for video is large and klutzy and I plan to get rid of it - and its related appendages - soon. - Finally decided that I don't need these gadgets for some casual video work.

 

Fluid heads can be big, but there are small and medium-sized ones, too. I have a Gitzo GHF2W and it's really nice for lenses of the size of 70-200/2.8 and even 500 PF, and very lightweight yet dampens vibrations and jerky movement effectively. It has an adjustable counterbalance mechanism.

 

However, the really big fluid heads designed for large video cameras can be quite arduous to lug around and I don't have one of those. At work we do have one for video work but I try to avoid gear that is so heavy it gives me back issues. ;-)

Not sure they could easily enforce a very basic 45 degree dovetail 'groove' patent.

Exactly!

It could be counter-claimed that Arca stole the design from countless microscope positioning clamps, machine-tool beds, etc., etc. That were all in widespread production when Arca's founders were in nappies.

 

And are they going to take out a patent for every fraction-of-a-degree variation in slide angle between 30 and 60 degrees? I think not.

I suppose the easiest way 'around' any of these patents is to make a slightly convex dovetail. Slightly more difficult to machine, but considering what carbide cutters they make for routing worktops these days...;)

 

It's always been a bit odd to need to perfectly matching pair of dovetails.... as in machine bed slideways. These fittings aren't meant to slide!

 

It would be right easy to make a curved dovetail to grip on anywhere between 30 and 60 deg too...:D

The Manfrotto fluid head I bought last year for video

Which one did you get?

 

I got a Manny 503HDV a few years back and it's been excellent. Easily capable enough for my D850 + 500mm PF and TC1.4 ii. Balances nicely and very hard to make jerky movements. I also use a 100mm spotting scope with it. The 055 CF tripod is light but very rigid. A bit of ballast helps too.

Which one did you get?

Just checked, it is "MVH502AH": 5.3lb by itself - not counting the tripod and the long piece on top (that annoyingly shifts back and forth when not locked down) and that long arm sticking out. Sure some people can use it for wildlife but why be masochistic when there are lighter and simpler methods. ;)

Edited June 1, 2022 by Mary Doo

My Gitzo fluid head is 0.6 kg so it's very light weight, and surprisingly capable. Since I sold my 500 PF I am not using the Gitzo head at the moment, but it is possible that in the future I will have a 100-400 which should work well with it. I find that even the lightweight fluid head reduces vibrations compared to other types of heads. However, the payload max for the head is 4 kg so it is not a good choice for my 300/2.8.